Source: Deutsche Bundesbank in English
A digital euro would be a digital form of central bank money, specifically the euro. It could be used by the general public in much the same way as cash, only in virtual form. Alongside cash, the Eurosystem would thus supply households with an additional form of central bank money that can be used quickly, easily and securely.
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Louisiana Bill Cassidy
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) announced Louisiana will receive $13,692,920.00 from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) for pipeline safety from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
“Pipelines play a crucial role in delivering the energy that powers our everyday lives,” said Dr. Cassidy. “This investment from the Infrastructure Law will significantly improve the safety and efficiency of Louisiana’s infrastructure and build our economy for 2050.”
Grant Awarded
Recipient
Project Description
$3,000,000.00
Grant Parish Police Jury
This grant will provide federal funding to replace 36 miles of 2-inch legacy PVC gas mains.
$2,546,363.00
Iberville Parish
This grant will provide federal funding to replace 5.64 miles of existing steel mains with 4-inch polyethylene coiled pipe, 88 steel service lines with 1-inch PE coiled pipe, and 88 aging residential meters.
$2,330,843.00
Village of Elizabeth
This grant will provide federal funding to replace 8 miles of 6-inch legacy steel distribution line with 4-inch high-density polyethylene pipe.
$1,872,488.00
Village of Morganza
This grant will provide federal funding to replace four miles of PVC pipe with modern polyethylene pipe with tracer wire.
$1,327,022.00
City of Patterson
This grant will provide federal funding to replace 3.06 miles of steel main and services with polyethylene.
$1,176,277.00
Town of Montgomery
This grant will provide federal funding to replace five 60+ year old regulator stations.
$1,059,315.00
Town of Washington
This grant will provide federal funding to replace approximately 2.3 miles of service line connections of 3/4-inch & 1-inch steel pipe with modern 1-inch polyethylene pipe with tracer wire. The project includes all connections, service valves, regulators, and fittings for approximately 300 customers.
$217,212.00
Village of Moreauville
This grant will provide federal funding to replace valves.
$163,400.00
Town of Basile
This grant will provide federal funding to perform an extensive leak survey on the distribution system and any area containing abandoned portions of legacy steel pipe.
Background
Thanks to IIJA, the Natural Gas Distribution Infrastructure Safety and Modernization is helping communities throughout the country safeguard natural gas pipes. Nearly one billion will be awarded over five years.
Earlier this year, Cassidy announced over $52 million to municipalities and gas utility districts seeking to replace aging natural gas infrastructure with new pipelines. Additionally, a similar announcement was made last April of over $27 million going to cities and towns in south and central Louisiana, for similar purposes.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3
Anneliese Dodds to outline priorities for gender equality and announce funding to boost women’s economic and social empowerment during visit to Washington D.C.
The UK’s Development Minister Anneliese Dodds will arrive at the World Bank Group and IMF Annual Meetings in Washington D.C. today [23 October] for a series of engagements focused on advancing gender equality.
It will mark the Minister’s first time attending in her capacity as the UK’s Governor to the World Bank Group. Her visit coincides with Chancellor Reeves attending the IMF Annual Meetings, marking the first time for the UK to send two female governors to the Meetings.
In a speech at the conference tomorrow [24 October], the Minister will outline her priorities for gender equality and announce a £7.5 million investment over the next two years, and continued support beyond that, in the World Bank’s Umbrella Facility for Gender Equality (UFGE). The facility supports the generation of high-quality data and evidence to address gender inequality and boost women’s economic and social empowerment.
The UFGE, which has received funding from the UK since 2012, has, for example, benefitted half a million women in Rwanda who were found to be losing rights over land due to not having marriage certificates. In Nigeria, the programme funded research on the benefits of cash transfers, which the government used to inform the expansion of its national livelihoods programme, covering more than 4 million vulnerable households.
The new funding will enable the UK’s support to the UFGE to expand beyond Africa into Asia and the Pacific and support the development of new methods to collect and use gender data, including through the adoption of AI technology.
The UK’s Development Minister Anneliese Dodds said:
My mission is to help create a world free from poverty, on a livable planet, for all. Women and girls are at the heart of this.
Britain is back with a voice on the world stage. We are playing a leading role with the World Bank to improve the lives of women and girls around the world.
The funding announced today will deliver projects that will have an enormous impact on the lives and economic situations of women and girls across the globe and drive economic growth.
This year’s Meetings come as the World Bank Group and IMF celebrate their 80th founding anniversary and will bring together finance and development ministers from all over the world to agree joint approaches to addressing pressing international development issues.
Minister Dodds’ attendance follows a keynote speech at Chatham House, in which she outlined her vision for a modern approach to international development.
Over the course of the Annual Meetings, the Minister will also host an event on conflict prevention, bringing together ministers from the Global South, international financial institutions, humanitarian actors, and academics, to discuss how the World Bank Group and IMF can work better in an increasingly fragile world.
Media enquiries
Email newsdesk@fcdo.gov.uk
Telephone 020 7008 3100
Contact the FCDO Communication Team via email (monitored 24 hours a day) in the first instance, and we will respond as soon as possible.
Source: United States Attorneys General 13
Ruhollah Bazghandi, an OFAC-Sanctioned Brigadier General in the IRGC and Former IRGC Intelligence Organization Counterintelligence Chief, and Members of His Iran-Based Network, Contracted Members of an Eastern European Organized Crime Group to Murder a U.
Note: View the superseding indictment here.
The Justice Department announced today the unsealing of a superseding indictment containing murder-for-hire, money-laundering, and sanctions evasion charges against Ruhollah Bazghandi, also known as Roohollah Azimi; Fnu Lnu, also known as Haj Taher, Haj Taher; Hossein Sedighi; and Seyed Mohammad Forouzan, all of Iran.
“The Justice Department has now charged eight individuals, including an Iranian military official, for their efforts to silence and kill a U.S. citizen because of her criticism of the Iranian regime,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “We will not tolerate efforts by an authoritarian regime like Iran to undermine the fundamental rights guaranteed to every American. Three of the defendants charged in this horrific plot are now in U.S. custody, and we will never stop working to identify, find, and bring to justice all those who endanger the safety of the American people.”
“Today’s indictment exposes the full extent of Iran’s plot to silence an American journalist for criticizing the Iranian regime,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray. “According to the charges, a brigadier general in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and a former Iranian intelligence officer, working with a network of conspirators, planned to kill a dissident living in New York City. The FBI’s investigation led to the disruption of this plot as one of the conspirators was allegedly on their way to murder the victim in New York. As these charges show, the FBI will work with our partners here and abroad to hold accountable those who target Americans.”
“Today’s indictment makes plain that the Iranian regime for years has been behind a violent campaign to stalk, intimidate, and arrange the killing of an American dissident on U.S. soil for bravely speaking up for the rights of the Iranian people,” said Assistant Attorney General Matthew G. Olsen of the Justice Department’s National Security Division. “The Department is committed to exposing and holding accountable those in Tehran who believe they can hide their hand in carrying out such reprehensible activities.”
“As alleged, for years, the Government of Iran has attempted to assassinate, on U.S. soil, a U.S. citizen of Iranian origin who is a prominent critic of the Iranian regime,” said U.S. Attorney Damian Williams for the Southern District of New York. “In January 2023, we unsealed charges alleging that members of an Eastern European crime group engaged in a plot to murder this victim. As we allege, that group was not acting alone. Today, we hold their Iranian masters to account, and allege that these Iran-based co-conspirators, including a Brigadier General in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, directed the murder plot. By charging these Iran-based defendants, we seek to strike another public blow at the heart of the Government of Iran’s efforts to execute the victim — as well as its lethal targeting, intimidation, and repression of other Iranian dissidents critical of the regime in the U.S. and abroad.”
As detailed in the superseding indictment, Bazghandi, Haj Taher, Sedighi, and Forouzan contracted members of an Eastern European criminal organization, including Rafat Amirov, also known as Farkhaddin Mirzoev, Pᴎᴍ, and Rome; Polad Omarov, also known as Araz Aliyev, Polad Qaqa, and Haci Qaqa; and Zialat Mamedov, also known as Ziko, to murder a U.S. citizen of Iranian origin in New York City who has publicly opposed the Iranian government and who has previously been the target of similar plots by the Iranian government. Amirov, Omarov, and Mamedov previously were arrested on charges contained in underlying indictments. Amirov and Omarov are in custody in the United States, pending trial; Mamedov was extradited from the Czech Republic to the Republic of Georgia to face charges there. Bazghandi, Haj Taher, Sedighi, and Forouzan, all of whom are based in Iran, remain at large. The case is pending before U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon for the Southern District of New York.
According to the allegations contained in the superseding indictment, other court filings, and statements made during court proceedings, Bazghandi, who resides in Iran, is an IRGC Brigadier General and has previously served as chief of an IRGC Intelligence Organization (IRGC-IO) counterintelligence office. In April 2023, the U.S. Secretary of State designated IRGC-IO as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist under Executive Order 14078, for hostage-taking and the wrongful detention of U.S. nationals abroad. On the same date, the Treasury Department sanctioned Bazghandi in connection with his involvement with the detention of foreign prisoners held in Iran. Bazghandi was designated by the Treasury Department a second time in June 2023, this time under Executive Order 13224, for his participation in IRGC-IO’s lethal targeting operations. Haj Taher, Sedighi, and Forouzan (collectively with Bazghandi, the Bazghandi Network), each of whom resides in Iran, also have connections to the Government of Iran.
The Bazghandi Network contracted Amirov, Omarov, Mamedov, and Khalid Mehdiyev to murder, on U.S. soil, a victim residing in New York City. The victim is a journalist, author, and human rights activist who has publicized the Government of Iran’s human rights abuses and suppression of political expression, including in connection with continuing protests against the regime across Iran. As recently as 2020 and 2021, Iranian intelligence officials and assets plotted to kidnap the victim from within the United States for rendition to Iran in an effort to silence the victim’s criticism of the regime. That plot was disrupted and exposed by the FBI and led to the filing of federal kidnapping conspiracy and other charges in the Southern District of New York against several participants in the plot in United States v. Farahani, et al.
Since at least July 2022, the Bazghandi Network tasked members of the organization with assassinating the victim. The organization’s participation in the murder-for-hire plot was directed by Amirov, who resided in Iran and who was tasked with targeting the victim by individuals in Iran. On approximately July 13, 2022, Amirov forwarded targeting information — which Amirov had received from individuals in Iran — about the victim and the victim’s residence to Omarov. Omarov, in turn, together with Mamedov, directed and collaborated with Mehdiyev, who was residing in Yonkers, New York, to carry out the plot against the victim. Mehdiyev’s participation in the plot was disrupted when he was arrested near the victim’s home on or about July 28, 2022, while in possession of the assault rifle, along with 66 rounds of ammunition, approximately $1,100 in cash, and a black ski mask.
In January 2023, Amirov, Omarov, and Mamedov were arrested overseas. On Jan. 27, 2023, they were charged publicly for their roles in the plot to assassinate the victim. Nevertheless, in the months that followed, members of the Bazghandi Network continued to target the victim. For example, in or about March 2023, Haj Taher searched for information about the victim’s family members and Sedighi saved an image of the victim’s residence. As recently as on or about May 1, 2023, Bazghandi conducted an internet search, in Farsi, for, “a person in the house of [the victim] movie,” and, on the same date, watched a video with the title, “A video of the arrested gunman in front of [the victim]’s home in New York received by [the victim’s employer].”
Bazghandi, Haj Taher, Sedighi, and Forouzan, have been charged with murder-for-hire, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison; conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison; conspiracy to commit money laundering, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison; and conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and sanctions against the Government of Iran, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison.
Amirov, Omarov, and Mamedov have also been charged with murder-for-hire, conspiracy to commit murder-for-hire, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. In addition, Amirov, Omarov, and Mamedov were charged with attempted murder in aid of racketeering, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and possession and use of a firearm in connection with the attempted murder, which carries a maximum penalty of life in prison and a mandatory minimum penalty of five years in prison. If convicted, a federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
The FBI investigated the case. The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs assisted with the extradition of Mamedov.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Michael D. Lockard, Jacob H. Gutwillig, and Matthew J.C. Hellman for the Southern District of New York, Trial Attorneys Christopher Rigali and Leslie Esbrook of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section, and Trial Attorney Dmitriy Slavin of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is merely an accusation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
Source: United States Attorneys General 13
A Florida woman was sentenced today to one year and one day in prison, one year of supervised release and ordered to pay $485,290.03 in restitution to the United States for filing false tax returns with the IRS to obtain tax refunds.
According to court documents and statements made in court, between 2018 and 2020, Yolanda Dewar filed four false tax returns seeking a total of almost $2 million in tax refunds from the IRS on behalf of a trust she created. These returns falsely reported that the trust had earned significant income, made payments to the IRS and had federal income taxes withheld on its behalf. Dewar continued filing false returns even after the IRS notified her that her claims were frivolous and had no basis in law. In total, the IRS issued nearly $500,000 to the trust in response to Dewar’s false claims. Dewar used a portion of the funds to purchase a car for a family member, get plastic surgery and renovate her home.
Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General Stuart M. Goldberg of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Markenzy Lapointe for the Southern District of Florida made the announcement.
IRS Criminal Investigation investigated the case.
Trial Attorneys Melissa S. Siskind and Kavitha Bondada of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Deric Zacca for the Southern District of Florida prosecuted the case.
Source: United States Attorneys General 13
Veni-Express Inc. (Veni-Express), headquartered in California, and its owners Myrna and Sonny Steinbaum have agreed to pay at least $135,000 to resolve False Claims Act allegations that they submitted false claims for mobile phlebotomy services and associated travel mileage and paid kickbacks to a third-party marketer of these services, in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS). Veni-Express has agreed to pay $100,000, plus additional amounts based on the sale of company property. Myrna Steinbaum has agreed to pay $25,000, and Sonny Steinbaum has agreed to pay $10,000. These settlements are based on their ability to pay.
The United States alleged that from 2015 to 2019, Veni-Express and the Steinbaums knowingly caused false or fraudulent claims to federal health care programs for mobile phlebotomy services and associated travel mileage. Specifically, with the Steinbaum’s oversight and approval, Veni-Express submitted false claims for venipuncture (blood draw) procedures that the company did not actually perform during homebound patient visits, and for travel mileage associated with these visits that was not reimbursable by Medicare. The United States further alleged that, from July 2014 to June 2015, Veni-Express paid unlawful kickbacks (in the form of a percentage of company revenue) to a third-party, Altera Laboratories also known as Med2U Healthcare LLC, for the marketing of Veni-Express’ services, in violation of the AKS.
“Health care providers that bill for services they did not provide or offer illegal incentives to increase profits will be held accountable,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Brian M. Boynton, head of the Justice Department’s Civil Division. “We will continue to safeguard federal health care programs against those who seek to abuse them.”
“Providers must not bill for services they did not perform. Further, the presence of unlawful kickbacks all too often corrupts medical judgment,” said U.S. Attorney Phillip A. Talbert for the Eastern District of California. “Our office is committed to investigating and holding accountable those who violate the False Claims Act and AKS to safeguard the public fisc and protect the integrity of our federal health care system.”
“Improper incentives and billing Medicare for services never actually provided divert taxpayer funding meant to pay for medically necessary services for Medicare enrollees,” said Special Agent in Charge Steven J. Ryan of the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (HHS-OIG). “HHS-OIG and our law enforcement partners remain committed to identifying and holding accountable those who engage in such unlawful relationships.”
The civil settlement resolves claims brought under the qui tam or whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act by Banisha Evans, a former phlebotomist for another California provider, and Richard Drummond, a technical director at a Texas laboratory. Under those provisions, a private party can file an action on behalf of the United States for false claims and receive a portion of any recovery. The qui tam cases are captioned U.S. et al., ex rel. Evans v. PhlebXpress et al., No. 2:18-cv-2038 (EDCA) and U.S. ex rel. Drummond v. Veni-Express Inc., et al., No. 2:21-cv-1199 (EDCA).
The relators’ share of the settlement has not yet been determined.
The resolution obtained in this matter was the result of a coordinated effort between the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of California and HHS-OIG.
The investigation and resolution of this matter illustrates the government’s emphasis on combating health care fraud. One of the most powerful tools in this effort is the False Claims Act. Tips and complaints from all sources about potential fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement can be reported to HHS at 800-HHS-TIPS (800-447-8477).
Trial Attorney Gary R. Dyal of the Civil Division’s Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, and Assistant U.S. Attorney Colleen Kennedy for the Eastern District of California handled the matter.
The claims resolved by the settlement are allegations only. There has been no determination of liability.
Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) State Crime Alerts (c)
CAMDEN, N.J. – A former branch manager of a national financial institution was sentenced today to 65 months in prison for using his position to organize a conspiracy to help individuals obtain at least 38 fraudulent Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans totaling approximately $5 million, U.S. Attorney Philip R. Sellinger announced today.
Tommy Hawkins, 61, of Philadelphia, previously pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Karen M. Williams to one count of bank fraud conspiracy. Judge Williams imposed the sentence on Oct. 18, 2024, in Camden federal court. A codefendant, Sieff Robert Sargeant, 44, of Island Park, New York, previously pleaded guilty before Judge Williams to one count of money laundering and was sentenced on Oct. 2, 2024, to six months in prison and six months of home confinement.
According to documents filed in these cases and statements made in court:
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act is a federal law enacted in March 2020 and was designed to provide emergency financial assistance to the millions of Americans who are suffering the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. One source of relief provided by the CARES Act was the authorization of hundreds of billions of dollars in forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through a program referred to as the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP). To obtain a PPP loan, a qualifying small business was required to apply and provide information on its operations, including the number of employees and expenses. In addition, businesses generally had to provide supporting documentation.
In 2020 and early 2021, Hawkins worked as the branch manager of the Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, branch of a national bank that was accepting Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loan applications. Hawkins worked with Eric Rivera, Lisa Smith, and others to recruit individuals who owned companies with little or no operations to open bank accounts at Hawkins’ branch and apply for PPP loans. Hawkins helped the recruited individuals submit PPP loan applications that contained materially false representations about the companies’ number of employees and payroll expenses. The applications also included false documentation, including tax forms. Based on these applications, Hawkins’ bank approved at least 38 PPP loans and disbursed approximately $5 million. Hawkins received incentive compensation through the bank for opening business bank accounts for the companies that received fraudulent PPP loans and also had an agreement with Rivera and Smith for them to pay Hawkins $5,000 of the loan proceeds for each PPP loan that Hawkins helped to obtain.
In April 2021, Sargeant’s business received a PPP loan based on a fraudulent application that was submitted through Hawkins’ branch. Sargeant then paid another individual, James Wessels, to create fake payroll checks. Sargeant distributed fake payroll checks to a friend, who cashed the checks and returned the majority of the cash to Sargeant. This was done to conceal that the proceeds actually were being spent on non-payroll expenses.
In addition the prison term, Judge Williams sentenced Hawkins to three years of supervised release and ordered restitution of $5.3 million.
Lisa Smith has pleaded guilty to her role in the scheme. Charges remain pending against Rivera and Wessels, and they are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
U.S. Attorney Sellinger credited special agents of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation – Office of the Inspector General, New York Region, under the direction of Special Agent-in-Charge Patricia Tarasca; special agents of the FBI’s South Jersey Resident Agency, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Wayne A. Jacobs in Philadelphia; special agents of the Social Security Administration, Office of the Inspector General, Boston-New York Field Division, under the direction of Acting Special Agent in Charge Corwin Rattler; and special agents of the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Inspector General, New York Region, under the direction of Special Agent in Charge Jonathan Mellone, with the investigation.
The government is represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel A. Friedman and Attorney-in-Charge Jason M. Richardson of the U.S. Attorney’s Office’s Criminal Division in Camden.
Source: New South Wales Government 2
Headline: NSW Government takes action after customers unlawfully charged for merchant fees
Merchant fee surcharges were levied on tens of millions of customer card transactions, despite repeated legal advice during the term of the former Liberal-National government that the government agency surcharges were unlawful.
The issue was identified by the NSW Auditor-General during settlement of the Department of Customer Service (DCS) financial statements for 2023-24 and brought to the attention of the current Government.
The current Secretary of DCS, Graeme Head, sought further information from his Department which revealed that Service NSW’s practice of charging merchant fees had been flagged as unlawful in legal advice received from the Crown Solicitor’s Office between February 2016 and December 2022. Despite this, merchant fees continued to be passed onto customers.
Merchant fee surcharges are levied to recoup transaction fees charged by payment providers including banks. Recouping the cost of merchant fees was directed by NSW Treasury in 2012.
Typical surcharges on Service NSW transactions include 30 cents for a 1-year licence renewal, 29 cents for a marriage certificate and $1.92 to renew registration for a small car (like a Toyota Corolla). The average surcharge on a Revenue NSW payment in 2023-24 was $0.92.
It’s currently estimated that 92 million transactions unlawfully incurred about $144 million in merchant fees from 2016 across Service NSW and Revenue NSW.
The Minns Labor Government has established an incident management taskforce and is progressing urgent work to shut down the unlawful charging of merchant fees.
People who have been charged fees are encouraged to register for updates on the Government’s response at service.nsw.gov.au/about-us/our-services/merchant-fees or by calling Service NSW on 13 77 88.
The Treasurer, Minister for Customer Service and Digital Government, and Minister for Finance have written to the NSW Ombudsman requesting an investigation into possible serious maladministration.
The Secretary of DCS has also referred the matter to the Ombudsman and the Independent Commission Against Corruption, noting the apparent failure to act on the 2016 Crown Solicitor’s advice.
The taskforce led by DCS has switched off fees being charged directly by Revenue NSW and the Rental Bond Board, and stopped fees on more than 80 per cent of Service NSW transactions.
Merchant fee surcharges have been switched off for more than 90 per cent of online payments, including the top 12 Service NSW transactions such as renewing a driver licence or vehicle registration or paying a fine.
Service NSW is urgently continuing work to switch off fees on all remaining transactions, including thousands of credit card terminals in Service NSW Service Centres. These transactions span several technology platforms and are conducted on behalf of multiple agencies.
While this work is being completed, alternate payment methods are available which do not incur a surcharge, such as paying in a Service Centre by cash or online with over-the-counter support from Service NSW staff.
The majority of Government transactions take place through Service NSW, but as a result of this information being uncovered, all departments have been instructed to report to NSW Treasury by 30 November on whether they charge merchant fees for services and to confirm they have the legal authority to do so.
Quotes attributable to Minister for Customer Service and Digital Government Jihad Dib:
“Our most immediate priority has been to stop these charges as quickly as possible.”
“It is deeply concerning that this practice has been ongoing, despite legal concerns being raised.”
“While the individual amounts typically charged may appear to be small, they have been charged unlawfully.”
“The community rightfully deserves an explanation about how this was allowed to continue for so long under the previous government.”
Quotes attributable to Minister for Finance Courtney Houssos:
“We have acted swiftly to establish a taskforce to deal with this issue. Our immediate efforts are focused on switching off the payment methods that charge these merchant fees as quickly as possible.
“We will get to the bottom of what happened and why millions of people were unlawfully charged merchant fees.
“Families, households and businesses expect governments to conduct themselves lawfully. That’s why all agencies have been instructed to examine their own processes.”
Source: Office of United States Attorneys
LAREDO, Texas – A 46-year-old man has been sentenced for possession with the intent to distribute meth, announced U.S. Attorney Alamdar S. Hamdani.
Daniel Rodriguez pleaded guilty April 2.
U.S. District Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo has now ordered Rodriguez to serve 360 months in federal prison to be immediately followed by five years of supervised release. In handing down the sentence, the court noted Rodriguez sold poison to people and despite having multiple opportunities to stop, he continued selling drugs. During the hearing, Rodriguez remarked he was a father and the court asked if he sold these same drugs to his family. Additionally, the court questioned if he would stop selling drugs if one of his own children had overdosed.
On Jan. 3, authorities executed a search warrant at Rodriguez’s residence. While approaching the house, law enforcement saw Rodriguez flee from inside his home, during which time he attempted to discard a baggie that was later found to contain meth.
After detaining Rodriguez, authorities searched the home and found more meth inside. He later admitted that the seized drugs belonged to him.
Rodriguez will remain in custody pending transfer to a U.S. Bureau of Prisons facility to be determined in the near future.
The Drug Enforcement Administration, Homeland Security Investigations, Customs and Border Protection, Border Patrol and the Laredo Police Department conducted the investigation. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Brian Bajew and Leslie Cortez prosecuted the case.
The case was prosecuted as part of an Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force (OCDETF) investigation. OCDETF is the largest anti-crime task force in the country. OCDETF identifies, disrupts and dismantles the highest-level criminal organizations that threaten the United States using a prosecutor-led, intelligence-driven, multi-agency approach. Additional information about the OCDETF Program can be found on the Department of Justice’s OCDETF webpage.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Xi highlights BRICS’ role in driving multipolarity, globalization ahead of Kazan Summit
KAZAN, Russia, Oct. 22 — Chinese President Xi Jinping on Tuesday underscored the role of BRICS as “a pillar” in promoting a multipolar world and fostering an inclusive economic globalization ahead of leaders’ formal meetings at the 2024 BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia.
The BRICS mechanism is the world’s most important platform for solidarity and cooperation between emerging markets and developing countries, Xi said during a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the sidelines of the summit.
The Kazan Summit marks the first in-person BRICS gathering since the group expanded its membership last year in Johannesburg, South Africa. More than 30 countries attend this year’s summit which runs until Thursday.
Xi told Putin, who chairs the summit, that he expected to have an in-depth discussion with Putin and other world leaders on the future development of the BRICS cooperation mechanism, so as to secure more opportunities for the Global South.
One of the key priorities of Russia’s BRICS chairmanship is integrating the new members into the BRICS framework, according to the official website. Other areas of practical cooperation include boosting trade and direct investment, as well as fostering a balanced and equitable transition to a low-carbon economy.
BRICS countries are expected to deepen consensus on strategic communication and practical cooperation for the group’s future development, said Wang Lei, director of the BRICS Cooperation Research Center at Beijing Normal University.
Wang also expressed hope for productive engagement between BRICS and the broader Global South at the summit to promote shared global development and uphold the effectiveness of multilateral governance systems.
Kazan, the capital of Tatarstan and the fifth-largest city in Russia, holds historical and cultural significance. During their meeting, Xi told Putin that around 400 years ago, the Great Tea Road that connected the two countries went past Kazan, through which tea leaves from China’s Wuyi Mountain region found their way into many Russian households.
The city is also home to Kazan Federal University, where notable figures like the Russian writer Leo Tolstoy and Russian revolutionary leader Vladimir Lenin studied.
Around noon on Tuesday, Xi arrived at Kazan International Airport, greeted by Russian officials. Kazan Mayor Ilsur Metshin told Xinhua that the city is honored to host the Chinese leader.
Guards of honor lined both sides of a red carpet to salute the Chinese leader, while Russian youths in traditional attire offered a warm welcome. Russian fighter jets escorted Xi’s plane before its landing.
“It is very important that, at the moment, we have such a good leader who can introduce new initiatives,” said Timirkhan Alishev, vice rector for International Affairs, Kazan Federal University, speaking of Xi’s role in international affairs.
Alishev told Xinhua that all initiatives introduced by China are rooted in multilateralism, fostering communication and dialogue on multiple levels.
“We see China puts a lot of efforts to develop BRICS,” said Alishev. “There are no preconditions for BRICS cooperation … You can start dialogue on equal basis with everybody.”
The term BRIC was initially coined in 2001 by Jim O’Neill, former chief economist at Goldman Sachs, as an investment concept referring to emerging market economies of Brazil, Russia, India and China. With South Africa’s inclusion in 2010, BRICS officially took shape.
After last year’s expansion, BRICS grouping now accounts for about 30 percent of the global GDP, nearly half of the global population and one-fifth of global trade. “Measured by GDP, the BRICS countries have already surpassed the G7 in importance,” said Dilma Rousseff, president of the New Development Bank (NDB), in a recent interview with Xinhua.
“I think this BRICS meeting is very important … At the moment, the countries of the Global South are in great need of funding. And the conditions for obtaining it are quite complicated,” Rousseff said during a meeting with Putin in Kazan on Tuesday.
Observers see the BRICS Summit as an opportunity for Global South countries to voice their needs. Victoria Fedosova, deputy director of the Institute for Strategic Research and Forecasts of the Russian Peoples’ Friendship University, said the very dynamic development of BRICS and the growth in membership reflect a demand for a platform for addressing global issues.
“The BRICS mechanism has enormous potential in adjusting the imbalances in global development accumulated over the last 80 years,” said Fedosova.
Other than the countries that became new full members on Jan. 1, 2024, over 30 countries like Thailand, Malaysia, Türkiye and Azerbaijan have either formally applied for or expressed interest in its membership, while many other developing countries are seeking deeper cooperation with the group.
As its influence expands, BRICS has gained appeal among many countries, particularly in the Global South, by offering them concrete advantages, said Zukiswa Roboji, a researcher at Walter Sisulu University in South Africa.
“BRICS has undoubtedly made notable strides in recent years,” said Roboji. It offers emerging economies easier access to financial resources and better opportunities for trade, investment and development, the expert added.
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
EDMONDS, WA – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) announced a major federal investment that will help create new jobs in Chehalis. The Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Manufacturing and Energy Supply Chains (MESC) has selected CleanFiber’s Chehalis location to receive $10 million to establish a 60,000-square-foot production facility that will turn recycled cardboard into carbon-storing insulation for homes.
“This planned new manufacturing plant is a triple win for the region: it will deliver good new manufacturing jobs, produce energy-saving advanced insulation, and reduce waste by upcycling local materials,” said Sen. Cantwell. “Supporting well-paying jobs in transitioning communities is a key requirement we included in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and this announcement shows the federal government is betting on Chehalis to be an engine of revitalization in Southwest Washington.”
The facility is expected to produce enough advanced insulation to weatherize more than 10,000 homes a year and will support 40 full-time employees.
Building the facility will require approximately 33 full-time local contractors during the construction phase to provide civil work, electrical, engineering, fire protection and insulation, mechanical work, and pipefitting. All contractors will be paid at or above the prevailing wage and CleanFiber will help create apprenticeship opportunities by engaging contractors with structured apprenticeship programs.
Once the facility is operational, CleanFiber expects to hire approximately 40 full-time employees. All hires will receive competitive wages and full benefits packages. The company plans outreach to disadvantaged and displaced coal workers, and will develop partnerships with state and local organizations (such as WorkSource Washington, the Washington State Labor Council, and the Pacific Mountain Workforce Board) to recruit from those populations. CleanFiber also pledges to remain neutral during any union organizing campaigns at their facility.
CleanFiber’s Chehalis plant is one of 14 projects announced today by DOE to accelerate domestic clean energy manufacturing in 15 coal communities across the United States. This is the first grant to a project in Washington state under the Advanced Energy Manufacturing and Recycling Program.
The program was created and funded by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) that Sen. Cantwell helped craft in the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, before passing the full Senate. Each project further positions the United States to win the competition for manufacturing in the 21st century and strengthen our national security by building supply chains for existing and emerging technologies in America, built by American workers with American materials.
CleanFiber is also building a sister plant in Ennis, Texas.
The projects, led by small-and medium-businesses in communities with de-commissioned coal facilities, were selected to address critical energy supply chain vulnerabilities. Sen. Cantwell was a strong supporter of the landmark BIL, which provided historic investments to revitalize communities in Washington state. The Senator’s CHIPS & Science Act also included provisions focusing on rural economic development, notably the recently announced Recompetes grant for the Olympic Peninsula. Overall the CHIPS & Science Act has led to resurgence of American manufacturing, innovation, and entrepreneurship, and spurred over $230 billion of investment in domestic semiconductor manufacturing.
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell
10.22.24
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA) joined 258 other Members of Congress in submitting an amicus brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Moyle v. United States and Idaho v. United States, two consolidated cases concerning the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) under consideration by the en banc Ninth Circuit. EMTALA is a federal law that requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding to provide necessary “stabilizing treatment” to patients experiencing medical emergencies, which can include abortion care.
After the Dobbs decision in 2022, a draconian anti-abortion law in Idaho went into effect that makes it a felony for a doctor to terminate a patient’s pregnancy unless it is “necessary” to prevent the patient’s death. The United States sued the State of Idaho, arguing that the state’s law is preempted by EMTALA in those circumstances in which abortion may not be necessary to prevent imminent death, but still constitutes the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient’s emergency medical condition. The district court agreed; it held that in those limited, but critically important situations, EMTALA requires Medicare-participating hospitals to provide abortion as an emergency medical treatment. Idaho Republicans appealed that ruling to the Supreme Court, which lifted the injunction and took the case in January—in March, Sen. Cantwell and 257 other Members filed an amicus brief asking the Supreme Court to affirm the district court decision. In June, the Supreme Court dismissed the case but without a ruling on the merits, sending the case back to the Ninth Circuit Court and reinstating the district court’s injunction.
In their brief in support of the Justice Department, the lawmakers ask the Ninth Circuit to uphold the district court’s ruling. They argue that the congressional intent, text, and history of EMTALA make clear that covered hospitals must provide abortion care when it is the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient’s emergency medical condition, and that EMTALA preempts Idaho’s abortion ban in emergency situations that present a serious threat to a patient’s health.
In their brief in support of the Justice Department, the lawmakers ask the Ninth Circuit to uphold the district court’s ruling. They argue that the congressional intent, text, and history of EMTALA make clear that covered hospitals must provide abortion care when it is the necessary stabilizing treatment for a patient’s emergency medical condition, and that EMTALA preempts Idaho’s abortion ban in emergency situations that present a serious threat to a patient’s health.
“[T]he 99th Congress passed EMTALA to ensure that every person who visits a Medicare-funded hospital with an ‘emergency medical condition’ is offered stabilizing treatment,” the Members write in their amicus brief. “Congress chose broad language for that mandate, requiring hospitals that participate in the Medicare program to provide ‘such treatment as may be required to stabilize the medical condition.’… That text—untouched by Congress for the past three decades—makes clear that in situations in which a doctor determines that abortion constitutes the ‘[n]ecessary stabilizing treatment’ for a pregnant patient, federal law requires the hospital to offer it. Yet Idaho has made providing that care a felony, in direct contravention of EMTALA’s mandate.”
Importantly, the Members note that in this case, “respecting the supremacy of federal law is about more than just protecting our system of government; it is about protecting people’s lives. If this Court allows Idaho’s near-total abortion ban to supersede federal law, pregnant patients in Idaho will continue to be denied appropriate medical treatment, placing them at heightened risk for medical complications and severe adverse health outcomes… And health care providers, unwilling to let Idaho’s law override their medical judgment regarding their patients’ best interests, will continue their exile from Idaho, creating maternity-care ‘deserts’ all over the state.” The Members point to numerous reports of OB/GYNs leaving Idaho en masse since the state’s abortion ban went into effect—Idaho has since lost fifty-five percent of its maternal-fetal medicine specialists and three rural hospitals have shut down maternity services altogether.
“These are not hypothetical scenarios. Because Idaho’s abortion ban contains no clear exceptions for the “emergency medical conditions” covered by EMTALA, it forces physicians to wait until their patients are on the verge of death before providing abortion care. The result in other states with similar laws has been ‘significant maternal morbidity,’” write the Members, pointing to harrowing reports of pregnant women with severe health complications being denied necessary abortion care, including an Idaho woman who was flown to Utah for an abortion while hemorrhaging, leaking amniotic fluid, and terrified that she would not survive to care for her two other children. “Federal law does not allow Idaho to endanger the lives of its residents in this way.”
In their brief, the Members also clarify that the references to “unborn child” in EMTALA were intended to expand hospitals’ obligations with respect to providing stabilizing treatment—not contract them or take away the obligation to provide abortion care in certain circumstances.
The Members’ brief also counters an argument from Idaho and its amici that the Supremacy Clause does not apply in this case because EMTALA was passed using Spending Clause authority, and therefore acts only as a condition on Medicare funding. The Members make clear that all laws passed by Congress are entitled to preemption—regardless of their source of constitutional authority—and states cannot pass laws that make it impossible for private parties to accept federal funding, inhibiting the purpose of the federal law.
“Because EMTALA requires abortion when necessary to stabilize a patient with an emergency medical condition, Idaho’s near-total abortion ban is preempted to the extent that it prevents doctors from providing that care,” the Members write. “This Court should reject Appellants’ novel theory that EMTALA is not entitled to preemptive effect because it was enacted pursuant to Congress’s spending power. Under the Supremacy Clause, all ‘the constitutional laws enacted by congress,’ constitute ‘the supreme Law of the Land,’. As the Supreme Court has repeatedly held, the principle of federal supremacy applies to laws passed pursuant to Congress’s spending authority no less than it does to laws effectuating other enumerated powers.”
“In sum, EMTALA plainly requires hospitals that participate in the Medicare program to provide abortion care when, in a doctor’s medical judgment, it constitutes the ‘[n]ecessary stabilizing treatment’ for a patient’s ‘emergency medical condition.’”
The lawmakers conclude by asking the Ninth Circuit to affirm the district court’s decision that EMTALA requires Medicare-participating hospitals to provide abortion care when it is necessary as emergency medical treatment.
In the Senate, the amicus brief was signed by 48 U.S. Senators: Schumer, Murray, Wyden, Durbin, Baldwin, Bennet, Blumenthal, Booker, Brown, Butler, Cantwell, Cardin, Carper, Casey Jr., Coons, Cortez Masto, Duckworth, Gillibrand, Hassan, Heinrich, Helmy, Hickenlooper, Hirono, Kaine, Kelly, King Jr., Klobuchar, Luján, Markey, Merkley, Murphy, Padilla, Peters, Reed, Rosen, Sanders, Schatz, Shaheen, Sinema, Smith, Stabenow, Tester, Van Hollen, Warner, Warnock, Warren, Welch, and Whitehouse.
In the House, the brief was signed by 211 U.S. Representatives.
The lawmakers’ amicus brief to the Supreme Court can be read in full HERE.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
The government has launched the 2024-25 Women’s Sport Investment Accelerator scheme, helping to attract more private investment in women’s sport and drive growth into the sector.
Women’s sport in the UK is set for a massive boost as the Government announces a scheme to drive investment in elite clubs and leagues across the country, as part of a new pledge to make the UK the world’s top destination for women’s sport investment.
The scheme will prioritise development, commercial growth and financial sustainability. Sponsorship and investment are key to increasing visibility and inspiring young female athletes to ensure greater talent pathways are created, and to develop their careers in sport.
Investment Minister Poppy Gustafsson will today [Wednesday 23 October] launch the 2024-25 Women’s Sport Investment Accelerator scheme, which will bring over 20 elite leagues, competitions and teams across nine different sports, such as the Barclays Women’s Super League and England Women’s Cricket, together with investors and industry experts to help them secure transformational investment and sponsorships.
It will provide them with comprehensive market insights, seminars, connections and networking opportunities over a series of sessions, led by the Department for Business and Trade in collaboration with Deloitte, which will give them the tools and expert insight to help them attract investment and grow their business.
Investment Minister Poppy Gustafsson will launch the scheme at a sport investment conference at Rothschild & Co today, involving leaders from major UK sports and some of the world’s most prominent investors.
Minister for Investment Poppy Gustafsson said:
The UK is already an elite home of women’s sport, and my goal is to make us the top destination for women’s sport investment.
The launch of this scheme, a week after our record-breaking International Investment Summit, shows the UK is truly the best place to do business in this fast-growing industry.
Off the back of the latest figures showing the industry could be worth over £1 billion this year, I’m looking forward to speaking to investors and clubs, leagues and teams today about how the Accelerator can drive this growth even further.
The scheme will capitalise on the rapid growth of the women’s sport industry, which is expected to be worth over £1 billion by the end of the year according to Deloitte, marking a 300 percent increase since 2021.
By supporting women’s sport to attract new private investment into the UK it will help deliver on the Government’s central Growth Mission, building on existing support for growing women’s sport including the £30 million Lionesses Future Fund and over £12 million to grow women’s rugby.
It follows a successful pilot of the scheme in 2023-24 which supported leagues, teams and competitions across football, cricket, rugby and more to secure game-changing investment and sponsorship deals.
Now, with two new sports and a range of new competitions and teams signed up, the scheme will provide even more dedicated advice and support to attract investment and offer more connections with investors.
The launch also comes after major recent UK women’s sport investment successes, including a £45 million sponsorship deal for the Barclays Women’s Super League, Michelle Kang’s acquisition of the London City Lionesses, and the England & Wales Cricket Board launching the process to secure private investment into The Hundred early next year.
Minister for Sport Stephanie Peacock said:
Women’s sport has been growing rapidly in recent years and we are committed to supporting its expansion, from the grassroots to elite level.
Last year, we welcomed Karen Carney OBE’s Review of Women’s Football which addressed the importance of growing investment in women’s sport.
As Sports Minister, I want to see as many women and girls as possible enjoy sport and physical activity, and this scheme will be instrumental in securing investment to grow the sector even further.
England & Wales Cricket Board Director of the Women’s Professional Game Beth Barrett-Wild said:
The first edition of the Women’s Sport Investment Accelerator scheme provided an engine to help power conversations and connections between rights holders, investors, and commercial partners, with expert insight from Deloitte helping to deepen understanding for all about the landscape and opportunities.
I’m really looking forward to the launch of year two, and the chance to take this discussion to the next level, as we all work together to unlock the full potential of women’s sport.
Deloitte Sports Business Group Lead Partner Tim Bridge said:
We’re witnessing a surge in investment opportunities within women’s sport. The rise of dedicated funds and brand sponsorships for women’s and girls’ clubs, leagues and competitions signals a powerful shift. The Accelerator programme has been built to connect investors and brands with these opportunities, showcasing the strength and remarkable growth potential of women’s sport. This influx of investment will be instrumental in driving professionalisation and boosting participation across the UK, creating a lasting impact for women’s sport at all levels while delivering significant economic returns.
The Government’s pledge to make the UK the top destination for women’s sport investment comes after the record-breaking International Investment Summit held just last week, which secured £63 billion of private investment into the UK which will create over 38,000 new jobs across the country.
Full list of the elite sports represented in the 2024-25 Women’s Sport Investment Accelerator:
Source: Government of Canada regional news
“No child should ever have to experience abuse. Whether at school or in the home, online or out in the community, abuse of any kind is always unacceptable. Child Abuse Prevention Month serves as an important reminder that everyone has a responsibility to know the warning signs and speak up to keep young people safe.
“Our government remains committed to protecting all children and youth and ensuring they have a safe place to turn, as well as the resources they need when abuse does happen. This includes supporting the invaluable work of Alberta’s child and youth advocacy centres, which foster welcoming environments where young survivors are empowered to tell their stories and seek justice, as well as Little Warriors, for those who need longer-term support to recover from child sexual abuse trauma.
“If you believe a child’s safety is at risk, don’t wait. Call the confidential, 24/7 Child Intervention line at 1-800-638-0715 or contact the nearest Children and Family Services office, Delegated First Nations Agency or local police.
“To every Albertan who has taken action to protect a child’s safety and well-being, or prevent abuse from happening in their community, thank you. To every child and youth who has experienced abuse: we believe you, you are not alone and help is available.”
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Pennsylvania Bob Casey
Funding will help improve the terminal building
Airport Terminal Program funding comes from infrastructure law
With this funding, Pittsburgh International Airport has received more than $129 million in federal funding since the start of 2021
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Bob Casey (D-PA) and John Fetterman (D-PA) and U.S. Representatives Chris Deluzio (D-PA-17) and Summer Lee (D-PA-12) announced that Pittsburgh International Airport (PIT) is receiving $6,000,000 in competitive grant funding to modernize and rehabilitate the terminal. This funding comes from the Airport Terminal Program (ATP), which was created by the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to revitalize the Nation’s aging airports.
“Pittsburgh International Airport is an essential connection between the region and the world, and it’s critical that the terminals are safe and can meet passenger needs. This investment from the infrastructure law will support ongoing efforts to modernize the airport by replacing floors, bulkheads, and decades-old moving walkways,” said Senator Casey. “I will always fight for investments that boost Southwestern Pennsylvania’s economy and keep the region moving.”
“Pittsburgh’s airport should reflect the grit and resilience of the city it serves and this $6 million investment helps make that happen. Upgrading parts of the terminal that have been in place for over 30 years will help bring our airport back up to speed, create jobs, and ensure it serves both the community and travelers with true Pittsburgh pride,” said Senator Fetterman.
“The Infrastructure Law is still at work in Western PA, this time bringing home $6 million more for the Pittsburgh International Airport terminal updates,” said Congressman Deluzio. “The airport is not only a place where people catch flights: but it’s also a workplace, employer, and economic hub. We need to make sure it works as smoothly as possible, and that we help out airport be the best it can be. I’m proud federal funding from the Infrastructure Law is a part of that effort.”
“Today’s announcement of $6 million in federal funding for Pittsburgh International Airport is a big win for the people of Pittsburgh and the hardworking travelers who rely on safe, accessible, and efficient airports. This investment is about putting people first by creating good-paying jobs, ensuring smoother and safer travel experiences, and revitalizing a space that millions pass through each year. It’s also a commitment to the growth and well-being of our community, helping Pittsburgh remain a hub of opportunity and progress for all who live, work, and visit here,” said Congresswoman Lee.
The funding for Pittsburgh International Airport will support the Terminal Modernization Program, which includes installing new flooring, restoring columns and bulkheads, and replacing 32-year-old moving walkways in the concourses. Since the infrastructure law was passed, millions of dollars have been allocated to PIT. In June 2024, Casey, Fetterman, Deluzio, and Lee announced $20.6 million for PIT to support their ongoing terminal improvement project. In February 2024, the Members announced $5.3 million in new infrastructure funding to fund a component of the 700,000 square foot landslide terminal construction. PIT has received a total of $129,706,728 since the start of 2021.
Source: US Federal Emergency Management Agency
Headline: FEMA Administrator Announces Community Liaison Hiring Program As Helene Recovery Continues
FEMA Administrator Announces Community Liaison Hiring Program As Helene Recovery Continues
WASHINGTON – FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell continued meeting with survivors and responders in North Carolina while leading the federal recovery efforts.FEMA Administrator Deanne Criswell joined Gov. Roy Cooper to visit a community care station in Asheville where the administrator announced the community liaison hiring program in the state. The agency will hire community-based staff to serve as liaisons between North Carolina survivors and FEMA to ensure needs are met throughout the recovery. North Carolina’s recovery continues progressing with power being restored to most customers while roads are reopening as debris is cleared. Over $130 million has gone to more than 91,000 households in the state for assistance like making home repairs and paying for a temporary place to stay. Nearly 4,600 survivors have participated in FEMA’s Transitional Sheltering Assistance program where they stay in hotels as they work on their recovery plans.Recovery continues in other states affected by Helene and Milton. For instance, in Florida—where power has been restored to pre-storm levels—more than 97,000 households have been approved for over $308 million in FEMA assistance for their Helene recovery. Over 116,000 households have received more than $129 million for Milton. In addition, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced Operation Blue Roof which is a free service to homeowners for 25 counties in Florida impacted by Hurricane Milton. Residents can sign-up at http://www.blueroof.gov or by calling 888-ROOF-BLU (888-766-3258). The sign-up period deadline is Nov. 5.FEMA encourages Helene and Milton survivors to apply online as this remains the best way to apply for disaster assistance. Here are the ways to apply for federal assistance: Apply online at disaster assistance.govCall 800-621-3362Use the FEMA AppVisit a Disaster Recovery Center to talk with FEMA and state agency officials and apply for assistancePresident Biden has approved major disaster declarations in six states – Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee and Virginia – affected by Helene. He has also approved a major disaster declaration for Florida following Hurricane Milton.These photos highlight response and recovery efforts across states impacted by hurricanes Helene and Milton.
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56715″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/ea36011f24448953e593fc9711a78afc.jpg?itok=4skrYjFT” alt=”Caption: Hendersonville, NC (Oct. 21, 2024) – FEMA Administrator, Deanne Crisswell, meets with survivors of Hurricane Helene as well as staff supporting recovery efforts at a Disaster Recovery Center.” class=”image-style-large”>
Hendersonville, NC (Oct. 21, 2024) – FEMA Administrator, Deanne Crisswell, meets with survivors of Hurricane Helene as well as staff supporting recovery efforts at a Disaster Recovery Center.
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56723″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/32c26741d8be2764728a9fd776fcb778.jpg?itok=KWdFFHt6″ alt=”Caption: Asheville, NC (October 21, 2024) – FEMA Administrator, Deanne Criswell, and North Carolina Governor, Roy Cooper, visit a Community Care Station where they engage with volunteers and DoD responding to Hurricane Helene.” class=”image-style-large”>
Asheville, NC (October 21, 2024) – FEMA Administrator, Deanne Criswell, and North Carolina Governor, Roy Cooper, visit a Community Care Station where they engage with volunteers and DoD responding to Hurricane Helene.
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56717″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/72ea43eb5f2c751b8017625bacb6b3c4.jpg?itok=DlgyTlbz” alt=”Caption: Hendersonville, NC (Oct. 21, 2024) – FEMA Administrator, Deanne Crisswell, meets with survivors of Hurricane Helene as well as staff supporting recovery efforts at a Disaster Recovery Center.” class=”image-style-large”>
Hendersonville, NC (Oct. 21, 2024) – FEMA Administrator, Deanne Crisswell, meets with survivors of Hurricane Helene as well as staff supporting recovery efforts at a Disaster Recovery Center.
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56673″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/4ba445c82ee4600a324abec797464634.jpg?itok=evYDlfmN” alt=”Caption: Henderson County, N.C. (Oct. 20, 2024) – A FEMA Disaster Recovery Center is open in Henderson County to help survivors of Hurricane Helene.” class=”image-style-large”>
Henderson County, N.C. (Oct. 20, 2024) – A FEMA Disaster Recovery Center is open in Henderson County to help survivors of Hurricane Helene.
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56644″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/87d6851fbd578890475cd1f006042951.jpg?itok=Lf-wvhTn” alt=”Caption: Chimney Rock, N.C. (Oct. 18, 2024) – U.S. Army Soldiers of the 325th Airborne Infantry Regiment remove debris from the riverside of Chimney Rock, N.C. on Friday, October 18, 2024. FEMA photo by Madeleine Cook” class=”image-style-large”>
Chimney Rock, N.C. (Oct. 18, 2024) – U.S. Army Soldiers of the 325th Airborne Infantry Regiment remove debris from the riverside of Chimney Rock, N.C. on Friday, October 18, 2024. FEMA photo by Madeleine Cook
GRANITEVILLE, South Carolina — Survivors visit a Disaster Recovery Center to learn and apply for disaster assistance to recover from Hurricane Helene. (Photo Credit: FEMA)
PALMETTO, Florida – FEMA workers set up in a new Disaster Recovery Center in Manatee County. Survivors can meet with FEMA staff at centers to discuss their applications and available federal resources. Find your closest center at www.FEMA.gov/DRC. (Photo Credit: FEMA)
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56656″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/b1f397baae1ec281f0d729e2ef2f78f8.jpg?itok=EWL_9iKb” alt=”Caption: Plant City, Fla. (Oct. 18, 2024) – A Florida Multiple Agency Resources Center has opened to assist Hurricanes Helene and Milton survivors with essential needs, including taking FEMA applications.” class=”image-style-large”>
Plant City, Fla. (Oct. 18, 2024) – A Florida Multiple Agency Resources Center has opened to assist Hurricanes Helene and Milton survivors with essential needs, including taking FEMA applications.
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56648″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/248308d77a173777da4d7ca79290a2a4.jpg?itok=di_u_teT” alt=”Caption: Charlotte County, Fla. (Oct. 17, 2024) – FEMA Disaster Survivor Assistance teams canvass the area to help those after Hurricane Milton.” class=”image-style-large”>
Charlotte County, Fla. (Oct. 17, 2024) – FEMA Disaster Survivor Assistance teams canvass the area to help those after Hurricane Milton.
MARTIN COUNTY, Florida- FEMA Disaster Survivors Assistance team members and Martin County emergency management canvas Martin County, Florida, to register and assist disaster survivors after Hurricane Milton. (Photo credit: FEMA)
View Original’ data-align=”center” data-asset-link=”1″ data-entity-type=”emerald” data-image-style=”large” data-asset-type=”imageasset” data-asset-id=”56695″ src=”https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/externals/dca0cc6832d311bc4c47dce5552b03a6.jpg?itok=2VxOWtN1″ alt=”Caption: Statesboro, Ga. (Oct. 12, 2024) – Volunteers from a disaster relief group clear debris from Hurricane Helene.” class=”image-style-large”>
Statesboro, Ga. (Oct. 12, 2024) – Volunteers from a disaster relief group clear debris from Hurricane Helene.
FEMA’s Disaster Recovery Toolkit provides graphics, social media copy and sample text in multiple languages. In addition, FEMA has set up a rumor response web page to reduce confusion about its role in the Helene and Milton response and recovery.
amy.ashbridge
Tue, 10/22/2024 – 22:50
Source: Australia Government Ministerial Statements
EVAN WALLACE: Against the political backdrop of the state government’s bungled delivery of the new Spirit of Tasmania ferries, Federal Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development, Catherine King, has been in Burnie to check out a number of projects that are set to benefit Tasmania’s north west. The Burnie shiploader, which is now complete and will assist in shipping materials off for export, and sections of the Burnie Cultural Precinct, which are now open to the public. Minister, good morning.
CATHERINE KING: Good morning, Evan. It’s lovely to be with you.
EVAN WALLACE: Now, before we talk infrastructure, you’re a mum. We just heard some lovely reflections for National Children’s Week. Do you have a favourite nursery rhyme?
CATHERINE KING: Oh gosh. Isn’t that funny? I had this little – there was a little Italian one called Sleep My Baby that I used to sing to my little boy, which I – [indistinct], I think it was called. And I used to sing that to him, so that was my favourite one, but hasn’t rubbed off. My son is now six foot five and 16, knows everything and towers over me and doesn’t sing or speak any Italian.
EVAN WALLACE: Oh, shame, shame. Now, look, you’ve been in Burnie, checking out some major infrastructure projects, including the new Port of Burnie shiploader. What sort of difference will the new shiploader make to communities and businesses who call north and north west Tasmania home?
CATHERINE KING: Well, what it does is – I actually had a chance to look at the old shiploader back in 2022. It was one of the first projects I visited after we came to government with Senator Anne Urquhart. It was a pretty rainy old day then, and you could tell this 1968 facility, whilst it had done Burnie proud and the people of the community proud, she was a bit tired and wasn’t working and functioning in the way that it should do. In particular, what you could see was that it didn’t meet OH&S standards. Workers really were stringing it together and trying to make it work. So this new shiploader meets all the new OH&S standards, the new cabin’s really comfortable, but it also loads more. It’s loaded already over 40,000 tonnes in freight. But what it also does is it’s very much part of the entire freight system here in Tasmania, getting those minerals to export, getting trucks off the road. So making sure that you’ve got those facilities. We’ve also- there’s also the bulk minerals export facility. There’s further money to go in that project. So really it’s about making sure Tasmania and the north west continues to have great facilities to export its products.
EVAN WALLACE: But if you are in the north and north west and you’re scratching your head and think, oh, it might just be a bit of a politician ease there, just what sort of tangible difference will it make if you’re a business or a community member?
CATHERINE KING: Well, it means that you can load more of your products onto the ships and more quickly, and that’s more efficient for the way in which you go about doing business. It means, potentially, that there can be more investment in some of the mines, more minerals coming out of Tasmania, and that means jobs.
EVAN WALLACE: Succinctly put. Now, your government is contributing to a number of major infrastructure projects in Tasmania. In Launceston, you’ve allocated $65 million for the UTAS Stadium; in Hobart, $240 million for the Macquarie Point Precinct. On the mines, wherever you go in Launceston, where I am, people are talking about the state government’s bungled handling of the new Spirit of Tasmania ferries. Do you still have faith in the state government as an infrastructure partner after its bungled handling of the new Spirits, Minister?
CATHERINE KING: Well, obviously, in terms of TasPorts and the Spirit of Tasmania as a government business enterprise, it has to work in the best interests of Tasmanians and I’m sure it’s under a fair bit of scrutiny at the moment and the government will need to deal with that. I’m really confident we’ve been delivering really big projects with the Tasmanian government for a long time. The Bridgeport Bridge is probably the largest of those at the moment. But I just drove over in Burnie, the upgrades to the bridge there, the walking tracks and the shiploader obviously is something I think Tasmanians can be very proud of.
It has been delivered largely- it’s been delivered by TasRail, but it has been delivered by contracts with Tasmanian companies, built for Tasmania by Tasmanians, as we heard yesterday. The steel manufacturer from Haywards, I think also the builder. You’ve got some terrific companies here, and the- really, the issue with mega projects and these sorts of things is that, you know, really making sure that we’ve got good scrutiny on those is part of what my department is involved in, and also why I’ve stepped Infrastructure Australia up much more into the space of evaluation, learning from projects as we go. So we build a lot of things with the Tasmanian government, so I’m sure the Tasmanian Government will be looking at what’s gone wrong in terms of TasPorts and the ships as well, and learning lessons from that.
EVAN WALLACE: But you still have full faith in the Tasmanian Government as an infrastructure partner?
CATHERINE KING: Yeah. Well the projects we’re delivering with them, they have done well at and we continue to work really closely with them in terms of that. And I look forward to continuing to do that as well as delivering with the local councils along this coast.
EVAN WALLACE: So you’re confident that with the likes of the UTAS Stadium, the Macquarie Point precinct, that these projects will be delivered on time and on budget?
CATHERINE KING: Well, my department works really closely with the Tasmanian Government. We get project status reports, we make milestone payments, we’re all over it. And so we have a lot of confidence in working with the Tasmanian Government. They’ve been a proven delivery partner for many, years on projects that we co-invest with them on.
EVAN WALLCE: You’ve talked about some of the steps that you might be taking with respect to oversight, and there are probably a lot of listeners wondering whether your government is going to take any extra steps, given what we’ve seen with the bungled handling of the Spirit of Tasmania ferries to ensure these projects stay on track. So speaking directly to those individuals who are feeling a bit dubious, or feeling- questioning just how well and how effectively these projects could get off the ground, what are those steps that your government is going to take to ensure that they do remain on track and on budget?
CATHERINE KING: So every project requires a report to me before we release any money. And then there are milestone payments that happen across that. I’ve got department officials looking through that all the time and basically making decisions about where projects are ready. We do a lot of planning work before we start projects, before we commit any money to them, to make sure we actually have a really good handle on what the costs are going to be. Obviously, there are always things that happen from supply chain issues to labour, conditions. Obviously COVID added costs as well. And we factor those in when we’re doing some of the planning work and we’ve got much better at doing that. So that always happens. Milestone payments are through. And then the other thing I’ve done is introduced with Infrastructure Australia some post-evaluation work, so we learn. But mega projects, really- those ones we call them over 250 million, are always really difficult and they do require extra level of scrutiny. And that’s what we do when we’re co-investing with the Tasmanian government.
EVAN WALLACE: So does that mean if that those projects fall off track, that they’re behind schedule, that you’ll just withhold payment from the Tasmanian Government?
CATHERINE KING: We can do that. Or there can be other mitigation measures put in place. So certainly the first thing we ask is what’s happening. But really the way in which it works between the Commonwealth and the Tasmanian Government is we are in constant contact about where projects are up to, where milestones are up to, and that work is constant. So really our expectation is that- we don’t- there’s no surprises. We don’t suddenly hear that there is something going wrong with the project. We know if something’s happening and we can work out what mitigation needs to be put in place for that. But of course, ultimately under the deeds that we have, the agreements we have with- we can withhold payments and we don’t make final payments until quite some time after a project has actually been finished.
EVAN WALLACE: And very quickly Catherine King, in 30 seconds or so, there is an election around the corner. You are in Tasmania’s north west today. If you’re someone listening in the north west and you’re struggling to keep a roof above your family’s head and put food on the table, what’s the one thing that your government has done that’s made the biggest difference to make their lives easier?
CATHERINE KING: Well, the biggest thing that we’ve done is absolutely tackle inflation We’ve halved inflation since we came to office at the same time as providing cost of living relief, to take the sting out of this cost of living crisis where we can. So obviously the tax breaks, cheaper medicines, really concentrating on getting childcare fees down and investing in that, is an investment into our futures.
EVAN WALLACE: More than one thing there, Minister. But before I let you go…
CATHERINE KING: [Interrupts] There’s never one.
EVAN WALLACE: … your favourite TV variety show?
CATHERINE KING: Oh gosh, I knew you were going to ask me that, and it’s funny, I don’t watch a lot of TV, what I have been watching on, I think, Apple TV, is Slow Horses. If everyone hasn’t seen it, it’s not really a variety TV show, but that’s the one thing. And I think last Christmas my favourite thing I did over summer, was I lay on the couch, and I watched the entire series of Ted Lasso.
EVAN WALLACE: Always good to have a laugh. Minister Catherine King, thanks for joining us on Northern Tasmania Breakfast.
CATHERINE KING: Really good to be with you, Evan.
Source: Government of Canada regional news
The Government of Yukon’s Department of Education is launching two Social Studies curriculum units – one new and one updated – for Grades 5 and 10, focusing on the history and legacy of Indian Residential Schools in the Yukon and Canada. These resources, designed to provide students with a deeper understanding of the impacts of residential schools, represent a significant step toward truth and reconciliation in the Yukon’s education system.
Source: China State Council Information Office
In the final weeks to Election Day, U.S. Vice President and Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris is to make a surprise visit to Houston, Texas, on Friday, as the Senate race between Democratic Congressman Colin Allred and Republican Senator Ted Cruz has become more competitive in the largest red state.
This marks Harris’ first stop in Texas since July, where she will appear with Allred at a Friday afternoon rally, reportedly focusing on abortion rights, an issue central to elections nationwide.
Allred, a three-term U.S. representative from Dallas, has been narrowing the polling gap with Cruz and consistently outraising him. National Democratic groups have poured millions of dollars into Allred’s campaign.
Cruz, who is seeking for his third term, is still favored to win with an average lead of about four percentage points in recent public polls. However, two leading election forecasters now shifted the race from “likely Republican” to “lean Republican.”
On Sunday, the Dallas Morning News, the state’s top newspaper by daily circulation, endorsed Allred, dealing another setback to Cruz. Some Democrats now view Texas as one of their best opportunities to gain a Senate seat.
Allred has centered his campaign on Texas’ abortion ban, one of the strictest in the country, blasting Cruz for supporting a law with no exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother. He also slammed Cruz for “only focused on himself,” citing the two-term senator’s 2021 Cancun vacation when millions of Texans lost power for days in a deadly historic winter storm.
Cruz, on the other hand, has leaned heavily into immigration issues, accusing Allred and Harris of repeatedly voting for “open borders,” while largely avoiding addressing abortion exceptions, deferring the issue to state control.
Harris County, which includes much of Houston, is a Democratic stronghold. In 2020, Biden won the county by 13 points, but Trump carried Texas by 5.6 points. Texas has remained the largest red state since Jimmy Carter’s victory in 1976.
Early voting began across Texas on Monday.
Source: National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA)
When an earthquake happens, stay where you are and drop, cover and hold – and don’t shelter in a doorway, as you’re far more likely to get injured, says the National Emergency Management Agency.
The New Zealand ShakeOut earthquake drill and tsunami hikoi is taking place tomorrow at 9.30am, and the NEMA’s Chief Science Advisor Professor Tom Wilson is reminding Kiwis that Drop, Cover and Hold is the best way to stay safe during shaking. (ref. http://www.shakeout.govt.nz/ )
Tom Wilson says research (Nicholas Horspool, 2022) based on ACC injury data from the 2016 Kaikoura-Hurunui earthquake indicates that you’re up to four times more likely to get injured if you try and move about during an earthquake.
“Don’t rush to shelter in a doorway when shaking happens. You’re more likely to get injured while scrambling to get to one, or you may get hurt by the door itself. Research shows that ‘Drop, cover and hold’ is the best general advice for keeping safe in earthquakes in New Zealand.”
The research also showed that people who moved to protect someone else were more likely to get injured.
“Earlier this month, many people in central New Zealand were awoken by strong shaking. If you have young children, your first instinct is to rush to their aid. However, you may get hurt in the process. Wait until the shaking stops, and arrive safely. Ideally you’ve already made your home ‘quake-safe’ so you are confident your tamariki will be safe.”
Natural Hazards Commission Toka Tū Ake Chief Resilience and Research Officer, Dr Jo Horrocks says keeping your home quake-safe is one of the best ways to protect yourself and your whānau during an earthquake.
“If you know your baby’s nursery is secured, for example, you’re less likely to feel the need to rush in during the shaking. Simple actions like securing heavy furniture and removing items that could fall above your bed can make a big difference in preventing injuries.
“By preparing your home now, you’re helping to keep everyone safe when the next earthquake hits.”
NEMA and the NHC Toka Tū Ake are encouraging people to practice their Drop, Cover and Hold during the NZ ShakeOut National Earthquake Drill this month on October 24 at 9.30am. You can sign up at http://www.shakeout.govt.nz – over 635,000 people have registered.
What to do if an earthquake happens:
If you are outside
If you are outside, Drop, Cover and Hold.
Move no more than a few steps away from buildings, trees, streetlights and power lines.
Then Drop, Cover and Hold.
If you are in an elevator
If you are in an elevator, Drop, Cover and Hold.
When the shaking stops, try and get out at the nearest floor if you can safely do so.
If you are driving
If you are driving, Pull over and Wait. Pull over to a clear location. Stop.
Wait there with your seatbelt fastened until the shaking stops.
Once the shaking stops, proceed with caution and avoid bridges or ramps as they may have been damaged.
If you are in bed
If you are in bed, Stay, Cover and Hold.
Stay in bed and pull the sheets and blankets over you. You are less likely to be injured if you stay in bed.
Cover your head and neck with your pillow.
Hold on until the shaking stops.
If you have a mobility impairment or use a cane
If you have a mobility impairment or use a cane, Drop, Cover and Hold or Sit, Cover and Hold
Drop by getting as low as you can or Sit on a chair, bed, etc.
Cover your head and neck with both hands. Keep your cane near you so you can use it when the shaking stops.
Hold on until the shaking stops.
If you use a walker or a wheelchair
If you use a walker or wheelchair, Lock, Cover and Hold.
Lock your wheels and get as low as possible.
Bend over and Cover your head and neck as best you can.
Then Hold on until the shaking stops.
Source: Samsung
Samsung Electronics today announced the launch of its Generative Wallpaper feature for the 2024 Neo QLED and QLED models, powered by Tizen OS. This new feature leverages AI to create custom 4K images that enhance the TV’s display, offering users a unique way to personalize their viewing experience.
“Generative Wallpaper brings a new dimension of personalization to our customers’ screens, allowing them to customize their TVs in a way that truly reflects their style,” said Cheolgi Kim, Executive Vice President of the Visual Display Business at Samsung Electronics. “As we continue to push the boundaries of AI technology, we look forward to transforming the home entertainment experience and evolving how users interact with their screens.”
Through Generative Wallpaper, Samsung will deliver high-quality visuals that seamlessly integrate with home décor and creating a welcoming and immersive atmosphere. The feature will be available through Samsung’s Ambient Mode, which transforms the TV into a canvas for curated visuals, including useful information like weather updates, news and time. To access the feature, users can simply navigate to the ‘Ambient Mode’ menu, select the button and choose from themes such as ‘Happy Holiday’ or ‘Party.’ Samsung’s advanced AI then provides stunning 4K visuals that harmonize with the user’s home environment.
Generative Wallpaper will debut this month in South Korea, North America and Europe, with a global rollout planned for 2025.
Source: New Zealand Transport Agency
Drivers need to be ready for roadworks State Highway 6 – Kohatu-Kawatiri, with road reconstruction due to begin next week.
Contractors will be on the job near Tunnicliff Bridge, between Motupiko and Korere, for six weeks beginning Monday, 29 October. The work will continue through to Friday, 6 December.
The highway’s pavement has reached the end of its life, and contractor will be carrying out long-term repairs to the road.
For the first three weeks (29 October to 15 November) the work will be carried out during the day from Monday to Friday under stop/go traffic controls. Drivers will need to factor in around 15-minute delays through the area.
Between 18 and 29 November, the highway will be closed during the day between Motupiko and Korere due to the narrowness of the Tunnicliffe Bridge section of the road. A local road detour will be available during this time, but drivers must allow an extra 20 minutes of travel time.
From 2 to 6 December, the site will return to daytime stop/go as road crews tidy up and disestablish the site.
Temporary speed limits will be in place while the repairs are underway. It is essential all road users follow them – they are there to keep drivers and workers safe, and also to protect newly laid road surfaces from damage.
Every effort is being made to minimise disruption for the public, with the work timed to begin after Labour Weekend be complete before the busy Christmas holiday season. It ensures the road will be roadwork-free when traffic is at its busiest.
Access through the closure zone will be available to residents, businesses, and emergency services.
Works Schedule:
Works Location:
Summer Maintenance Season – Tips and Advice:
More Information:
Source: New Zealand Governor General
Fakaalofa lahi atu – and my very warmest Pacific greetings.
I’d like to specifically acknowledge: Prime Minister Tagelagi; Prime Minister Mark Brown of the Cook Islands; Alapati Tavite, Ulu of Tokelau; President Williame Katonivere of Fiji; Ministers and Members of Parliament of Niue; and Members of the Diplomatic Corps.
Thank you, Prime Minister Tagelagi for inviting Richard and me to join leaders of our ‘Realm family’ and members of the Diplomatic Corps in celebrating this year’s Constitution Day, marking the 50th year of self-government and enduring freedom of association with New Zealand.
I am honoured to represent His Majesty King Charles III, our Head of State of the Realm of New Zealand, and affirm his best wishes to you all on this very special day for Niue.
I also wish to convey warmest congratulations from the nearly 31,000 New Zealanders who regard Niue as home. You will be aware of the great pride they take in their distinctive culture, language and traditions, and the strength of their connections to Niue.
I’m sure those who witnessed that historic moment fifty years ago, on the 19th of October 1974, would be delighted to see what has been achieved in the intervening years: the upgraded roads and airport, the growth of tourism with Matavai Resort and other outstanding new accommodation options, the sea tracks, Niue Development Bank, new government buildings, a supermarket complex, and Millenium Hall.
Similarly, I hope they would applaud the emphasis on sustainability and the protection of biodiversity, the establishment of a maritime protection area, and modernised waste management systems.
I hope they would also be pleased to see Niue’s connections to the world, enabled by jet travel and internet access. I’m sure they would be astonished and delighted to see the growth of media and educational opportunities, solar power, electronic banking, an emergency operations centre, and the facilities of a truly modern hospital.
I was pleased to learn how closely Niue and New Zealand worked to minimise the impact of COVID-19, and I wish to congratulate Prime Minister Tagelagi and everyone involved in keeping the people of Niue safe.
Nationhood is necessarily an ongoing project, based on a shared understanding of identity, values, and culture.
All Niueans contribute to this vision, whether they be Assembly Members, Ministers of Cabinet, the Speakers of the Fale Fono, the Public Service Commissioners, Secretaries of Government, the Judges and Judiciary, Niue’s High Commissioners in New Zealand, the Public Service, educators, the keepers of traditional knowledge and crafts, or artists, composers and cultural performers. So too do those Niueans engaged in fishing, growing crops, joining in community and church activities, and hosting tourists – as well as tupuna and spiritual leaders providing wise guidance and counsel across communities.
I commend the people of Niue for working to sustain and transfer their cultural heritage and traditions. Showdays and Taoga Festivals have brought villages together with the Niuean diaspora to celebrate community, tradition and whanaungatanga. It must be gratifying to see Niueans born in New Zealand choosing to live here, and renew their ties with their culture and history.
Since 1974, New Zealand has been proud to be Niue’s Constitutional partner, with responsibilities to provide necessary administrative support. The bonds between our two nations have flourished, nurtured by our shared history, language, culture and citizenship.
The people-to-people links, forged through family ties, friendships, and shared experiences, have created a tapestry of interwoven lives between Niue and New Zealand, and Niue and the Pacific.
Today, we are joined by Niueans who have travelled from New Zealand, Australia and beyond to be part of these celebrations.
Over these past fifty years, Niue has developed its own network of diplomatic, political, trade and economic relationships – and I acknowledge the support and collaboration of such partners and friends who are with us in celebration today. As Niue continues its journey of growth and development, I pay tribute to those partners who have supported those development aspirations, and your vision of a connected and prosperous Niue.
All of us share in the challenges of our times – particularly climate change – and it is in the absolute interests of all of us to do what is right and what is necessary to build greater resilience and wellbeing for the people of the Pacific.
This special Aho Pulefakamotu is a time for Niueans to celebrate the legacy of your forebears, and to look forward to how you might shape the destiny of your nation.
I wish the people of Niue every success with the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead – strengthened by the executive, legislative and judicial processes established by your Constitution – and secure in the knowledge that you will be supported, as always, by your friends in New Zealand.
Kia moui olaola a Niue. Kia tumau a Niue. Niue ke Monuina. Niue ko Kaina. Niue ki Mua.
Now, onwards to the next 50 glorious years. May God Bless Niue. May God Bless you all. Kia fakamonuina mai he Atua a Niue Fekai.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lauren Ball, Professor of Community Health and Wellbeing, The University of Queensland
Scurvy is is often considered a historical ailment, conjuring images of sailors on long sea voyages suffering from a lack of fresh fruit and vegetables.
Yet doctors in developed countries have recently reported treating cases of scurvy, including Australian doctors who reported their findings today in the journal BMJ Case Reports.
Scurvy is a disease caused by a severe deficiency of vitamin C (ascorbic acid), which is essential for the production of collagen. This protein helps maintain the health of skin, blood vessels, bones and connective tissue.
Without enough vitamin C, the body cannot properly repair tissues, heal wounds, or fight infections. This can lead to a range of symptoms including:
Scurvy was common from the 15th to 18th centuries, when naval sailors and other explorers lived on rations or went without fresh food for long periods. You might have heard some of these milestones in the history of the disease:
in 1497-1499, Vasco da Gama’s crew suffered severely from scurvy during their expedition to India, with a large portion of the crew dying from it
from the 16th to 18th centuries, scurvy was rampant among European navies and explorers, affecting notable figures such as Ferdinand Magellan and Sir Francis Drake. It was considered one of the greatest threats to sailors’ health during long voyages
in 1747, British naval surgeon James Lind is thought to have conducted one of the first clinical trials, demonstrating that citrus fruit could prevent and cure scurvy. However, it took several decades for his findings to be widely implemented
in 1795, the British Royal Navy officially adopted the practice of providing lemon or lime juice to sailors, dramatically reducing the number of scurvy cases.
In the new case report, doctors in Western Australia reported treating a middle-aged man with the condition. In a separate case report, doctors in Canada reported treating a 65-year old woman.
Both patients presented with leg weakness and compromised skin, yet the doctors didn’t initially consider scurvy. This was based on the premise that there is abundant vitamin C in our modern food supply, so deficiency should not occur.
On both occasions, treatment with high doses of vitamin C (1,000mg per day for at least seven days) resulted in improvements in symptoms and eventually a full recovery.
The authors of both case reports are concerned that if scurvy is left untreated, it could lead to inflamed blood vessels (vasculitis) and potentially cause fatal bleeding.
Last year, a major New South Wales hospital undertook a chart review, where patient records are reviewed to answer research questions.
This found vitamin C deficiency was common. More than 50% of patients who had their vitamin C levels tested had either a modest deficiency (29.9%) or significant deficiency (24.5%). Deficiencies were more common among patients from rural and lower socioeconomic areas.
Now clinicians are urged to consider vitamin C deficiency and scurvy as a potential diagnosis and involve the support of a dietitian.
Sourcing and consuming nutritious foods with sufficient vitamin C is unfortunately still an issue for some people. Factors that increase the risk of vitamin C deficiency include:
poor diet. People with restricted diets – due to poverty, food insecurity or dietary choices – may not get enough vitamin C. This includes those who rely heavily on processed, nutrient-poor foods rather than fresh produce
food deserts. In areas where access to fresh, affordable fruits and vegetables is limited (often referred to as food deserts), people may unintentionally suffer from a vitamin C deficiency. In some parts of developing countries such as India, lack of access to fresh food is recognised as a risk for scurvy
the cost-of-living crisis. With greater numbers of people unable to pay for fresh produce, people who limit their intake of fruits and vegetables may develop nutrient deficiencies, including scurvy
weight loss procedures and medications. Restricted dietary intake due to weight loss surgery or weight loss medications may lead to nutrient deficiencies, such as in this case report of scurvy from Denmark
mental illness and eating disorders. Conditions such as depression and anorexia nervosa can lead to severely restricted diets, increasing the risk of scurvy, such as in this case report from 2020 in Canada
isolation. Older adults, especially those who live alone or in nursing homes, may have difficulty preparing balanced meals with sufficient vitamin C
certain medical conditions. People with digestive disorders, malabsorption issues, or those on restrictive medical diets (due to severe allergies or intolerances) can develop scurvy if they are unable to absorb or consume enough vitamin C.
Australia’s dietary guidelines recommend adults consume 45mg of vitamin C (higher if pregnant or breastfeeding) each day. This is roughly the amount found in half an orange or half a cup of strawberries.
When more vitamin C is consumed than required, excess amounts leave the body through urine.
Signs of scurvy can appear as early as a month after a daily intake of less than 10 mg of vitamin C.
Eating vitamin C-rich foods – such as oranges, strawberries, kiwifruit, plums, pineapple, mango, capsicum, broccoli and Brussels sprouts – can resolve symptoms within a few weeks.
Vitamin C is also readily available as a supplement if there are reasons why intake through food may be compromised. Typically, the supplements contain 1,000mg per tablet, and the recommended upper limit for daily Vitamin C intake is 2,000mg.
Lauren Ball receives funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council, Queensland Health and Mater Misericordia. She is a Director of Dietitians Australia, a Director of Food Standards Australia and New Zealand, a Director of the Darling Downs and West Moreton Primary Health Network and an Associate Member of the Australian Academy of Health and Medical Sciences.
– ref. Scurvy is largely a historical disease but there are signs it’s making a comeback – https://theconversation.com/scurvy-is-largely-a-historical-disease-but-there-are-signs-its-making-a-comeback-241894
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
Following is the speech by the Financial Secretary, Mr Paul Chan, at the Bloomberg Global Regulatory Forum in New York, yesterday (October 22, New York time): Mike (Founder of Bloomberg L.P. & Bloomberg Philanthropies, Mr Michael Bloomberg), Mr Cotzias (Global Head of External Relations of Bloomberg, Mr Constantin Cotzias), distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen, Good afternoon. I’m pleased to be here, in New York City, in fall. And delighted to hear that baseball, more than politics, is still the talk of the town. Well, baseball and finance. For that, for hosting today’s Global Regulatory Forum, for consistently driving high-powered discussion on the future of global finance, my thanks to Bloomberg. Last year’s Forum took place for the first time in Hong Kong, when we discussed how to navigate complexity and unlock opportunities. A year on, many things in the financial world have changed, and I’m pleased to bring you some positive updates about our city.Hong Kong: strong fundamentals Despite several challenging years, from social violence to the pandemic, Hong Kong is back, back once again with a stable, welcoming and promising business environment. Our strong fundamentals continue to be internationally recognised. Hong Kong ranks once again among the top three global financial centres, behind only New York and London. Canada’s Fraser Institute has again ranked Hong Kong the world’s freest economy. The International Monetary Fund and credit-rating agencies have reaffirmed Hong Kong’s institutional framework, our quality regulation and economic and financial resilience. These commendations are echoed by the global investor community. Total banking deposits in Hong Kong, for example, have grown 5 per cent, or US$100 billion, this year to date, reaching more than US$2 trillion. Our asset-and-wealth-management sector is also growing. We are managing over US$4 trillion in assets, and over half of that value was sourced from investors outside Hong Kong and the Chinese Mainland. Coupled with easing interest rate cycles and the Mainland’s stimulus package to inject liquidity to the banking sector and provide more support to the real estate sector, our stock market has gone on a rally, rising some 15 per cent in the past month or so. From late September to early October, we have seen strong net buys from American and European investors, constituting some 85 per cent of the buy side by value. And 90 per cent of those investors are long-term fund managers and investment banks. International investors have good reason to be confident in Hong Kong. Our singular “one country, two systems” arrangement is here to stay, here for the long term. That clear and compelling commitment has been reiterated, time and again, by President Xi Jinping. Indeed, the arrangement was designed not for short-term expediency but for the long-term interests of our country. It is clear that the Mainland is fully embracing high-level opening up, evident in the conclusions of state and party meetings in Beijing in the past year or so. The Mainland will support Hong Kong in remaining as a “super connector”, to assist in realising the country’s vision. We can, and will, continue to do just that, thanks to the advantages that define Hong Kong’s international character: our common law tradition, a judiciary that exercises powers independently; the free flow of goods, capital, talent and information; a currency pegged to the US dollar; and business practices that align with the best international standards. For so long, we have built our success as an international financial, trade and shipping centre on these merits, and they will continue to underpin Hong Kong’s development in the future. Robust financial regulation But still, Hong Kong is a small, fully open and externally-oriented economy. That means we are prone to external shocks and volatility. The trials and tribulations in the Asian Financial Crisis in 1998, the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, and the market squeeze during the onset of the COVID pandemic, are good lessons to learn. Each time we weathered a crisis, we grew more resilient, but the take home message for us is clear: first, we need to identify systemic weaknesses and vulnerabilities, and address them. Second, establish multi-sectoral risk detection and monitoring systems to raise alarm against potential crises. Third, build in a strong buffer to allow us to respond to the unknowns. This is particularly valid for Hong Kong which implements a linked exchange rate system. Hong Kong dollar is pegged to the US dollar, and therefore we must have sufficient monetary depth to enforce our convertibility undertakings and defend our currency board system. To ensure we have ample liquidity as we need it, we have a foreign exchange reserve of more than US$420 billion at our disposal. In light of rising geopolitical and economic challenges, we’ve established a high-level, cross-market, co-ordinated and round-the-clock monitoring mechanism. It covers all sectors of the financial market and gathers all financial regulators, allowing us to detect looming risks. I’m glad to report that over the past few years, our financial markets have been functioning in an orderly manner, despite volatility that might appear from time to time. The role of regulators in market development Good regulation, of course, is only half the story. For the ultimate goal of regulation is to promote the healthy and sustainable development of the financial market. Good market development, in my view, is equally important, and it is the best means to future-proof our financial systems. This requires the regulatory regime be agile and forward-looking. This requires the regime to respond to market and economic changes, embrace and empower technological innovation, and create the conditions for markets to thrive. It’s why in Hong Kong, regulators have been given a dual mandate, serving both as regulators and market enablers. Our listing regime reform is a good case in point. Back in 2018, the Government and the financial regulators made bold decisions to allow pre-profit or pre-revenue biotech companies, and new economy companies with weighted voting rights structures, to list on our stock exchange. The idea was met with doubt initially. But today the facts speak for themselves: new economy companies constitute only 13 per cent of the total number of listed companies, but their capitalisation accounts for 26 per cent. These reforms have not only broadened our market’s appeal but also put Hong Kong as a leading listing hub for innovative enterprises. Reform is an ongoing process. For instance, last year we introduced a new Chapter in our listing rules to facilitate the listing of specialist technology companies. Looking ahead, two key areas will be vital for Hong Kong’s financial future: enhancing our financial connectivity with the world, and embracing innovation.Enhancing Connectivity Connectivity has always been the trump card of Hong Kong – although “trump” may be a word that you may now love or hate. For long, we have been the premier listing platform for Mainland companies going global. The launch of the “Stock Connect” 10 years ago was a landmark in forging close connectivity between the two markets. Its very significance was to allow foreign investors to make use of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, and all the regimes, regulation and practices with which they are familiar, to access the Mainland’s stock market. Today, over 70 per cent of the A-share holdings by foreign investors were acquired through the Stock Connect. The Scheme has been continuously expanding, now covering bonds, ETFs, derivatives such as swap contracts. Just in April this year, the China Securities Regulatory Commission announced four further measures to expand the Connect Schemes, including enlarging the scope of ETFs Connect, covering REITs in Stock Connect, and more. Meanwhile, it also made clear that they will support leading Mainland companies to list on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. Obviously our IPO market has seen a rebound. In the first nine months this year, we raised more than US$7.1 billion, ranking fourth globally thus far. Looking ahead, Hong Kong is also strengthening connections with other markets in the ASEAN countries, the Middle East and the Belt and Road countries. For instance, next week, we will be seeing the launch of two ETFs on the Saudi Stock Exchange investing in the Hong Kong Stock market. So Hong Kong’s role as a connector of markets will only grow stronger. And with this, our financial regulators will continue to make it their strategic priorities to enhance collaboration with regulatory counterparts for timely and effective responses. Embracing innovation Ladies and gentlemen, another area essential to our future is innovation. In Hong Kong, we’re taking a balanced regulatory approach to enable financial innovation. For example, last year, we introduced a regulatory regime for digital assets, along the principle of “same activity, same risks, same regulation”. The key feature is to put in place guardrails for investor protection, while enabling financial innovation to thrive in a responsible and sustainable manner. So far, three firms have been issued with virtual asset trading platform licences, and we are expecting more in the next couple of months. Besides, legislation will be introduced later this year for the regulation of stablecoins. Then there’s also AI (artificial intelligence), which is reshaping the financial services industry, driving new products and services that enhance efficiency, security and customer experience. Like blockchain and other new technologies, we must address the potential challenges of AI, such as cybersecurity, data privacy and the protection of intellectual property rights. To that end, we will publish a policy statement next week. We will work to provide a clear supervisory framework and create a conducive and sustainable market environment. Concluding remarks Ladies and gentlemen, alongside changing global financial landscape comes far-reaching opportunity. Judging from Hong Kong’s experience, capturing such opportunities calls for the mentality of policy makers to focus not just on regulation compliance but also market development. For some, this may require a paradigm shift. But in our view, it will be an essential path to future-proof our financial markets, ensuring their long-term sustainable growth. Finally, I wish to convey my thanks again to Bloomberg for inviting me to this Forum. I wish you all the best of business and health in the coming year. Thank you.
Source: Victoria Country Fire Authority
Pomonal fireground 2024
CFA declared the first Fire Danger Period (FDP) for the 2024-25 fire season, commencing on Monday, 28 October for the following municipalities in the west and northwest of the state:
Victorians can expect a hotter and drier summer and communities should be preparing their properties and creating a Bushfire Survival Plan.
CFA will be introducing further FDPs for Victorian municipalities in the coming weeks and months based on assessments of the amount of rain, grassland curing rate and local conditions.
CFA Chief Officer Jason Heffernan said with an increased fire risk expected in the west and southwest of the state, now is the time to take action and be ready for what’s ahead.
“Fire safety is a shared responsibility and we ask Victorians to be prepared and stay informed,” Jason said.
“Take this opportunity ahead of the FDP to clean up your property but also be cautious when burning off and ensure it’s properly extinguished.
“Now is also the time to sit down with your household and prepare your bushfire plan.”
CFA West Region Acting Deputy Chief Officer Mark Gunning said as a result of reduced rainfall this year, we’re concerned about the dry conditions we’re already seeing in the far west of the state.
“Following from a devastating fire season in the Wimmera earlier this year, we saw many people who had prepared their properties for fire, survive the passage of the bushfires in the Grampians and southern Wimmera.”
Those conducting burn-offs must notify authorities online at the Fire Permits Victoria website (http://www.firepermits.vic.gov.au), or by calling 1800 668 511.
By registering your burn-off online, you allow emergency call takers to allocate more of their time taking calls from people who need emergency assistance immediately.
No burning off is permitted during the FDP without a Permit to Burn, which can be applied for through the Fire Permits Victoria website.
Fire Danger Period information:
| Submitted by | CFA Media |
|---|
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ross Garnaut, Professorial Research Fellow in Economics, The University of Melbourne
Australia now has a government and parliament wanting timely transition to net zero. We have a government and parliament wanting to build Australia as the renewable energy superpower of the zero-carbon world economy. For the time being, we have favourable international settings for using our opportunity.
The government of Australia has embraced this superpower narrative, taken some big steps towards supporting its emergence, and articulated sound principles for guiding further policy development.
But Australians in business and the community wanting to make large efforts to turn opportunity into reality find themselves in a tangle of policy uncertainty and contradiction.
The source of the problem is the abolition of carbon pricing in 2014. Since then, the Commonwealth government has worked within constraints that rule out success.
We can make a start towards net zero and becoming a renewable energy superpower without moving the constraints, but we can’t get far. This is a problem for any government of Australia, and not only for the current Labor government. We will not rise sustainably out of the post-pandemic dog days until we get energy policy right.
Striking the right balance between state intervention and market exchange is always essential for successful economic development, in all places.
The market generally delivers goods and services more cost-effectively than the state where there is genuine competition among suppliers and purchasers of goods and services.
The difference is especially large and important at a time of structural change and uncertainty. State decisions inevitably tend towards continuation on established paths and slow response to new opportunities.
Australia will not make use of more than a small fraction of the superpower opportunities available to it without immense contributions from an innovative, competitive private business sector.
So we have to design energy and related markets that provide the widest possible scope for competition among enterprises within clear rules understood in advance of investment decisions by all market participants.
The state has to do well the things that only the state can do. Because government capacity is a finite resource, it is much more likely that it will do the essential things well if it doesn’t try to do the things that markets do well.
The state must define the boundaries between the services that it delivers and those to be delivered by the market.
In the electricity sector, government must take responsibility for design of the market rules and compliance with them. It must provide the natural monopoly services of electricity transmission and hydrogen transportation and storage. It must take ultimate responsibility for system security and reliability.
For any market to work, individual market participants must be blocked by regulation from damaging others through their business decisions, or subject to a tax equal to the costs they impose on others. And they must be rewarded for large benefits that they confer on others.
This is essential economics. Its understatement in Productivity Commission and financial media commentary on energy and climate policy discussion over the past decade reveals the debasement of Australian political culture that gave us the dog days.
It has been politically incorrect to tell the truth out loud.
A crucial element of post-2030 market design is introduction of a green premium for zero-carbon energy.
It is obviously necessary for low-cost decarbonisation and expansion of the electricity sector and building Australia as a renewable energy superpower. The green premium is crucial for securing international market access for the zero-carbon export industries.
One of the dog days constraints on policy is that there should be no mandatory demands on private investors. Those constraints must be broken for the green premium to reflect the social cost of carbon, as it must if we are to achieve net zero by 2050 and build Australia as the renewable energy superpower.
The economically efficient way of achieving the premium is carbon pricing. It would be most efficient within an economy-wide system, although it could be introduced initially for the electricity sector and extended to other industries later.
Investors now need to know soon that there will be a premium reasonably related to the social cost of carbon after the Renewable Energy Target ends in 2030.
What matters for the superpower industries is the green premiums for which they are eligible in other countries. Pending the emergence of appropriate premiums, the Commonwealth is proposing payments from the budget.
That is appropriate. It can get the early movers started. It would be expensive if it continued for long. The superpower industries will grow rapidly if they have access to premiums corresponding to the social cost of carbon. Over time, payments from the Australian budget will be replaced by market premiums in destination countries.
There are several possible forms of carbon pricing. The system operating in Australia from 2012 to 2014 was economically and environmentally efficient.
It would have been linked to the EU Emissions Trading System from July 1 2014 if it had not been abolished the day before. The Australian carbon price would be equal to the European price. We would be introducing a European-type Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism to ensure that Australian producers were not disadvantaged by competition in the domestic market from suppliers who were not subject to similar carbon constraints. The ETS (emissions trading scheme) would be contributing around 2% of GDP to public revenues – going a substantial part of the way to answering the daunting budget challenge to restoration of Australian prosperity.
Part of that increased revenue could support payments to power users to ensure there was no increase in power prices to users until expansion of renewable generation and storage had brought costs down – along the lines of the A$300 per household introduced in the 2024 budget, but larger.
The arrangements would provide automatic access for zero-carbon Australian goods to the high-priced European market. There would be no need to provide for a green premium for sales to Europe from the Australian market. The green premiums in other markets would at first need to be covered, as they are now, from the Australian public revenue.
Rod Sims (former chair of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission) and I have suggested a carbon solutions levy. It is administratively simpler than the ETS. It would initially raise much more revenue.
We propose exemption for coal and gas exports to countries in which Australian zero-carbon exports attract a premium comparable to the EU carbon price, even if it is not generated through an ETS.
We would hope that if the carbon solutions levy were to be introduced from 2030, our major trading partners would by that time have introduced green premiums that justify exemption from the levy for coal and gas exports to those countries.
The European Union would be exempt from the beginning. The Northeast Asian economies are moving towards eventual justification of exemption. China now has a country-wide emissions trading system.
The carbon price in July 2024 is about A$21 per tonne, having increased by 50% since early in the year. The price is expected to continue rising until it is playing a major role in transformation of Chinese industry.
Incidentally, China undertook to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that its emissions would peak by 2030, but its rapid expansion of renewable energy generation, electric vehicles and zero-carbon industrial technologies suggest that the peak may have come in 2023.
Japan is working on direct budgetary support for importers of zero-carbon products which could pass through into a premium for zero-carbon exports from Australia.
During a visit in April 2024, I was advised that the Japanese government is working towards issue of “green bonds” to pay for the premium. A carbon tax from 2035 would meet the cost of servicing and retiring the bonds.
Korea and Taiwan are introducing their own mechanisms for supporting premiums for zero-carbon imports.
One initial criticism of the carbon solutions levy is that it would cause leakage of Australian exports to competing suppliers of gas and coal. There would be some leakage, alongside substantial transfers from rents to the public revenues, and for metallurgical coal in particular, some increase in export prices.
The price increase would introduce an element of green premium for Australian green iron exports. The Superpower Institute (a non-profit research organisation founded by Sims and I) has commissioned the Centre of Policy Studies at Victoria University to quantify the extent of leakage, transfers from rent and higher export prices. The results will be available for public discussion early in 2025. The study will also calculate the effect of the levy on Australian public finances, real incomes and real consumption.
Australia’s main competitor in regional coal markets is Indonesia. Its main competitors in gas markets are Papua New Guinea, East Timor, Indonesia, Brunei and the Middle East petroleum producers.
No informed person would suggest that there could be an economic problem with leakage to the Middle East: Saudi Arabia and the small Gulf states extract revenue from petroleum exports at much higher rates per dollar than Australia would after imposition of the levy.
There is a case in the Australian national interest for not seeing expansion of export sales from Papua New Guinea and East Timor as being entirely a waste.
But in their national interest and ours, I suggest that we seek to negotiate a four-way agreement on climate and energy with Indonesia, East Timor and Papua New Guinea.
We would all impose carbon solutions levy-type levies at similar rates. This would be a major source of revenue for all of us.
Participation of Indonesia removes leakage of coal exports. Indonesia already has an emissions trading scheme, although it generates a carbon price of only a few dollars per tonne.
It may choose to remove other imposts on fossil carbon exports at the time of introduction of new carbon-related measures – such as the requirement to make 35% of coal exports available at prices well below international prices for domestic power generation.
Participation of the four countries removes the leakage issue for gas. The four neighbours would cooperate in major development programs based on expansion of zero-carbon energy supply and goods production.
There is active discussion in Indonesia of archipelago-wide electricity transmission infrastructure to allow the superior renewable energy resources of the outer islands – Papua, Nusa Tenggara, Sulawesi, Kalimantan, Sumatra – to contribute to decarbonisation and growth of zero-carbon industry everywhere, including in the Java heartland.
The Indonesian grid would run close to neighbouring Australia, Papua New Guinea, East Timor, East and West Malaysia and the Philippines. It would be the geopolitically practical means of linking Australia and Singapore, as envisaged in the SunCable project in the Northern Territory.
The Indonesian national grid could link to the Australian Sungrid discussed in my book The Superpower Transformation in Darwin and the Pilbara.
The alternatives to economy-wide carbon pricing are likely to turn out to be short-lived expedients that lead sooner rather than later to the return of today’s incoherence and underperformance in energy and climate policy and performance.
The state must provide reliability of power supply to the general population.
The Commonwealth government can do this without distorting competitive electricity markets by establishing an energy reserve I have proposed in my book The Superpower Transformation.
The superpower industries depend on electricity and hydrogen markets operating efficiently and embodying carbon prices. Otherwise the market design issues relevant to their development are similar to those for electricity.
Negative carbon externalities need to be corrected by taxation or alternative carbon pricing mechanisms. Positive externalities from innovation should be rewarded.
Positive innovation externalities are important in the introduction of new industries, technologies and business models for the zero-carbon economy.
Economy-wide carbon pricing at the social cost of carbon is essential to getting the balance right between state intervention and market exchange.
Once it is in place with fiscal rewards for innovation, the government can let businesses decide which new industries and technologies warrant investment.
Once carbon pricing is known to be coming into place reasonably soon, there is no further need for government underwriting of investment in power generation.
There is no need to include a climate trigger in assessment of a project of any kind: if it emits carbon, it will pay for the climate damage it does.
There is no need for government to take a view on climate grounds about the merits of nuclear power generation. It is zero-emissions generation and, like renewable energy, not subject to the carbon price. If it can compete with other forms of generation, it will find a place in private investment decisions on the energy mix.
There is no need for government investment in nuclear power generation. Private investors will have the same incentives to invest in nuclear as in other zero-carbon generation technologies.
There will be no need for the government to take a view on incentives for carbon capture and storage. If it is effective and emissions are actually reduced, carbon payments will be correspondingly reduced.
The carbon price will allow private investors to get on with the job of expanding renewable energy supply at a rapid pace and decarbonising the economy more generally.
This is an edited extract from Ross Garnaut’s new book, Let’s Tax Carbon: And Other Ideas for a Better Australia.
Ross Garnaut is a Director and shareholder of Zen Energy. Together with Rod Sims, Ross is a co-founder and Director of The Superpower Institute, a not for profit think tank.
– ref. Let’s tax carbon: Ross Garnaut on why the time is right for a second shot at carbon pricing – https://theconversation.com/lets-tax-carbon-ross-garnaut-on-why-the-time-is-right-for-a-second-shot-at-carbon-pricing-241806
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
TALLAHASSEE, Fla., Oct. 22, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Capital City Bank Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: CCBG) today reported net income attributable to common shareowners of $13.1 million, or $0.78 per diluted share, for the third quarter of 2024 compared to $14.2 million, or $0.83 per diluted share, for the second quarter of 2024, and $12.7 million, or $0.74 per diluted share, for the third quarter of 2023.
QUARTER HIGHLIGHTS (3rdQuarter 2024 versus 2ndQuarter 2024)
Income Statement
Balance Sheet
Commenting on the company’s results, William G. Smith, Jr., Capital City Bank Group Chairman, President, and CEO, said, “I am pleased with what we accomplished in the quarter to enhance shareowner value – 4.2% growth in tangible book value per share and a 9.5% increase in the dividend. Earnings for the quarter remained stable driven by margin expansion, stable credit, and core deposit growth. Looking ahead, I remain optimistic about our full year financial performance and beyond, driven by our balance sheet flexibility, revenue diversification, and focus on continuous improvement.”
Discussion of Operating Results
Net Interest Income/Net Interest Margin
Tax-equivalent net interest income for the third quarter of 2024 totaled $40.2 million, compared to $39.3 million for the second quarter of 2024, and $39.3 million for the third quarter of 2023. Compared to the second quarter of 2024, the increase was primarily due to increases in loan and investment interest income and a decrease in deposit interest expense, partially offset by a decrease in overnight funds interest income. One additional calendar day also contributed to the increase. Favorable repricing of existing adjustable/fixed rate loans at higher rates drove the increase in loan interest income. The increase in investment interest income was due to the reinvestment of maturing securities at higher rates. The decrease in deposit interest expense was attributable to lower average NOW account balances and average rate, in addition to lower rates on promotional deposit products.
Compared to the third quarter of 2023, the $0.9 million increase was primarily driven by an increase in loan interest income and to a lesser extent overnight funds interest income, partially offset by an increase in deposit interest expense. For the first nine months of 2024, tax-equivalent net interest income totaled $118.0 million compared to $120.1 million for the same period of 2023 with the decrease primarily attributable to an increase in deposit interest expense and a decrease in investment interest income, partially offset by an increase in loan interest income.
Our net interest margin for the third quarter of 2024 was 4.12%, an increase of 10 basis points over the second quarter of 2024 and an increase of nine basis points over the third quarter of 2023. For the month of September 2024, our net interest margin was 4.16%. For the first nine months of 2024, our net interest margin was 4.05% compared to 4.04% for the same period of 2023. The increase over the second quarter of 2024 reflected favorable loan and investment repricing, partially offset by a lower overnight funds rate. The increase over both prior year periods reflected higher loan rates partially offset by a higher cost of deposits. For the third quarter of 2024, our cost of funds was 93 basis points, a decrease of four basis points from the second quarter of 2024 and an increase of 27 basis points over the third quarter of 2023. Our cost of deposits (including noninterest bearing accounts) was 92 basis points, 95 basis points, and 58 basis points, respectively, for the same periods.
Provision for Credit Losses
We recorded a provision expense for credit losses of $1.2 million for the third quarter of 2024, comparable to the second quarter of 2024 and a $1.2 million decrease from the third quarter of 2023. The provision expense for the third quarter of 2024 reflected a $0.7 million increase in the provision for loans held for investment (“HFI”), a $0.6 million provision benefit for unfunded loan commitments, and a $0.1 million provision benefit for debt securities. The increase in the provision for loans HFI was primarily due to loan grade migration and slightly higher loss rates partially offset by lower loan balances. A lower level of commitments drove the provision benefit for unfunded loan commitments. For the first nine months of 2024, we recorded a provision expense for credit losses of $3.3 million compared to $7.7 million for the same period of 2023 with the decrease driven primarily by lower new loan volume in 2024. We discuss the allowance for credit losses further below.
Noninterest Income and Noninterest Expense
Noninterest income for the third quarter of 2024 totaled $19.5 million compared to $19.6 million for the second quarter of 2024 and $16.7 million for the third quarter of 2023. The slight decrease from the second quarter of 2024 reflected a $0.4 million decrease in mortgage banking revenues partially offset by a $0.3 million increase in wealth management fees. Compared to the third quarter of 2023, the $2.8 million increase was primarily attributable to a $2.1 million increase in mortgage banking revenues driven by a higher gain on sale margin, and a $0.8 million increase in wealth management fees.
For the first nine months of 2024, noninterest income totaled $57.2 million compared to $54.5 million for the same period of 2023, primarily attributable to a $3.2 million increase in mortgage banking revenues and a $1.8 million increase in wealth management fees, partially offset by a $2.1 million decrease in other income. The increase in mortgage banking revenues was due to a higher gain on sale margin. The increase in wealth management fees was primarily driven by higher retail brokerage fees and to a lesser extent trust fees, primarily attributable to both new account growth and higher account values driven by higher market returns. The decrease in other income was primarily attributable to a $1.4 million gain from the sale of mortgage servicing rights in the second quarter of 2023, and to a lesser extent a decrease in vendor bonus income and miscellaneous income.
Noninterest expense for the third quarter of 2024 totaled $42.9 million compared to $40.4 million for the second quarter of 2024 and $39.1 million for the third quarter of 2023. The $2.5 million increase over the second quarter of 2024 was primarily due to a $1.4 million increase in compensation and a $1.0 million increase in other expense. The increase in compensation reflected higher salary expense of $0.9 million and associate benefit expense of $0.5 million. The increase in salary expense was driven by annual merit adjustments, and the increase in other associate benefit expense was primarily attributable to higher health insurance cost, and to a lesser extent higher stock-based compensation expense. The increase in other expense was primarily due to a $0.5 million increase in professional fees, processing fees of $0.3 million, and higher miscellaneous expense which included a $0.5 million payment to the counterparty for our VISA Class B share swap due to revision to the share conversion rate related to additional funding by VISA of the merchant litigation reserve. Compared to the third quarter of 2023, the $3.8 million increase was primarily attributable to a $2.8 million increase in compensation expense and a $0.9 million increase in other expense. The unfavorable variance in compensation expense reflected higher salary expense of $2.2 million and associate benefit expense of $0.6 million, with the salary variance driven by merit adjustments and the associate benefit expense variance reflective of higher health insurance cost. Further, salary expense was unfavorably impacted by lower realized loan cost (credit offset to salary expense) of $1.0 million which reflected lower loan volume in 2024. The increase in other expense was attributable to a $0.6 million increase in professional fees and higher miscellaneous expense due to the aforementioned $0.5 million share swap payment in the third quarter of 2024.
For the first nine months of 2024, noninterest expense totaled $123.5 million compared to $117.1 million for the same period of 2023 with the $6.4 million increase primarily attributable to increases in compensation expense of $4.6 million, occupancy expense of $0.5 million, and other expense of $1.3 million. The increase in compensation expense reflected a $3.9 million increase in salary expense and a $0.7 million increase in associate benefit expense. The increase in salary expense was primarily due to a lower level of realized loan cost (credit offset to salary expense) of $2.9 million (lower new loan volume) and higher base salary expense of $1.9 million (primarily annual merit raises), partially offset by lower commission expense of $1.3 million (lower residential mortgage volume). The increase in occupancy was primarily attributable to an increase in maintenance agreement expense (security upgrades and addition of interactive teller machines). The increase in other expense reflected a $1.8 million gain from the sale of a banking office in the first quarter of 2023 and higher miscellaneous expense due to the aforementioned $0.5 million share swap payment in 2024, that was partially offset by lower pension plan expense (service cost) of $1.0 million.
Income Taxes
We realized income tax expense of $3.0 million (effective rate of 19.1%) for the third quarter of 2024 compared to $3.2 million (effective rate of 18.5%) for the second quarter of 2024 and $3.0 million (effective rate of 20.7%) for the third quarter of 2023. For the first nine months of 2024, we realized income tax expense of $9.7 million (effective rate of 20.1%) compared to $10.1 million (effective rate of 20.5%) for the same period of 2023. The decrease in our effective tax rate from both prior year periods was primarily due to a higher level of tax benefit accrued from investments in solar tax credit equity funds. Absent discrete items, we expect our annual effective tax rate to approximate 20-21% for 2024.
Discussion of Financial Condition
Earning Assets
Average earning assets totaled $3.883 billion for the third quarter of 2024, a decrease of $51.9 million, or 1.3%, from the second quarter of 2024, and an increase of $59.4 million, or 1.6%, over the fourth quarter of 2023. The change for both prior periods was driven by variances in deposit balances (see below – Deposits). Compared to the second quarter of 2024, the change in the earning asset mix reflected a $33.2 million decrease in loans HFI, a $11.4 million decline in investment securities, and a $5.6 million decrease increase in overnight funds sold. Compared to the fourth quarter of 2023, the change in the earning asset mix reflected a $157.1 million increase in overnight funds that was partially offset by a $17.7 million decrease in loans HFI, a $54.7 million decrease in investment securities and a $25.2 million decline in loans held for sale.
Average loans HFI decreased $33.2 million, or 1.2%, from the second quarter of 2024 and decreased $17.7 million, or 0.7%, from the fourth quarter of 2023. Compared to the second quarter of 2024, the decrease was driven by a $19.4 million decrease in consumer loans (primarily indirect auto), commercial loans of $13.2 million, and commercial real estate loans of $7.7 million, partially offset by a $7.4 million increase in residential real estate loans. Compared to the fourth quarter of 2023, the decrease was primarily attributable to a $54.5 million decrease in consumer loans (primarily indirect auto) and commercial loans of $24.2 million (primarily tax-exempt loans) that was partially offset by a $59.2 million increase in residential real estate loans.
Period end loans HFI decreased $7.1 million, or 0.3%, from the second quarter of 2024 and decreased $50.8 million, or 1.9%, from the fourth quarter of 2023. Compared to the second quarter of 2024, the decline reflected a $20.9 million decrease in consumer loans (primarily indirect auto), a $10.4 million decrease in commercial loans, and a $3.2 million decline in commercial real estate loans, partially offset by a $10.9 million increase in residential real estate loans and a $18.1 million increase in construction loans. The decrease from the fourth quarter of 2023 was primarily attributable to a $57.7 million decrease in consumer loans (primarily indirect auto), a $30.6 million decline in commercial loans, and a $5.5 million decrease in commercial real estate loans, partially offset by a $22.2 million increase in residential real estate loans and a $22.8 million increase in construction real estate loans.
Allowance for Credit Losses
At September 30, 2024, the allowance for credit losses for loans HFI totaled $29.8 million compared to $29.2 million at June 30, 2024 and $29.9 million at December 31, 2023. Activity within the allowance is provided on Page 9. The increase in the allowance over June 30, 2024 was primarily attributable to slightly higher forecasted unemployment rate utilized in calculating loan loss rates and loan grade migration (see above – Provision for Credit Losses). Net loan charge-offs were 19 basis points of average loans for the third quarter of 2024 versus 18 basis points for the second quarter of 2024. At September 30, 2024, the allowance represented 1.11% of loans HFI compared to 1.09% at June 30, 2024, and 1.10% at December 31, 2023.
Credit Quality
Nonperforming assets (nonaccrual loans and other real estate) totaled $7.2 million at September 30, 2024 compared to $6.2 million at June 30, 2024 and $6.2 million at December 31, 2023. At September 30, 2024, nonperforming assets as a percent of total assets equaled 0.17%, compared to 0.15% at June 30, 2024 and 0.15% at December 31, 2023. Nonaccrual loans totaled $6.6 million at September 30, 2024, a $1.1 million increase over June 30, 2024 and a $0.3 million increase over December 31, 2023. Further, classified loans totaled $25.5 million at September 30, 2024, a $0.1 million decrease from June 30, 2024 and a $3.3 million increase over December 31, 2023.
Deposits
Average total deposits were $3.572 billion for the third quarter of 2024, a decrease of $69.0 million, or 1.9%, from the second quarter of 2024 and an increase of $23.5 million, or 0.7%, over the fourth quarter of 2023. Compared to the second quarter of 2024, the decrease was primarily attributable to lower NOW account balances primarily due to the seasonal decline in our public fund balances. The increase over the fourth quarter of 2023 reflected growth in both money market and certificate of deposit balances which reflected a combination of balances migrating from savings and noninterest bearing accounts, in addition to receiving new deposits from existing and new clients via various deposit strategies.
At September 30, 2024, total deposits were $3.579 billion, a decrease of $29.5 million, or 0.8%, from June 30, 2024, and a decrease of $122.7 million, or 3.3%, from December 31, 2023. The decrease from June 30, 2024 was primarily due to lower noninterest bearing, money market, and savings account balances. The decrease from December 31, 2023 was primarily due to lower NOW account balances, primarily due to the seasonal decline in our public funds, partially offset by higher money market and certificate of deposit balances from both new and existing clients. Total public funds balances were $516.2 million at September 30, 2024, $575.0 million at June 30, 2024, and $709.8 million at December 31, 2023.
Liquidity
The Bank maintained an average net overnight funds (i.e., deposits with banks plus FED funds sold less FED funds purchased) sold position of $256.9 million in the third quarter of 2024 compared to $262.4 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $99.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2023. Compared to the second quarter of 2024, the decrease reflected lower average deposits (primarily seasonal public funds) that was substantially offset by a decline in average loans. Compared to the fourth quarter of 2023, the increase was primarily driven by higher average deposits and lower average investments.
At September 30, 2024, we had the ability to generate approximately $1.522 billion (excludes overnight funds position of $262 million) in additional liquidity through various sources including various federal funds purchased lines, Federal Home Loan Bank borrowings, the Federal Reserve Discount Window, and brokered deposits.
We also view our investment portfolio as a liquidity source as we have the option to pledge securities in our portfolio as collateral for borrowings or deposits, and/or to sell selected securities in our portfolio. Our portfolio consists of debt issued by the U.S. Treasury, U.S. governmental agencies, municipal governments, and corporate entities. At September 30, 2024, the weighted-average maturity and duration of our portfolio were 2.51 years and 2.17 years, respectively, and the available-for-sale portfolio had a net unrealized after-tax loss of $15.5 million.
Capital
Shareowners’ equity was $476.5 million at September 30, 2024 compared to $461.0 million at June 30, 2024 and $440.6 million at December 31, 2023. For the first nine months of 2024, shareowners’ equity was positively impacted by net income attributable to shareowners of $39.8 million, a $8.7 million decrease in the net unrealized loss on available for sale securities, net adjustments totaling $0.9 million related to transactions under our stock compensation plans, and stock compensation accretion of $1.1 million. Shareowners’ equity was reduced by a common stock dividend of $11.0 million ($0.65 per share), the repurchase of common stock of $2.3 million (82,540 shares), a $0.6 million increase in the fair value of the interest rate swap related to subordinated debt, and a $0.7 million reclassification to temporary equity.
At September 30, 2024, our total risk-based capital ratio was 17.97% compared to 17.50% at June 30, 2024 and 16.57% at December 31, 2023. Our common equity tier 1 capital ratio was 14.88%, 14.44%, and 13.52%, respectively, on these dates. Our leverage ratio was 10.89%, 10.51%, and 10.30%, respectively, on these dates. At September 30, 2024, all our regulatory capital ratios exceeded the thresholds to be designated as “well-capitalized” under the Basel III capital standards. Further, our tangible common equity ratio (non-GAAP financial measure) was 9.28% at September 30, 2024 compared to 8.91% and 8.26% at June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively. If our unrealized held-to-maturity securities losses of $12.9 million (after-tax) were recognized in accumulated other comprehensive loss, our adjusted tangible capital ratio would be 9.00%.
About Capital City Bank Group, Inc.
Capital City Bank Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: CCBG) is one of the largest publicly traded financial holding companies headquartered in Florida and has approximately $4.2 billion in assets. We provide a full range of banking services, including traditional deposit and credit services, mortgage banking, asset management, trust, merchant services, bankcards, securities brokerage services and financial advisory services, including the sale of life insurance, risk management and asset protection services. Our bank subsidiary, Capital City Bank, was founded in 1895 and now has 63 banking offices and 105 ATMs/ITMs in Florida, Georgia and Alabama. For more information about Capital City Bank Group, Inc., visit http://www.ccbg.com.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Forward-looking statements in this Press Release are based on current plans and expectations that are subject to uncertainties and risks, which could cause our future results to differ materially. The words “may,” “could,” “should,” “would,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “target,” “vision,” “goal,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. The following factors, among others, could cause our actual results to differ: our ability to successfully manage credit risk, interest rate risk, liquidity risk, and other risks inherent to our industry; the effects of changes in the level of checking or savings account deposits and the competition for deposits on our funding costs, net interest margin and ability to replace maturing deposits and advances; legislative or regulatory changes; adverse developments in the financial services industry; inflation, interest rate, market and monetary fluctuations; uncertainty in the pricing of residential mortgage loans that we sell, as well as competition for the mortgage servicing rights related to these loans; interest rate risk and price risk resulting from retaining mortgage servicing rights and the effects of higher interest rates on our loan origination volumes; changes in monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. Government; the cost and effects of cybersecurity incidents or other failures, interruptions, or security breaches of our systems or those of our customers or third-party providers; the effects of fraud related to debit card products; the accuracy of our financial statement estimates and assumptions; changes in accounting principles, policies, practices or guidelines; the frequency and magnitude of foreclosure of our loans; the effects of our lack of a diversified loan portfolio; the strength of the local economies in which we operate; our ability to declare and pay dividends; structural changes in the markets for origination, sale and servicing of residential mortgages; our ability to retain key personnel; the effects of natural disasters (including hurricanes), widespread health emergencies (including pandemics), military conflict, terrorism, civil unrest or other geopolitical events; our ability to comply with the extensive laws and regulations to which we are subject; the impact of the restatement of our previously issued consolidated statements of cash flows; any deficiencies in the processes undertaken to effect these restatements and to identify and correct all errors in our historical financial statements that may require restatement; any inability to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting and/or disclosure control or inability to remediate our existing material weaknesses in our internal controls deemed ineffective; the willingness of clients to accept third-party products and services rather than our products and services; technological changes; the outcomes of litigation or regulatory proceedings; negative publicity and the impact on our reputation; changes in consumer spending and saving habits; growth and profitability of our noninterest income; the limited trading activity of our common stock; the concentration of ownership of our common stock; anti-takeover provisions under federal and state law as well as our Articles of Incorporation and our Bylaws; other risks described from time to time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission; and our ability to manage the risks involved in the foregoing. Additional factors can be found in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, as amended, and our other filings with the SEC, which are available at the SEC’s internet site (http://www.sec.gov). Forward-looking statements in this Press Release speak only as of the date of the Press Release, and we assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements or the reasons why actual results could differ, except as may be required by law.
USE OF NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
Unaudited
We present a tangible common equity ratio and a tangible book value per diluted share that removes the effect of goodwill and other intangibles resulting from merger and acquisition activity. We believe these measures are useful to investors because it allows investors to more easily compare our capital adequacy to other companies in the industry.
The GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliations are provided below.
| (Dollars in Thousands, except per share data) | Sep 30, 2024 | Jun 30, 2024 | Mar 31, 2024 | Dec 31, 2023 | Sep 30, 2023 | ||||||||||||
| Shareowners’ Equity (GAAP) | $ | 476,499 | $ | 460,999 | $ | 448,314 | $ | 440,625 | $ | 419,706 | |||||||
| Less: Goodwill and Other Intangibles (GAAP) | 92,813 | 92,853 | 92,893 | 92,933 | 92,973 | ||||||||||||
| Tangible Shareowners’ Equity (non-GAAP) | A | 383,686 | 368,146 | 355,421 | 347,692 | 326,733 | |||||||||||
| Total Assets (GAAP) | 4,225,316 | 4,225,695 | 4,259,922 | 4,304,477 | 4,138,287 | ||||||||||||
| Less: Goodwill and Other Intangibles (GAAP) | 92,813 | 92,853 | 92,893 | 92,933 | 92,973 | ||||||||||||
| Tangible Assets (non-GAAP) | B | $ | 4,132,503 | $ | 4,132,842 | $ | 4,167,029 | $ | 4,211,544 | $ | 4,045,314 | ||||||
| Tangible Common Equity Ratio (non-GAAP) | A/B | 9.28% | 8.91% | 8.53% | 8.26% | 8.08% | |||||||||||
| Actual Diluted Shares Outstanding (GAAP) | C | 16,980,686 | 16,970,228 | 16,947,204 | 17,000,758 | 16,997,886 | |||||||||||
| Tangible Book Value per Diluted Share (non-GAAP) | A/C | $ | 22.60 | $ | 21.69 | $ | 20.97 | $ | 20.45 | $ | 19.22 | ||||||
| CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC. | |||||||||||
| EARNINGS HIGHLIGHTS | |||||||||||
| Unaudited | |||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | ||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) | Sep 30, 2024 | Jun 30, 2024 | Sep 30, 2023 | Sep 30, 2024 | Sep 30, 2023 | ||||||
| EARNINGS | |||||||||||
| Net Income Attributable to Common Shareowners | $ | 13,118 | $ | 14,150 | $ | 12,655 | $ | 39,825 | $ | 40,539 | |
| Diluted Net Income Per Share | $ | 0.78 | $ | 0.83 | $ | 0.74 | $ | 2.35 | $ | 2.38 | |
| PERFORMANCE | |||||||||||
| Return on Average Assets (annualized) | 1.24 | % | 1.33 | % | 1.19 | % | 1.26 | % | 1.26 | % | |
| Return on Average Equity (annualized) | 10.87 | 12.23 | 11.74 | 11.39 | 13.00 | ||||||
| Net Interest Margin | 4.12 | 4.02 | 4.03 | 4.05 | 4.04 | ||||||
| Noninterest Income as % of Operating Revenue | 32.67 | 33.30 | 29.87 | 32.69 | 31.25 | ||||||
| Efficiency Ratio | 71.81 | % | 68.61 | % | 69.88 | % | 70.49 | % | 67.07 | % | |
| CAPITAL ADEQUACY | |||||||||||
| Tier 1 Capital | 16.77 | % | 16.31 | % | 15.11 | % | 16.77 | % | 15.11 | % | |
| Total Capital | 17.97 | 17.50 | 16.30 | 17.97 | 16.30 | ||||||
| Leverage | 10.89 | 10.51 | 9.98 | 10.89 | 9.98 | ||||||
| Common Equity Tier 1 | 14.88 | 14.44 | 13.26 | 14.88 | 13.26 | ||||||
| Tangible Common Equity (1) | 9.28 | 8.91 | 8.08 | 9.28 | 8.08 | ||||||
| Equity to Assets | 11.28 | % | 10.91 | % | 10.14 | % | 11.28 | % | 10.14 | % | |
| ASSET QUALITY | |||||||||||
| Allowance as % of Non-Performing Loans | 452.64 | % | 529.79 | % | 619.58 | % | 452.64 | % | 619.58 | % | |
| Allowance as a % of Loans HFI | 1.11 | 1.09 | 1.08 | 1.11 | 1.08 | ||||||
| Net Charge-Offs as % of Average Loans HFI | 0.19 | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.20 | 0.16 | ||||||
| Nonperforming Assets as % of Loans HFI and OREO | 0.27 | 0.23 | 0.17 | 0.27 | 0.17 | ||||||
| Nonperforming Assets as % of Total Assets | 0.17 | % | 0.15 | % | 0.11 | % | 0.17 | % | 0.11 | % | |
| STOCK PERFORMANCE | |||||||||||
| High | $ | 36.67 | $ | 28.58 | $ | 33.44 | $ | 36.67 | $ | 36.86 | |
| Low | 26.72 | 25.45 | 28.64 | 25.45 | 28.03 | ||||||
| Close | $ | 35.29 | $ | 28.44 | $ | 29.83 | $ | 35.29 | $ | 29.83 | |
| Average Daily Trading Volume | 37,151 | 29,861 | 26,774 | 32,720 | 33,936 | ||||||
| (1) Tangible common equity ratio is a non-GAAP financial measure. For additional information, including a reconciliation to GAAP, refer to Page 6. |
|||||||||||
| CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC. | |||||||||||||||
| CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION | |||||||||||||||
| Unaudited | |||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | Third Quarter | Second Quarter | First Quarter | Fourth Quarter | Third Quarter | ||||||||||
| ASSETS | |||||||||||||||
| Cash and Due From Banks | $ | 83,431 | $ | 75,304 | $ | 73,642 | $ | 83,118 | $ | 72,379 | |||||
| Funds Sold and Interest Bearing Deposits | 261,779 | 272,675 | 231,047 | 228,949 | 95,119 | ||||||||||
| Total Cash and Cash Equivalents | 345,210 | 347,979 | 304,689 | 312,067 | 167,498 | ||||||||||
| Investment Securities Available for Sale | 336,187 | 310,941 | 327,338 | 337,902 | 334,052 | ||||||||||
| Investment Securities Held to Maturity | 561,480 | 582,984 | 603,386 | 625,022 | 632,076 | ||||||||||
| Other Equity Securities | 6,976 | 2,537 | 3,445 | 3,450 | 3,585 | ||||||||||
| Total Investment Securities | 904,643 | 896,462 | 934,169 | 966,374 | 969,713 | ||||||||||
| Loans Held for Sale | 31,251 | 24,022 | 24,705 | 28,211 | 34,013 | ||||||||||
| Loans Held for Investment (“HFI”): | |||||||||||||||
| Commercial, Financial, & Agricultural | 194,625 | 204,990 | 218,298 | 225,190 | 221,704 | ||||||||||
| Real Estate – Construction | 218,899 | 200,754 | 202,692 | 196,091 | 197,526 | ||||||||||
| Real Estate – Commercial | 819,955 | 823,122 | 823,690 | 825,456 | 828,234 | ||||||||||
| Real Estate – Residential | 1,023,485 | 1,012,541 | 1,012,791 | 1,001,257 | 966,512 | ||||||||||
| Real Estate – Home Equity | 210,988 | 211,126 | 214,617 | 210,920 | 203,606 | ||||||||||
| Consumer | 213,305 | 234,212 | 254,168 | 270,994 | 285,122 | ||||||||||
| Other Loans | 461 | 2,286 | 3,789 | 2,962 | 1,401 | ||||||||||
| Overdrafts | 1,378 | 1,192 | 1,127 | 1,048 | 1,076 | ||||||||||
| Total Loans Held for Investment | 2,683,096 | 2,690,223 | 2,731,172 | 2,733,918 | 2,705,181 | ||||||||||
| Allowance for Credit Losses | (29,836 | ) | (29,219 | ) | (29,329 | ) | (29,941 | ) | (29,083 | ) | |||||
| Loans Held for Investment, Net | 2,653,260 | 2,661,004 | 2,701,843 | 2,703,977 | 2,676,098 | ||||||||||
| Premises and Equipment, Net | 81,876 | 81,414 | 81,452 | 81,266 | 81,677 | ||||||||||
| Goodwill and Other Intangibles | 92,813 | 92,853 | 92,893 | 92,933 | 92,973 | ||||||||||
| Other Real Estate Owned | 650 | 650 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||||||||||
| Other Assets | 115,613 | 121,311 | 120,170 | 119,648 | 116,314 | ||||||||||
| Total Other Assets | 290,952 | 296,228 | 294,516 | 293,848 | 290,965 | ||||||||||
| Total Assets | $ | 4,225,316 | $ | 4,225,695 | $ | 4,259,922 | $ | 4,304,477 | $ | 4,138,287 | |||||
| LIABILITIES | |||||||||||||||
| Deposits: | |||||||||||||||
| Noninterest Bearing Deposits | $ | 1,330,715 | $ | 1,343,606 | $ | 1,361,939 | $ | 1,377,934 | $ | 1,472,165 | |||||
| NOW Accounts | 1,174,585 | 1,177,180 | 1,212,452 | 1,327,420 | 1,092,996 | ||||||||||
| Money Market Accounts | 401,272 | 413,594 | 398,308 | 319,319 | 304,323 | ||||||||||
| Savings Accounts | 507,604 | 514,560 | 530,782 | 547,634 | 571,003 | ||||||||||
| Certificates of Deposit | 164,901 | 159,624 | 151,320 | 129,515 | 99,958 | ||||||||||
| Total Deposits | 3,579,077 | 3,608,564 | 3,654,801 | 3,701,822 | 3,540,445 | ||||||||||
| Repurchase Agreements | 29,339 | 22,463 | 23,477 | 26,957 | 22,910 | ||||||||||
| Other Short-Term Borrowings | 7,929 | 3,307 | 8,409 | 8,384 | 18,786 | ||||||||||
| Subordinated Notes Payable | 52,887 | 52,887 | 52,887 | 52,887 | 52,887 | ||||||||||
| Other Long-Term Borrowings | 794 | 1,009 | 265 | 315 | 364 | ||||||||||
| Other Liabilities | 71,974 | 69,987 | 65,181 | 66,080 | 75,585 | ||||||||||
| Total Liabilities | 3,742,000 | 3,758,217 | 3,805,020 | 3,856,445 | 3,710,977 | ||||||||||
| Temporary Equity | 6,817 | 6,479 | 6,588 | 7,407 | 7,604 | ||||||||||
| SHAREOWNERS’ EQUITY | |||||||||||||||
| Common Stock | 169 | 169 | 169 | 170 | 170 | ||||||||||
| Additional Paid-In Capital | 36,070 | 35,547 | 34,861 | 36,326 | 36,182 | ||||||||||
| Retained Earnings | 454,342 | 445,959 | 435,364 | 426,275 | 418,030 | ||||||||||
| Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, Net of Tax | (14,082 | ) | (20,676 | ) | (22,080 | ) | (22,146 | ) | (34,676 | ) | |||||
| Total Shareowners’ Equity | 476,499 | 460,999 | 448,314 | 440,625 | 419,706 | ||||||||||
| Total Liabilities, Temporary Equity and Shareowners’ Equity | $ | 4,225,316 | $ | 4,225,695 | $ | 4,259,922 | $ | 4,304,477 | $ | 4,138,287 | |||||
| OTHER BALANCE SHEET DATA | |||||||||||||||
| Earning Assets | $ | 3,880,769 | $ | 3,883,382 | $ | 3,921,093 | $ | 3,957,452 | $ | 3,804,026 | |||||
| Interest Bearing Liabilities | 2,339,311 | 2,344,624 | 2,377,900 | 2,412,431 | 2,163,227 | ||||||||||
| Book Value Per Diluted Share | $ | 28.06 | $ | 27.17 | $ | 26.45 | $ | 25.92 | $ | 24.69 | |||||
| Tangible Book Value Per Diluted Share(1) | 22.60 | 21.69 | 20.97 | 20.45 | 19.22 | ||||||||||
| Actual Basic Shares Outstanding | 16,944 | 16,942 | 16,929 | 16,950 | 16,958 | ||||||||||
| Actual Diluted Shares Outstanding | 16,981 | 16,970 | 16,947 | 17,001 | 16,998 | ||||||||||
| (1) Tangible book value per diluted share is a non-GAAP financial measure. For additional information, including a reconciliation to GAAP, refer to Page 6. | |||||||||||||||
| CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC. | ||||||||||||||
| CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS | ||||||||||||||
| Unaudited | ||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | Nine Months Ended September 30, |
||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) | Third Quarter |
Second Quarter |
First Quarter |
Fourth Quarter |
Third Quarter |
2024 | 2023 | |||||||
| INTEREST INCOME | ||||||||||||||
| Loans, including Fees | $ | 41,659 | $ | 41,138 | $ | 40,683 | $ | 40,407 | $ | 39,344 | $ | 123,480 | $ | 111,845 |
| Investment Securities | 4,155 | 4,004 | 4,244 | 4,392 | 4,561 | 12,403 | 14,300 | |||||||
| Federal Funds Sold and Interest Bearing Deposits | 3,514 | 3,624 | 1,893 | 1,385 | 1,848 | 9,031 | 8,741 | |||||||
| Total Interest Income | 49,328 | 48,766 | 46,820 | 46,184 | 45,753 | 144,914 | 134,886 | |||||||
| INTEREST EXPENSE | ||||||||||||||
| Deposits | 8,223 | 8,579 | 7,594 | 5,872 | 5,214 | 24,396 | 11,710 | |||||||
| Repurchase Agreements | 221 | 217 | 201 | 199 | 190 | 639 | 314 | |||||||
| Other Short-Term Borrowings | 52 | 68 | 39 | 310 | 440 | 159 | 1,228 | |||||||
| Subordinated Notes Payable | 610 | 630 | 628 | 627 | 625 | 1,868 | 1,800 | |||||||
| Other Long-Term Borrowings | 11 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 4 | 17 | 15 | |||||||
| Total Interest Expense | 9,117 | 9,497 | 8,465 | 7,013 | 6,473 | 27,079 | 15,067 | |||||||
| Net Interest Income | 40,211 | 39,269 | 38,355 | 39,171 | 39,280 | 117,835 | 119,819 | |||||||
| Provision for Credit Losses | 1,206 | 1,204 | 920 | 2,025 | 2,393 | 3,330 | 7,689 | |||||||
| Net Interest Income after Provision for Credit Losses | 39,005 | 38,065 | 37,435 | 37,146 | 36,887 | 114,505 | 112,130 | |||||||
| NONINTEREST INCOME | ||||||||||||||
| Deposit Fees | 5,512 | 5,377 | 5,250 | 5,304 | 5,456 | 16,139 | 16,021 | |||||||
| Bank Card Fees | 3,624 | 3,766 | 3,620 | 3,713 | 3,684 | 11,010 | 11,205 | |||||||
| Wealth Management Fees | 4,770 | 4,439 | 4,682 | 4,276 | 3,984 | 13,891 | 12,061 | |||||||
| Mortgage Banking Revenues | 3,966 | 4,381 | 2,878 | 2,327 | 1,839 | 11,225 | 8,072 | |||||||
| Other | 1,641 | 1,643 | 1,667 | 1,537 | 1,765 | 4,951 | 7,093 | |||||||
| Total Noninterest Income | 19,513 | 19,606 | 18,097 | 17,157 | 16,728 | 57,216 | 54,452 | |||||||
| NONINTEREST EXPENSE | ||||||||||||||
| Compensation | 25,800 | 24,406 | 24,407 | 23,822 | 23,003 | 74,613 | 69,965 | |||||||
| Occupancy, Net | 7,098 | 6,997 | 6,994 | 7,098 | 6,980 | 21,089 | 20,562 | |||||||
| Other | 10,023 | 9,038 | 8,770 | 9,038 | 9,122 | 27,831 | 26,539 | |||||||
| Total Noninterest Expense | 42,921 | 40,441 | 40,171 | 39,958 | 39,105 | 123,533 | 117,066 | |||||||
| OPERATING PROFIT | 15,597 | 17,230 | 15,361 | 14,345 | 14,510 | 48,188 | 49,516 | |||||||
| Income Tax Expense | 2,980 | 3,189 | 3,536 | 2,909 | 3,004 | 9,705 | 10,130 | |||||||
| Net Income | 12,617 | 14,041 | 11,825 | 11,436 | 11,506 | 38,483 | 39,386 | |||||||
| Pre-Tax Loss Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest | 501 | 109 | 732 | 284 | 1,149 | 1,342 | 1,153 | |||||||
| NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO COMMON SHAREOWNERS |
$ | 13,118 | $ | 14,150 | $ | 12,557 | $ | 11,720 | $ | 12,655 | $ | 39,825 | $ | 40,539 |
| PER COMMON SHARE | ||||||||||||||
| Basic Net Income | $ | 0.77 | $ | 0.84 | $ | 0.74 | $ | 0.69 | $ | 0.75 | $ | 2.35 | $ | 2.38 |
| Diluted Net Income | 0.78 | 0.83 | 0.74 | 0.70 | 0.74 | 2.35 | 2.38 | |||||||
| Cash Dividend | $ | 0.23 | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.20 | $ | 0.20 | $ | 0.65 | $ | 0.56 |
| AVERAGE SHARES | ||||||||||||||
| Basic | 16,943 | 16,931 | 16,951 | 16,947 | 16,985 | 16,942 | 17,001 | |||||||
| Diluted | 16,979 | 16,960 | 16,969 | 16,997 | 17,025 | 16,966 | 17,031 | |||||||
| CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC. | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES (“ACL”) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| AND CREDIT QUALITY | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Unaudited | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2023 | Nine Months Ended September 30, |
||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) | Third Quarter |
Second Quarter |
First Quarter |
Fourth Quarter |
Third Quarter |
2024 | 2023 | |||||||||||||
| ACL – HELD FOR INVESTMENT LOANS | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Balance at Beginning of Period | $ | 29,219 | $ | 29,329 | $ | 29,941 | $ | 29,083 | $ | 28,243 | $ | 29,941 | $ | 25,068 | ||||||
| Transfer from Other (Assets) Liabilities | – | – | (50 | ) | 66 | – | (50 | ) | – | |||||||||||
| Provision for Credit Losses | 1,879 | 1,129 | 932 | 2,354 | 1,993 | 3,940 | 7,175 | |||||||||||||
| Net Charge-Offs (Recoveries) | 1,262 | 1,239 | 1,494 | 1,562 | 1,153 | 3,995 | 3,160 | |||||||||||||
| Balance at End of Period | $ | 29,836 | $ | 29,219 | $ | 29,329 | $ | 29,941 | $ | 29,083 | $ | 29,836 | $ | 29,083 | ||||||
| As a % of Loans HFI | 1.11% | 1.09% | 1.07% | 1.10% | 1.08% | 1.11% | 1.08% | |||||||||||||
| As a % of Nonperforming Loans | 452.64% | 529.79% | 431.46% | 479.70% | 619.58% | 452.64% | 619.58% | |||||||||||||
| ACL – UNFUNDED COMMITMENTS | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Balance at Beginning of Period | 3,139 | $ | 3,121 | $ | 3,191 | $ | 3,502 | $ | 3,120 | $ | 3,191 | $ | 2,989 | |||||||
| Provision for Credit Losses | (617 | ) | 18 | (70 | ) | (311 | ) | 382 | (669 | ) | 513 | |||||||||
| Balance at End of Period(1) | 2,522 | 3,139 | 3,121 | 3,191 | 3,502 | 2,522 | 3,502 | |||||||||||||
| ACL – DEBT SECURITIES | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Provision for Credit Losses | $ | (56 | ) | $ | 57 | $ | 58 | $ | (18 | ) | $ | 18 | $ | 59 | $ | 1 | ||||
| CHARGE-OFFS | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Commercial, Financial and Agricultural | $ | 331 | $ | 400 | $ | 282 | $ | 217 | $ | 76 | $ | 1,013 | $ | 294 | ||||||
| Real Estate – Construction | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | |||||||||||||
| Real Estate – Commercial | 3 | – | – | – | – | 3 | 120 | |||||||||||||
| Real Estate – Residential | – | – | 17 | 79 | – | 17 | – | |||||||||||||
| Real Estate – Home Equity | 23 | – | 76 | – | – | 99 | 39 | |||||||||||||
| Consumer | 1,315 | 1,061 | 1,550 | 1,689 | 1,340 | 3,926 | 4,065 | |||||||||||||
| Overdrafts | 611 | 571 | 638 | 602 | 659 | 1,820 | 2,187 | |||||||||||||
| Total Charge-Offs | $ | 2,283 | $ | 2,032 | $ | 2,563 | $ | 2,587 | $ | 2,075 | $ | 6,878 | $ | 6,705 | ||||||
| RECOVERIES | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Commercial, Financial and Agricultural | $ | 176 | $ | 59 | $ | 41 | $ | 83 | $ | 28 | $ | 276 | $ | 194 | ||||||
| Real Estate – Construction | – | – | – | – | – | – | 2 | |||||||||||||
| Real Estate – Commercial | 5 | 19 | 204 | 16 | 17 | 228 | 36 | |||||||||||||
| Real Estate – Residential | 88 | 23 | 37 | 34 | 30 | 148 | 219 | |||||||||||||
| Real Estate – Home Equity | 59 | 37 | 24 | 17 | 53 | 120 | 209 | |||||||||||||
| Consumer | 405 | 313 | 410 | 433 | 418 | 1,128 | 1,503 | |||||||||||||
| Overdrafts | 288 | 342 | 353 | 442 | 376 | 983 | 1,382 | |||||||||||||
| Total Recoveries | $ | 1,021 | $ | 793 | $ | 1,069 | $ | 1,025 | $ | 922 | $ | 2,883 | $ | 3,545 | ||||||
| NET CHARGE-OFFS (RECOVERIES) | $ | 1,262 | $ | 1,239 | $ | 1,494 | $ | 1,562 | $ | 1,153 | $ | 3,995 | $ | 3,160 | ||||||
| Net Charge-Offs as a % of Average Loans HFI(2) | 0.19% | 0.18% | 0.22% | 0.23% | 0.17% | 0.20% | 0.16% | |||||||||||||
| CREDIT QUALITY | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Nonaccruing Loans | $ | 6,592 | $ | 5,515 | $ | 6,798 | $ | 6,242 | $ | 4,694 | ||||||||||
| Other Real Estate Owned | 650 | 650 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||||||||||||
| Total Nonperforming Assets (“NPAs”) | $ | 7,242 | $ | 6,165 | $ | 6,799 | $ | 6,243 | $ | 4,695 | ||||||||||
| Past Due Loans 30-89 Days | $ | 9,388 | $ | 5,672 | $ | 5,392 | $ | 6,855 | $ | 5,577 | ||||||||||
| Classified Loans | 25,501 | 25,566 | 22,305 | 22,203 | 21,812 | |||||||||||||||
| Nonperforming Loans as a % of Loans HFI | 0.25% | 0.21% | 0.25% | 0.23% | 0.17% | |||||||||||||||
| NPAs as a % of Loans HFI and Other Real Estate | 0.27% | 0.23% | 0.25% | 0.23% | 0.17% | |||||||||||||||
| NPAs as a % of Total Assets | 0.17% | 0.15% | 0.16% | 0.15% | 0.11% | |||||||||||||||
| (1)Recorded in other liabilities | ||||||||||||||||||||
| (2)Annualized | ||||||||||||||||||||
| CAPITAL CITY BANK GROUP, INC. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| AVERAGE BALANCE AND INTEREST RATES | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Unaudited | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Third Quarter 2024 | Second Quarter 2024 | First Quarter 2024 | Fourth Quarter 2023 | Third Quarter 2023 | Sep 2024 YTD | Sep 2023 YTD | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | Average Balance |
Interest | Average Rate |
Average Balance |
Interest | Average Rate |
Average Balance |
Interest | Average Rate |
Average Balance |
Interest | Average Rate |
Average Balance |
Interest | Average Rate |
Average Balance |
Interest | Average Rate |
Average Balance |
Interest | Average Rate |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ASSETS: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans Held for Sale | $ | 24,570 | $ | 720 | 7.49 | % | $ | 26,281 | $ | 517 | 5.26 | % | $ | 27,314 | $ | 563 | 5.99 | % | $ | 49,790 | 817 | 6.50 | % | $ | 62,768 | $ | 971 | 6.14 | % | $ | 26,050 | $ | 1,800 | 6.22 | % | $ | 57,438 | $ | 2,416 | 5.62 | % | |||||||||||||||
| Loans Held for Investment(1) | 2,693,533 | 40,985 | 6.09 | 2,726,748 | 40,683 | 6.03 | 2,728,629 | 40,196 | 5.95 | 2,711,243 | 39,679 | 5.81 | 2,672,653 | 38,455 | 5.71 | 2,716,220 | 121,864 | 6.02 | 2,637,911 | 109,688 | 5.56 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Investment Securities | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Taxable Investment Securities | 907,610 | 4,148 | 1.82 | 918,989 | 3,998 | 1.74 | 952,328 | 4,239 | 1.78 | 962,322 | 4,389 | 1.81 | 1,002,547 | 4,549 | 1.80 | 926,241 | 12,385 | 1.78 | 1,034,825 | 14,265 | 1.84 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax-Exempt Investment Securities(1) | 846 | 10 | 4.33 | 843 | 9 | 4.36 | 856 | 9 | 4.34 | 862 | 7 | 4.32 | 2,456 | 17 | 2.66 | 848 | 28 | 4.34 | 2,649 | 50 | 2.49 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Investment Securities | 908,456 | 4,158 | 1.82 | 919,832 | 4,007 | 1.74 | 953,184 | 4,248 | 1.78 | 963,184 | 4,396 | 1.82 | 1,005,003 | 4,566 | 1.81 | 927,089 | 12,413 | 1.78 | 1,037,474 | 14,315 | 1.84 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Federal Funds Sold and Interest Bearing Deposits | 256,855 | 3,514 | 5.44 | 262,419 | 3,624 | 5.56 | 140,488 | 1,893 | 5.42 | 99,763 | 1,385 | 5.51 | 136,556 | 1,848 | 5.37 | 220,056 | 9,031 | 5.48 | 237,987 | 8,741 | 4.91 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Earning Assets | 3,883,414 | $ | 49,377 | 5.06 | % | 3,935,280 | $ | 48,831 | 4.99 | % | 3,849,615 | $ | 46,900 | 4.90 | % | 3,823,980 | $ | 46,277 | 4.80 | % | 3,876,980 | $ | 45,840 | 4.69 | % | 3,889,415 | $ | 145,108 | 4.98 | % | 3,970,810 | $ | 135,160 | 4.55 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and Due From Banks | 70,994 | 74,803 | 75,763 | 76,681 | 75,941 | 73,843 | 75,483 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for Credit Losses | (29,905 | ) | (29,564 | ) | (30,030 | ) | (29,998 | ) | (29,172 | ) | (29,833 | ) | (27,581 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Assets | 291,359 | 291,669 | 295,275 | 296,114 | 295,106 | 292,762 | 297,688 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Assets | $ | 4,215,862 | $ | 4,272,188 | $ | 4,190,623 | $ | 4,166,777 | $ | 4,218,855 | $ | 4,226,187 | $ | 4,316,400 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| LIABILITIES: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Noninterest Bearing Deposits | $ | 1,332,305 | $ | 1,346,546 | $ | 1,344,188 | $ | 1,416,825 | $ | 1,474,574 | $ | 1,340,981 | $ | 1,538,268 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| NOW Accounts | 1,145,544 | $ | 4,087 | 1.42 | % | 1,207,643 | $ | 4,425 | 1.47 | % | 1,201,032 | $ | 4,497 | 1.51 | % | 1,138,461 | $ | 3,696 | 1.29 | % | 1,125,171 | $ | 3,489 | 1.23 | % | 1,184,596 | $ | 13,009 | 1.47 | % | 1,184,453 | $ | 8,679 | 0.98 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Money Market Accounts | 418,625 | 2,694 | 2.56 | 407,387 | 2,752 | 2.72 | 353,591 | 1,985 | 2.26 | 318,844 | 1,421 | 1.77 | 322,623 | 1,294 | 1.59 | 393,294 | 7,431 | 2.52 | 293,089 | 2,249 | 1.03 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Savings Accounts | 512,098 | 180 | 0.14 | 519,374 | 176 | 0.14 | 539,374 | 188 | 0.14 | 557,579 | 202 | 0.14 | 579,245 | 200 | 0.14 | 523,573 | 544 | 0.14 | 603,643 | 396 | 0.09 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Time Deposits | 163,462 | 1,262 | 3.07 | 160,078 | 1,226 | 3.08 | 138,328 | 924 | 2.69 | 116,797 | 553 | 1.88 | 95,203 | 231 | 0.96 | 153,991 | 3,412 | 2.96 | 90,970 | 386 | 0.57 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Interest Bearing Deposits | 2,239,729 | 8,223 | 1.46 | 2,294,482 | 8,579 | 1.50 | 2,232,325 | 7,594 | 1.37 | 2,131,681 | 5,872 | 1.09 | 2,122,242 | 5,214 | 0.97 | 2,255,454 | 24,396 | 1.44 | 2,172,155 | 11,710 | 0.72 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Deposits | 3,572,034 | 8,223 | 0.92 | 3,641,028 | 8,579 | 0.95 | 3,576,513 | 7,594 | 0.85 | 3,548,506 | 5,872 | 0.66 | 3,596,816 | 5,214 | 0.58 | 3,596,435 | 24,396 | 0.91 | 3,710,423 | 11,710 | 0.42 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Repurchase Agreements | 27,126 | 221 | 3.24 | 26,999 | 217 | 3.24 | 25,725 | 201 | 3.14 | 26,831 | 199 | 2.94 | 25,356 | 190 | 2.98 | 26,619 | 639 | 3.21 | 17,588 | 314 | 2.39 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Short-Term Borrowings | 2,673 | 52 | 7.63 | 6,592 | 68 | 4.16 | 3,758 | 39 | 4.16 | 16,906 | 310 | 7.29 | 24,306 | 440 | 7.17 | 4,334 | 159 | 4.88 | 26,586 | 1,228 | 6.17 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Subordinated Notes Payable | 52,887 | 610 | 4.52 | 52,887 | 630 | 4.71 | 52,887 | 628 | 4.70 | 52,887 | 627 | 4.64 | 52,887 | 625 | 4.62 | 52,887 | 1,868 | 4.64 | 52,887 | 1,800 | 4.49 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Long-Term Borrowings | 795 | 11 | 5.55 | 258 | 3 | 4.31 | 281 | 3 | 4.80 | 336 | 5 | 4.72 | 387 | 4 | 4.73 | 447 | 17 | 5.16 | 433 | 15 | 4.78 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Interest Bearing Liabilities | 2,323,210 | $ | 9,117 | 1.56 | % | 2,381,218 | $ | 9,497 | 1.60 | % | 2,314,976 | $ | 8,465 | 1.47 | % | 2,228,641 | $ | 7,013 | 1.25 | % | 2,225,178 | $ | 6,473 | 1.15 | % | 2,339,741 | $ | 27,079 | 1.55 | % | 2,269,649 | $ | 15,067 | 0.89 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Other Liabilities | 73,767 | 72,634 | 68,295 | 78,772 | 83,099 | 71,574 | 82,877 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Liabilities | 3,729,282 | 3,800,398 | 3,727,459 | 3,724,238 | 3,782,851 | 3,752,296 | 3,890,794 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Temporary Equity | 6,443 | 6,493 | 7,150 | 7,423 | 8,424 | 6,694 | 8,719 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SHAREOWNERS’ EQUITY: | 480,137 | 465,297 | 456,014 | 435,116 | 427,580 | 467,197 | 416,887 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total Liabilities, Temporary Equity and Shareowners’ Equity | $ | 4,215,862 | $ | 4,272,188 | $ | 4,190,623 | $ | 4,166,777 | $ | 4,218,855 | $ | 4,226,187 | $ | 4,316,400 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest Rate Spread | $ | 40,260 | 3.49 | % | $ | 39,334 | 3.38 | % | $ | 38,435 | 3.43 | % | $ | 39,264 | 3.55 | % | $ | 39,367 | 3.54 | % | $ | 118,029 | 3.43 | % | $ | 120,093 | 3.66 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest Income and Rate Earned(1) | 49,377 | 5.06 | 48,831 | 4.99 | 46,900 | 4.90 | 46,277 | 4.80 | 45,840 | 4.69 | 145,108 | 4.98 | 135,160 | 4.55 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest Expense and Rate Paid(2) | 9,117 | 0.93 | 9,497 | 0.97 | 8,465 | 0.88 | 7,013 | 0.73 | 6,473 | 0.66 | 27,079 | 0.93 | 15,067 | 0.51 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Net Interest Margin | $ | 40,260 | 4.12 | % | $ | 39,334 | 4.02 | % | $ | 38,435 | 4.01 | % | $ | 39,264 | 4.07 | % | $ | 39,367 | 4.03 | % | $ | 118,029 | 4.05 | % | $ | 120,093 | 4.04 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (1)Interest and average rates are calculated on a tax-equivalent basis using a 21% Federal tax rate. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (2)Rate calculated based on average earning assets. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
For Information Contact:
Jep Larkin
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
850.402. 8450
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
Acceleration in Core Deposit Growth Drives Increase in Quarterly Net Interest Margin to 2.50%
Balance Sheet Well Positioned to Benefit From Federal Reserve Rate Cuts
HAUPPAUGE, N.Y., Oct. 22, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Dime Community Bancshares, Inc. (NASDAQ: DCOM) (the “Company” or “Dime”), the parent company of Dime Community Bank (the “Bank”), today reported net income available to common stockholders of $11.5 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, or $0.29 per diluted common share, compared to $16.7 million, or $0.43 per diluted common share, for the quarter ended June 30, 2024, and $13.2 million, or $0.34 per diluted common share for the quarter ended September 30, 2023.
Stuart H. Lubow, President and Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) of the Company, stated, “Strong growth in low-cost core deposits drove a significant linked quarter expansion in the Net Interest Margin. Importantly, following the recent 50 basis point reduction in the Federal Funds rate, we lowered deposit costs and expect to benefit from these actions in the fourth quarter and beyond. Since the Federal Reserve rate cut in mid-September, the spread between the weighted average rate on loans and core deposits has improved by approximately 15 basis points. We anticipate the full quarter impact of this spread improvement to drive continued Net Interest Margin expansion in the fourth quarter.”
Mr. Lubow commented, “During the third quarter, our Business loan portfolio increased by over $120 million and we continue to have strong pipelines in our Middle Market and Healthcare verticals. Compared to the prior quarter, the level of net charge-offs and criticized and classified loans remained stable and we continued to prudently build our allowance for credit losses to total loans and risk-based capital levels. In conclusion, I am extremely proud of our employees for their unwavering focus on our customers and enabling us to be the premier business bank on Greater Long Island.”
Highlights for the Third Quarter of 2024 Included:
Management’s Discussion of Quarterly Operating Results
Net Interest Income
Net interest income for the third quarter of 2024 was $79.9 million compared to $75.5 million for the second quarter of 2024 and $76.5 million for the third quarter of 2023.
The table below provides a reconciliation of the reported net interest margin (“NIM”) and adjusted NIM excluding the impact of purchase accounting accretion on the loan portfolio.
| (Dollars in thousands) | Q3 2024 | Q2 2024 | Q3 2023 | |||||||||
| Net interest income | $ | 79,924 | $ | 75,502 | $ | 76,479 | ||||||
| Purchase accounting amortization (accretion) on loans (“PAA”) | (266 | ) | (101 | ) | 186 | |||||||
| Adjusted net interest income excluding PAA on loans (non-GAAP) | $ | 79,658 | $ | 75,401 | $ | 76,665 | ||||||
| Average interest-earning assets | $ | 12,734,246 | $ | 12,624,556 | $ | 12,984,061 | ||||||
| NIM (1) | 2.50 | % | 2.41 | % | 2.34 | % | ||||||
| Adjusted NIM excluding PAA on loans (non-GAAP) (2) | 2.49 | % | 2.40 | % | 2.34 | % | ||||||
(1) NIM represents net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
(2) Adjusted NIM excluding PAA on loans represents adjusted net interest income, which excludes PAA amortization on acquired loans divided by average interest-earning assets.
During the quarter ended June 30, 2024, there was a recovery of interest income from a loan that was previously on non-accrual status in the amount of $1.3 million. Excluding the impact of this item, the second quarter NIM was 2.37%.
Loan Portfolio
The ending WAR on the total loan portfolio was 5.40% at September 30, 2024, a 1 basis point increase compared to the ending WAR of 5.39% on the total loan portfolio at June 30, 2024.
Outlined below are loan balances and WARs for the quarter ended as indicated.
| September 30, 2024 | June 30, 2024 | September 30, 2023 | ||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | Balance | WAR (1) | Balance | WAR (1) | Balance | WAR (1) | ||||||||||
| Loans held for investment balances at period end: | ||||||||||||||||
| Business loans (2) | $ | 2,653,624 | 6.82 | % | $ | 2,530,896 | 6.92 | % | $ | 2,271,768 | 6.72 | % | ||||
| One-to-four family residential, including condominium and cooperative apartment | 934,209 | 4.65 | 906,949 | 4.55 | 892,869 | 4.39 | ||||||||||
| Multifamily residential and residential mixed-use (3)(4) | 3,866,931 | 4.60 | 3,920,354 | 4.59 | 4,102,024 | 4.45 | ||||||||||
| Non-owner-occupied commercial real estate | 3,281,923 | 5.25 | 3,315,100 | 5.25 | 3,374,281 | 5.09 | ||||||||||
| Acquisition, development, and construction | 149,299 | 8.46 | 144,860 | 8.96 | 203,402 | 8.92 | ||||||||||
| Other loans | 6,058 | 10.71 | 6,699 | 3.39 | 6,267 | 6.28 | ||||||||||
| Loans held for investment | $ | 10,892,044 | 5.40 | % | $ | 10,824,858 | 5.39 | % | $ | 10,850,611 | 5.20 | % | ||||
(1) WAR is calculated by aggregating interest based on the current loan rate from each loan in the category, adjusted for non-accrual loans, divided by the total balance of loans in the category.
(2) Business loans include commercial and industrial loans and owner-occupied commercial real estate loans.
(3) Includes loans underlying multifamily cooperatives.
(4) While the loans within this category are often considered “commercial real estate” in nature, multifamily and loans underlying cooperatives are reported separately from commercial real estate loans in order to emphasize the residential nature of the collateral underlying this significant component of the total loan portfolio.
Outlined below are the loan originations, for the quarter ended as indicated.
| (Dollars in millions) | Q3 2024 | Q2 2024 | Q3 2023 | ||||||
| Loan originations | $ | 122.7 | $ | 162.4 | $ | 153.4 | |||
Deposits and Borrowed Funds
Period end total deposits (including mortgage escrow deposits) at September 30, 2024 were $11.42 billion, compared to $11.03 billion at June 30, 2024 and $10.53 billion at December 31, 2023.
Total Federal Home Loan Bank advances were $508.0 million at September 30, 2024 compared to $633.0 million at June 30, 2024 and $1.31 billion at December 31, 2023.
Mr. Lubow commented, “During the third quarter of 2024, we continued our strategy of utilizing core deposit growth to reduce our wholesale funding position.”
Non-Interest Income
Non-interest income was $7.6 million during the third quarter of 2024, $11.8 million during the second quarter of 2024, and $7.9 million during the third quarter of 2023. Included in non-interest income for the second quarter of 2024, was income related to the sale of premises of approximately $3.7 million.
Non-Interest Expense
Total non-interest expense was $57.7 million during the third quarter of 2024, $55.7 million during the second quarter of 2024, and $59.5 million during the third quarter of 2023. Excluding the impact of the loss on extinguishment of debt, amortization of other intangible assets and severance expense, adjusted non-interest expense was $57.4 million during the third quarter of 2024, $55.4 million during the second quarter of 2024, and $50.6 million during the third quarter of 2023 (see “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables at the end of this news release).
Mr. Lubow commented, “As we have communicated previously, the increase in non-interest expense has been due to the significant investments and hires in the Private and Commercial Bank and the Middle Market C&I Lending operations. Third quarter results reflected a fully-loaded run-rate for these initiatives and we expect to keep our expense base relatively flat in the fourth quarter of 2024.”
The ratio of non-interest expense to average assets was 1.71% during the third quarter of 2024, compared to 1.66% during the linked quarter and 1.73% for the third quarter of 2023. Excluding the impact of the loss on extinguishment of debt, amortization of other intangible assets and severance expense, the ratio of adjusted non-interest expense to average assets was 1.70% during the third quarter of 2024, compared to 1.65% during the linked quarter and 1.48% for the third quarter of 2023 (see “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables at the end of this news release).
The efficiency ratio was 65.9% during the third quarter of 2024, compared to 63.8% during the linked quarter and 70.5% during the third quarter of 2023. Excluding the impact of net (gain) loss on sale of securities and other assets, fair value change in equity securities and loans held for sale, severance expense, loss on extinguishment of debt and amortization of other intangible assets the adjusted efficiency ratio was 65.6% during the third quarter of 2024, compared to 65.9% during the linked quarter and 59.7% during the third quarter of 2023 (see “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables at the end of this news release).
Income Tax Expense
The reported effective tax rate for the third quarter of 2024 was 26.9% compared to 29.0% for the second quarter of 2024, and 35.1% for the third quarter of 2023.
Credit Quality
Non-performing loans were $49.5 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $24.8 million for the prior quarter.
A credit loss provision of $11.6 million was recorded during the third quarter of 2024, compared to a credit loss provision of $5.6 million during the second quarter of 2024, and a credit loss provision of $1.8 million during the third quarter of 2023.
Capital Management
The Company’s and the Bank’s regulatory capital ratios continued to be in excess of all applicable regulatory requirements as of September 30, 2024. All risk-based regulatory capital ratios increased in the third quarter of 2024.
Dividends per common share were $0.25 during the third and second quarters of 2024, respectively.
Book value per common share was $29.31 at September 30, 2024 compared to $28.97 at June 30, 2024.
Tangible common book value per share (which represents common equity less goodwill and other intangible assets, divided by the number of shares outstanding) was $25.22 at September 30, 2024 compared to $24.87 at June 30, 2024 (see “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables at the end of this news release).
Earnings Call Information
The Company will conduct a conference call at 9:00 a.m. (ET) on Tuesday, October 22, 2024, during which CEO Lubow will discuss the Company’s third quarter 2024 financial performance, with a question-and-answer session to follow.
Participants may access the conference call via webcast using this link: https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/hfnjf6ym. To participate via telephone, please register in advance using this link: https://register.vevent.com/register/BI017781a02def49c0ad228b72ba201600. Upon registration, all telephone participants will receive a one-time confirmation email detailing how to join the conference call, including the dial-in number along with a unique PIN that can be used to access the call. All participants are encouraged to dial-in 10 minutes prior to the start time.
A replay of the conference call and webcast will be available on-demand for 12 months at https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/hfnjf6ym.
ABOUT DIME COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC.
Dime Community Bancshares, Inc. is the holding company for Dime Community Bank, a New York State-chartered trust company with over $13.7 billion in assets and the number one deposit market share among community banks on Greater Long Island(1).
(1) Aggregate deposit market share for Kings, Queens, Nassau & Suffolk counties for community banks with less than $20 billion in assets.
This news release contains a number of forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). These statements may be identified by use of words such as “annualized,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “likely,” “may,” “outlook,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “should,” “will,” “would” and similar terms and phrases, including references to assumptions.
Forward-looking statements are based upon various assumptions and analyses made by the Company in light of management’s experience and its perception of historical trends, current conditions and expected future developments, as well as other factors it believes are appropriate under the circumstances. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors (many of which are beyond the Company’s control) that could cause actual results to differ materially from future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on such statements. Factors that could affect our results include, without limitation, the following: the timing and occurrence or non-occurrence of events may be subject to circumstances beyond the Company’s control; there may be increases in competitive pressure among financial institutions or from non-financial institutions; changes in the interest rate environment may affect demand for our products and reduce interest margins and the value of our investments; changes in deposit flows, the cost of funds, loan demand or real estate values may adversely affect the business of the Company; changes in the quality and composition of the Company’s loan or investment portfolios or unanticipated or significant increases in loan losses may negatively affect the Company’s financial condition or results of operations; changes in accounting principles, policies or guidelines may cause the Company’s financial condition to be perceived differently; changes in corporate and/or individual income tax laws may adversely affect the Company’s financial condition or results of operations; general socio-economic conditions, public health emergencies, international conflict, inflation, and recessionary pressures, either nationally or locally in some or all areas in which the Company conducts business, or conditions in the securities markets or the banking industry may be less favorable than the Company currently anticipates and may adversely affect our customers, our financial results and our operations; legislation or regulatory changes may adversely affect the Company’s business; technological changes may be more difficult or expensive than the Company anticipates; there may be failures or breaches of information technology security systems; success or consummation of new business initiatives may be more difficult or expensive than the Company anticipates; there may be difficulties or unanticipated expense incurred in the consummation of new business initiatives or the integration of any acquired entities; and litigation or other matters before regulatory agencies, whether currently existing or commencing in the future, may delay the occurrence or non-occurrence of events longer than the Company anticipates. For discussion of these and other risks that may cause actual results to differ from expectations, please refer to the sections entitled “Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in the Company’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and updates set forth in the Company’s subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K.
| Contact: Avinash Reddy | |
| Senior Executive Vice President – Chief Financial Officer | |
| 718-782-6200 extension 5909 |
| DIME COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION (In thousands) |
||||||||||||
| September 30, | June 30, | December 31, | ||||||||||
| 2024 |
2024 |
2023 |
||||||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | $ | 626,056 | $ | 413,983 | $ | 457,547 | ||||||
| Securities available-for-sale, at fair value | 774,608 | 819,222 | 886,240 | |||||||||
| Securities held-to-maturity | 592,414 | 588,000 | 594,639 | |||||||||
| Loans held for sale | 13,098 | 14,766 | 10,159 | |||||||||
| Loans held for investment, net: | ||||||||||||
| Business loans (1) | 2,653,624 | 2,530,896 | 2,310,379 | |||||||||
| One-to-four family and cooperative/condominium apartment | 934,209 | 906,949 | 889,236 | |||||||||
| Multifamily residential and residential mixed-use (2)(3) | 3,866,931 | 3,920,354 | 4,017,703 | |||||||||
| Non-owner-occupied commercial real estate | 3,281,923 | 3,315,100 | 3,381,842 | |||||||||
| Acquisition, development and construction | 149,299 | 144,860 | 168,513 | |||||||||
| Other loans | 6,058 | 6,699 | 5,755 | |||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses | (85,221 | ) | (77,812 | ) | (71,743 | ) | ||||||
| Total loans held for investment, net | 10,806,823 | 10,747,046 | 10,701,685 | |||||||||
| Premises and fixed assets, net | 35,066 | 36,054 | 44,868 | |||||||||
| Premises held for sale | — | — | 905 | |||||||||
| Restricted stock | 64,235 | 68,445 | 98,750 | |||||||||
| Bank Owned Life Insurance (“BOLI”) | 372,367 | 354,761 | 349,816 | |||||||||
| Goodwill | 155,797 | 155,797 | 155,797 | |||||||||
| Other intangible assets | 4,181 | 4,467 | 5,059 | |||||||||
| Operating lease assets | 48,537 | 51,703 | 52,729 | |||||||||
| Derivative assets | 105,636 | 134,489 | 122,132 | |||||||||
| Accrued interest receivable | 54,578 | 55,588 | 55,666 | |||||||||
| Other assets | 93,133 | 104,442 | 100,013 | |||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 13,746,529 | $ | 13,548,763 | $ | 13,636,005 | ||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||||||||
| Non-interest-bearing checking (excluding mortgage escrow deposits) | $ | 3,231,160 | $ | 3,012,481 | $ | 2,884,378 | ||||||
| Interest-bearing checking | 938,070 | 633,721 | 515,987 | |||||||||
| Savings (excluding mortgage escrow deposits) | 1,845,266 | 2,340,222 | 2,335,354 | |||||||||
| Money market | 3,898,509 | 3,607,090 | 3,125,996 | |||||||||
| Certificates of deposit | 1,416,467 | 1,382,271 | 1,607,683 | |||||||||
| Deposits (excluding mortgage escrow deposits) | 11,329,472 | 10,975,785 | 10,469,398 | |||||||||
| Non-interest-bearing mortgage escrow deposits | 87,841 | 52,647 | 61,121 | |||||||||
| Interest-bearing mortgage escrow deposits | 5 | 2 | 136 | |||||||||
| Total mortgage escrow deposits | 87,846 | 52,649 | 61,257 | |||||||||
| FHLBNY advances | 508,000 | 633,000 | 1,313,000 | |||||||||
| Subordinated debt, net | 272,300 | 262,814 | 200,196 | |||||||||
| Derivative cash collateral | 68,960 | 130,090 | 108,100 | |||||||||
| Operating lease liabilities | 51,362 | 54,530 | 55,454 | |||||||||
| Derivative liabilities | 98,108 | 122,567 | 121,265 | |||||||||
| Other liabilities | 66,552 | 66,732 | 81,110 | |||||||||
| Total liabilities | 12,482,600 | 12,298,167 | 12,409,780 | |||||||||
| Stockholders’ equity: | ||||||||||||
| Preferred stock, Series A | 116,569 | 116,569 | 116,569 | |||||||||
| Common stock | 416 | 416 | 416 | |||||||||
| Additional paid-in capital | 488,607 | 488,760 | 494,454 | |||||||||
| Retained earnings | 827,690 | 826,080 | 813,007 | |||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss (“AOCI”), net of deferred taxes | (72,970 | ) | (82,780 | ) | (91,579 | ) | ||||||
| Unearned equity awards | (10,111 | ) | (12,023 | ) | (8,622 | ) | ||||||
| Treasury stock, at cost | (86,272 | ) | (86,426 | ) | (98,020 | ) | ||||||
| Total stockholders’ equity | 1,263,929 | 1,250,596 | 1,226,225 | |||||||||
| Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity | $ | 13,746,529 | $ | 13,548,763 | $ | 13,636,005 | ||||||
(1) Business loans include commercial and industrial loans, owner-occupied commercial real estate loans and Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) loans.
(2) Includes loans underlying multifamily cooperatives.
(3) While the loans within this category are often considered “commercial real estate” in nature, multifamily and loans underlying cooperatives are here reported separately from commercial real estate loans in order to emphasize the residential nature of the collateral underlying this significant component of the total loan portfolio.
| DIME COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (Dollars in thousands except share and per share amounts) |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||||
| September 30, | June 30, | September 30, | September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2024 |
2023 |
2024 |
2023 |
|||||||||||||||
| Interest income: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Loans | $ | 151,828 | $ | 147,099 | $ | 142,995 | $ | 442,492 | $ | 409,744 | |||||||||
| Securities | 7,766 | 7,907 | 7,916 | 23,553 | 24,261 | ||||||||||||||
| Other short-term investments | 4,645 | 4,412 | 6,930 | 18,621 | 16,599 | ||||||||||||||
| Total interest income | 164,239 | 159,418 | 157,841 | 484,666 | 450,604 | ||||||||||||||
| Interest expense: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Deposits and escrow | 74,025 | 72,878 | 62,507 | 219,972 | 152,395 | ||||||||||||||
| Borrowed funds | 8,764 | 9,033 | 16,925 | 32,494 | 50,855 | ||||||||||||||
| Derivative cash collateral | 1,526 | 2,005 | 1,930 | 5,244 | 4,904 | ||||||||||||||
| Total interest expense | 84,315 | 83,916 | 81,362 | 257,710 | 208,154 | ||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 79,924 | 75,502 | 76,479 | 226,956 | 242,450 | ||||||||||||||
| Provision (recovery) for credit losses | 11,603 | 5,585 | 1,806 | 22,398 | (950 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Net interest income after provision (recovery) | 68,321 | 69,917 | 74,673 | 204,558 | 243,400 | ||||||||||||||
| Non-interest income: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Service charges and other fees | 4,267 | 3,972 | 3,963 | 12,783 | 12,633 | ||||||||||||||
| Title fees | 190 | 294 | 291 | 617 | 829 | ||||||||||||||
| Loan level derivative income | 132 | 1,085 | 783 | 1,623 | 6,353 | ||||||||||||||
| BOLI income | 2,606 | 2,484 | 2,317 | 7,551 | 7,332 | ||||||||||||||
| Gain on sale of Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loans | 19 | 113 | 335 | 385 | 1,061 | ||||||||||||||
| Gain on sale of residential loans | 38 | 27 | 21 | 142 | 103 | ||||||||||||||
| Fair value change in equity securities and loans held for sale | 39 | (416 | ) | (299 | ) | (1,219 | ) | (1,079 | ) | ||||||||||
| Net loss on sale of securities | — | — | — | — | (1,447 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Gain (loss) on sale of other assets | 2 | 3,695 | (22 | ) | 6,665 | (22 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Other | 338 | 554 | 539 | 1,359 | 1,571 | ||||||||||||||
| Total non-interest income | 7,631 | 11,808 | 7,928 | 29,906 | 27,334 | ||||||||||||||
| Non-interest expense: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Salaries and employee benefits | 36,132 | 32,184 | 30,520 | 100,353 | 87,054 | ||||||||||||||
| Severance | — | — | 8,562 | 42 | 9,068 | ||||||||||||||
| Occupancy and equipment | 7,448 | 7,409 | 7,277 | 22,225 | 21,794 | ||||||||||||||
| Data processing costs | 4,544 | 4,405 | 4,309 | 13,262 | 12,744 | ||||||||||||||
| Marketing | 1,629 | 1,637 | 2,079 | 4,763 | 5,016 | ||||||||||||||
| Professional services | 2,036 | 2,766 | 1,277 | 6,269 | 4,876 | ||||||||||||||
| Federal deposit insurance premiums | 2,105 | 2,250 | 1,866 | 6,594 | 5,613 | ||||||||||||||
| Loss on extinguishment of debt | 1 | — | — | 454 | — | ||||||||||||||
| Amortization of other intangible assets | 286 | 285 | 349 | 878 | 1,075 | ||||||||||||||
| Other | 3,548 | 4,758 | 3,284 | 11,094 | 11,944 | ||||||||||||||
| Total non-interest expense | 57,729 | 55,694 | 59,523 | 165,934 | 159,184 | ||||||||||||||
| Income before taxes | 18,223 | 26,031 | 23,078 | 68,530 | 111,550 | ||||||||||||||
| Income tax expense | 4,896 | 7,552 | 8,093 | 19,033 | 31,764 | ||||||||||||||
| Net income | 13,327 | 18,479 | 14,985 | 49,497 | 79,786 | ||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock dividends | 1,822 | 1,822 | 1,822 | 5,465 | 5,465 | ||||||||||||||
| Net income available to common stockholders | $ | 11,505 | $ | 16,657 | $ | 13,163 | $ | 44,032 | $ | 74,321 | |||||||||
| Earnings per common share (“EPS”): | |||||||||||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.43 | $ | 0.34 | $ | 1.13 | $ | 1.92 | |||||||||
| Diluted | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.43 | $ | 0.34 | $ | 1.13 | $ | 1.92 | |||||||||
| Average common shares outstanding for diluted EPS | 38,366,619 | 38,329,485 | 38,203,961 | 38,317,223 | 38,177,704 | ||||||||||||||
| DIME COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES UNAUDITED SELECTED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS (Dollars in thousands except per share amounts) |
||||||||||||||||||||
| At or For the Three Months Ended | At or For the Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||||||
| September 30, | June 30, | September 30, | September 30, | September 30, | ||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||||||||||
| Per Share Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Reported EPS (Diluted) | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.43 | $ | 0.34 | $ | 1.13 | $ | 1.92 | ||||||||||
| Cash dividends paid per common share | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 0.75 | 0.74 | |||||||||||||||
| Book value per common share | 29.31 | 28.97 | 28.03 | 29.31 | 28.03 | |||||||||||||||
| Tangible common book value per share (1) | 25.22 | 24.87 | 23.87 | 25.22 | 23.87 | |||||||||||||||
| Common shares outstanding | 39,152 | 39,148 | 38,811 | 39,152 | 38,811 | |||||||||||||||
| Dividend payout ratio | 86.21 | % | 58.14 | % | 73.53 | % | 66.37 | % | 38.54 | % | ||||||||||
| Performance Ratios (Based upon Reported Net Income): | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Return on average assets | 0.39 | % | 0.55 | % | 0.44 | % | 0.49 | % | 0.78 | % | ||||||||||
| Return on average equity | 4.19 | 5.88 | 4.91 | 5.24 | 8.78 | |||||||||||||||
| Return on average tangible common equity (1) | 4.70 | 6.88 | 5.69 | 6.06 | 10.73 | |||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin | 2.50 | 2.41 | 2.34 | 2.37 | 2.52 | |||||||||||||||
| Non-interest expense to average assets | 1.71 | 1.66 | 1.73 | 1.63 | 1.56 | |||||||||||||||
| Efficiency ratio | 65.9 | 63.8 | 70.5 | 64.6 | 59.0 | |||||||||||||||
| Effective tax rate | 26.87 | 29.01 | 35.07 | 27.77 | 28.48 | |||||||||||||||
| Balance Sheet Data: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Average assets | $ | 13,502,753 | $ | 13,418,441 | $ | 13,759,493 | $ | 13,571,710 | $ | 13,623,570 | ||||||||||
| Average interest-earning assets | 12,734,246 | 12,624,556 | 12,984,061 | 12,791,233 | 12,853,701 | |||||||||||||||
| Average tangible common equity (1) | 996,578 | 979,611 | 943,805 | 981,614 | 933,072 | |||||||||||||||
| Loan-to-deposit ratio at end of period (2) | 95.4 | 98.2 | 102.0 | 95.4 | 102.0 | |||||||||||||||
| Capital Ratios and Reserves – Consolidated: (3) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Tangible common equity to tangible assets (1) | 7.27 | % | 7.27 | % | 6.87 | % | ||||||||||||||
| Tangible equity to tangible assets (1) | 8.13 | 8.14 | 7.73 | |||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 common equity ratio | 10.16 | 10.06 | 9.67 | |||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio | 11.28 | 11.17 | 10.76 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total risk-based capital ratio | 14.76 | 14.46 | 13.33 | |||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio | 8.76 | 8.78 | 8.38 | |||||||||||||||||
| Consolidated CRE concentration ratio (4) | 487 | 499 | 547 | |||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses/ Total loans | 0.78 | 0.72 | 0.67 | |||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses/ Non-performing loans | 172.29 | 313.21 | 311.16 | |||||||||||||||||
(1) See “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables for reconciliation of tangible equity, tangible common equity, and tangible assets.
(2) Total deposits include mortgage escrow deposits, which fluctuate seasonally.
(3) September 30, 2024 ratios are preliminary pending completion and filing of the Company’s regulatory reports.
(4) The Consolidated CRE concentration ratio is calculated using the sum of commercial real estate, excluding owner-occupied commercial real estate, multifamily, and acquisition, development, and construction, divided by consolidated capital. The September 30, 2024 ratio is preliminary pending completion and filing of the Company’s regulatory reports.
| DIME COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES UNAUDITED AVERAGE BALANCES AND NET INTEREST INCOME (Dollars in thousands) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| September 30, 2024 | June 30, 2024 | September 30, 2023 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average | Average | Average | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average | Yield/ | Average | Yield/ | Average | Yield/ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Balance | Interest | Cost | Balance | Interest | Cost | Balance | Interest | Cost | |||||||||||||||||
| Assets: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-earning assets: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Business loans (1) | $ | 2,609,934 | $ | 46,656 | 7.11 | % | $ | 2,400,219 | $ | 42,933 | 7.19 | % | $ | 2,260,203 | $ | 38,384 | 6.74 | % | |||||||
| One-to-four family residential, including condo and coop | 924,150 | 11,024 | 4.75 | 886,037 | 9,968 | 4.52 | 879,688 | 9,165 | 4.13 | ||||||||||||||||
| Multifamily residential and residential mixed-use | 3,902,220 | 45,790 | 4.67 | 3,958,617 | 45,775 | 4.65 | 4,114,476 | 46,099 | 4.45 | ||||||||||||||||
| Non-owner-occupied commercial real estate | 3,297,760 | 44,804 | 5.40 | 3,359,004 | 44,728 | 5.36 | 3,382,927 | 44,184 | 5.18 | ||||||||||||||||
| Acquisition, development, and construction | 147,875 | 3,505 | 9.43 | 164,283 | 3,638 | 8.91 | 222,039 | 5,075 | 9.07 | ||||||||||||||||
| Other loans | 4,891 | 49 | 3.99 | 5,100 | 57 | 4.50 | 6,156 | 88 | 5.67 | ||||||||||||||||
| Securities | 1,493,492 | 7,766 | 2.07 | 1,537,487 | 7,907 | 2.07 | 1,619,960 | 7,916 | 1.94 | ||||||||||||||||
| Other short-term investments | 353,924 | 4,645 | 5.22 | 313,809 | 4,412 | 5.65 | 498,612 | 6,930 | 5.51 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-earning assets | 12,734,246 | 164,239 | 5.13 | % | 12,624,556 | 159,418 | 5.08 | % | 12,984,061 | 157,841 | 4.82 | % | |||||||||||||
| Non-interest-earning assets | 768,507 | 793,885 | 775,432 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 13,502,753 | $ | 13,418,441 | $ | 13,759,493 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing liabilities: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing checking (2) | $ | 798,024 | $ | 4,635 | 2.31 | % | $ | 631,403 | $ | 1,499 | 0.95 | % | $ | 786,892 | $ | 2,896 | 1.46 | % | |||||||
| Money market | 3,771,562 | 36,841 | 3.89 | 3,495,989 | 33,193 | 3.82 | 2,975,267 | 24,275 | 3.24 | ||||||||||||||||
| Savings (2) | 2,102,282 | 19,492 | 3.69 | 2,336,202 | 23,109 | 3.98 | 2,342,424 | 20,316 | 3.44 | ||||||||||||||||
| Certificates of deposit | 1,232,984 | 13,057 | 4.21 | 1,393,678 | 15,077 | 4.35 | 1,494,491 | 15,020 | 3.99 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits | 7,904,852 | 74,025 | 3.73 | 7,857,272 | 72,878 | 3.73 | 7,599,074 | 62,507 | 3.26 | ||||||||||||||||
| FHLBNY advances | 528,652 | 4,455 | 3.35 | 671,242 | 6,429 | 3.85 | 1,250,717 | 14,370 | 4.56 | ||||||||||||||||
| Subordinated debt, net | 271,450 | 4,307 | 6.31 | 202,232 | 2,604 | 5.18 | 200,232 | 2,553 | 5.06 | ||||||||||||||||
| Other short-term borrowings | 131 | 2 | 6.07 | — | — | — | 120 | 2 | 6.61 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total borrowings | 800,233 | 8,764 | 4.36 | 873,474 | 9,033 | 4.16 | 1,451,069 | 16,925 | 4.63 | ||||||||||||||||
| Derivative cash collateral | 91,305 | 1,526 | 6.65 | 145,702 | 2,005 | 5.53 | 156,795 | 1,930 | 4.88 | ||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities | 8,796,390 | 84,315 | 3.81 | % | 8,876,448 | 83,916 | 3.80 | % | 9,206,938 | 81,362 | 3.51 | % | |||||||||||||
| Non-interest-bearing checking (2) | 3,209,502 | 3,042,382 | 3,065,186 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other non-interest-bearing liabilities | 223,546 | 242,980 | 265,559 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | 12,229,438 | 12,161,810 | 12,537,683 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stockholders’ equity | 1,273,315 | 1,256,631 | 1,221,810 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity | $ | 13,502,753 | $ | 13,418,441 | $ | 13,759,493 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | $ | 79,924 | $ | 75,502 | $ | 76,479 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest rate spread | 1.32 | % | 1.28 | % | 1.31 | % | |||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin | 2.50 | % | 2.41 | % | 2.34 | % | |||||||||||||||||||
| Deposits (including non-interest-bearing checking accounts) (2) | $ | 11,114,354 | $ | 74,025 | 2.65 | % | $ | 10,899,654 | $ | 72,878 | 2.69 | % | $ | 10,664,260 | $ | 62,507 | 2.33 | % | |||||||
(1) Business loans include commercial and industrial loans, owner-occupied commercial real estate loans and PPP loans.
(2) Includes mortgage escrow deposits.
| DIME COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES UNAUDITED SCHEDULE OF NON-PERFORMING ASSETS (Dollars in thousands) |
||||||||||||
| At or For the Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||
| September 30, | June 30, | September 30, | ||||||||||
| Asset Quality Detail | 2024 |
2024 |
2023 |
|||||||||
| Non-performing loans (“NPLs”) | ||||||||||||
| Business loans (1) | $ | 25,411 | $ | 20,287 | $ | 19,555 | ||||||
| One-to-four family residential, including condominium and cooperative apartment | 3,880 | 3,884 | 2,874 | |||||||||
| Multifamily residential and residential mixed-use | — | — | — | |||||||||
| Non-owner-occupied commercial real estate | 19,509 | 15 | 15 | |||||||||
| Acquisition, development, and construction | 657 | 657 | 657 | |||||||||
| Other loans | 6 | — | 219 | |||||||||
| Total Non-accrual loans | $ | 49,463 | $ | 24,843 | $ | 23,320 | ||||||
| Total Non-performing assets (“NPAs”) | $ | 49,463 | $ | 24,843 | $ | 23,320 | ||||||
| Total loans 90 days delinquent and accruing (“90+ Delinquent”) | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||
| NPAs and 90+ Delinquent | $ | 49,463 | $ | 24,843 | $ | 23,320 | ||||||
| NPAs and 90+ Delinquent / Total assets | 0.36 | % | 0.18 | % | 0.17 | % | ||||||
| Net charge-offs (“NCOs”) | $ | 4,199 | $ | 3,640 | $ | 4,864 | ||||||
| NCOs / Average loans (2) | 0.15 | % | 0.14 | % | 0.18 | % | ||||||
(1) Business loans include commercial and industrial loans, owner-occupied commercial real estate loans and PPP loans.
(2) Calculated based on annualized NCOs to average loans, excluding loans held for sale.
DIME COMMUNITY BANCSHARES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NON-GAAP RECONCILIATION
(Dollars in thousands except per share amounts)
The following tables below provide a reconciliation of certain financial measures calculated under generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) (as reported) and non-GAAP measures. A non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are required to be disclosed in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP in the United States. The Company’s management believes the presentation of non-GAAP financial measures provides investors with a greater understanding of the Company’s operating results in addition to the results measured in accordance with GAAP. While management uses these non-GAAP measures in its analysis of the Company’s performance, this information should not be viewed as a substitute for financial results determined in accordance with GAAP or considered to be more important than financial results determined in accordance with GAAP.
The following non-GAAP financial measures exclude pre-tax income and expenses associated with the fair value change in equity securities and loans held for sale, net (gain) loss on sale of securities and other assets, severance, the FDIC special assessment and loss on extinguishment of debt:
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||
| September 30, | June 30, | September 30, | September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||||
| 2024 |
2024 |
2023 |
2024 |
2023 |
|||||||||||||||||
| Reconciliation of Reported and Adjusted (non-GAAP) Net Income Available to Common Stockholders | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Reported net income available to common stockholders | $ | 11,505 | $ | 16,657 | $ | 13,163 | $ | 44,032 | $ | 74,321 | |||||||||||
| Adjustments to net income (1): | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Fair value change in equity securities and loans held for sale | (39 | ) | 416 | 299 | 1,219 | 1,079 | |||||||||||||||
| Net (gain) loss on sale of securities and other assets | (2 | ) | (3,695 | ) | 22 | (6,665 | ) | 1,469 | |||||||||||||
| Severance | — | — | 8,562 | 42 | 9,068 | ||||||||||||||||
| Loss on extinguishment of debt | 1 | — | — | 454 | — | ||||||||||||||||
| Income tax effect of adjustments | 13 | 1,043 | (176 | ) | 1,574 | (985 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| Adjusted net income available to common stockholders (non-GAAP) | $ | 11,478 | $ | 14,421 | $ | 21,870 | $ | 40,656 | $ | 84,952 | |||||||||||
| Adjusted Ratios (Based upon Adjusted (non-GAAP) Net Income as calculated above) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted EPS (Diluted) | $ | 0.29 | $ | 0.37 | $ | 0.56 | $ | 1.04 | $ | 2.19 | |||||||||||
| Adjusted return on average assets | 0.39 | % | 0.48 | % | 0.69 | % | 0.45 | % | 0.88 | % | |||||||||||
| Adjusted return on average equity | 4.18 | 5.17 | 7.76 | 4.89 | 9.95 | ||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted return on average tangible common equity | 4.69 | 5.97 | 9.38 | 5.60 | 12.25 | ||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted non-interest expense to average assets | 1.70 | 1.65 | 1.48 | 1.62 | 1.46 | ||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted efficiency ratio | 65.6 | 65.9 | 59.7 | 65.5 | 54.7 | ||||||||||||||||
(1) Adjustments to net income are taxed at the Company’s approximate statutory tax rate.
The following table presents a reconciliation of operating expense as a percentage of average assets (as reported) and adjusted operating expense as a percentage of average assets (non-GAAP):
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | |||||||||||||||||||
| September 30, | June 30, | September 30, | September 30, | September 30, | ||||||||||||||||
| 2024 | 2024 | 2023 | 2024 | 2023 | ||||||||||||||||
| Operating expense as a % of average assets – as reported | 1.71 | % | 1.66 | % | 1.73 | % | 1.63 | % | 1.56 | % | ||||||||||
| Loss on extinguishment of debt | — | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
| Severance | — | — | (0.25 | ) | — | (0.09 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Amortization of other intangible assets | (0.01 | ) | (0.01 | ) | — | (0.01 | ) | (0.01 | ) | |||||||||||
| Adjusted operating expense as a % of average assets (non-GAAP) | 1.70 | % | 1.65 | % | 1.48 | % | 1.62 | % | 1.46 | % | ||||||||||
The following table presents a reconciliation of efficiency ratio (non-GAAP) and adjusted efficiency ratio (non-GAAP):
| Three Months Ended | Nine Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||
| September 30, | June 30, | September 30, | September 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||||||||
| 2024 |
2024 |
2023 |
2024 |
2023 |
|||||||||||||||||
| Efficiency ratio – as reported (non-GAAP) (1) | 65.9 | % | 63.8 | % | 70.5 | % | 64.6 | % | 59.0 | % | |||||||||||
| Non-interest expense – as reported | $ | 57,729 | $ | 55,694 | $ | 59,523 | $ | 165,934 | $ | 159,184 | |||||||||||
| Severance | — | — | (8,562 | ) | (42 | ) | (9,068 | ) | |||||||||||||
| Loss on extinguishment of debt | (1 | ) | — | — | (454 | ) | — | ||||||||||||||
| Amortization of other intangible assets | (286 | ) | (285 | ) | (349 | ) | (878 | ) | (1,075 | ) | |||||||||||
| Adjusted non-interest expense (non-GAAP) | $ | 57,442 | $ | 55,409 | $ | 50,612 | $ | 164,560 | $ | 149,041 | |||||||||||
| Net interest income – as reported | $ | 79,924 | $ | 75,502 | $ | 76,479 | $ | 226,956 | $ | 242,450 | |||||||||||
| Non-interest income – as reported | $ | 7,631 | $ | 11,808 | $ | 7,928 | $ | 29,906 | $ | 27,334 | |||||||||||
| Fair value change in equity securities and loans held for sale | (39 | ) | 416 | 299 | 1,219 | 1,079 | |||||||||||||||
| Net (gain) loss on sale of securities and other assets | (2 | ) | (3,695 | ) | 22 | (6,665 | ) | 1,469 | |||||||||||||
| Adjusted non-interest income (non-GAAP) | $ | 7,590 | $ | 8,529 | $ | 8,249 | $ | 24,460 | $ | 29,882 | |||||||||||
| Adjusted total revenues for adjusted efficiency ratio (non-GAAP) | $ | 87,514 | $ | 84,031 | $ | 84,728 | $ | 251,416 | $ | 272,332 | |||||||||||
| Adjusted efficiency ratio (non-GAAP) (2) | 65.6 | % | 65.9 | % | 59.7 | % | 65.5 | % | 54.7 | % | |||||||||||
(1) The reported efficiency ratio is a non-GAAP measure calculated by dividing GAAP non-interest expense by the sum of GAAP net interest income and GAAP non-interest income.
(2) The adjusted efficiency ratio is a non-GAAP measure calculated by dividing adjusted non-interest expense by the sum of GAAP net interest income and adjusted non-interest income.
The following table presents the tangible common equity to tangible assets, tangible equity to tangible assets, and tangible common book value per share calculations (non-GAAP):
| September 30, | June 30, | September 30, | |||||||||||
| 2024 |
2024 |
2023 |
|||||||||||
| Reconciliation of Tangible Assets: | |||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 13,746,529 | $ | 13,548,763 | $ | 13,651,405 | |||||||
| Goodwill | (155,797 | ) | (155,797 | ) | (155,797 | ) | |||||||
| Other intangible assets | (4,181 | ) | (4,467 | ) | (5,409 | ) | |||||||
| Tangible assets (non-GAAP) | $ | 13,586,551 | $ | 13,388,499 | $ | 13,490,199 | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Tangible Common Equity – Consolidated: | |||||||||||||
| Total stockholders’ equity | $ | 1,263,929 | $ | 1,250,596 | $ | 1,204,344 | |||||||
| Goodwill | (155,797 | ) | (155,797 | ) | (155,797 | ) | |||||||
| Other intangible assets | (4,181 | ) | (4,467 | ) | (5,409 | ) | |||||||
| Tangible equity (non-GAAP) | 1,103,951 | 1,090,332 | 1,043,138 | ||||||||||
| Preferred stock, net | (116,569 | ) | (116,569 | ) | (116,569 | ) | |||||||
| Tangible common equity (non-GAAP) | $ | 987,382 | $ | 973,763 | $ | 926,569 | |||||||
| Common shares outstanding | 39,152 | 39,148 | 38,811 | ||||||||||
| Tangible common equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP) | 7.27 | % | 7.27 | % | 6.87 | % | |||||||
| Tangible equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP) | 8.13 | 8.14 | 7.73 | ||||||||||
| Book value per common share | $ | 29.31 | $ | 28.97 | $ | 28.03 | |||||||
| Tangible common book value per share (non-GAAP) | 25.22 | 24.87 | 23.87 | ||||||||||