NewzIntel.com

Category: Economy

  • MIL-OSI USA: Waller, A Tale of Two Outlooks

    Source: US State of New York Federal Reserve

    Thank you, Jack and thank you to the CFA of St. Louis for the opportunity to speak to you today. It’s a pleasure to be back home here in the city where I worked for nearly 12 years before becoming a Governor at the Federal Reserve Board.
    I am here to discuss my favorite topic, which is the outlook for the U.S. economy and the implications for monetary policy.1 I speak publicly on the outlook every few weeks or so, and usually the most exciting thing to happen in between these appearances is a monthly data release from the Bureau of Labor Statistics or the Commerce Department.
    This time, of course, is different. The tariff increases announced April 2 were dramatically larger than I anticipated, adding on to other tariffs announced in March, along with retaliatory actions from some countries. Combining all of these actions to date, it is clear that tariffs this large and broadly applied could significantly affect the economy and the Federal Open Market Committee’s (FOMC) pursuit of our economic objectives. Given that there is still so much uncertainty about how trade policy will play out and how businesses and households will respond, I have struggled, like many others I have talked with, to fit these varying possibilities into a single coherent view of the outlook.
    It is an understatement to say that financial markets did not respond well to the April 2 tariff announcement. Then last Wednesday, a substantial proportion of the newest tariffs were suspended for 90 days pending negotiations to lower them, reportedly in exchange for lower barriers to U.S. exporters. This left in place a 10 percent tariff on all imports, the pre-existing tariffs on some products and countries, and a sharp increase in import and export tariffs on China trade. More sector-specific tariffs are promised, and much uncertainty remains about whether tariff negotiations will lead to deals or whether the April 2 tariffs will be implemented in 90 days.
    Uncertainty about trade or fiscal policy decisions is precisely why you won’t hear me talking about such actions very often. It is why I avoided speaking in detail about proposed tariffs earlier this year. I do not judge such policy actions. But I must base my policy decisions on the actions taken. Tariffs are the elephant in the room, so let’s talk about them.
    As I said a moment ago, I struggled after April 2 to come up with a single coherent view of how the tariff increases would affect my outlook and views on monetary policy. That difficulty did not end after the 90-day tariff suspensions announced on April 9, which, if anything, may have widened the range of possible outcomes and effects and made the timing even less certain. Friday’s exemptions for some tariffs on some electronics imports from China only complicated the picture. Considering all this uncertainty, it is impossible to forecast how the economy will evolve very far into the future. In such circumstances, I tend to think in terms of scenarios and managing the associated risks. So, for the balance of my remarks, I will try to lay out some possible tariff scenarios and how they will affect my thinking about the appropriate path for monetary policy in the coming months.
    But before I get to this exercise, it is essential to understand how the economy was faring leading up to this big change in trade policy. As I will detail, in my view, the economy was on a fairly solid footing in the first quarter of 2025. While the evidence suggests real gross domestic product (GDP) growth slowed from a 2.4 percent annual pace in the fourth quarter, I believe the economy did grow modestly in the first quarter and that growth would have been stronger except for some special factors that are unlikely to continue.
    A variety of “soft” data—reports from business contacts and a range of consumer and business surveys—hinted at a substantial slowdown. The “hard” data, which includes actual measurement and estimates of aggregate economic conditions, have tended to show that the economy grew modestly. While monthly readings through February show consumer spending slowed from the fourth quarter, that may have reflected unusual seasonal factors that weighed on spending in the first two months of this year, including harsh winter weather. We will get March retail sales later this week, and that should provide some helpful evidence of the pace of consumer spending. Another factor counted against measured GDP growth in the first quarter was a surge in imports, likely an anticipatory effect caused by the prospect of the new tariffs, which probably won’t continue. In the labor market, employment grew 228,000 in March, exceeding expectations, and job openings through February indicated that the labor market remained roughly in balance. In light of the continuing strength of the labor market and factors that probably temporarily lowered GDP growth, I think the U.S. economy was in good shape in the first quarter.
    Inflation has had a bumpy path down toward our 2 percent goal, and progress seemed to stall last year. But after some high inflation readings in January and February, we got some encouraging news last Thursday on consumer price index (CPI) inflation. Headline CPI prices fell 0.1 percent in March, bringing the 12-month measure of CPI inflation down to 2.4 percent. A drop in energy prices—which has continued so far this month—was a big reason for the step-down. Core CPI inflation, which excludes volatile energy and food prices and is a good guide to future inflation, rose just a tenth of a percent last month, which brought the 12-month change down to 2.8 percent, its lowest 12-month reading since March 2021.
    When CPI data is supplemented with the producer price data that we received last week, we estimate that the price index for personal consumption expenditures (PCE), the FOMC’s preferred inflation gauge, was roughly unchanged in March bringing the 12-month change to 2.3 percent. Core PCE prices are estimated to have risen less than 0.1 percent for the month, leaving core PCE inflation at 2.7 percent over the previous 12 months. Both measures of total and core PCE inflation were above the FOMC’s 2 percent goal.
    Looking across the first-quarter data, I see the economy growing modestly with a labor market that was still solid and inflation that was still too high but was making slow progress toward our goal of 2 percent.
    Let me now return to tariffs and my scenarios. To level set the discussion of tariffs, as of December 2024, the effective average trade-weighted tariff for all imports into the United States was under 3 percent. Earlier this year, targeted tariffs brought the average to 10 percent. The April 2 tariffs would have pushed that to 25 percent or more. Even with the pause on implementing those tariffs, retaining the new 10 percent tariff on most imports and a tariff on Chinese imports of well over 100 percent, estimates are that the average effective tariff today is still around 25 percent. This estimate is rough, and we have seen that policy can change quickly, but the point is that even after the 90-day pause, the current tariff rate is a sharp increase to a level that the United States has not experienced for at least a century.
    The primary challenge in analyzing the economic effects of the tariff increases is the considerable uncertainty that remains about their size and permanence. So I have decided to focus on two scenarios for tariff policy when thinking about the economic response. One possibility is that they will remain very high and be long-lasting, near the current average of 25 percent or more, as part of a committed effort by the Administration to engineer a fundamental shift in the U.S. economy toward producing more goods domestically and reducing trade deficits. The second scenario is that the suspensions are the beginning of a concerted effort to negotiate reductions in foreign barriers faced by U.S. exporters that will result in the removal of most of the announced import tariffs, which would reduce the average tariff rate to around 10 percent. This latter scenario had been my base case up until March 1. While there is a range of possibilities that could combine these objectives for tariff policy, these two approaches would yield significantly different outcomes for the economy and monetary policy, so I would like to discuss them today as two separate scenarios.
    In doing so, I am not here to judge the objectives for the tariff increases. I am a central banker, and, as I said earlier, that means I take fiscal and other policy decisions made by others as a given when setting monetary policy.
    Before I summarize my two scenarios, let me emphasize that neither of them are forecasts and that I am employing scenarios as a way to frame my thinking about managing the risks of decision making when the outlook is as uncertain as it is. The “large tariff” scenario assumes that average tariffs around 25 percent will remain in place for some time. Let’s assume they remain at that level until at least the end of 2027, which is the horizon for economic projections made by FOMC participants. In my view, keeping the large tariffs in place this long would be necessary if the primary goal is remaking the U.S. economy, which is now mostly services, into one that produces a larger share of the goods it consumes. Such a shift, if it is possible, would be a dramatic change for the United States and would surely take longer than three years.
    In the second scenario, it is assumed that the primary goal would be to use the tariffs as leverage to negotiate reductions in trade barriers faced by U.S. exporters. In this case, while I would expect that the announced minimum 10 percent tariff on all goods from all countries would remain in place, I would also expect that substantially all other tariffs would be eliminated over time. I will call this the “smaller tariff” scenario.
    Let me begin with the large tariff scenario and the implications for inflation. As I have noted in past speeches, the textbook view of tariffs is that they are a one-time increase in prices and would not be expected to be a persistent source of inflationary pressure.2 While the tariffs after April 9 were very large, I still believe they would have only a temporary effect on inflation.
    Private sector forecasts expect tariff increases of this magnitude to increase inflation by 1-1/2 to 2 percentage points over the next year or so, which I think is a reasonable estimate. If underlying core PCE inflation were to continue at its estimated 12-month pace of 2.7 percent in March, that would mean inflation could reach a peak close to 5 percent on an annualized basis in coming months if businesses quickly and completely passed through the cost of the tariff. Even if the tariffs were only partially passed on to consumers, inflation could move up to around 4 percent. These outcomes would obviously be a reversal of the progress we have made on bringing inflation down over the past few years.
    It will be important to watch inflation expectations and make sure they remain anchored during this process. Surveys of consumers have shown big increases in inflation expectations for this year. However, I tend to discount survey-based measures of inflation and prefer those based on the spread between nominal and inflation-indexed securities, since investors have more skin in the game than survey respondents. These market-based measures have not increased significantly, which implies market participants view tariffs as a one-time change to the price level. So I don’t think expectations have become unanchored.
    There are other factors that may limit the increase in inflation. I continue to believe that monetary policy is meaningfully restricting economic activity and hope that underlying inflation may moderate over the course of the year, separate from the tariff effects. Also, competitive forces, including the desire to hold on to customers, may induce businesses to pass along only a fraction of higher costs from tariffs. Finally, if the economy slows substantially, then weaker demand will put downward pressure on inflation after tariffs take effect.
    In terms of output growth, with large tariff increases, I would expect the U.S. economy to slow significantly later this year and this slower pace to continue into next year. Higher prices from tariffs would reduce spending, and uncertainty about the pace of spending would deter business investment. I have heard this repeatedly from business contacts around the country—tariff uncertainty is freezing capital spending. Productivity growth, an important source of GDP increases in recent years, would slow as investment is allocated according to trade policy and not towards its most productive and profitable uses. A fall in productivity would likely lower estimates of the neutral policy rate, making the current policy rate more restrictive than it is currently. Any trade retaliation from U.S. trading partners would reduce U.S. exports, which would be a drag on growth. There is a long list of factors that can lower growth in this scenario.
    Along with slower economic growth would come higher unemployment. With large tariffs remaining in place, I expect the unemployment rate, which was 4.2 percent in March, would rise by several tenths of a percentage point this year and approach 5 percent next year. Even as the economy has moderated over the past year, the unemployment rate has stayed remarkably stable and close to estimates of its long-term rate—in other words, close to the FOMC’s goal. But a verifiable fact about the unemployment rate, based on history, is that when it starts to rise, as I expect it would under this scenario, it often rises significantly.
    In summary, under the large tariff scenario, economic growth is likely to slow to a crawl and significantly raise the unemployment rate. I do expect inflation to rise significantly, but if inflation expectations remain well anchored, I also expect inflation to return to a more moderate level in 2026. Inflation could rise starting in a few months and then move back down toward our target possibly as early as by the end of this year.
    Yes, I am saying that I expect that elevated inflation would be temporary, and “temporary” is another word for “transitory.” Despite the fact that the last surge of inflation beginning in 2021 lasted longer than I and other policymakers initially expected, my best judgment is that higher inflation from tariffs will be temporary. If this inflation is temporary, I can look through it and determine policy based on the underlying trend. I can hear the howls already that this must be a mistake given what happened in 2021 and 2022. But just because it didn’t work out once does not mean you should never think that way again. Let me use a football analogy to characterize my thoughts. You are the Philadelphia Eagles and it is fourth down and a few inches from the goal line. You call for the Tush Push but fail to convert by running the ball. Since it didn’t work out the way you expected, does that mean that you shouldn’t call for the Tush Push the next time you face a similar situation? I don’t think so. With the history of 2021 and 2022 still in my mind, I believe my analysis of the effect of tariffs is the right call, and I am going to stick with my best judgment.
    While I expect the inflationary effects of higher tariffs to be temporary, their effects on output and employment could be longer-lasting and an important factor in determining the appropriate stance of monetary policy. If the slowdown is significant and even threatens a recession, then I would expect to favor cutting the FOMC’s policy rate sooner, and to a greater extent than I had previously thought. In my February speech, I referred to this as the world of “bad news” rate cuts. With a rapidly slowing economy, even if inflation is running well above 2 percent, I expect the risk of recession would outweigh the risk of escalating inflation, especially if the effects of tariffs in raising inflation are expected to be short lived.3
    Let me now turn to the second scenario, in which tariffs are lower. In this case, I would expect the 10 percent across-the-board tariff to be the baseline for the average trade weighted tariff. Under this scenario the effect on inflation would be significantly smaller than if larger tariffs remained. Here, the peak effect on inflation could be around 3 percent on an annualized basis. Since it may take some time for tariff-related price increases to work their way through production chains, the peak may be lower but still dissipate slowly. As trade negotiations proceed, I would expect that expectations of future inflation would remain anchored and short-term measures could even fall over time, helping keep overall inflation in check.
    At the same time, the fact that there is still an increase in tariffs means the smaller tariff scenario would surely have a negative effect on output and employment growth, but smaller than the larger tariff scenario. The new tariffs are hitting an economy in good standing, which leaves me encouraged that households and businesses would continue to spend and hire during trade negotiations that lead to substantially reduced import tariffs and possibly remove barriers to U.S. exporters over time.
    As a result of these limited effects on inflation and economic activity from steadily diminishing tariffs, I would support a limited monetary policy response. Anchored or even lower inflation expectations as the economy slows, combined with the view that smaller tariff effects are temporary, gives the FOMC room to adjust policy as progress on the underlying trend in inflation is revealed in price data. With the threat of a sharp slowdown or recession diminished, pressure to reduce rates based on falling demand would diminish also. That is, the policy response in this scenario could allow for more patience. The preemptive policy cuts we did last fall can allow us some time to wait and see if the hard data catch up to the soft data or vice versa and how much of the tariff will be passed through to the consumer. In such a scenario, the outlook for monetary policy might not look much different than it did before March 1. With a fairly small tariff effect on inflation, I would expect inflation to continue on its path down towards our 2 percent target. In this case, “good news” rate cuts are very much on the table in the latter half of this year.
    Let me conclude with two essential points. The first is that the new tariff policy is one of the biggest shocks to affect the U.S. economy in many decades. The second is that the future of that policy, as well as its possible effects, is still highly uncertain. This makes the outlook also highly uncertain and demands that policymakers remain flexible in considering the wide range of outcomes. In the end, the United States is a dynamic, resilient capitalist system that responds well to shocks and always has. I suspect that will continue to be the case now.

    1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Open Market Committee. Return to text
    2. See Christopher J. Waller (2025), “Disinflation Progress Uneven but Still on Track Rate Cuts on Track as Well,” speech delivered at the University of New South Wales Macroeconomic Workshop, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, February 17. Return to text
    3. Recent research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis shows that this action is the optimal monetary policy response in a standard macroeconomic model. See Javier Bianchi and Louphou Coulibaly “The Optimal Monetary Policy Response to Tariffs” Working Paper 810, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, March 7, 2025. Return to text

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congressman Robert Garcia Introduces Bipartisan Bill to Reduce Lead Exposure Near Airports

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Robert Garcia California (42nd District)

    Washington, D.C. – Today, Congressman Robert Garcia (CA-42) and Congressman Jay Obernolte (CA-23) announced the introduction of the bipartisan Cutting Lead Exposure and Aviation Relief (CLEAR) Skies Act to protect the health of communities near airports by reducing harmful lead emissions from aviation fuel and accelerating the transition to unleaded alternatives. The full text of the CLEAR Skies Act can be found here.

    “As the former Mayor of Long Beach, we led efforts to create a more sustainable airport and supported federal efforts to lower emissions that impact neighboring communities,” said Congressman Garcia. “Harmful emissions from leaded airplane fuel continue to pollute the air in neighborhoods near airports, putting children and families at risk. This bill will help accelerate the adoption of cleaner and safer aviation fuel.”

    “As both a pilot and a representative of a district that is at the forefront of aviation and technological innovation, I’m proud to lead the CLEAR Skies Act alongside Congressman Robert Garcia,” said Congressman Obernolte. “This bill is more than just a commitment to cleaner skies—it is smart policy that drives innovation and safeguards public health. By incentivizing the production of unleaded aviation gasoline, we are not only reducing harmful lead emissions but also empowering American businesses to lead in sustainable aviation technology. It’s a win-win for both our environment and our economy.”

    The CLEAR Skies Act will support the aviation industry’s transition away from leaded gasoline by creating a federal production tax credit to reduce the cost of unleaded aviation gas. In November 2024, the City of Long Beach approved a new subsidy program of up to $200,000 in reimbursements to offset unleaded fuel costs for general aviation users, funded by airport revenues. The American Association of Airport Executives has endorsed this bill.

    Congressman Garcia has been a strong advocate for climate and environmental justice and is proud to expand investments in sustainable technologies for the future. Last Congress, Congressman Garcia introduced a bill to address port pollution and champion environmental justice for local port communities impacted by shipping emissions. In October, Congressman Garcia sent a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to add Exide Technologies, Inc. to the National Priorities List (NPL) for a Superfund designation to facilitate a long-term comprehensive cleanup of the affected communities and to secure environmental justice for the residents of Southeast Los Angeles. As Mayor of the City of Long Beach, his signature ballot initiative, Measure A, launched the largest infrastructure repair program in a generation, promoting good-paying union jobs.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warren, Wyden, Gillibrand Press Social Security Commissioner on Benefit Portal Malfunctions, Planned Firings of SSA Tech Workers

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    April 14, 2025
    Lawmakers send letter amidst widespread website outages, benefit disruptions
    “We are concerned these cuts will lead to further website and benefit disruptions, preventing tens of millions of Americans from accessing their hard-earned Social Security and Supplemental Security Income benefits.”
    Text of Letter (PDF)
    Washington, D.C. – Senate Banking Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Senate Finance Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), and Senate Special Committee on Aging Ranking Member Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), wrote to Acting Social Security Commissioner Leland Dudek with concerns about ongoing issues with the Social Security Administration’s (SSA) website and reported plans to worsen the situation by firing up to 50 percent of employees from the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO). 
    OCIO is responsible for maintaining the agency’s benefit claims processing systems, managing SSA.gov and SSA’s online benefits portal, and protecting Social Security recipients’ sensitive information. In February, the agency announced plans to reduce its workforce by over 12 percent. Hundreds more staff firings will happen at OCIO, which has been directed to cut half of its staff. These cuts are expected to worsen the ongoing issues with SSA’s website and online portals.
    On March 27, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order stripping federal employees—including those at OCIO—of their bargaining rights, which would make it easier for the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to fire OCIO staff and replace them with employees “more amenable to doing what (DOGE) want(s) to do.” 
    “(T)hese actions are dangerous for SSA—OCIO employees are the ones who know SSA’s programming language and…administration and oversight of the agency’s anti-fraud software, which DOGE has been tampering with,” wrote the lawmakers. 
    The senators emphasized that these firings will exacerbate the agency’s ongoing website issues, including recipients being incorrectly labeled as “not receiving payments” and losing access to their account histories. Senator Warren, along with Senators Wyden (D-Ore.) and Kelly (D-Ariz.), sent a letter to Dudek on April 7, 2025, demanding an explanation for their constituents’ reports of these disruptions, but the agency has not responded.
    “It is unsurprising that weeks after you allowed DOGE to invade SSA, improperly access SSA data, and announce closures of Social Security offices, our constituents began having problems accessing their benefits…We are concerned that these recurring issues will impact the benefits of our constituents—many of whom rely on Social Security to pay rent or put food on the table,” wrote the lawmakers. 
    The cuts to the agency also expose SSA to system vulnerabilities, risking Americans’ data to hackers and foreign agents seeking to obtain private information. In addition to the dozens of senior SSA officials with centuries’ worth of experience who have resigned or retired, SSA’s entire cybersecurity leadership was also part of the exodus.
    “Leaving Americans’ most sensitive information unguarded places immeasurable financial and economic harm on our most vulnerable…We ask that you immediately cease all OCIO firings and act swiftly to restore SSA system and website functionality to prevent any further disruption of…benefits,” concluded the lawmakers. 
    The senators asked Dudek to provide clarity on the impact of cuts to OCIO, DOGE’s role in the firings, and the Acting Commissioner’s plan to ensure technical knowledge of internal systems are not lost during work force reductions. 
    The letter is the latest oversight push from Senate Democrats’ Social Security War Room, a coordinated effort to fight back against the Trump administration’s attack on Americans’ Social Security. The War Room coordinates messaging across the Senate Democratic Caucus and external stakeholders; encourages grassroots engagement by providing opportunities for Americans to share what Social Security means to them; and educates Senate staff, the American public, and stakeholders about Republicans’ agenda and their continued cuts to Americans’ Social Security services and benefits.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Warren, Stansbury, Democratic Leaders Introduce Bill to Rein in Musk, Special Government Employees (SGEs)

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    April 14, 2025
    Bill would expand existing ethics rules to apply to SGEs, strengthen conflict of interest rules, increase transparency
    Bill Text (PDF) | Bill Summary (PDF)
    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Representative Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.) introduced the SGE Ethics Enforcement & Reform (SEER) Act, a bill to strengthen transparency and ethics requirements for Special Government Employees (SGEs). The bill would rein in Elon Musk by restricting certain SGEs from officially communicating with agencies and offices that regulate or contract with large companies owned by the SGE.
    Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), along with Senators Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), and Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), joined in cosponsoring the bill.
    Representatives Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.), Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) cosponsored the House version of the bill. 
    “Unelected billionaire Elon Musk should not be acting as co-president of the United States and making $8 million a day from government contracts while he’s at it. My new bill would crack down on conflicts of interest and create stronger ethics rules for Elon Musk and all Special Government Employees. Government should work for the American people, not billionaires lining their own pockets,” said Senator Warren.
    “For months Elon Musk has dismantled federal agencies, fired thousands of federal workers, data-mined American data, and set himself up to make billions of dollars in federal contracts—all while acting as a Special Government Employee.  Never again can we allow such blatant abuses of power to happen,” said Rep. Melanie Stansbury (D-N.M.). “That is why I am proud to introduce the SEER Act with Senator Elizabeth Warren to ensure the Trump Administration and people like Elon Musk cannot take advantage of the system and that there are strict rules and legal consequences in place to hold them accountable.”
    Special Government Employees (SGEs) are temporary federal employees with a limit of 130 work days per year. Unlike regular employees, SGEs typically maintain jobs outside of the government and can be paid by an outside entity for the time they spend working for the federal government. SGEs are also not required to publicly disclose their financial interest, unless they are classified above the GS-15 level and serve for longer than 60 days. 
    Elon Musk and various members of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) are designated as SGEs, allowing them to be paid by private companies while they work to dismantle federal agencies. Musk specifically is an SGE at the White House and does not have to recuse himself from matters impacting his own multi-billion-dollar companies as long as his work does not meet the relatively narrow definition of a “particular matter” (as defined by Office of Government Ethics regulations).
    This new bill would bar Musk from communicating with the Space Force and other agencies that interface with his companies, including the CFPB and the NLRB, which have reviewed and investigated complaints about Tesla. The bill would also block Musk from participating in portions of projects that he has a financial interest in, and would require him to file a public financial disclosure form.
    Generally, the SEER Act includes reforms to: 
    Expand existing ethics rules to apply to SGEs: This bill makes SGEs subject to most standard ethics rules starting on their 61st day in government, and rules on outside compensation after their 130th day.
    Strengthen conflict-of-interest rules for SGEs:
    Prohibits any SGE who owns or leads a billion-dollar company, or a company with large federal contracts or monopolistic market power, from communicating, in their official capacity, with agencies that contract with, regulate, or conduct enforcement actions against their company; 
    Requires SGEs to resolve a broader range of conflicts of interest raised by government work that would directly and predictably affect their non-government employers; and 
    Requires OGE to agree before issuing a conflict-of-interest waiver to an SGE. 
    Hold SGE chairs and vice chairs of advisory committees to a tougher standard for receiving a conflict-of-interest waiver. 

    Increase transparency surrounding SGE classification and SGE financial interests: 
    Allow public access to the financial disclosures of SGEs without requiring the public to request disclosure; 
    Allow public access to conflict-of-interest waivers; and 
    Requires the Office of Personnel Management to maintain a public database of SGEs, including the number of days served as an SGE and the reason for their classification as an SGE instead of a regular employee. 

    “The Trump Administration’s use of this special designation to install people with potential conflicts in high-level government jobs with no accountability may have begun with Elon Musk – but it goes way beyond Musk. The public now has no way to know whether special government employees who don’t file public financial disclosure reports or are empowered to oversee themselves are putting the people’s interests ahead of their own,” said Jon Golinger, Democracy Advocate at Public Citizen. “Public Citizen strongly supports the SEER Act to close these loopholes and ensure that anti-corruption rules apply to special government employees, strengthen conflict-of-interest barriers to prevent financial self-dealing or misuse of insider information, and shine sunlight with financial disclosure so the public knows who has been given the power and privilege of doing the people’s business.” 
    “Special Government Employees (SGEs) may be able to hold jobs outside of government, but they should not be allowed to operate outside of the bounds of ethics or transparency rules” said Debra Perlin, Vice President for Policy at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). “Senator Warren’s SGE Ethics Enforcement and Reform Act would require SGEs to abide by ethics rules similar to those in place for other federal employees and ensure transparency around who is classified as an SGE and what their conflicts of interest may be. This will help ensure that the work of Special Government Employees serves the American people, and not personal financial interests.”
    This bill is endorsed by Public Citizen, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Project On Government Oversight (POGO), State Democracy Defenders, Campaign Legal Center, American Federation Of Government Employees (AFGE), and the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU).

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ricketts Leads Letter to Commerce Secretary Lutnick Calling for Imminent Reform to Biden AI Diffusion Rule

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Pete Ricketts (Nebraska)
    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Friday, U.S. Senator Pete Ricketts (R-NE) led a group of colleagues in sending a letter to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick regarding the Biden administration’s AI Diffusion Rule (AIDR). The letter calls on the Trump administration to withdraw Biden’s bad rule and propose an alternative that is effective in preventing Communist China from capturing the world market in a leading technology. The letter states:
    “We applaud President Trump’s commitment to ensuring American dominance in the tech sector. Today, we are in an enviable position: American companies dominate in crucial areas that will define tomorrow’s economy including semiconductor design, compute infrastructure, and artificial intelligence (AI). This leadership position has been hard fought. Maintaining and growing our tech lead requires diligently advancing an American-led, global ecosystem around the world.”
    “With the compliance deadline of May 15, 2025, rapidly approaching, immediate action is necessary to prevent irreversible damage to American innovation and competitiveness,” the letter continues. “Every day this rule remains in place, American companies face mounting uncertainty, stalled investments, and the risk of losing critical global partnerships that cannot be easily regained. Therefore, we urge you to withdraw this rule and propose an alternative that is effective in preventing Communist China from capturing the world market in a leading technology without compromising American advantages.”
    The letter was also signed by Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC), Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), Ted Budd (R-NC), Roger Wicker (R-MS), Eric Schmitt (R-MO), and Tommy Tuberville (R-AL).
    Read the full letter here or below:
    Dear Secretary Lutnick:
    We applaud President Trump’s commitment to ensuring American dominance in the tech sector. Today, we are in an enviable position: American companies dominate in crucial areas that will define tomorrow’s economy including semiconductor design, compute infrastructure, and artificial intelligence (AI). This leadership position has been hard fought. Maintaining and growing our tech lead requires diligently advancing an American-led, global ecosystem around the world.
    Concerningly, President Biden’s recently issued Artificial Intelligence Diffusion Rule
    (AIDR) threatens to undermine this leadership and advancement. Among other things, the rule categorizes countries into three tiers, imposing complex restrictions on the purchase of U.S. technology. Only Tier 1 countries—limited to just 18 nations—would have access to American technology. Even these 18 would only have access if they comply with a burdensome and ever-evolving set of federal regulations. The vast majority of nations fall into Tier 2. These countries face arbitrary purchase limits and a cumbersome licensing process to acquire U.S. computing technologies. Strikingly, key allies and partners like Israel have been inexplicably excluded from the top tier and placed into Tier 2. Tier 3 countries, including Communist China, are already rightly restricted.
    While the AIDR claims to provide secure ecosystems for the responsible diffusion of AI, this rushed midnight rule’s impact and overly broad scope will result in consequences that divorce it from its intent. Fundamentally, the rule places burdensome constraints on U.S. companies that would be difficult to comply with and even harder for the Federal government to enforce. Buyers, particularly in Tier 2 countries that are constrained from purchasing U.S. technology, would be incentivized to turn to Communist China’s unregulated, cheap substitutes. Additionally, technology companies in Tier 2 countries could be motivated to create their own AI technology stack that is outside our export control regime. Neither outcome furthers our nation’s long-term economic and national security goals.
    With the compliance deadline of May 15, 2025, rapidly approaching, immediate action is necessary to prevent irreversible damage to American innovation and competitiveness. Every day this rule remains in place, American companies face mounting uncertainty, stalled investments, and the risk of losing critical global partnerships that cannot be easily regained. Therefore, we urge you to withdraw this rule and propose an alternative that is effective in preventing Communist China from capturing the world market in a leading technology without compromising American advantages.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: HSE and Avito launch master’s degree program in machine learning in digital product

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University Higher School of Economics – State University Higher School of Economics –

    Faculty of Computer Science HSE, together with the Russian IT company Avito, announces the launch of a new Master’s program in Machine Learning (ML) in Digital Product. The program is aimed at training specialists who will be able to apply advanced machine learning technologies to solve real business problems and create products used by millions of users. A total of 35 people will be able to undergo training in the first wave, the training of 30 of them will be fully financed by Avito.

    The program is suitable for graduates of a bachelor’s degree in mathematical, technical or economic specialties who want to deepen their knowledge in the field of machine learning. Avito expects that future students can program in Python and write understandable code for analysts and engineers, know standard algorithms and data structures, as well as the basics of ML and SQL, have basic knowledge in the field of linear algebra, probability theory, mathematical statistics and mathematical analysis.

    The full-time master’s program lasts two years and includes both mandatory and optional courses, allowing students to create an individual educational track. Mandatory subjects include probability theory, mathematical statistics, recommender systems, deep learning, MLOps, Python algorithms, backend development, and GPU computing. Elective courses include the basics of micro- and macroeconomics, mechanism design, auction theory, LLM (Large Language Models), deep learning in audio and video processing, dynamic pricing, etc.

    Students will be able to get a paid internship in one of Avito’s DS teams already during their studies — the company will launch several waves of selection during the training period. During the internship, students will be able to use the practical knowledge they have gained when writing term papers and theses under the guidance of a mentor from the team.

    The development of the master’s program was carried out jointly with experts from the HSE Faculty of Computer Science and data scientists from Avito. The teachers are leading specialists in the field of machine learning, such as Anna Markova, Ruslan Gilyazev, Anastasia Rysmyatova, Mikhail Kamenshchikov and Alexander Ledovsky, who have both teaching experience and experience working on large Avito projects, including the development of platforms for predicting ad parameters, monetization and algorithms for ranking paid ads.

    To be admitted, you must pass a portfolio competition and an interview with Avito experts. The selection starts on June 20 and will last until the end of August.

    “Our Master’s program is an opportunity to immerse yourself in the world of machine learning and learn how to solve real business problems. Students will master the full cycle of working with ML – from design to implementation, solving cases based on Avito data. This is a unique chance to gain practical experience in a large IT company. We strive to make education accessible to talented students, so Avito fully covers the cost of tuition for 30 program participants. Classes are held in the evenings and on Saturdays, which allows students not only to study, but also to immediately apply knowledge in practice, building a career in parallel with their studies,” shared Ilya Nikitin, academic director of the educational program “Machine Learning in a Digital Product”, a lecturer at the Faculty of Computer Science at the Higher School of Economics.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Bipartisan Delegation Introduces Legislation To Boost Hiring Of Military Spouses

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative John R Carter (R-TX-31)

    Today, U.S. Reps. Don Beyer (D-VA), Mike Kelly (R-PA), John Carter (R-TX), and Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) led a bipartisan delegation in introducing the Military Spouse Hiring Act, legislation to amend the tax code to incentivize businesses to hire military spouses.

    Today, U.S. Reps. Don Beyer (D-VA), Mike Kelly (R-PA), John Carter (R-TX), and Jimmy Panetta (D-CA) led a bipartisan delegation in introducing the Military Spouse Hiring Act, legislation to amend the tax code to incentivize businesses to hire military spouses. Beyer, Kelly, and Panetta serve on the House Committee on Ways and Means, which has jurisdiction over tax policy, with Kelly chairing the Tax Subcommittee. Carter chairs the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies, and is co-chair of the Army Caucus.

    “My mother was a military spouse, and I am keenly aware of challenges facing partners of active-duty servicemembers, who often have to relocate their families long distances,” said Rep. Beyer. “Our legislation would make important changes to the tax code to overcome hurdles to employment that disproportionately affect military spouses and show military families that ther service to the nation is valued.”

    “America’s soldiers and military families who support them on the frontlines deserve our nation’s support.” said Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA), Chairman of the Ways & Means Subcommittee on Tax.  “Unfortunately, military spouses have a higher rate of unemployment and are often underemployed due to frequent relocations and service member deployments.  Our bipartisan, bicameral legislation aims to help active-duty families get a leg up financially by encouraging local businesses to hire more military spouses in their communities.  It’s a win-win for America.”

    “Military spouses do so much to support our servicemembers, but too often, they struggle to find steady jobs because of the unique challenges that face military families,” said Rep. Carter. “The Military Spouse Hiring Act is a simple, commonsense way to help—giving businesses an incentive to hire these hardworking men and women. At the end of the day, supporting military spouses means supporting military families, and that’s something we should all get behind.”

    “Military spouses face high unemployment rates and career instability due to the frequent relocations required by military service,” said Rep. Panetta. “The Military Spouse Hiring Act directly addresses this challenge by making military spouses eligible for the Work Opportunity Tax Credit, encouraging businesses to hire them and providing these families with greater economic stability.  This bipartisan, bicameral legislation is a commonsense step to support our military families and ensure that they have some stability through economic opportunity.”

    A Senate companion is being introduced by Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA), John Boozman (R-AR), and Maggie Hassan (D-NH).

    According to a survey by Blue Star Families, military spouse employment is the top issue impacting active-duty families, and the top contributor to financial stress among military families. Military spouses consistently experience unemployment rates substantially higher than the national rate, and two thirds of employed active duty military spouses report underemployment. Frequent moves often stall military spouses’ upward career progression and force them to find new jobs. This hurts military families and military readiness.

    Today’s legislation would address the issue by expanding the Work Opportunity Tax Credit program—which incentivizes employers to hire individuals who experience unique employment barriers—to include military spouses.

    The Military Spouse Hiring Act is supported by: Air & Space Forces Association (AFA), Air Force Sergeants Association (AFSA), Association of Military Surgeons of the United States (AMSUS), Chief Warrant Officers Association of the US Coast Guard (CWOA), Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States (EANGUS), Fleet Reserve Association (FRA), Jewish War Veterans (JWV), Marine Corps League (MCL), Military Chaplains Association (MCA), Military Family Advisory Network (MFAN), Military Officers Association of America (MOAA), Military Order of the Purple Heart (MOPH), Military Spouse Advocacy network (MSAN), National Defense Committee (NDC), National Military Family Association (NMFA), National Military Spouse Network (NMSN), Non Commissioned Officers Association (NCOA), Reserve Organization of America (ROA), Service Women’s Action Network (SWAN), The American Legion (TAL), The Retired Enlisted Association (TREA), Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), United States Army Warrant Officers Association (USA WOA), Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA), Wounded Warrior Project (WWP)

    “Military spouse unemployment continues to hover at a very troubling 21%, and expanding the Work Opportunity Tax Credit (WOTC) would help bring that number down by incentivizing employers to hire our nation’s military spouses,” said Sue Hoppin, founder and president of the National Military Spouse Network. “Our mission is to support the efforts of spouses to secure viable careers within the military lifestyle and then help them pave the way for a successful transition post military life. This expansion would go a long way. We extend our sincere thanks and gratitude to Congressman Beyer, who has been a tireless champion of the Military Spouse Hiring Act.”

    “Employing military spouses is a strategic issue with direct ties to force readiness and the retention of experienced warfighters.  And in 2025, having two household incomes is a baseline requirement.  This bill eases an employer’s path to hiring from this talented pool of dedicated workers to invest in both military families and the viability of the all-volunteer force,” Lt. Gen. Brian Kelly, USAF (Ret), president and CEO of the Military Officers Association of America, said. “MOAA wants to thank Sens. Kaine, Boozman, Hassan and Rounds and Reps. Beyer, Kelly, Panetta and Carter for their ongoing work to support military spouses and families.”

    “Hiring a military spouse isn’t just good for a business, it’s good for America,” said Besa Pinchotti, CEO of the National Military Family Association. “Expanding the Work Opportunity tax Credit to include military spouses incentivizes businesses to employ military spouses, a highly qualified talent pool. It also supports military family financial security—ensuring our military is always ready. We’re grateful to Senators Boozman and Kaine and Representatives Kelly and Beyer for introducing this important legislation.”

    The bill has a history of robust bipartisan support in both chambers. Full text of the legislation is available here, with a summary here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Fast-Growing Snack Brand Selects Rutherford County for New Manufacturing Hub

    Source: US State of North Carolina

    Headline: Fast-Growing Snack Brand Selects Rutherford County for New Manufacturing Hub

    Fast-Growing Snack Brand Selects Rutherford County for New Manufacturing Hub
    lsaito

    Raleigh, NC

    Today, Governor Josh Stein announced that Wow Bao, a fast-growing Asian street food company, will create 88 jobs in Rutherford County. The company will invest $6.45 million to establish its first company-operated manufacturing facility in Forest City.

    “North Carolina welcomes Wow Bao to our state where businesses find a strong infrastructure and ready workforce,” said Governor Stein.  “Wow Bao’s decision to expand here strengthens our state’s vibrant food industry and brings new opportunities and jobs to Rutherford County.” 

    Wow Bao was founded in 2003 as a fast-casual restaurant brand and became known for its unique Asian-inspired menu, including bao (steamed buns), potstickers, and soup dumplings. Since then, the brand has grown rapidly, offering fresh, flavorful, and high-quality snacks in restaurants, airport locations, hundreds of Delivery Only kitchens and thousands of grocery stores, nationwide. The company is set to meet growing demand by opening its first company-operated manufacturing facility in Forest City, which will increase production capacity, modernize operations, and expand its reach. 

    “Wow Bao is thrilled to bring our operations to Forest City,” said Matt Fallon, CFO of Wow Bao. “With a world-class workforce and vibrant food and beverage industry, it became clear that Forest City and the State of North Carolina were the perfect home for this exciting phase of Wow Bao’s expansion. We are excited to begin cooking up America’s Number One Bao in Forest City and shipping it out to the rest of the country. We’re grateful for the support of Governor Stein, and our many partners throughout North Carolina, and we look forward to joining the community and catapulting this great brand forward.”

    “With the largest manufacturing workforce in the Southeast and the fourth largest food and beverage industry in the country, North Carolina is the ideal place for companies like Wow Bao to thrive,” said N.C. Commerce Secretary Lee Lilley. “Our economic development teams at the state, regional, and local level will continue to provide strong support as the company expands their cutting-edge business.”  

    Positions at Wow Bao’s new facility will include maintenance engineers, production supervisors, sanitation associates, and other personnel. While wages vary by position, annual salaries for the new positions will average $49,648, exceeding the Rutherford County average of $46,673. These new jobs could potentially create an annual payroll impact of more than $4.3 million for the region.

    A performance-based grant of $180,000 from the One North Carolina Fund awarded to Wow Bao Service, Inc. will help facilitate the company’s location to North Carolina. The OneNC Fund provides financial assistance to local governments to help attract economic investment and to create jobs. Companies receive no money upfront and must meet job creation and capital investment targets to qualify for payment. All OneNC grants require a matching grant from local governments and any award is contingent upon that condition being met.

    “Congratulations to Wow Bao on choosing Rutherford County for its new manufacturing facility,” said N.C. Senator Timothy D. Moffitt. “We look forward to the continued success and impact of their presence in North Carolina.”

    “This expansion is a tremendous win for Forest City, bringing more jobs and strengthening our position as a leader in food production,” said N.C. Representative Jake Johnson. “I’m excited to see Wow Bao expand and thrive here.” 

    In addition to the North Carolina Department of Commerce and the Economic Development Partnership of North Carolina, other key partners in this project include the North Carolina General Assembly, Commerce’s Division of Workforce Solutions, North Carolina Community College System, Isothermal Community College, Rutherford County, and the Town of Forest City. 

    Apr 14, 2025

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General Alan Wilson leads 22-state coalition supporting Senator Tim Scott’s fight against de-bankingRead More

    Source: US State of South Carolina

    (COLUMBIA, S.C.) – South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson is leading a coalition of 22 state attorneys general in commending U.S. Senator Tim Scott’s newly introduced legislation: the Financial Integrity and Regulation Management Act (“FIRM Act”). The bill is aimed at curbing the politically motivated denial of financial services—commonly known as de-banking. 

    “We commend Senator Scott for taking a bold stand against de-banking, a practice that threatens free speech, religious liberty, and equal access to financial services,” said Attorney General Wilson. “No law-abiding American should be denied banking access based on their beliefs or political affiliation.” All Americans, regardless of ideology, deserve equal treatment by financial institutions.  

    The coalition warns that de-banking efforts, once focused on firearms manufacturers and payday lenders, have expanded to include religious organizations, conservative tech leaders, and even former President Donald Trump and the Trump Organization. The letter also criticizes proxy advisory firms for pressuring shareholders to oppose reforms that would eliminate politically driven banking discrimination. 

    “These politically charged attacks are fundamentally un-American and may also violate state laws,” Wilson continued. “This legislation gives us another tool to push back and protect citizens’ rights.” 

    The letter is also joined by attorneys general from North Dakota, Georgia, Ohio, Florida, Montana, Louisiana, Alabama, Texas, Idaho, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Nebraska, West Virginia, Tennessee, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, Mississippi, Missouri, Kansas, and Pennsylvania. 

    You can read the full letter here.  

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Ecuador: can freshly re-elected Daniel Noboa govern a country in crisis?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nicolas Forsans, Professor of Management and Co-director of the Centre for Latin American & Caribbean Studies, University of Essex

    Daniel Noboa has been re-elected as president of Ecuador with a margin that has surprised most observers. Just weeks before the April 13 runoff, polls had him neck and neck with his left-wing rival, Luisa González. In the end, Noboa secured about 56% of the vote against González’s 44%, a difference of more than 1 million votes.

    The victory gives Noboa, a 37-year-old businessman and political outsider, a full four-year mandate. Noboa won a shortened presidential term in November 2023 in a snap election called when his predecessor, Guillermo Lasso, dissolved congress in an attempt to escape impeachment.

    It also marks the third consecutive presidential defeat for the movement led by former president, Rafael Correa, whose influence remains polarising in Ecuadorian politics.

    González is, at the time of writing, refusing to concede, claiming “grotesque” electoral fraud. “I refuse to believe that the people prefer lies over the truth”, she has said. But she has presented no evidence to support the allegation.

    International observers, including the EU and the Organisation of American States, have confirmed the elections were free and fair. In the absence of proof, the fraud claims appear to be more political theatre than a real challenge to the integrity of the vote.

    Political scion to dominant incumbent

    Noboa’s campaign leaned heavily on security – a theme that has come to dominate Ecuadorian public life as the country grapples with record levels of violence. Since assuming the presidency in 2023, Noboa has governed under a permanent state of emergency.

    He declared an “internal armed conflict” in early 2024, deployed the military in prisons and on the streets, and launched a wide-ranging security plan called Plan Fénix. This plan includes building a new maximum-security prison in the coastal province of Santa Elena modelled on El Salvador’s much-criticised approach to curbing violence.

    Initially, these measures won Noboa widespread support. But the picture soon darkened. January 2025 was Ecuador’s most violent month on record, with 781 homicides. Criminal groups remain entrenched in the country’s port cities and prisons. And human rights organisations have raised serious concerns about arbitrary arrests, the excessive use of force, and the militarisation of civilian life.

    Despite these setbacks, Noboa’s message of strength and order clearly resonated with voters. Ecuadorians, exhausted by spiralling violence, appear willing to accept more authoritarian governance in exchange for safety. This is a trend seen across the region, from President Nayib Bukele’s 2024 re-election in El Salvador to rising approval for militarised policing in Brazil, Honduras and Mexico.

    The challenges Noboa now faces are daunting. The most pressing is Ecuador’s descent into organised crime and narco-violence. Situated between Colombia and Peru, the country has become a major transit hub for cocaine bound for the US and Europe. Powerful international cartels have partnered with local gangs, and the state has lost control over large swaths of territory.

    In response, Noboa has not only empowered the armed forces but has also sought international assistance. In 2024, he met with Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater, a controversial US private military contractor. This raised concerns about the outsourcing of Ecuador’s security and its implications for human rights. He has also floated the idea of hosting foreign troops in Ecuador, a proposal that would require a constitutional amendment.

    But militarised solutions alone did not bring an end to violence during Noboa’s first term, nor are they likely to succeed in his second.

    Ecuador’s security crisis is not just a matter of policing – it is a crisis of state capacity. The judiciary is riddled with corruption, prisons have become centres of criminal coordination, and police officers are often outgunned and underpaid. Without reforming these institutions, Noboa’s war on crime risks becoming a war without end.

    At the same time, Ecuador’s economy is faltering. In 2024, the country fell into recession, with GDP contracting and inflation rising. Ecuador is reliant on hydropower for its electricity generation, and a historic drought that year caused blackouts lasting up to 14 hours a day. This revealed years of under-investment in infrastructure.

    In response, Noboa raised VAT, cut fuel subsidies, and secured a US$4 billion (roughly £3 billion) loan from the International Monetary Fund. These unpopular measures provoked grumbling but not mass protests, a fact some analysts attribute to exhaustion rather than approval.

    Inequality remains high, especially for young people and those living in rural and coastal regions. Unemployment and underemployment affect nearly half of the working-age population, and around one-third of Ecuadorians live in poverty. Noboa has announced new cash transfers and youth employment programmes, but these are palliative, not structural.

    To make matters worse, Noboa governs with limited support in the National Assembly. His party, Acción Democrática Nacional, holds 66 of the chamber’s 151 seats – one less than González’s Citizen Revolution.

    The Indigenous Pachakutik party controls a crucial bloc of nine seats, but is itself internally divided. Passing legislation will require building coalitions and compromising. These are skills that Noboa has yet to demonstrate at scale.

    Noboa’s credibility has also been challenged. His family’s banana export company, Noboa Trading, has been linked to multiple drug seizures in Europe. While there is no evidence implicating Noboa directly, the revelations raise uncomfortable questions about the president’s anti-drug narrative and potential conflicts of interest.

    Towards democratic reform

    Noboa’s victory gives him an opportunity, but not a blank cheque. His success will now depend on whether he can pivot from ruling by decree to governing by consensus. The public expects results: less violence, more jobs and greater political stability.

    To meet these expectations, he will need to restore the rule of law, protect human rights and build inclusive institutions capable of resisting criminal capture. This means professionalising the police, strengthening the judiciary and tackling the deep inequalities that fuel violence and despair.

    It also means stepping back from theatrical gestures, such as alliances with foreign mercenaries, and focusing on the slow, often frustrating work of state-building.

    In the coming months, Noboa will face a simple but profound test: can he translate his electoral mandate into real, lasting progress for a country on the edge? Ecuador’s future may depend on the answer.

    Nicolas Forsans 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.

    – ref. Ecuador: can freshly re-elected Daniel Noboa govern a country in crisis? – https://theconversation.com/ecuador-can-freshly-re-elected-daniel-noboa-govern-a-country-in-crisis-254420

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: New UK system to protect satellites against attack shows how global conflict has spilled into outer space

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jessie Hamill-Stewart, PhD Researcher, University of Bath

    Lockheed Martin and US Space Force

    The UK government has announced £65 million in funding for a new system called Borealis which is intended to help the UK military defend its satellites against threats. Borealis is a software system that collates and processes data to strengthen the UK military’s ability to monitor what’s going on in space.

    The government’s investment, announced on March 7, underlines the increasingly critical role played by space systems in the modern world. Space services play a key role in managing critical infrastructure such as the energy grid, transport systems and communications networks.

    For example, SpaceX’s Starlink system has been vitally important for communication on the battlefield during Ukraine’s war with Russia. It is just one example of the game changing potential of satellite based services.

    The investment in Borealis also shows that the UK government is taking the threat to space systems increasingly seriously. From as long ago as 2019, senior US officials have warned that space is no longer considered a “benign environment”.

    In 2021, a US general claimed that states were constantly conducting attacks on satellites, including jamming and cyber-attacks. Announcing the Borealis system in 2025, Major General Paul Tedman, the commander of UK Space Command, characterised space as “increasingly contested”.

    As the international order is coming under increasing pressure, nations are engaging in more combative behaviour, not just in space, but in cyberspace, and under the seas.

    A space system is composed of four parts – traditionally called segments. These include the space segment (satellites and other spacecraft), the ground segment (ground stations, control rooms), and the user segment (a signal receiver, for example). Communications between these parts of the system form what’s called the link segment.

    In addition to intentional attacks, satellites can also experience problems because of physical collisions with orbiting debris, from cosmic radiation, and activity on the Sun, which can interfere with onboard systems. For satellites, security against attacks has often been a secondary consideration. It was hard enough to build a system which could survive in space without introducing the additional costs and challenges of securing it against attacks from adversaries.

    Addressing threats to assets in space will require an all-encompassing approach, as I have argued in a recent report. First, security needs to cover all four segments of space infrastructure. The easiest way to interrupt a space system might be to target the ground or the user segment, rather than trying to interfere directly with a satellite.

    Starlink has been vitally important in Ukraine during the war with Russia.
    LanKS / Shutterstock

    Second, security needs to be considered across the life cycle of the system, from design and construction, through launch, to operations and application. Consider, for example, if the detailed specifications of a satellite have already been leaked to a malicious party. That might provide them with an in-depth understanding of how to attack the spacecraft – and in such a way that may be difficult to defend against without going back to redesign it.

    This type of issue was less of a problem when satellites were developed almost entirely by government agencies and large aerospace companies. ongoing expansion of the commercial space sector, start-ups and new entrants to the sector may not have the same approach to security as more seasoned organisations.

    Third, security needs to include the whole range of threats facing space infrastructure, of which a satellite is just one part. We must therefore consider the physical security of hardware, information security, cybersecurity, the personnel working on the project, and supply chain security.

    Vulnerable to sabotage

    The range of threats facing space systems parallels those facing other critical systems, such as underwater telecommunications cables. There have been several recent incidents of subsea cables being cut in the Baltic Sea, for example. There is also at least one reported instance of hackers burrowing deep inside core telecommunications networks.

    It is becoming painfully clear that much of the infrastructure underpinning the economy and our daily lives is fundamentally insecure. Determined attackers are increasingly operating across both the physical world and cyberspace.

    Retrofitting security onto space systems is technically challenging and hugely expensive. There are also tough policy questions here. Governments simply do not have the resources or the legal powers to act alone on this issue. Neither is it clear that the private sector will voluntarily commit to higher security standards and a vast programme of investment in existing infrastructure.

    Another issue is the global nature of space systems: differing security regulations make it challenging to ensure a coordinated approach to infrastructure across states.

    This underscores the importance of raising public awareness around the scale and scope of threats to space systems – and making clear what the impact would be on the public if this infrastructure ceased to operate. If governments are going to invest more in securing space systems, then people will need to understand why this is critical.

    However, the challenge of reverse engineering security into the complex and rapidly expanding network of space systems may ultimately be beyond the resources and appetites of governments and companies.

    If that is the case, then in addition to raising awareness around security risks, governments and other organisations should also consider efforts to increase the resilience of space systems to attacks. In addition to thinking about how to better secure our space infrastructure, it may be prudent to consider how we might live without it.

    Jessie Hamill-Stewart 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. Dr Neil Ashdown contributed to this article. He is the head of research at Tyburn St Raphael.

    – ref. New UK system to protect satellites against attack shows how global conflict has spilled into outer space – https://theconversation.com/new-uk-system-to-protect-satellites-against-attack-shows-how-global-conflict-has-spilled-into-outer-space-253963

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Why ‘de-extinct’ dire wolves are a Trojan horse to hide humanity’s destruction of nature

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rich Grenyer, Associate Professor in Biogeography and Biodiversity, University of Oxford

    One of the biotech company’s ‘dire wolves’. Colossal

    With wildlife populations globally 73% smaller on average than in 1970 and large mammals missing from much of the world, surely there’s never been a better time to “de-extinct” species? US biotech company Colossal Biosciences Inc claimed to do just that recently by resurrecting the dire wolf from Game of Thrones (a species that also lived in our world, several thousand years ago).

    The potential seems huge. A species in trouble? Get a high-quality genome and you’ve made it a save game point, ready to replay when the environment improves. Didn’t get there in time? Never mind – you can use frozen remains in the permafrost, or shotgun-blasted specimens in a museum collection. And pretty soon, even if you don’t have those, a dose of generative AI and you can probably infer some of that genome anyway. A little genetic engineering and you have a species back from the dead, ready to go.

    What’s the problem? Well, pretty much everything. These aren’t species returned from extinction. They aren’t going to be very useful, and in fact may well not survive at all. Most worrying of all, like the Freys and Boltons hidden in the hall before the Red Wedding, it’s the ethos of de-extinction hidden in these “dire wolf” puppies that will likely do the most damage to biodiversity if it establishes itself.

    Extinction has not been reversed

    The dire wolf was a very large carnivore that lived in the Americas about 10,000 years ago. Anatomically, it resembled a big, muscular, extra-toothy grey wolf: the species alive today that everyone thinks of when they say “wolf”.

    The two pups revealed by Colossal Biosciences are not dire wolves. They are grey wolves, with 14 genes modified to produce an animal that resembles what we think a dire wolf looked like. Actually, only one of the 14 was a gene directly from a dire wolf specimen – the others were gene variants from existing grey wolf populations chosen to give physical features that made the engineered wolves bigger and whiter.

    Over time, gene editing technology could increase the possible number of genes that can be engineered into a host species, and increase the complexity of the traits being inserted. But it’s not species being revived, it’s a few of their characteristics being borrowed by a species from today. It’s like claiming to have brought Napoleon back from the dead by asking a short French man to wear his hat.

    The argument for this kind of genetic engineering revolves around the notion that the new hybrids might be useful for environmental restoration. As a top predator, the dire wolf could in theory bring the same revolutionary changes to ecosystems that reintroducing grey wolves to Yellowstone national park in the US famously caused in the 1990s. In other words, a more complete ecosystem, with wolves checking the voracious appetite of deer such that more complex and biodiverse habitats rebound.

    However, in ecosystems where the dire wolf would reign supreme the grey wolf can very clearly fill the same role (just as it did in Yellowstone) without any of the unnecessary technology – if only people stopped trying to shoot them and exempt them from endangered species legislation.

    There’s also the problem that captive breeding programmes seeking to release endangered species into the wild today regularly butt against: that the new animals have little or no idea what to do or how to live in their new habitat.

    Operation Migration, dramatised in the 1996 film Fly Away Home, saw a dedicated team of pilots teach endangered migratory birds how to traverse North America by having them chase microlight aircraft for thousands of miles. This is just one example of the intensive training necessary, and which is never guaranteed to be successful. It’s obviously more difficult to train apex predators by example – I will not be volunteering for the “intro to pack hunting” session.

    No quick fixes

    The word “de-extinction” is not just itself untrue, but it seeks to diminish the inconvenient truth of the biodiversity crisis: we know what causes extinction, and it’s us.

    Food systems have to destroy less habitat and use much less protein from animals, wild and farmed. Energy systems have to burn less carbon, so that there are fewer deaths among species (including ours) trying to adapt to higher temperatures and the changes they bring. To do both these things, our landscapes have to leave more space for nature and much of what remains must be used more efficiently to provide food, fuel and living space.

    There are definite signs that we can make good on these promises: conservation does work, for humans and for other species.

    But these changes require us to recognise that certain economic and political philosophies are no longer tenable. They require sacrifice by everyone and a willingness by rich people and countries to pay with money, trade policy, intellectual property rights and energy supply, so that many of the poorest people and countries can flourish while avoiding the environmental damage that those rich countries caused over their own histories.

    What motivates people to cope with these changes is a desire for justice, a need to nurture, a drive to make things better and a recognition that while habitats can sometimes be restored, species extinctions are irreversible dead-ends which can only be avoided. That recognition is under threat.

    The Trump administration is trying to defang the US Endangered Species Act. In the UK, a wholesale revision of legislation to prevent biodiversity loss has begun with the targeting of the habitat regulations, in preemptive defence of the government’s need to “build, build, build” in a desperate search for more economic growth. How useful would it be if the risk of extinction could be averted with a simple “don’t worry, we’ll pay to de-extinct it afterwards”?

    There won’t be a dire wolf, and even if there were to be one, we’d have no idea what it was for (and neither would it). We’ll all pay for the mistaken belief that extinction is a solved problem, and that the business-as-usual global economy that has caused the sixth mass extinction is no big deal, because its casualties aren’t actually dead – just temporarily inconvenienced by an extinction that is no longer forever.

    Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?

    Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 45,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.

    Rich Grenyer 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.

    – ref. Why ‘de-extinct’ dire wolves are a Trojan horse to hide humanity’s destruction of nature – https://theconversation.com/why-de-extinct-dire-wolves-are-a-trojan-horse-to-hide-humanitys-destruction-of-nature-254309

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Government invests more than £45 million in groundbreaking technologies to boost Britain’s food security

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 2

    Press release

    Government invests more than £45 million in groundbreaking technologies to boost Britain’s food security

    More funding for farmers to increase profits, boost food production and protect nature

    New inventions and technologies to increase profits, boost food production and help protect nature have been handed a major cash injection, the government has announced today (14 April).
       
    From robots carrying out delicate fruit picking, to health monitors for cows and sheep, right through to variable irrigation systems to maximise water usage on crops – these grants support the development of wide-range projects and products which will help a large number of farmers.  
       
    The three special funds, worth a combined £45.6 million, will support multiple projects across the research and development (R&D) lifecycle, from early-stage concepts to on-farm trials.

    They will help bring cutting-edge technologies into real-world use with a particular focus on reducing on-farm emissions and capitalising on new opportunities made possible by the Precision Breeding Act, which could supercharge food production by increase crop yields, reduce pesticides and enhance disease resistance.   

    These funds will help to strengthen food security, increase farmers’ profits and protect nature as part of the government’s Plan for Change.   

    Farming Minister Daniel Zeichner said:   

    This government is serious about delivering its Plan for Change.  

    That is why I’m delighted to see money getting out the door to British farmers. This £45m will support them with technology to boost food production, profits and the rural economy.

    From 28 April, applications will open for the new Accelerating Development of Practices and Technologies (ADOPT) competition, which will commit up to £20.6 million of funding in 25/26. This grant will support farmers looking to test new technologies on their own farms and bridge the gap between innovation and real-world application.     

    Farmers can access tailored advice and apply for a £2,500 support grant at the ADOPT Support Hub to help them through the application and trial process.  

    From 5 May, two further competitions will open under the Farming Innovation Programme (FIP):  

    • The first £12.5 million to support collaborative research into ways to reduce on-farm emissions, helping farms to become more sustainable and climate-resilient.  

    • The second £12.5 million competition will fund R&D using precision-bred crops to improve yield, reduce chemical inputs and enhance disease resistance. This builds on the new opportunities enabled by the Genetic Technology (Precision Breeding) Act 2023.  

    FIP, Defra’s flagship innovation programme, is delivered by Innovate UK, as part of UKRI, and forms part of the government’s wider commitment to food production and security, farm productivity and nature.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 April 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI USA: SEC Publishes New Data and Analysis About Registered Investment Companies and Money Market Funds

    Source: Securities and Exchange Commission

    The Securities and Exchange Commission today published new data and analysis in a pair of reports that provide the investing public with updated key information about registered investment companies and money market funds.  

    “It is important that the Commission publicly shares the information it collects in a clear and transparent way,” said Acting Chairman Mark Uyeda. “These two reports will provide the public with key information about the approximately $41.5 trillion investors trust to funds and the approximately $7.39 trillion invested in money market funds.”

    Annual Registered Investment Company Update contains statistics and SEC staff analysis based on Form N-CEN data. It is designed to facilitate the public’s ability to efficiently review, digest, and use key summary information about the industry. This information includes insights into the service providers used by investment companies, the assets they manage, and certain activities they undertake (such as securities lending).

    Money Market Fund Statistics is an enhanced version of the money market funds report generated by the Division of Investment Management. This report contains additional statistical analysis and enhancements, as well as certain metrics based on Form N-MFP data. The modifications to the report are designed to further facilitate the public’s ability to efficiently review, digest, and use aggregate information about the money market fund industry by including summaries of more money market fund data, including information about internal affiliated funds, portfolio investments, flows, and industry concentration. The report extends the downloadable historical statistical series of data back to 2010.

    The statistics reported in both reports may be downloaded in a structured format, which will provide the historical statistical series of information with each publication of the reports.

    “These reports reflect the important work of the Division of Investment Management staff analyzing and collecting data from registered funds and money market funds,” said Natasha Vij Greiner, Director of the SEC’s Division of Investment Management. “The statistics and staff analysis in the reports will help investors, economists, academics, and other interested members of the public better engage with the staff and the Commission. This is critical information given the important role of funds in financial markets and the portfolios of millions of investors.”

    Tim Husson, who leads the SEC’s Division of Investment Management’s Analytics Office, added, “Forms N-MFP and N-CEN provide insights into key areas of the investment company industry. The reports reflect our continued dedication to enhance the public’s use of important information about the industry.”

    The Division of Investment Management advises the Commission on rules and forms under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, including oversight of investment advisers, as well as investment companies, such as mutual funds, money market funds, and ETFs. The Division’s Analytics Office provides practical reviews and actionable analysis of the asset management industry.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Honduran man extradited to US for alleged role in international drug smuggling conspiracy

    Source: US Immigration and Customs Enforcement

    WASHINGTON — A Honduran man was extradited to the United States April 11 for his alleged involvement in a drug smuggling conspiracy, following extensive coordination and cooperation between U.S. and Honduran law enforcement authorities.

    Matthew R. Galeotti, head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, acting U.S. Attorney Michael M. Simpson for the Eastern District of Louisiana and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations New Orleans Special Agent in Charge Eric DeLaune made the announcement.

    Olvin Javier Velasquez Maldonado, 39, allegedly conspired to transport approximately 24 kilograms of cocaine from Honduras to the U.S. on a vessel attempting to illegally bring 23 Honduran nationals into the country. This operation was intercepted by the U.S. Coast Guard in February 2022, about 75 miles off the coast of Louisiana after the vessel, M/V Pop, developed engine trouble.

    According to court documents, Velasquez Maldonado was tasked with ensuring the cocaine was safely transported on the M/V Pop, which set sail from Utila, Honduras, to Cocodrie, Louisiana. When he was apprehended, Velasquez Maldonado allegedly pretended to be an undocumented immigrant aiming to stay in the U.S. to avoid prosecution.

    Velasquez Maldonado is charged with one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. He made his initial court appearance in the Eastern District of Louisiana.

    If convicted, Velasquez Maldonado faces a mandatory minimum penalty of 10 years in prison and 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.

    His co-defendants, Carl Allison, 47, Darrel Martinez, 41, and Josue Flores-Villeda, 37, previously pleaded guilty to associated charges in 2023. Lenord Cooper, 40, admitted to aiding in the unlawful entry of aliens into the U.S. and attempting to do so for financial gain. Hennessy Devon Cooper Zelaya, 29, and Rudy Jackson Hernandez, 38, were also convicted after trial of aiding in the unlawful entry of aliens into the U.S. and attempting to do so for financial gain.

    An indictment is merely an allegation. The defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    The investigation and extradition of Velasquez Maldonado was coordinated under Joint Task Force Alpha and the Extraterritorial Criminal Travel Strike Force program. JTFA, a partnership with the Department of Homeland Security, has been elevated and expanded by the attorney general with a mandate to target cartels and transnational criminal organizations to eliminate human smuggling and trafficking networks operating in Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Panama, and Colombia that impact public safety and the security of our borders. To date, JTFA’s work has resulted in more than 355 domestic and international arrests of leaders, organizers, and significant facilitators of alien smuggling; more than 315 U.S. convictions; more than 260 significant jail sentences imposed; and forfeitures of substantial assets.

    The ECT program is a partnership between the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and ICE HSI and focuses on human smuggling networks that may present national security, public safety risks or grave humanitarian concerns. ECT has dedicated investigative, intelligence, and prosecutorial resources. ECT also coordinates and receives assistance from other U.S. government agencies and foreign law enforcement authorities.

    ICE HSI Houma, Louisiana investigated the case, with assistance from ICE HSI Pittsburgh, ICE HSI Atlanta and the Louisiana Bureau of Investigation. The ICE HSI Human Smuggling Unit in Washington, D.C., U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s National Targeting Center International Interdiction Task Force, U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service, U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s Air and Marine Operations, Louisiana State Police, Pennsylvania State Police, North Huntington Township Police and Terrebonne Parish Sheriff’s Office also provided valuable assistance, in addition to the substantial assistance provided by the Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs and the Criminal Division’s Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance and Training in Honduras.

    Deputy Chief Rami Badawy of the Criminal Division’s Human Rights and Special Prosecutions Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Carter Guice of the General Crimes Unit for the Eastern District of Louisiana are prosecuting the case.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Ageas launches offering to raise €525 million through an accelerated bookbuild offering of newly issued ordinary shares

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Ageas launches offering to raise €525 million through an accelerated bookbuild offering of newly issued ordinary shares

    Ageas to raise €525 million through the issuance of new shares in a private placement to certain institutional and professional investors through an accelerated bookbuilding process.

    Ageas SA/NV (“Ageas” or the “Company”) launches an offering of new shares in Ageas (the “New Shares”) to raise €525 million (the “Offering”). The Offering will begin immediately and will be executed through an accelerated bookbuilding process (the “Share Placement”). The New Shares will be issued under the existing authorisation granted to the Board of Directors by the shareholders at the extraordinary general meeting held on 15 May 2024. The Offering is intended to partly finance the acquisition of esure1 to establish a top-3 UK personal lines platform (the “Transaction”).

    For more details, please visit the following link: https://ageas.com/en/esure-2025.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Coface SA: Disclosure of trading in own shares (excluding the liquidity agreement) made on April 7 to April 11, 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    COFACE SA: Disclosure of trading in own shares (excluding the liquidity agreement) made on April 7 to April 11, 2025

    Paris, April 14, 2025 – 17.45

    Pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 of 16 April 2014 on market abuse1

    The main features of the 2024-2025 Share Buyback Program have been published on the Company’s website (http://www.coface.com/Investors/Disclosure-requirements, under “Own share transactions”) and are also described in the 2024 Universal Registration Document.

    Trading session
    of (Date)    		 Number
    of shares    		 Weighted
    average price    		 Gross amount MIC Code Purpose
    of buyback
    07/04/2025 15,000 15.5785 € 233,677 € XPAR LTIP
    08/04/2025 11,000 16.1885 € 178,074 € XPAR LTIP
    09/04/2025 11,000 15.7422 € 173,164 € XPAR LTIP
    10/04/2025 11,000 16.5766 € 182,342 € XPAR LTIP
    11/04/2025 11,022 16.1732 € 178,261 € XPAR LTIP
    Total 07/04/2025 – 11/04/2025 59,022 16.0198 € 945,519 €   LTIP

    CONTACTS

    ANALYSTS / INVESTORS
    Thomas JACQUET: +33 1 49 02 12 58 – thomas.jacquet@coface.com
    Rina ANDRIAMIADANTSOA: +33 1 49 02 15 85 – rina.andriamiadantsoa@coface.com

    FINANCIAL CALENDAR 2025
    (subject to change)

    Q1-2025 results: 5 May 2025 (after market close)
    Annual General Shareholders’ Meeting: 14 May 2025
    H1-2025 results: 31 July 2025 (after market close)
    9M-2025 results: 3 November 2025 (after market close)

    FINANCIAL INFORMATION
    This press release, as well as COFACE SA’s integral regulatory information, can be found on the Group’s website: http://www.coface.com/Investors

    For regulated information on Alternative Performance Measures (APM), please refer to our Interim Financial Report for H1-2024 and our 2024 Universal Registration Document (see part 3.7 “Key financial performance indicators”).

      Regulated documents posted by COFACE SA have been secured and authenticated with the blockchain technology by Wiztrust.
    You can check the authenticity on the website www.wiztrust.com.
     

    COFACE: FOR TRADE
    As a global leading player in trade credit risk management for more than 75 years, Coface helps companies grow and navigate in an uncertain and volatile environment.
    Whatever their size, location or sector, Coface provides 100,000 clients across some 200 markets. with a full range of solutions: Trade Credit Insurance, Business Information, Debt Collection, Single Risk insurance, Surety Bonds, Factoring.
    Every day, Coface leverages its unique expertise and cutting-edge technology to make trade happen, in both domestic and export markets.
    In 2024, Coface employed ~5,236 people and registered a turnover of €1.84 billion.

    www.coface.com

    COFACE SA is listed in Compartment A of Euronext Paris
    ISIN: FR0010667147 / Ticker: COFA

    1 Also in pursuant to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1052 of 8 March 2016 (and updates); Article L.225-209 and seq. of the French Commercial Code; Article L.221-3, Article L.241-1 and seq. of the General Regulation of the French Market Authority (AMF); AMF Recommendation DOC-2017-04 Guide for issuers on their own shares transactions and for stabilization measures.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Update: MultiCorp International, Inc. Announces a Quadripartitie Agreement

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    AGOURA HILLS, CALIFORNIA, April 14, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — MultiCorp International, Inc. (OTC Markets PINK: MCIC) Multicorp International, Inc. is pleased to announce the execution of a Quadripartite Agreement on March 26, 2025 and the currently pending $2,000,000,000 credit transfer from a top 10 European Bank to Neoforma Inc.’s domestic bank to access immediate liquidity.

    Multicorp International, Inc.’s alliance with 40 Brightwater LLC’s Global Financial Consortium inclusive of Neoforma Inc. and now Airavata Developers Corporation has expanded immediate access to greater liquidity, which will be added to the previously announced financings from Edwards Capital N.A. correspondent bank.

    In turn, Neoforma Inc. will provide a line of credit to MultiCorp International, Inc. in an amount of up to $1,800,000,000 (one billion eight hundred million USD), to be utilized to execute all transactions previously announced with Global X Cryptocurrency Stablecoin Tokens (GBP-pegged), Bitcoin, and gold-backed Cryptocurrency Tokens, as well as to perfect the newly-targeted acquisition of a mineral property in Michigan and to cover all required corporate expenditures.

    About MultiCorp International, Inc. :

    (https://multicorpinternational.com/)

    MultiCorp International, Inc., a diversified leader in health, energy, and agriculture, announces a series of strategic initiatives aimed at accelerating its growth and expanding its market presence. The company is actively pursuing joint ventures and acquisitions, is fortifying its organizational infrastructure, and is preparing for significant advancements in the stock market.

    About Neoforma Inc. :

    www.neoforma.co

    Neoforma Inc. is a Minnesota based privately held corporation and a global leader in Software & Technology. The company has now diversified into International finance including private equity and has operations globally, including India, the UAE, the UK, Mexico and the United States and serves clients globally. Its client base includes numerous global corporations as well as government entities.

    About Airavata Developers Corporation:

    Airavata-corp.com

    Airavata Developers Corporation is a prominent international construction firm that has carved a niche for itself in the design and construction of commercial and industrial infrastructure. With a commitment to excellence, we specialize in a wide array of services that encompass every phase of the construction process, including comprehensive pre-construction planning, meticulous project management, and effective general contracting. Each of these services is tailored to meet the specific needs and demands of our diverse clientele, ensuring that we not only meet but exceed their expectations.

    At the helm of our organization are the highly respected Principal Partners, Alan Khara, who serves as the Chief Executive Director and Chairman, and David D. Brannon, the Executive Financial Director. Together, they bring a wealth of experience and knowledge to the company. Their unwavering dedication extends beyond just business; they are passionately committed to fostering community excellence. This commitment is demonstrated through substantial efforts in promoting global economic development while simultaneously focusing on job creation within the communities we operate. Their leadership style emphasizes ethical practices, innovative thinking, and a deep responsibility toward societal well-being.

    Airavata Developers Corporation has set forth an ambitious goal: to emerge as the global leader within this ever-evolving and dynamic construction industry. To achieve this vision, we place a strong emphasis on delivering exceptional service that stands out in a competitive marketplace. This is complemented by our proactive approach in integrating cutting-edge technology and state-of-the-art materials into our projects. By continually investing in the latest advancements in construction techniques and environmental sustainability, we ensure that our infrastructure not only meets current industry standards but also anticipates future demands.

    Our commitment to quality, sustainability, and innovation drives every project we undertake, ensuring that we consistently remain at the forefront of industry trends and client expectations.

    David Brannon Chief Financial Director/ Partner

     About 40 Brightwater LLC:

    40 Brightwater LLC is a private holding company focusing specifically on acquiring private entities and merging its holdings with public companies by leveraging its financial network and resources through its Managing Member, President & CEO Shannon Newby.

    Disclaimer: This press release does not constitute an offer to sell or solicit an offer to buy, nor will there be any sale of these securities in any jurisdiction where such an offer, solicitation, or sale would be unlawful before registration or qualification under applicable securities laws. Any offer will be made only through a prospectus supplement and accompanying base prospectus as part of an effective registration statement.

    Contact Information: J. A. Coleman, J.a.coleman1512@gmail.com.

    This press release is for informational purposes only and should not be considered investment advice or a solicitation to purchase securities. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. These statements are based on current expectations and could differ materially from actual events

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI NGOs: No end in sight: Sudan’s two years of war story Apr 14, 2025

    Source: Doctors Without Borders –

    As the war in Sudan between the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) enters its third year, millions of people remain unseen, bombed, besieged, displaced, and deprived of food, medical care, and basic lifesaving services. Sixty percent of the country’s 50 million people need humanitarian assistance, according to the UN, amid simultaneous health crises and limited access to public health care.

    Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) reiterates our call on the warring parties and their allies to ensure that civilians, humanitarian personnel, and medical teams are protected and that all restrictions impeding the movement of humanitarian supplies and staff are lifted, especially as the rainy season fast approaches.

    “The warring parties are not only failing to protect civilians—they are actively compounding their suffering,” said Claire San Filippo, MSF emergency coordinator. “Wherever you look in Sudan, you will find needs—overwhelming, urgent, and unmet. Millions are receiving almost no humanitarian assistance, medical facilities and staff remain under attack, and the global humanitarian system is failing to deliver even a fraction of what’s required.”

    Wherever you look in Sudan, you will find needs—overwhelming, urgent, and unmet. 

    Claire San Filippo, MSF emergency coordinator

    As front lines have shifted over the course of the war, especially in Khartoum and Darfur, civilians have feared retaliatory attacks from both warring parties. For the past two years, both RSF and SAF have repeatedly and indiscriminately bombed densely populated areas. The RSF and allied militias have unleashed a campaign of brutality, including systematic sexual violence, abductions, mass killings, looting of aid, erasure of civilian neighborhoods, and occupation of medical facilities. Both sides have laid siege to towns, destroyed vital infrastructure, and blocked humanitarian aid. 

    Newly displaced families arrive in Tawila on April 13 following new attacks in Zamzam camp. | Sudan 2025 © Marion Ramstein/MSF

    Sudan’s largest displacement camp is under attack

    RSF and allied armed groups launched a large-scale ground offensive on April 11, attacking Zamzam camp and leaving its residents starved, shelled, and deprived of lifesaving assistance. Marion Ramstein, MSF emergency field coordinator in North Darfur, described the situation:

    “There are reports of people fleeing and many casualties, although we can’t verify how many at the moment. 

    “Back in February, we were forced to suspend all MSF activities in the camp because of escalating security issues. Repeated shelling, shooting at our ambulances, and a tightened siege that prevented us from resupplying facilities and sending staff made it impossible for MSF to continue working in Zamzam despite the immense needs. 

    “The communication network with Zamzam has been shut down. We don’t have news of many of the people who worked with us and decided to remain with their relatives in the camp after the suspension of our field hospital. We’re horrified by what they have to endure, and extremely worried about them and the hundreds of thousands of people already on the brink of survival in the area. We were appalled to learn that nine staff from Relief International were killed. It was the only international humanitarian organization still operating in Zamzam.

    We were appalled to learn that nine staff from Relief International were killed. It was the only international humanitarian organization still operating in Zamzam.

    Marion Ramstein, MSF emergency field coordinator

    “On April 12 and 13, our team in Tawila saw more than 10,000 people fleeing from Zamzam and nearby areas. They arrived in an advanced state of dehydration, exhaustion, and stress. They have nothing but the clothes they’re wearing, nothing to eat, nothing to drink. They sleep on the ground under the trees. Several people told us about family members left behind—lost during the escape, injured, or killed.”

    MSF set up a health post at the entrance of Tawila city to receive the new arrivals and provide water and medical care. Our teams quickly distributed what we had on hand, such as blankets, mosquito nets, and buckets; and we are referring the most critical cases to the local hospital MSF has been supporting since last October. MSF teams are also screening newly arrived children for malnutrition so they can immediately receive therapeutic food and be enrolled in our nutritional program for adequate care.

    A health worker screens a child for malnutrition in Tawila, North Darfur. | Sudan 2024 © MSF

    Hunger and famine take hold

    Widespread starvation is taking hold in areas across Sudan, according to the UN: Sudan is currently the only place in the world where famine has been officially declared in multiple locations. Famine was first declared in Zamzam camp for internally displaced people in August 2024, and has since spread to 10 more areas. Seventeen additional regions are now on the brink. Without immediate intervention, hundreds of thousands of lives are at risk.

    In March, MSF supported multi-antigen catch up vaccination campaigns for children under 2 years old in South Darfur. The over 17,000 children who received vaccinations in 11 of the 14 localities were also screened for malnutrition, with 7 percent of those screened found to be suffering from severe acute malnutrition and with 30 percent with global acute malnutrition. In December 2024, during a therapeutic food distribution in Tawila locality, North Darfur, MSF teams screened over 9,500 children under 5 years old. They found a staggering 35.5 percent global acute malnutrition rate, with 7 percent of the children suffering from severe acute malnutrition.

    MSF staff hold a meeting at the mobile clinic in Atam, South Sudan, which has received thousands of Sudanese refugees. | South Sudan 2025 © Paula Casado Aguirregabiria/MSF

    Simultaneous emergencies compound crises

    Sudan is facing multiple, overlapping health emergencies at the same time. MSF teams have treated over 12,000 patients—including women and children—for trauma injuries directly resulting from violent attacks. During the first week of February 2025, MSF teams in three areas of Sudan—Khartoum, North Darfur, and South Darfur states—treated mass influxes of war-wounded patients. Sudan is also experiencing one of the worst maternal and child health crises we are seeing anywhere in the world. In October 2024, in two MSF-supported facilities in Nyala, capital of South Darfur, 26 percent of pregnant and breastfeeding women seeking care were acutely malnourished. 

    “Outbreaks of measles, cholera, and diphtheria are spreading, driven by poor living conditions and disrupted vaccination campaigns,” said Marta Cazorla, MSF emergency coordinator. “Mental health support and care for survivors of sexual violence remain painfully limited. These compounding crises reflect not just the brutality of the conflict, but the dire consequences of the crumbling public health care system and a failing humanitarian response.” 

    Since April 2023, more than 1.7 million people have sought medical consultations at hospitals, health facilities and mobile clinics MSF supports or is working in, and more than 32,000 people were admitted to our emergency wards.

    About 13 million people have been displaced by the conflict, according to the UN—many of them displaced multiple times. Of these, 8.9 million remain displaced inside Sudan, while 3.9 million have crossed into neighboring countries. Many live in overcrowded camps or makeshift shelters, without access to food, water, health care, or a sense of the future. People depend entirely on humanitarian organizations—but organizations are not responding everywhere. 

    MSF doctors examine Sameera, who developed an arm infection from a poorly administered injection following a home delivery. | Sudan 2025 © Belen Filgueira/MSF

    Health facilities destroyed 

    According to the World Health Organization (WHO), more than 70 percent of health facilities in conflict-affected areas are barely operational or completely closed, leaving millions without access to critical care amid one of the worst humanitarian crises in recent history. Since the war began, MSF has recorded over 80 violent incidents targeting our staff, infrastructure, vehicles, and supplies. Clinics have been looted and destroyed, medicines stolen, and health care workers assaulted, threatened, or killed. 

    “Buildings were destroyed, even beds were looted, and medicines ,” said Muhammad Yusuf Ishaq Abdullah, MSF health promotion officer in Tawila, North Darfur, about the state of Tawila’s hospital after being attacked and looted in June 2023. “From afar, it looked like a hospital, but when you entered it, it was a shelter for snakes and grass.”

    These attacks must stop. Medical personnel and facilities are not targets. 

    A mother cares for her child in the pediatric section of the cholera treatment center in Kosti, which experienced a cholera outbreak. | Sudan 2025 © MSF

    The threat of rainy season approaches

    The fast-approaching rainy season threatens to make an already catastrophic situation even worse—severing supply routes, flooding entire regions, and cutting off communities just as the hunger gap peaks and malnutrition and malaria spike.

    MSF calls for immediate preparedness measures ahead of the rainy season. More border crossings must be opened, and key roads and bridges must be repaired and kept accessible, especially in Darfur, where seasonal flooding isolates communities year after year. 

    In addition, humanitarian restrictions must be lifted, and unhindered access must be guaranteed. MSF urges all actors—including donors, governments, and UN agencies—to enable and prioritize aid delivery, ensuring that assistance not only reaches the country but is transported swiftly and safely to the hardest-hit and most remote communities. Without a serious commitment to overcoming the political, financial, logistical, and security barriers that hinder last-mile delivery, countless lives will remain beyond the reach of help.

    The people of Sudan have endured this horror for too long. They cannot and should not wait any longer to access essential needs. 

    MIL OSI NGO –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Coal in Alberta: Neither public outrage nor waning global demand seem to matter to Danielle Smith

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ian Urquhart, Professor Emeritus, Political Science, University of Alberta

    “We heard you, Albertans.” With those words, Alberta Energy Minister Brian Jean put coal mining in Alberta’s Rocky Mountains back on the table last December. Common sense might suggest Jean meant that Albertans are in favour of resuscitating metallurgical coal mining there, but that’s not the case.

    Instead, the public strongly opposes reviving metallurgical coal mining — also known as coking coal mining — to supply Asian steelmakers. December’s Coal Industry Modernization Initiative sadly exemplifies what has become too common in politics today — using misinformation to try to win the public’s willingness to accept the unacceptable.

    In this case, the government’s treatment of expert opinion compounds its misinformation. It’s blind to expert advice from the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Australian government questioning the rosiness of metallurgical coal’s future.

    Bringing coal miners back to Alberta’s Rockies was extremely contentious between 2020 and 2022. Jason Kenney’s Conservatives removed the de facto exploration and exploitation restrictions in place there since the 1970s. At the same time, Benga Mining Limited proposed to resume coal mining in southwest Alberta. Together, these events ignited a public furore.

    Public opposition

    Andrew Nikiforuk, a journalist whose books and articles focus on epidemics and the energy industry, was one of the first to bring coal miner ambitions to the public’s attention. He told me the outrage was “probably the most important environmental protest I have ever witnessed in this province.”

    Benga’s Grassy Mountain project was summarily dismissed by government regulators in 2021. Eleven weeks before that decision, Alberta created the Coal Policy Committee. It consulted Albertans about the 2020 decision to invite coal miners to return to the Rockies.

    The committee gave anyone with a view on coal — positive or negative — the opportunity to contribute to its deliberations. The response was impressive. The committee received nearly 4,400 pieces of correspondence, 176 detailed written submissions and conducted 67 virtual and public meetings.

    The consultation confirmed what polling firms had already found: “A significant number of respondents are apprehensive about coal development in Alberta.”

    Albertans didn’t believe coal’s economic benefits justified its risks to landscapes and water quality. Only eight per cent of those who answered the committee’s survey question about the economic benefits of coal mining felt they were very important; 64 per cent regarded those benefits as “not important at all.”

    This unambiguous public opposition repeated what the federal-provincial review panel into Benga’s Grassy Mountain coal mine proposal revealed in 2020-2021. Ninety-eight per cent of the more than 4,400 public comments left on the review panel’s website opposed the proposal to bring coal mining back to the Crowsnest Pass.

    Second, the committee concluded that land-use planning, with public consultation, needed to take place before a decision could be made about permitting coal exploration in the Rockies.

    Premier Danielle Smith’s government hasn’t listened. It doesn’t intend to conduct the land-use planning called for by the committee.

    Jean has also said he will consult industry — and only industry — as he tries to get his new policy in place this year. He promised “targeted” engagement with coal industry stakeholders. The public and other interests will be mere spectators.

    Global coal demand is a myth

    Alberta’s coal initiative has an optimistic view of future metallurgical coal demand.

    Jean markets his proposal by saying Alberta coal is needed “given the current and anticipated future global demand for coal.” But the IAE doesn’t share that optimism. Nor do experts from the Australian government, the world’s largest exporter of metallurgical coal.

    The IEA’s annual coal report is a benchmark for understanding the medium-term global outlook for coal. Its most recent report projects metallurgical coal production will fall by 4.2 per cent from 2024 to 2027. The IEA’s 2024 World Energy Outlook predicted steelmaking coal production would fall over the next two decades as steelmakers reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

    In 2050, it expects world coking coal production to drop 35.8 per cent from the 2024 level.

    Australia’s pre-eminence comes from producing 46 per cent of global metallurgical coal exports. The Australian government’s March 2025 Resources and Energy Quarterly confirms the general thrust of the IEA’s analyses. A slight increase in the amount of steel produced without metallurgical coal “will likely result in a slight fall in global metallurgical coal demand through to 2030.”



    Read more:
    Australia urgently needs to get serious about long-term climate policy – but there’s no sign of that in the election campaign

    Asian demand

    The IEA makes it clear that Australian producers don’t intend to relinquish market share willingly. Forty-seven Australian coal projects are in the pipeline, with most focused on metallurgical coal or metallurgical/thermal coal combined. Three-quarters of Australia’s metallurgical coal exports feed the Asian steel industry.

    Then there’s Mongolia. After its “recent extraordinary export growth” into China, Mongolia now supplies nearly one-half of China’s imports. The country is the world’s second largest metallurgical coal exporter. Mongolia’s high-quality coal, proximity to China and improved rail infrastructure will make its production difficult to displace.

    It’s unlikely, then, that new coal production from Alberta will gain easy access to Asian markets.

    Alberta’s Coal Industry Modernization Initiative illustrates two dangerous trends in politics today — the refusal to heed both the public and experts.

    The stakes here are large. Coal mining will undoubtedly have a substantial impact on the headwaters that serve people in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Smith’s Conservatives should in fact embrace common sense and the spirit of party policy from the 1970s. Prohibit coal mining in Alberta’s Rockies.

    Ian Urquhart 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.

    – ref. Coal in Alberta: Neither public outrage nor waning global demand seem to matter to Danielle Smith – https://theconversation.com/coal-in-alberta-neither-public-outrage-nor-waning-global-demand-seem-to-matter-to-danielle-smith-252551

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Video: The ‘inevitable’ caregiving cost nightmare: One young founder’s story and solution

    Source: World Economic Forum (video statements)

    Lily Vittayarukskul was a college grad at 14 on track to become a NASA aerospace engineer. However, an aunt’s cancer battle upended those plans, wreaking havoc on her family and their finances. The experience inspired her to launch the AI-powered startup Waterlily, helping people better predict expenses for getting older, including eldercare or assisted living, costs most don’t realize aren’t fully covered by either health insurance or Medicare. In this talk, Lily wades through the mounting data showing how super-ageing societies will struggle to meet and afford long-term care needs She also shares the tough lessons her personal story taught her and what others can do to prepare for an aging economy.

    This interview was recorded January 2025 at the Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland

    About this episode
    Waterlily: https://www.waterlily.com/

    Related World Economic Forum Initiatives:

    Waterlily is an Uplink Innovator
    About Uplink: https://uplink.weforum.org/uplink/s/

    About the Uplink / Manulife – Prosperity in Longevity Challenge
    https://uplink.weforum.org/uplink/s/uplink-issue/a00TE000003HcDrYAK/prospering-in-longevity-challenge

    World Economic Forum Longevity Economy Initiative: https://initiatives.weforum.org/financial-resilience-for-every-generation/home

    Related Reports:
    Future-Proofing the Longevity Economy: Innovations and Key Trends: https://www.weforum.org/publications/future-proofing-the-longevity-economy-innovations-and-key-trends/

    Global Risks report: https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2025/digest/

    Related Podcasts:
    Meet The Leader – Adam Grant: Future leaders won’t succeed without this key trait https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buVVIpttzUA

    Meet The Leader – How leaders can prepare teams for the future of work: ADP’s Chief Economist: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShvNPomJ4mE&t=508s

    The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. The Forum engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. We believe that progress happens by bringing together people from all walks of life who have the drive and the influence to make positive change.

    World Economic Forum Website ► http://www.weforum.org/
    Facebook ► https://www.facebook.com/worldeconomicforum/
    YouTube ► https://www.youtube.com/wef
    Instagram ► https://www.instagram.com/worldeconomicforum/ 
    Twitter ► https://twitter.com/wef
    LinkedIn ► https://www.linkedin.com/company/world-economic-forum
    TikTok ► https://www.tiktok.com/@worldeconomicforum
    Flipboard ► https://flipboard.com/@WEF

    #WorldEconomicForum

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGL0-rDVyds

    MIL OSI Video –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lankford, Steube Protect Charities from Government Overreach

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Oklahoma James Lankford

    OKLAHOMA CITY, OK — Senator James Lankford (R-OK) and Congressman Greg Steube (R-FL) introduced the Safeguarding Charity Act to protect the independence of our nation’s tax-exempt organizations. It safeguards churches, nonprofits, and private schools from a perilous line of litigation in federal courts that could subject them to burdensome federal regulations.

    “Tax-exempt organizations should not live in fear of federal control every day because courts want to redefine the meaning of tax-exempt status. Tax-exempt status is not the same as receiving federal funding, and it should not be used as political leverage against the nonprofits in Oklahoma and across the nation,” said Lankford. “We should be focused on enabling the work of these organizations—not burdening them with unnecessary and costly federal requirements.”

    “Radical judges do not have the authority to twist federal law and force religious institutions to choose between their convictions and compliance,” said Steube. “The Safeguarding Charity Act reaffirms that tax-exempt status does not mean an organization is receiving federal financial assistance. This bill is about protecting churches, religious schools, and charities from federal overreach. I’m grateful to Senator Lankford for his leadership on this important effort in the Senate.”

    “Charities and other nonprofits provide invaluable services to their communities,” said Greg Baylor, Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) Senior Counsel. “In part to recognize their critical work, nonprofits are tax-exempt so that they can devote scarce resources to serving those in need. Until recently, no one really thought that their tax-exempt status was the sort of “federal financial assistance” that triggered the application of several burdensome federal statutes and regulations. But some courts have embraced this unfounded view, and Congress needs to set things straight. Let’s be clear: a nonprofit’s tax-exempt status should not be considered government funding and thus should not trigger multiple burdensome federal laws under which charities and other nonprofits could lose their tax-exempt status. ADF commends Sen. Lankford and Rep. Steube for introducing the Safeguarding Charity Act to protect nonprofits from these financially crushing burdens so that nonprofits can continue to serve their communities free from unfair and unexpected government overreach.” 

    “ACSI commends Senator Lankford and Congressman Steube for their leadership in introducing the Safeguarding Charity Act,” said P. George Tryfiates, VP for Public Policy and Legal Affairs at the Association of Christian Schools International. “This legislation is critical to set the record straight: an organization’s nonprofit status is not the receipt of federal financial assistance. It never has been. It is not now. Politically motivated lawsuits based on this false premise must stop, or else all nonprofits will be at risk. We urge every member of Congress to support the Safeguarding Charity Act.” 

    “Agudath Israel of America is pleased to support the ‘Safeguarding Charity Act (SCA),’ introduced by Senator James Lankford and Representative Greg Steube,” said Rabbi Abba Cohen, VP for Government Affairs of Agudath Israel of America. “This legislation is vitally important to nonprofits across the country, including synagogues, religious schools and charities within the Jewish community.  It will enshrine into law that which has generally been understood that ‘tax-exempt status’ does not constitute ‘federal financial assistance.’” 

    Background

    The legislation is also supported by Philanthropy Roundtable, Seventh-day Adventist Church, ERLC,  American Association of Christian Schools, Association for Biblical Higher Education, Family Research Council, Citygate Network, Christian Employers Alliance, and National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference.

    Lankford first introduced the legislation with Congressman Steube in 2024.

    In 2023, Lankford also introduced the Charitable Act to incentivize giving to America’s nonprofits. The bill would expand and extend the expired non-itemized deduction for charitable giving that would ensure Americans who donate to charities, houses of worship, religious organizations, and other nonprofits of their choice are able to deduct that donation from their federal taxes at a higher level than the previous $300 deduction.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK sends multi-million pound military equipment loan to Ukraine

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    UK sends multi-million pound military equipment loan to Ukraine

    The UK makes second £752 million payment to Ukraine through the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans for Ukraine scheme.

    A £752 million payment has today (14 April) been sent to Ukraine through the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans for Ukraine scheme. The funding will support Ukraine to procure vital military equipment, including urgently needed air defence. This comes as Russia continues its air assault on Ukraine, striking the city of Sumy.

    The loan, which will be paid for through the profits of sanctioned Russian sovereign assets in the EU, forms part of a wider £2.26 billion loan agreed between the Chancellor and Minister Marchenko on 1 March.

    The payment highlights the UK’s steadfast support to Ukraine whilst building on the Chancellor’s Spring Statement pledge to go further and faster to protect our national security and maximise the economic growth potential of the UK defence sector. The equipment support and maintenance elements will be mainly spent in the UK, boosting the UK economy and skilled jobs.

    Rachel Reeves, Chancellor of the Exchequer said:

    The world is changing before our eyes, reshaped by global instability, including Russian aggression in Ukraine. 

    A strong Ukraine is vital to UK national security and this second tranche of funding will help put them in the strongest possible position, and contribute towards our collective security.

    Defence Secretary, John Healey MP said:

    2025 is the critical year for Ukraine and this is the critical moment. This is the moment for our defence industries to step up, and they are; a moment for our militaries to step up, and they are; a moment for our Governments to step up, and we are.

    This new tranche of funds is part of our £4.5 billion of military support this year – more than ever before – and will be used to buy urgently needed air defence, artillery, and parts to help repair vehicles and equipment to get them back into the fight.

    We are stepping up support for Ukraine to deter Russian aggression and bolster Britain’s national security as the foundation of our Plan for Change.

    Today’s payment forms the second part of the UK’s £2.26 billion loan, which has been spaced into three separate tranches to give Ukraine more flexibility and allow them to swiftly adapt to the ever-changing battlefield. The first payment was made on 6 March, with the final payment to follow in 2026.

    The multi-billion payment forms part of the UK’s contribution to the Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration Loans for Ukraine scheme, which is a G7 commitment to collectively support Ukraine through a total of $50 billion.

    It follows a £450 million surge in military support that was announced by the UK last week, which includes £350 million from this year’s record £4.5 billion military support funding for Ukraine. Further funding is being provided by Norway, via the UK-led International Fund for Ukraine.

    In addition to providing financial support, the Ministry of Defence will also support Ukraine to procure the equipment needed to fight Russia’s invasion. This will include a new ‘close fight’ military aid package – with funding for radar systems, anti-tank mines and hundreds of thousands of drones – worth more than £250 million, using funding from the UK and Norway.

    The government’s Plan for Change will see UK defence spending increased to 2.5% of GDP by 2027. The UK’s world-leading defence sector is vital to the economy, supporting 430,000 high-skilled, high-paid jobs across the UK and strengthening our security. 68% of defence spending is outside of London and the South East, benefitting every nation and region of the UK.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 April 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: expert reaction to study on projected lifetime cancer risks associated with Computed Tomography (CT) imaging in the US

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    A study published in JAMA Internal Medicine looks at CT scans and lifetime cancer risk in the USA. 

    Lynda Johnson, Professional Officer for Clinical Imaging and Radiation Protection, The Society and College of Radiographers, said:

    “The Society and College of Radiographers (SoR) welcomes research into the harmful effects of ionising radiation and recognises the importance of balancing benefit and risk information to patients and the public.

    “This paper articulates the complexities of large-scale dose estimation and acknowledges the many variables which influence an individual’s likelihood of developing cancer at some point in their lifetime. In the UK, the use of ionising radiation is governed by The Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations 2017 (The Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2018). Central to the legislation and UK radiographic practice, as this paper rightly concludes, are the principles of justification and optimisation. Justification means that any exposures to ionising radiation for medical purposes must be demonstrated to provide a greater benefit than risk to the individual. Once justified, the exposure must be optimised, meaning that it is as low as reasonably practicable to provide the intended outcome, or answer the clinical question.

    “Computed Tomography (CT) scans are undertaken by highly trained radiographers and nuclear medicine technologists who have met the educational and professional standards required to ensure all CT scans are appropriately justified and optimised. Considering the increased use of CT as an invaluable diagnostic tool, it is imperative that the risk of harm from potential misuse,  poor quality referrals, or inappropriate exposure parameters continues to be managed effectively. This is achieved by safeguarding standards of education, training and practical experience, compliance with the regulations, and applying best practice quality standards such as The Quality Standard for Imaging.

    “It is particularly important to recognise, as this paper highlights, the increased risk to children from unjustified CT exposures. Staff are trained to give special consideration to the justification and optimisation of CT scans for children and will assess the benefits and risks of using CT against alternative techniques that do not involve ionising radiation such as MRI and Ultrasound.

    “Accurate communication around the benefits and risks of CT is essential to protect the public from harm. Focussing on risk alone is not helpful and, in some cases, might prevent a person from attending a scan that could provide early diagnosis of cancer. Anyone undergoing a CT scan must be provided with balanced, accurate and relevant information to enable them to understand what it means to them as an individual in terms of their diagnosis, treatment and potential long-term care.

    “The UK Health Security Agency is responsible for undertaking dose audits and producing National Diagnostic Reference levels (NDRLs) for computed tomography. These inform local practices and employers must ensure their organisational doses do not consistently exceed the NDRLs. They are publicly available here alongside helpful dose comparisons here and benefit and risk information for patients here.”

    Dr Doreen Lau, Lecturer in Inflammation, Ageing and Cancer Biology at Brunel University of London, said:

    “This is a well-conducted modelling study using robust data from US hospitals and established methods for estimating cancer risk from radiation exposure. It provides a timely reminder that while CT scans are often life-saving and essential for diagnosis, they do come with a small but real potential risk of contributing to cancer over a lifetime, especially when used repeatedly, in younger patients, or when not clinically necessary.

    “The findings don’t mean that people should avoid CT scans when recommended by a doctor. In most cases, the benefit of detecting or ruling out serious illness far outweighs the very small risk of harm. What this research highlights is the need to minimise unnecessary imaging and use the lowest dose possible, particularly in settings where CT usage is high. Where appropriate, clinicians may also consider alternative imaging methods that do not involve ionising radiation, such as MRI or ultrasound—especially for younger patients or when repeat imaging is anticipated.

    “CT scan rates are much higher in the US than in the UK, where imaging is used more conservatively and with stricter clinical justification. That means the estimated risks in this study are likely to be much lower in the UK context, though the message about appropriate use still holds.

    “Importantly, this study models estimated cancer risk from radiation exposure. It does not show a direct causal link between specific CT scans and individual cancer cases. These are projections based on population-level data and assumptions about radiation risk, not observed cancer rates. Although the model estimates a small increased risk with each scan, it does not prove that any one scan causes cancer. Other factors such as underlying health issues and clinical decision-making, may also influence who gets scanned and how often.”

     

    Prof Stephen Duffy, Emeritus Professor of Cancer Screening, Centre for Cancer Screening, Prevention and Early Diagnosis, Queen Mary University of London, said:

    “This paper reports on a very high quality numerical modelling exercise, estimating the likely number of cancers occurring in the USA as a result of 93 million CT examinations. The authors estimate that just over 100,000 cancers are predicted to occur as a result of radiation from these CT examinations. This amounts to around a 0.1% increase in cancer risk over the patients lifetime per CT examination. When we consider that the lifetime risk of cancer in the general population is around 50%, the additional risk is small. Doctors do not order CT examinations unless they are necessary, and it seems to me that the likely benefit in diagnosis and subsequent treatment of disease outweighs the very small increase in cancer risk.

    “I would also remark that the estimates, while based on the best models available to the authors, are indirect, so there is considerable uncertainty about the estimates.

    “Thus I would say to patients that if you are recommended to have a CT scan, it would be wise to do so.”

    Dr Giles Roditi, Consultant Cardiovascular Radiologist and Honorary Clinical Associate Professor of Radiology, University of Glasgow, said:

    “CT scanning is a powerful diagnostic tool and has become a bedrock of modern radiology departments, particularly for emergency department imaging. However, the paper by Smith-Bindman et al. is a timely reminder that with great power comes great responsibility.  The paper makes the case that the rise in the utilisation of CT scanning is now at such a scale that its projected use could lead to scenario in which CT-associated cancer eventually accounts for 5% of all new cancer diagnoses annually in the USA.  What should we do with this information and how does this translate to and inform practise in the UK ?

    “Firstly, the evidence base is sound and there is little new as regards the basic assumptions that the paper is based upon but the authors have updated this with more modern dose estimates and data on the utilisation of CT scanning not only across different age groups but also stratified by gender and the exposure of different organs that have different sensitivities to ionising radiation induced damage. The authors are to be congratulated in the detailed breakdown of CT utilisation across these categories and how lifetime risk of cancer impacts across age and gender etc.  as well as the modern dosimetric approach used plus accounting for multiphase CT examinations that inevitably entail higher dose.

    “With all medical endeavours there is an element of risk.  Risk is generally defined as a situation involving exposure to danger or the possibility that something unpleasant will occur.  Furthermore, the use of the word risk often implies an element of chance, uncertainty or unpredictability.  However, risk can often be well defined in any particular context as – 

Risk = (probability of an event) x (impact of event) 


    “Risk is thus different for ‘well’ versus ‘sick’ patients with the latter deriving greater benefit.  This paper helps us better define risk at a population level by updating knowledge on the probable incidence of later CT-associated cancer.  A potential limitation that could be levelled at the paper is that not all the risks associated with CT are included, only those related to later development of cancer diagnoses.  For example, other relevant factors as a demerit to CT scanning could include the very small risks of anaphylaxis related to the use of contrast medium, used now in a large proportion of scans in Western medicine.  Similarly, the small but potential other risks such as cataract acceleration are not mentioned.

    “On the other hand, while the authors mention that ‘CT is frequently lifesaving’ they have not in my opinion really put the information in full relevant context.  The authors context is that this is approximately 5% of new cancer diagnoses could be attributable to CT i.e. a figure of 100,000 cancers in the USA is where there were 1,777,566 new cancer cases reported in 2021 and 608,366 people died of cancer in 2022 (the latest CDC data available). This is because the natural incidence of cancer induction is 1 in 2 for adults. Hence, an alternative way of looking at this would be that although the figure of 100,000 cancers is alarming this is only a small additional risk over and above an individual’s lifetime risk of developing cancer i.e. a risk rising from about 50% to 52.5%. The authors also do not address how many of these cancer will be fatal although we presume based upon CD data it would be approximately one third.

    “The main issue, however, is that the benefits of CT scanning are not more explicitly stated.  This is likely because the benefits of most medical imaging in terms of morbidity & mortality have been very difficult to quantify with surprisingly little published in the literature. This is mainly because imaging has too often only been part of an overall therapeutic strategy where the main treatment outcomes depend critically upon the imaging but the imaging itself is not tested (e.g. treatments for stroke and cancer).  However, there have been recent trials that provide some context, for example SCOT-HEART was probably the first major trial in which diagnostic CT was shown to save lives.  In SCOT-THEART the patients were randomised to a conventional treatment pathway without CT scan or an investigative arm in which the standard care pathway was simply supplemented by a CT scan of the coronary arteries.  This trial showed clear benefit for those patients that had CT with a significantly lower mortality rate and this has been shown to persist now up to 10 years following the end of the trial. Similarly trials of lung cancer screening have now shown positive benefit from CT scanning in the detection of early, treatable stage lung cancer in high risk patients.

    “So how does this translate into the situation in the UK ? Firstly, there are significant differences in practise due to both cultural and legislative environments.  In the UK we operate under the precepts of the Ionising Radiation (Medical Exposure) Regulations last updated in 2017 which mandates that we apply the ALARA/ALARP principles and should opt for diagnostic imaging tests with the lowest radiation dose, or preferably an imaging test with no ionising radiation exposure (e.g. ultrasound or MRI) where this answers the clinical question.  Culturally in the UK we also regard all requests for imaging as just that, requests that can be questioned through discussion. In the USA clinicians order scans and radiology departments have little room to manoeuvre when it comes to not performing or changing these orders, particularly since the imaging fees that accompany the scanning activity are the lifeblood of the department. Another issue in the USA in addition to the overuse of CT mentioned in the paper is the repeat imaging that is often performed in a fragmented healthcare system where it is easier (and more profitable) for an institution to simply repeat a scan on a patient referred in from elsewhere rather than seek out and transfer the original scans.

    “In the NHS we have systems that allow image transfer between institutions and of course unlike the USA we are very capacity limited and often have long waiting times for scans. One side effect of this is that it tends to reduce demand such that tests unlikely to influence clinical decision-making are less likely to be requested. On the downside is that the CT scanner base in the UK is aging and we know that older scanners inevitably expose patients to higher radiation doses than modern systems for the same type of scan, often with less good image quality. Indeed, on modern generation systems with advanced iterative reconstruction algorithms and AI enhancements in the imaging chain then CT scans can be acquired at doses similar to (or little more than) conventional x-rays. These advances have largely been spurred by the drive to reduce dose in coronary CT scans but the benefits potentially reduce doses across all CT scanning. The paper by Smith-Bindman et al. reminds us that we must advocate more strongly to upgrade our CT scanners for the benefit of our patients.

    “So what would I say to a UK patient scheduled to have a CT scan and worried by this paper ? In general terms I would strongly advise them not to worry as they are highly likely to benefit from a well indicated scan, this is particularly so in those who are unwell and in older patients (those > 55 years). For younger patients, particularly those of child-bearing age where the breasts and/or reproductive organs would be included and for those who are physically well then if concerned they can always ask to discuss the merits of alternative scans such as ultrasound and MRI. For example, in our own practise we image all our altruistic potential living kidney donors with MRI rather than CT since our own (unpublished) estimates indicate that if we used CT then 1 in 526 of these well people would have a fatal induced cancer, a risk eliminated by using MRI.”

    Prof Richard Wakeford, Honorary Professor in Epidemiology, Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health (COEH), University of Manchester, said:

    “Although it is not unreasonable to reiterate guidance on the potential risks to health arising from exposures to low levels of ionising radiation, such as the x-ray doses received from CT scans, considerable caution is required in providing quantitative estimates of the effects produced by such exposures. This is largely because of the substantial assumptions that must be made in applying risk models derived from epidemiological studies of populations briefly exposed to moderate and high doses, primarily the Japanese survivors of the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to low-level exposure circumstances. For example, for the purposes of radiological protection, it is prudent to assume that the size of the additional risk is directly proportional to the dose received, with no threshold dose below which the risk is zero, and this is the assumption made by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in making its recommendations. However, ICRP notes that these assumptions “conceal large biological and statistical uncertainties”, and cautions against risk projections based on large numbers of people receiving low doses.

    “The direct epidemiological investigation of cancer incidence among patients who have been examined by CT is a worthwhile exercise, but substantial care is required in the interpretation of results – as with all medical diagnostic procedures, people are examined because they are ill, have been ill, or are suspected of being ill, and such selection for exposure leads to difficulties in obtaining reliable conclusions about the effects of radiation exposure from these studies.

    “The “bottom line” of the paper is that ~103,000 cases of cancer (which does not include cases of non-melanoma skin cancer, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma) are estimated to result from CT scans conducted in the USA in 2023, an estimate that must be viewed with circumspection. This estimate of ~103,000 cases of cancer is, on the face of it, rather alarming, but it is also uncertain, to an extent that extends (well) beyond the uncertainty limits presented in the paper. ICRP emphasises that all medical exposures must be justified as doing more good than harm, and the potential risk from radiation exposure during a diagnostic examination clearly needs to be factored into clinical judgement about the need for a specific diagnostic procedure. The level of potential risk posed by exposure to low doses of radiation should be taken into account in reaching a balanced decision on whether or not a CT scan is clinically desirable, but this judgement should not be unduly influenced by large, but uncertain, projected numbers of cancers.”

    ‘Projected Lifetime Cancer Risks From Current Computed Tomography Imaging’ by Rebecca Smith-Bindman et al. was published in JAMA Internal Medicine at 16:00 UK time on Monday 14 April 2025.

    DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2025.0505

    Declared interests

    Prof Stephen Duffy: I have no conflict of interest.

    Dr Giles Roditi: Prof Roditi is a Past-President of the British Society of Cardiovascular Imaging/Cardiovascular CT, a Past President of the Society of Magnetic Resonance Angiography and a member of the SCOT-HEART investigators.

    Prof Richard Wakeford: “I am, or was, a member of a number of national and international expert committees addressing radiation risks, such as ICRP, UNSCEAR and (previously) COMARE, SAGE, etc.. Details can be found at: https://research.manchester.ac.uk/en/persons/richard.wakeford

    “I am a member of the Technical Working Party of the Compensation Scheme for Radiation-Linked Diseases (http://www.csrld.org.uk/), for which I receive a small consultancy fee. I also receive small payments for lecturing in academic and various professional courses (e.g., https://www.oecd-nea.org/jcms/pl_27505/international-radiological-protection-school-irps-at-stockholm-university). Otherwise, I am formally “retired” from employment, although I seem to be as busy as ever!”

    Dr Doreen Lau: no financial or conflicts of interest related to this study.

    For all other experts, no reply to our request for DOIs was received. 

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Restaurant And Owner Agree To Pay Over $1.5 Million To Settle Allegations Of Pandemic Relief Fund Misuse

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    CHARLOTTE, N.C. – U.S. Attorney Russ Ferguson announced today that Bobby Gerald Duncan (“Duncan”) and DE & E Foods, Inc. d/b/a Hillbilly’s Barbeque and Steaks (“Hillbilly’s BBQ”) have agreed to pay $1,530,682.26 to resolve allegations that they violated the False Claims Act by knowingly obtaining $762,903 in pandemic relief funds, and then misusing those funds for Duncan’s own personal gain. The settlement further resolves allegations that Duncan and Hillbilly’s BBQ knowingly made false statements to obtain the relief funds, as well as obtain loan forgiveness of the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) portion of the funds.

    The United States civil complaint alleged that Duncan, through his restaurant Hillbilly’s BBQ, obtained the relief funds through an Economic Injury Disaster Loan (“EIDL”) and two PPP loans. Rather than using the funds for authorized purposes, including for payroll and other business-related expenses, Duncan misappropriated the funds for his own benefit, specifically to purchase a separate FedEx business with Duncan’s longtime friend.

    Duncan did so by first transferring $100,000 of the relief funds from a Hillbilly’s BBQ corporate account to a personal account entitled “Vacation Account,” and then adding his friend as an account holder to artificially boost the friend’s credit score for a separate SBA loan intended for the FedEx business purchase. When that failed, Duncan used the pandemic relief funds to buy the FedEx business outright for $750,000, by writing two large checks for its purchase directly from the Hillbilly’s BBQ business account (one for $400,000 and another for $350,000).

    “Pandemic relief funds were meant to provide a financial lifeline to small businesses struggling to stay afloat during the unprecedented COVID crisis,” said U.S. Attorney Ferguson. “Where those funds were misused, we will pursue their return as part of our ongoing effort to curb waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer money.”

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Seth Johnson of the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Charlotte is in charge of this case.

    The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only. There has been no determination of liability. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK sanctions Iranian organised crime network

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    UK sanctions Iranian organised crime network

    The UK has announced further sanctions to tackle the domestic threat posed by the Iranian regime by sanctioning Iranian-backed, Swedish-based Foxtrot criminal Network and its leader, Rawa Majid, for their role in attacks against targets across Europe.

    Foreign Secretary, David Lammy said:

    Today, the UK has announced sanctions against the notorious criminal Foxtrot Network and its leadership.

    The Iranian regime uses criminal gangs across the world to threaten people. The UK has targeted this criminal network and its leader, Rawa Majid, due to their involvement in violence against Jewish and Israeli targets in Europe on behalf of the Iranian regime. The UK will not tolerate these threats.

    This forms part of the UK Government’s ongoing response to Iranian hostilities in Europe. Last month, we announced that Iran will be placed on the enhanced tier of the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (FIRS) and to date, the UK has sanctioned more than 450 Iranian individuals and entities, in response to the regime’s human rights violations, nuclear weapons programme and malign influence internationally.

    The UK Government will continue to hold the Iranian regime and criminals acting on its behalf to account.

    Background

    The Individual that is subject to a UK travel ban, asset freeze and director disqualification:

    • Rawa Majid, Head of the Foxtrot Network

    The following organisation is also being sanctioned by the UK and is subject to an asset freeze and director disqualification:

    • Foxtrot Network
    • Since the start of 2022, the UK has responded to more than 20 Iran-backed plots, presenting potentially lethal threats to British citizens and UK residents.
    • Today’s designations were made under the 2023 Iran Sanctions Regulations, which came into force in December 2023 : [Iran sanctions: guidance – GOV.UK](Iran sanctions: guidance – GOV.UK
    • On 4 March 2025 the Security Minister’s statement to Parliament confirmed Iran would be specified on the enhanced tier of the Foreign Influence Registration Scheme (FIRS), and that the government will work with our allies to better understand, expose, and condemn Iranian actions; and bring Iranian-linked criminals to justice wherever in the world they may be – Protecting national security – GOV.UK
    • The US designated Majid and the Foxtrot Network in March 2025.

    Definitions:  

    • Asset freeze: an asset freeze prevents any UK citizen, or any business in the UK, from dealing with any funds or economic resources which are owned, held or controlled by the designated person. It also prevents funds or economic resources being provided to or for the benefit of the designated person. UK financial sanctions apply to all persons within the territory and territorial sea of the UK and to all UK persons, wherever they are in the world.
    • Travel ban: a travel ban means that the designated person must be refused leave to enter or to remain in the United Kingdom, as the individual is an excluded person under section 8B of the Immigration Act 1971.
    • Director disqualification: Where director disqualification sanctions apply, it is an offence for a person designated for the purpose of those sanctions to act as a director of a UK company, or a foreign company that is sufficiently-connected to the UK, or to take part in the management, formation or promotion of a company.

    Media enquiries

    Email newsdesk@fcdo.gov.uk

    Telephone 020 7008 3100

    Contact the FCDO Communication Team via email (monitored 24 hours a day) in the first instance, and we will respond as soon as possible.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 April 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI: Virginia529 Education Savings Program Rebrands to Invest529 with Tuition Giveaway to Celebrate

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Richmond, Va., April 14, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Virginia families now have a new way to think about saving for college—and a chance to win big while they do it. The trusted Virginia529 education savings program is now called Invest529, and to mark the moment, individuals and families can enter to win four years of college tuition during a special giveaway, open now through April 30.

    Participants simply watch a short video at Invest529.com and complete an entry form for the chance to win four years of tuition valued at $62,000, based on the average in-state tuition at Virginia colleges and universities.

    While Invest529 has long been the official name of the organization’s education savings program, many Virginians knew it by Virginia529—the former name of the independent state agency that administers the highly rated program. This refreshed name helps clarify the distinction between the education savings program and the organization behind it, which has now rebranded as Commonwealth Savers.

    “As we introduce Invest529 more broadly and celebrate our expanded offerings, our commitment remains what it has been for 30 years: helping individuals and families take control of their financial futures,” said Mary Morris, CEO of Commonwealth Savers. “Our new agency name better reflects the full range of programs we offer today, including for education, disability and retirement savings.”

    Commonwealth Savers now manages three, tax-advantaged savings programs:

    • Invest529, the organization’s flagship education savings program
    • ABLEnow, one of the nation’s largest programs for individuals with disabilities
    • RetirePath Virginia, a retirement savings program for Virginians

    To read the terms and conditions and enter the giveaway for a chance to win four years of college tuition, visit Invest529.com.

    About Invest529

    Invest529, which is administered by Commonwealth Savers Plan, makes education more accessible and affordable for families and individuals. With more than $110.3 billion in assets under management and 3.1 million accounts as of March 31, 2025, Invest529 is part of the largest education savings plan available. Two flexible, affordable, tax-advantaged programs–Invest529SM and CollegeAmerica®–and early commitment scholarship program SOAR Virginia® –assist students of any age in reaching their higher education goals. For more information on Invest529’s education savings options, visit Invest529.com or call 1-888-567-0540 to obtain program materials. These include information on Invest529 savings options, investment objectives, risks, charges, expenses and other important information; read and consider them carefully before investing. All investments are subject to risk, including the possible loss of the money you invest.  Invest529 encourages prospective participants to seek the advice of a professional concerning any financial, tax or legal implications related to opening an account. For residents of states other than Virginia: before investing, you should consider whether your or the beneficiary’s home state offers any state tax or other state benefits such as financial aid, scholarship funds, and protections from creditors that are only available for investments in that state’s qualified tuition program. ©2025 Commonwealth Savers Plan. All Rights Reserved.

    About Commonwealth Savers

    Commonwealth Savers, formerly Virginia529, is a financial organization that helps individuals and families achieve financial wellness through a variety of tax-advantaged savings programs. With over $100+ billion in assets under management and 3+ million accounts, Commonwealth Savers is the nationwide leader in 529 education savings programs. The organization manages Invest529, a flexible, affordable education savings program, and CollegeAmerica®, the largest advisor-sold 529 plan in the nation. Through SOAR Virginia®, an early commitment scholarship program, Virginia students are supported in reaching their higher education goals. Commonwealth Savers also administers ABLEnow, a national savings program for individuals with disabilities, and ABLEAmerica, an advisor-sold disability savings option. Its newest program offering, RetirePath Virginia, helps workers across the Commonwealth save for retirement. For more information on Commonwealth Savers’ savings options, visit Commonwealthsavers.com or call 1-855-4SAVEVA (728382). All investments are subject to risk, and prospective participants are encouraged to consult with financial professionals. For non-Virginia residents, consider whether your home state offers benefits specific to its own savings programs. ©2025 Commonwealth Savers Plan. All Rights Reserved.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Africa’s healthcare funding crisis: 3 strategies to manage deadly diseases

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Francisca Mutapi, Professor in Global Health Infection and Immunity. and co-Director of the Global Health Academy, University of Edinburgh

    The increasing trend of reducing foreign aid to Africa is forcing the continent to reassess its approach to healthcare delivery.

    African countries face a major challenge of dealing with high rates of communicable diseases, such as malaria and HIV/Aids, and rising levels of non-communicable diseases. But the continent’s health systems don’t have the resources to provide accessible and affordable healthcare to address these challenges.

    Historically, aid has played a critical role in supporting African health systems. It has funded key areas, including medical research, treatment programmes, healthcare infrastructure and workforce salaries. In 2021, half of sub-Saharan Africa’s countries relied on external financing for more than one-third of their health expenditures.

    As aid dwindles, a stark reality emerges: many African governments are unable to achieve universal health coverage or address rising healthcare costs.

    The reduction in aid restricts healthcare services and threatens to reverse decades of health progress on the continent. A fundamental shift in healthcare strategy is necessary to address this crisis.

    The well-known maxim that “prevention is better than cure” holds not just for health outcomes but also for economic efficiency. It’s much more affordable to prevent diseases than it is to treat them.

    As an infectious diseases specialist, I have seen how preventable diseases can put a financial burden on health systems and households.

    For instance, each year, there are global economic losses of over US$33 billion due to neglected tropical diseases. Many conditions, such as lymphatic filariasis, often require lifelong care. This places a heavy burden on families and stretches national healthcare systems to their limits.

    African nations can cut healthcare costs through disease prevention. This often requires fewer specialist health workers and less expensive interventions.

    To navigate financial constraints, African nations must rethink and redesign their healthcare systems.

    Three key areas where cost-effective, preventive strategies can work are: improving water, sanitation, and hygiene; expanding vaccination programmes; and making non-communicable disease prevention part of community health services.

    A shift in healthcare delivery

    Improving water, sanitation, and hygiene infrastructure

    Many diseases prevalent in Africa are transmitted through contact with contaminated water and soil. Investing in safe water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) infrastructure is an opportunity. This alone can prevent a host of illnesses such as parasitic worms and diarrhoeal diseases. It can also improve infection control and strengthen epidemic and pandemic disease control.

    Currently, WASH coverage in Africa remains inadequate. Millions are vulnerable to preventable illnesses. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2020 alone, about 510,000 deaths in Africa could have been prevented with improved water and sanitation. Of these, 377,000 deaths were caused by diarrhoeal diseases.

    Unsafe WASH conditions also contribute to secondary health issues, such as under-nutrition and parasitic infections. Around 14% of acute respiratory infections and 10% of the undernutrition disease burden – such as stunting – are linked to unsafe WASH conditions.

    By investing in functional WASH infrastructure, African governments can significantly reduce the incidence of these diseases. This will lead to lower healthcare costs and improved public health outcomes.

    Local production of relevant vaccines

    Vaccination is one of the most cost-effective health interventions available for preventing infection. Immunisation efforts save over four million lives every year across the continent.

    There is an urgent need for vaccines against diseases prevalent in Africa whose current control is heavily reliant on aid. Neglected tropical diseases are among them.

    Vaccines can also prevent some non-communicable diseases. A prime example is the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which can prevent up to 85% of cervical cancer cases in Africa.

    HPV vaccination is also more cost-effective than treating cervical cancer. In some African countries, the cost per vaccine dose averages just under US$20. Treatment costs can reach up to US$2,500 per patient, as seen in Tanzania.

    It is vital to invest in a comprehensive vaccine ecosystem. This includes strengthening local research and building innovation hubs. Regulatory bodies across the continent must also be harmonised and markets created to attract vaccine investment.

    Integrating disease prevention into community healthcare services

    Historically, African healthcare systems were designed to address communicable diseases, such as tuberculosis and HIV. This left them ill-equipped to handle the rising burden of non-communicable diseases, such as type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. One cost-effective approach is to integrate the prevention and management of these diseases into existing community health programmes.

    Community health workers currently provide low-cost interventions for health issues such as pneumonia and malaria. They can be trained to address non-communicable diseases as well.

    In some countries, community health workers are already filling the service gap. Getting them more involved in prevention strategies will strengthen primary healthcare services in Africa. This investment will ultimately reduce the long-term financial burden of treating chronic diseases.

    A treatment-over-prevention approach will not be affordable

    Current estimates suggest that by 2030, an additional US$371 billion per year – roughly US$58 per person – will be required to provide basic primary healthcare services across Africa.

    Adding to the challenge is the rising global cost of healthcare, projected to increase by 10.4% this year alone. This marks the third consecutive year of escalating costs. For Africa, costs also come from population growth and the rising burden of non-communicable diseases.

    By shifting focus from treatment to prevention, African nations can make healthcare accessible, equitable and financially sustainable despite the decline in foreign aid.

    Francisca Mutapi is affiliated with Uniting to Combat NTDs

    – ref. Africa’s healthcare funding crisis: 3 strategies to manage deadly diseases – https://theconversation.com/africas-healthcare-funding-crisis-3-strategies-to-manage-deadly-diseases-253644

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Africa’s healthcare funding crisis: 3 strategies to manage deadly diseases

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Francisca Mutapi, Professor in Global Health Infection and Immunity. and co-Director of the Global Health Academy, University of Edinburgh

    The increasing trend of reducing foreign aid to Africa is forcing the continent to reassess its approach to healthcare delivery.

    African countries face a major challenge of dealing with high rates of communicable diseases, such as malaria and HIV/Aids, and rising levels of non-communicable diseases. But the continent’s health systems don’t have the resources to provide accessible and affordable healthcare to address these challenges.

    Historically, aid has played a critical role in supporting African health systems. It has funded key areas, including medical research, treatment programmes, healthcare infrastructure and workforce salaries. In 2021, half of sub-Saharan Africa’s countries relied on external financing for more than one-third of their health expenditures.

    As aid dwindles, a stark reality emerges: many African governments are unable to achieve universal health coverage or address rising healthcare costs.

    The reduction in aid restricts healthcare services and threatens to reverse decades of health progress on the continent. A fundamental shift in healthcare strategy is necessary to address this crisis.

    The well-known maxim that “prevention is better than cure” holds not just for health outcomes but also for economic efficiency. It’s much more affordable to prevent diseases than it is to treat them.

    As an infectious diseases specialist, I have seen how preventable diseases can put a financial burden on health systems and households.

    For instance, each year, there are global economic losses of over US$33 billion due to neglected tropical diseases. Many conditions, such as lymphatic filariasis, often require lifelong care. This places a heavy burden on families and stretches national healthcare systems to their limits.

    African nations can cut healthcare costs through disease prevention. This often requires fewer specialist health workers and less expensive interventions.

    To navigate financial constraints, African nations must rethink and redesign their healthcare systems.

    Three key areas where cost-effective, preventive strategies can work are: improving water, sanitation, and hygiene; expanding vaccination programmes; and making non-communicable disease prevention part of community health services.

    A shift in healthcare delivery

    Improving water, sanitation, and hygiene infrastructure

    Many diseases prevalent in Africa are transmitted through contact with contaminated water and soil. Investing in safe water, sanitation, and hygiene (WASH) infrastructure is an opportunity. This alone can prevent a host of illnesses such as parasitic worms and diarrhoeal diseases. It can also improve infection control and strengthen epidemic and pandemic disease control.

    Currently, WASH coverage in Africa remains inadequate. Millions are vulnerable to preventable illnesses. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2020 alone, about 510,000 deaths in Africa could have been prevented with improved water and sanitation. Of these, 377,000 deaths were caused by diarrhoeal diseases.

    Unsafe WASH conditions also contribute to secondary health issues, such as under-nutrition and parasitic infections. Around 14% of acute respiratory infections and 10% of the undernutrition disease burden – such as stunting – are linked to unsafe WASH conditions.

    By investing in functional WASH infrastructure, African governments can significantly reduce the incidence of these diseases. This will lead to lower healthcare costs and improved public health outcomes.

    Local production of relevant vaccines

    Vaccination is one of the most cost-effective health interventions available for preventing infection. Immunisation efforts save over four million lives every year across the continent.

    There is an urgent need for vaccines against diseases prevalent in Africa whose current control is heavily reliant on aid. Neglected tropical diseases are among them.

    Vaccines can also prevent some non-communicable diseases. A prime example is the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, which can prevent up to 85% of cervical cancer cases in Africa.

    HPV vaccination is also more cost-effective than treating cervical cancer. In some African countries, the cost per vaccine dose averages just under US$20. Treatment costs can reach up to US$2,500 per patient, as seen in Tanzania.

    It is vital to invest in a comprehensive vaccine ecosystem. This includes strengthening local research and building innovation hubs. Regulatory bodies across the continent must also be harmonised and markets created to attract vaccine investment.

    Integrating disease prevention into community healthcare services

    Historically, African healthcare systems were designed to address communicable diseases, such as tuberculosis and HIV. This left them ill-equipped to handle the rising burden of non-communicable diseases, such as type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular diseases. One cost-effective approach is to integrate the prevention and management of these diseases into existing community health programmes.

    Community health workers currently provide low-cost interventions for health issues such as pneumonia and malaria. They can be trained to address non-communicable diseases as well.

    In some countries, community health workers are already filling the service gap. Getting them more involved in prevention strategies will strengthen primary healthcare services in Africa. This investment will ultimately reduce the long-term financial burden of treating chronic diseases.

    A treatment-over-prevention approach will not be affordable

    Current estimates suggest that by 2030, an additional US$371 billion per year – roughly US$58 per person – will be required to provide basic primary healthcare services across Africa.

    Adding to the challenge is the rising global cost of healthcare, projected to increase by 10.4% this year alone. This marks the third consecutive year of escalating costs. For Africa, costs also come from population growth and the rising burden of non-communicable diseases.

    By shifting focus from treatment to prevention, African nations can make healthcare accessible, equitable and financially sustainable despite the decline in foreign aid.

    – Africa’s healthcare funding crisis: 3 strategies to manage deadly diseases
    – https://theconversation.com/africas-healthcare-funding-crisis-3-strategies-to-manage-deadly-diseases-253644

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: International Summit on the Future of Energy Security Partners

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    International Summit on the Future of Energy Security Partners

    Government welcomes Official Partners of International Summit on the Future of Energy Security.

    • The Official Partners sponsoring the International Energy Agency and UK Government’s energy security summit are Iberdrola/ScottishPower, National Grid, SSE and Urenco 

    • Ministers and industry leaders from around the world will gather in London in April to discuss the future of energy security 

    • Summit will be hosted by Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and International Energy Agency Executive Director Dr Fatih Birol

    The government has today (Monday 14 April) announced the four Official Partners sponsoring the upcoming summit marking a new era for energy security.  

    Energy ministers and key energy sector decision makers from around the world will convene at the UK Government and International Energy Agency’s Summit on the Future of Energy Security, co-hosted by the Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and IEA Executive Director Dr Fatih Birol, at Lancaster House, London, on 24-25 April.   

     Sponsorship from Iberdrola/ScottishPower, National Grid, SSE and Urenco will help deliver the summit at a lower cost to UK taxpayers and demonstrates their ongoing commitment to delivering clean energy and energy security in the UK and around the world.   

    In recent years, energy security has risen up the global agenda as countries act to respond to today’s challenges and protect themselves from future energy shocks. The summit is an opportunity to cooperate on rising to the challenges the world faces on energy security and seizing the opportunities to act. It comes as the UK sets a global example by accelerating to a new era of clean electricity by 2030.  

    The Official Partners  

    Iberdrola/ScottishPower   

    Iberdrola is the largest utility in Europe, with a market capitalization of £85 billion, and serves 100 million people worldwide thanks to a diversified portfolio of businesses across the electricity value chain in the UK, the US, Spain, France, Germany, Brazil and Australia. In the UK, Iberdrola is investing £24 billion up to 2028 through ScottishPower, mainly in transmission and distribution networks and offshore wind. Overall, the Group is dedicating around 70% of its investments to power networks to accelerate electrification as a way to increase energy security and competitiveness, create new industries and jobs, and improve sustainability. Around two thirds of Iberdrola’s global investments are allocated to the UK and to the US   

    Iberdrola Executive Chairman Ignacio Galán said:  

    Energy security is the first step towards overall security. Digitalization, big data, AI and the industries of the future rely on a secure power supply, driving demand growth not seen for decades, and network infrastructures are the backbone of a resilient power system.  Driven by the UK Government’s clear and stable energy policies, Iberdrola is investing £24 billion to 2028 in the UK in transmission, distribution and offshore wind to guarantee energy security, growth and competitiveness. We welcome the IEA and UK Government bringing together key policy makers and energy companies to analyse how best to enhance energy security globally.

    National Grid  

    National Grid is investing £60 billion in energy networks over the next five years in the UK and the northeastern United States. This represents nearly double the investment of the previous five years. Its commitment will unlock significant economic growth, create thousands of new jobs, reduce energy bills in the long term, increase energy security, and support an increasingly decarbonised, electrified economy.  

    National Grid Chief Executive Officer John Pettigrew said:   

    National Grid is investing £60 billion in energy networks to 2029, boosting energy security, driving economic growth, and supporting 60,000 more jobs across the UK and US. Innovation and investment will be essential to unlocking the benefits of the energy transformation for customers and communities; it is essential that events like this exist to enable the sector to collaborate and drive progress forwards.

    SSE  

    SSE is a UK-listed and headquartered company investing £20 billion over five years to 2027 in renewable energy, electricity networks, and flexible power generation. Harnessing some of Europe’s best renewable resources with projects like Dogger Bank – the world’s largest offshore wind farm – SSE generates homegrown clean energy, protecting billpayers from overdependence on imported fossil fuels. It also builds and operate vital transmission and distribution grids to connect and transport more secure power to homes and businesses. At the same time, through its fleet of flexible generation and storage assets across hydro, batteries and efficient gas-fired power stations, it provides the balance required to ensure an increasingly renewable energy system is not only cleaner but more secure.  

    SSE Chief Executive Officer Alistair Phillips-Davies said:   

    It has never been clearer that energy security equates to national security – and achieving it requires countries to focus both on developing their own homegrown energy sources and on international cooperation to ensure increased flexibility and resilience. This principle is at the heart of the UK Government’s Clean Power Mission, and we are proud to be playing our part in delivering mission-critical investments across renewables, networks, and system flexibility. But there is more we can and must do, and we are therefore thrilled to be partnering with the UK Government and the IEA to advance this crucial agenda.

    Urenco  

    Urenco is a global uranium enrichment company, fuelling nuclear power plants to ensure a secure, reliable, and low carbon supply of energy. With four facilities in different countries within the Western world, it is providing customers with choice of where to receive their supply from and are rapidly ramping up capacity to meet increased demand.  

    Urenco Chief Executive Officer Boris Schucht said:  

    There are now well-established drivers for an enhanced role of nuclear power: the need to meet climate change goals; and the need for countries to have a secure and independent energy supply. As a long-standing and integral part of the global nuclear industry, Urenco sees it as our responsibility to make a valuable contribution to meeting world-wide energy needs, complementing other low carbon sources through a 24/7 supply which is cost effective over the lifetime of a reactor. We will continue to collaborate with partners across the energy sector and beyond to help ensure the reliable, clean energy system our world needs are achieved.

    Updates to this page

    Published 14 April 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –