As the autonomous trade measures for imports from Ukraine will expire on 5 June 2025, the Commission is committed to pursuing the review of the current trade conditions under Article 29 of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA)[1] with Ukraine.
The Commission is confident that this review will be the best way to provide stability and predictability for producers and other stakeholders in the EU as well as in Ukraine.
The review of the DCFTA should take into account as much as possible the concerns of the EU producers and other stakeholders . It will be crucial to find the right balance between the necessity to continue facilitating the movement of Ukrainian agricultural goods, thereby supporting the Ukrainian economy in its efforts in sustaining its fight against the Russian aggressor, and at the same time address the concerns of EU stakeholders about the increased agri-food imports from Ukraine.
Furthermore, the Commission is considering including a strong safeguard clause as well as a link to compliance with relevant EU production standards. The Commission is currently working on the details of its position.
On Monday 28 April, from 15.00 to 16.00, Luis de Guindos, Vice-President of the European Central Bank (ECB), will as usual present to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) the ECB’s Annual Report followed by an exchange of views.
The ECB will publish its Annual Report 2024 in 22 EU official languages on the ECB’s website on Monday 28 April at 15:00. It covers the ECB’s monetary policy and economic and financial developments in 2024 and presents the activities of the Eurosystem in its various areas of competence. At the same time, the ECB will also publish its response to comments and suggestions raised by the European Parliament in its Resolution on the ECB, as voted on 11 February 2025.
The presentation of the ECB’s Annual Report and the exchange of view with ECON Members will also be an opportunity to discuss the latest developments, challenges and outlook in economic and monetary affairs and is expected to feed into the preparation of the European Parliament’s ECB annual report 2025.
Hamas has been listed on the EU terror list since 2001 and continues to be so. Following the brutal and indiscriminate terrorist attack against Israel on 7 October 2023, a new dedicated sanctions regime against Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad was set up in January 2024[1]. Since then, two packages of listings have been adopted.
The EU has also made use of the CP931[2]/EU Terrorist List to designate leading figures of Hamas as terrorists[3]. The EU also adopted sanctions under the Global Human Rights sanctions regime in response to sexual violence committed by Hamas[4].
The EU has been clear that there must be no future role for Hamas in the future governance of Gaza, and that Hamas should no longer be a threat to Israel.
The EU will continue its political and financial support to the Palestinian Authority and its reform programme to help it prepare for its return to govern Gaza[5].
[1] Sanctions against terrorism: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/sanctions-against-terrorism/
[2] Common Position 931′ (CP931) is the Council Common Position of 27 December 2001 on the application of specific measures to combat terrorism and designating entities as terrorist organisations. CP931 mandates EU Member States to enforce specific measures against groups involved in terrorism.
[4] Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad: Council extends restrictive measures by one year: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2025/01/13/hamas-and-palestinian-islamic-jihad-council-extends-restrictive-measures-by-one-year/
[5] Statement by the High Representative on the Arab Plan for Gaza: https://www.eeas.europa.eu/eeas/statement-high-representative-arab-plan-gaza_en
On 20 October 2024, the people of the Republic of Moldova voted in a referendum on Moldova’s EU path. Despite massive interference and hybrid campaigns by Russia, including blatant vote-buying, they expressed majority support for anchoring their future within the EU.
The Commission took note of the results reflecting diverse opinions among Moldova’s citizens and will keep working closely with the country to build consensus on its path towards EU membership.
Moldova has continued to make progress as recognised by the EU leaders during the European Council in March 2024. However, since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, Moldova has been tackling challenges related to slow economic growth, supporting a large number of Ukrainian refugees, inflation, disruption to its energy supplies and cyber-attacks.
For this reason, in October 2024, the President of the Commission announced the Commission’s proposal for a Growth Plan for the Republic of Moldova[1]. Its aim is to support the Moldovan economy with EUR 1.8 billion between 2025 and 2027.
It also provides Moldova with similar financial support to that offered to Western Balkan countries and to Ukraine, reflecting their aspirations to join the EU.
The co-legislators adopted Regulation (EU) 2025/535 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 March 2025 establishing the Reform and Growth Facility for the Republic of Moldova[2].
The EU condemns the unprecedented malign interference by Russia into Moldova’s elections and will continue supporting Moldova’s resilience and progress on its EU accession path.
It is a key priority for the Commission to simplify rules and reduce the reporting burdens for undertakings, including financial institutions financial institutions.
On 26 February 2025, the Commission presented an omnibus package[1] aiming at simplification in relation to sustainability reporting.
The omnibus proposals delay by two years the reporting for companies that should have done so in 2026 or later and introduce a reduction in the scope of reporting under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD)[2] to large companies[3] with more than 1000 employees.
This entails a change of scope of reporting under Taxonomy regulation[4], which is aligned with the CSRD. In addition, the proposal will make Taxonomy reporting voluntary for companies in scope with a turnover below EUR 450 million.
In parallel, the Commission also published for public feedback proposed changes to the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act[5] significantly simplifying reporting requirements and introducing materiality thresholds, and changes to Climate and Environmental Delegated Acts[6].
As regards the green asset ratio, it is proposed to allow financial institutions to exclude from the indicators’ denominators the exposures that relate to undertakings with less than 1000 employees, which will not be obliged to report on EU Taxonomy information as per the Omnibus proposal.
In addition, the Omnibus package will protect companies out of the scope of the requirements, including SMEs, from excessive sustainability information requests that they receive when they are included in the value chains of larger companies or from financial institutions ( trickle-down effect ).
[2] Directive (EU) 2022/2464 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2022 amending Regulation (EU) No 537/2014, Directive 2004/109/EC, Directive 2006/43/EC and Directive 2013/34/EU, as regards corporate sustainability reporting, OJ L 322, 16.12.2022, p. 15.
[3] Large companies are defined in the Accounting Directive as companies that exceed at least two of the three following criteria: balance sheet of EUR 25 million, turnover of EUR 50 million and 250 employees.
[4] Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment, and amending Regulation (EU) .2019/2088, OJ L 198, 22.6.2020, p. 13.
[5] Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2178 of 6 July 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by specifying the content and presentation of information to be disclosed by undertakings subject to Articles 19a or 29a of Directive 2013/34/EU concerning environmentally sustainable economic activities, and specifying the methodology to comply with that disclosure obligation, OJ L 443 10.12.2021, p. 9.
[6] Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2139 of 4 June 2021 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to climate change mitigation or climate change adaptation and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives (OJ L 442, 9.12.2021, p. 1) and 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council by establishing the technical screening criteria for determining the conditions under which an economic activity qualifies as contributing substantially to the sustainable use and protection of water and marine resources, to the transition to a circular economy, to pollution prevention and control, or to the protection and restoration of biodiversity and ecosystems and for determining whether that economic activity causes no significant harm to any of the other environmental objectives and amending Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2178 as regards specific public disclosures for those economic activities (OJ L 2023/2486, 21.11.2023).
Question for written answer E-001524/2025 to the Commission Rule 144 Elena Kountoura (The Left)
EU island regions face chronic and structural problems with regard to access to basic health services. This issue is exacerbated by geographical isolation, seasonal population pressure, the inability to attract medical and nursing staff and the inadequacy of infrastructure. Despite the fact that the TFEU recognises insularity as a permanent structural handicap, these specific problems do not appear to be dealt with sufficiently under the current cohesion policy strategy and priorities.[1]
Taking into account the desperate shortages of doctors, nurses and basic health infrastructure on at least 15 Greek islands, as reflected in data from the Panhellenic Federation of Public Hospital Employees in view of Easter and the upcoming tourist season[2], and the resolution of the European Parliament[3] calling on the EU to draw up a dedicated strategy and agenda for islands, with clearly defined priorities for action and funding, and stressing the need to improve health infrastructure and upgrade primary healthcare provision, access to healthcare and the provision of support, in order to encourage the establishment of healthcare professionals, can the Commission say:
1.Does it intend to establish a specific horizontal priority and category of funding and targeted support for basic public health services on islands within the framework of the cohesion funds?
2.Does the Commission intend to establish specific rules, targeted financial support and binding criteria for strengthening healthcare services in island regions under the post-2027 cohesion policy framework, in order to take account of the specific situation of islands with regard to access to healthcare services?
Submitted: 14.4.2025
[1] Despite financial support from EU cohesion policy funds, such as the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+), for action in the area of health, the problem of poor and unequal health coverage on islands remains acute and, in many cases, it is getting worse. This highlights the need for more targeted, established and permanent measures.
[2] For more information, see https://www.efsyn.gr/ellada/ygeia/468921_kentra-aerodiakomidon-ehoyn-ginei-ta-nisia#goog_rewarded
[3] For further information, see European Parliament resolution of 7 June 2022 on EU islands and cohesion policy: current situation and future challenges (2021/2079 (INI)), https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2022-0225_EN.html.
The Commission carries out rigorous selection processes, including checks on grant beneficiaries. To protect the financial interests of the Union, the Commission makes sure that the action is implemented in accordance with the applicable financial rules and the grant agreement signed with the beneficiary. Any breach of obligation of the terms of the grant agreement can lead to measures including grant agreement suspension and termination.
The monitoring of the implementation of the grants, in which the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) European Network was a beneficiary, did not reveal any activities that would not be in line with the requirements for EU funding nor the need to review the allocation of funding.
Further, the Commission notes that the IPPF is no t currently implementing any EU funding either.
The Commission is aware of the allegations related to the tissue donation programme of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America (IPPFA), which is a member association of IPPF. As the Commission pointed out in its replies to written questions E-011611/2015[1], E-12709/2015[2] and P-012161/2015[3], the IPPFA is not a recipient of EU funding either.
Any information about alleged illegal activities taking place in the EU should be reported to the appropriate national law enforcement for further investigation, and, if necessary, for prosecution under the national legislative provisions.
Boosting EU cooperation with countries in Latin America and the Caribbean in the fight against organised crime is a priority of the Commission[1]. It is also a priority of the EU cooperation with Mexico.
The EU closely monitors Mexico’s security strategy and remains committed to supporting Mexico in security and drug trafficking efforts through programmes like the Europe Latin America Programme of Assistance against Transnational Organised Crime[2] and the Cooperation Program between Latin America, the Caribbean and the EU on drug policy[3].
The Commission ensures effective fund management through strict monitoring, evaluation, and financial controls, involving the Court of Auditors and the European Anti-Fraud Office.
The EU applies a constructive engagement policy while safeguarding financial interests, using the early detection and exclusion system as per Article 138 of the Financial Regulation[4].
EU support in Mexico funds civil society organisations focused on democratic, social, and economic development. Assistance also extends to inclusive and green reforms via Member States and United Nations agencies, emphasising capacity building, best practice exchanges, and policy support.
Key intervention areas include decent work, green transport, migration, health, public finance reform, in the framework of the Global Gateway strategy[5].
Civil society plays a crucial role in Mexico’s development, achieving successes in migration, human rights, transparency, and public accountability. This participatory approach strengthens reforms and the rule of law.
The EU also actively cooperated with the United States and other partners in the Global Coalition to Address Synthetic Drug Threats.
[1] A ction 15 of the communication on the EU roadmap to fight drug trafficking and organised crime, COM(2023) 641 final, https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52023DC0641
The Commission has currently two ongoing grant contracts with the European Feminist Initiative.
The Commission is currently verifying all the elements reported in the quoted article and provided by NGO Monitor. After a complete review of these allegations, the Commission will act in line with contractual provisions and the EU Financial Regulation[1].
The Commission is bound to ensure that no persons or entities receive EU funding if they are involved in criminal or unethical practices, terrorist financing and terrorist offences.
EU restrictive measures are applicable to any of the Commission grant beneficiaries all over the world. The EU is also strictly opposed to incitement of violence and hatred.
Specific clauses have been introduced in all grant contracts with beneficiaries managing EU funds in the occupied Palestinian territories and in Israel.
Pursuant to these clauses, these grant beneficiaries shall not engage in activities as defined by the Council Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law[2], which include incitement to violence or hatred.
This prohibition is without prejudice to the respect of fundamental rights as enshrined in Article 6 of the Treaty on EU[3] (TEU) including the right of freedom of expression and information and the right of freedom of assembly and association as guaranteed by the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms[4].
Moreover, a new provision has been inserted into the EU Financial Regulation which provides that grant beneficiaries and contractors shall be excluded from future EU funding in case of ‘incitement to discrimination, hatred and violence against a group of persons or a member of a group, or similar activities that are contrary to the values on which the Union is founded enshrined in Article 2 TEU, where such misconduct has an impact on the person or entity’s integrity which negatively affects or concretely risks affecting the performance of the legal commitment’[5].
[1] Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/2509 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 September 2024 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union (recast), OJ L, 2024/2509, 26.9.2024.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Danny K Davis (7th District of Illinois)
In contrast to GOP effort to slash child care funding, this bill increases the maximum child care credit from $1,200 to $4,000 for one child or from $2,100 to $8,000 for two or more children.
Washington, D.C.- April 24, 2025, Representatives Danny K. Davis (D-IL), Suzan DelBene (D-WA), and Linda Sánchez (D-CA) introduced theChild and Dependent Care Tax Credit Enhancement Actto permanently expand the child care tax credit to raise the maximum credit from $1,050 to $4,000for 1 child and from $2,100 to $8,000for 2 or more children. This bill is led by Senators Tina Smith (D-MN), Ron Wyden (D-OR), and Patty Murray (D-WA) in the Senate.
The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit (CDCTC) is the only tax credit that helps working parents offset the rising cost of child care. In 2021, Democrats successfully enhanced both the CDCTC and the Child Tax Credit because both credits are essential to support parents’ ability to provide for their families. While 100% of the CDCTC reimburses parents for actual child care costs paid to work, parents mostly use the Child Tax Credit to defray other significant costs of caring for a child, such as food, rent, and clothing.
Unfortunately, as currently structured, the CDCTC fails to meet the needs of tens of millions of working families. Very few families receive meaningful benefit from the credit due to the extremely low phase-out level of $15,000, the low expense limits, the non-refundable nature, and the loss of benefit due to inflation. For example, the Tax Policy Center estimates that only 13% of familieswith children claimed the CDCTC in 2022. TheChild Care and Dependent Credit Enhancement Actwill increase the maximum credit amount to $4,000 per child up to $8,000 for two or more children, expand eligibility to low-income families, make the credit available to married couples who file separately due to high student loan debt, and retain the credit’s value over time by indexing it to inflation. Compared to 2019, low-income working parents quadrupled their credit received in 2021.
High-quality, affordable child care is essential to the economic well-being of families, businesses, and our country. Yet, child care places a major financial burden on American families. The price of child care can range from $5,357 to $17,171 per yeardepending on location and type of care. Astoundingly, the cost of center-based care for two children is more than the average mortgage in 41 states and more than the average annual rent in all 50 states plus DC. Households under the poverty line spend nearly one third of their income on child care, and increases in median child care prices are connected to lower maternal employment rates. Further, the child care crisis hits families of color disproportionately hard. For a single parent who has never been married who is Black, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, or American Indian/Alaska Native, child care can cost 36%, 41%, or 49% of the median income, respectively, compared to only 31% for single White parents. Further, Latino and American Indian and Alaska Native parents disproportionately live in child care deserts.
“High-quality, affordable child care is essential to the economic well-being of families, businesses, and our country,” said Rep. Davis. “I am proud to lead the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit Enhancement Act that would restore the 2021 credit so that families can receive up to $4,000 for child care for one child or up to $8,000 for two or more children, much better than the almost $600 that the typical family receives currently. This bill would strengthen the financial well-being of families and grow our economy. It is critical that Congress acts now to help working families.”
“Access to affordable child care is one of the biggest barriers families face. Enhancing the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit will give parents the relief they need by supporting both families and care providers,” said DelBene. “This bill is a commonsense step toward making child care more accessible and affordable for every family.”
“Working parents shouldn’t have to choose between earning a paycheck and caring for their kids,” said Sánchez. “Expanding the child care tax credit will make child care more affordable and accessible, so parents can focus on their work knowing their kids are being cared for.”
The bill is endorsed by state and national child and worker advocates, including: Center for Law and Social Policy; Child Care Aware of America; Early Care and Education Consortium; First Five Years Fund; First Focus Campaign for Children; MomsRising; National Association for the Education of Young Children; National Women’s Law Center Action Fund; Save the Children; Start Early; Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM); and ZERO TO THREE.
Example Statements from Supporting Organizations
“Often conflated with the child tax credit, the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit is one of the only tax incentives that helps working families with their child care expenses. As the cost of care increases, many families must contend with whether their current job pays enough to justify their child care expenses,” said Radha Mohan, Executive Director, Early Care & Education Consortium. “For families where one parent must leave the workforce because they cannot afford the cost of care, this often hurts the family from an economic standpoint in the long run. The CDCTC Enhancement Act helps ensure that families do not have to make this choice by providing a credit to offset the cost of care. When paired with programs such as the Child Care and Development Block Grant, this bill will ensure that many families will have reduced their child care costs by over 50%.”
“As almost any working family with young children will tell you, the cost of child care is a major source of financial stress, putting immense pressure on already tight budgets,” First Five Years Fund Executive Director Sarah Rittling. “The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit Enhancement Act would make essential updates to the CDCTC to ensure more parents are able to keep more of what they earn to offset the high cost of care. We are grateful to Reps. Danny Davis, Suzan DelBene, and Linda Sanchez for their leadership and commitment to supporting families with young children.”
“For families with young children, the cost of childcare is often unaffordable and impacts their economic opportunity—the cornerstone of child and family well-being. The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit (CDCTC) Enhancement Act of 2025 is an important effort to update the CDCTC to ensure that more families can offset their child care costs. We are grateful to Rep. Danny Davis and his longstanding efforts to support children and families in his district and across the country, and also extend that appreciation to Reps. Suzan DelBene and Linda Sanchez.” Diana Rauner, President, Start Early
“Affordable child care isn’t a luxury—it’s the backbone of our economy,” said Yelena Tsilker, Senior Government Relations and Advocacy Director at ZERO TO THREE, a national nonprofit that focuses on the healthy development of babies and toddlers. “Parents of infants now face child care bills that top $16,000 a year—higher than in-state college tuition in many states. The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit Enhancement Act tackles that crisis head-on by making the CDCTC fully refundable and increasing the maximum credit, so families of every income can choose the high-quality care their babies need. This relief will keep parents in the workforce and help millions of children thrive. We applaud Representatives Davis, DelBene, and Sánchez for championing legislation that hard-working families have long awaited.”
The text of the bill is availableHERE; a summary of the bill is availableHERE.
LOS ANGELES – A United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officer has been arrested on a five-count federal grand jury indictment alleging he fraudulently obtained nearly $150,000 in COVID-19 pandemic business-relief loan funds for two of his sham businesses, the Justice Department announced today.
Amer Aldarawsheh, 45, of Moreno Valley, is charged with five counts of wire fraud.
He was arrested Wednesday morning and pleaded not guilty to all the charges against him at his arraignment Wednesday afternoon in United States District Court in downtown Los Angeles. A federal magistrate judge ordered Aldarawsheh released on $30,000 bond and scheduled a June 16 in U.S. District Court in Riverside.
According to the indictment unsealed Wednesday, Aldarawsheh owned and purportedly operated two businesses: Nahar Enterprises Inc., a San Bernardino based business he described as a trucking and freight company, and Ameral, which he described as an automotive repair company.
From July 2020 to December 2021, Aldarawsheh made false statements to the Small Business Administration (SBA) to fraudulently obtain a loan under the Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program (EIDL), which provided low-interest financing to small businesses, renters, and homeowners in regions affected by declared disasters.
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act of 2020 authorized the SBA to provide EIDL loans of up to $2 million to eligible small businesses experiencing substantial financial disruption during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Aldarawsheh applied to the SBA for EIDL loans on behalf of his two companies, neither of which had substantial business or employees. EIDL loans were supposed to be used by the recipient to only pay certain authorized business expenses. Instead, Aldarawsheh knowingly misappropriated and misused the EIDL funds he received from the SBA for his own personal benefit, including in December 2020, causing the transfer of $149,900 in SBA COVID-19 EIDL loan funds to be wired from the SBA to a bank account under his control.
An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
If convicted, Aldarawsheh would face a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison for each count.
The United States Custom and Border Protection Office of Professional Responsibility, Small Business Administration Office of Inspector General, and Federal Bureau of Investigation investigated this matter.
Assistant United States Attorneys Laura A. Alexander and Michael J. Morse of the Public Corruption and Civil Rights Section are prosecuting this case.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Rick Allen (R-GA-12)
Today, Chairman of the Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions Subcommittee, Representative Rick W. Allen (GA-12), introduced the Protecting Prudent Investment of Retirement Savings Act.
This legislation seeks to codify that those who manage other people’s retirement savings under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) must prioritize maximizing returns for a secure retirement rather than political or social impact using risky environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors. Upon the bill’s introduction, Representative Allen issued the following statement:
“Americans’ hard-earned retirement savings should never be jeopardized by politically-motivated mismanagement. Unfortunately, the Biden-Harris Administration made this possible with an overreaching rule that allows fiduciaries to aggressively invest retirees’ money in ESG funds—which oftencharge steeper fees, carry higher risk, and have lower returns. The Protecting Prudent Investment of Retirement Savings Act would codify that retirement plan sponsors must make investment decisions solely based on financial returns—ensuring Americans’ hard-earned savings are invested sensibly. I am grateful for Chairman Walberg’s support in this effort to protect the American Dream for millions of workers and families,”said Congressman Allen.
“Americans don’t work to have their hard-earned savings funneled into higher-risk, lower-yield ESG investments. The Biden-Harris administration’s misguided ESG policies allowed fiduciaries to play politics and steer retirees’ savings into left-wing investments for political and social purposes. I’m proud to support a bill, introduced by HELP Subcommittee Chairman Rick Allen, to protect Americans’ financial futures and promote retirees’ interest in a secure retirement—instead of out-of-touch ESG agendas,” said Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Tim Walberg.
BACKGROUND: In 2022, President Biden’s Department of Labor finalized a flawed rule that allowed financial advisors to invest Americans’ retirement savings into risky, climate-related ESG funds. Despite bipartisan and bicameral disapproval in the form of a Congressional Review Act resolution that passed both the House and Senate, President Biden doubled down on this rulemaking by vetoing the resolution. In the 118th Congress, the House of Representatives also passed similar legislation championed by Congressman Allen, but the bill died in the Democrat-controlled Senate.
The President of the Council of Ministers, Giorgia Meloni, had a telephone conversation today with the Sultan of Oman, His Majesty Haitham bin Tariq Al Said.
During the call, President Meloni thanked the Sultan for the role he has played in facilitating negotiations between the United States and Iran, and assured him of Italy’s full support for the initiative, in line with what it has already done in hosting the second round of talks in Rome.
The two leaders also discussed the strengthening of bilateral relations at all levels, from energy to culture, from the economy to tourism. In this context, they expressed their satisfaction with the cooperation between the two nations with regard to digital interconnections.
At the end of the conversation, President Meloni accepted the Sultan’s invitation to visit Oman.
Mahe, Seychelles, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BitMart, a leading global digital asset trading platform, has announced a donation of $10,000 to Brink, a non-profit organization dedicated to supporting Bitcoin’s open-source development. This donation will aid in the continued research, development, and maintenance of the Bitcoin protocol, helping to ensure the long-term sustainability and security of the network.
At BitMart, we recognize the importance of Bitcoin’s infrastructure and are proud to contribute to the efforts of organizations like Brink that are essential in maintaining and advancing the Bitcoin software and protocol. By supporting Brink, BitMart reaffirms its commitment to the future of the Bitcoin ecosystem and open-source innovation.
This contribution will directly support Brink’s fellowship and grant programs, which nurture the next generation of Bitcoin developers and sustain the work of experienced engineers contributing to the protocol’s evolution.
About BitMart BitMart is the premier global digital asset trading platform. With millions of users worldwide and ranked among the top crypto exchanges on CoinGecko, it currently offers 1,700+ trading pairs with competitive trading fees. Constantly evolving and growing, BitMart is interested in crypto’s potential to drive innovation and promote financial inclusion. To learn more about BitMart, visit their Website, follow their X (Twitter), or join their Telegram for updates, news, and promotions. Download BitMart App to trade anytime, anywhere.
About Brink Brink is a non-profit organization focused on strengthening the Bitcoin protocol through fundamental research and development. Through its fellowship and grants programs, Brink supports both new contributors and seasoned developers in the Bitcoin community. For more information, visit Brink’s website.
Disclaimer: Use of BitMart services is entirely at your own risk. All crypto investments, including earnings, are highly speculative in nature and involve substantial risk of loss. Past, hypothetical, or simulated performance is not necessarily indicative of future results.
The value of digital currencies can go up or down and there can be a substantial risk in buying, selling, holding, or trading digital currencies. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital currencies is suitable for you based on your personal investment objectives, financial circumstances, and risk tolerance. BitMart does not provide any investment, legal, or tax advice.
Source: United States Senator for New York Charles E Schumer
SUNY Schenectady’s Top-Tier Aviation Science And Air Traffic Control Degree Program Has Excellent Reputation For Training Future Air Traffic Controllers And Is Uniquely Qualified To Help Address Nationwide Shortage
FAA Air Traffic Controllers Have Been Warning About Low Staffing Levels For Years, And Schumer Says Fed Training For SUNY Schenectady’s Program Is Key To Supporting Aspiring Air Traffic Controllers And Keeping Our Skies Safe
Schumer: FAA Partnership With SUNY Schenectady Will Help Next Generation Of Air Traffic Controllers Reach New Heights
Amid the nationwide shortage of FAA controllers and as the nation grapples with an increasing number of aviation incidents, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer today called on the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to include SUNY Schenectady’s Aviation Science and Air Traffic Control degree program in its Enhanced Air Traffic-Collegiate Training Initiative (AT-CTI) program. Schumer said this partnership will boost air traffic control education and training to support aspiring air traffic controllers in Upstate NY and make our skies safer, creating a pipeline of local students to enter this high paying career and address the nationwide shortage.
“As Americans across the country grapple with more and more aviation incidents, we need to take action to ensure the FAA has the resources it needs to keep our skies safe. SUNY Schenectady’s air traffic controller training program is uniquely qualified and ready to create a local pipeline of students to enter this high-paying career, it just needs the final approval from FAA. I’m urging the FAA to work with SUNY Schenectady to make this happen ASAP and give America the talent it needs to address the national air traffic controller shortage,” said Senator Schumer. “SUNY Schenectady’s top-notch program is nationally recognized as a leader for aviation science. The FAA can help the next generation of air traffic controllers’ right here in the Capital Region, and I am fighting to get the final approval to make it happen.”
Dr. Steady Moono, SUNY Schenectady President, said, “SUNY Schenectady continues to be at the forefront of aviation training in the region. We have invested in the future, to provide our students with the largest and most comprehensive Air Traffic Control simulator at a community college east of the Mississippi. We are honored to stand with Senator Schumer in addressing the urgent need for skilled air traffic controllers across the nation. SUNY Schenectady is prepared and eager to be part of the solution through the FAA’s Collegiate Training Initiative. With our proven track record in aviation education and commitment to student success, we are ready to equip the next generation of air traffic professionals with the training, discipline, and excellence that this critical role demands.”
“We are grateful to Senator Schumer for his continued support of SUNY Schenectady and his commitment to addressing the national shortage of air traffic controllers,” said Gary Hughes, Chair of the Schenectady County Legislature. “SUNY Schenectady’s Aviation Science and Air Traffic Control Program provides students with practical, skills-focused training that supports our regional workforce and responds to the needs of today’s economy. A partnership with the FAA would expand opportunities for students while also helping to strengthen aviation safety nationwide.”
Air traffic controllers across the country have been warning about low staffing levels for years. As of September 2023, according to CNN, only about 70% of FAA staffing targets were filled by fully certified controllers, with some major airports at less than 60%. Schumer said boosting SUNY Schenectady’s Aviation Science and Air Traffic Control degree program is key to supporting aspiring air traffic controllers and keeping our skies safe.
SUNY Schenectady runs a successful curriculum for its Aviation Science and Air Traffic Control degree program to train air traffic controllers, including a state-of-the-art simulator that only exists in one other place. The program, which is run at the Schenectady County airport and SUNY Schenectady’s main campus, recently completed a new Center for Aviation Sciences building and is a leader for aviation safety education. SUNY Schenectady has been working with the FAA for over a year to be admitted into the Air Traffic-Collegiate Training Initiative Program, which provides new training at eligible colleges to deliver new air traffic controllers to the workforce faster and address the national shortages. SUNY Schenectady is at one of the final steps for FAA’s requirements and are about to host FAA for a site visit.
Schumer’s letter to Acting FAA Administrator Chris Rocheleau can be found attached and below:
Dear Administrator Rocheleau:
I am writing to express my strong support for the inclusion of SUNY Schenectady County Community College (SUNY Schenectady) into the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)’s Enhanced Air Traffic-Collegiate Training Initiative (AT-CTI) program.
As the nation grapples with an increasing number of near-misses and tragic aviation incidents, the urgency of investing in the next generation of highly trained, competent air traffic controllers has never been greater. The aviation system is already under unprecedented stress — from soaring flight volumes to a wave of retirements within the controller workforce. These challenges demand not only swift action but also a broader and more expansive approach to air traffic control education and training.
SUNY Schenectady has its Aviation Science and Air Traffic Control degree program that is recognized across the SUNY System, New York state and our nation. This program carries an excellent reputation for training the next generation of pilots and air traffic controllers. This well-established program is based at SUNY Schenectady’s main campus and the Schenectady County airport, which is also home to the 109th Air National Guard unit that flies LC-130 ski birds to polar regions in support of missions led by both the Department of Defense and National Science Foundation.
SUNY Schenectady has recently completed a new $5 million Center for Aviation Sciences building and earlier this year installed new state-of-the-art simulators to enhance its already robust air traffic controller program. In February of 2024, SUNY Schenectady was named, among only nine other community colleges in the country, a Leader College by Achieving The Dream (ATD), a national non-profit dedicated to advancing community colleges as hubs of equity and economic mobility in their communities.
The recent air tragedies have underscored how important it is to increase ATC training and hiring, and SUNY Schenectady is well-positioned to help meet this urgent national need. More trained controllers make for safer skies, more efficient airports, and higher confidence by the flying public. I applaud SUNY Schenectady’s foresight in submitting this application and sincerely hope it is met with your approval. Please do not hesitate to contact my Washington DC office at (202) 224-6542. Thank you for your consideration.
SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico – Three individuals who were fugitives since December 2024 were arrested today in the municipalities of San Juan and Carolina, PR, on criminal charges related to their alleged participation on drug trafficking and violent crimes associated to a drug trafficking organization that operated in San Juan, Carolina, and other areas nearby, from in or about 2021 through December 2024, when the arrest operation took place. The three fugitives had been charged in the case of United States v. Victor J. Pérez-Fernández, a.k.a. “La Cone/Vitu/Vitikin/Enano,” et al., Case No. 24-453 (MAJ).
Defendants [10] Gerald O. Rodríguez-Rodríguez, a.k.a. “Patrón;” [18] Ángel L. Sanjurjo, a.k.a. “Vaca;” and [33] Ramsell Maldonado-Tatis, a.k.a. “R” were arrested by FBI special agents, Puerto Rico Police Bureau and the Carolina Municipal Police Department. They are charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute controlled substances; possession and distribution of heroin, cocaine base (crack), cocaine, marijuana, and fentanyl; and possession of firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime. Defendant Maldonado-Tatis is also facing one count for possession of a machine gun in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime.
“As alleged in the indictment, these individuals were engaged in violent crime and spread deadly drugs through our communities,” said U.S. Attorney Muldrow. “Today’s arrests make clear that this Office will work tirelessly to keep the law-abiding residents of Puerto Rico safe and hold accountable those who bring violence to our streets.”
“The arrests carried out this morning reaffirm our unwavering commitment to dismantling criminal organizations. The message is clear: if you’re part of a violent criminal enterprise, the FBI will work relentlessly to find you and bring you to justice,” said Devin J. Kowalski, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s San Juan Field Office. “The residents of Puerto Rico deserve safe communities, and through close collaboration with our local and federal partners, we will continue to bring fugitives to justice and restore peace where it is most needed.”
According to the charging documents, the drug trafficking organization distributed heroin, fentanyl, crack, cocaine, marijuana, Tramadol, and Clonazepam within 1,000 feet of the Sabana Abajo Public Housing Project (PHP), the Luis Lloréns Torres PHP, the Los Mirtos PHP, the Lagos de Blasina PHP, the La Esmeralda PHP, the El Coral PHP, the Monte Hatillo PHP, and other areas near those locations, all for significant financial gain and profit. The drug trafficking organizations that operated in and around these areas (known as The Alliance) reached an agreement to conduct their drug trafficking operations as allies, which they referred to as “La Paz” (The Peace). At that time, each housing project organization was controlled by their own leadership and structure. As part of The Alliance, there would not be war between these organizations and members would be able to rely on each other for protection, drugs, and weapons.
Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA) and Chief of the Gang Section Alberto López-Rocafort; Deputy Chief of the Gang Section, AUSA Teresa Zapata-Valladares; and AUSAs Laura Díaz-González, R. Vance Eaton, and Joseph Russell are prosecuting the case.
This case is part of Operation Take Back America, a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).
TOANO, Va., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — C&F Financial Corporation (the Corporation) (NASDAQ: CFFI), the holding company for C&F Bank, today reported consolidated net income of $5.4 million for the first quarter of 2025, compared to $3.4 million for the first quarter of 2024. The following table presents selected financial performance highlights for the periods indicated:
For The Quarter Ended
Consolidated Financial Highlights (unaudited)
3/31/2025
3/31/2024
Consolidated net income (000’s)
$
5,395
$
3,435
Earnings per share – basic and diluted
$
1.66
$
1.01
Annualized return on average equity
9.35
%
6.33
%
Annualized return on average tangible common equity1
10.65
%
7.30
%
Annualized return on average assets
0.84
%
0.57
%
________________________ 1 For more information about these non-GAAP financial measures, which are not calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), please see “Use of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “Reconciliation of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures,” below.
Tom Cherry, President and Chief Executive Officer of C&F Financial Corporation, commented, “We are pleased with our first quarter results. Net income increased across all of our business segments compared to the same quarter last year. Both loan and deposit growth at the community banking segment was strong and loan originations at the mortgage banking segment increased when compared to the first quarter of last year. Despite a decrease in the average balance of loans at the consumer finance segment, we were able to increase net income by continuing to focus on efficiencies. Consolidated margins grew slightly as higher cost time deposits continue to reprice downward. Despite the economic uncertainties, we are optimistic about our earnings for 2025.”
Key highlights for the first quarter of 2025 are as follows.
Community banking segment loans grew $27.6 million, or 7.6 percent annualized, and $139.9 million, or 10.4 percent, compared to December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2024, respectively;
Consumer finance segment loans decreased $4.7 million, or 4.0 percent annualized, and $14.0 million, or 2.9 percent, compared to December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2024, respectively;
Deposits increased $45.8 million, or 8.4 percent annualized, and $128.7 million, or 6.2 percent, compared to December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2024, respectively;
Consolidated annualized net interest margin was 4.16 percent for the first quarter of 2025 compared to 4.09 percent for the first quarter of 2024 and 4.13 percent in the fourth quarter of 2024;
The community banking segment recorded provision for credit losses of $100,000 and $500,000 for the first quarters of 2025 and 2024, respectively;
The consumer finance segment recorded provision for credit losses of $2.9 million and $3.0 million for the first quarters of 2025 and 2024, respectively;
The consumer finance segment experienced net charge-offs at an annualized rate of 2.64 percent of average total loans for the first quarter of 2025, compared to 2.54 percent for the first quarter of 2024; and
Mortgage banking segment loan originations increased $19.5 million, or 20.6 percent, to $113.8 million for the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024 and decreased $16.7 million, or 12.8 percent compared to the fourth quarter of 2024.
Community Banking Segment. The community banking segment reported net income of $5.4 million for the first quarter of 2025, compared to $4.0 million for the same period of 2024, due primarily to:
higher interest income resulting from higher average balances of loans and the effects of higher average interest rates on asset yields; and
lower provision for credit losses due primarily to lower loan growth;
partially offset by:
higher interest expense due primarily to higher average balances of interest-bearing deposits and higher average rates on deposits; and
higher marketing and advertising expenses related to the strategic marketing initiative, which began in the second half of 2024.
Average loans increased $165.3 million, or 12.7 percent, for the first quarter of 2025, compared to the same period in 2024, due primarily to growth in the construction, commercial real estate, land acquisition and development and builder lines segments of the loan portfolio. Average deposits increased $131.6 million, or 6.4 percent, for the first quarter of 2025, compared to the same period in 2024, due primarily to higher balance of time deposits and noninterest-bearing demand deposits.
Average interest-earning asset yields were higher for the first quarter of 2025, compared to the same period of 2024, due primarily to a shift in the mix of the loan portfolio, renewals of fixed rate loans originated during periods of lower interest rates and purchases of securities available for sale in the overall higher interest rate environment. Average costs of interest-bearing deposits were higher for the first quarter of 2025, compared to the same period of 2024, due primarily to the continued effects of a shift in the mix of deposits with customers seeking higher yielding opportunities as a result of higher interest rates paid on time deposits.
The community banking segment’s nonaccrual loans were $1.2 million at March 31, 2025 compared to $333,000 at December 31, 2024. The increase in nonaccrual loans compared to December 31, 2024 is due primarily to the downgrade of one residential mortgage relationship in the first quarter of 2025. The community banking segment recorded $100,000 in provision for credit losses for the first quarter of 2025, compared to $500,000 for the same period of 2024. At March 31, 2025, the allowance for credit losses increased to $17.5 million, compared to $17.4 million at December 31, 2024, due primarily to growth in the loan portfolio and increased macroeconomic uncertainties. The allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans decreased to 1.18 percent at March 31, 2025 from 1.20 percent at December 31, 2024 due primarily to growth in loans with shorter expected lives, which resulted in lower estimated losses over the life of the loan. Management believes that the level of the allowance for credit losses is adequate to reflect the net amount expected to be collected.
Mortgage Banking Segment. The mortgage banking segment reported net income of $431,000 for the first quarter of 2025, compared to $294,000 for the same period of 2024, due primarily to:
higher gains on sales of loans and higher mortgage banking fee income due to higher volume of mortgage loan originations;
partially offset by:
higher variable expenses tied to mortgage loan origination volume such as commissions and bonuses, reported in salaries and employee benefits; and
lower reversal of provision for indemnifications.
Despite the sustained elevated level of mortgage interest rates, higher home prices and low levels of inventory, mortgage banking segment loan originations increased for the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period of 2024. Mortgage loan originations for the mortgage banking segment were $113.8 million for the first quarter of 2025, comprised of $12.1 million refinancings and $101.7 million home purchases, compared to $94.3 million, comprised of $7.5 million refinancings and $86.8 million home purchases, for the same period in 2024. Mortgage loan originations in the first quarter of 2025 decreased $16.7 million compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 due in part to normal industry seasonal fluctuations. Mortgage loan segment originations include originations of loans sold to the community banking segment, at prices similar to those paid by third-party investors. These transactions are eliminated to reach consolidated totals.
During the first quarter of 2025, the mortgage banking segment recorded a reversal of provision for indemnification losses of $25,000, compared to a reversal of provision for indemnification losses of $140,000 in the same period of 2024. The allowance for indemnifications was $1.32 million and $1.35 million at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. The release of indemnification reserves in 2025 and 2024 was due primarily to lower volume of mortgage loan originations in recent years, improvement in the mortgage banking segment’s assessment of borrower payment performance and other factors affecting expected losses on mortgage loans sold in the secondary market, such as time since origination. Management believes that the indemnification reserve is sufficient to absorb losses related to loans that have been sold in the secondary market.
Consumer Finance Segment. The consumer finance segment reported net income of $226,000 for the first quarter of 2025, compared to net loss of $63,000 for the same period in 2024, due primarily to:
lower interest expense on borrowings from the community banking segment as a result of lower average balances of borrowings;
lower salaries and employee benefits expense due to an effort to reduce overhead costs; and
higher interest income resulting from the effects of higher interest rates on loan yields, partially offset by lower average balances of loans.
Average loans decreased $8.3 million, or 1.8 percent, for the first quarter of 2025, compared to the same period in 2024. The consumer finance segment experienced net charge-offs at an annualized rate of 2.64 percent of average total loans for the first quarter of 2025, compared to 2.54 percent for the first quarter of 2024, due primarily to an increase in delinquent loans, repossessions and the average amount charged-off when a loan was uncollectable. At March 31, 2025, total delinquent loans as a percentage of total loans was 3.05 percent, compared to 3.90 percent at December 31, 2024, and 2.78 percent at March 31, 2024.
The consumer finance segment, at times, offers payment deferrals as a portfolio management technique to achieve higher ultimate cash collections on select loan accounts. A significant reliance on deferrals as a means of managing collections may result in a lengthening of the loss confirmation period, which would increase expectations of credit losses inherent in the portfolio. Average amounts of payment deferrals of automobile loans on a monthly basis, which are not included in delinquent loans, were 1.75 percent of average automobile loans outstanding during the first quarter of 2025, compared to 1.62 percent during the same period during 2024. The allowance for credit losses was $22.5 million at March 31, 2025 and $22.7 million at December 31, 2024. The allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans was 4.88 percent at March 31, 2025 compared to 4.86 percent at December 31, 2024. Management believes that the level of the allowance for credit losses is adequate to reflect the net amount expected to be collected. If loan performance deteriorates resulting in further elevated delinquencies or net charge-offs, the provision for credit losses may increase in future periods.
Liquidity. The objective of the Corporation’s liquidity management is to ensure the continuous availability of funds to satisfy the credit needs of our customers and the demands of our depositors, creditors and investors. Uninsured deposits represent an estimate of amounts above the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance coverage limit of $250,000. As of March 31, 2025, the Corporation’s uninsured deposits were approximately $644.4 million, or 29.1 percent of total deposits. Excluding intercompany cash holdings and municipal deposits, which are secured with pledged securities, amounts uninsured were approximately $496.6 million, or 22.4 percent of total deposits as of March 31, 2025. The Corporation’s liquid assets, which include cash and due from banks, interest-bearing deposits at other banks and nonpledged securities available for sale, were $315.0 million and borrowing availability was $598.7 million as of March 31, 2025, which in total exceed uninsured deposits, excluding intercompany cash holdings and secured municipal deposits, by $417.1 million as of March 31, 2025.
In addition to deposits, the Corporation utilizes short-term and long-term borrowings as sources of funds. Short-term borrowings from the Federal Reserve Bank and the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (FHLB) may be used to fund the Corporation’s day-to-day operations. Short-term borrowings also include securities sold under agreements to repurchase. Total borrowings decreased to $119.5 million at March 31, 2025 from $122.6 million at December 31, 2024 due primarily to fluctuations in short-term borrowings.
Additional sources of liquidity available to the Corporation include cash flows from operations, loan payments and payoffs, deposit growth, maturities, calls and sales of securities, the issuance of brokered certificates of deposit and the capacity to borrow additional funds.
Capital and Dividends. During the first quarter of 2025, the Corporation increased its quarterly cash dividend by 5 percent, to 46 cents per share, compared to the previous quarterly dividend. This dividend, which was paid to shareholders on April 1, 2025, represents a payout ratio of 27.7 percent of earnings per share for the first quarter of 2025. The Board of Directors of the Corporation continually reviews the amount of cash dividends per share and the resulting dividend payout ratio in light of changes in economic conditions, current and future capital levels and requirements, and expected future earnings.
Total consolidated equity increased $8.3 million at March 31, 2025, compared to December 31, 2024, due primarily to net income and lower unrealized losses in the market value of securities available for sale, which are recognized as a component of other comprehensive income, partially offset by dividends paid on the Corporation’s common stock. The Corporation’s securities available for sale are fixed income debt securities and their unrealized loss position is a result of increased market interest rates since they were purchased. The Corporation expects to recover its investments in debt securities through scheduled payments of principal and interest. Unrealized losses are not expected to affect the earnings or regulatory capital of the Corporation or C&F Bank. The accumulated other comprehensive loss related to the Corporation’s securities available for sale, net of deferred income taxes, decreased to $19.1 million at March 31, 2025 compared to $23.7 million at December 31, 2024 due primarily to fluctuations in debt security market interest rates and a decrease in the balance of securities available for sale in an unrealized loss position as a result of maturities, calls and paydowns.
As of March 31, 2025, the most recent notification from the FDIC categorized C&F Bank as well capitalized under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. To be categorized as well capitalized under regulations applicable at March 31, 2025, C&F Bank was required to maintain minimum total risk-based, Tier 1 risk-based, CET1 risk-based and Tier 1 leverage ratios. In addition to the regulatory risk-based capital requirements, C&F Bank must maintain a capital conservation buffer of additional capital of 2.5 percent of risk-weighted assets as required by the Basel III capital rules. The Corporation and C&F Bank exceeded these ratios at March 31, 2025. For additional information, see “Capital Ratios” below. The above mentioned ratios are not impacted by unrealized losses on securities available for sale. In the event that all of these unrealized losses become realized into earnings, the Corporation and C&F Bank would both continue to exceed minimum capital requirements, including the capital conservation buffer, and be considered well capitalized.
In December 2024, the Board of Directors authorized a program, effective January 1, 2025 through December 31, 2025, to repurchase up to $5.0 million of the Corporation’s common stock (the 2025 Repurchase Program). During the first quarter of 2025, the Corporation did not make any repurchases of its common stock under the 2025 Repurchase Program.
About C&F Financial Corporation. The Corporation’s common stock is listed for trading on The Nasdaq Stock Market under the symbol CFFI. The common stock closed at a price of $65.33 per share on April 23, 2025. At March 31, 2025, the book value per share of the Corporation was $72.51 and the tangible book value per share was $64.39. For more information about the Corporation’s tangible book value per share, which is not calculated in accordance with GAAP, please see “Use of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “Reconciliation of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures,” below.
C&F Bank operates 31 banking offices and four commercial loan offices located throughout eastern and central Virginia and offers full wealth management services through its subsidiary C&F Wealth Management, Inc. C&F Mortgage Corporation and its subsidiary C&F Select LLC provide mortgage loan origination services through offices located in Virginia and the surrounding states. C&F Finance Company provides automobile, marine and recreational vehicle loans through indirect lending programs offered primarily in the Mid-Atlantic, Midwest and Southern United States from its headquarters in Henrico, Virginia.
Additional information regarding the Corporation’s products and services, as well as access to its filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), are available on the Corporation’s website at http://www.cffc.com.
Use of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures. The accounting and reporting policies of the Corporation conform to GAAP in the United States and prevailing practices in the banking industry. However, certain non-GAAP measures are used by management to supplement the evaluation of the Corporation’s performance. These may include adjusted net income, adjusted earnings per share, adjusted return on average equity, adjusted return on average assets, return on average tangible common equity (ROTCE), adjusted ROTCE, tangible book value per share, price to tangible book value ratio, and the following fully-taxable equivalent (FTE) measures: interest income on loans-FTE, interest income on securities-FTE, total interest income-FTE and net interest income-FTE.
Management believes that the use of these non-GAAP measures provides meaningful information about operating performance by enhancing comparability with other financial periods, other financial institutions, and between different sources of interest income. The non-GAAP measures used by management enhance comparability by excluding the effects of balances of intangible assets, including goodwill, that vary significantly between institutions, and tax benefits that are not consistent across different opportunities for investment. These non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered an alternative to, or more important than, GAAP-basis financial statements, and other bank holding companies may define or calculate these or similar measures differently. A reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measures used by the Corporation to evaluate and measure the Corporation’s performance to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures is presented below.
Forward-Looking Statements. This press release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These forward-looking statements are based on the beliefs of the Corporation’s management, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to, the Corporation’s management, and reflect management’s current views with respect to certain events that could have an impact on the Corporation’s future financial performance. These statements, including without limitation statements made in Mr. Cherry’s quote and statements regarding future interest rates and conditions in the Corporation’s industries and markets, relate to expectations concerning matters that are not historical fact, may express “belief,” “intention,” “expectation,” “potential” and similar expressions, and may use the words “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “plan,” “may,” “might,” “will,” “intend,” “target,” “should,” “could,” or similar expressions. These statements are inherently uncertain, and there can be no assurance that the underlying assumptions will prove to be accurate. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated or implied by such statements. Forward-looking statements in this release may include, without limitation, statements regarding expected future operations and financial performance, expected trends in yields on loans, expected future recovery of investments in debt securities, future dividend payments, deposit trends, charge-offs and delinquencies, changes in cost of funds and net interest margin and items affecting net interest margin, strategic business initiatives and the anticipated effects thereof, changes in interest rates and the effects thereof on net interest income, mortgage loan originations, expectations regarding C&F Bank’s regulatory risk-based capital requirement levels, technology initiatives, our diversified business strategy, asset quality, credit quality, adequacy of allowances for credit losses and the level of future charge-offs, market interest rates and housing inventory and resulting effects in mortgage loan origination volume, sources of liquidity, adequacy of the reserve for indemnification losses related to loans sold in the secondary market, the effect of future market and industry trends, the effects of future interest rate fluctuations, cybersecurity risks, and inflation. Factors that could have a material adverse effect on the operations and future prospects of the Corporation include, but are not limited to, changes in:
interest rates, such as volatility in short-term interest rates or yields on U.S. Treasury bonds, increases in interest rates following actions by the Federal Reserve and increases or volatility in mortgage interest rates
general business conditions, as well as conditions within the financial markets
general economic conditions, including unemployment levels, inflation rates, supply chain disruptions and slowdowns in economic growth
general market conditions, including disruptions due to pandemics or significant health hazards, severe weather conditions, natural disasters, terrorist activities, financial crises, political crises, changes in trade policy and the implementation of tariffs, war and other military conflicts or other major events, or the prospect of these events
average loan yields and average costs of interest-bearing deposits and borrowings
financial services industry conditions, including bank failures or concerns involving liquidity
labor market conditions, including attracting, hiring, training, motivating and retaining qualified employees
the legislative/regulatory climate, regulatory initiatives with respect to financial institutions, products and services, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the CFPB) and the regulatory and enforcement activities of the CFPB
monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. Government, including policies of the FDIC, U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the effect of these policies on interest rates and business in our markets
demand for financial services in the Corporation’s market area
the value of securities held in the Corporation’s investment portfolios
the quality or composition of the loan portfolios and the value of the collateral securing those loans
the inventory level, demand and fluctuations in the pricing of used automobiles, including sales prices of repossessed vehicles
the level of automobile loan delinquencies or defaults and our ability to repossess automobiles securing delinquent automobile finance installment contracts
the level of net charge-offs on loans and the adequacy of our allowance for credit losses
the level of indemnification losses related to mortgage loans sold
demand for loan products
deposit flows
the strength of the Corporation’s counterparties
the availability of lines of credit from the FHLB and other counterparties
the soundness of other financial institutions and any indirect exposure related to the closing of other financial institutions and their impact on the broader market through other customers, suppliers and partners, or that the conditions which resulted in the liquidity concerns experienced by closed financial institutions may also adversely impact, directly or indirectly, other financial institutions and market participants with which the Corporation has commercial or deposit relationships
competition from both banks and non-banks, including competition in the non-prime automobile finance markets and marine and recreational vehicle finance markets
services provided by, or the level of the Corporation’s reliance upon third parties for key services
the commercial and residential real estate markets, including changes in property values
the demand for residential mortgages and conditions in the secondary residential mortgage loan markets
the Corporation’s technology initiatives and other strategic initiatives
the Corporation’s branch expansion, relocation and consolidation plans
cyber threats, attacks or events
C&F Bank’s product offerings
accounting principles, policies and guidelines, and elections by the Corporation thereunder.
These risks and uncertainties should be considered in evaluating the forward-looking statements contained herein, and readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this release. For additional information on risk factors that could affect the forward-looking statements contained herein, see the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and other reports filed with the SEC. The Corporation undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
C&F Financial Corporation
Selected Financial Information (dollars in thousands, except for per share data) (unaudited)
Financial Condition
3/31/2025
12/31/2024
3/31/2024
Interest-bearing deposits in other banks
$
62,490
$
49,423
$
39,303
Investment securities – available for sale, at fair value
431,513
418,625
430,421
Loans held for sale, at fair value
27,278
20,112
22,622
Loans, net:
Community Banking segment
1,463,679
1,436,226
1,324,690
Consumer Finance segment
439,604
444,085
452,537
Total assets
2,612,530
2,563,374
2,469,751
Deposits
2,216,654
2,170,860
2,087,932
Repurchase agreements
25,909
28,994
27,803
Other borrowings
93,546
93,615
93,772
Total equity
235,271
226,970
216,949
ForThe
Quarter Ended
Results of Operations
3/31/2025
3/31/2024
Interest income
$
35,988
$
32,708
Interest expense
10,978
9,550
Provision for credit losses:
Community Banking segment
100
500
Consumer Finance segment
2,900
3,000
Noninterest income:
Gains on sales of loans
1,847
1,288
Other
5,726
6,204
Noninterest expenses:
Salaries and employee benefits
13,483
14,252
Other
9,576
8,898
Income tax expense
1,129
565
Net income
5,395
3,435
Fully-taxable equivalent (FTE) amounts1
Interest income on loans-FTE
32,428
29,636
Interest income on securities-FTE
3,346
3,098
Total interest income-FTE
36,276
32,993
Net interest income-FTE
25,298
23,443
________________________ 1For more information about these non-GAAP financial measures, please see “Use of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “Reconciliation of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
For the Quarter Ended
3/31/2025
3/31/2024
Average
Income/
Yield/
Average
Income/
Yield/
Yield Analysis
Balance
Expense
Rate
Balance
Expense
Rate
Assets
Securities:
Taxable
$
339,450
$
2,193
2.58
%
$
365,244
$
1,980
2.17
%
Tax-exempt
119,033
1,153
3.87
120,920
1,118
3.70
Total securities
458,483
3,346
2.92
486,164
3,098
2.55
Loans:
Community banking segment
1,467,555
19,966
5.52
1,302,260
17,331
5.35
Mortgage banking segment
20,968
339
6.56
17,700
281
6.39
Consumer finance segment
465,526
12,123
10.56
473,848
12,024
10.21
Total loans
1,954,049
32,428
6.73
1,793,808
29,636
6.64
Interest-bearing deposits in other banks
55,830
502
3.65
28,417
259
3.67
Total earning assets
2,468,362
36,276
5.95
2,308,389
32,993
5.75
Allowance for credit losses
(40,605
)
(40,292
)
Total non-earning assets
154,554
156,800
Total assets
$
2,582,311
$
2,424,897
Liabilities and Equity
Interest-bearing deposits:
Interest-bearing demand deposits
$
332,341
600
0.67
$
335,570
553
0.66
Savings and money market deposit accounts
489,217
1,205
1.00
484,645
1,061
0.88
Certificates of deposit
821,949
7,964
3.93
705,167
6,916
3.94
Total interest-bearing deposits
1,643,507
9,769
2.40
1,525,382
8,530
2.25
Borrowings:
Repurchase agreements
28,192
112
1.59
27,997
111
1.59
Other borrowings
93,597
1,097
4.69
78,445
909
4.64
Total borrowings
121,789
1,209
3.97
106,442
1,020
3.83
Total interest-bearing liabilities
1,765,296
10,978
2.51
1,631,824
9,550
2.35
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits
545,346
531,885
Other liabilities
40,874
44,125
Total liabilities
2,351,516
2,207,834
Equity
230,795
217,063
Total liabilities and equity
$
2,582,311
$
2,424,897
Net interest income
$
25,298
$
23,443
Interest rate spread
3.44
%
3.40
%
Interest expense to average earning assets
1.79
%
1.66
%
Net interest margin
4.16
%
4.09
%
3/31/2025
Funding Sources
Capacity
Outstanding
Available
Unsecured federal funds agreements
$
75,000
$
—
$
75,000
Borrowings from FHLB
248,508
40,000
208,508
Borrowings from Federal Reserve Bank
315,221
—
315,221
Total
$
638,729
$
40,000
$
598,729
Asset Quality
3/31/2025
12/31/2024
Community Banking
Total loans
$
1,481,190
$
1,453,605
Nonaccrual loans
$
1,189
$
333
Allowance for credit losses (ACL)
$
17,511
$
17,379
Nonaccrual loans to total loans
0.08
%
0.02
%
ACL to total loans
1.18
%
1.20
%
ACL to nonaccrual loans
1,472.75
%
5,218.92
%
Annualized year-to-date net charge-offs to average loans
0.01
%
0.01
%
Consumer Finance
Total loans
$
462,136
$
466,793
Nonaccrual loans
$
975
$
614
Repossessed assets
$
976
$
779
ACL
$
22,532
$
22,708
Nonaccrual loans to total loans
0.21
%
0.13
%
ACL to total loans
4.88
%
4.86
%
ACL to nonaccrual loans
2,310.97
%
3,698.37
%
Annualized year-to-date net charge-offs to average loans
2.64
%
2.62
%
For The
Quarter Ended
Other Performance Data
3/31/2025
3/31/2024
Net Income (Loss):
Community Banking
$
5,445
$
4,012
Mortgage Banking
431
294
Consumer Finance
226
(63
)
Other1
(707
)
(808
)
Total
$
5,395
$
3,435
Net income attributable to C&F Financial Corporation
$
5,368
$
3,401
Earnings per share – basic and diluted
$
1.66
$
1.01
Weighted average shares outstanding – basic and diluted
3,234,935
3,370,934
Annualized return on average assets
0.84
%
0.57
%
Annualized return on average equity
9.35
%
6.33
%
Annualized return on average tangible common equity2
10.65
%
7.30
%
Dividends declared per share
$
0.46
$
0.44
Mortgage loan originations – Mortgage Banking
$
113,750
$
94,346
Mortgage loans sold – Mortgage Banking
106,431
86,079
________________________ 1 Includes results of the holding company that are not allocated to the business segments and elimination of inter-segment activity. 2 For more information about these non-GAAP financial measures, please see “Use of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “Reconciliation of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Market Ratios
3/31/2025
12/31/2024
Market value per share
$
67.39
$
71.25
Book value per share
$
72.51
$
70.00
Price to book value ratio
0.93
1.02
Tangible book value per share1
$
64.39
$
61.86
Price to tangible book value ratio1
1.05
1.15
Price to earnings ratio (ttm)
11.16
11.86
________________________ 1 For more information about these non-GAAP financial measures, please see “Use of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and “Reconciliation of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”
Minimum Capital
Capital Ratios
3/31/2025
12/31/2024
Requirements3
C&F Financial Corporation1
Total risk-based capital ratio
14.1
%
14.1
%
8.0
%
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio
11.9
%
11.9
%
6.0
%
Common equity tier 1 capital ratio
10.8
%
10.7
%
4.5
%
Tier 1 leverage ratio
9.9
%
9.8
%
4.0
%
C&F Bank2
Total risk-based capital ratio
13.7
%
13.5
%
8.0
%
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio
12.4
%
12.3
%
6.0
%
Common equity tier 1 capital ratio
12.4
%
12.3
%
4.5
%
Tier 1 leverage ratio
10.3
%
10.1
%
4.0
%
________________________ 1 The Corporation, a small bank holding company under applicable regulations and guidance, is not subject to the minimum regulatory capital regulations for bank holding companies. The regulatory requirements that apply to bank holding companies that are subject to regulatory capital requirements are presented above, along with the Corporation’s capital ratios as determined under those regulations. 2 All ratios at March 31, 2025 are estimates and subject to change pending regulatory filings. All ratios at December 31, 2024 are presented as filed. 3 The ratios presented for minimum capital requirements are those to be considered adequately capitalized.
For The Quarter Ended
3/31/2025
3/31/2024
Reconciliation of Certain Non-GAAP Financial Measures
Return on Average Tangible Common Equity
Average total equity, as reported
$
230,795
$
217,063
Average goodwill
(25,191
)
(25,191
)
Average other intangible assets
(1,118
)
(1,366
)
Average noncontrolling interest
(637
)
(649
)
Average tangible common equity
$
203,849
$
189,857
Net income
$
5,395
$
3,435
Amortization of intangibles
62
65
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
(27
)
(34
)
Net tangible income attributable to C&F Financial Corporation
$
5,430
$
3,466
Annualized return on average equity, as reported
9.35
%
6.33
%
Annualized return on average tangible common equity
10.65
%
7.30
%
For The Quarter Ended
3/31/2025
3/31/2024
Fully Taxable Equivalent Net Interest Income1
Interest income on loans
$
32,382
$
29,586
FTE adjustment
46
50
FTE interest income on loans
$
32,428
$
29,636
Interest income on securities
$
3,104
$
2,863
FTE adjustment
242
235
FTE interest income on securities
$
3,346
$
3,098
Total interest income
$
35,988
$
32,708
FTE adjustment
288
285
FTE interest income
$
36,276
$
32,993
Net interest income
$
25,010
$
23,158
FTE adjustment
288
285
FTE net interest income
$
25,298
$
23,443
____________________ 1 Assuming a tax rate of 21%.
3/31/2025
12/31/2024
Tangible Book Value Per Share
Equity attributable to C&F Financial Corporation
$
234,634
$
226,360
Goodwill
(25,191
)
(25,191
)
Other intangible assets
(1,084
)
(1,147
)
Tangible equity attributable to C&F Financial Corporation
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation FBI Crime News (b)
In early 2023, a unit in the FBI’s Criminal Division that focuses on child exploitation sifted through terabytes of communications and uncovered thousands of digital breadcrumbs that led to Nigeria. The Child Exploitation Operational Unit assembled priority lists of subjects to locate and interview in the West African country, including some of the cases that involved suicides.
The FBI, through the legal attaché office in Nigeria, coordinated all this with Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the country’s lead agency for investigating financial crimes. Other partners included federal agencies in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom that had similar sextortion cases resolving to Nigeria.
In late summer 2023, a team of FBI special agents, analysts, and forensic examiners—along with criminal investigators from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)—set up a discreet temporary command post in the city of Lagos. The operation was dubbed Artemis after the Greek goddess who protects youths. In Nigeria, the teams worked in shifts for weeks at a time exchanging information with EFCC investigators to facilitate the arrests and interviews of Nigerians whose digital footprints appeared to connect them to some of the most appalling cases in the U.S.
“Everybody was equally invested in making this one goal happen,” said Special Agent Karen R., who managed the Bureau’s coordination of the sextortion cases that led up to the weeks-long operation in Nigeria. While Canada and Australia are well-known partners for the FBI, Karen pointed out that Nigeria’s EFCC has a uniquely strong track record of working with the Bureau, particularly on sprawling financial crimes that both countries are trying to stamp out.
“They are just as invested as we are in trying to make this problem go away,” she said. “We all know Nigerian prince scams. We know all of the scams that are traditionally done there. They’re aware of it, too, and don’t like that their country is known for that type of activity.”
Indeed, as everyone set out in the summer of 2023 to find and arrest the criminals and bring them to justice, Nigerian authorities were on a parallel mission of trying to dissuade would-be scammers in their own country from taking up sextortion and other financial crimes as an easy way to make money.
Poverty is widespread in Nigeria, and jobs and opportunities are scarce. Smart, tech-savvy, college-aged individuals with a phone, nude images scraped from the internet, and a script for duping faraway boys might view sextortion as a viable trade with little risk or downside.
In a release issued under the same headline today by The Now Corporation (OTC: NWPN), please note that the provided embedded image has changed. The corrected release follows:
PASADENA, Calif., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Now Corporation (OTC: NWPN), a diversified holding company focused on sustainable innovation, is excited to announce the publication of its April 2025 newsletter. The latest edition highlights major advancements in electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure and the continued evolution of its vintage fashion subsidiary.
Reviving American Heritage through M Love Vintage Holdings Inc. The newsletter also spotlights M Love Vintage Holdings Inc., the company’s fashion subsidiary, which is reviving iconic Americana through the timeless styles of Chuck’s Vintage. This effort marks a new era for the brand, celebrating its legacy while embracing a modern, luxurious approach to vintage wear. M Love Vintage Holdings Inc. Embarks on New Era of Luxury Vintage Fashion Under The Now Corporation
About The Now Corporation: The Now Corporation is committed to acquiring and developing sustainable technologies across industries such as renewable energy, electric mobility, and advanced manufacturing. Through its subsidiaries, including Green Rain Solar Inc. and M Love Vintage Holdings Inc., the company strives to deliver impactful innovation.
Legal Notice Regarding Forward-Looking Statements This press release contains forward-looking information within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and is subject to the safe harbor created by those sections. This material contains statements about expected future events and/or financial results that are forward- looking in nature and subject to risks and uncertainties. This includes the possibility that the business outlined in this press release may not be concluded due to unforeseen technical, installation, permitting, or other challenges. Such forward-looking statements involve risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance, or achievements of The Now Corporation to differ materially from those expressed herein. Except as required under U.S. federal securities laws, The Now Corporation undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.
Following a two-week trial, a federal jury in Minneapolis convicted three Minnesota men yesterday for their involvement in the Highs — a violent Minneapolis street gang — and a gang-related murder on Aug. 7, 2021.
“These defendants participated in a senseless murder and other acts of violence that terrorized their community,” said Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Department’s Criminal Division. “Today’s conviction sends a message to gang members in Minneapolis that there is no glory in gun violence. Working with our federal, state, and local law enforcement partners, the Department is committed to prosecuting criminal enterprises that use violence and intimidation to exert power in our cities — dismantling violent gangs and securing justice for the victims and their loved ones.”
“Minneapolis criminal street gangs have inflicted devastating harm on our community for far too long. Three years ago, the U.S. Attorney’s Office announced our federal violent crime initiative to address the skyrocketing and completely unacceptable rates of violent crime in Minnesota,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Lisa D. Kirkpatrick for the District of Minnesota. “Since then, we have brought large RICO cases against three criminal street gangs — charging them as the violent enterprises they are. Make no mistake: we will not stop. Criminal street gangs in Minneapolis will continue to see federal justice. The citizens of Minnesota — the many victims of these crimes — deserve no less.”
“This conviction sends a strong message that violent street gangs will not be tolerated in our communities,” said Special Agent in Charge Travis Riddle of the ATF St. Paul Field Division. “Through the power of the RICO statute, ATF agents, in partnership with federal, state, and local law enforcement, have been able to target the violent criminal activity of the Highs gang. This conviction is a direct result of the tireless work by our agents who are committed to dismantling these criminal organizations and ensuring that those who use violence to control neighborhoods are held accountable. ATF will continue to lead efforts to take down street gangs and protect the citizens of Minneapolis.”
“This was cold-blooded, calculated violence meant to control through fear,” said Special Agent in Charge Alvin M. Winston Sr. of FBI Minneapolis. “They believed violence gave them power—but today’s conviction proves that justice is stronger. The FBI, together with our law enforcement partners, is committed to dismantling these criminal enterprises and holding violent offenders accountable.
“Minneapolis has seen a significant drop in violent crime, especially gun violence, thanks to the outstanding work of MPD officers and our law enforcement partners. Most notably, the U.S. Attorney’s Office has been instrumental in helping us target the small number of individuals driving violence, without causing harm to the broader communities we serve. Together, we’re not just reducing crime — we’re rebuilding trust,” said Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara.
“The verdict marks a decisive victory in the fight against violent criminal organizations,” said Ramsey E. Covington, Special Agent in Charge, IRS Criminal Investigation, Chicago Field Office. “Reducing violence in this community has required a change in tactics, and IRS Criminal Investigation special agents are perfectly poised to support our law enforcement partners in this effort. Our agents will continue to apply their financial expertise and investigative skills to bring justice to those who endanger our communities and threaten our way of life.”
According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Keon Pruitt, 22, Dantrell Johnson, 32, and Gregory Hamilton, 29, each of Minneapolis, were members of various “cliques,” or subsets, of the Highs — a criminal enterprise that controlled territory north of West Broadway Avenue in Minneapolis. Evidence at trial proved that the Highs gang committed multiple murders, narcotics trafficking, weapons violations, burglaries, assaults, and robberies. As members of the Highs, the defendants were expected to retaliate against the rival Lows gang, which operated south of West Broadway Avenue.
On Aug. 7, 2021, a prominent Highs member was shot and killed by a Lows member at the Winner gas station, a Highs hangout. The following day, Highs members organized a memorial for the deceased member at the gas station, where they distributed firearms and encouraged each other to retaliate against Lows members for the murder. Defendants Pruitt, Johnson, and Hamilton were all in attendance at the memorial.
Later that day, Johnson and Hamilton drove to a known Lows hangout — Wally’s Foods — and shot a Lows associate, who survived his injuries. Approximately two hours later, Johnson, Hamilton, and Pruitt drove to Skyline Market, another known Lows hangout, to shoot another Lows member. Inside the market, they shot a man whom they mistakenly believed to be a Lows member — which was captured on the store’s cameras. The victim ran for his life from the store and into the street. Pruitt, who was driving two juvenile members in a stolen Porsche, let the juveniles out of the car. The juvenile members then chased the victim into a nearby alley and fatally shot him. The victim was shot at least eight times.
The jury convicted Prutt, Johnson, and Hamilton of Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) conspiracy and using and carrying a firearm in relation to a crime of violence resulting in death. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled at a later date. Each defendant faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
This is the first of several trials scheduled in this case, which charged a total of 28 defendants with RICO conspiracy, narcotics trafficking, firearms offenses, and other charges related to their activities as members and associates of the Highs gang. Sixteen defendants are pending trial.
The ATF, FBI, Minneapolis Police Department, IRS Criminal Investigation, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, and Minnesota Department of Corrections are investigating the case, with assistance from the U.S. Marshals Service, DEA, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. The Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office, Dakota County Sheriff’s Office, St. Paul Police Department, and numerous other law enforcement agencies contributed to the investigation.
Trial Attorney Brian Lynch of the Criminal Division’s Violent Crime and Racketeering Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Thomas Lopez-Calhoun, Albania Concepcion, and Rebecca Kline for the District of Minnesota tried this case.
CHICAGO, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — What do you get when you combine a spotless shop floor, a legacy of quality craftsmanship, and an entrepreneur with vision? A modern American Dream in motion.
Billy Banks, a Chicago-based entrepreneur, father of triplets, and former Northwestern University entrepreneurship professor, has acquired General Machine, a precision manufacturing business based in Freeburg, Illinois. Established in 1980, General Machine has earned its reputation by delivering high-quality custom metal fabrication and machining services to industries such as mining, construction, power generation, and infrastructure.
A native of Elkhart, Indiana, Banks began his career in the RV industry, learning the fundamentals of American manufacturing firsthand. From there, his journey was anything but linear—spanning corporate roles, startups, and even academia. He first cut his teeth by co-founding M-Tec Corporation, a steel fabrication business servicing the RV, commercial vehicle and trailer industries. Next, he co-founded Reach360, a HR-tech platform focused on providing Fortune 500 HR services and benefits to small businesses. Whether in the classroom or the boardroom, Banks has remained committed to creating opportunity and building things that last.
“When I was growing up in northern Indiana, I saw what happens when manufacturing disappears—it leaves a void in communities,” said Banks. “But I also saw what’s possible when you reinvest in people and production.”
That belief led him to acquire General Machine—a business with skilled employees, strong customer relationships, and untapped potential. The acquisition, which included both the business and its real estate, required a creative financing solution. That’s where First American Bank stepped in.
To overcome high capital barriers, Banks partnered with the bank to structure a deal that leveraged the SBA 7(a) loan program to reduce the down payment, finance goodwill, and support stable cash flow through a 10-year amortization schedule. Working in tandem with GrowthCorp, First American Bank also utilized the SBA 504 program to secure 40% of the project at a fixed 25-year rate—while requiring only a 10% down payment. A working capital line of credit rounded out the financing to support ongoing operations.
“Billy brought a clear vision, strong experience, and a deep passion for revitalizing American manufacturing,” said Ross Van Beek, Senior Vice President, Commercial Loan Relationship Manager at First American Bank.
“This is exactly the kind of entrepreneurial story we love to support—because it creates jobs, strengthens communities, and builds the future of American industry.”
Van Beek, along with colleagues Mark Kroencke and Madelyn McCarthy, played a pivotal role in structuring and closing the transaction.
Now at the helm, Banks has ambitious plans: double the business in three years—and then do it again.
He’s building on a rock-solid foundation. General Machine’s capabilities include:
Large precision machining for industrial-scale components
Welding and fabrication of steel, stainless, and aluminum
CNC machining, plasma cutting, and forming for structural and heavy equipment applications
Sheet metal and custom part fabrication backed by deep technical expertise
Banks is already modernizing the company—enhancing digital outreach, deepening customer relationships, and integrating advanced technologies like AI to improve quoting, scheduling, and operational efficiency.
“General Machine has all the right bones,” said Banks. “Now it’s about honoring what works—craftsmanship, relationships, integrity—while building something even bigger.”
Thanks to First American Bank’s strategic financial support and Banks’ bold leadership, General Machine is poised to lead the next era of precision manufacturing—one expertly machined part at a time.
If you’re looking to take your business to the next level with innovative financial solutions, contact First American Bank today. Our team is ready to help you structure the right financing to fuel your growth.
For more information about First American Bank and its services, visit www.firstambank.com.
First American Bank is a Member FDIC.
Contact: Teresa Lee 305-631-6400 tlee@firstambank.com
Innovate BC’s new IP Hub is a one-stop-shop for innovators to access tailored education and resources that will help them protect and leverage their intellectual property
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Launched today, Innovate BC’s new IP Hub digital platform supports B.C. entrepreneurs in developing their understanding of intellectual property (IP) to support the building and implementing of an effective IP strategy to help grow their business.
Developed as part of the Province of British Columbia’s Intellectual Property Strategy, the free-to-use IP Hub offers a tailored experience that will connect users with information and resources based on an assessment of their current IP competency.
“B.C.’s Intellectual Property Strategy is about supporting our local businesses by giving them the tools they need to protect, grow and profit from what they create,” said Diana Gibson, Minister of Jobs, Economic Development and Innovation. “The launch of the IP Hub is a key part of that—helping entrepreneurs, researchers, startups and our high potential businesses fully understand their IP, scale their businesses, and keep their talent right here at home in British Columbia.”
The strategic management of IP is essential for companies developing innovative products or solutions, playing a crucial role in commercialization, increasing revenue, and competitiveness. The IP Hub offers relevant and timely resources that meet the user’s current level of IP comprehension and will provide them with ongoing support to build, implement and expand their own IP strategy.
Once assessed, users will have access to a wide range of supports that are available within B.C. and across Canada, aligned to their business stage, sector, size, and other characteristics that inform IP strategy. Resources include access to localized IP programming, a calendar of relevant and upcoming IP-focussed events, education materials, and more.
“Having a clear and proactive intellectual property strategy isn’t just a competitive advantage — it’s a necessity,” said Peter Cowan, President and CEO of Innovate BC. “For innovators and tech companies, IP is often their most valuable asset, protecting innovation, attracting investment, and enabling growth. By bolstering IP capacities here in British Columbia, we’re empowering our startups and scale-ups to thrive, strengthening our innovation ecosystem, and unlocking long-term economic prosperity for communities and industries across the province.”
The IP Hub is a part of Innovate BC’s suite of IP programs and resources for B.C. companies, which includes AccelerateIP, a program delivered by New Ventures BC that provides innovators with IP-related education, funding, and strategy development.
To learn more about the IP Hub and to access the platform, visit https://bcip.ca/
Additional Quotes
Faisal Khan, Founder + CEO, FMRK Diagnostic Technologies
“A dynamic IP strategy is the life blood of any 21st century business. It allows you to secure investment capital, protect yourself in the market, recoup your R&D investments and so much more. Companies can never reach their full potential without one.”
Annie Dahan, Founder at Seacork Studio
“Developing a robust and actionable IP strategy has been essential to our growth, credibility and our ability to navigate the market.”
About Innovate BC
A Crown Agency of British Columbia, Innovate BC works to foster innovation across the province and bolster the growth of the local economy through delivering a wide range of programs that help companies start and scale, access talent and encourage technology development, commercialization, and adoption. Innovate BC also harnesses crucial data collection and research, and works to forge strategic industry and community partnerships that create more opportunities for B.C. innovators.
Following a two-week trial, a federal jury in Minneapolis convicted three Minnesota men yesterday for their involvement in the Highs — a violent Minneapolis street gang — and a gang-related murder on Aug. 7, 2021.
“These defendants participated in a senseless murder and other acts of violence that terrorized their community,” said Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Department’s Criminal Division. “Today’s conviction sends a message to gang members in Minneapolis that there is no glory in gun violence. Working with our federal, state, and local law enforcement partners, the Department is committed to prosecuting criminal enterprises that use violence and intimidation to exert power in our cities — dismantling violent gangs and securing justice for the victims and their loved ones.”
“Minneapolis criminal street gangs have inflicted devastating harm on our community for far too long. Three years ago, the U.S. Attorney’s Office announced our federal violent crime initiative to address the skyrocketing and completely unacceptable rates of violent crime in Minnesota,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Lisa D. Kirkpatrick for the District of Minnesota. “Since then, we have brought large RICO cases against three criminal street gangs — charging them as the violent enterprises they are. Make no mistake: we will not stop. Criminal street gangs in Minneapolis will continue to see federal justice. The citizens of Minnesota — the many victims of these crimes — deserve no less.”
“This conviction sends a strong message that violent street gangs will not be tolerated in our communities,” said Special Agent in Charge Travis Riddle of the ATF St. Paul Field Division. “Through the power of the RICO statute, ATF agents, in partnership with federal, state, and local law enforcement, have been able to target the violent criminal activity of the Highs gang. This conviction is a direct result of the tireless work by our agents who are committed to dismantling these criminal organizations and ensuring that those who use violence to control neighborhoods are held accountable. ATF will continue to lead efforts to take down street gangs and protect the citizens of Minneapolis.”
“This was cold-blooded, calculated violence meant to control through fear,” said Special Agent in Charge Alvin M. Winston Sr. of FBI Minneapolis. “They believed violence gave them power—but today’s conviction proves that justice is stronger. The FBI, together with our law enforcement partners, is committed to dismantling these criminal enterprises and holding violent offenders accountable.
“Minneapolis has seen a significant drop in violent crime, especially gun violence, thanks to the outstanding work of MPD officers and our law enforcement partners. Most notably, the U.S. Attorney’s Office has been instrumental in helping us target the small number of individuals driving violence, without causing harm to the broader communities we serve. Together, we’re not just reducing crime — we’re rebuilding trust,” said Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara.
“The verdict marks a decisive victory in the fight against violent criminal organizations,” said Ramsey E. Covington, Special Agent in Charge, IRS Criminal Investigation, Chicago Field Office. “Reducing violence in this community has required a change in tactics, and IRS Criminal Investigation special agents are perfectly poised to support our law enforcement partners in this effort. Our agents will continue to apply their financial expertise and investigative skills to bring justice to those who endanger our communities and threaten our way of life.”
According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, Keon Pruitt, 22, Dantrell Johnson, 32, and Gregory Hamilton, 29, each of Minneapolis, were members of various “cliques,” or subsets, of the Highs — a criminal enterprise that controlled territory north of West Broadway Avenue in Minneapolis. Evidence at trial proved that the Highs gang committed multiple murders, narcotics trafficking, weapons violations, burglaries, assaults, and robberies. As members of the Highs, the defendants were expected to retaliate against the rival Lows gang, which operated south of West Broadway Avenue.
On Aug. 7, 2021, a prominent Highs member was shot and killed by a Lows member at the Winner gas station, a Highs hangout. The following day, Highs members organized a memorial for the deceased member at the gas station, where they distributed firearms and encouraged each other to retaliate against Lows members for the murder. Defendants Pruitt, Johnson, and Hamilton were all in attendance at the memorial.
Later that day, Johnson and Hamilton drove to a known Lows hangout — Wally’s Foods — and shot a Lows associate, who survived his injuries. Approximately two hours later, Johnson, Hamilton, and Pruitt drove to Skyline Market, another known Lows hangout, to shoot another Lows member. Inside the market, they shot a man whom they mistakenly believed to be a Lows member — which was captured on the store’s cameras. The victim ran for his life from the store and into the street. Pruitt, who was driving two juvenile members in a stolen Porsche, let the juveniles out of the car. The juvenile members then chased the victim into a nearby alley and fatally shot him. The victim was shot at least eight times.
The jury convicted Prutt, Johnson, and Hamilton of Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) conspiracy and using and carrying a firearm in relation to a crime of violence resulting in death. A sentencing hearing will be scheduled at a later date. Each defendant faces a maximum penalty of life in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
This is the first of several trials scheduled in this case, which charged a total of 28 defendants with RICO conspiracy, narcotics trafficking, firearms offenses, and other charges related to their activities as members and associates of the Highs gang. Sixteen defendants are pending trial.
The ATF, FBI, Minneapolis Police Department, IRS Criminal Investigation, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, and Minnesota Department of Corrections are investigating the case, with assistance from the U.S. Marshals Service, DEA, Homeland Security Investigations, and the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office. The Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office, Dakota County Sheriff’s Office, St. Paul Police Department, and numerous other law enforcement agencies contributed to the investigation.
Trial Attorney Brian Lynch of the Criminal Division’s Violent Crime and Racketeering Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Thomas Lopez-Calhoun, Albania Concepcion, and Rebecca Kline for the District of Minnesota tried this case.
INDIANAPOLIS, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Today the Board of Directors of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis (“FHLBank Indianapolis” or “Bank”) declared its first quarter 2025 dividends on Class B-2 activity-based capital stock and Class B-1 non-activity-based stock at annualized rates of 9.50% and 4.50%, respectively. The higher dividend rate on activity-based stock reflects the Board’s discretion under the Bank’s capital plan to reward members that use FHLBank Indianapolis in support of their liquidity needs.
The dividends will be paid in cash on April 25, 2025.
Earnings Highlights
Net income, for the three months ended March 31, 2025, was $75 million, a net decrease of $20 million compared to the corresponding period in the prior year. The decrease was primarily due to net unrealized losses on qualifying fair-value and economic hedging relationships1, a substantial increase in voluntary contributions to affordable housing and community investment programs, and lower earnings on the portion of the Bank’s assets funded by its capital2, partially offset by higher interest spreads on interest-earning assets, net of interest-bearing liabilities.
Affordable Housing Program Allocation
The Bank’s Affordable Housing Program (“AHP”) provides grant funding to support housing for low- and moderate-income families in communities served by its Michigan and Indiana members. For the three months ended March 31, 2025, AHP assessments3 totaled $9 million. Such required allocations will be available to the Bank’s members in 2026 to help address their communities’ affordable housing needs, including construction, rehabilitation, accessibility improvements and homebuyer down-payment assistance.
In addition, as part of the Bank’s commitment to further support its AHP and additional affordable housing and community investment programs, the Bank voluntarily contributed additional funding, in the three months ended March 31, 2025, totaling $11 million, all of which has been recognized and reported in other expenses.
The Bank’s combined required and voluntary allocations recognized, in the three months ended March 31, 2025, totaled $20 million, an increase of $5 million, or 35%, compared to the corresponding period in the prior year.
Condensed Statements of Income
The following table presents unaudited condensed statements of income ($ amounts in millions):
Three Months Ended March 31,
2025
2024
Interest income(a)
$
940
$
1,016
Interest expense(a)
814
887
Provision for credit losses
—
—
Net interest income after provision for credit losses
126
129
Other income(b)
—
9
Other expenses(c)
42
32
AHP assessments
9
11
Net income
$
75
$
95
(a) Includes hedging gains (losses) and net interest settlements on fair-value hedge relationships. The Bank uses derivatives, specifically interest-rate swaps, to hedge the risk of changes in the fair value of certain of its advances, available-for-sale securities and consolidated obligations. These derivatives are designated as fair-value hedges and, therefore, changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative, and changes in the fair value of the hedged item that are attributable to the hedged risk, are recorded in net interest income. (b) Includes impact of purchase discount (premium) recorded through mark-to-market gains (losses) on trading securities and net interest settlements on derivatives hedging trading securities, while generally offsetting interest income on trading securities is included in interest income. (c) Includes voluntary contributions to the Bank’s AHP and other affordable housing and community investment programs.
Balance Sheet Highlights
Total assets, at March 31, 2025, were $80.7 billion, a net decrease of $3.8 billion, or 5%, from December 31, 2024, primarily due to a decrease in liquidity investments.
Advances4
The carrying value of advances outstanding, at March 31, 2025, totaled $38.5 billion, a net decrease of $1.3 billion, or 3%, from December 31, 2024. The par value of advances outstanding decreased by 4% to $38.6 billion, which included a net decrease in short-term advances of 7% and a net decrease in long-term advances of 2%. At March 31, 2025, based on contractual maturities, long-term advances composed 64% of advances outstanding, while short-term advances composed 36%.
The par value of advances outstanding to depository institutions — comprising commercial banks, savings institutions and credit unions — decreased by 4%, while advances outstanding to insurance companies decreased by 3%. As a percent of total advances outstanding at par value at March 31, 2025, advances to commercial banks and savings institutions were 52% and advances to credit unions were 14%, resulting in total advances to depository institutions of 66%, while advances to insurance companies were 34%.
In general, advances fluctuate in accordance with members’ funding needs, primarily determined by their deposit levels, mortgage pipelines, loan growth, investment opportunities, available collateral, other balance sheet strategies, and the cost of alternative funding options.
Mortgage Loans Held for Portfolio5
Mortgage loans held for portfolio, at March 31, 2025, totaled $11.4 billion, a net increase of $583 million, or 5%, from December 31, 2024, as the Bank’s purchases from its members exceeded principal repayments by borrowers. Purchases of mortgage loans from members, for the three months ended March 31, 2025, totaled $834 million.
In general, the Bank’s volume of mortgage loans purchased is affected by several factors, including interest rates, competition, the general level of housing and refinancing activity in the United States, consumer product preferences, the Bank’s balance sheet capacity and risk appetite, and regulatory considerations.
Liquidity Investments6
Liquidity investments, at March 31, 2025, totaled $9.5 billion, a net decrease of $3.5 billion, or 27%, from December 31, 2024. The Bank’s liquidity remained well above regulatory requirements and continues to enable the Bank to be a reliable liquidity provider to its members.
Cash and short-term investments decreased by $3.5 billion, or 29%, to $8.4 billion. The portion of U.S. Treasury obligations classified as trading securities increased by $7 million, or 1%, to $1.1 billion. As a result of this activity, cash and short-term investments represented 88% of the total liquidity investments at March 31, 2025, while U.S. Treasury obligations represented 12%.
The total outstanding balance and composition of the Bank’s liquidity investments are influenced by its liquidity needs, regulatory requirements, actual and anticipated member advance activity, market conditions, and the availability of short-term investments at attractive interest rates, relative to the cost of funds.
Other Investment Securities
Other investment securities, which consist substantially of mortgage-backed securities and U.S. Treasury obligations classified as held-to-maturity or available-for-sale, at March 31, 2025, totaled $20.6 billion, a net increase of $424 million, or 2%, from December 31, 2024.
Consolidated Obligations7
FHLBank Indianapolis’ consolidated obligations outstanding, at March 31, 2025, totaled $74.6 billion, a net decrease of $3.5 billion, or 4%, from December 31, 2024, which reflected decreased funding needs associated with the net decrease in the Bank’s total assets.
Capital8
Total capital, at March 31, 2025, was $4.2 billion, a net decrease of $48 million, or 1%, from December 31, 2024. The net decrease resulted primarily from the Bank’s repurchases of capital stock, offset by members’ purchases of capital stock to support their advance activity and the Bank’s growth in retained earnings.
The Bank’s regulatory capital-to-assets ratio9, at March 31, 2025, was 5.52%, which exceeds all applicable regulatory capital requirements.
Condensed Statements of Condition
The following table presents unaudited condensed statements of condition ($ amounts in millions):
March 31, 2025
December 31, 2024
Advances
$
38,487
$
39,833
Mortgage loans held for portfolio, net
11,379
10,796
Liquidity investments
9,451
12,911
Other investment securities(a)
20,613
20,189
Other assets
781
806
Total assets
$
80,711
$
84,535
Consolidated obligations
$
74,605
$
78,085
MRCS
266
363
Other liabilities
1,653
1,852
Total liabilities
76,524
80,300
Capital stock(b)
2,484
2,555
Retained earnings(c)
1,707
1,684
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
(4
)
(4
)
Total capital
4,187
4,235
Total liabilities and capital
$
80,711
$
84,535
Total regulatory capital(d)
$
4,457
$
4,602
Regulatory capital-to-assets ratio
5.52
%
5.44
%
(a) Includes held-to-maturity and available-for-sale securities. (b) Putable by members at par value. (c) Includes restricted retained earnings, at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, of $481 million and $466 million, respectively. (d) Consists of total capital less accumulated other comprehensive income plus mandatorily redeemable capital stock.
All amounts referenced above are unaudited. More detailed information about FHLBank Indianapolis’ financial condition as of March 31, 2025, and its results for the three months then ended, will be included in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in the Bank’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Safe Harbor Statement
This news release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 concerning plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events and performance. Forward-looking statements can be identified by words such as “will,” “believes,” “may,” “temporary,” “estimates,” and “expects” or the negative of these words or comparable terminology. Each forward-looking statement contained in this news release reflects FHLBank Indianapolis’ current beliefs and expectations. Actual results or performance may differ materially from what is expressed in any forward-looking statements.
Any forward-looking statement contained in this news release speaks only as of the date on which it was made. FHLBank Indianapolis undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise, except as may be required by law. Readers are referred to the documents filed by the Bank with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), specifically reports on Form 10-K and Form 10-Q, which include factors that could cause actual results to differ from forward-looking statements. These reports are available at www.sec.gov.
Media Contact: Scott Thien Senior Corporate Communications Associate 317-902-3103 sthien@fhlbi.com
Building Partnerships. Serving Communities. FHLBank Indianapolis is a regional bank included in the Federal Home Loan Bank System. FHLBanks are government-sponsored enterprises created by Congress to provide access to low-cost funding for their member financial institutions, with particular attention paid to providing solutions that support the housing and small business needs of members’ customers. FHLBanks are privately capitalized and funded, and receive no Congressional appropriations. FHLBank Indianapolis is owned by its Indiana and Michigan financial institution members, including commercial banks, credit unions, insurance companies, savings institutions and community development financial institutions.
For more information about FHLBank Indianapolis, visit www.fhlbi.com. Also, follow the Bank on LinkedIn, as well as Instagram and X at @FHLBankIndy. Please note that content the Bank shares on its website and social media is not incorporated by reference into any of its filings with the SEC unless, and only to the extent that, a filing by the Bank with the SEC expressly provides to the contrary.
1 The Bank’s net gains (losses) on derivatives fluctuate due to volatility in the overall interest-rate environment as the Bank hedges asset or liability risk exposures. In general, the Bank holds derivatives and associated hedged items to the maturity, call, or put date. Therefore, due to timing, nearly all of the cumulative net gains and losses for these financial instruments will generally reverse over the remaining contractual terms of the hedged item. However, there may be instances when the Bank terminates these instruments prior to the maturity, call or put date, which may result in a realized gain or loss. 2 FHLBank Indianapolis earns interest income on advances to and mortgage loans purchased from its Michigan and Indiana member financial institutions, as well as on long- and short-term investments. Net interest income is primarily determined by the size of the Bank’s balance sheet and the spread between the interest earned on its assets and the interest cost of funding with consolidated obligations. Because of the Bank’s inherent relatively low interest-rate spread, it has historically derived a significant portion of its net interest income from deploying its interest-free capital in floating-rate assets. 3 Each year, Federal Home Loan Banks are required to allocate to the AHP 10% of earnings, defined for this purpose as income before assessments plus interest expense on mandatorily redeemable capital stock. 4 Advances are secured loans that the Bank provides to its member institutions. 5 The Bank purchases mortgage loans from its members to support its housing mission, provide an additional source of liquidity to its members, and diversify its investments. 6 The Bank’s liquidity investments consist of cash, interest-bearing deposits, securities purchased under agreements to resell, federal funds sold and U.S. Treasury obligations. 7 The primary source of funds for FHLBank Indianapolis, and for the other FHLBanks, is the sale of FHLBanks’ consolidated obligations in the capital markets. FHLBank Indianapolis is the primary obligor for the payment of the principal and interest on the consolidated obligations issued on its behalf; additionally, it is jointly and severally liable with each of the other FHLBanks for all of the FHLBanks’ consolidated obligations outstanding. 8 FHLBank Indianapolis is a cooperative whose member financial institutions and former members own all of its capital stock as a condition of membership and to support outstanding credit products. 9 Total regulatory capital, which consists of capital stock, mandatorily redeemable capital stock and retained earnings, as a percentage of total assets.
ATLANTA, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (the Bank) today released preliminary unaudited financial highlights for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. All numbers reported below for the first quarter of 2025 are approximate until the Bank announces unaudited financial results in its Form 10-Q, which is expected to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on or about May 9, 2025.
Operating Results for the First Quarter of 2025
Net interest income for the first quarter of 2025 was $207 million, a decrease of $47 million, compared to net interest income of $254 million for the same period in 2024. The decrease in net interest income was primarily due to a decrease in interest rates and a decrease in average advance balances during the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024. Net income for the first quarter of 2025 was $143 million, a decrease of $51 million, compared to net income of $194 million for the same period in 2024. The decrease in net income was primarily due to the decrease in net interest income.
For the first quarter of 2025, the Bank continued to meet members’ liquidity demand and average advance balances were $97.1 billion, compared to average advance balances of $103.0 billion for the same period in 2024.
The net yield on interest-earning assets for the first quarter of 2025 was 56 basis points, compared to 66 basis points for the same period in 2024. Many of the Bank’s assets and liabilities are indexed to the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR). Average daily SOFR during the first quarter of 2025 was 4.33 percent compared to 5.31 percent for the same period in 2024.
The Bank’s first quarter 2025 performance resulted in an annualized return on average equity (ROE) of 6.82 percent as compared to 9.24 percent for the same period in 2024. The decrease in ROE was primarily due to the decreased net income for the first quarter of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024.
Financial Condition Highlights
Total assets were $146.2 billion as of March 31, 2025, a decrease of $858 million from December 31, 2024.
Advances outstanding were $85.7 billion as of March 31, 2025, a decrease of $157 million from December 31, 2024.
Total capital was $8.0 billion as of March 31, 2025, an increase of $56 million from December 31, 2024. Retained earnings were $2.8 billion as of March 31, 2025, an increase of $43 million from December 31, 2024.
As of March 31, 2025, the Bank was in compliance with all applicable regulatory capital and liquidity requirements.
Reliable Source of Liquidity
During the first quarter of 2025, the Bank originated a total of $75.5 billion of advances, thereby providing significant liquidity to its members to support lending and other activities in their communities. The Bank is proud to continue to execute on its mission to be a reliable source of liquidity and funding for its members, while remaining adequately capitalized.
Commitment to Affordable Housing and Community Development
The Bank commits 10 percent of its income before assessments to support the affordable housing and community development needs of communities served by its members as required by law, which amounted to $77 million for the 2024 statutory Affordable Housing Program (AHP) assessment available for funding in 2025. As of March 31, 2025, the Bank has accrued $16 million to its AHP pool of funds that will be available to the Bank’s members and their communities in 2026 for funding of eligible projects.
The Bank has committed to voluntarily contribute, at a minimum, an additional 50 percent of its prior year statutory AHP assessment to affordable housing. For 2025, the Bank authorized $41 million in voluntary housing contributions consisting of $9 million in voluntary non-statutory AHP contributions and $32 million in voluntary non-AHP contributions. These amounts are anticipated to be expensed during 2025.
Since the inception of its AHP in 1990, the Bank has awarded more than $1.2 billion in AHP funds, assisting more than 177,000 households.
Dividends
On April 24, 2025, the board of directors of the Bank approved a quarterly cash dividend at an annualized rate of 6.85 percent.
“As we began 2025, the Bank focused on fulfilling our mission by providing significant liquidity to members as well as remaining a reliable partner during a time of economic volatility,” said FHLBank Atlanta Chair of the Board, Thornwell Dunlap. “We are pleased to return a strong dividend to members and appreciate their ongoing trust in FHLBank Atlanta.”
The dividend payout will be calculated based on members’ capital stock held during the first quarter of 2025 and will be credited to members’ daily investment accounts at the close of business on April 29, 2025.
Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta Financial Highlights (Preliminary and unaudited) (Dollars in millions)
Statements of Condition
As of March 31, 2025
As of December 31, 2024
Advances
$
85,672
$
85,829
Investments
59,326
60,084
Mortgage loans held for portfolio, net
87
89
Total assets
146,233
147,091
Total consolidated obligations, net
135,022
135,851
Total capital stock
5,164
5,148
Retained earnings
2,828
2,785
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(3
)
—
Total capital
7,989
7,933
Capital-to-assets ratio (GAAP)
5.46
%
5.39
%
Capital-to-assets ratio (Regulatory)
5.47
%
5.39
%
Three Months EndedMarch 31,
Operating Results and Performance Ratios
2025
2024
Net interest income
$
207
$
254
Standby letters of credit fees
4
4
Other income
1
2
Total noninterest expense (1)
53
44
Affordable Housing Program assessment
16
22
Net income
143
194
Return on average assets
0.38
%
0.50
%
Return on average equity
6.82
%
9.24
%
__________ (1) Total noninterest expense includes voluntary housing and community investment contributions of $11 million and $5 million for the first quarter of 2025 and 2024, respectively.
The selected financial data above should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in the Bank’s First Quarter 2025 Form 10-Q expected to be filed with the SEC on or about May 9, 2025, which will be available at www.fhlbatl.com and on www.sec.gov.
About Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta
FHLBank Atlanta offers competitively-priced financing, community development grants, and other banking services to help member financial institutions make affordable home mortgages and provide economic development credit to neighborhoods and communities. The Bank is a cooperative whose members are commercial banks, credit unions, savings institutions, community development financial institutions, and insurance companies located in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and the District of Columbia. FHLBank Atlanta is one of 11 district banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank System (FHLBank System). Since 1990, the FHLBanks have awarded approximately $9.1 billion in Affordable Housing Program funds, assisting more than 1.2 million households.
For more information, visit our website at www.fhlbatl.com.
To the extent that the statements made in this announcement may be deemed as “forward-looking statements”, they are made within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which include statements with respect to the Bank’s beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, anticipations, assumptions, estimates, intentions, and future performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which may be beyond the Bank’s control, and which may cause the Bank’s actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from the future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, and the reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on them, since those may not be realized due to a variety of factors, including, without limitation: legislative, regulatory and accounting actions, changes, approvals or requirements; completion of the Bank’s financial closing procedures and final accounting adjustments for the most recently completed quarter; SOFR variations; changes to economic, liquidity and market conditions; changes in demand for advances, advance levels, consolidated obligations of the Bank and/or the FHLBank System and their market; changes in interest rates; changes in prepayment speeds, default rates, delinquencies, and losses on mortgage-backed securities; volatility of market prices, rates and indices that could affect the value of financial instruments; changes in credit ratings and/or the terms of derivative transactions; changes in product offerings; political, national, climate, and world events; disruptions in information systems; membership changes; mergers and acquisitions involving members; changes to the Bank’s voluntary housing program and other adverse developments or events, including extraordinary or disruptive events, affecting the market, involving other Federal Home Loan Banks, their members or the FHLBank System in general, including acts or war and terrorism. Additional factors that might cause the Bank’s results to differ from forward-looking statements are provided in detail in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are available at www.sec.gov.
The forward-looking statements in this release speak only as of the date that they are made, and the Bank has no obligation and does not undertake to publicly update, revise, or correct any of these statements after the date of this announcement, or after the respective dates on which such statements otherwise are made, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as may be required by law. New factors may emerge, and it is not possible for us to predict the nature of each new factor, or assess its potential impact, on our business and financial condition. Given these uncertainties, we caution you not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.
CONTACT: Sheryl Touchton Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta stouchton@fhlbatl.com 404.716.4296
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (video statements)
FBI Assistant Legal Attaché Robert Cameron discusses a financially motivated sextortion operation in Nigeria. The joint international operation targeted suspects whose crimes occurred in at least three countries and led to multiple deaths by suicides, including more than 20 in the U.S. since 2021.
More at: https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/fbi-operation-in-nigeria-targeted-perpetrators-of-online-extortion-schemes-that-prey-on-teens
—————————————————
Subscribe to Inside the FBI wherever you get your podcasts:
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4H2d3cg…
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast…
Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0…
More ways to follow us: https://inside-the-fbi.transistor.fm/…
Follow us on social media:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/fbi
Facebook: https://facebook.com/FBI
Instagram: https://instagram.com/fbi
YouTube: youtube.com/fbi
In the sweltering summer of AD18, a desperate chant echoed across China’s sun-scorched plains: “Heaven has gone blind!” Thousands of starving farmers, their faces smeared with ox blood, marched toward the opulent vaults held by the Han dynasty’s elite rulers.
As recorded in the ancient text Han Shu (the book of Han), these farmers’ calloused hands held bamboo scrolls – ancient “tweets” accusing the bureaucrats of hoarding grain while the farmers’ children gnawed tree bark. The rebellion’s firebrand warlord leader, Chong Fan, roared: “Drain the paddies!”
Within weeks, the Red Eyebrows, as the protesters became known, had toppled local regimes, raided granaries and – for a fleeting moment – shattered the empire’s rigid hierarchy.
The Han dynasty of China (202BC-AD220) was one of the most developed civilisations of its time, alongside the Roman empire. Its development of cheaper and sharper iron ploughs enabled the gathering of unprecedented harvests of grain.
But instead of uplifting the farmers, this technological revolution gave rise to agrarian oligarchs who hired ever-more officials to govern their expanding empire. Soon, bureaucrats earned 30 times more than those tilling the soil.
And when droughts struck, the farmers and their families starved while the empire’s elites maintained their opulence. As a famous poem from the subsequent Tang dynasty put it: “While meat and wine go to waste behind vermilion gates, the bones of the frozen dead lie by the roadside.”
Two millennia later, the role of technology in increasing inequality around the world remains a major political and societal issue. AI-driven “technology panic” – exacerbated by the disruptive efforts of Donald Trump’s new administration in the US – gives the feeling that everything has been upended. New tech is destroying old certainties; populist revolt is shredding the political consensus.
And yet, as we stand at the edge of this technological cliff, seemingly peering into a future of AI-induced job apocalypses, history whispers: “Calm down. You’ve been here before.”
The link between technology and inequality
Technology is humanity’s cheat code to break free from scarcity. The Han dynasty’s iron plough didn’t just till soil; it doubled crop yields, enriching landlords and swelling tax coffers for emperors while – initially, at least – leaving peasants further behind. Similarly, Britain’s steam engine didn’t just spin cotton; it built coal barons and factory slums. Today, AI isn’t just automating tasks; it’s creating trillion-dollar tech fiefdoms while destroying myriads of routine jobs.
Technology amplifies productivity by doing more with less. Over centuries, these gains compound, raising economic output and increasing incomes and lifespans. But each innovation reshapes who holds power, who gets rich – and who gets left behind.
As the Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter warned during the second world war, technological progress is never a benign rising tide that lifts all boats. It’s more like a tsunami that drowns some and deposits others on golden shores, amid a process he called “creative destruction”.
A decade later, Russian-born US economist Simon Kuznets proposed his “inverted-U of inequality”, the Kuznets curve. For decades, this offered a reassuring narrative for citizens of democratic nations seeking greater fairness: inequality was an inevitable – but temporary – price of technological progress and the economic growth that comes with it.
In recent years, however, this analysis has been sharply questioned. Most notably, French economist Thomas Piketty, in a reappraisal of more than three centuries of data, argued in 2013 that Kuznets had been misled by historical fluke. The postwar fall in inequality he had observed was not a general law of capitalism, but a product of exceptional events: two world wars, economic depression, and massive political reforms.
In normal times, Piketty warned, the forces of capitalism will always tend to make the rich richer, pushing inequality ever higher unless checked by aggressive redistribution.
So, who’s correct? And where does this leave us as we ponder the future in this latest, AI-driven industrial revolution? In fact, both Kuznets and Piketty were working off quite narrow timeframes in modern human history. Another country, China, offers the chance to chart patterns of growth and inequality over a much longer period – due to its historical continuity, cultural stability, and ethnic uniformity.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Unlike other ancient civilisations such as the Egyptians and Mayans, China has maintained a unified identity and unique language for more than 5,000 years, allowing modern scholars to trace thousand-year-old economic records. So, with colleagues Qiang Wu and Guangyu Tong, I set out to reconcile the ideas of Kuznets and Piketty by studying technological growth and wage inequality in imperial China over 2,000 years – back beyond the birth of Jesus.
To do this, we scoured China’s extraordinarily detailed dynastic archives, including the Book of Han (AD111) and Tang Huiyao (AD961), in which meticulous scribes recorded the salaries of different ranking officials. And here is what we learned about the forces – good and bad, corrupt and selfless – that most influenced the rise and fall of inequality in China over the past two millennia.
Chinese dynasties and their most influential technologies:
Black text denotes historical events in the west; grey text denotes important interactions between China and the west. Peng Zhou, CC BY-NC-SA
China’s cycles of growth and inequality
One of the challenges of assessing wage inequality over thousands of years is that people were paid different things at different times – such as grain, silk, silver and even labourers.
The Book of Han records that “a governor’s annual grain salary could fill 20 oxcarts”. Another entry describes how a mid-ranking Han official’s salary included ten servants tasked solely with polishing his ceremonial armour. Ming dynasty officials had their meagre wages supplemented with gifts of silver, while Qing elites hid their wealth in land deals.
To enable comparison over two millennia, we invented a “rice standard” – akin to the gold standard that was the basis of the international monetary system for a century from the 1870s. Rice is not just a staple of Chinese diets, it has been a stable measure of economic life for thousands of years.
While rice’s dominion began around 7,000BC in the Yangtze river’s fertile marshes, it was not until the Han dynasty that it became the soul of Chinese life. Farmers prayed to the “Divine Farmer” for bountiful harvests, and emperors performed elaborate ploughing rituals to ensure cosmic harmony. A Tang dynasty proverb warned: “No rice in the bowl, bones in the soil.”
Using price records, we converted every recorded salary – whether paid in silk, silver, rent or servants – into its rice equivalent. We could then compare the “real rice wages” of two categories of people we called either “officials” or “peasants” (including farmers), as a way of tracking levels of inequality over the two millennia since the start of the Han dynasty in 202BC. This chart shows how real-wage inequality in China rose and fell over the past 2,000 years, according to our rice-based analysis.
Official-peasant wage ratio in imperial China over 2,000 years:
The ratio describes the multiple by which the ‘real rice wage’ of the average ‘official’ exceeds that of the average ‘peasant’, giving an indication of changing inequality levels over two millennia. Peng Zhou, CC BY-SA
The chart’s black line describes a tug-of-war between growth and inequality over the past two millennia. We found that, across each major dynasty, there were four key factors driving levels of inequality in China: technology (T), institutions (I), politics (P), and social norms (S). These followed the following cycle with remarkable regularity.
1. Technology triggers an explosion of growth and inequality
During the Han dynasty, new iron-working techniques led to better ploughs and irrigation tools. Harvests boomed, enabling the Chinese empire to balloon in both territory and population. But this bounty mostly went to those at the top of society. Landlords grabbed fields, bureaucrats gained privileges, while ordinary farmers saw precious little reward. The empire grew richer – but so did the gap between high officials and the peasant majority.
Even when the Han fell around AD220, the rise of wage inequality was barely interrupted. By the time of the Tang dynasty (AD618–907), China was enjoying a golden age. Silk Road trade flourished as two more technological leaps had a profound impact on the country’s fortunes: block printing and refined steelmaking.
Block printing enabled the mass production of books – Buddhist texts, imperial exam guides, poetry anthologies – at unprecedented speed and scale. This helped spread literacy and standardise administration, as well as sparking a bustling market in bookselling.
Meanwhile, refined steelmaking boosted everything from agricultural tools to weaponry and architectural hardware, lowering costs and raising productivity. With a more literate populace and an abundance of stronger metal goods, China’s economy hit new heights. Chang’an, then China’s cosmopolitan capital, boasted exotic markets, lavish temples, and a swirl of foreign merchants enjoying the Tang dynasty’s prosperity.
While the Tang dynasty marked the high-water mark for levels of inequality in Chinese history, subsequent dynasties would continue to wrestle with the same core dilemma: how do you reap the benefits of growth without allowing an overly privileged – and increasingly corrupt – bureaucratic class to push everyone else into peril?
2. Institutions slow the rise of inequality
Throughout the two millennia, some institutions played an important role in stabilising the empire after each burst of growth. For example, to alleviate tensions between emperors, officials and peasants, imperial exams known as “Ke Ju” were introduced during the Sui dynasty (AD581-618). And by the time of the Song dynasty (AD960-1279) that followed the demise of the Tang, these exams played a dominant role in society.
They addressed high levels of inequality by promoting social mobility: ordinary civilians were granted greater opportunities to ascend the income ladder by achieving top marks. This induced greater competition among officials – and strengthened emperors’ authority over them in the later dynasties. As a result, both the wages of officials and wage inequality went down as their bargaining power gradually diminished.
However, the rise of each new dynasty was also marked by a growth of bureaucracy that led to inefficiencies, favouritism and bribery. Over time, corrupt practices took root, eroding trust in officialdom and heightening wage inequality as many officials commanded informal fees or outright bribes to sustain their lifestyles.
As a result, while the emergence of certain institutions was able to put a break on rising inequality, it typically took another powerful – and sometimes highly destructive – factor to start reducing it.
3. Political infighting and external wars reduce inequality
Eventually, the rampant rise in inequality seen in almost every major Chinese dynasty bred deep tensions – not only between the upper and lower classes, but even between the emperor and their officials.
These pressures were heightened by the pressures of external conflict, as each dynasty waged wars in pursuit of further growth. The Tang’s three century-rule featured conflicts such as the Eastern Turkic-Tang war (AD626), the Baekje-Goguryeo-Silla war (666), and the Arab-Tang battle of Talas (751).
The resulting demand for more military spending drained imperial coffers, forcing salary cuts for soldiers and tax hikes on the peasants – breeding resentment among both that sometimes led to popular uprisings. In a desperate bid for survival, the imperial court then slashed officials’ pay and stripped away their bureaucratic perks.
The result? Inequality plummeted during these times of war and rebellion – but so did stability. Famine was rife, frontier garrisons mutinied, and for decades, warlords carved out territories while the imperial centre floundered.
So, this shrinking wage gap cannot be said to have resulted in a happier, more stable society. Rather, it reflected the fact that everyone – rich and poor – was worse off in the chaos. During the final imperial dynasty, the Qing (from the end of the 17th century), real-terms GDP per person was dropping to levels that had last been seen at the start of the Han dynasty, 2,000 years earlier.
4. Social norms emphasise harmony, preserve privilege
One other common factor influencing the rise and fall of inequality across China’s dynasties was the shared rules and expectations that developed within each society.
A striking example is the social norms rooted in the philosophy of Neo-Confucianism, which emerged in the Song dynasty at the end of the first millennium – a period sometimes described as China’s version of the Renaissance. It blended the moral philosophy of classical Confucianism – created by the philosopher and political theorist Confucius during the Zhou dynasty (1046-256BC) – with metaphysical elements drawn from both Buddhism and Daoism.
Neo-Confucianism emphasised social harmony, hierarchical order and personal virtue – values that reinforced imperial authority and bureaucratic discipline. Unsurprisingly, it quickly gained the support of emperors keen to ensure control of their people, and became the mainstream school of thought in the Ming and Qing dynasties.
However, Neo-Confucianist thinking proved a double-edged sword. Local gentry hijacked this moral authority to fortify their own power. Clan leaders set up Confucian schools and performed elaborate ancestral rites, projecting themselves as guardians of tradition.
Over time, these social norms became rigid. What had once fostered order and legitimacy became brittle dogma, more useful for preserving privilege than guiding reform. Neo-Confucian ideals evolved into a protective veil for entrenched elites. When the weight of crisis eventually came, they offered little resilience.
The last dynasty
China’s final imperial dynasty, the Qing, collapsed under the weight of multiple uprisings both from within and without. Despite achieving impressive economic growth during the 18th century – fuelled by agricultural innovation, a population boom, and the roaring global trade in tea and porcelain – levels of inequality exploded, in part due to widespread corruption.
The infamous government official Heshen, widely regarded as the most corrupt figure in the Qing dynasty, amassed a personal fortune reckoned to exceed the empire’s entire annual revenue (one estimate suggests he amassed 1.1 billion taels of silver, equivalent to around US$270 billion (£200bn), during his lucrative career).
Imperial institutions failed to restrain the inequality and moral decay that the Qing’s growth had initially masked. The mechanisms that once spurred prosperity – technological advances, centralised bureaucracy and Confucian moral authority – eventually ossified, serving entrenched power rather than adaptive reform.
When shocks like natural disasters and foreign invasions struck, the system could no longer respond. The collapse of the empire became inevitable – and this time there was no groundbreaking technology to enable a new dynasty to take the Qing’s place. Nor were there fresh social ideals or revitalised institutions capable of rebooting the imperial model. As foreign powers surged ahead with their own technological breakthroughs, China’s imperial system collapsed under its own weight. The age of emperors was over.
The world had turned. As China embarked on two centuries of technological and economic stagnation – and political humiliation at the hands of Great Britain and Japan – other nations, led first by Britain and then the US, would step up to build global empires on the back of new technological leaps.
In these modern empires, we see the same four key influences on their cycles of growth and inequality – technology, institutions, politics and social norms – but playing out at an ever-faster rate. As the saying goes: history does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
Rule Britannia
If imperial China’s inequality saga was written in rice and rebellions, Britain’s industrial revolution featured steam and strikes. In Lancashire’s “satanic mills”, steam engines and mechanised looms created industrialists so rich that their fortunes dwarfed small nations.
In 1835, social observer Andrew Ure enthused: “Machinery is the grand agent of civilisation.” Yet for many decades, the steam engines, spinning jennies and railways disproportionately enriched the new industrial class, just as in the Han dynasty of China 2,000 years earlier. The workers? They inhaled soot, lived in slums – and staged Europe’s first symbolic protest when the Luddites began smashing their looms in 1811.
During the 19th century, Britain’s richest 1% hoarded as much as 70% of the nation’s wealth, while labourers toiled 16-hour days in mills. In cities like Manchester, child workers earned pennies while industrialists built palaces.
But as inequality peaked in Britain, the backlash brewed. Trade unions formed (and became legal in 1824) to demand fair wages. Reforms such as the Factory Acts (1833–1878) banned child labour and capped working hours.
Although government forces intervened to suppress the uprisings, unrest such as the 1830 Swing Riots and 1842 General Strike exposed deep social and economic inequalities. By 1900, child labour was banned and pensions had been introduced. The 1900 Labour Representation Committee (later the Labour Party) vowed to “promote legislation in the direct interests of labour” – a striking echo of how China’s imperial exams had attempted to open paths to power.
Slowly, the working class saw some improvement: real wages for Britain’s poorest workers gradually increased over the latter half of the 19th century, as mass production lowered the cost of goods and expanding factory employment provided a more stable livelihood than subsistence farming.
And then, two world wars flattened Britain’s elite – the Blitz didn’t discriminate between rich and poor neighbourhoods. When peace finally returned, the Beveridge Report gave rise to the welfare state: the NHS, social housing, and pensions.
Income inequality plummeted as a result. The top 1%’s share fell from 70% to 15% by 1979. While China’s inequality fell via dynastic collapse, Britain’s decline resulted from war-driven destruction, progressive taxation, and expansive social reforms.
Wealth share of top 1% in the UK
Evidence for UK inequality before 1895 is not well documented; dotted curve is conjectured based on Kuznets curve. Sources: Alvaredo et al (2018), World Inequality Database. Peng Zhou, CC BY-SA
However, from the 1980s onwards, inequality in Britain has begun to rise again. This new cycle of inequality has coincided with another technological revolution: the emergence of personal computers and information technology — innovations that fundamentally transformed how wealth was created and distributed.
The era was accelerated by deregulation, deindustrialisation and privatisation — policies associated with former prime minister Margaret Thatcher, that favoured capital over labour. Trade unions were weakened, income taxes on the highest earners were slashed, and financial markets were unleashed. Today, the richest 1% of UK adults own more 20% of the country’s total wealth.
The UK now appears to be in the worst of both worlds – wrestling with low growth and rising inequality. Yet renewal is still within reach. The current UK government’s pledge to streamline regulation and harness AI could spark fresh growth – provided it is coupled with serious investment in skills, modern infrastructure, and inclusive institutions geared to benefit all workers.
At the same time, history reminds us that technology is a lever, not a panacea. Sustained prosperity comes only when institutional reform and social attitudes evolve in step with innovation.
The American century
While China’s growth-and-inequality cycles unfolded over millennia and Britain’s over centuries, America’s story is a fast-forward drama of cycles lasting mere decades. In the early 20th century, several waves of new technology widened the gap between rich and poor dramatically.
By 1929, as the world teetered on the edge of the Great Depression, John D. Rockefeller had amassed such a vast fortune – valued at roughly 1.5% of America’s entire GDP – that newspapers hailed him the world’s first billionaire. His wealth stemmed largely from pioneering petroleum and petrochemical ventures including Standard Oil, which dominated oil refining in an age when cars and mechanised transport were exploding in popularity.
Yet this period of unprecedented riches for a handful of magnates coincided with severe imbalances in the broader US economy. The “roaring Twenties” had boosted consumerism and stock speculation, but wage growth for many workers lagged behind skyrocketing corporate profits. By 1929, the top 1% of Americans owned more than a third of the nation’s income, creating a precariously narrow base of prosperity.
When the US stock market crashed in October 1929, it laid bare how vulnerable the system was to the fortunes of a tiny elite. Millions of everyday Americans – living without adequate savings or safeguards – faced immediate hardship, ushering in the Great Depression. Breadlines snaked through city streets, and banks collapsed under waves of withdrawals they could not meet.
In response, President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal reshaped American institutions. It introduced unemployment insurance, minimum wages, and public works programmes to support struggling workers, while progressive taxation – with top rates exceeding 90% during the second world war. Roosevelt declared: “The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much – it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little.”
In a different way to the UK, the second world war proved a great leveller for the US – generating millions of jobs and drawing women and minorities into industries they’d long been excluded from. After 1945, the GI Bill expanded education and home ownership for veterans, helping to build a robust middle class. Although access remained unequal, especially along racial lines, the era marked a shift toward the norm that prosperity should be shared.
Meanwhile, grassroots movements led by figures like Martin Luther King Jr. reshaped social norms about justice. In his lesser-quoted speeches, King warned that “a dream deferred is a dream denied” and launched the Poor People’s Campaign, which demanded jobs, healthcare and housing for all Americans. This narrowing of income distribution during the post-war era was dubbed the “Great Compression” – but it did not last.
As oil crises of the 1970s marked the end of the preceding cycle of inequality, another cycle began with the full-scale emergence of the third industrial revolution, powered by computers, digital networks and information technology.
As digitalisation transformed business models and labour markets, wealth flowed to those who owned the algorithms, patents and platforms – not those operating the machines. Hi-tech entrepreneurs and Wall Street financiers became the new oligarchs. Stock options replaced salaries as the true measure of success, and companies increasingly rewarded capital over labour.
By the 2000s, the wealth share of the richest 1% climbed to 30% in the US. The gap between the elite minority and working majority widened with every company stock market launch, hedge fund bonus and quarterly report tailored to shareholder returns.
But this wasn’t just a market phenomenon – it was institutionally engineered. The 1980s ushered in the age of (Ronald) Reaganomics, driven by the conviction that “government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem”. Following this neoliberalist philosophy, taxes on high incomes were slashed, capital gains were shielded, and labour unions were weakened.
Deregulation gave Wall Street free rein to innovate and speculate, while public investment in housing, healthcare and education was curtailed. The consequences came to a head in 2008 when the US housing market collapsed and the financial system imploded.
The Global Financial Crisis that followed exposed the fragility of a deregulated economy built on credit bubbles and concentrated risk. Millions of people lost their homes and jobs, while banks were rescued with public money. It marked an economic rupture and a moral reckoning – proof that decades of pro-market policies had produced a system that privatised gain and socialised loss.
Inequality, long growing in the background, now became a glaring, undeniable fault line in American life – and it has remained that way ever since.
Fig 5. Wealth share and income share of top 1% in the US
Sources: wealth inequality: World Inequality Database; income share: Picketty & Saez (2003). Dotted curves are conjectured based on Kuznets curve. Peng Zhou, CC BY-SA
So is the US proof that the Kuznets model of inequality is indeed wrong? While the chart above shows inequality has flattened in the US since the 2008 financial crisis, there is little evidence of it actually declining. And in the short term, while Donald Trump’s tariffs are unlikely to do much for growth in the US, his low-tax policies won’t do anything to raise working-class incomes either.
The story of “the American century” is a dizzying sequence of technological revolutions – from transport and manufacturing to the internet and now AI – crashing one atop the other before institutions, politics or social norms could catch up. In my view, the result is not a broken cycle but an interrupted one. Like a wheel that never completes its turn, inequality rises, reform stutters – and a new wave of disruption begins.
Our unequal AI future?
Like any technological explosion, AI’s potential is dual-edged. Like the Tang dynasty’s bureaucrats hoarding grain, today’s tech giants monopolise data, algorithms and computing power. Management consultant firm McKinsey has predicted that algorithms could automate 30% of jobs by 2030, from lorry drivers to radiologists.
The rise of AI isn’t just a technological revolution – it’s a political battleground. History’s empires collapsed when elites hoarded power; today’s fight over AI mirrors the same stakes. Will it become a tool for collective uplift like Britain’s post-war welfare state? Or a weapon of control akin to Han China’s grain-hoarding bureaucrats?
The answer hinges on who wins these political battles. In 19th-century Britain, factory owners bribed MPs to block child labour laws. Today, Big Tech spends billions lobbying to neuter AI regulation.
Meanwhile, grassroots movements like the Algorithmic Justice League demand bans on facial recognition in policing, echoing the Luddites who smashed looms not out of technophobia but to protest exploitation. The question is not if AI will be regulated but who will write the rules: corporate lobbyists or citizen coalitions.
The real threat has never been the technology itself, but the concentration of its spoils. When elites hoard tech-driven wealth, social fault-lines crack wide open – as happened more than 2,000 years ago when the Red Eyebrows marched against Han China’s agricultural monopolies.
To be human is to grow – and to innovate. Technological progress raises inequality faster than incomes, but the response depends on how people band together. Initiatives like “Responsible AI” and “Data for All” reframe digital ethics as a civil right, much like Occupy Wall Street exposed wealth gaps. Even memes – like TikTok skits mocking ChatGPT’s biases – shape public sentiment.
There is no simple path between growth and inequality. But history shows our AI future isn’t preordained in code: it’s written, as always, by us.
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Peng Zhou does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (video statements)
The FBI and law enforcement partners from Canada, Australia, and Nigeria conducted a first-of-its kind operation in Summer 2023 that resulted in charges against some of the most egregious perpetrators of financially motivated sextortion.
More at: www.fbi.gov/news/stories/fbi-operation-in-nigeria-targeted-perpetrators-of-online-extortion-schemes-that-prey-on-teens
—————————————————
Subscribe to Inside the FBI wherever you get your podcasts:
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4H2d3cg…
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast…
Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0…
More ways to follow us: https://inside-the-fbi.transistor.fm/…
Follow us on social media:
X: https://twitter.com/fbi
Facebook: https://facebook.com/FBI
Instagram: https://instagram.com/fbi
YouTube: youtube.com/user/fbi
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (video statements)
Dein Whyte, cyber crime section supervisor for Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, discusses a financially motivated sextortion operation in Nigeria. The joint international operation targeted suspects whose crimes occurred in at least three countries and led to multiple deaths by suicides, including more than 20 in the U.S. since 2021.
More at: https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/fbi-operation-in-nigeria-targeted-perpetrators-of-online-extortion-schemes-that-prey-on-teens
—————————————————
Subscribe to Inside the FBI wherever you get your podcasts:
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4H2d3cg…
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast…
Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0…
More ways to follow us: https://inside-the-fbi.transistor.fm/…
Follow us on social media:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/fbi
Facebook: https://facebook.com/FBI
Instagram: https://instagram.com/fbi
YouTube: youtube.com/fbi
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) (video statements)
Abba Sambo, advanced fee fraud section supervisor for Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, discusses a financially motivated sextortion operation in Nigeria. The joint international operation targeted suspects whose crimes occurred in at least three countries and led to multiple deaths by suicides, including more than 20 in the U.S. since 2021.
More at: https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/fbi-operation-in-nigeria-targeted-perpetrators-of-online-extortion-schemes-that-prey-on-teens
—————————————————
Subscribe to Inside the FBI wherever you get your podcasts:
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4H2d3cg…
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast…
Google Podcasts: https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0…
More ways to follow us: https://inside-the-fbi.transistor.fm/…
Follow us on social media:
Twitter: https://twitter.com/fbi
Facebook: https://facebook.com/FBI
Instagram: https://instagram.com/fbi
YouTube: youtube.com/fbi
