NewzIntel.com

    • Checkout Page
    • Contact Us
    • Default Redirect Page
    • Frontpage
    • Home-2
    • Home-3
    • Lost Password
    • Member Login
    • Member LogOut
    • Member TOS Page
    • My Account
    • NewzIntel Alert Control-Panel
    • NewzIntel Latest Reports
    • Post Views Counter
    • Privacy Policy
    • Public Individual Page
    • Register
    • Subscription Plan
    • Thank You Page

Category: Farming

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Federal, Provincial and Territorial Ministers of Agriculture meet to help strengthen the resilience and competitiveness of the sector

    Source: Government of Canada News

    July 18, 2025 – Ottawa, Ontario

    Yesterday, federal, provincial and territorial (FPT) Ministers of Agriculture met virtually to discuss ways to support a more resilient and competitive agriculture sector and food supply chains that make up Canada’s agri-food landscape. Ministers discussed possible measures to support the hard-working producers and processors across Canada to address the emerging challenges related to international trade and the potential opportunities that could be created by increased interprovincial trade.

    Ministers reiterated their commitment to enhancing the effectiveness of business risk management (BRM) programs. Due to the uncertain trade environment and unfavourable climate conditions in parts of the country, Ministers agreed to take the necessary steps to implement a package of enhancements to the AgriStability program. For the 2025 program year only, the compensation rate will be increased from 80% to 90% and the maximum payment limit will be increased from $3 million to $6 million. These changes are meant to help producers manage the risks they face. In addition, for AgriStability, starting in the 2026 program year, provinces and territories will have the option to use a new inventory valuation method for inventories destined to be used on-farm. Ministers agreed to seek the necessary approvals to include feed costs associated with rented pasture as an allowable expense in advance of the 2026 program year, report back on progress at the September annual meeting and to continue a review of AgriStability allowable expenses.

    FPT Ministers are working together to increase interprovincial trade of food. Ministers discussed a variety of options, including ways to remove barriers to internal food trade and identify new trade opportunities. Ministers also discussed enhanced client service support from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) for small to medium-sized businesses wishing to market food products across Canada under a federal food licence, increasing slaughter capacity where possible in regions with restricted access to services, and allowing interprovincial trade of low-risk manufactured foods without a federal licence. These ideas will be informed by the 2 ongoing pilots on meat trade and slaughter that are being accelerated. These initiatives aim to support business growth and improve market access, while maintaining Canada’s robust food safety system.

    FPT Ministers highlighted the critical importance of joint efforts across governments to maintain, expand and diversify international market access. In support of this work, Ministers discussed the federal Indo-Pacific Agriculture and Agri-Food Office and other resources in the region. Ministers also emphasized the importance of engaging with China at the highest level, to improve the overall trade relationship and to remove Chinese tariffs on Canadian agriculture and seafood products. Ministers also underscored the benefits of existing trade agreements and emphasized the importance of considering the impact of tariffs on businesses.

    The annual conference of FPT Ministers of Agriculture will take place in-person in Winnipeg, Manitoba September 7 to 9, 2025. 

    MIL OSI Canada News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Peters Secures Funding to Strengthen Public Safety, Michigan Manufacturing, and Great Lakes Protections in Appropriations Bill

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Michigan Gary Peters

    WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Senator Gary Peters (MI) helped secure funding in the Fiscal Year 2026 Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Act to fund Michigan priorities, high-impact local projects, and federal programs that support manufacturing, our environment and Great Lakes, public safety, law enforcement, and cutting-edge research.

    “This bipartisan legislation advances critical projects in Michigan and across the country,” said Senator Peters. “The bill makes needed investments to strengthen public safety, support local law enforcement, and boost Michigan’s economic competitiveness. It will also help safeguard our state’s precious natural resources and the Great Lakes for future generations. I’m proud to have helped secure this funding and will keep working to get it across the finish line.”

    Meanwhile, the House of Representatives is considering their own funding bills. The Senate and House will then need to reach an agreement on a final funding bill and have it pass both chambers before being sent to the President to be signed into law.

    The bill includes numerous measures led and supported by Peters, including:

    Strengthening Michigan’s Manufacturing Sector

    Preventing Illegal Trump Administration Cuts to Manufacturing Programs: The bill included language Senator Peters authored to prevent the Department of Commerce from unilaterally defunding or withdrawing contracts from Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Programs – like the Michigan Manufacturing Technology Center. The bill also includes $175 million for the MEP program despite the Trump Administration’s budget proposal to eliminate it. This program helps small and medium manufacturers grow their business, integrate advanced manufacturing techniques and technology, and works to strengthen our domestic manufacturing supply chain. For every dollar of federal investment, MEP generates $24.60 in new sales growth for manufacturers and $27.50 in new investment. This translates into $4.3 billion in new sales annually. In 2024, the Michigan Manufacturing Tech Center estimated they helped 584 businesses produce over $150 million in sales growth and over $100 million in investments. For every $1 of a company’s investment, the Center returns $18 in financial returns.

    Addressing Unfair Chinese Trade Practices: Peters secured language in the bill recognizing that non-allied nations like China are becoming large global exporters of electric vehicles and underscoring a concern that these electric vehicles will soon flood the U.S. market. Some Chinese motor vehicle producers are seeking to establish manufacturing plants in Mexico and other strategic locations to sidestep U.S. tariffs. Peters’ provision in the bill directs the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), in consultation with other relevant departments and agencies, to examine non-allied nations’ non-market policies and practices related to electric vehicles, including policies that prevent U.S auto manufacturers from competing in their markets on a level playing field.

    USMCA: In the summer of 2026, the United States’ trade agreement with Mexico and Canada will undergo a mandatory review period. Peters secured language directing the Office of the United States Trade Representative to pursue changes to the agreement that will improve the agreement’s labor standards, prevent China from taking advantage of it, and onshore more manufacturing jobs throughout the United States, including Michigan.

    National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST): The bill invests heavily in the National Institute of Standards and Technology. These resources will help NIST advance research in cutting-edge fields like carbon dioxide removal, artificial intelligence, quantum information science, and cybersecurity. NIST will also develop standards, tools, and tests to help ensure AI systems operate safely.

    Making Michigan Communities Safer

    PAWS Act: Peters secured $3 million in the Fiscal Year 2026?Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for the Emergency and Transitional Pet Shelter and Housing Assistance Grant Program, which was established by Peters’ Pet and Women Safety (PAWS) Act. The grant program, administered by the Department of Justice, provides emergency and transitional shelter options for domestic violence survivors with companion animals. Peters secured language in the Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies Appropriations Act encouraging the Department of Justice to continue providing robust funding for grants under the program.

    Project Safe Neighborhood: Peters secured funding in the bill for the Project Safe Neighborhoods initiative – a nationwide law enforcement program that uses evidence-based and data-driven approaches to reduce violent crime. Last Congress, the Senate passed Peters’ bipartisan legislationto reauthorize the Project Safe Neighborhoods program.

    Promoting Community Policing in Oakland County: The bill includes $1 million to modernize Oakland County’s Courts and Law Enforcement Management Information Systems (CLEMIS), which will improve transparency of law enforcement activity and promote community policing.

    Improving Criminal Investigation in Van Buren County: Peters secured $576,000 in the bill for Van Buren County to support purchase of rapid-processing DNA technology, which will reduce a current backlog and enable crimes to be solved more efficiently.

    Purchasing New Patrol Vehicles in Kalamazoo: The bill includes $490,000 to help the City of Kalamazoo upgrade its public safety vehicles, which will allow personnel to respond to service calls safely and efficiently.

    Making Road Patrols Safer in Oakland County: The bill would provide $26,000 for the Oakland County Sherriff’s Office to purchase safety equipment for motorcycle patrol officers.

    Supporting Safe Traffic Stops in Warren: Peters secured $38,000 in the bill to help the City of Warren Police Department purchase new safety equipment to aid officers during traffic stops and investigations.

    Improving the Health of the Great Lakes: The bill includes $1,500,000 for the Great Lakes Commission to improve the health of the Great Lakes. Specifically, funding will help address water quality, nutrient pollution, harmful algal blooms, aquatic invasive species, and coastal management throughout the Great Lakes region.

    Upgrading Police Communications in Marquette: The bill would provide $264,000 for the City of Marquette to purchase new portable radios, which would improve emergency response for Marquette Police Department officers.

    Upgrading Aging Patrol Vehicle Fleet in Houghton: The bill includes $385,000 for the City of Houghton to purchase new police patrol vehicles, helping to improve emergency response throughout the region.

    Bolstering AI Research to Help Small and Medium Sized Manufacturers: Senator Peters secured $2,000,000 in this bill to support Michigan Tech’s research into and deployment of AI standards and practices that would help boost small and medium manufacturers in Michigan.

    Westland Police Technology Update: The bill also includes $100,000 to upgrade aging computer systems in police squad cars in Westland.

    Preventing Violence Against Women: The bill contains increased funding for the Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) and its lifesaving programs. Grants from OVW programs support training for police officers, state domestic violence and sexual assault coalitions, rape prevention programs, homicide reduction initiatives, domestic violence hotlines, women’s shelters, transitional housing, and rural support services. In addition, Peters secured language in the bill directing the Department of Justice to develop best practices, in consultation with Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) community-based organizations, for the investigation and prosecution of violence against MENA women.

    Improving Police-Community Relations: The bill provides funding for State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance and Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Office grant programs which aim to strengthen police-community relations.

    Addressing Substance Use Disorder in Our Communities: The bill provides significant funding to help our communities and first responders address substance use disorders, including opioids, and to address drug trafficking.

    Court Appointed Special Advocate (CASA) Program: Peters helped secure funding for the Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) program. This program is critical to thousands of abused or neglected children who have highly trained and extremely dedicated advocates appointed on their behalf, and to child victims who are still waiting for the presence of a consistent, caring adult to speak for their best interests in the courtroom and in the community. This funding will help improve outcomes for every abused and neglected child, as was the intention of Congress when it enacted the Victims of Child Abuse Act of 1990.

    Investing in Sustainable Solutions to Protect Michigan’s Environment, Natural Resources

    Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory: The bill provides funding for the Great Lakes Environmental Research Lab (GLERL), which studies the dynamic environments and ecosystems of the Great Lakes. The work produced and shared by GLERL informs local decisions for safe and sustainable resource management throughout the Great Lakes Basin. GLERL research also plays a crucial role in the work carried out by the Coast Guard’s Center of Expertise for Oil Spill Preparedness and Response in Sault Ste Marie. Peters secured language in the bill recognizing the importance of continued support for the work of the Great Lakes Center of Expertise for Oil Spill Preparedness and Response, which examines the impacts of oil spills in freshwater environments and develops effective responses. Peters-led efforts made the Great Lakes Center of Expertise a reality. Peters authored and passed legislation into law establishing the Great Lakes Center of Expertise in 2018, and then successfully secured $4.5 million in total to kick-start the initiative the following year. Peters then announced the Great Lakes Center of Expertise will be headquartered in two Michigan locations to maximize research and operational capabilities. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, Peters has continued to secure funding to support the Center’s work.

    Great Lakes Monitoring: The U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) is the nation’s premier ocean, coasts, and Great Lakes observing program. The bill provides funding to fill critical gaps in our nation’s ocean and Great Lakes observation infrastructure. It will also ensure the availability of coastal data to inform management decisions on oil spill planning and response, navigation safety, fisheries management, and harmful algal blooms.

    Addressing Harmful Algal Blooms: The bill supports the National Ocean Service’s research on harmful algal blooms (HABs). This funding is vital to preserving the health of the Great Lakes, which provide drinking water to more than 40 million people; support a $16 billion recreational boating industry; and draw 37 million anglers, hunters, and bird watchers each year. HABs, which produce toxic or harmful effects on people and wildlife, have been reported in the Great Lakes and in every U.S. coastal state. According to NOAA, their occurrence may be on the rise.

    Coastal Zone Management Grants: This bill provides much-needed funding for NOAA’s Coastal Zone Management Program, which provides grants to states with approved coastal zone management plans for the protection, restoration, and enhancement of coastal zone areas, including those in the Great Lakes region. All eight Great Lakes states have active Coastal Zone Management programs committed to preserving the health of the Lakes and the $6 trillion regional economy they help sustain. This unique program is essential to the economic and ecological importance of our coastlines and Great Lakes shorelines while supporting state and local efforts to address critical management issues such as coastal hazards, habitat, and water quality.

    Marine Debris Program: The NOAA Marine Debris Program is a joint effort that supports national and international efforts to prevent, identify, and reduce the occurrence of marine debris. The program leverages resources from state and local agencies, tribes, non-governmental organizations, academia, and industry for innovative research, outreach, and education initiatives. This bill provides funding to allow this important work to continue.

    Improving the Census Process to Ensure Michigan Communities Are Accurately Represented

    Census Bureau: The bill provides funding for the U.S. Census Bureau, however, it provides less funding than is required to meet the needs of the upcoming 2030 decennial census. The census and other key federal surveys are tied to important outcomes for communities in Michigan and across the country, including federal resources for education, health care and infrastructure. The resources allocated by this bill will give the Census Bureau the tools it needs to prepare for the 2030 Census, produce critical economic data, and ensure the public can access high-quality data that keeps pace with the needs of our nation. This funding is essential to ensuring the Bureau does not fall behind on crucial preparations and can control long-term costs. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, where Peters serves as Ranking Member, is responsible for conducting oversight of the Census Bureau. Peters previously convened a hearing in downtown Detroit to examine impacts of the 2020 Census on Michigan. Peters also convened a hearing in 2021 with senior federal officials to examine how lawmakers can work to improve operations at the Census Bureau. Peters has also pressed the Census Bureau to ensure it addresses 2020 Census undercounts and improves annual population data.

    Investing in Science, Innovation, and the STEM Workforce

    Michigan Technological University AI Program: Peters secured $2.5 million in funding from the Safe and Secure AI Manufacturing Implementation Program for Michigan Technological University to support research into and deployment of AI standards and practices to support small and medium manufacturers.

    National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA): The bill provides continued funding for key NASA science and STEM education programs that support cutting edge research and scholarships at Michigan’s Universities. The STEM education programs also strengthen our aerospace workforce pipeline. These programs were partially eliminated under the Trump Administration’s budget request.,

    Fully Fund the Artemis Space Mission: This bill includes full funding that Senator Peters’ championed for the Artemis Mission, which is set to take the United States back to the Moon as well as, eventually, to Mars. This mission was partially eliminated under the Trump budget proposal. The Artemis program is supported by Michigan Aerospace manufacturers and one of the astronauts participating in the upcoming Artemis III mission is a Michigander, Christina Koch.

    National Science Foundation: Senator Peters helped secure $9 billion in funding for the National Science Foundation. This level of funding avoids the catastrophic 55% cut proposed by the Trump Administration, which would have devastated U.S. scientific and STEM leadership, and harmed Michigan’s research institutions’ ability to continue to do cutting edge research.

    Implementation of Peters’ PROSWIFT Act: Peters secured funding for the pilot program Peters created through his Promoting Research and Observations of Space Weather to Improve the Forecasting of Tomorrow (PROSWIFT) Act. The program aims to strengthen our nation’s ability to predict severe space weather events and mitigate their harmful impacts on Earth – work being spearheaded at Michigan’s own Universities.

    Improving Access to Reentry: Peters secured language in the bill directing Residential Reentry Centers, where individuals often go between prison and full return to their communities, to better collect ID-related data. A 2022 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that opportunities exist to better assist incarcerated people with obtaining ID documents prior to release. Peters’ language requires an assessment from BOP regarding the feasibility of contracting with additional state DMVs to provide identification document services to qualifying individuals prior to release.

    National Marine Fisheries Services – Studying PFAS in Fish: The bill recognizes the threat posed by the concentration of PFAS detected in fish tissue. The bill directs NOAA to conduct fish tissue sampling and monitoring of PFAS to evaluate the impacts on aquatic health.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: One Month Left to Apply for FEMA Assistance After Tennessee April Severe Storms

    Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency

    Headline: One Month Left to Apply for FEMA Assistance After Tennessee April Severe Storms

    One Month Left to Apply for FEMA Assistance After Tennessee April Severe Storms

    Middle and Western Tennesseans who have been affected by April severe storms, straight-line winds, tornadoes and flooding have one month left to apply for FEMA assistance

    Homeowners, renters, students, self-employed, ranchers and farmers in Cheatham, Davidson, Dickson, Dyer, Hardeman, McNairy, Montgomery, Obion and Wilson counties who were displaced or have property damage from the April 2-24 storms have until Tuesday, Aug

    19 to submit an application for FEMA assistance

    Money is available for survivors who need help covering uninsured costs for things like rental expenses, home repairs, vehicle damage, medical expenses, moving and storage, and reimbursement for temporary housing

    How to Apply for FEMA AssistanceApply online at DisasterAssistance

    gov, use the FEMA App for mobile devices or call the FEMA Helpline at 800-621-3362

    In-person help is available at any Disaster Recovery Center for submitting applications, getting updates and asking questions

    Find a center here: DRC Locator (fema

    gov)

    Video: What to Expect Before Applying for FEMA Assistance | ASL | SpanishVideo: Next Steps After Applying for FEMA Assistance  | ASL | SpanishDisaster Recovery Center locations:Dyer County: Bogota Community Center, 78 Sandy Lane, Bogota, TN 38007Hours: 8 a

    m

    –6 p

    m

    CT Monday-SundayHardeman County: Safehaven Storm Shelter, 530 Madison Ave W

    , Grand Junction, TN 38039Hours: 8 a

    m

    –6 p

    m

    CT Monday-SundayMcNairy County: Latta Theatre, 205 W

    Court Ave

    , Selmer, TN 38375Hours: 8 a

    m

    –6 p

    m

    CT Monday-SundayMontgomery County: Montgomery County Library, 350 Pageant Lane, Clarksville, TN 37040Hours: 9 a

    m

    –8 p

    m

    CT Monday-Thursday; 9 a

    m

    –6 p

    m

    CT Friday-Saturday; 1 p

    m

    –5 p

    m

    CT SundayObion County: Obion County Library, 1221 E

    Reelfoot Ave

    , Union City, TN 38261Hours: 8 a

    m

    –6 p

    m

    CT Monday-Saturday; closed Sunday
    kwei

    nwaogu
    Fri, 07/18/2025 – 13:52

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Shiprock Man Sentenced for Violent Knife Attack Causing Serious Injuries

    Source: US FBI

    ALBUQUERQUE – A Shiprock man was sentenced to 48 months in prison for attacking his ex-girlfriend with a knife, causing serious injuries.

    There is no parole in the federal system.

    According to court records, on November 2, 2024, Jane Doe, and her sister were stopped at a road construction zone when her ex-boyfriend, Tyrell Lee Johnson, 29, an enrolled member of the Navajo Nation, approached their vehicle. Johnson physically attacked Jane Doe, striking her head, stabbing her abdomen with a knife, and striking her with his vehicle as he fled the scene. Jane Doe sustained injuries, including an abdominal wound, bruises, and abrasions.

    Navajo Police located Johnson’s vehicle in Cudei, New Mexico, identified by its damaged front bumper, and apprehended him after a brief pursuit. Officers recovered a black folding knife from Johnson’s possession and confirmed he had no alcohol in his system during processing.

    Upon his release from prison, Johnson will be subject to three years of supervised release.

    U.S. Attorney Ryan Ellison and Philip Russell, Acting Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Albuquerque Field Office made the announcement today.

    The Farmington Resident Agency of the FBI’s Albuquerque Field Office investigated this case with assistance from the Navajo Nation Department of Investigation and Department of Criminal Investigations. Assistant United States Attorney Mark A. Probasco is prosecuting the case.

    MIL Security OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Long Island MS-13 Gang Member Pleads Guilty to Role in Two 2016 Murders in Nassau County

    Source: US FBI

    Earlier today, in federal court in Central Islip, Kevin Cuevas Del Cid, also known as “Creeper,” “Malcriado,” “Sombra,” “Vinky,” and “Dabura,” a member of the Sailors Locos Salvatruchas Westside (Sailors) clique of La Mara Salvatrucha, also known as the MS-13, a transnational criminal organization, pleaded guilty to racketeering charges in connection with his participation in the May 21, 2016 murder of Kerin Pineda and the October 10, 2016 murder of Javier Castillo, both of whom were killed in Freeport, New York, as well as a conspiracy to distribute cocaine and marijuana.  The proceeding was held before United States District Judge Joan M. Azrack.  

    Joseph Nocella, Jr., United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York; Christopher G. Raia, Assistant Director in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation, New York Field Office (FBI); and Patrick J. Ryder, Commissioner, Nassau County Police Department (NCPD), announced the guilty plea.

    “Today, the defendant pleaded guilty to the brutal killings of two young people, whose murders demonstrate the MS-13’s well-established obsession with committing extreme acts of violence and complete disregard for human life,” stated U.S. Attorney Nocella.  “Our Office and our law enforcement partners remain steadfast in our commitment to hold violent gang members accountable for the fear, destruction, and death they bring to our communities.”

    “Kevin Cuevas Del Cid, an MS-13 member, slaughtered two victims based on their assumed alliance with a rival gang. Del Cid’s attacks reflect the gang’s brutal rhetoric designed to intimidate and punish any perceived threat to its organization,” stated FBI Assistant Director in Charge Raia.  “The FBI remains committed to collaborating with our local law enforcement partners to eradicate this senseless gang violence from continuing to terrorize our communities.”

    “We are grateful to our federal partners for working together to take these dangerous criminals off our streets,” stated NCPD Commissioner Ryder.  “We have no tolerance for gang violence in Nassau County and we will never stop working to protect our citizens from these violent elements.”

    According to court filings and statements by the defendant at the guilty plea proceeding, the defendant participated in the murder of 20-year-old Kerin Pineda, who was killed because of his suspected membership in the 18th Street gang.  Specifically, in May 2016, Del Cid and other MS-13 members devised a plan where Del Cid created a fake Facebook profile of a young female to communicate with Pineda in order to lure Pineda out to be killed. On May 21, 2016,  Pineda went to a secluded wooded area near the Merrick-Freeport border believing that he was meeting the young female he had been communicating with on Facebook, who was, in fact, Del Cid.  When Pineda arrived, he was surrounded and violently attacked by Del Cid and the other MS-13 members, each of whom took turns hacking and slashing him with machetes.  Pineda’s body was then buried in a hole that had been dug in the ground the day before in anticipation of the murder.  Del Cid is the last of six previously charged MS-13 members to plead guilty to the Pineda murder.

    Del Cid also pleaded guilty to the murder of 15-year-old Javier Castillo, who, like Pineda, was killed because the MS-13 suspected him of being a member of the 18th Street gang.  On October 10, 2016, members of the Sailors clique in Brentwood convinced Castillo, who lived in Central Islip, to go with them to Freeport – approximately 30 miles away – to smoke marijuana.  Del Cid and the other MS-13 members took Castillo to an isolated marsh area along the water in Cow Meadow Park, in Freeport, where they attacked and killed him, taking turns hacking him with a machete.  Thereafter, the MS-13 members dug a hole and buried Castillo’s body, which was not recovered until one year later, in October 2017.  With Del Cid’s conviction, more than a half dozen MS-13 have been charged and pleaded guilty in connection with the Castillo murder.

    Del Cid, who was 16 years old at the time of the Pineda and Castillo murders, initially was charged by a juvenile information filed under seal on May 20, 2020. The government subsequently filed a motion to transfer Del Cid to adult status for prosecution, and an evidentiary hearing was held on June 3, 2022.  On July 6, 2022, United States Circuit Judge Joseph F. Bianco, sitting by designation, issued a Memorandum and Order granting the government’s motion, and ordering Del Cid be prosecuted as an adult.

    Today’s guilty plea is the latest achievement in a series of federal prosecutions by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York targeting members of the MS-13, a violent transnational criminal organization.  The MS-13’s leadership is based in El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico, but the gang has thousands of members across the United States.  With numerous branches, or “cliques,” the MS-13 is the most violent criminal organization on Long Island.  Since 2003, hundreds of MS-13 members, including dozens of clique leaders, have been convicted on federal felony charges in the Eastern District of New York. A majority of those MS-13 members have been convicted on federal racketeering charges for participating in murders, attempted murders, and assaults.  Since 2010, this Office has obtained indictments charging MS-13 members with carrying out more than 75 murders in the Eastern District of New York, resulting in the convictions of dozens of MS-13 leaders and members in connection with those murders.  These prosecutions are the product of investigations led by the FBI’s Long Island Gang Task Force, which is comprised of agents and officers of the FBI, NCPD, Suffolk County Police Department, Nassau County Sheriff’s Department, Suffolk County Probation Office, Suffolk County Sheriff’s Office, the New York State Police, the Hempstead Police Department, the Rockville Centre Police Department, and the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision.

    The case is part of Operation Take Back America, a Department of Justice initiative aimed at eradicating transnational criminal organizations, combating violent crime, and restoring the rule of law.

    This prosecution is also part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) investigation.  OCDETF identifies, disrupts, and dismantles the highest-level drug traffickers, money launderers, gangs, and transnational criminal organizations that threaten the United States by using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach that leverages the strengths of federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies against criminal networks.

    The government’s case is being handled by the Criminal Section of the Office’s Long Island Division.  Assistant United States Attorneys Paul G. Scotti, Justina L. Geraci, and Megan E. Farrell are in charge of the prosecution, with the assistance of Paralegal Specialist Kerry Ucci and Automated Litigation Specialist Michael Compitello.

    The Defendant:

    KEVIN CUEVAS DEL CID (also known as “Creeper,” “Malcriado,” “Sombra,” “Vinky,” and “Dabura”)
    Age: 25
    Freeport, New York

    E.D.N.Y. Docket No. 20-CR-251 (S-1) (JMA)

    MIL Security OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Pocan, Krishnamoorthi, Amo, 49 Colleagues Slam Rubio’s Decision to Incinerate Food Aid

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Mark Pocan (2nd District of Wisconsin)

    WASHINGTON D.C. – Today, U.S. Representatives Mark Pocan (WI-02), Raja Krishnamoorthi (IL-08), and Gabe Amo (RI-01) led a letter with 49 of their colleagues to Secretary of State Marco Rubio opposing his decision to withhold nearly 500 metric tons of emergency food aid and instead incinerate those supplies once they expire. 

    “As you know, these rations were designed to nourish vulnerable children in conflict-affected regions such as Afghanistan and Pakistan,” the Members wrote. “This action is not only morally indefensible, but also wasteful, strategically shortsighted, and completely counter to the entirety of your work while in the Senate.”

    “We understand that instead of delivering this emergency assistance to malnourished children as originally intended, the State Department will destroy the biscuits at an additional cost to the taxpayer of $130,000,” the Members continued. “According to reporting in the Atlantic, USAID employees and inventory data say this food could have fed 1.5 million children for a week. Given the alarming rates of food insecurity and famine in regions like Gaza and Sudan, the decision to burn lifesaving aid produced by American farmers and paid for by American tax dollars amounts to a tragic abdication of our global humanitarian responsibilities and hurts our own global interests.”

    “The United States has long led the world in humanitarian assistance, not only as a matter of compassion but also as a cornerstone of global stability and diplomacy,” the Members concluded. “Destroying aid that could save lives undermines that legacy and damages our standing in the international community. We urge you to immediately prioritize the distribution of all remaining and viable food assistance stockpiles. American leadership demands nothing less.”

    A full copy of the letter can be found here. 

    The list of signers includes: Pocan, Mark; Krishnamoorthi, Raja; Amo, Gabe; Barragán, Nanette; Bera, Ami; Beyer, Donald; Bonamici, Suzanne; Brownley, Julia; Brown, Shontel; Carson, André; Casar, Greg; Case, Ed; Castro, Joaquin; Cohen, Steve; Crow, Jason; Davis, Danny; DeGette, Diana; Doggett, Lloyd; Evans, Dwight; Foushee, Valerie; Friedman, Laura; Garamendi, John; Jackson, Jonathan; Jayapal, Pramila; Johnson, Julie; Kaptur, Marcy; Khanna, Ro; Latimer, George; Magaziner, Seth; McBath, Lucy; McBride, Sarah; McCollum, Betty; Moore, Gwen; Moulton, Seth; Nadler, Jerrold; Norton, Eleanor; Omar, Ilhan; Peters, Scott; Pettersen, Brittany; Ramirez, Delia; Raskin, Jamie; Scanlon, Mary Gay; Schakowsky, Janice; Simon, Lateefah; Sorensen, Eric; Subramanyam, Suhas; Takano, Mark; Thompson, Mike; Tlaib, Rashida; Velázquez, Nydia; Vindman, Eugene; Williams, Nikema

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Gov. Pillen, Sen. DeKay and NDA Director Vinton Celebrate Passage of Nebraska Law Addressing Fake Meat

    Source: US State of Nebraska

    . Pillen, Sen. DeKay and NDA Director Vinton Celebrate Passage of Nebraska Law Addressing Fake Meat 

     

    O’NEILL, NE – Today, Governor Jim Pillen was joined by Senator Barry DeKay and Nebraska Department of Agriculture Director Sherry Vinton at Shamrock Locker in O’Neill to ceremonially sign LB246. The new law bans the manufacture, distribution and sale of lab-grown or cultivated meat in Nebraska. Passage of the measure during the most recent legislative session builds on the Governor’s executive order from last year which prohibits agencies from purchasing lab-grown meat and requires state contractors to certify they will not discriminate against natural-meat producers in favor of lab or cultivated meat producers.  

    “Nebraska feeds the world and saves the planet. I know first-hand that the food products we sell overseas are in high demand, largely because of the care with which we raise our crops and our animals,” said Gov. Pillen. 

    “The idea of a meat substitute makes no sense and only serves to undercut the livelihood of our producers. If someone wants meat from a bioreactor, they can buy it through Amazon. They won’t find it on our store shelves.”  

    Nebraska is a leading beef producing state, consistently ranking high in cattle slaughter and exports. In 2024, the state processed 6.8 million head of cattle, more than any other state. It also leads the nation in beef and veal exports, sending over $2 billion of high-quality products to international markets.

    While securing the state’s livestock industry is essential, the new law is also meant to protect consumers. Long term health effects of eating fake meat are currently unknown, as noted by NDA Dir. Vinton. 

    “Lab-grown meat has been marketed as an ethical and environmental alternative to the traditional beef industry, but the truth is, we do not know the true health impacts of the fake meat and the growth agents used to cultivate it, nor the long-term environmental benefits,” said Dir. Vinton. “Lab-grown meat is an experiment with the intent of replacing not only traditional meat, but traditional agriculture.”

    Sen. DeKay said he was pleased to introduce LB246 on the Governor’s behalf.  

    “He and I were in agreement that the prospect of synthetic meat entering the marketplace is a bridge too far,” noted Sen. DeKay. Cultured meat advocates have made no secret that their ultimate goal is to socially engineer our diets and end animal husbandry. I am thankful to the Governor for not going quietly into that future.”

    The new law goes into effect on Sept. 3. 

     

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Griffith Announces $300,000 USDA Grant to Turman Forest Products, Inc.

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA)

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has awarded Turman Forest Products, Inc., based in Bedford County, Virginia, a $300,000 grant. The funding supports upgrades to a mill debarker. U.S. Congressman Morgan Griffith (R-VA) issued the following statement:

    “Wood innovations grants help local timber businesses meet demands for sustainably sourcing wood to make products.

    “This USDA grant for $300,000 helps Turman Forest Products provide quality wood products and support rural manufacturing jobs.”

    BACKGROUND

    According to its website, Turman Forest Products specializes in the manufacturing of green Appalachian hardwood lumber.

    The Wood Innovations Grant program invests in proposals that expand traditional wood utilization projects, promote using wood as a construction material in commercial, institutional and multifamily buildings, and expand wood energy markets.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: H.R. 2027, Returning SBA to Main Street Act of 2025

    Source: US Congressional Budget Office

    Bill Summary

    H.R. 2027 would require the Small Business Administration (SBA) to relocate 30 percent of its employees from its headquarters in Washington, D.C., to regional offices throughout the United States and reduce its headquarters office space by 30 percent. Those changes would be contingent upon the agency determining that they would reduce costs to the federal government.

    Estimated Federal Cost

    The estimated budgetary effect of H.R. 2027 is shown in Table 1. The costs of the legislation fall within budget function 370 (commerce and housing credit).

    Table 1.

    Estimated Changes in Spending Subject to Appropriation Under H.R. 2027

     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

     
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2025-2030

    Salaries and Benefits

                 

    Estimated Authorization

    *

    -4

    -10

    -8

    -2

    -2

    -26

    Estimated Outlays

    *

    -3

    -9

    -9

    -3

    -2

    -26

    Overhead Expenses

                 

    Estimated Authorization

    0

    5

    6

    -5

    -5

    -5

    -4

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    4

    6

    -3

    -5

    -5

    -3

    Total Changes

                 

    Estimated Authorization

    *

    1

    -4

    -13

    -7

    -7

    -30

    Estimated Outlays

    *

    1

    -3

    -12

    -8

    -7

    -29

    Basis of Estimate

    CBO assumes that H.R. 2027 will be enacted near the end of fiscal year 2025, that the SBA would not begin to relocate employees until 2026, and that the Congress would reduce annual appropriations by the estimated amounts each year. Outlays were estimated using historical obligation and spending rates.

    Spending Subject to Appropriation

    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2027 would decrease spending subject to appropriation by $29 million over the 2025-2030 period. The Congress appropriated $974million for the SBA’s administrative expenses in fiscal year 2025.

    Salaries and Benefits. H.R. 2027 would require the SBA to relocate 30 percent of its employees currently assigned to work at the headquarters in Washington, D.C., to regional offices throughout the United States within one year and to adjust their compensation for the new location. Additionally, employees would no longer be allowed to telework unless they qualify for an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

    There are currently about 900 full-time employees assigned to work at the SBA headquarters; under the bill, about 270 employees would need to be relocated. CBO assumes that half of those employees would relocate in 2026, and half would choose to leave the agency. CBO expects that it would take about two years for the SBA to hire new employees at regional offices to replace those that leave the agency. The lag in hiring new employees accounts for about 50 percent of the estimated reduction in costs for salaries and benefits.

    Salaries and benefits for federal employees vary by location. Based on information from the SBA, CBO expects that the average salaries and benefits of those employees in 2026 would decrease from about $208,000 to $201,000. Employees that relocate would be eligible to receive amounts to cover their household’s transportation expenses, temporary housing and assistance with selling and purchasing a home.

    Using information from the Department of Agriculture, which relocated two subagencies in 2019, CBO estimates that average relocation expenses would be about $70,000 per employee. Additionally, some employees that leave the SBA would be eligible for severance averaging about $55,000 per employee. After accounting for anticipated inflation, attrition, and the time required to hire new employees, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2027 would reduce the costs of SBA’s salaries and benefits by $26 million over the 2025-2030 period. Any reduction in spending would be subject to future appropriations being reduced by the estimated amounts.

    H.R. 2027 also would require the SBA to report within six months on the number of employees at its headquarters who would be eligible to be relocated and a plan for implementing those changes. CBO estimates that the report would cost less than $500,000.

    Overhead Expenses. H.R. 2027 also would require the agency to reduce office space at its headquarters location by 30 percent within two years. Using information from the SBA, CBO estimates that overhead expenses (including rent, security, and telecommunications services) for the affected employees at the SBA headquarters totaled about $6 million in 2025 compared to costs of about $1.5 million at regional offices for the same number of employees.

    Finally, the SBA would require assistance from the General Services Administration (GSA) to locate and set up additional office space in regional offices. Using information from GSA, CBO estimates that the new working and meeting space, furniture, and workstation purchases, and installation of information technology and audiovisual equipment would cost $10 million. CBO expects those costs would be incurred in 2026 and 2027.

    After accounting for inflation, attrition, and the time required for hiring, and acquiring space and under the assumption that the SBA would reduce its office space in Washington, D.C., CBO estimates that implementing the bill would reduce overhead costs for the SBA by $3million over the 2025-2030 period. Any reduction in spending would be subject to future appropriations being reduced by the estimated amounts.

    Uncertainty

    CBO’s estimate of H.R. 2027 is subject to uncertainty because determining how many employees would relocate and the costs associated with their relocation is uncertain. For example, if the SBA paid severance to those that choose to leave the agency, decided not to hire new employees to offset expected attrition, or paid higher or lower relocation expenses, the actual costs could be higher or lower than those estimated.

    Additionally, if employees chose to retire and collect retirement benefits earlier than they would under current law, spending on retirement benefits, which are recorded in the budget as direct spending, would change.

    Pay-As-You-Go Considerations

    Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.

    Increase in Long-Term Net Direct Spending and Deficits

    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2027 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

    Mandates

    The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

    Previous CBO Estimate

    On June 27, 2025, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 298, the Returning SBA to Main Street Act, as reported by the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship on March 4, 2025. The two bills are similar, and CBO’s estimates of their budgetary effects are the same.

    Federal Costs: Aurora Swanson

    Mandates: Rachel Austin

    Estimate Reviewed By

    Justin Humphrey
    Chief, Finance, Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit

    Kathleen FitzGerald 
    Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit

    H. Samuel Papenfuss 
    Deputy Director of Budget Analysis

    Phillip L. Swagel

    Director, Congressional Budget Office

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: H.R. 2027, Returning SBA to Main Street Act of 2025

    Source: US Congressional Budget Office

    Bill Summary

    H.R. 2027 would require the Small Business Administration (SBA) to relocate 30 percent of its employees from its headquarters in Washington, D.C., to regional offices throughout the United States and reduce its headquarters office space by 30 percent. Those changes would be contingent upon the agency determining that they would reduce costs to the federal government.

    Estimated Federal Cost

    The estimated budgetary effect of H.R. 2027 is shown in Table 1. The costs of the legislation fall within budget function 370 (commerce and housing credit).

    Table 1.

    Estimated Changes in Spending Subject to Appropriation Under H.R. 2027

     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

     
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2025-2030

    Salaries and Benefits

                 

    Estimated Authorization

    *

    -4

    -10

    -8

    -2

    -2

    -26

    Estimated Outlays

    *

    -3

    -9

    -9

    -3

    -2

    -26

    Overhead Expenses

                 

    Estimated Authorization

    0

    5

    6

    -5

    -5

    -5

    -4

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    4

    6

    -3

    -5

    -5

    -3

    Total Changes

                 

    Estimated Authorization

    *

    1

    -4

    -13

    -7

    -7

    -30

    Estimated Outlays

    *

    1

    -3

    -12

    -8

    -7

    -29

    Basis of Estimate

    CBO assumes that H.R. 2027 will be enacted near the end of fiscal year 2025, that the SBA would not begin to relocate employees until 2026, and that the Congress would reduce annual appropriations by the estimated amounts each year. Outlays were estimated using historical obligation and spending rates.

    Spending Subject to Appropriation

    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2027 would decrease spending subject to appropriation by $29 million over the 2025-2030 period. The Congress appropriated $974million for the SBA’s administrative expenses in fiscal year 2025.

    Salaries and Benefits. H.R. 2027 would require the SBA to relocate 30 percent of its employees currently assigned to work at the headquarters in Washington, D.C., to regional offices throughout the United States within one year and to adjust their compensation for the new location. Additionally, employees would no longer be allowed to telework unless they qualify for an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

    There are currently about 900 full-time employees assigned to work at the SBA headquarters; under the bill, about 270 employees would need to be relocated. CBO assumes that half of those employees would relocate in 2026, and half would choose to leave the agency. CBO expects that it would take about two years for the SBA to hire new employees at regional offices to replace those that leave the agency. The lag in hiring new employees accounts for about 50 percent of the estimated reduction in costs for salaries and benefits.

    Salaries and benefits for federal employees vary by location. Based on information from the SBA, CBO expects that the average salaries and benefits of those employees in 2026 would decrease from about $208,000 to $201,000. Employees that relocate would be eligible to receive amounts to cover their household’s transportation expenses, temporary housing and assistance with selling and purchasing a home.

    Using information from the Department of Agriculture, which relocated two subagencies in 2019, CBO estimates that average relocation expenses would be about $70,000 per employee. Additionally, some employees that leave the SBA would be eligible for severance averaging about $55,000 per employee. After accounting for anticipated inflation, attrition, and the time required to hire new employees, CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2027 would reduce the costs of SBA’s salaries and benefits by $26 million over the 2025-2030 period. Any reduction in spending would be subject to future appropriations being reduced by the estimated amounts.

    H.R. 2027 also would require the SBA to report within six months on the number of employees at its headquarters who would be eligible to be relocated and a plan for implementing those changes. CBO estimates that the report would cost less than $500,000.

    Overhead Expenses. H.R. 2027 also would require the agency to reduce office space at its headquarters location by 30 percent within two years. Using information from the SBA, CBO estimates that overhead expenses (including rent, security, and telecommunications services) for the affected employees at the SBA headquarters totaled about $6 million in 2025 compared to costs of about $1.5 million at regional offices for the same number of employees.

    Finally, the SBA would require assistance from the General Services Administration (GSA) to locate and set up additional office space in regional offices. Using information from GSA, CBO estimates that the new working and meeting space, furniture, and workstation purchases, and installation of information technology and audiovisual equipment would cost $10 million. CBO expects those costs would be incurred in 2026 and 2027.

    After accounting for inflation, attrition, and the time required for hiring, and acquiring space and under the assumption that the SBA would reduce its office space in Washington, D.C., CBO estimates that implementing the bill would reduce overhead costs for the SBA by $3million over the 2025-2030 period. Any reduction in spending would be subject to future appropriations being reduced by the estimated amounts.

    Uncertainty

    CBO’s estimate of H.R. 2027 is subject to uncertainty because determining how many employees would relocate and the costs associated with their relocation is uncertain. For example, if the SBA paid severance to those that choose to leave the agency, decided not to hire new employees to offset expected attrition, or paid higher or lower relocation expenses, the actual costs could be higher or lower than those estimated.

    Additionally, if employees chose to retire and collect retirement benefits earlier than they would under current law, spending on retirement benefits, which are recorded in the budget as direct spending, would change.

    Pay-As-You-Go Considerations

    Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.

    Increase in Long-Term Net Direct Spending and Deficits

    CBO estimates that enacting H.R. 2027 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 10-year periods beginning in 2036.

    Mandates

    The bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.

    Previous CBO Estimate

    On June 27, 2025, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 298, the Returning SBA to Main Street Act, as reported by the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship on March 4, 2025. The two bills are similar, and CBO’s estimates of their budgetary effects are the same.

    Federal Costs: Aurora Swanson

    Mandates: Rachel Austin

    Estimate Reviewed By

    Justin Humphrey
    Chief, Finance, Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit

    Kathleen FitzGerald 
    Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit

    H. Samuel Papenfuss 
    Deputy Director of Budget Analysis

    Phillip L. Swagel

    Director, Congressional Budget Office

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Kehoe Announces Eleven Appointments to Various Boards and Commissions, Fills One County Vacancy

    Source: US State of Missouri

    JULY 18, 2025

    Jefferson City — Today, Governor Mike Kehoe announced eleven appointments to various boards and commissions and filled one county vacancy.

    Beth Banker, of Kansas City, was reappointed to the Child Abuse and Neglect Board.

    Ms. Banker is the clinical director for the Child Protection Center. She previously served as an art therapist and consultant at Operation Breakthrough. An active member of her community, Banker serves on the American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children (APSAC) and the Missouri Juvenile Justice Advisory Group. Banker earned a master’s degree in social work from Boston University.

    Cary Corley, Ph.D., of Lee’s Summit, was appointed to the Committee of Professional Counselors.

    Mr. Corley is currently the owner and clinical director of Corley Counseling, LLC. He previously served as a counselor for  Peace Partnership, a non-profit counseling center. Dr. Corley is an active member of his community, serving as a Sunday school and leadership institute teacher, marriage counselor, and seminar speaker at Abundant Life Church.  He is also a member of his Homeowners Association Elections Committee. Mr. Lee earned his Doctorate of Counseling Psychology from Midwestern College.

    Sarah Chapman, from Auxvasse, was appointed as the student representative to the Southeast Missouri State University Board of Governors.

    Ms. Chapman is a student ambassador for Southeast Missouri State University Admissions. She is a member of the Student Government Association and the National Society of Leadership and Success. Chapman is currently pursuing a double major in english and music at Southeast Missouri State University.

    Jeffery Davis, of Wardsville, was appointed to the Southeast Missouri State University Board of Governors.

    Mr. Davis is the executive director of Government Affairs for BNSF Railway. He previously served as the commissioner and chairman of the Missouri Public Service Commission. Davis is an active member of his community, serving on the Missouri Railroad Association and the Missouri Chamber of Commerce. Davis earned his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Southeast Missouri State University.

    Lee Harris, Ph.D., of Independence, was appointed to the Committee of Professional Counselors.

    Mr. Lee is the owner and therapist at AHA Mental Health. Harris also serves as the program manager of Adult and Family Services for ReDiscover, a nonprofit community mental health center that provides comprehensive programs and services for adults and children. He previously served as a program supervisor at the Child Abuse Prevention Association. Lee his Doctorate of Behavioral Health from Arizona State University.

    Todd Hays, of Monroe City, was reappointed to the Missouri State Fair Commission.

    Mr. Hays is a fifth-generation farmer operating a farrow-to-finish hog operation and row crop farm. He is an active member of his community, currently serving as vice president of the Missouri Farm Bureau and Monroe City Agri-Leaders, and previously served on the Monroe City Fair Board for over 15 years. Hays holds an Associate of Arts in Business Marketing from Moberly Area Community College.
     

    Jared Hill, of Kansas City, was appointed to the Missouri State Fair Commission.

    Mr. Hill is the president and owner of Mainline Services LLC, a railroad maintenance and emergency services company. Prior to Mainline, Hill served as the president of HB Trucking LLC. He is a member of the Platte County Fair Board, working tirelessly to promote agricultural education, youth programs, and community events. Hill is also an active member of Eagle Scout Troop 249.

    Megan Hill, of Marble Hill, was appointed as the Bollinger County Clerk.

    Ms. Hill previously served as the deputy recorder of deeds for the Bollinger County Courthouse before stepping in as the county clerk in an interim capacity. Prior to public service, she worked as an accounting manager at SEMO Options Inc. Hill earned a Bachelor of Science in Business Management from National American University.

    Matthew Kliethermes, Ph.D, of Maryland Heights, was reappointed to the Child Abuse and Neglect Review Board.

    Mr. Kliethermes is a clinical professor at the University of Missouri – St. Louis, serving as the training director for the Children’s Advocacy Services of Greater St. Louis. A leader in his field, he serves on several boards including the American Psychological Association and the National Child Traumatic Stress Network. Kliethermes earned his doctorate in clinical psychology from St. Louis University.

    Monica Lyle, of St. James, was appointed to the Child Abuse and Neglect Review Board.

    Ms. Lyle is a counselor for the Salem R-80 School District. She previously served as a counselor for the Rolla #31 School District and the director of education for Perimeter of Missouri. Lyle has been highly involved in several professional organizations, including the American School Counselor Association and the Missouri School Counselor Association. Lyle earned a master’s degree in counseling from Missouri Baptist University.

    Lesia Shelton, of Buffalo, was reappointed to the Governor’s Council on Disability.

    Ms. Shelton provides specialized employment services for the deaf and hard of hearing at Preferred Family Healthcare. An engaged member of her community, she serves as a member of the Deaf Awareness Group of Southwest Missouri and volunteers for the Dallas County Sheriff’s Posse. Shelton is a licensed Missouri Interpreter for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing.

    Jonathan Truesdale, of Raymore City, was appointed to the Lincoln University Board of Curators.

    Mr. Truesdale is an attorney at Truesdale Law, LLC in the Greater Kansas City area, specializing in criminal defense, probate law, and personal injury. He previously served as an attorney for Maryland Office of Public Defense. In addition to his professional career, Truesdale is a member of the Mercury Club of Kansas City. Truesdale earned his Juris Doctor from The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: Professor Benedict Oramah recognised for long service as Export Trading Group (ETG), TRACE, KCB and CBZ toast award success at 32nd Afreximbank Annual Meetings

    Source: APO – Report:

    Key Highlights

    • The third edition of the Pan-African Business and Development Awards has recognised and celebrated leading businesses on the continent and in the diaspora in alignment with Afreximbank’s push for a promotion of a Global Africa
    • Marking his distinguished tenor, Professor Benedict Oramah, outgoing Afreximbank President, was honoured with the Bank’s Long Service Award alongside other employees
    • Export Trading Group (ETG) won the Global Africa Business Leader Award 2025 for fostering economic growth across the continent and enhancing food security
    • KCB Group Plc, Kenya and CBZ Bank, Zimbabwe emerged winners of the Afreximbank Financial Institutions Award 2025 for banking institutions with more than $500m and less than $500m capital respectively for having played a pivotal role in bridging the trade finance gap in Africa.
    • TRACE, a multimedia platform dedicated to the entertainment and empowerment of people of African descent won the Diaspora Business of the Year Award for their impact in strengthening continental and diaspora ties.

    African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) (www.Afreximbank.com) hosted the third edition of the Pan-African Business and Development Awards in association with the Business Council for Africa (BCA) on Wednesday June 25, 2025, at a colourful Gala Dinner attended by more than 400 dignitaries including business and political leaders from Nigeria, across Africa and the diaspora.

    The Pan-African Business and Development Awards, held annually during the Afreximbank Annual Meetings, are designed to celebrate and recognise transformative businesses and financial institutions within the African continent and in the diaspora in keeping with the Bank’s vision for a Global Africa.

    Export Trading Group (ETG), operational in nearly 20 countries on the continent, won the Global Africa Business Leader Award, 2025 for fostering economic growth across the continent and enhancing food security by connecting smallholder farmers with regional and global markets, improving livelihoods and boosting intra-African trade, reflecting Afreximbank’s mandate of fostering trade and economic growth across the continent. The company’s investments in storage, logistics, and processing infrastructure have helped reduce post-harvest losses and increased value addition.

    This year, TRACE, the multimedia platform dedicated to the entertainment and empowerment of people of African descent, won the Diaspora Business of the Year award for its impact in strengthening continental and diaspora ties through the vehicle of entertainment. Its mission is to uplift African identity through music, education, and storytelling. TRACE’s platforms reach and support over 5,000 artists and 1,000 brands annually. It employs hundreds across Africa, contributing hundreds of millions of dollars in value.

    Two banking giants were recognised in the Afreximbank Financial Institutions Award–2025. KCB Group Plc, Kenya’s largest bank by assets emerged winner of the award for banking institutions with more than $500m capital while CBZ Bank, also Zimbabwe’s largest Bank emerged winner of the Afreximbank Financial Institutions Award-2025 for banking institutions with less than $500m capital.

    KCB, which won in the same category in 2024, was recognised for facilitating local and cross-border trade finance through various products as well as mitigating risks inherent in trade on behalf of its customers. One of the first East African banks to enhance financial inclusion and economic growth, it has positioned itself as an enabler for businesses and consumers to transact efficiently across African borders.

    CBZ Bank from Zimbabwe has played a pivotal role in bridging the trade finance gap in Africa by leveraging strategic partnerships, introducing innovative products, and executing a comprehensive pan-African vision. During the 31st Afreximbank Annual meetings held in Nassau, The Bahamas last year, CBZ Bank and Afreximbank inked two deals (https://apo-opa.co/44ZDCxm) totalling $80 million consisting of US$60 million line of credit and $20 million Afreximbank Trade Facilitation Programme (AFTRAF) facility signalling their continued collaboration aimed at promoting economic development.

    In a speech delivered on behalf of Professor Benedict Oramah, President and Chairman of Board of Directors at Afreximbank, the Bank’s Senior Executive Vice President, Denys Denya, said: “This Awards event is our way of saying thank you to everyone who, regardless of size or significance of your role, has contributed to furthering the course of development in Africa. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you. With these awards, we reaffirm our commitment to the shared goal of transforming the African economy and restoring the dignity of Africans, regardless of their geographic location.”

    Arnold Ekpe, former group CEO of Ecobank Transnational Incorporated and chair of the BCA, in his remarks, commented on the importance of recognising and celebrating institutions that contribute to Africa’s development, which he said, “has become the defining essence of Afreximbank.”

    A major highlight of the awards ceremony was the recognition of four long serving Afreximbank staff members for their dedicated service of between 25 and 30 years. This esteemed group included Professor Benedict Oramah who was honoured for over three decades at the Bank with ten years spent at the helm as President and Chairman of Board of Directors.

    Presenting the long service award to Prof. Oramah, Wale Edun, Nigeria’s Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy said: “Tonight, we acknowledge not just a remarkable career, but a transformative journey spanning three decades. Under your leadership, the bank hasn’t just scaled; it has soared, championing strategies that have fundamentally reshaped trade and development across Africa. Nigeria is incredibly proud of your achievements, your leadership, and your unwavering commitment to the economic prosperity of our continent. You are a true son of the soil; a shining example of what dedication and vision can accomplish.”

    The Pan-African Business and Development Awards are hosted by Afreximbank in association with the BCA. The awards series was launched in 2023 to recognise those organisations and leaders that epitomise the pan-African spirit by leading the way in building substantive and transformative cross-border businesses.

    – on behalf of Afreximbank.

    Media Contact:
    Vincent Musumba
    Communications and Events Manager (Media Relations)
    Email: press@afreximbank.com

    Follow on Social Media: 
    X: https://apo-opa.co/4nVC0NN
    Facebook: https://apo-opa.co/44SE54f 
    LinkedIn: https://apo-opa.co/459VM0t 
    Instagram: https://apo-opa.co/44WtHZo

    About Afreximbank:
    African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) is a Pan-African multilateral financial institution mandated to finance and promote intra- and extra-African trade. For over 30 years, the Bank has been deploying innovative structures to deliver financing solutions that support the transformation of the structure of Africa’s trade, accelerating industrialisation and intra-regional trade, thereby boosting economic expansion in Africa. A stalwart supporter of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), Afreximbank has launched a Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) that was adopted by the African Union (AU) as the payment and settlement platform to underpin the implementation of the AfCFTA. Working with the AfCFTA Secretariat and the AU, the Bank has set up a US$10 billion Adjustment Fund to support countries effectively participating in the AfCFTA. At the end of December 2024, Afreximbank’s total assets and contingencies stood at over US$40.1 billion, and its shareholder funds amounted to US$7.2 billion. Afreximbank has investment grade ratings assigned by GCR (international scale) (A), Moody’s (Baa2), China Chengxin International Credit Rating Co., Ltd (CCXI) (AAA), Japan Credit Rating Agency (JCR) (A-) and Fitch (BBB-). Afreximbank has evolved into a group entity comprising the Bank, its equity impact fund subsidiary called the Fund for Export Development Africa (FEDA), and its insurance management subsidiary, AfrexInsure (together, “the Group”). The Bank is headquartered in Cairo, Egypt.

    For more information, visit: www.Afreximbank.com

    Media files

    .

    MIL OSI Africa –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: SBA Relief Still Available to Texas Small Businesses and Private Nonprofits Affected by Adverse Weather

    Source: United States Small Business Administration

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. – The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) is reminding eligible small businesses and private nonprofit (PNP) organizations in Texas of the deadline to apply for low interest federal disaster loans to offset economic losses caused by adverse weather conditions occurring as noted below.

    The disaster declarations cover the counties listed below:

    Declaration Number

    Primary
    Counties

    Neighboring
    Counties

    Incident Type

    Incident Date

    Deadline

    20929

    Bee, Kleberg and Live Oak Atascosa, Brooks, Duval, Goliad, Jim Wells, Karnes, Kenedy, McMullen, Nueces, Refugio and San Patricio Excessive Rain and Excessive Moisture July 10-29, 2024 8/19/25

    20930

    Bailey, Castro, Childress, Deaf Smith, Hale, Hansford, Lubbock, Randall, Runnels and Swisher Armstrong, Briscoe, Carson, Cochran, Coke, Coleman, Collingsworth, Concho, Cottle, Crosby, Floyd, Garza, Hall, Hardeman, Hockley, Hutchinson, Lamb, Lynn, Moore, Nolan, Ochiltree, Oldham, Parmer, Potter, Roberts, Sherman, Taylor, Terry and Tom Green; Curry, Quay and Roosevelt in New Mexico; Harmon and Texas in Oklahoma. Excessive Heat and High Winds Occurring June 1–Oct. 31, 2024 8/19/25

    Under this declaration, SBA’s Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) program is available to small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, nurseries, and PNPs with financial losses directly related to the disaster. The SBA is unable to provide disaster loans to agricultural producers, farmers, or ranchers, except for small aquaculture enterprises.

    EIDLs are available for working capital needs caused by the disaster and are available even if the business or PNP did not suffer any physical damage. The loans may be used to pay fixed debts, payroll, accounts payable and other bills not paid due to the disaster.

    “Through a declaration by the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, SBA provides critical financial assistance to help communities recover,” said Chris Stallings, associate administrator of the Office of Disaster Recovery and Resilience at the SBA. “We’re pleased to offer loans to small businesses and private nonprofits impacted by these disasters.”

    The loan amount can be up to $2 million with interest rates as low as 4% for small businesses and 3.25% for PNPs with terms up to 30 years. Interest does not accrue, and payments are not due until 12 months from the date of the first loan disbursement. The SBA sets loan amounts and terms based on each applicant’s financial condition.

    To apply online and receive additional disaster assistance information visit sba.gov/disaster. Applicants may also call SBA’s Customer Service Center at (800) 659-2955 or email disastercustomerservice@sba.gov for more information on SBA disaster assistance. For people who are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.

    Submit completed loan applications to SBA no later than Aug. 19.

    ###

    About the U.S. Small Business Administration

    The U.S. Small Business Administration helps power the American dream of business ownership. As the only go-to resource and voice for small businesses backed by the strength of the federal government, the SBA empowers entrepreneurs and small business owners with the resources and support they need to start, grow, expand their businesses, or recover from a declared disaster. It delivers services through an extensive network of SBA field offices and partnerships with public and private organizations. To learn more, visit www.sba.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham Statement on Crypto Week and Digital Asset Legislation

    Source: US Commodity Futures Trading Commission

    WASHIGNTON, D.C. – Commodity Futures Trading Commission Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham today praised the passage of digital asset legislation by the House of Representatives.
    “This week marks a significant milestone in the Trump Administration’s commitment to embrace the promise of digital assets and make America the crypto capital of the world. The GENIUS Act, which is now headed to the President’s desk, will open a new chapter in financial services. The House also took an important step forward in advancing the CLARITY Act, a long-awaited framework for the regulation of digital asset markets.
    “Under President Trump’s strong leadership and clear vision, Crypto Week is the beginning of America’s golden age of digital asset innovation. The CFTC stands ready to fulfill our mission and oversee our markets that enable U.S. economic growth and competitiveness. The future is bright.
    “Congratulations to House Agriculture Committee Chairman GT Thompson and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman, as well as Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Scott, House Financial Services Committee Chairman French Hill, Senators Bill Hagerty and Cynthia Lummis, Representatives Bryan Steil and Dusty Johnson, and Speaker Mike Johnson, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, Majority Whip Tom Emmer, Majority Leader John Thune, their staffs and all who played a role in making this week possible.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Behind bars, not beyond rights: UN Peacekeeping & the Nelson Mandela Rules

    Source: United Nations – Peacekeeping

    Written by Maya Kelly, a Strategic Communications Consultant and Social Media Coordinator for the UN Department of Peace Operations. She has a background in media, communications, technoculture, and education policy

    Human rights belong to everyone – including prisoners.  

    Nelson Mandela once said, “A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but rather its lowest ones.” Imprisoned for 27 years under apartheid, the late president of South Africa saw firsthand the injustices faced behind bars. He spent his life advocating for the fair and human treatment of all people, including prisoners. 

    His fight continues today. Around the world, prisons hold individuals convicted of violent or non-violent offences, political prisoners, juveniles, and pre-trial detainees held for months or years without any conviction – and who accounted for nearly a third of the world’s 11.5 million prison population as of 2022. 

    In many places, these prisoners’ rights are still not upheld. Many are subjected to violence. Many are denied humane treatment, clean water, adequate food, proper sanitation, healthcare, and legal protections. Overincarceration, overcrowding, underfunding, poor conditions and the serious neglect of prison services threaten the lives of prisoners, the safety of communities, and the global community’s efforts to advance human rights, sustainable development, and peace. 

    The Nelson Mandela Rules, adopted by the UN General Assembly 10 years ago, seek to change this by establishing minimum standards for the treatment of prisoners. In the countries where we operate, UN peacekeeping helps host governments put these rules into practice in countries like South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and Kosovo*. Our efforts protect the rights of detainees, improve the safety and security of communities, and help advance sustainable peace in regions affected by conflict.

    What are the Nelson Mandela Rules?

    The UN first adopted rules for the treatment of prisoners in 1955. They were not updated again until 2015, when after five years of revisions, the UN General Assembly unanimously adopted the revised United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners – known today as the Nelson Mandela Rules.  

    The new resolution was named to honour the legacy of Mandela’s lifelong struggle for global human rights, equality, democracy, and the promotion of a culture of peace. 

    The Nelson Mandela Rules are the universally recognized blueprint for effective and humane prison management in the 21st century.

    While there are 122 rules in total, they are guided by a set of key principles, which seek to create prison systems that ensure humane treatment for prisoners and help prevent repeat offences:

    1. Humane treatment: Every prisoner is a human being whose rights and dignity must be respected. This includes protection from torture and from cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, and the right to food, water, and medical attention.
    2. Non-discrimination: The rules should be applied equally and without discrimination based on race, gender, language, religion, sexuality or another other status.
    3. Normalisation: Life in prison should be as similar as possible to life in the wider community, with access to resources and regular family contact, to support reintegration and deter repeat offences.
    4. Safety and security: Prisons should provide a safe and secure environment for prisoners, prison staff, service providers and visitors, including protecting prisoners from violence.
    5. Tailored rehabilitation: Rehabilitation opportunities, including education and vocational training, should meet prisoners’ individual needs to prepare them to live a law-abiding and self-supporting life upon release. Rehabilitation reduces the likelihood of repeat offences upon prisoners’ release. 

    Ensuring prisons meet these standards protects the prisoners and personnel inside and improves the safety of surrounding communities.

    Why are the Mandela Rules Important?

    When the Nelson Mandela Rules are applied, we’re all better off: the rules improve both prisoner and community safety and security.

    Humane, rehabilitative prisons lower reoffending rates upon release, improving public safety. Overcrowding and poor sanitation in prisons accelerates the spread of disease, threatening the health of inmates and the wider community. Improving prison health protects public health. Incarceration disrupts families and communities for generations, while prison alternatives and maintained family contact during incarceration leads to stronger social and community cohesion. Incarceration is not only expensive for governments but has long lasting economic costs for families and communities who lose economic potential. 

    While the Mandela Rules establish the minimum standards in countries where United Nations peace operations are present, chronic underfunding, overcrowding, and outdated infrastructure severely limit governments’ abilities to meet even the most basic standards of detention. If left unchecked, prisons become breeding grounds for communicable disease, violence, and radicalization with social, economic and political costs that are felt well beyond the prison walls. We, therefore, work together with national authorities and partners to implement and uphold the Mandela Rules in prisons in some of the world’s toughest conflict environments.

    How UN Peacekeeping helps countries put the Mandela Rules into practice

    UN Peacekeeping deploys Justice and Corrections experts to improve how prisons are run, support programs that help prisoners reintegrate into society, and train national prison staff to strengthen justice for prisoners and wider community members.

    We support host governments implement the Nelson Mandela Rules, building safer, fairer prisons that respect human rights, reduce the risk of violence and radicalization, and strengthen public trust in justice institutions. These are key foundations for building lasting peace, security, and stability in conflict and post-conflict settings.

    In prisons in South Sudan, climate shocks, regional conflict, stalled imports and overcrowding in prisons mean that prisoners do not have enough to eat. The peacekeeping mission UNMISS is working with the Food and Agriculture Association (FAO) to train inmates in agriculture and let them grow food on “prison farms” to supply the prisons. The results have been transformative: food insecurity has been reduced, and prisoners have gained vocational skills that give them hope for their futures. “This farm helps us produce food, gives us the physical exercise we need, but above all, gives us hope for rebuilding our lives once we finish our sentences,” says Jakor Kuron, an inmate.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Behind bars, not beyond rights: UN Peacekeeping & the Nelson Mandela Rules

    Source: United Nations – Peacekeeping

    Written by Maya Kelly, a Strategic Communications Consultant and Social Media Coordinator for the UN Department of Peace Operations. She has a background in media, communications, technoculture, and education policy

    Human rights belong to everyone – including prisoners.  

    Nelson Mandela once said, “A nation should not be judged by how it treats its highest citizens, but rather its lowest ones.” Imprisoned for 27 years under apartheid, the late president of South Africa saw firsthand the injustices faced behind bars. He spent his life advocating for the fair and human treatment of all people, including prisoners. 

    His fight continues today. Around the world, prisons hold individuals convicted of violent or non-violent offences, political prisoners, juveniles, and pre-trial detainees held for months or years without any conviction – and who accounted for nearly a third of the world’s 11.5 million prison population as of 2022. 

    In many places, these prisoners’ rights are still not upheld. Many are subjected to violence. Many are denied humane treatment, clean water, adequate food, proper sanitation, healthcare, and legal protections. Overincarceration, overcrowding, underfunding, poor conditions and the serious neglect of prison services threaten the lives of prisoners, the safety of communities, and the global community’s efforts to advance human rights, sustainable development, and peace. 

    The Nelson Mandela Rules, adopted by the UN General Assembly 10 years ago, seek to change this by establishing minimum standards for the treatment of prisoners. In the countries where we operate, UN peacekeeping helps host governments put these rules into practice in countries like South Sudan, the Central African Republic, and Kosovo*. Our efforts protect the rights of detainees, improve the safety and security of communities, and help advance sustainable peace in regions affected by conflict.

    What are the Nelson Mandela Rules?

    The UN first adopted rules for the treatment of prisoners in 1955. They were not updated again until 2015, when after five years of revisions, the UN General Assembly unanimously adopted the revised United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners – known today as the Nelson Mandela Rules.  

    The new resolution was named to honour the legacy of Mandela’s lifelong struggle for global human rights, equality, democracy, and the promotion of a culture of peace. 

    The Nelson Mandela Rules are the universally recognized blueprint for effective and humane prison management in the 21st century.

    While there are 122 rules in total, they are guided by a set of key principles, which seek to create prison systems that ensure humane treatment for prisoners and help prevent repeat offences:

    1. Humane treatment: Every prisoner is a human being whose rights and dignity must be respected. This includes protection from torture and from cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, and the right to food, water, and medical attention.
    2. Non-discrimination: The rules should be applied equally and without discrimination based on race, gender, language, religion, sexuality or another other status.
    3. Normalisation: Life in prison should be as similar as possible to life in the wider community, with access to resources and regular family contact, to support reintegration and deter repeat offences.
    4. Safety and security: Prisons should provide a safe and secure environment for prisoners, prison staff, service providers and visitors, including protecting prisoners from violence.
    5. Tailored rehabilitation: Rehabilitation opportunities, including education and vocational training, should meet prisoners’ individual needs to prepare them to live a law-abiding and self-supporting life upon release. Rehabilitation reduces the likelihood of repeat offences upon prisoners’ release. 

    Ensuring prisons meet these standards protects the prisoners and personnel inside and improves the safety of surrounding communities.

    Why are the Mandela Rules Important?

    When the Nelson Mandela Rules are applied, we’re all better off: the rules improve both prisoner and community safety and security.

    Humane, rehabilitative prisons lower reoffending rates upon release, improving public safety. Overcrowding and poor sanitation in prisons accelerates the spread of disease, threatening the health of inmates and the wider community. Improving prison health protects public health. Incarceration disrupts families and communities for generations, while prison alternatives and maintained family contact during incarceration leads to stronger social and community cohesion. Incarceration is not only expensive for governments but has long lasting economic costs for families and communities who lose economic potential. 

    While the Mandela Rules establish the minimum standards in countries where United Nations peace operations are present, chronic underfunding, overcrowding, and outdated infrastructure severely limit governments’ abilities to meet even the most basic standards of detention. If left unchecked, prisons become breeding grounds for communicable disease, violence, and radicalization with social, economic and political costs that are felt well beyond the prison walls. We, therefore, work together with national authorities and partners to implement and uphold the Mandela Rules in prisons in some of the world’s toughest conflict environments.

    How UN Peacekeeping helps countries put the Mandela Rules into practice

    UN Peacekeeping deploys Justice and Corrections experts to improve how prisons are run, support programs that help prisoners reintegrate into society, and train national prison staff to strengthen justice for prisoners and wider community members.

    We support host governments implement the Nelson Mandela Rules, building safer, fairer prisons that respect human rights, reduce the risk of violence and radicalization, and strengthen public trust in justice institutions. These are key foundations for building lasting peace, security, and stability in conflict and post-conflict settings.

    In prisons in South Sudan, climate shocks, regional conflict, stalled imports and overcrowding in prisons mean that prisoners do not have enough to eat. The peacekeeping mission UNMISS is working with the Food and Agriculture Association (FAO) to train inmates in agriculture and let them grow food on “prison farms” to supply the prisons. The results have been transformative: food insecurity has been reduced, and prisoners have gained vocational skills that give them hope for their futures. “This farm helps us produce food, gives us the physical exercise we need, but above all, gives us hope for rebuilding our lives once we finish our sentences,” says Jakor Kuron, an inmate.

    MIL OSI United Nations News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Bluetongue outbreak endangers UK livestock – what you need to know about the virus

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Cate Williams, Knowledge Exchange Fellow at Institute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth University

    Bluetongue causes illness and death in cattle, sheep, goats and other ruminants. Juice Flair/Shutterstock

    A tiny midge, no bigger than a pinhead, is bringing UK farming to its knees. The culprit? A strain of the bluetongue virus that’s never been seen before.

    As of July 1, the whole of England has been classed as an “infected area” due to bluetongue virus serotype 3 (BTV-3).

    There are movement restrictions and testing in place in Scotland, Wales and the island of Ireland. No animals from England – or that have passed through England – are allowed to attend this year’s Royal Welsh Show on July 21-24, for example.


    Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK’s latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences.


    The virus, which causes illness and death in sheep, cattle, goats and other ruminants, is spread by biting midges. Although it poses no risk to humans and can’t be transmitted from one animal to another, the latest outbreak is more severe than previous ones. And it could cause lasting damage to UK farming.

    Bluetongue isn’t new to the UK, however. A different strain, BTV-8 was detected in 2007 and contained. But BTV-3 is a different story. First detected in the Netherlands in late 2023, it was quickly spotted in the UK, where an early containment effort initially appeared successful.

    But the virus made a comeback in autumn 2024 – and this time it spread. On its second attempt, the virus was able to circulate and caused an outbreak. With little existing immunity, BTV-3 has now established itself, prompting concerns about animal welfare, food production and farming livelihoods.

    What does the disease do?

    Sheep tend to be the most severely affected, though all ruminants are at risk. Clinical signs are species-specific but can include swelling of the face, congestion, nasal discharge, ulcers in the mouth and nose, difficulty breathing and abortion or birth deformities.

    Bluetongue can cause the animal’s tongue to swell. It can also turn blue from lack of blood flow – although this is somewhat rare.

    Bluetongue disease causes suffering in animals, and while there is a vaccine, there is no treatment for the disease once it’s contracted.

    BTV-3 appears to be more lethal than earlier strains. In the Netherlands, vets report that BTV-3 is causing more severe symptoms than BTV-8 did.

    Vets in England reported that in some herds 25-40% of cows failed to get pregnant, and there was a high rate of birth defects and stillborn calves. One farm in Suffolk started the calving season with 25% of their cows not pregnant and ended with just 48 calves from 97 cows.

    Belgium has seen a fall in calf births, reduced milk deliveries and higher mortality in small ruminants compared to the previous three years.

    How is it spread?

    Bluetongue virus is transmitted by midges from the Culicoides genus. These are tiny, biting insects that thrive in mild, wet conditions.

    Multiple midges can bite the same animal, and it only takes one of them to carry BTV before that animal becomes a host for further transmission. When animals are transported long distances, infected individuals can be bitten again and introduce the virus to previously uninfected midge populations.

    Climate change is making outbreaks like this more likely. Milder winters and cooler, wetter summers are ideal for midges, increasing both their numbers and their biting activity.

    While there’s no danger to human health, the consequences of BTV-3 are far-reaching. Limitations on movement, exports and imports are being imposed to help prevent the spread of the disease, but this could also hamper farming practices and trade.

    The disease and its associated restrictions pose another source of stress for farmers, 95% of whom have ranked mental health as the biggest hidden problem in farming.

    Genetic pick and mix

    One of the reasons bluetongue is so tricky to manage is its ability to evolve. It has a segmented genome, meaning its genetic material, in this case RNA, is split into ten segments. This characteristic is exclusive to “reassortment viruses” and means that they can easily exchange segments of RNA. It’s like a genetic pick and mix with ten different types of sweets that come in an unlimited number of flavours.

    This allows BTV to create new, genetically distinct “serotypes”, which may have a selective advantage or a disadvantage. Those with an advantage will emerge and spread successfully, while those with a disadvantage will not emerge at all. This process, known as “reassortment”, is partly responsible for the numerous influenza pandemics throughout history and has even allowed diseases to jump the species barrier.

    Although bluetongue doesn’t affect humans directly, its spread poses a growing threat to the UK’s livestock sector and food supply. It’s important to learn from other countries that are further along in the BTV-3 outbreak so that the likely effects can be anticipated in the UK.

    Cate Williams 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. Bluetongue outbreak endangers UK livestock – what you need to know about the virus – https://theconversation.com/bluetongue-outbreak-endangers-uk-livestock-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-virus-260229

    MIL OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: F&M Bank Announces Board Leadership Transition: Andrew Briggs to Step Down as Chairman, Kevin J. Sauder Named Successor

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ARCHBOLD, Ohio, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — F&M Bank (“F&M”), an Archbold, Ohio-based bank owned by Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: FMAO), announced that Andrew Briggs, Chairman of the Board, will step down from his position as part of a plan he initiated. Briggs, who has served on the Board for seven years and as Chairman since 2024, will continue serving as a director through his retirement from the Board in 2026 and will work closely with newly appointed Chairman, Kevin J. Sauder, to ensure a seamless transition.

    Sauder, who currently serves as Vice Chairman of the Board and is Retired President & CEO of Sauder Woodworking Co., has been named Chairman of the Board, effective today. A member of F&M’s Board since 2004, Sauder brings extensive leadership experience, deep community ties, and a strong commitment to the mission and values of F&M Bank. He and Briggs will work together over the coming year to support board continuity and strategic momentum.

    “Andrew’s guidance has been instrumental in helping F&M expand our footprint and deepen our community relationships,” said Lars B. Eller, President and CEO of F&M Bank. “He has been a passionate advocate for our employees, customers, and shareholders. His dedication to ensuring a smooth and collaborative transition is a reflection of his deep commitment to F&M’s future.”

    Eller added, “Kevin is a thoughtful, strategic leader who understands the importance of relationship banking in the communities we serve. His business acumen, integrity, and vision make him an ideal successor. I look forward to working with Kevin in his new role as Chairman as we continue building on the strong foundation Andrew helped establish.”

    Throughout his tenure, Briggs has played a vital role in advancing F&M’s strategic vision, supporting its community banking mission, and strengthening its governance. His leadership has positioned the bank for continued growth and sustained value for all stakeholders.

    About F&M Bank:
    F&M Bank is a local independent community bank that has been serving its communities since 1897. F&M Bank provides commercial banking, retail banking and other financial services. Our locations are in Butler, Champaign, Fulton, Defiance, Hancock, Henry, Lucas, Shelby, Williams, and Wood counties in Ohio. In Northeast Indiana, we have offices located in Adams, Allen, DeKalb, Jay, Steuben and Wells counties. The Michigan footprint includes Oakland County, and we have Loan Production Offices in Troy, Michigan; Muncie, Indiana; and Perrysburg and Bryan, Ohio.

    Safe harbor statement
    Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements by F&M, including management’s expectations and comments, may not be based on historical facts and are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21B of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Actual results could vary materially depending on risks and uncertainties inherent in general and local banking conditions, competitive factors specific to markets in which F&M and its subsidiaries operate, future interest rate levels, legislative and regulatory decisions, capital market conditions, or the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its impacts on our credit quality and business operations, as well as its impact on general economic and financial market conditions. F&M assumes no responsibility to update this information. For more details, please refer to F&M’s SEC filing, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. Such filings can be viewed at the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov or through F&M’s website www.fm.bank.

    Company Contact: Investor and Media Contact:
    Lars B. Eller
    President and Chief Executive Officer
    Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc.
    (419) 446-2501
    leller@fm.bank
    Andrew M. Berger
    Managing Director
    SM Berger & Company, Inc.
    (216) 464-6400
    andrew@smberger.com

    The MIL Network –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) strengthens the resilience of farming and pastoral communities through mechanical restoration of degraded land

    Source: APO


    .

    In Niger, farmers and herders lose nearly 100,000 hectares of land every year due to degradation. This situation reduces available space for productive activities and undermines their hopes of achieving food and nutrition sovereignty. Ongoing land degradation is a major contributor to the country’s recurring cereal and fodder shortages, exposing farming and pastoral households to repeated food crises.

    The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) is supporting Niger in its efforts to build more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable agrifood systems to improve production, nutrition, the environment, and livelihoods, leaving no one behind. Through the Action Against Desertification  programme, FAO is working to restore degraded land for agricultural and pastoral use in support of the Great Green Wall (GGW) initiative. This support focuses on land restoration activities, reseeding, plant care, establishing community management committees, training members in association life, management and marketing, benefit-sharing from restored sites, and networking.

    In total, FAO has helped restore and utilize over 20,000 hectares of land across 55 sites in the regions of Tillabéri, Dosso, and Tahoua. The mechanical land preparation is carried out using a Delfino plough, which can cover more than 15 hectares per day. The machine carves half-moon shapes that enhance rainwater infiltration and retention, up to 1,000 litres per basin, giving trees, shrubs, and forage the best chance of growing and surviving in the early months after planting.

    The Delfino tractor-plough unit has become a central tool in the collaboration between FAO and the National Agency of the Great Green Wall (NAGGW), enabling large areas to be treated and significantly reducing the need for manual labour.  

    Half-moons are better than those we dig by hand

    At the Awanchalla site in Bagaroua, Tahoua region, communities expressed their amazement at the Delfino plough, which restored 100 hectares in a very short time in an area where labour has become increasingly scarce. “Our dream has come true, to see this land recovered by the machine. We had abandoned it for decades because it was unfit for farming or livestock. The work of the Delfino is impressive, fast, and saves us time. The half-moons it creates are better than those we dig by hand,” said Bizo Abarchi, a community member and representative of the village chief.

    For fellow community member Issa Matto, the restored site offers new opportunities: “Now that the land is recovered, I no longer need to migrate. I can stay in the village. With FAO’s support, we’ll grow forage for sale, a highly profitable activity in our pastoral zone. We’ll also receive plant seedlings based on our selections, tend to them, and eventually sell the fruits. These activities expand our farming space and give me hope that my life will improve,” he said.

    To ensure the site is well-managed and sustainable, “we’re determined to give our best,” said Abdoul Moumouni Djimraou, another local. “We’ve already set up a management committee. We’ve thought through the mechanisms for successful land use, marketing, benefit-sharing, working with local authorities, and managing potential conflicts between users and surrounding communities.”

    Partners with the European Union

    By promoting the mechanical use of the Delfino plough to restore degraded land at scale, thanks to the European Union funded project “Knowledge for Action in Implementing the Great Green Wall” (K4GGWA), FAO, together with the EU, national authorities and local communities, is helping to create the conditions for advancing the Great Green Wall in Niger and strengthening the resilience of farming and pastoral communities.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO): Regional Office for Africa.

    MIL OSI Africa –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: South Africa: Deputy President Mashatile concludes Working Visit to China

    Source: APO


    .

    Deputy President Shipokosa Paulus Mashatile has today, Friday, 18 July 2025, concluded a successful Working Visit to the People’s Republic of China, aimed at strengthening bilateral relations and economic cooperation between South Africa and China. 

    At the invitation of the Chairman of China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT), Mr Ren Hongbin, the Deputy President participated in the third China International Supply Chain Expo (CISCE), taking place from 16 – 20 July 2025 in Beijing, China.

    CISCE is the world’s first national-level expo dedicated to global supply chains, hosted under the auspices of the Chinese central government and organised by the CCPIT. 

    The Deputy President used South Africa’s participation at CISCE as a strategic opportunity to advance the South-Africa China All-Round Strategic Cooperative Partnership in the New Era. This also reinforced South Africa’s role as a key gateway to Sub-Saharan Africa for trade, investment and industrial cooperation. 

    During the Expo, the Deputy President officially launched the South African National Pavilion. The Pavilion showcased over 30  South African entities from a variety of sectors including Agro-Processing, Electronics, Chemicals, Leather, Footwear and Textiles, Cosmetics, Mining Services, and the creative industries.

    The opening of the 2025 South African National Pavilion is a focused response to resolutions made at the FOCAC in Beijing in 2024. This is significant in that it demonstrates how South Africa is an important trade partner to China. 

    During the Working Visit, the Deputy President held a bilateral meeting with Vice President Han Zheng of the People’s Republic of China. 

    Vice President Zheng expressed confidence in the South African Government and emphasised the importance of strengthening existing cooperation. He further reiterated China’s support for South Africa’s Presidency of the G20. 

    The Deputy President expressed appreciation for China’s longstanding partnership and extended an invitation to Vice President Zheng to visit South Africa to co-chair the 9th South Africa-China Bi-National Commission at a mutually agreeable date early in 2026.

    Deputy President Mashatile also met with Mr Ren Hongbin, Chairman of the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT), where he emphasised the significance of the Expo in South Africa’s efforts to advance the promotion of trade, investment cooperation, the growth of innovation, and the encouragement of learning and interchange.

    In an effort to strengthen bilateral economic relations and explore strategic investment opportunities across key sectors, the Deputy President had the opportunity to experience some of the fascinating work being done by companies such as SINOMA international engineering company, the China State Construction Engineering Corporation (CSCEC) and the Beijing Automotive International Corporation (BAIC).

    Furthermore, the Deputy President’s engagement with the ICBC & Standard Bank and the South-Africa China Business Forum demonstrated the commitment to strengthening Africa-China Relations.

    Deputy President Mashatile was accompanied by the Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Ms Thandi Moraka; the Minister of Small Business Development, Ms Stella Ndabeni-Abrahams; Minister of Tourism, Ms Patricia de Lille; Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition, Mr Parks Tau; Minister of Water and Sanitation, Ms Pemmy Majodina; and Minister of Agriculture, Mr John Steenhuisen.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of The Presidency of the Republic of South Africa.

    MIL OSI Africa –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Veritex Holdings, Inc. Reports Second Quarter 2025 Operating Results and Declares Quarterly Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DALLAS, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —  Veritex Holdings, Inc. (“Veritex”, the “Company”, “we” or “our”) (Nasdaq: VBTX), the holding company for Veritex Community Bank, today announced the results for the quarter ended June 30, 2025.

    The Company also announced that the Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share of common stock. The dividend will be payable on August 21, 2025 to shareholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

        Quarter to Date
    Financial Highlights   Q2 2025   Q1 2025   Q2 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    (unaudited)
    GAAP            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 27,202  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.50  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       28.49  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.87 %
    Return on average equity1     7.56       7.27       7.10  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.29  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       59.11  
    Non-GAAP2            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 28,310  
    Diluted operating EPS     0.56       0.54       0.52  
    Tangible book value per common share     22.68       22.33       20.62  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings     42,672       43,413       44,420  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82       1.89       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.91  
    Return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.49       10.54  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.70       10.94  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15       60.62       58.41  

    1 Annualized ratio.
    2 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a reconciliation of these non-generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.

    Other Second Quarter Credit, Capital and Company Highlights

    • Credit quality remained strong with a nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) to total assets ratio of 0.60% and annualized net charge-offs of 0.05% for the quarter and 0.11% year-to-date;
    • Allowance for Credit Losses (“ACL”) to total loans held-for-investment ratio (excluding mortgage warehouse (“MW”)) remained relatively unchanged at 1.28%;
    • Capital remains strong with common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 11.05% as of June 30, 2025;
    • Book value per share increased $0.31 to $30.39 and tangible book value per share increased $0.35 to $22.68;
    • We repurchased 286,291 and 663,637 shares of Company stock for $7.1 million and $16.6 million during the second quarter and year-to-date, respectively; and
    • On July 14, 2025, we announced entry into a definitive agreement to merge with Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (“Huntington”), which is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2025, subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions.

    Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025

    Net Interest Income

    For the three months ended June 30, 2025, net interest income before provision for credit losses was $96.3 million and net interest margin (“NIM”) was 3.33% compared to $95.4 million and 3.31%, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The $894 thousand increase, or 0.9%, in net interest income before provision for credit losses was primarily due to a $2.8 million increase in interest income on loans, a $1.7 million decrease in interest expense on certificates and other time deposits and a $768 thousand decrease in subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, partially offset by a $2.9 million increase in interest expense on transaction and savings deposits and a $1.2 million decrease in interest income on deposits in financial institutions and fed funds sold for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The NIM increased two basis points (bps) compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025, primarily due to the decreased funding costs on certificates and other time deposits and subordinated debt due to the redemption of $75.0 million in subordinated debt during the three months ended March 31, 2025 as well as a mix shift from lower yielding to higher yielding assets for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was largely offset by higher deposits funding costs primarily driven by the expiration of favorable hedges on money market deposit accounts at the end of the first quarter 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, net interest income before provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was relatively unchanged. Net interest income benefited from decreases in interest expense of $16.3 million on certificates and other time deposits, $1.4 million on advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and $1.1 million on subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, as well as an increase of $1.5 million in interest income on debt securities. These changes were substantially offset by a decrease of $17.6 million in interest income on loans and a $2.5 million increase in interest expense on interest-bearing demand and savings deposits. The NIM increased four bps from 3.29% for the three months ended June 30, 2024 to 3.33% for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was primarily due to decreased funding costs on deposits, advances and subordinated debt resulting from interest rate cuts for the year over year period, partially offset by the related declines in rates earned on interest-earnings assets, primarily loans.

    Noninterest Income

    Noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was $13.5 million, a decrease of $790 thousand, or 5.5%, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The change was primarily due to a $1.6 million decrease in government guaranteed loan income, partially offset by an $850 thousand increase in customer swap income during the period.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $2.9 million, or 27.6%. The increase was primarily due to a $1.2 million increase in customer swap income, a $728 thousand increase in service charges and fees on deposit accounts, a $528 thousand increase in loan fees and a $368 thousand increase in government guaranteed loan income for the year over year period.

    Noninterest Expense

    Noninterest expense was $67.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $66.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, an increase of $328 thousand, or 0.5%. The increase was primarily due to a $920 thousand increase in other noninterest expense, a $627 thousand increase in professional and regulatory fees and a $580 thousand increase in marketing expenses compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The increase was largely offset by a $1.7 million decrease in salaries and employee benefits primarily due to $733 thousand in lower payroll taxes, which are historically higher in the first quarter, as well as decreases of $678 thousand in bonus expense, $370 thousand in employee insurance expense and $340 thousand in stock grant expenses, offset partially by a $1.0 million increase in salaries expense. In addition, deferred loan origination costs, which reduce salaries expense, were $399 thousand higher for the three months ended June 30, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $4.0 million, or 6.4%. The increase was primarily due to a $2.2 million increase in salaries and employee benefits driven by a $4.7 million increase in salaries expense and incentives accruals and a $521 thousand increase in payroll taxes, offset by decreases of $1.1 million in stock grant expense and $661 thousand in severance expense, as well as $1.6 million higher deferred loan origination costs, which reduces salaries and employee benefit expense. Additionally, there was a $1.1 million increase in other noninterest expense, driven primarily by higher OREO expenses, and a $636 thousand increase in marketing expenses during the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the same period in the prior year.

    Income Tax

    Income tax expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 totaled $8.5 million, which is consistent with the amount recorded for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 21.6% for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to 22.7% for the three months ended March 31, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, income tax expense increased by $295 thousand, or 3.6%, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 23.2% for the three months ended June 30, 2024.

    Financial Condition

    Total loans held for investment (“LHI”), excluding MW was $8.78 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $44.7 million compared to March 31, 2025.

    Total deposits were $10.42 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $247.2 million compared to March 31, 2025. The decrease was primarily the result of decreases of $185.4 million in noninterest bearing deposits and $171.4 million in interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits, partially offset by an increase of $113.5 million in certificates and other time deposits.

    Credit Quality

    NPAs totaled $75.2 million, or 0.60% of total assets, of which $66.0 million represented LHI and $9.2 million represented OREO at June 30, 2025, compared to $96.9 million, or 0.77% of total assets, at March 31, 2025. The Company had net charge-offs of $1.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025. Annualized net charge-offs to average loans outstanding were five bps for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 17 bps and 28 bps for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

    ACL as a percentage of LHI was 1.19% at both June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025 and 1.16% at June 30, 2024. ACL as a percentage of LHI (excluding MW) was 1.28% at June 30, 2025, 1.27% at March 31, 2025 and 1.23% at June 30, 2024. The Company recorded a provision for credit losses on loans of $1.8 million, $4.0 million and $8.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively. The provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was primarily attributable to changes in economic factors for the period. The balance for unfunded commitments increased to $8.9 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $7.4 million at March 31, 2025, and we recorded a $1.5 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to a $1.3 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and no provision recorded for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2024. The increase in the allowance for unfunded commitments was attributable to increases in unfunded balances and changes in economic factors for the period.

    Dividend Information

    On July 18, 2025, Veritex’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share on its outstanding shares of common stock. The dividend will be paid on or after August 21, 2025 to stockholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Veritex’s management uses certain non-GAAP (U.S. generally accepted accounting principles) financial measures to evaluate its operating performance and provide information that is important to investors. However, non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and should be viewed in addition to, and not as an alternative for, Veritex’s reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Specifically, Veritex reviews and reports tangible book value per common share of the Company; operating earnings; tangible common equity to tangible assets; return on average tangible common equity; pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans; diluted operating earnings per share; operating return on average assets; operating return on average tangible common equity; and operating efficiency ratio. Veritex has included in this earnings release information related to these non-GAAP financial measures for the applicable periods presented. Please refer to “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights at the end of this earnings release for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures.

    About Veritex Holdings, Inc.

    Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, Veritex is a bank holding company that conducts banking activities through its wholly owned subsidiary, Veritex Community Bank, with locations throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and in the Houston metropolitan area. Veritex Community Bank is a Texas state chartered bank regulated by the Texas Department of Banking and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. For more information, visit www.veritexbank.com.

    CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

    This communication may contain certain forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, certain plans, expectations, goals, projections, and statements about the benefits of the proposed transaction, the plans, objectives, expectations and intentions of Veritex and Huntington, the expected timing of completion of the transaction, and other statements that are not historical facts and are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, and uncertainties that are beyond the control of Veritex and Huntington. Such statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, estimates, uncertainties and other important factors that change over time and could cause actual results to differ materially from any results, performance, or events expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including as a result of the factors referenced below. Statements that do not describe historical or current facts, including statements about beliefs and expectations, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as expect, anticipate, continue, believe, intend, estimate, plan, trend, objective, target, goal, or similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as will, may, might, should, would, could, or similar variations. The forward-looking statements are intended to be subject to the safe harbor provided by Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

    Veritex and Huntington caution that the forward-looking statements in this communication are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to assess and are subject to change based on factors which are, in many instances, beyond Veritex’s and Huntington’s control. While there is no assurance that any list of risks and uncertainties or risk factors is complete, below are certain factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained or implied in the forward-looking statements or historical performance: changes in general economic, political, or industry conditions; deterioration in business and economic conditions, including persistent inflation, supply chain issues or labor shortages, instability in global economic conditions and geopolitical matters, as well as volatility in financial markets; changes in U.S. trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs; the impact of pandemics and other catastrophic events or disasters on the global economy and financial market conditions and our business, results of operations, and financial condition; the impacts related to or resulting from bank failures and other volatility, including potential increased regulatory requirements and costs, such as FDIC special assessments, long-term debt requirements and heightened capital requirements, and potential impacts to macroeconomic conditions, which could affect the ability of depository institutions, including us, to attract and retain depositors and to borrow or raise capital; unexpected outflows of uninsured deposits which may require us to sell investment securities at a loss; changing interest rates which could negatively impact the value of our portfolio of investment securities; the loss of value of our investment portfolio which could negatively impact market perceptions of us and could lead to deposit withdrawals; the effects of social media on market perceptions of us and banks generally; cybersecurity risks; uncertainty in U.S. fiscal and monetary policy, including the interest rate policies of the Federal Reserve; volatility and disruptions in global capital, foreign exchange and credit markets; movements in interest rates; competitive pressures on product pricing and services; success, impact, and timing of our business strategies, including market acceptance of any new products or services including those implementing our “Fair Play” banking philosophy; changes in policies and standards for regulatory review of bank mergers; the nature, extent, timing, and results of governmental actions, examinations, reviews, reforms, regulations, and interpretations, including those related to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the Basel III regulatory capital reforms, as well as those involving the SEC, OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, CFPB and state-level regulators; the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstances that could give rise to the right of one or both of the parties to terminate the merger agreement between Veritex and Huntington; the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against Veritex and Huntington; delays in completing the transaction; the failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the transaction); the failure to obtain Veritex shareholder approval or to satisfy any of the other conditions to the transaction on a timely basis or at all; the possibility that the anticipated benefits of the transaction are not realized when expected or at all, including as a result of the impact of, or problems arising from, the integration of the two companies or as a result of the strength of the economy and competitive factors in the areas where Veritex and Huntington do business; the possibility that the transaction may be more expensive to complete than anticipated, including as a result of unexpected factors or events; diversion of management’s attention from ongoing business operations and opportunities; potential adverse reactions or changes to business, customer or employee relationships, including those resulting from the announcement or completion of the transaction; the ability to complete the transaction and integration of Veritex and Huntington successfully; the dilution caused by Huntington’s issuance of additional shares of its capital stock in connection with the transaction; and other factors that may affect the future results of Veritex and Huntington. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described above can be found in Veritex’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the SEC and available on Veritex’s investor relations website, ir.veritexbank.com, under the heading “Financials” and in other documents Veritex files with the SEC, and in Huntington’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and available in the “Investor Relations” section of Huntington’s website, http://www.huntington.com, under the heading “Investor Relations” and in other documents Huntington files with the SEC.

    All forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements set forth above. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and are based on information available at that time. Neither Veritex nor Huntington assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, new information or future events, changes in assumptions or changes in circumstances or other factors affecting forward-looking statements that occur after the date the forward-looking statements were made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by federal securities laws. If Veritex or Huntington update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference should be drawn that Veritex or Huntington will make additional updates with respect to those or other forward-looking statements. As forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, caution should be exercised against placing undue reliance on such statements.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    Per Share Data (Common Stock):                            
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57     $ 0.53     $ 0.46     $ 0.57     $ 0.50     $ 1.10     $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.45       0.56       0.50       1.09       0.94  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       29.37       29.53       28.49       30.39       28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share1     22.68       22.33       21.61       21.72       20.62       22.68       20.62  
    Dividends paid per common share outstanding2     0.22       0.22       0.20       0.20       0.20       0.44       0.40  
                                 
    Common Stock Data:                            
    Shares outstanding at period end     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350       54,265       54,350  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding for the period     54,251       54,486       54,489       54,409       54,457       54,368       54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding for the period     54,766       55,123       55,237       54,932       54,823       54,944       54,832  
                                 
    Summary of Credit Ratios:                            
    ACL to total LHI     1.19 %     1.19 %     1.18 %     1.21 %     1.16 %     1.19 %     1.16 %
    NPAs to total assets     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual purchase credit deteriorated (“PCD”) loans, to total assets3     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total loans and OREO     0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3     0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  
                                 
    Summary Performance Ratios:                            
    Return on average assets3     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Return on average equity3     7.56       7.27       6.17       7.79       7.10       7.42       6.72  
    Return on average tangible common equity1, 3     10.79       10.49       9.04       11.33       10.54       10.64       10.03  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       67.04       61.94       59.11       61.03       60.72  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.20       3.30       3.29       3.32       3.27  
                                 
    Selected Performance Metrics – Operating:                        
    Diluted operating EPS1   $ 0.56     $ 0.54     $ 0.54     $ 0.59     $ 0.52     $ 1.10     $ 1.05  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1, 3     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1, 3     1.82       1.89       1.72       1.83       1.83       1.86       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1,3     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1,3     10.79       10.70       10.69       11.74       10.94       10.75       11.14  
    Operating efficiency ratio1     61.15       60.62       62.98       60.63       58.41       60.88       58.57  
                                 
    Veritex Holdings, Inc. Capital Ratios:                        
    Average stockholders’ equity to average total assets     13.19 %     12.96 %     12.58 %     12.31 %     12.26 %     13.07 %     12.34 %
    Tangible common equity to tangible assets1     10.16       9.95       9.54       9.37       9.14       10.16       9.14  
    Tier 1 capital to average assets (leverage)4     10.73       10.55       10.32       10.06       10.06       10.73       10.06  
    Common equity tier 1 capital4     11.05       11.04       11.09       10.86       10.49       11.05       10.49  
    Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets4     11.32       11.31       11.36       11.13       10.75       11.32       10.75  
    Total capital to risk-weighted assets4     13.46       13.46       13.96       13.91       13.45       13.46       13.45  
    Risk-weighted assets4   $ 11,435,978     $ 11,318,220     $ 11,247,813     $ 11,290,800     $ 11,450,997     $ 11,435,978     $ 11,450,997  

    1 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.
    2 Dividend amount represents dividend paid per common share subsequent to each respective quarter end.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    4 June 30, 2025 ratios and risk-weighted assets are estimated.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands)


        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)       (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    ASSETS                    
    Cash and due from banks   $ 66,696     $ 81,088     $ 52,486     $ 54,165     $ 53,462  
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks     703,869       768,702       802,714       1,046,625       598,375  
    Cash and cash equivalents     770,565       849,790       855,200       1,100,790       651,837  
    Debt securities, net     1,418,804       1,463,157       1,478,538       1,423,610       1,349,354  
    Other investments     73,986       69,452       69,638       71,257       75,885  
    Loans held for sale (“LHFS”)     69,480       69,236       89,309       48,496       57,046  
    LHI, MW     669,052       571,775       605,411       630,650       568,047  
    LHI, excluding MW     8,783,988       8,828,672       8,899,133       9,028,575       9,209,094  
    Total loans     9,522,520       9,469,683       9,593,853       9,707,721       9,834,187  
    ACL     (112,262 )     (111,773 )     (111,745 )     (117,162 )     (113,431 )
    Bank-owned life insurance     86,048       85,424       85,324       84,776       84,233  
    Bank premises, furniture and equipment, net     116,642       112,801       113,480       114,202       105,222  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)     9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256  
    Intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization     25,006       27,974       28,664       32,825       35,817  
    Goodwill     404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452  
    Other assets     212,889       210,863       226,200       211,471       232,518  
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY                    
    Deposits:                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits   $ 2,133,294     $ 2,318,645     $ 2,191,457     $ 2,643,894     $ 2,416,727  
    Interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits     5,009,137       5,180,495       5,061,157       4,204,708       3,979,454  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750       2,679,221       2,958,861       3,625,920       3,744,596  
    Correspondent money market deposits     482,739       486,762       541,117       561,489       584,067  
    Total deposits     10,417,920       10,665,123       10,752,592       11,036,011       10,724,844  
    Accounts payable and other liabilities     135,647       151,579       183,944       168,415       180,585  
    Advances from FHLB     169,000       —       —       —       —  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     156,082       155,909       230,736       230,536       230,285  
    Total liabilities     10,878,649       10,972,611       11,167,272       11,434,962       11,135,714  
    Stockholders’ equity:                    
    Common stock     617       615       613       613       612  
    Additional paid-in capital     1,329,803       1,329,626       1,328,748       1,324,929       1,321,995  
    Retained earnings     545,015       526,044       507,903       493,921       473,801  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (38,528 )     (42,170 )     (65,076 )     (40,330 )     (76,713 )
    Treasury stock     (187,688 )     (180,635 )     (171,119 )     (171,119 )     (171,079 )
    Total stockholders’ equity     1,649,219       1,633,480       1,601,069       1,608,014       1,548,616  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except per share data)

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months
    Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    Interest income:                            
    Loans, including fees   $ 149,354   $ 146,505   $ 154,998     $ 167,261   $ 166,979   $ 295,859   $ 328,921  
    Debt securities     16,883     17,106     16,893       15,830     15,408     33,989     29,103  
    Deposits in financial institutions and Fed Funds sold     8,039     9,244     11,888       12,571     7,722     17,283     15,772  
    Equity securities and other investments     847     870     940       1,001     1,138     1,717     2,038  
    Total interest income     175,123     173,725     184,719       196,663     191,247     348,848     375,834  
    Interest expense:                            
    Transaction and savings deposits     48,080     45,165     44,841       47,208     45,619     93,245     92,403  
    Certificates and other time deposits     28,539     30,268     40,279       46,230     44,811     58,807     85,303  
    Advances from FHLB     113     27     130       47     1,468     140     2,859  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     2,056     2,824     3,328       3,116     3,113     4,880     6,227  
    Total interest expense     78,788     78,284     88,578       96,601     95,011     157,072     186,792  
    Net interest income     96,335     95,441     96,141       100,062     96,236     191,776     189,042  
    Provision for credit losses     1,750     4,000     2,300       4,000     8,250     5,750     15,750  
    Provision (benefit) for unfunded commitments     1,500     1,300     (401 )     —     —     2,800     (1,541 )
    Net interest income after provisions     93,085     90,141     94,242       96,062     87,986     183,226     174,833  
    Noninterest income:                            
    Service charges and fees on deposit accounts     5,702     5,611     5,612       5,442     4,974     11,313     9,870  
    Loan fees     2,735     2,495     2,265       3,278     2,207     5,230     4,717  
    Loss on sales of debt securities     —     —     (4,397 )     —     —     —     (6,304 )
    Government guaranteed loan income, net     1,688     3,301     5,368       780     1,320     4,989     3,934  
    Customer swap income     1,550     700     509       271     326     2,250     775  
    Other income     1,824     2,182     699       3,335     1,751     4,006     4,248  
    Total noninterest income     13,499     14,289     10,056       13,106     10,578     27,788     17,240  
    Noninterest expense:                            
    Salaries and employee benefits     34,957     36,624     37,446       37,370     32,790     71,581     66,155  
    Occupancy and equipment     4,511     4,650     4,633       4,789     4,585     9,161     9,262  
    Professional and regulatory fees     5,558     4,931     5,564       4,903     5,617     10,489     11,670  
    Data processing and software expense     5,507     5,403     5,741       5,268     5,097     10,910     9,953  
    Marketing     2,612     2,032     2,896       2,781     1,976     4,644     3,522  
    Amortization of intangibles     2,438     2,438     2,437       2,438     2,438     4,876     4,876  
    Telephone and communications     233     330     323       335     365     563     626  
    Other     11,346     10,426     12,154       12,216     10,273     21,772     19,193  
    Total noninterest expense     67,162     66,834     71,194       70,100     63,141     133,996     125,257  
    Income before income tax expense     39,422     37,596     33,104       39,068     35,423     77,018     66,816  
    Income tax expense     8,516     8,526     8,222       8,067     8,221     17,042     15,458  
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882     $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358  
                                 
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57   $ 0.53   $ 0.46     $ 0.57   $ 0.50   $ 1.10   $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45     $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding     54,251     54,486     54,489       54,409     54,457     54,368     54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237       54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

        For the Quarter Ended
        June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Assets                                    
    Interest-earning assets:                                    
    Loans1   $ 8,875,970     $ 141,688   6.40 %   $ 8,886,905     $ 140,329   6.40 %   $ 9,344,482     $ 160,323   6.90 %
    LHI, MW     523,203       7,666   5.88       426,724       6,176   5.87       420,946       6,656   6.36  
    Debt securities     1,440,369       16,883   4.70       1,467,220       17,106   4.73       1,352,293       15,408   4.58  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     707,933       8,039   4.55       827,751       9,244   4.53       560,586       7,722   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,779       847   4.80       70,696       870   4.99       78,964       1,138   5.80  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,618,254       175,123   6.05       11,679,296       173,725   6.03       11,757,271       191,247   6.54  
    ACL     (112,369 )             (111,563 )             (115,978 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     933,328               938,401               937,413          
    Total assets   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                                    
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,502,672     $ 48,080   3.50 %   $ 5,449,091     $ 45,165   3.36 %   $ 4,570,329     $ 45,619   4.01 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,742,655       28,539   4.17       2,726,309       30,268   4.50       3,591,035       44,811   5.02  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     9,813       113   4.62       2,333       27   4.69       106,648       1,468   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     155,985       2,056   5.29       191,638       2,824   5.98       230,141       3,113   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,411,125       78,788   3.76       8,369,371       78,284   3.79       8,498,153       95,011   4.50  
                                         
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,244,745               2,345,586               2,346,908          
    Other liabilities     142,925               170,389               192,036          
    Total liabilities     10,798,795               10,885,346               11,037,097          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,640,418               1,620,788               1,541,609          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Net interest rate spread2           2.29 %           2.24 %           2.04 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 96,335   3.33 %       $ 95,441   3.31 %       $ 96,236   3.29 %

    1 Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million and $58.5 million for the quarters ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, and June 30, 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the quarter are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except percentages)
        For the Six Months Ended
        June 30, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
    Assets                        
    Interest-earning assets:                        
    Loans1   $ 8,881,407     $ 282,017   6.40 %   $ 9,314,148     $ 317,908   6.86 %
    LHI, MW     475,230       13,842   5.87       350,252       11,013   6.32  
    Debt securities     1,453,721       33,989   4.71       1,323,644       29,103   4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     767,511       17,283   4.54       572,589       15,772   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,738       1,717   4.89       77,616       2,038   5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,648,607       348,848   6.04       11,638,249       375,834   6.49  
    ACL     (111,969 )             (114,104 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     935,850               933,229          
    Total assets   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                        
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,476,030     $ 93,245   3.43 %   $ 4,604,887     $ 92,403   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,734,527       58,807   4.34       3,437,385       85,303   4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     6,094       140   4.63       103,819       2,859   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     173,713       4,880   5.67       230,011       6,227   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,390,364       157,072   3.78       8,376,102       186,792   4.48  
                             
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,294,887               2,351,112          
    Other liabilities     156,580               192,422          
    Total liabilities     10,841,831               10,919,636          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,630,657               1,537,738          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Net interest rate spread2           2.26 %           2.01 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 191,776   3.32 %       $ 189,042   3.27 %

    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the six month periods are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


    Yield Trend
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average yield on interest-earning assets:                            
    Loans1   6.40 %   6.40 %   6.56 %   6.89 %   6.90 %   6.40 %   6.86 %
    LHI, MW   5.88     5.87     5.83     6.75     6.36     5.87     6.32  
    Total Loans   6.37     6.38     6.53     6.89     6.88     6.38     6.84  
    Debt securities   4.70     4.73     4.61     4.55     4.58     4.71     4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks   4.55     4.53     4.87     5.41     5.54     4.54     5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments   4.80     4.99     5.18     5.25     5.80     4.89     5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets   6.05 %   6.03 %   6.15 %   6.49 %   6.54 %   6.04 %   6.49 %
                                 
    Average rate on interest-bearing liabilities:                            
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   3.50 %   3.36 %   3.57 %   4.00 %   4.01 %   3.43 %   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits   4.17     4.50     4.83     5.00     5.02     4.34     4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and other   4.62     4.69     4.88     5.73     5.54     4.63     5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes   5.29     5.98     5.74     5.38     5.44     5.67     5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3.76 %   3.79 %   4.12 %   4.46 %   4.50 %   3.78 %   4.48 %
                                 
    Net interest rate spread2   2.29 %   2.24 %   2.03 %   2.03 %   2.04 %   2.26 %   2.01 %
    Net interest margin3   3.33 %   3.31 %   3.20 %   3.30 %   3.29 %   3.32 %   3.27 %

      
    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million, $46.4 million, $54.3 million and $58.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024, respectively and $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024 respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.

    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.

    Supplemental Yield Trend

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average cost of interest-bearing deposits   3.73 %   3.74 %   4.07 %   4.44 %   4.46 %   3.73 %   3.33 %
    Average costs of total deposits, including noninterest-bearing   2.93     2.91     3.16     3.42     3.46     2.92     2.48  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


       
    LHI and Deposit Portfolio Composition    
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    LHI1                                        
    Commercial and Industrial (“C&I”)   $ 2,692,209     30.6 %   $ 2,717,037     30.7 %   $ 2,693,538     30.2 %   $ 2,728,544     30.2 %   $ 2,798,260     30.4 %
    Real Estate:                                        
    Owner occupied commercial (“OOCRE”)     800,881     9.1       795,808     9.0       780,003     8.8       807,223     8.9       806,285     8.7  
    Non-owner occupied commercial (“NOOCRE”)     2,311,466     26.3       2,266,526     25.6       2,382,499     26.7       2,338,094     25.9       2,369,848     25.7  
    Construction and land     1,142,457     13.0       1,214,260     13.7       1,303,711     14.7       1,436,540     15.8       1,536,580     16.7  
    Farmland     31,589     0.4       31,339     0.4       31,690     0.4       32,254     0.4       30,512     0.3  
    1-4 family residential     1,086,342     12.3       1,021,293     11.6       957,341     10.7       944,755     10.5       917,402     10.0  
    Multi-family residential     718,946     8.2       782,412     8.9       750,218     8.4       738,090     8.2       748,740     8.1  
    Consumer     8,796     0.1       8,597     0.1       9,115     0.1       11,292     0.1       9,245     0.1  
    Total LHI1   $ 8,792,686     100 %   $ 8,837,272     100 %   $ 8,908,115     100 %   $ 9,036,792     100 %   $ 9,216,872     100 %
                                             
    MW     669,052           571,775           605,411           630,650           568,047      
                                             
    Total LHI1   $ 9,461,738         $ 9,409,047         $ 9,513,526         $ 9,667,442         $ 9,784,919      
                                             
    Total LHFS     69,480           69,236           89,309           48,496           57,046      
                                             
    Total loans   $ 9,531,218         $ 9,478,283         $ 9,602,835         $ 9,715,938         $ 9,841,965      
                                             
    Deposits                                        
    Noninterest-bearing   $ 2,133,294     20.5 %   $ 2,318,645     21.7 %   $ 2,191,457     20.4 %   $ 2,643,894     24.0 %   $ 2,416,727     22.5 %
    Interest-bearing transaction     603,861     5.8       863,462     8.1       839,005     7.8       421,059     3.8       523,272     4.9  
    Money market     3,856,812     37.0       3,730,446     35.0       3,772,964     35.1       3,462,709     31.4       3,268,286     30.5  
    Savings     548,464     5.3       586,587     5.5       449,188     4.2       320,940     2.9       187,896     1.8  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750     26.8       2,679,221     25.1       2,958,861     27.5       3,625,920     32.8       3,744,596     34.9  
    Correspondent money market accounts     482,739     4.6       486,762     4.6       541,117     5.0       561,489     5.1       584,067     5.4  
    Total deposits   $ 10,417,920     100 %   $ 10,665,123     100 %   $ 10,752,592     100 %   $ 11,036,011     100 %   $ 10,724,844     100 %
                                             
    Total loans to deposits ratio     91.5 %         88.9 %         89.3 %         88.0 %         91.8 %    
                                             
    Total loans to deposit ratio, excluding MW loans and LHFS     84.4 %         82.9 %         82.8 %         81.9 %         85.9 %    

    1Total LHI does not include deferred fees of $8.7 million, $8.6 million, $9.0 million, $8.2 million and $7.8 million at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.


    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

    Asset Quality
      For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
      (Dollars in thousands)        
    NPAs:                          
    Nonaccrual loans $ 61,142     $ 69,188     $ 52,521     $ 55,335     $ 58,537     $ 61,142     $ 58,537  
    Nonaccrual PCD loans1   196       196       —       70       73       196       73  
    Accruing loans 90 or more days past due2   4,641       3,249       1,914       2,860       143       4,641       143  
    Total nonperforming loans held for investment (“NPLs”)   65,979       72,633       54,435       58,265       58,753       65,979       58,753  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)   9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256       9,218       24,256  
    Total NPAs $ 75,197     $ 96,901     $ 79,172     $ 67,299     $ 83,009     $ 75,197     $ 83,009  
                               
    Charge-offs:                          
    1-4 family residential $ —     $ —     $ —     $ —     $ (31 )   $ —     $ (31 )
    Multifamily   —       —       —       —       (198 )     —       (198 )
    OOCRE   —       —       —       —       —       —       (120 )
    NOOCRE   (215 )     (3,090 )     (5,113 )     —       (1,969 )     (3,305 )     (6,262 )
    C&I   (1,571 )     (918 )     (4,586 )     (2,259 )     (5,601 )     (2,489 )     (6,547 )
    Consumer   (55 )     (212 )     (420 )     (54 )     (30 )     (267 )     (101 )
    Total charge-offs $ (1,841 )   $ (4,220 )   $ (10,119 )   $ (2,313 )   $ (7,829 )   $ (6,061 )   $ (13,259 )
                               
    Recoveries:                          
    1-4 family residential $ 1     $ 21     $ 2     $ 3     $ —     $ 22     $ 1  
    OOCRE   186       —       —       —       120       186       120  
    NOOCRE   —       —       1,323       —       —       —       —  
    C&I   131       32       1,047       1,962       361       163       457  
    MW   —       —       —       46       —       —       —  
    Consumer   262       195       30       33       497       457       546  
    Total recoveries $ 580     $ 248     $ 2,402     $ 2,044     $ 978     $ 828     $ 1,124  
                               
    Net charge-offs $ (1,261 )   $ (3,972 )   $ (7,717 )   $ (269 )   $ (6,851 )   $ (5,233 )   $ (12,135 )
                               
    Provision for credit losses $ 1,750     $ 4,000     $ 2,300     $ 4,000     $ 8,250     $ 5,750     $ 15,750  
                               
    ACL $ 112,262     $ 111,773     $ 111,745     $ 117,162     $ 113,431     $ 112,262     $ 113,431  
                               
    Asset Quality Ratios:                          
    NPAs to total assets   0.60 %     0.77 %     0.62 %     0.52 %     0.65 %     0.60 %     0.65 %
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total assets   0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total LHI and OREO   0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    NPLs to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    NPLs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    ACL to total LHI   1.19       1.19       1.18       1.21       1.16       1.19       1.16  
    ACL to total LHI, excluding MW   1.28       1.27       1.25       1.30       1.23       1.28       1.23  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3   0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  

    1 Nonaccrual PCD loans consist of PCD loans that transitioned upon adoption of ASC 326 Financial Instruments – Credit Losses and were accounted for on a pooled basis that have subsequently been placed on nonaccrual status.
    2 Accruing loans greater than 90 days past due exclude purchase credit deteriorated loans greater than 90 days past due that are accounted for on a pooled basis.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    We identify certain financial measures discussed in this earnings release as being “non-GAAP financial measures.” In accordance with SEC rules, we classify a financial measure as being a non-GAAP financial measure if that financial measure excludes or includes amounts, or is subject to adjustments that have the effect of excluding or including amounts, that are included or excluded, as the case may be, in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, in our statements of income, balance sheets or statements of cash flows. Non-GAAP financial measures do not include operating and other statistical measures or ratios calculated using exclusively either one or both of (i) financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP and (ii) operating measures or other measures that are not non-GAAP financial measures.

    The non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the most directly comparable or other financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP. Moreover, the manner in which we calculate the non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release may differ from that of other companies reporting measures with similar names. You should understand how such other financial institutions calculate their financial measures that appear to be similar or have similar names to the non-GAAP financial measures we have discussed in this earnings release when comparing such non-GAAP financial measures.

    Tangible Book Value Per Common Share. Tangible book value is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (b) tangible book value per common share as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by number of common shares outstanding. For tangible book value per common share, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is book value per common share.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in changes from period to period in book value per common share exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing total book value while not increasing our tangible book value.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and presents our tangible book value per common share compared with our book value per common share:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Common shares outstanding     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350  
                         
    Book value per common share   $ 30.39     $ 30.08     $ 29.37     $ 29.53     $ 28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share   $ 22.68     $ 22.33     $ 21.61     $ 21.72     $ 20.62  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets. Tangible common equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity, less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; (b) tangible assets as total assets less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) tangible common equity to tangible assets as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by tangible assets (as described in clause (b)). For tangible common equity to tangible assets, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is total stockholders’ equity to total assets.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the relative changes from period to period in common equity and total assets, in each case, exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing both total stockholders’ equity and assets while not increasing our tangible common equity or tangible assets.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and total assets to tangible assets and presents our tangible common equity to tangible assets:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Tangible Assets                    
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible Assets   $ 12,109,548     $ 12,185,333     $ 12,345,145     $ 12,617,342     $ 12,256,259  
    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets     10.16 %     9.95 %     9.54 %     9.37 %     9.14 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity. Return on average tangible common equity is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles (which we refer to as “return”) as net income, plus amortization of core deposit intangibles, less tax benefit at the statutory rate; (b) average tangible common equity as total average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) return (as described in clause (a)) divided by average tangible common equity (as described in clause (b)). For return on average tangible common equity, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is return on average equity.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the return on common equity, exclusive of the impact of core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and core deposit intangibles have the effect of increasing total stockholders’ equity while not increasing our tangible common equity. This measure is particularly relevant to acquisitive institutions that may have higher balances in goodwill and core deposit intangibles than non-acquisitive institutions.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, average tangible common equity to average common equity and net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles, net of taxes to net income and presents our return on average tangible common equity:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 30,996     $ 26,807     $ 32,927     $ 29,128     $ 63,828     $ 55,210  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity (Annualized)     10.79 %     10.49 %     9.04 %     11.33 %     10.54 %     10.64 %     10.03 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Operating Earnings, Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings and performance metrics calculated using Operating Earnings and Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings, including Diluted Operating Earnings per Share, Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Loans, Operating Return on Average Tangible Common Equity and Operating Efficiency Ratio. Operating earnings, pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and the performance metrics calculated using these metrics, listed below, are non-GAAP measures used by management to evaluate the Company’s financial performance. We calculate (a) operating earnings as net income plus BOLI 1035 exchange charges, plus severance payments, plus loss on sales of debt securities available for sale (“AFS”), net, plus FDIC special assessment, less tax impact of adjustments, plus nonrecurring tax adjustments. We calculate (b) diluted operating earnings per share as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by weighted average diluted shares outstanding. We calculate (c) pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as operating earnings as described in clause (a) plus provision for income taxes, plus provision (benefit) for credit losses and unfunded commitments. We calculate (d) pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets as pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (e) operating return on average assets as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (f) operating return on average tangible common equity as operating earnings as described in clause (a), adjusted for the amortization of intangibles and tax benefit at the statutory rate, divided by total average tangible common equity (average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization). We calculate (g) operating efficiency ratio as noninterest expense plus adjustments to operating noninterest expense divided by noninterest income plus adjustments to operating noninterest income, plus net interest income.

    We believe that these measures and the operating metrics calculated utilizing these measures are important to management and many investors in the marketplace who are interested in understanding the ongoing operating performance of the Company and provide meaningful comparisons to its peers.

    The following tables reconcile, as of the dates set forth below, operating net income and pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and related metrics:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882   $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges1     —     517     —     —     —     517     —
    Plus: Severance payments2     —     —     1,545     1,487     613     —     613
    Plus: Loss on sales of AFS securities, net     —     —     4,397     —     —     —     6,304
    Plus: FDIC special assessment     —     —     —     —     134     —     134
    Operating pre-tax income     30,906     29,587     30,824     32,488     27,949     60,493     58,409
    Less: Tax impact of adjustments     —     109     1,248     307     166     109     1,489
    Plus: Nonrecurring tax adjustments     —     229     193     —     527     229     527
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906   $ 29,707   $ 29,769   $ 32,181   $ 28,310   $ 60,613   $ 57,447
                                 
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237     54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45   $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94
    Diluted operating EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.54   $ 0.54   $ 0.59   $ 0.52   $ 1.10   $ 1.05

    1Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    2Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands)   Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
    Pre-Tax, Pre-Provision Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Plus: Provision for income taxes     8,516       8,526       8,222       8,067       8,221       17,042       15,458  
    Plus: Provision for credit losses and unfunded commitments     3,250       5,300       1,899       4,000       8,250       8,550       14,209  
    Plus: Severance payments3     —       —       1,545       1,487       613       —       613  
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net     —       —       4,397       —       —       —       6,304  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2     —       517       —       —       —       517       —  
    Plus: FDIC special assessment     —       —       —       —       134       —       134  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings   $ 42,672     $ 43,413     $ 40,945     $ 44,555     $ 44,420     $ 86,085     $ 88,076  
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
                                 
    Average loans   $ 9,399,173     $ 9,313,629     $ 9,449,565     $ 9,661,774     $ 9,765,428     $ 9,356,637     $ 9,664,400  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82 %     1.89 %     1.72 %     1.83 %     1.83 %     1.86 %     1.83 %
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
                                 
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 29,769     $ 32,181     $ 28,310     $ 60,613     $ 57,447  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 31,633     $ 31,694     $ 34,107     $ 30,236     $ 64,465     $ 61,299  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Less: Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Less: Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79 %     10.70 %     10.69 %     11.74 %     10.94 %     10.75 %     11.14 %
                                 
    Efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.91 %     67.04 %     61.94 %     59.11 %     61.03 %     60.72 %
    Operating efficiency ratio                            
    Net interest income   $ 96,335     $ 95,441     $ 96,141     $ 100,062     $ 96,236     $ 191,776     $ 189,042  
    Noninterest income     13,499       14,289       10,056       13,106       10,578       27,788       17,240  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2     —       517       —       —       —       517       —  
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net     —       —       4,397       —       —       —       6,304  
    Operating noninterest income     13,499       14,806       14,453       13,106       10,578       28,305       23,544  
    Noninterest expense     67,162       66,834       71,194       70,100       63,141       133,996       125,257  
    Less: FDIC special assessment     —       —       —       —       134       —       134  
    Less: Severance payments3     —       —       1,545       1,487       613       —       613  
    Operating noninterest expense   $ 67,162     $ 66,834     $ 69,649     $ 68,613     $ 62,394     $ 133,996     $ 124,510  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.62 %     62.98 %     60.63 %     58.41 %     60.88 %     58.57 %

    1 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    2 Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    3 Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

    The MIL Network –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Veritex Holdings, Inc. Reports Second Quarter 2025 Operating Results and Declares Quarterly Dividend

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    DALLAS, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —  Veritex Holdings, Inc. (“Veritex”, the “Company”, “we” or “our”) (Nasdaq: VBTX), the holding company for Veritex Community Bank, today announced the results for the quarter ended June 30, 2025.

    The Company also announced that the Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share of common stock. The dividend will be payable on August 21, 2025 to shareholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

        Quarter to Date
    Financial Highlights   Q2 2025   Q1 2025   Q2 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    (unaudited)
    GAAP            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 27,202  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.50  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       28.49  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.87 %
    Return on average equity1     7.56       7.27       7.10  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.29  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       59.11  
    Non-GAAP2            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 28,310  
    Diluted operating EPS     0.56       0.54       0.52  
    Tangible book value per common share     22.68       22.33       20.62  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings     42,672       43,413       44,420  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82       1.89       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.91  
    Return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.49       10.54  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79       10.70       10.94  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15       60.62       58.41  

    1 Annualized ratio.
    2 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a reconciliation of these non-generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.

    Other Second Quarter Credit, Capital and Company Highlights

    • Credit quality remained strong with a nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) to total assets ratio of 0.60% and annualized net charge-offs of 0.05% for the quarter and 0.11% year-to-date;
    • Allowance for Credit Losses (“ACL”) to total loans held-for-investment ratio (excluding mortgage warehouse (“MW”)) remained relatively unchanged at 1.28%;
    • Capital remains strong with common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 11.05% as of June 30, 2025;
    • Book value per share increased $0.31 to $30.39 and tangible book value per share increased $0.35 to $22.68;
    • We repurchased 286,291 and 663,637 shares of Company stock for $7.1 million and $16.6 million during the second quarter and year-to-date, respectively; and
    • On July 14, 2025, we announced entry into a definitive agreement to merge with Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (“Huntington”), which is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2025, subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions.

    Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025

    Net Interest Income

    For the three months ended June 30, 2025, net interest income before provision for credit losses was $96.3 million and net interest margin (“NIM”) was 3.33% compared to $95.4 million and 3.31%, respectively, for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The $894 thousand increase, or 0.9%, in net interest income before provision for credit losses was primarily due to a $2.8 million increase in interest income on loans, a $1.7 million decrease in interest expense on certificates and other time deposits and a $768 thousand decrease in subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, partially offset by a $2.9 million increase in interest expense on transaction and savings deposits and a $1.2 million decrease in interest income on deposits in financial institutions and fed funds sold for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The NIM increased two basis points (bps) compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025, primarily due to the decreased funding costs on certificates and other time deposits and subordinated debt due to the redemption of $75.0 million in subordinated debt during the three months ended March 31, 2025 as well as a mix shift from lower yielding to higher yielding assets for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was largely offset by higher deposits funding costs primarily driven by the expiration of favorable hedges on money market deposit accounts at the end of the first quarter 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, net interest income before provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was relatively unchanged. Net interest income benefited from decreases in interest expense of $16.3 million on certificates and other time deposits, $1.4 million on advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and $1.1 million on subordinated debentures and subordinated notes, as well as an increase of $1.5 million in interest income on debt securities. These changes were substantially offset by a decrease of $17.6 million in interest income on loans and a $2.5 million increase in interest expense on interest-bearing demand and savings deposits. The NIM increased four bps from 3.29% for the three months ended June 30, 2024 to 3.33% for the three months ended June 30, 2025. The increase was primarily due to decreased funding costs on deposits, advances and subordinated debt resulting from interest rate cuts for the year over year period, partially offset by the related declines in rates earned on interest-earnings assets, primarily loans.

    Noninterest Income

    Noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was $13.5 million, a decrease of $790 thousand, or 5.5%, compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The change was primarily due to a $1.6 million decrease in government guaranteed loan income, partially offset by an $850 thousand increase in customer swap income during the period.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $2.9 million, or 27.6%. The increase was primarily due to a $1.2 million increase in customer swap income, a $728 thousand increase in service charges and fees on deposit accounts, a $528 thousand increase in loan fees and a $368 thousand increase in government guaranteed loan income for the year over year period.

    Noninterest Expense

    Noninterest expense was $67.2 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $66.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, an increase of $328 thousand, or 0.5%. The increase was primarily due to a $920 thousand increase in other noninterest expense, a $627 thousand increase in professional and regulatory fees and a $580 thousand increase in marketing expenses compared to the three months ended March 31, 2025. The increase was largely offset by a $1.7 million decrease in salaries and employee benefits primarily due to $733 thousand in lower payroll taxes, which are historically higher in the first quarter, as well as decreases of $678 thousand in bonus expense, $370 thousand in employee insurance expense and $340 thousand in stock grant expenses, offset partially by a $1.0 million increase in salaries expense. In addition, deferred loan origination costs, which reduce salaries expense, were $399 thousand higher for the three months ended June 30, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, noninterest expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 increased by $4.0 million, or 6.4%. The increase was primarily due to a $2.2 million increase in salaries and employee benefits driven by a $4.7 million increase in salaries expense and incentives accruals and a $521 thousand increase in payroll taxes, offset by decreases of $1.1 million in stock grant expense and $661 thousand in severance expense, as well as $1.6 million higher deferred loan origination costs, which reduces salaries and employee benefit expense. Additionally, there was a $1.1 million increase in other noninterest expense, driven primarily by higher OREO expenses, and a $636 thousand increase in marketing expenses during the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to the same period in the prior year.

    Income Tax

    Income tax expense for the three months ended June 30, 2025 totaled $8.5 million, which is consistent with the amount recorded for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 21.6% for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to 22.7% for the three months ended March 31, 2025.

    Compared to the three months ended June 30, 2024, income tax expense increased by $295 thousand, or 3.6%, compared to the three months ended June 30, 2025. The Company’s effective tax rate was approximately 23.2% for the three months ended June 30, 2024.

    Financial Condition

    Total loans held for investment (“LHI”), excluding MW was $8.78 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $44.7 million compared to March 31, 2025.

    Total deposits were $10.42 billion at June 30, 2025, a decrease of $247.2 million compared to March 31, 2025. The decrease was primarily the result of decreases of $185.4 million in noninterest bearing deposits and $171.4 million in interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits, partially offset by an increase of $113.5 million in certificates and other time deposits.

    Credit Quality

    NPAs totaled $75.2 million, or 0.60% of total assets, of which $66.0 million represented LHI and $9.2 million represented OREO at June 30, 2025, compared to $96.9 million, or 0.77% of total assets, at March 31, 2025. The Company had net charge-offs of $1.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025. Annualized net charge-offs to average loans outstanding were five bps for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 17 bps and 28 bps for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively.

    ACL as a percentage of LHI was 1.19% at both June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025 and 1.16% at June 30, 2024. ACL as a percentage of LHI (excluding MW) was 1.28% at June 30, 2025, 1.27% at March 31, 2025 and 1.23% at June 30, 2024. The Company recorded a provision for credit losses on loans of $1.8 million, $4.0 million and $8.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025 and June 30, 2024, respectively. The provision for credit losses for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was primarily attributable to changes in economic factors for the period. The balance for unfunded commitments increased to $8.9 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $7.4 million at March 31, 2025, and we recorded a $1.5 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2025, compared to a $1.3 million provision for unfunded commitments for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and no provision recorded for unfunded commitments for the three months ended June 30, 2024. The increase in the allowance for unfunded commitments was attributable to increases in unfunded balances and changes in economic factors for the period.

    Dividend Information

    On July 18, 2025, Veritex’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share on its outstanding shares of common stock. The dividend will be paid on or after August 21, 2025 to stockholders of record as of the close of business on August 7, 2025.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Veritex’s management uses certain non-GAAP (U.S. generally accepted accounting principles) financial measures to evaluate its operating performance and provide information that is important to investors. However, non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and should be viewed in addition to, and not as an alternative for, Veritex’s reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP. Specifically, Veritex reviews and reports tangible book value per common share of the Company; operating earnings; tangible common equity to tangible assets; return on average tangible common equity; pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets; pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans; diluted operating earnings per share; operating return on average assets; operating return on average tangible common equity; and operating efficiency ratio. Veritex has included in this earnings release information related to these non-GAAP financial measures for the applicable periods presented. Please refer to “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights at the end of this earnings release for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures.

    About Veritex Holdings, Inc.

    Headquartered in Dallas, Texas, Veritex is a bank holding company that conducts banking activities through its wholly owned subsidiary, Veritex Community Bank, with locations throughout the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and in the Houston metropolitan area. Veritex Community Bank is a Texas state chartered bank regulated by the Texas Department of Banking and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. For more information, visit www.veritexbank.com.

    CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

    This communication may contain certain forward-looking statements, including, but not limited to, certain plans, expectations, goals, projections, and statements about the benefits of the proposed transaction, the plans, objectives, expectations and intentions of Veritex and Huntington, the expected timing of completion of the transaction, and other statements that are not historical facts and are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, and uncertainties that are beyond the control of Veritex and Huntington. Such statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, estimates, uncertainties and other important factors that change over time and could cause actual results to differ materially from any results, performance, or events expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, including as a result of the factors referenced below. Statements that do not describe historical or current facts, including statements about beliefs and expectations, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as expect, anticipate, continue, believe, intend, estimate, plan, trend, objective, target, goal, or similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as will, may, might, should, would, could, or similar variations. The forward-looking statements are intended to be subject to the safe harbor provided by Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

    Veritex and Huntington caution that the forward-looking statements in this communication are not guarantees of future performance and involve a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to assess and are subject to change based on factors which are, in many instances, beyond Veritex’s and Huntington’s control. While there is no assurance that any list of risks and uncertainties or risk factors is complete, below are certain factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained or implied in the forward-looking statements or historical performance: changes in general economic, political, or industry conditions; deterioration in business and economic conditions, including persistent inflation, supply chain issues or labor shortages, instability in global economic conditions and geopolitical matters, as well as volatility in financial markets; changes in U.S. trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs; the impact of pandemics and other catastrophic events or disasters on the global economy and financial market conditions and our business, results of operations, and financial condition; the impacts related to or resulting from bank failures and other volatility, including potential increased regulatory requirements and costs, such as FDIC special assessments, long-term debt requirements and heightened capital requirements, and potential impacts to macroeconomic conditions, which could affect the ability of depository institutions, including us, to attract and retain depositors and to borrow or raise capital; unexpected outflows of uninsured deposits which may require us to sell investment securities at a loss; changing interest rates which could negatively impact the value of our portfolio of investment securities; the loss of value of our investment portfolio which could negatively impact market perceptions of us and could lead to deposit withdrawals; the effects of social media on market perceptions of us and banks generally; cybersecurity risks; uncertainty in U.S. fiscal and monetary policy, including the interest rate policies of the Federal Reserve; volatility and disruptions in global capital, foreign exchange and credit markets; movements in interest rates; competitive pressures on product pricing and services; success, impact, and timing of our business strategies, including market acceptance of any new products or services including those implementing our “Fair Play” banking philosophy; changes in policies and standards for regulatory review of bank mergers; the nature, extent, timing, and results of governmental actions, examinations, reviews, reforms, regulations, and interpretations, including those related to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and the Basel III regulatory capital reforms, as well as those involving the SEC, OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, CFPB and state-level regulators; the occurrence of any event, change or other circumstances that could give rise to the right of one or both of the parties to terminate the merger agreement between Veritex and Huntington; the outcome of any legal proceedings that may be instituted against Veritex and Huntington; delays in completing the transaction; the failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals (and the risk that such approvals may result in the imposition of conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the transaction); the failure to obtain Veritex shareholder approval or to satisfy any of the other conditions to the transaction on a timely basis or at all; the possibility that the anticipated benefits of the transaction are not realized when expected or at all, including as a result of the impact of, or problems arising from, the integration of the two companies or as a result of the strength of the economy and competitive factors in the areas where Veritex and Huntington do business; the possibility that the transaction may be more expensive to complete than anticipated, including as a result of unexpected factors or events; diversion of management’s attention from ongoing business operations and opportunities; potential adverse reactions or changes to business, customer or employee relationships, including those resulting from the announcement or completion of the transaction; the ability to complete the transaction and integration of Veritex and Huntington successfully; the dilution caused by Huntington’s issuance of additional shares of its capital stock in connection with the transaction; and other factors that may affect the future results of Veritex and Huntington. Additional factors that could cause results to differ materially from those described above can be found in Veritex’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the SEC and available on Veritex’s investor relations website, ir.veritexbank.com, under the heading “Financials” and in other documents Veritex files with the SEC, and in Huntington’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024 and in its subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, each of which is on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and available in the “Investor Relations” section of Huntington’s website, http://www.huntington.com, under the heading “Investor Relations” and in other documents Huntington files with the SEC.

    All forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements set forth above. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and are based on information available at that time. Neither Veritex nor Huntington assume any obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, new information or future events, changes in assumptions or changes in circumstances or other factors affecting forward-looking statements that occur after the date the forward-looking statements were made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by federal securities laws. If Veritex or Huntington update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference should be drawn that Veritex or Huntington will make additional updates with respect to those or other forward-looking statements. As forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, caution should be exercised against placing undue reliance on such statements.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    Per Share Data (Common Stock):                            
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57     $ 0.53     $ 0.46     $ 0.57     $ 0.50     $ 1.10     $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS     0.56       0.53       0.45       0.56       0.50       1.09       0.94  
    Book value per common share     30.39       30.08       29.37       29.53       28.49       30.39       28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share1     22.68       22.33       21.61       21.72       20.62       22.68       20.62  
    Dividends paid per common share outstanding2     0.22       0.22       0.20       0.20       0.20       0.44       0.40  
                                 
    Common Stock Data:                            
    Shares outstanding at period end     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350       54,265       54,350  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding for the period     54,251       54,486       54,489       54,409       54,457       54,368       54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding for the period     54,766       55,123       55,237       54,932       54,823       54,944       54,832  
                                 
    Summary of Credit Ratios:                            
    ACL to total LHI     1.19 %     1.19 %     1.18 %     1.21 %     1.16 %     1.19 %     1.16 %
    NPAs to total assets     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual purchase credit deteriorated (“PCD”) loans, to total assets3     0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total loans and OREO     0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3     0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  
                                 
    Summary Performance Ratios:                            
    Return on average assets3     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Return on average equity3     7.56       7.27       6.17       7.79       7.10       7.42       6.72  
    Return on average tangible common equity1, 3     10.79       10.49       9.04       11.33       10.54       10.64       10.03  
    Efficiency ratio     61.15       60.91       67.04       61.94       59.11       61.03       60.72  
    Net interest margin     3.33       3.31       3.20       3.30       3.29       3.32       3.27  
                                 
    Selected Performance Metrics – Operating:                        
    Diluted operating EPS1   $ 0.56     $ 0.54     $ 0.54     $ 0.59     $ 0.52     $ 1.10     $ 1.05  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1, 3     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1, 3     1.82       1.89       1.72       1.83       1.83       1.86       1.83  
    Operating return on average assets1,3     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1,3     10.79       10.70       10.69       11.74       10.94       10.75       11.14  
    Operating efficiency ratio1     61.15       60.62       62.98       60.63       58.41       60.88       58.57  
                                 
    Veritex Holdings, Inc. Capital Ratios:                        
    Average stockholders’ equity to average total assets     13.19 %     12.96 %     12.58 %     12.31 %     12.26 %     13.07 %     12.34 %
    Tangible common equity to tangible assets1     10.16       9.95       9.54       9.37       9.14       10.16       9.14  
    Tier 1 capital to average assets (leverage)4     10.73       10.55       10.32       10.06       10.06       10.73       10.06  
    Common equity tier 1 capital4     11.05       11.04       11.09       10.86       10.49       11.05       10.49  
    Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets4     11.32       11.31       11.36       11.13       10.75       11.32       10.75  
    Total capital to risk-weighted assets4     13.46       13.46       13.96       13.91       13.45       13.46       13.45  
    Risk-weighted assets4   $ 11,435,978     $ 11,318,220     $ 11,247,813     $ 11,290,800     $ 11,450,997     $ 11,435,978     $ 11,450,997  

    1 Refer to the section titled “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” after the financial highlights for a reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.
    2 Dividend amount represents dividend paid per common share subsequent to each respective quarter end.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    4 June 30, 2025 ratios and risk-weighted assets are estimated.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands)


        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)       (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    ASSETS                    
    Cash and due from banks   $ 66,696     $ 81,088     $ 52,486     $ 54,165     $ 53,462  
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks     703,869       768,702       802,714       1,046,625       598,375  
    Cash and cash equivalents     770,565       849,790       855,200       1,100,790       651,837  
    Debt securities, net     1,418,804       1,463,157       1,478,538       1,423,610       1,349,354  
    Other investments     73,986       69,452       69,638       71,257       75,885  
    Loans held for sale (“LHFS”)     69,480       69,236       89,309       48,496       57,046  
    LHI, MW     669,052       571,775       605,411       630,650       568,047  
    LHI, excluding MW     8,783,988       8,828,672       8,899,133       9,028,575       9,209,094  
    Total loans     9,522,520       9,469,683       9,593,853       9,707,721       9,834,187  
    ACL     (112,262 )     (111,773 )     (111,745 )     (117,162 )     (113,431 )
    Bank-owned life insurance     86,048       85,424       85,324       84,776       84,233  
    Bank premises, furniture and equipment, net     116,642       112,801       113,480       114,202       105,222  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)     9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256  
    Intangible assets, net of accumulated amortization     25,006       27,974       28,664       32,825       35,817  
    Goodwill     404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452       404,452  
    Other assets     212,889       210,863       226,200       211,471       232,518  
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY                    
    Deposits:                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits   $ 2,133,294     $ 2,318,645     $ 2,191,457     $ 2,643,894     $ 2,416,727  
    Interest-bearing transaction and savings deposits     5,009,137       5,180,495       5,061,157       4,204,708       3,979,454  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750       2,679,221       2,958,861       3,625,920       3,744,596  
    Correspondent money market deposits     482,739       486,762       541,117       561,489       584,067  
    Total deposits     10,417,920       10,665,123       10,752,592       11,036,011       10,724,844  
    Accounts payable and other liabilities     135,647       151,579       183,944       168,415       180,585  
    Advances from FHLB     169,000       —       —       —       —  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     156,082       155,909       230,736       230,536       230,285  
    Total liabilities     10,878,649       10,972,611       11,167,272       11,434,962       11,135,714  
    Stockholders’ equity:                    
    Common stock     617       615       613       613       612  
    Additional paid-in capital     1,329,803       1,329,626       1,328,748       1,324,929       1,321,995  
    Retained earnings     545,015       526,044       507,903       493,921       473,801  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (38,528 )     (42,170 )     (65,076 )     (40,330 )     (76,713 )
    Treasury stock     (187,688 )     (180,635 )     (171,119 )     (171,119 )     (171,079 )
    Total stockholders’ equity     1,649,219       1,633,480       1,601,069       1,608,014       1,548,616  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except per share data)

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months
    Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)   (unaudited)
    Interest income:                            
    Loans, including fees   $ 149,354   $ 146,505   $ 154,998     $ 167,261   $ 166,979   $ 295,859   $ 328,921  
    Debt securities     16,883     17,106     16,893       15,830     15,408     33,989     29,103  
    Deposits in financial institutions and Fed Funds sold     8,039     9,244     11,888       12,571     7,722     17,283     15,772  
    Equity securities and other investments     847     870     940       1,001     1,138     1,717     2,038  
    Total interest income     175,123     173,725     184,719       196,663     191,247     348,848     375,834  
    Interest expense:                            
    Transaction and savings deposits     48,080     45,165     44,841       47,208     45,619     93,245     92,403  
    Certificates and other time deposits     28,539     30,268     40,279       46,230     44,811     58,807     85,303  
    Advances from FHLB     113     27     130       47     1,468     140     2,859  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     2,056     2,824     3,328       3,116     3,113     4,880     6,227  
    Total interest expense     78,788     78,284     88,578       96,601     95,011     157,072     186,792  
    Net interest income     96,335     95,441     96,141       100,062     96,236     191,776     189,042  
    Provision for credit losses     1,750     4,000     2,300       4,000     8,250     5,750     15,750  
    Provision (benefit) for unfunded commitments     1,500     1,300     (401 )     —     —     2,800     (1,541 )
    Net interest income after provisions     93,085     90,141     94,242       96,062     87,986     183,226     174,833  
    Noninterest income:                            
    Service charges and fees on deposit accounts     5,702     5,611     5,612       5,442     4,974     11,313     9,870  
    Loan fees     2,735     2,495     2,265       3,278     2,207     5,230     4,717  
    Loss on sales of debt securities     —     —     (4,397 )     —     —     —     (6,304 )
    Government guaranteed loan income, net     1,688     3,301     5,368       780     1,320     4,989     3,934  
    Customer swap income     1,550     700     509       271     326     2,250     775  
    Other income     1,824     2,182     699       3,335     1,751     4,006     4,248  
    Total noninterest income     13,499     14,289     10,056       13,106     10,578     27,788     17,240  
    Noninterest expense:                            
    Salaries and employee benefits     34,957     36,624     37,446       37,370     32,790     71,581     66,155  
    Occupancy and equipment     4,511     4,650     4,633       4,789     4,585     9,161     9,262  
    Professional and regulatory fees     5,558     4,931     5,564       4,903     5,617     10,489     11,670  
    Data processing and software expense     5,507     5,403     5,741       5,268     5,097     10,910     9,953  
    Marketing     2,612     2,032     2,896       2,781     1,976     4,644     3,522  
    Amortization of intangibles     2,438     2,438     2,437       2,438     2,438     4,876     4,876  
    Telephone and communications     233     330     323       335     365     563     626  
    Other     11,346     10,426     12,154       12,216     10,273     21,772     19,193  
    Total noninterest expense     67,162     66,834     71,194       70,100     63,141     133,996     125,257  
    Income before income tax expense     39,422     37,596     33,104       39,068     35,423     77,018     66,816  
    Income tax expense     8,516     8,526     8,222       8,067     8,221     17,042     15,458  
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882     $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358  
                                 
    Basic EPS   $ 0.57   $ 0.53   $ 0.46     $ 0.57   $ 0.50   $ 1.10   $ 0.94  
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45     $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94  
    Weighted average basic shares outstanding     54,251     54,486     54,489       54,409     54,457     54,368     54,451  
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237       54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

        For the Quarter Ended
        June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest
    Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Assets                                    
    Interest-earning assets:                                    
    Loans1   $ 8,875,970     $ 141,688   6.40 %   $ 8,886,905     $ 140,329   6.40 %   $ 9,344,482     $ 160,323   6.90 %
    LHI, MW     523,203       7,666   5.88       426,724       6,176   5.87       420,946       6,656   6.36  
    Debt securities     1,440,369       16,883   4.70       1,467,220       17,106   4.73       1,352,293       15,408   4.58  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     707,933       8,039   4.55       827,751       9,244   4.53       560,586       7,722   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,779       847   4.80       70,696       870   4.99       78,964       1,138   5.80  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,618,254       175,123   6.05       11,679,296       173,725   6.03       11,757,271       191,247   6.54  
    ACL     (112,369 )             (111,563 )             (115,978 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     933,328               938,401               937,413          
    Total assets   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                                    
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,502,672     $ 48,080   3.50 %   $ 5,449,091     $ 45,165   3.36 %   $ 4,570,329     $ 45,619   4.01 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,742,655       28,539   4.17       2,726,309       30,268   4.50       3,591,035       44,811   5.02  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     9,813       113   4.62       2,333       27   4.69       106,648       1,468   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     155,985       2,056   5.29       191,638       2,824   5.98       230,141       3,113   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,411,125       78,788   3.76       8,369,371       78,284   3.79       8,498,153       95,011   4.50  
                                         
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                                    
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,244,745               2,345,586               2,346,908          
    Other liabilities     142,925               170,389               192,036          
    Total liabilities     10,798,795               10,885,346               11,037,097          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,640,418               1,620,788               1,541,609          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,439,213             $ 12,506,134             $ 12,578,706          
                                         
    Net interest rate spread2           2.29 %           2.24 %           2.04 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 96,335   3.33 %       $ 95,441   3.31 %       $ 96,236   3.29 %

    1 Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million and $58.5 million for the quarters ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, and June 30, 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the quarter are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (In thousands, except percentages)
        For the Six Months Ended
        June 30, 2025   June 30, 2024
        Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
      Average
    Outstanding
    Balance
      Interest
    Earned/
    Interest Paid
      Average
    Yield/
    Rate4
    Assets                        
    Interest-earning assets:                        
    Loans1   $ 8,881,407     $ 282,017   6.40 %   $ 9,314,148     $ 317,908   6.86 %
    LHI, MW     475,230       13,842   5.87       350,252       11,013   6.32  
    Debt securities     1,453,721       33,989   4.71       1,323,644       29,103   4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks     767,511       17,283   4.54       572,589       15,772   5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments     70,738       1,717   4.89       77,616       2,038   5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets     11,648,607       348,848   6.04       11,638,249       375,834   6.49  
    ACL     (111,969 )             (114,104 )        
    Noninterest-earning assets     935,850               933,229          
    Total assets   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                        
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   $ 5,476,030     $ 93,245   3.43 %   $ 4,604,887     $ 92,403   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,734,527       58,807   4.34       3,437,385       85,303   4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and Other     6,094       140   4.63       103,819       2,859   5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes     173,713       4,880   5.67       230,011       6,227   5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     8,390,364       157,072   3.78       8,376,102       186,792   4.48  
                             
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Noninterest-bearing deposits     2,294,887               2,351,112          
    Other liabilities     156,580               192,422          
    Total liabilities     10,841,831               10,919,636          
    Stockholders’ equity     1,630,657               1,537,738          
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 12,472,488             $ 12,457,374          
                             
    Net interest rate spread2           2.26 %           2.01 %
    Net interest income and margin3       $ 191,776   3.32 %       $ 189,042   3.27 %

    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.
    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
    4 Yields and rates for the six month periods are annualized

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


    Yield Trend
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average yield on interest-earning assets:                            
    Loans1   6.40 %   6.40 %   6.56 %   6.89 %   6.90 %   6.40 %   6.86 %
    LHI, MW   5.88     5.87     5.83     6.75     6.36     5.87     6.32  
    Total Loans   6.37     6.38     6.53     6.89     6.88     6.38     6.84  
    Debt securities   4.70     4.73     4.61     4.55     4.58     4.71     4.42  
    Interest-bearing deposits in other banks   4.55     4.53     4.87     5.41     5.54     4.54     5.54  
    Equity securities and other investments   4.80     4.99     5.18     5.25     5.80     4.89     5.28  
    Total interest-earning assets   6.05 %   6.03 %   6.15 %   6.49 %   6.54 %   6.04 %   6.49 %
                                 
    Average rate on interest-bearing liabilities:                            
    Interest-bearing demand and savings deposits   3.50 %   3.36 %   3.57 %   4.00 %   4.01 %   3.43 %   4.04 %
    Certificates and other time deposits   4.17     4.50     4.83     5.00     5.02     4.34     4.99  
    Advances from FHLB and other   4.62     4.69     4.88     5.73     5.54     4.63     5.54  
    Subordinated debentures and subordinated notes   5.29     5.98     5.74     5.38     5.44     5.67     5.44  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   3.76 %   3.79 %   4.12 %   4.46 %   4.50 %   3.78 %   4.48 %
                                 
    Net interest rate spread2   2.29 %   2.24 %   2.03 %   2.03 %   2.04 %   2.26 %   2.01 %
    Net interest margin3   3.33 %   3.31 %   3.20 %   3.30 %   3.29 %   3.32 %   3.27 %

      
    1Includes average outstanding balances of LHFS of $62.2 million, $66.3 million, $46.4 million, $54.3 million and $58.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024, respectively and $64.2 million and $56.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024 respectively, and average balances of LHI, excluding MW.
    2 Net interest rate spread is the average yield on interest-earning assets minus the average rate on interest-bearing liabilities.

    3 Net interest margin is equal to net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.

    Supplemental Yield Trend

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
    Average cost of interest-bearing deposits   3.73 %   3.74 %   4.07 %   4.44 %   4.46 %   3.73 %   3.33 %
    Average costs of total deposits, including noninterest-bearing   2.93     2.91     3.16     3.42     3.46     2.92     2.48  
    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)


       
    LHI and Deposit Portfolio Composition    
        Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    LHI1                                        
    Commercial and Industrial (“C&I”)   $ 2,692,209     30.6 %   $ 2,717,037     30.7 %   $ 2,693,538     30.2 %   $ 2,728,544     30.2 %   $ 2,798,260     30.4 %
    Real Estate:                                        
    Owner occupied commercial (“OOCRE”)     800,881     9.1       795,808     9.0       780,003     8.8       807,223     8.9       806,285     8.7  
    Non-owner occupied commercial (“NOOCRE”)     2,311,466     26.3       2,266,526     25.6       2,382,499     26.7       2,338,094     25.9       2,369,848     25.7  
    Construction and land     1,142,457     13.0       1,214,260     13.7       1,303,711     14.7       1,436,540     15.8       1,536,580     16.7  
    Farmland     31,589     0.4       31,339     0.4       31,690     0.4       32,254     0.4       30,512     0.3  
    1-4 family residential     1,086,342     12.3       1,021,293     11.6       957,341     10.7       944,755     10.5       917,402     10.0  
    Multi-family residential     718,946     8.2       782,412     8.9       750,218     8.4       738,090     8.2       748,740     8.1  
    Consumer     8,796     0.1       8,597     0.1       9,115     0.1       11,292     0.1       9,245     0.1  
    Total LHI1   $ 8,792,686     100 %   $ 8,837,272     100 %   $ 8,908,115     100 %   $ 9,036,792     100 %   $ 9,216,872     100 %
                                             
    MW     669,052           571,775           605,411           630,650           568,047      
                                             
    Total LHI1   $ 9,461,738         $ 9,409,047         $ 9,513,526         $ 9,667,442         $ 9,784,919      
                                             
    Total LHFS     69,480           69,236           89,309           48,496           57,046      
                                             
    Total loans   $ 9,531,218         $ 9,478,283         $ 9,602,835         $ 9,715,938         $ 9,841,965      
                                             
    Deposits                                        
    Noninterest-bearing   $ 2,133,294     20.5 %   $ 2,318,645     21.7 %   $ 2,191,457     20.4 %   $ 2,643,894     24.0 %   $ 2,416,727     22.5 %
    Interest-bearing transaction     603,861     5.8       863,462     8.1       839,005     7.8       421,059     3.8       523,272     4.9  
    Money market     3,856,812     37.0       3,730,446     35.0       3,772,964     35.1       3,462,709     31.4       3,268,286     30.5  
    Savings     548,464     5.3       586,587     5.5       449,188     4.2       320,940     2.9       187,896     1.8  
    Certificates and other time deposits     2,792,750     26.8       2,679,221     25.1       2,958,861     27.5       3,625,920     32.8       3,744,596     34.9  
    Correspondent money market accounts     482,739     4.6       486,762     4.6       541,117     5.0       561,489     5.1       584,067     5.4  
    Total deposits   $ 10,417,920     100 %   $ 10,665,123     100 %   $ 10,752,592     100 %   $ 11,036,011     100 %   $ 10,724,844     100 %
                                             
    Total loans to deposits ratio     91.5 %         88.9 %         89.3 %         88.0 %         91.8 %    
                                             
    Total loans to deposit ratio, excluding MW loans and LHFS     84.4 %         82.9 %         82.8 %         81.9 %         85.9 %    

    1Total LHI does not include deferred fees of $8.7 million, $8.6 million, $9.0 million, $8.2 million and $7.8 million at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.


    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Financial Highlights
    (Unaudited)

    Asset Quality
      For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Mar 31,
    2025
      Dec 31,
    2024
      Sep 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2024
      Jun 30,
    2025
      Jun 30,
    2024
      (Dollars in thousands)        
    NPAs:                          
    Nonaccrual loans $ 61,142     $ 69,188     $ 52,521     $ 55,335     $ 58,537     $ 61,142     $ 58,537  
    Nonaccrual PCD loans1   196       196       —       70       73       196       73  
    Accruing loans 90 or more days past due2   4,641       3,249       1,914       2,860       143       4,641       143  
    Total nonperforming loans held for investment (“NPLs”)   65,979       72,633       54,435       58,265       58,753       65,979       58,753  
    Other real estate owned (“OREO”)   9,218       24,268       24,737       9,034       24,256       9,218       24,256  
    Total NPAs $ 75,197     $ 96,901     $ 79,172     $ 67,299     $ 83,009     $ 75,197     $ 83,009  
                               
    Charge-offs:                          
    1-4 family residential $ —     $ —     $ —     $ —     $ (31 )   $ —     $ (31 )
    Multifamily   —       —       —       —       (198 )     —       (198 )
    OOCRE   —       —       —       —       —       —       (120 )
    NOOCRE   (215 )     (3,090 )     (5,113 )     —       (1,969 )     (3,305 )     (6,262 )
    C&I   (1,571 )     (918 )     (4,586 )     (2,259 )     (5,601 )     (2,489 )     (6,547 )
    Consumer   (55 )     (212 )     (420 )     (54 )     (30 )     (267 )     (101 )
    Total charge-offs $ (1,841 )   $ (4,220 )   $ (10,119 )   $ (2,313 )   $ (7,829 )   $ (6,061 )   $ (13,259 )
                               
    Recoveries:                          
    1-4 family residential $ 1     $ 21     $ 2     $ 3     $ —     $ 22     $ 1  
    OOCRE   186       —       —       —       120       186       120  
    NOOCRE   —       —       1,323       —       —       —       —  
    C&I   131       32       1,047       1,962       361       163       457  
    MW   —       —       —       46       —       —       —  
    Consumer   262       195       30       33       497       457       546  
    Total recoveries $ 580     $ 248     $ 2,402     $ 2,044     $ 978     $ 828     $ 1,124  
                               
    Net charge-offs $ (1,261 )   $ (3,972 )   $ (7,717 )   $ (269 )   $ (6,851 )   $ (5,233 )   $ (12,135 )
                               
    Provision for credit losses $ 1,750     $ 4,000     $ 2,300     $ 4,000     $ 8,250     $ 5,750     $ 15,750  
                               
    ACL $ 112,262     $ 111,773     $ 111,745     $ 117,162     $ 113,431     $ 112,262     $ 113,431  
                               
    Asset Quality Ratios:                          
    NPAs to total assets   0.60 %     0.77 %     0.62 %     0.52 %     0.65 %     0.60 %     0.65 %
    NPAs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total assets   0.60       0.77       0.62       0.52       0.65       0.60       0.65  
    NPAs to total LHI and OREO   0.79       1.03       0.83       0.70       0.85       0.79       0.85  
    NPLs to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    NPLs, excluding nonaccrual PCD loans, to total LHI   0.70       0.77       0.57       0.60       0.60       0.70       0.60  
    ACL to total LHI   1.19       1.19       1.18       1.21       1.16       1.19       1.16  
    ACL to total LHI, excluding MW   1.28       1.27       1.25       1.30       1.23       1.28       1.23  
    Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding3   0.05       0.17       0.32       0.01       0.28       0.11       0.25  

    1 Nonaccrual PCD loans consist of PCD loans that transitioned upon adoption of ASC 326 Financial Instruments – Credit Losses and were accounted for on a pooled basis that have subsequently been placed on nonaccrual status.
    2 Accruing loans greater than 90 days past due exclude purchase credit deteriorated loans greater than 90 days past due that are accounted for on a pooled basis.
    3 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    We identify certain financial measures discussed in this earnings release as being “non-GAAP financial measures.” In accordance with SEC rules, we classify a financial measure as being a non-GAAP financial measure if that financial measure excludes or includes amounts, or is subject to adjustments that have the effect of excluding or including amounts, that are included or excluded, as the case may be, in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, in our statements of income, balance sheets or statements of cash flows. Non-GAAP financial measures do not include operating and other statistical measures or ratios calculated using exclusively either one or both of (i) financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP and (ii) operating measures or other measures that are not non-GAAP financial measures.

    The non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the most directly comparable or other financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP. Moreover, the manner in which we calculate the non-GAAP financial measures that we present in this earnings release may differ from that of other companies reporting measures with similar names. You should understand how such other financial institutions calculate their financial measures that appear to be similar or have similar names to the non-GAAP financial measures we have discussed in this earnings release when comparing such non-GAAP financial measures.

    Tangible Book Value Per Common Share. Tangible book value is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (b) tangible book value per common share as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by number of common shares outstanding. For tangible book value per common share, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is book value per common share.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in changes from period to period in book value per common share exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing total book value while not increasing our tangible book value.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and presents our tangible book value per common share compared with our book value per common share:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Common shares outstanding     54,265       54,297       54,517       54,446       54,350  
                         
    Book value per common share   $ 30.39     $ 30.08     $ 29.37     $ 29.53     $ 28.49  
    Tangible book value per common share   $ 22.68     $ 22.33     $ 21.61     $ 21.72     $ 20.62  

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets. Tangible common equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) tangible common equity as total stockholders’ equity, less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; (b) tangible assets as total assets less goodwill and core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) tangible common equity to tangible assets as tangible common equity (as described in clause (a)) divided by tangible assets (as described in clause (b)). For tangible common equity to tangible assets, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is total stockholders’ equity to total assets.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the relative changes from period to period in common equity and total assets, in each case, exclusive of changes in core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and other intangible assets have the effect of increasing both total stockholders’ equity and assets while not increasing our tangible common equity or tangible assets.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, total stockholders’ equity to tangible common equity and total assets to tangible assets and presents our tangible common equity to tangible assets:

        As of
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Tangible Common Equity                    
    Total stockholders’ equity   $ 1,649,219     $ 1,633,480     $ 1,601,069     $ 1,608,014     $ 1,548,616  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible common equity   $ 1,230,899     $ 1,212,722     $ 1,177,873     $ 1,182,380     $ 1,120,545  
    Tangible Assets                    
    Total assets   $ 12,527,868     $ 12,606,091     $ 12,768,341     $ 13,042,976     $ 12,684,330  
    Adjustments:                    
    Goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Core deposit intangibles     (13,868 )     (16,306 )     (18,744 )     (21,182 )     (23,619 )
    Tangible Assets   $ 12,109,548     $ 12,185,333     $ 12,345,145     $ 12,617,342     $ 12,256,259  
    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets     10.16 %     9.95 %     9.54 %     9.37 %     9.14 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity. Return on average tangible common equity is a non-GAAP measure generally used by financial analysts and investment bankers to evaluate financial institutions. We calculate: (a) net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles (which we refer to as “return”) as net income, plus amortization of core deposit intangibles, less tax benefit at the statutory rate; (b) average tangible common equity as total average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization; and (c) return (as described in clause (a)) divided by average tangible common equity (as described in clause (b)). For return on average tangible common equity, the most directly comparable financial measure calculated in accordance with GAAP is return on average equity.

    We believe that this measure is important to many investors in the marketplace who are interested in the return on common equity, exclusive of the impact of core deposit intangibles. Goodwill and core deposit intangibles have the effect of increasing total stockholders’ equity while not increasing our tangible common equity. This measure is particularly relevant to acquisitive institutions that may have higher balances in goodwill and core deposit intangibles than non-acquisitive institutions.

    The following table reconciles, as of the dates set forth below, average tangible common equity to average common equity and net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles, net of taxes to net income and presents our return on average tangible common equity:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands)
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Net income available for common stockholders adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 30,996     $ 26,807     $ 32,927     $ 29,128     $ 63,828     $ 55,210  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Return on Average Tangible Common Equity (Annualized)     10.79 %     10.49 %     9.04 %     11.33 %     10.54 %     10.64 %     10.03 %

    VERITEX HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
    Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)

    Operating Earnings, Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings and performance metrics calculated using Operating Earnings and Pre-tax, Pre-provision Operating Earnings, including Diluted Operating Earnings per Share, Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Assets, Pre-tax, Pre-Provision Operating Return on Average Loans, Operating Return on Average Tangible Common Equity and Operating Efficiency Ratio. Operating earnings, pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and the performance metrics calculated using these metrics, listed below, are non-GAAP measures used by management to evaluate the Company’s financial performance. We calculate (a) operating earnings as net income plus BOLI 1035 exchange charges, plus severance payments, plus loss on sales of debt securities available for sale (“AFS”), net, plus FDIC special assessment, less tax impact of adjustments, plus nonrecurring tax adjustments. We calculate (b) diluted operating earnings per share as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by weighted average diluted shares outstanding. We calculate (c) pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as operating earnings as described in clause (a) plus provision for income taxes, plus provision (benefit) for credit losses and unfunded commitments. We calculate (d) pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets as pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (e) operating return on average assets as operating earnings as described in clause (a) divided by total average assets. We calculate (f) operating return on average tangible common equity as operating earnings as described in clause (a), adjusted for the amortization of intangibles and tax benefit at the statutory rate, divided by total average tangible common equity (average stockholders’ equity less average goodwill and average core deposit intangibles, net of accumulated amortization). We calculate (g) operating efficiency ratio as noninterest expense plus adjustments to operating noninterest expense divided by noninterest income plus adjustments to operating noninterest income, plus net interest income.

    We believe that these measures and the operating metrics calculated utilizing these measures are important to management and many investors in the marketplace who are interested in understanding the ongoing operating performance of the Company and provide meaningful comparisons to its peers.

    The following tables reconcile, as of the dates set forth below, operating net income and pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings and related metrics:

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
        Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
        (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906   $ 29,070   $ 24,882   $ 31,001   $ 27,202   $ 59,976   $ 51,358
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges1     —     517     —     —     —     517     —
    Plus: Severance payments2     —     —     1,545     1,487     613     —     613
    Plus: Loss on sales of AFS securities, net     —     —     4,397     —     —     —     6,304
    Plus: FDIC special assessment     —     —     —     —     134     —     134
    Operating pre-tax income     30,906     29,587     30,824     32,488     27,949     60,493     58,409
    Less: Tax impact of adjustments     —     109     1,248     307     166     109     1,489
    Plus: Nonrecurring tax adjustments     —     229     193     —     527     229     527
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906   $ 29,707   $ 29,769   $ 32,181   $ 28,310   $ 60,613   $ 57,447
                                 
    Weighted average diluted shares outstanding     54,766     55,123     55,237     54,932     54,823     54,944     54,832
    Diluted EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.53   $ 0.45   $ 0.56   $ 0.50   $ 1.09   $ 0.94
    Diluted operating EPS   $ 0.56   $ 0.54   $ 0.54   $ 0.59   $ 0.52   $ 1.10   $ 1.05

    1Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    2Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

        For the Quarter Ended   For the Six Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands)   Jun 30, 2025   Mar 31, 2025   Dec 31, 2024   Sep 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2024   Jun 30, 2025   Jun 30, 2024
    Pre-Tax, Pre-Provision Operating Earnings                            
    Net income   $ 30,906     $ 29,070     $ 24,882     $ 31,001     $ 27,202     $ 59,976     $ 51,358  
    Plus: Provision for income taxes     8,516       8,526       8,222       8,067       8,221       17,042       15,458  
    Plus: Provision for credit losses and unfunded commitments     3,250       5,300       1,899       4,000       8,250       8,550       14,209  
    Plus: Severance payments3     —       —       1,545       1,487       613       —       613  
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net     —       —       4,397       —       —       —       6,304  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2     —       517       —       —       —       517       —  
    Plus: FDIC special assessment     —       —       —       —       134       —       134  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating earnings   $ 42,672     $ 43,413     $ 40,945     $ 44,555     $ 44,420     $ 86,085     $ 88,076  
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average assets1     1.38 %     1.41 %     1.28 %     1.38 %     1.42 %     1.39 %     1.42 %
                                 
    Average loans   $ 9,399,173     $ 9,313,629     $ 9,449,565     $ 9,661,774     $ 9,765,428     $ 9,356,637     $ 9,664,400  
    Pre-tax, pre-provision operating return on average loans1     1.82 %     1.89 %     1.72 %     1.83 %     1.83 %     1.86 %     1.83 %
                                 
    Average total assets   $ 12,439,213     $ 12,506,134     $ 12,750,972     $ 12,861,918     $ 12,578,706     $ 12,472,488     $ 12,457,374  
    Return on average assets1     1.00 %     0.94 %     0.78 %     0.96 %     0.87 %     0.97 %     0.83 %
    Operating return on average assets1     1.00       0.96       0.93       1.00       0.91       0.98       0.93  
                                 
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles                            
    Operating earnings   $ 30,906     $ 29,707     $ 29,769     $ 32,181     $ 28,310     $ 60,613     $ 57,447  
    Adjustments:                            
    Plus: Amortization of core deposit intangibles     2,438       2,438       2,437       2,438       2,438       4,876       4,876  
    Less: Tax benefit at the statutory rate     512       512       512       512       512       1,024       1,024  
    Operating earnings adjusted for amortization of core deposit intangibles   $ 32,832     $ 31,633     $ 31,694     $ 34,107     $ 30,236     $ 64,465     $ 61,299  
                                 
    Average Tangible Common Equity                            
    Total average stockholders’ equity   $ 1,640,418     $ 1,620,788     $ 1,604,335     $ 1,583,401     $ 1,541,609     $ 1,630,657     $ 1,537,738  
    Adjustments:                            
    Less: Average goodwill     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )     (404,452 )
    Less: Average core deposit intangibles     (15,467 )     (17,904 )     (20,342 )     (22,789 )     (25,218 )     (16,679 )     (26,437 )
    Average tangible common equity   $ 1,220,499     $ 1,198,432     $ 1,179,541     $ 1,156,160     $ 1,111,939     $ 1,209,526     $ 1,106,849  
    Operating return on average tangible common equity1     10.79 %     10.70 %     10.69 %     11.74 %     10.94 %     10.75 %     11.14 %
                                 
    Efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.91 %     67.04 %     61.94 %     59.11 %     61.03 %     60.72 %
    Operating efficiency ratio                            
    Net interest income   $ 96,335     $ 95,441     $ 96,141     $ 100,062     $ 96,236     $ 191,776     $ 189,042  
    Noninterest income     13,499       14,289       10,056       13,106       10,578       27,788       17,240  
    Plus: BOLI 1035 exchange charges2     —       517       —       —       —       517       —  
    Plus: Loss on sale of AFS securities, net     —       —       4,397       —       —       —       6,304  
    Operating noninterest income     13,499       14,806       14,453       13,106       10,578       28,305       23,544  
    Noninterest expense     67,162       66,834       71,194       70,100       63,141       133,996       125,257  
    Less: FDIC special assessment     —       —       —       —       134       —       134  
    Less: Severance payments3     —       —       1,545       1,487       613       —       613  
    Operating noninterest expense   $ 67,162     $ 66,834     $ 69,649     $ 68,613     $ 62,394     $ 133,996     $ 124,510  
    Operating efficiency ratio     61.15 %     60.62 %     62.98 %     60.63 %     58.41 %     60.88 %     58.57 %

    1 Annualized ratio for quarterly metrics.
    2 Represents non-recurring charges for the completion of a 1035 exchange of BOLI contracts.
    3 Severance payments relate to certain restructurings made during the periods disclosed.

    The MIL Network –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Europe: OLAF played key role in Ukraine’s uncovering of massive underground pesticide production

    Source: European Anti-Fraud Offfice

    Press release 20/2025 
    PDF version

    A far-reaching investigation coordinated by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has played a central part in uncovering a sophisticated criminal network in Ukraine which engaged in mass production and counterfeiting of agrochemical products. These were falsely labelled under some of the leading agrochemical brands in Europe and the USA. As a result, Ukrainian authorities conducted 89 searches across the country that led to the seizure of hundreds of tons of illicit products worth over 2.3 million EUR. 

    Ukrainian authorities recently dismantled a large-scale criminal network producing and selling illicit pesticides on an industrial scale. Police raids uncovered several underground workshops and resulted in the confiscation of more than 175 tons of counterfeit agrochemicals as well as raw materials for their production. These were ordered from China and contained potent and poisonous substances. 

    In addition, a separate production of packaging for these products was discovered, together with fake labels, plastic packaging, holographic security elements of various trademarks and seals of business entities. Part of the seized products are believed to have been intended for European market, posing a significant threat to food security, environmental safety and legitimate agrochemical companies. You can read more about the operation in the press release of the Ukrainian State Customs Service here and the National Police of Ukraine here.

    OLAF’s role in the operation focused on strategic gathering, analysis and sharing of intelligence as well as cross-border coordination that led to the setting up of a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) between Romania, Ukraine and OLAF under the umbrella of EUROJUST. The investigation started in 2023 with a 2024 to the seizure of additional 1000 litres of counterfeit crop protection products in Romania and in the end helped to identify and later dismantle the source: an illegal large-scale manufacturing operation in Ukraine. 

    National Police of Ukraine, Department for Combating Smuggling and Violations of Customs Rules of the State Customs Service of Ukraine, Office of the Prosecutor General in Ukraine as well as Financial and economic Police Bihor county in Romania and Public Prosecution office Oradea in Romania provided critical support during the operation. 

    Ville Itälä, Director-General of OLAF, said: “This is a textbook example of how operational actions unfold across borders. What started like isolated seizures in Bulgaria and Romania turned out to be the surface of a much deeper operation in Ukraine. Thanks to the methodical investigation and strong cooperation with our partners, we were able to trace the supply chain all the way to the source. This way, we help to protect not only European markets but also legitimate businesses, farmers and the environment.”

    OLAF remains committed to tackling cross-border crime and protecting the European Union from the dangers posed by counterfeit products. 

    OLAF mission, mandate and competences:
    OLAF’s mission is to detect, investigate and stop fraud with EU funds.    

    OLAF fulfils its mission by:
    •    carrying out independent investigations into fraud and corruption involving EU funds, so as to ensure that all EU taxpayers’ money reaches projects that can create jobs and growth in Europe;
    •    contributing to strengthening citizens’ trust in the EU Institutions by investigating serious misconduct by EU staff and members of the EU Institutions;
    •    developing a sound EU anti-fraud policy.

    In its independent investigative function, OLAF can investigate matters relating to fraud, corruption and other offences affecting the EU financial interests concerning:
    •    all EU expenditure: the main spending categories are Structural Funds, agricultural policy and rural development funds, direct expenditure and external aid;
    •    some areas of EU revenue, mainly customs duties;
    •    suspicions of serious misconduct by EU staff and members of the EU institutions.

    Once OLAF has completed its investigation, it is for the competent EU and national authorities to examine and decide on the follow-up of OLAF’s recommendations. All persons concerned are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in a competent national or EU court of law.

    For further details:

    Pierluigi CATERINO
    Spokesperson
    European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)
    Phone: +32(0)2 29-52335  
    Email: olaf-media ec [dot] europa [dot] eu (olaf-media[at]ec[dot]europa[dot]eu)
    https://anti-fraud.ec.europa.eu
    LinkedIn: European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)
    X: x.com/EUAntiFraud
    Bluesky: euantifraud.bsky.social

    If you’re a journalist and you wish to receive our press releases in your inbox, please leave us your contact data.
     

    MIL OSI Europe News –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: From ‘Stone Age’ treasury boss to National Party Senator: John Stone 1929-2025

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Head, Canberra School of Government, University of Canberra

    AUSPIC

    John Owen Stone AO was a legendary leader of the Commonwealth Treasury. He was secretary (departmental head) from January 1979 to September 1984 but was an intellectual driving force before then as deputy secretary from 1971 to 1978.

    Over those years he dealt with eight treasurers: Billy Snedden, Gough Whitlam, Frank Crean, Jim Cairns, Bill Hayden, Phillip Lynch, John Howard and Paul Keating.

    It is a sign of his influence that those years were dubbed the “Stone Age” by South Australian Premier Don Dunstan and others.

    Former Defence Department heads Arthur Tange and Tony Ayers were at various times called the “last of the mandarins” but Stone is probably truly the last.

    In 1978 journalist Paul Kelly called Stone “one of the two men who ran the nation”, the other being then prime minister Malcolm Fraser.

    It is hard to think of any later public servant about whom that could be said.

    Stone’s entry in the Senate’s biographical dictionary captures him well:

    he could be charming, witty and flattering, but he is often decried as being obstinate and arrogant.

    A Reserve Bank official is said to have said “I wish I was as certain about one thing as John Stone is about everything.”

    This obduracy cemented the Treasury’s reputation for arrogance and weakened its influence.

    Early years – from physics to economics

    John was born in 1929, the elder of two sons of a farmer and a primary school teacher. His childhood was spent in the Western Australian wheat belt. But after his parents divorced when he was 12, he moved with his mother to Perth.

    He attended Perth Modern School where contemporaries included Bob Hawke, Rolf Harris and Maxwell Newton.

    He graduated with first-class honours from the University of Western Australia in 1950, majoring in mathematical physics, and served as president of the students’ association.

    While there he met Billy Snedden, who two decades later would be Prime Minister William McMahon’s treasurer and with whom Stone would work as treasury deputy secretary.

    In 1951 he won a Rhodes scholarship. He initially enrolled for a physics degree at Oxford, but switched to economics, graduating with a Bachelor of Arts in Politics, Philosophy and Economics.

    He joined Australia’s Treasury, initially in its London office, in 1954. The same year he married Nancy Hardwick, a biochemical researcher, and they would have five children.

    The mandarin who put Treasury first

    Stone was an admirer of fellow Rhodes scholar Sir Roland Wilson, the longest-serving Treasury secretary with doctorates from Oxford and Chicago.

    Along with Wilson, Stone was a strong critic of the 1965 report of the Committee of Economic Inquiry known as the Vernon Report which called for greater planning and an independent economic advisory committee whose advice would have rivalled Treasury’s and succeeded in having Prime Minister Menzies reject it.

    In the late 1960s as treasury’s representative he was an executive director at the International Monetary Fund and defied his treasurer William McMahon by voting against the introduction of Special Drawing Rights that gave members rights over other members’ reserves.

    Stone believed that was why he was passed over for the secretary’s position when Frederick Wheeler was appointed in 1971.

    At treasury in the 1970s, Stone publicly clashed with members of a global environmental group called the Club of Rome about whether there were environmental limits to economic growth.

    During a public meeting in Canberra in 1973, he argued the world would not run out of the resources it needed because price rises would create incentives to use them more efficiently and develop substitutes.

    These ideas permeated the treasury’s second economic research paper called Economic Growth – is it Worth Having? which he heavily influenced.

    Stone claimed to have personally drafted the words in Treasurer Bill Hayden’s 1975 budget statement that said Australia was

    no longer operating in that simple Keynesian world in which some reduction in unemployment could, apparently, always be purchased at the cost of some more inflation.

    Stone was the driving force behind the subsequent Fraser government’s mantra of “fight inflation first”.

    As a senior Treasury officer, Stone was often openly contemptuous of politicians. He would share these views with journalists at the bar of the Hotel Canberra and in later years at the bar of the National Press Club.

    He was particularly critical when politicians had the temerity to take advice from what he termed “meretricious players” from outside the treasury.

    This attitude led Stone to oppose even the sort of free-market measures he might be expected to like when they were advocated by someone else.

    He unsuccessfully opposed the Whitlam government’s cuts to tariffs in 1973 and some of the recommendations of the Campbell Committee of Inquiry into Australia’s financial system in 1981.

    Fraser is said to have said Stone “believes in the deregulation of everything he does not regulate”.

    Stone also opposed the Hawke government’s decision to float the dollar in 1983.

    He argued the timing was wrong and that the dollar would appreciate, weakening the economy. After rising for a short time, the dollar actually depreciated and the economy performed strongly.

    Ludicrously, Stone denied having ever opposed it.

    Many in the Labor Party had wanted Stone sacked when it came to power in 1983, but Keating kept him on, partly to reassure financial markets. As Keating’s confidence in his own judgement grew, Stone’s influence waned.

    Stone announced his resignation just before the August 1984 budget and made a scathing attack on many of the government’s policies in his 1984 Shann Memorial Lecture at the University of Western Australia.




    Read more:
    Happy birthday AUD: how our Australian dollar was floated, 40 years ago this week


    Politics post-treasury

    Stone isn’t the only treasury official to have gone into politics. Leslie Bury even became treasurer. Jim Short and Arthur Sinodinos became assistant treasurers.

    But Stone was the only former head of the treasury to enter politics. He served as a National Party Senator for Queensland from 1987 to 1990, having been part of the Joh for Canberra campaign which had as its organising principle the anointing of Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen as prime minister.

    He was the Senate running mate to Sir Joh’s wife Flo Bjelke-Petersen.

    Stone was twice the Coalition’s finance spokesman, but he was something of a loose cannon. John Howard dropped him from the front bench for a time after he said “Asian immigration has to be slowed”.

    He apparently held ambitions to be treasurer. In 1990 he resigned from the Senate to contest a seat in the House of Representatives that would have made that easier given treasurers are traditionally members of the lower house.

    Stone failed to win it. He then reneged on an earlier promise by nominating to return to his Senate seat. Faced with uproar in the party, he withdrew and his meteoric political career was over.

    He co-founded the HR Nicholls Society, which pressed for the deregulation of industrial relations laws, and the Samuel Griffith Society which concerned itself with states’ rights.

    Stone was active in the Institute of Public Affairs and wrote frequently in Quadrant. He opposed republicanism, centralism, trade unionism, multiculturalism and climate action.

    He died aged 96 and is survived by five children.

    John Hawkins was a senior economist at the Australian Treasury where he wrote a series of biographical essays on Australian treasurers.

    Selwyn Cornish is the Reserve Bank of Australia historian and a former Australian Treasury official.

    – ref. From ‘Stone Age’ treasury boss to National Party Senator: John Stone 1929-2025 – https://theconversation.com/from-stone-age-treasury-boss-to-national-party-senator-john-stone-1929-2025-216360

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-Evening Report: From ‘Stone Age’ treasury boss to National Party Senator: John Stone 1929-2025

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By John Hawkins, Head, Canberra School of Government, University of Canberra

    AUSPIC

    John Owen Stone AO was a legendary leader of the Commonwealth Treasury. He was secretary (departmental head) from January 1979 to September 1984 but was an intellectual driving force before then as deputy secretary from 1971 to 1978.

    Over those years he dealt with eight treasurers: Billy Snedden, Gough Whitlam, Frank Crean, Jim Cairns, Bill Hayden, Phillip Lynch, John Howard and Paul Keating.

    It is a sign of his influence that those years were dubbed the “Stone Age” by South Australian Premier Don Dunstan and others.

    Former Defence Department heads Arthur Tange and Tony Ayers were at various times called the “last of the mandarins” but Stone is probably truly the last.

    In 1978 journalist Paul Kelly called Stone “one of the two men who ran the nation”, the other being then prime minister Malcolm Fraser.

    It is hard to think of any later public servant about whom that could be said.

    Stone’s entry in the Senate’s biographical dictionary captures him well:

    he could be charming, witty and flattering, but he is often decried as being obstinate and arrogant.

    A Reserve Bank official is said to have said “I wish I was as certain about one thing as John Stone is about everything.”

    This obduracy cemented the Treasury’s reputation for arrogance and weakened its influence.

    Early years – from physics to economics

    John was born in 1929, the elder of two sons of a farmer and a primary school teacher. His childhood was spent in the Western Australian wheat belt. But after his parents divorced when he was 12, he moved with his mother to Perth.

    He attended Perth Modern School where contemporaries included Bob Hawke, Rolf Harris and Maxwell Newton.

    He graduated with first-class honours from the University of Western Australia in 1950, majoring in mathematical physics, and served as president of the students’ association.

    While there he met Billy Snedden, who two decades later would be Prime Minister William McMahon’s treasurer and with whom Stone would work as treasury deputy secretary.

    In 1951 he won a Rhodes scholarship. He initially enrolled for a physics degree at Oxford, but switched to economics, graduating with a Bachelor of Arts in Politics, Philosophy and Economics.

    He joined Australia’s Treasury, initially in its London office, in 1954. The same year he married Nancy Hardwick, a biochemical researcher, and they would have five children.

    The mandarin who put Treasury first

    Stone was an admirer of fellow Rhodes scholar Sir Roland Wilson, the longest-serving Treasury secretary with doctorates from Oxford and Chicago.

    Along with Wilson, Stone was a strong critic of the 1965 report of the Committee of Economic Inquiry known as the Vernon Report which called for greater planning and an independent economic advisory committee whose advice would have rivalled Treasury’s and succeeded in having Prime Minister Menzies reject it.

    In the late 1960s as treasury’s representative he was an executive director at the International Monetary Fund and defied his treasurer William McMahon by voting against the introduction of Special Drawing Rights that gave members rights over other members’ reserves.

    Stone believed that was why he was passed over for the secretary’s position when Frederick Wheeler was appointed in 1971.

    At treasury in the 1970s, Stone publicly clashed with members of a global environmental group called the Club of Rome about whether there were environmental limits to economic growth.

    During a public meeting in Canberra in 1973, he argued the world would not run out of the resources it needed because price rises would create incentives to use them more efficiently and develop substitutes.

    These ideas permeated the treasury’s second economic research paper called Economic Growth – is it Worth Having? which he heavily influenced.

    Stone claimed to have personally drafted the words in Treasurer Bill Hayden’s 1975 budget statement that said Australia was

    no longer operating in that simple Keynesian world in which some reduction in unemployment could, apparently, always be purchased at the cost of some more inflation.

    Stone was the driving force behind the subsequent Fraser government’s mantra of “fight inflation first”.

    As a senior Treasury officer, Stone was often openly contemptuous of politicians. He would share these views with journalists at the bar of the Hotel Canberra and in later years at the bar of the National Press Club.

    He was particularly critical when politicians had the temerity to take advice from what he termed “meretricious players” from outside the treasury.

    This attitude led Stone to oppose even the sort of free-market measures he might be expected to like when they were advocated by someone else.

    He unsuccessfully opposed the Whitlam government’s cuts to tariffs in 1973 and some of the recommendations of the Campbell Committee of Inquiry into Australia’s financial system in 1981.

    Fraser is said to have said Stone “believes in the deregulation of everything he does not regulate”.

    Stone also opposed the Hawke government’s decision to float the dollar in 1983.

    He argued the timing was wrong and that the dollar would appreciate, weakening the economy. After rising for a short time, the dollar actually depreciated and the economy performed strongly.

    Ludicrously, Stone denied having ever opposed it.

    Many in the Labor Party had wanted Stone sacked when it came to power in 1983, but Keating kept him on, partly to reassure financial markets. As Keating’s confidence in his own judgement grew, Stone’s influence waned.

    Stone announced his resignation just before the August 1984 budget and made a scathing attack on many of the government’s policies in his 1984 Shann Memorial Lecture at the University of Western Australia.




    Read more:
    Happy birthday AUD: how our Australian dollar was floated, 40 years ago this week


    Politics post-treasury

    Stone isn’t the only treasury official to have gone into politics. Leslie Bury even became treasurer. Jim Short and Arthur Sinodinos became assistant treasurers.

    But Stone was the only former head of the treasury to enter politics. He served as a National Party Senator for Queensland from 1987 to 1990, having been part of the Joh for Canberra campaign which had as its organising principle the anointing of Queensland Premier Joh Bjelke-Petersen as prime minister.

    He was the Senate running mate to Sir Joh’s wife Flo Bjelke-Petersen.

    Stone was twice the Coalition’s finance spokesman, but he was something of a loose cannon. John Howard dropped him from the front bench for a time after he said “Asian immigration has to be slowed”.

    He apparently held ambitions to be treasurer. In 1990 he resigned from the Senate to contest a seat in the House of Representatives that would have made that easier given treasurers are traditionally members of the lower house.

    Stone failed to win it. He then reneged on an earlier promise by nominating to return to his Senate seat. Faced with uproar in the party, he withdrew and his meteoric political career was over.

    He co-founded the HR Nicholls Society, which pressed for the deregulation of industrial relations laws, and the Samuel Griffith Society which concerned itself with states’ rights.

    Stone was active in the Institute of Public Affairs and wrote frequently in Quadrant. He opposed republicanism, centralism, trade unionism, multiculturalism and climate action.

    He died aged 96 and is survived by five children.

    John Hawkins was a senior economist at the Australian Treasury where he wrote a series of biographical essays on Australian treasurers.

    Selwyn Cornish is the Reserve Bank of Australia historian and a former Australian Treasury official.

    – ref. From ‘Stone Age’ treasury boss to National Party Senator: John Stone 1929-2025 – https://theconversation.com/from-stone-age-treasury-boss-to-national-party-senator-john-stone-1929-2025-216360

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Economics: Catalysing Sustainable & Green Infrastructure Financing for Achieving Net Zero – Inaugural Address delivered by Shri M Rajeshwar Rao, Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India – July 03, 2025 – at the Conference on Green Infrastructure Finance at College of Agriculture Banking, RBI, Pune

    Source: Reserve Bank of India

    Catalysing Sustainable & Green Infrastructure Financing for Achieving Net Zero
    (Inaugural Address delivered by Shri M Rajeshwar Rao, Deputy Governor, Reserve Bank of India – July 03, 2025 – at the Conference on Green Infrastructure Finance at College of Agriculture Banking, RBI, Pune)

    MIL OSI Economics –

    July 18, 2025
  • 60 lakh PMAY houses in Bihar, over 3 lakh in Motihari alone: PM Modi

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Friday highlighted key Central welfare schemes benefiting the people of Bihar and reaffirmed the Nitish Kumar-led NDA government’s commitment to building a “New Bihar.”

    During his visit to Motihari in Bihar’s East Champaran district, the Prime Minister launched a series of infrastructure projects worth over ₹7,200 crore. Addressing a large public gathering, he underlined the government’s consistent focus on public welfare, contrasting it with what he called the “discriminatory” approach of the previous UPA regime.

    PM Modi said that Bihar accounts for 60 lakh of the total 4 crore pucca houses built under the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY), emphasizing the state’s substantial share in the nationwide scheme.

    He added that in Motihari alone, over 3 lakh families have received pucca houses under PMAY.

    The Prime Minister also spoke about the recently approved Dhan Dhanya Krishi Yojana, which aims to benefit farmers in underperforming agricultural districts. “Under this scheme, 100 districts with untapped farming potential will be identified. Over 1.75 crore farmers across the country are expected to benefit, with a significant number from Bihar,” he said.

    Referring to the growth trajectory of Eastern nations, PM Modi said Bihar should similarly become a growth hub for India. “Our vision is clear: when Bihar progresses, the country progresses. We are committed to building a prosperous Bihar and ensuring employment for every youth.”

    He said rapid progress is underway across various sectors to boost job opportunities for the state’s youth. “The Nitish government has already provided employment to lakhs of young people and has set new goals to enhance youth employment further. The Central government is fully supporting these efforts,” he added.

    —IANS

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: African Development Fund supports climate-resilient rice value chains across West Africa

    Source: APO – Report:

    The Board of Directors of the African Development Fund (ADF) (http://apo-opa.co/4nUpfmv), the concessional funding window of the African Development Bank Group (www.AfDB.org), on 17 July 2025 approved a $9.44 million grant for the Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice) to strengthen the climate resilience of rice value chains across West Africa.

    Funded through ADF’s Climate Action Window (http://apo-opa.co/4nVdlsD), the project will support rice producers and processors in 13 countries: Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Togo.

    The initiative, part of the Regional Resilient Rice Value Chains Development Project in West Africa (REWARD), and specifically its adaptation component (REWARD-Adaptation), aims to scale up the adoption of climate-smart agricultural practices and technologies throughout the rice production and processing sectors.

    “The strategy for this project is to reduce the vulnerability and strengthen the resilience of rice value chains, from production to processing and marketing, while lowering greenhouse gas emissions through the dissemination and adoption of climate-smart practices and technologies,” said Marwan Ladki, Senior Irrigation Engineer at the African Development Bank, who is responsible for the project.

    Key project interventions include the distribution of climate-resilient rice seeds to 11,000 farmers, including 4,950 women and 6,600 young farmers. It will train 12,600 farmers and processors, support 65 small and medium-sized enterprises with equipment and improved access to business networks, and facilitate the provision of climate services and early warning systems through digital platforms and radio broadcasts, reaching up to 2 million beneficiaries. The project will also deploy four automatic weather stations per country to improve spatial coverage and climate monitoring. It is projected to create 47,000 employment opportunities, including 8,000 permanent and 39,000 seasonal jobs.

    – on behalf of African Development Bank Group (AfDB).

    Media contact:
    Alexis Adélé
    Department of Communication and External Relations
    media@afdb.org

    About AfricaRice:
    The Africa Rice Center (AfricaRice), based in Côte d’Ivoire, is a pan-African centre of excellence for rice research, development and capacity building. It contributes to reducing poverty, ensuring food and nutrition security, and improving the livelihoods of farmers and other actors in the rice value chain in Africa by increasing the productivity and profitability of rice-based agri-food systems, while ensuring the sustainability of natural resources.

    About the African Development Bank Group:
    The African Development Bank Group is Africa’s leading development finance institution. It comprises three distinct entities: the African Development Bank (AfDB), the African Development Fund (ADF) and the Nigeria Trust Fund (NTF). Represented in 41 African countries, with an external office in Japan, the Bank contributes to the economic development and social progress of its 54 regional member countries. For more information: www.AfDB.org

    Media files

    .

    MIL OSI Africa –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Tomb Raider video game composer jailed for Covid loan fraud

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Press release

    Tomb Raider video game composer jailed for Covid loan fraud

    Composer sentenced for Bounce Back Loan abuse following Insolvency Service investigations

    • Video game composer Peter Connelly has been jailed after fraudulently obtaining a second Covid Bounce Back Loan for his company
    • Connelly, known for his work on Tomb Raider, inflated his company’s turnover during the first few months of the pandemic in 2020
    • Insolvency Service investigations have also resulted in the 52-year-old being banned as a company director for six years

    A video game composer and sound designer who fraudulently applied for a Covid loan has been jailed.

    Durham-based Peter Connelly, best known for his work on the Tomb Raider series, overstated his company’s turnover to obtain a second Bounce Back Loan of £37,500 in 2020 when businesses were only entitled to a single loan.

    Connelly had previously secured a legitimate Bounce Back Loan worth £22,000 one month earlier.

    The 52-year-old, of Lambton Court, Peterlee, was jailed for 16 months at a hearing of Durham Crown Court on Thursday 17 July.

    He was also disqualified as a company director for six years.

    David Snasdell, Chief Investigator at the Insolvency Service, said:

    Peter Connelly blatantly disregarded the rules of the Bounce Back Loan Scheme, designed to support small and medium-sized businesses during the pandemic.

    Connelly not only secured two loans when businesses were only allowed one, but deliberately inflated his company’s turnover to receive more money than he was entitled to.

    The Insolvency Service is the lead agency for tackling Bounce Back Loan misconduct and we remain committed to ensuring fraudsters who stole from the public purse during a national emergency are brought to justice.

    Connelly was the sole director of Peter Connelly Limited, established in June 2008.

    The company was known as Universal Sound Design Limited up until November 2012, and it described its trading as “sound recording and music publishing activities”.

    Connelly’s first application for a Bounce Back Loan was in May 2020, when he secured £22,000. This application was within the rules of the scheme.

    However, one month later in June 2020, Connelly applied to a different bank for a Bounce Back Loan of £37,500, claiming his company’s turnover for 2019 was £150,000.

    Insolvency Service analysis revealed his turnover was just over £58,000, meaning he substantially inflated it on his second application.

    Connelly also falsely declared that this was the only loan he had applied for.

    In interviews, Connelly told the Insolvency Service that he had been given the opportunity to re-imagine the music for the Tomb Raider soundtrack. This was a significant project which had the potential to be very lucrative, he added.

    To complete the project, Connelly said he had taken out personal loans and sold his car.

    However, Connelly said everything stalled at the start of the pandemic.

    Peter Connelly Limited went into liquidation in August 2021. Neither loan had been repaid at this time.

    Connelly himself entered into an Individual Voluntary Arrangement (IVA) in June 2022, a legally binding agreement where he has committed to making regular payments to an insolvency practitioner to repay his debts.

    The IVA remains active.

    Further information

    • Peter Connelly is of Lambton Court, Peterlee, County Durham His date of birth is 8 September 1972
    • Peter Connelly Limited (company number 06618880)
    • Read more about the Bounce Back Loan Scheme and the action the Insolvency Service can take if it finds misconduct
    • Further information about the work of the Insolvency Service, and how to complain about financial misconduct

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

    • Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)
    • Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

    Updates to this page

    Published 18 July 2025

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: African Union and European Union join hands to promote and invest in Circular Economy and Sustainable Growth

    Source: APO


    .

    The African Union (AU) and the European Union (EU) officially announced the launch of the Continental Circular Economy Action Plan (CEAP) for Africa (2024–2034) today. Introduced by Moses Vilakati, AU Commissioner for Agriculture, Rural Development, Blue Economy, and Sustainable Environment, and Jessika Roswall, EU Commissioner Environment, Water Resilience and a Competitive Circular Economy, the plan is designed to advance sustainability, drive economic growth, and enhance resource efficiency across Africa over the next decade.

    The CEAP focuses on transitioning African economies to a circular model by reducing waste, promoting resource reuse, and encouraging recycling. As a key component of the African Union’s Agenda 2063,  the initiative was developed with co-financing and technical support from the European Union. The CEAP offers a strategic framework for sustainable investments aligned with the Europe-Africa Global Gateway Investment Package and international partnerships. The CEAP will focus on priority sectors including agriculture, packaging, energy, construction, manufacturing, electronics, technology, as well as the fashion and textiles industries.

    Following a comprehensive approach, the CEAP will:

    • Foster Circular Economy Across Sectors: The plan seeks to promote sustainable practices in key areas such as agriculture, industry, and energy by transforming waste into resources and encouraging innovation in resource management.

    • Improve Waste Management: CEAP will enhance waste management systems and recycling infrastructure, particularly through the application of green technologies and local innovations.

    • Create Green Jobs: The initiative aims to generate millions of green jobs and foster sustainable entrepreneurship, particularly among young and women.

    • Enhance Regional Cooperation: The plan will facilitate cross-border collaboration to share best practices, align policies, and create a collective impact across the continent.

    • Build Climate Resilience: By reducing consumption and promoting sustainable production, CEAP will help mitigate climate change and support biodiversity conservation.

    AU Commissioner Moses Vilakati said “The launch of the Continental Circular Economy Action Plan is a pivotal moment for Africa’s sustainable development. Through this collaboration with the EU, we are setting the stage for a green, inclusive, and resilient future. This plan represents a unique opportunity for Africa to lead in the global circular economy and tackle the challenges of climate change head-on.”

    EU Commissioner Jessika Roswall added “The CEAP is a landmark initiative that builds on the strong partnership between the EU and AU. It is an opportunity to drive economic growth, create jobs, and reduce environmental impact. By adopting circular economy principles, we can achieve sustainable development and build a stronger future for both Africa and Europe.”

    The launch of CEAP reflects the joint commitment of the African Union and the European Union to tackle global environmental challenges and advance sustainable development. Both unions are actively supporting its implementation by providing financial assistance, technical expertise, and capacity-building resources to ensure its success across all African countries. The overarching goal, however, is for the CEAP to serve as a transformative driver of sustainable economic growth throughout the continent. To achieve this, the AU is seeking additional support from international partners, including development banks and the private sector. 

    The CEAP was launched on the sidelines of the African Ministerial Conference on Environment, with attendance from African Ministers of Environment, representatives from Regional Economic Communities, UN Agencies, the private sector, and Micro, Small and Medium-sized enterprises (MSMEs), who  showcased their circular economy initiatives.

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Delegation of the European Union to Kenya.

    MIL OSI Africa –

    July 18, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 15 16 17 18 19 … 308
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

  • Blog
  • About
  • FAQs
  • Authors
  • Events
  • Shop
  • Patterns
  • Themes

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress