housing – Page 669 – NewzIntel.com

MIL-OSI: OceanFirst Financial Corp. Announces First Quarter Financial Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

RED BANK, N.J., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OceanFirst Financial Corp. (NASDAQ:OCFC) (the “Company”), the holding company for OceanFirst Bank N.A. (the “Bank”), announced net income available to common stockholders of $20.5 million, or $0.35 per diluted share, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, a decrease from $27.7 million, or $0.47 per diluted share, for the corresponding prior year period, and a decrease from $20.9 million, or $0.36 per diluted share, for the linked quarter. Selected performance metrics are as follows (refer to “Selected Quarterly Financial Data” for additional information):

	For the Three Months Ended,
	March 31,		December 31,		March 31,
Performance Ratios (Annualized):	2025		2024		2024
Return on average assets	0.62	%	0.61	%	0.82	%
Return on average stockholders’ equity	4.85		4.88		6.65
Return on average tangible stockholders’ equity ^(a)	7.05		7.12		9.61
Return on average tangible common equity ^(a)	7.40		7.47		10.09
Efficiency ratio	65.67		67.86		59.56
Net interest margin	2.90		2.69		2.81

_{^(a) Return on average tangible stockholders’ equity and return on average tangible common equity (“ROTCE”) are non-GAAP (“generally accepted accounting principles”) financial measures. Refer to “Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures,” “Selected Quarterly Financial Data” and “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables for reconciliation and additional information regarding non-GAAP financial measures.}

Core earnings¹ for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 were $20.3 million, or $0.35 per diluted share, a decrease from $25.6 million, or $0.44 per diluted share, for the corresponding prior year period, and a decrease from $22.1 million, or $0.38 per diluted share, for the linked quarter.

Core earnings PTPP¹ for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 was $32.4 million, or $0.56 per diluted share, as compared to $36.2 million, or $0.62 per diluted share, for the corresponding prior year period, and $29.6 million, or $0.51 per diluted share, for the linked quarter. Selected performance metrics are as follows:

	For the Three Months Ended,
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
Core Ratios¹(Annualized):		2025			2024			2024
Return on average assets		0.62	%		0.65	%		0.76	%
Return on average tangible stockholders’ equity		7.00			7.51			8.91
Return on average tangible common equity		7.34			7.89			9.36
Efficiency ratio		65.81			67.74			61.05
Core diluted earnings per share	$	0.35		$	0.38		$	0.44
Core PTPP diluted earnings per share		0.56			0.51			0.62

Key developments for the recent quarter are described below:

Margin Expansion: Net interest margin increased 21 basis points to 2.90%, from 2.69%, and net interest income increased by $3.3 million to $86.7 million driven by a decrease in total cost of deposits to 2.06% from 2.32% in the linked quarter.
Commercial Loans: Commercial and industrial loans increased $95.1 million, or 6.1% as compared to the linked quarter. Additionally, the total commercial loan pipeline increased 90% to $375.6 million from $197.5 million in the linked quarter.
Provision for Credit Losses: Provision for credit losses was $5.3 million reflecting a net loan reserve build of $5.2 million, primarily driven by elevated uncertainty around macroeconomic conditions. This resulted in an increase of five basis points in the allowance for loan credit losses to total loans to 0.78%. Criticized and classified loans decreased by 5% to $149.3 million compared to the linked quarter, providing strong evidence of stable credit performance for the Company’s loan portfolio.

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Christopher D. Maher, commented on the Company’s results, “We are pleased to present our current quarter results, which reflect a meaningful expansion of net interest income and net interest margin, continued strong asset quality metrics, and further capital accretion, including share repurchases.” Mr. Maher added, “Additionally, we understand the increased market uncertainty and volatility, but we have confidence that the Company is well-positioned. Finally, we are pleased that the first quarter talent recruiting season has resulted in a robust addition of commercial banking talent. Reflecting the strength of the commercial banking platform we have built, 36 highly experienced commercial bankers have joined OceanFirst this year.”

The Company’s Board of Directors declared its 113th consecutive quarterly cash dividend on common stock. The quarterly cash dividend on common stock of $0.20 per share will be paid on May 16, 2025 to common stockholders of record on May 5, 2025. The Company’s Board of Directors also previously declared a quarterly cash dividend on preferred stock of $0.4375 per depositary share, representing 1/40th interest in the Series A Preferred Stock. This dividend will be paid on May 15, 2025 to preferred stockholders of record on April 30, 2025. The Company has notified the preferred stockholders that it intends to redeem the Series A Preferred Stock in full on May 15, 2025.

_{¹ Core earnings and core earnings before income taxes and provision for credit losses (“PTPP” or “Pre-Tax-Pre-Provision”), and ratios derived therefrom, are non-GAAP financial measures. For the periods presented, core earnings exclude merger related expenses, net (gain) loss on equity investments, net gain on sale of trust business, the opening provision for credit losses in connection with the acquisition of Spring Garden Capital Group, LLC (“Spring Garden”), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) special assessment, and the income tax effect of these items, (collectively referred to as “non-core” operations). PTPP excludes the aforementioned pre-tax “non-core” items along with income tax expense (benefit) and provision for credit losses (exclusive of the Spring Garden opening provision). Refer to “Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures,” “Selected Quarterly Financial Data” and the “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables for additional information regarding non-GAAP financial measures.}

Results of Operations

The current quarter was impacted by a decrease in average interest earning assets and liabilities, benefited from funding cost repricing efforts, and included a sale of non-performing residential and consumer loans of $5.1 million, which had related charge-offs of $720,000. Additionally, the current quarter included non-recurring benefits of $842,000 in other income and $1.3 million in normal incentive related adjustments.

Net Interest Income and Margin

Three months ended March 31, 2025 vs. March 31, 2024

Net interest income increased to $86.7 million, from $86.2 million, primarily reflecting the net impact of the decreasing interest rate environment. Net interest margin increased to 2.90%, from 2.81%, which included the impact of purchase accounting accretion and prepayment fees of 0.03% and 0.04%, respectively. Net interest margin increased primarily due to the decrease in cost of funds outpacing the decrease in yield on average interest-earning assets.

Average interest-earning assets decreased by $238.4 million primarily due to a decrease in commercial loans and securities. The average yield for interest-earning assets decreased to 5.13%, from 5.26%.

The cost of average interest-bearing liabilities decreased to 2.78%, from 3.03%, primarily due to lower cost of deposits and, to a lesser extent, Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances. The total cost of deposits decreased 25 basis points to 2.06%, from 2.31%. Average interest-bearing liabilities decreased by $226.1 million, primarily due to decreases in savings, time deposits and other borrowings, largely offset by an increase in FHLB advances.

Three months ended March 31, 2025 vs. December 31, 2024

Net interest income increased by $3.3 million and net interest margin increased to 2.90%, from 2.69%, primarily reflecting the impact of deposit repricing. Net interest income included the impact of purchase accounting accretion and prepayment fees of 0.03% in the current quarter and none in the prior quarter.

Average interest-earning assets decreased by $219.5 million, primarily due to decreases in securities and interest-earning cash deposits. The yield on average interest-earning assets decreased to 5.13%, from 5.15%.

Average interest-bearing liabilities decreased by $211.3 million, primarily due to decreases in deposits and other borrowings, partly offset by an increase in FHLB advances. The total cost of average interest-bearing liabilities decreased to 2.78%, from 3.04%, primarily due to lower cost of deposits. The total cost of deposits decreased to 2.06%, from 2.32%.

Provision for Credit Losses

Provision for credit losses for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 was $5.3 million, as compared to $591,000 for the corresponding prior year period and $3.5 million for the linked quarter. The linked quarter included a $1.4 million initial provision for credit losses related to the acquisition of Spring Garden. The current quarter provision was primarily driven by elevated uncertainty around macroeconomic conditions.

Net loan charge-offs were $636,000 for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, as compared to net loan charge-offs of $349,000 for the corresponding prior year period and net loan recoveries of $158,000 in the linked quarter. The current quarter includes charge-offs of $720,000 related to the sale of $5.1 million non-performing residential and consumer loans. Refer to “Results of Operations” section for further discussion.

Non-interest Income

Three months ended March 31, 2025 vs. March 31, 2024

Other income decreased to $11.3 million, as compared to $12.3 million. Other income was favorably impacted by non-core operations of $205,000 related to net gains on equity investments in the current quarter. The prior year other income was favorably impacted by non-core operations of $3.1 million related to net gains on equity investments and a gain on sale of a portion of the Company’s trust business.

Excluding non-core operations, other income increased by $1.8 million. The primary drivers were increases related to net gain on sale of loans of $501,000, commercial loan swap income of $482,000, and an increase in non-recurring other income of $842,000 as noted above.

Three months ended March 31, 2025 vs. December 31, 2024

Excluding non-core operations, other income decreased by $1.2 million from $12.2 million in the linked quarter. The primary drivers were decreases in fees and service charges of $1.5 million, primarily due to lower title fee income as a result of seasonality, and income from bank owned life insurance of $686,000, related to non-recurring death benefits of $768,000 in the linked quarter. This was partly offset by increases in commercial loan swap income of $534,000 and non-recurring other income of $842,000 noted above.

Non-interest Expense

Three months ended March 31, 2025 vs. March 31, 2024

Operating expenses increased to $64.3 million, as compared to $58.7 million. Operating expenses in the prior year were adversely impacted by non-core operations of $418,000 from an FDIC special assessment.

Excluding non-core operations, operating expenses increased by $6.0 million. The primary driver was an increase in compensation and benefits of $4.0 million, mostly due to acquisitions at the end of the prior year and annual merit increases. Additional drivers were increases in other operating expenses of $1.0 million, due to additional loan servicing expense, and increases in data processing expense of $691,000, partly due to acquisitions at the end of the prior year.

Three months ended March 31, 2025 vs. December 31, 2024

Operating expenses in the linked quarter were $64.8 million and were adversely impacted by non-core items of $110,000 from merger-related expenses. Excluding non-core operations, operating expenses decreased by $445,000. This included a decrease in normal incentive related adjustments of $1.3 million, offset by annual merit increases during the year. Additionally, there were decreases in other operating expense of $840,000, mostly related to lower title costs and marketing of $507,000. This was partly offset by an increase in federal deposit insurance and regulatory assessments of $466,000.

Income Tax Expense

The provision for income taxes was $6.8 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, as compared to $10.6 million for the same prior year period and $5.1 million for the linked quarter. The effective tax rate was 24.1% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, as compared to 27.1% for the same prior year period and 18.7% for the linked quarter. The prior year’s effective tax rate was negatively impacted by 3.0% due to a one-time write-off of a deferred tax asset of $1.2 million. The linked quarter’s effective tax rate was positively impacted by utilization of higher tax credits.

Financial Condition

March 31, 2025 vs. December 31, 2024

Total assets decreased by $112.0 million to $13.31 billion, from $13.42 billion, primarily due to decreases in total debt securities. Debt securities available-for-sale decreased by $81.3 million to $746.2 million, from $827.5 million, primarily due to principal reductions, maturities and calls. Debt securities held-to-maturity decreased by $40.4 million to $1.01 billion, from $1.05 billion, primarily due to principal repayments. Loans held-for-sale decreased by $11.5 million to $9.7 million from $21.2 million. Total loans increased by $7.2 million to $10.13 billion, from $10.12 billion, while the loan pipeline increased by $197.8 million to $504.4 million, from $306.7 million. Other assets decreased by $14.9 million to $170.8 million, from $185.7 million, primarily due to a decrease in market values associated with customer interest rate swap programs.

Total liabilities decreased by $118.3 million to $11.60 billion, from $11.72 billion primarily related to a funding mix-shift. Deposits increased by $110.7 million to $10.18 billion, from $10.07 billion, primarily due to increases in non-interest bearing, savings and time deposits. Time deposits increased to $2.12 billion, from $2.08 billion, representing 20.8% and 20.7% of total deposits, respectively. Time deposits included an increase in brokered time deposits of $295.8 million, offset by a decrease in retail time deposits of $251.1 million. The loan-to-deposit ratio was 99.5%, as compared to 100.5%. FHLB advances decreased by $181.6 million to $891.0 million, from $1.07 billion partly driven by a shift to slightly favorably priced brokered deposits.

Other liabilities decreased by $58.0 million to $240.4 million, from $298.4 million, primarily due to a decrease in the market values of derivatives associated with customer interest rate swaps and related collateral received from counterparties.

Capital levels remain strong and in excess of “well-capitalized” regulatory levels at March 31, 2025, including the Company’s estimated common equity tier one capital ratio which remained at 11.2%.

Total stockholders’ equity increased to $1.71 billion, as compared to $1.70 billion, primarily reflecting net income, partially offset by capital returns comprising of dividends and share repurchases. During the quarter ended March 31, 2025, the Company repurchased 398,395 shares totaling $6.9 million representing a weighted average cost of $17.20. The Company had 1,228,863 shares available for repurchase under the authorized repurchase program. Additionally, accumulated other comprehensive loss decreased by $2.6 million primarily due to increases in fair market value of available-for-sale debt securities, net of tax.

The Company’s tangible common equity² increased by $7.3 million to $1.12 billion. The Company’s stockholders’ equity to assets ratio was 12.84% at March 31, 2025, and tangible common equity to tangible assets ratio increased by 14 basis points during the quarter to 8.76%, primarily due to the drivers described above.

Book value per common share increased to $29.27, as compared to $29.08. Tangible book value per common share² increased to $19.16, as compared to $18.98.

_{² Tangible book value per common share and tangible common equity to tangible assets are non-GAAP financial measures and exclude the impact of intangible assets, goodwill, and preferred equity from both stockholders’ equity and total assets. Refer to “Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” and the “Non-GAAP Reconciliation” tables for additional information regarding non-GAAP financial measures.}

Asset Quality

March 31, 2025 vs. December 31, 2024

The Company’s non-performing loans increased to $37.0 million, from $35.5 million, and represented 0.37% and 0.35% of total loans, respectively. The allowance for loan credit losses as a percentage of total non-performing loans was 213.14%, as compared to 207.19%. The level of 30 to 89 days delinquent loans increased to $46.2 million, from $36.6 million, primarily related to commercial loans. Criticized and classified assets, including other real estate owned, decreased to $151.2 million, from $159.9 million. The Company’s allowance for loan credit losses was 0.78% of total loans, as compared to 0.73%. Refer to “Provision for Credit Losses” section for further discussion.

The Company’s asset quality, excluding purchased with credit deterioration (“PCD”) loans, was as follows. Non-performing loans increased to $29.2 million, from $27.6 million. The allowance for loan credit losses as a percentage of total non-performing loans was 269.43%, as compared to 266.73%. The level of 30 to 89 days delinquent loans, excluding non-performing loans, increased to $35.8 million, from $33.6 million.

Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

Reported amounts are presented in accordance with GAAP. The Company’s management believes that the supplemental non-GAAP information, which consists of reported net income excluding non-core operations and in some instances excluding income taxes and provision for credit losses, and reporting equity and asset amounts excluding intangible assets, goodwill or preferred stock, all of which can vary from period to period, provides a better comparison of period-to-period operating performance. Additionally, the Company believes this information is utilized by regulators and market analysts to evaluate a company’s financial condition and, therefore, such information is useful to investors. These disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for financial results in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures, which may be presented by other companies. Refer to the Non-GAAP Reconciliation table at the end of this document for details on the earnings impact of these items.

Annual Meeting

The Company previously announced that its Annual Meeting of Stockholders will be held on Monday, May 19, 2025 at 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The record date for stockholders to vote at the Annual Meeting is Tuesday, March 25, 2025. Voting before the meeting is encouraged, even for stockholders planning to participate in the virtual webcast. Votes may be submitted by telephone or online according to the instructions on the proxy card or by mail. A link to the live webcast is available by visiting oceanfirst.com – Investor Relations. Access will begin at 7:45 a.m. Eastern Time to allow time for stockholders to log-in with the control number provided on the proxy card prior to the 8:00 a.m. Eastern Time scheduled start. Eligible stockholders may also vote during the live meeting online at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/OCFC2025 by entering the 16-digit control number included on the proxy card or notice. As a reminder, participants of the meeting are not required to vote. Additional information regarding virtual access to the meeting will be distributed prior to the meeting.

Conference Call

As previously announced, the Company will host an earnings conference call on Friday, April 25, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The direct dial number for the call is (833) 470-1428, using the access code 934356. For those unable to participate in the conference call, a replay will be available. To access the replay, dial (855) 762-8306, from one hour after the end of the call until May 2, 2025. The conference call, as well as the replay, are also available (listen-only) by internet webcast at www.oceanfirst.com in the Investor Relations section.

OceanFirst Financial Corp.’s subsidiary, OceanFirst Bank N.A., founded in 1902, is a $13.3 billion regional bank providing financial services throughout New Jersey and in the major metropolitan areas between Massachusetts and Virginia. OceanFirst Bank delivers commercial and residential financing, treasury management, trust and asset management, and deposit services and is one of the largest and oldest community-based financial institutions headquartered in New Jersey. To learn more about OceanFirst, go to www.oceanfirst.com.

Forward-Looking Statements

In addition to historical information, this news release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which are based on certain assumptions and describe future plans, strategies and expectations of the Company. These forward-looking statements are generally identified by use of the words “believe”, “expect”, “intend”, “anticipate”, “estimate”, “project”, “will”, “should”, “may”, “view”, “opportunity”, “potential”, or similar expressions or expressions of confidence. The Company’s ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain. Factors which could have a material adverse effect on the operations of the Company and its subsidiaries include, but are not limited to: changes in interest rates, inflation, general economic conditions, including potential recessionary conditions, levels of unemployment in the Company’s lending area, real estate market values in the Company’s lending area, potential goodwill impairment, natural disasters, potential increases to flood insurance premiums, the current or anticipated impact of military conflict, terrorism or other geopolitical events, the imposition of tariffs or other domestic or international governmental policies, the level of prepayments on loans and mortgage-backed securities, legislative/regulatory changes, monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. Government, including policies of the U.S. Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the quality or composition of the loan or investment portfolios, demand for loan products, deposit flows, the availability of low-cost funding, changes in liquidity, including the size and composition of the Company’s deposit portfolio, and the percentage of uninsured deposits in the portfolio, changes in capital management and balance sheet strategies and the ability to successfully implement such strategies, competition, demand for financial services in the Company’s market area, changes in consumer spending, borrowing and saving habits, changes in accounting principles, a failure in or breach of the Company’s operational or security systems or infrastructure, including cyberattacks, the failure to maintain current technologies, failure to retain or attract employees, the impact of pandemics on our operations and financial results and those of our customers and the Bank’s ability to successfully integrate acquired operations. These risks and uncertainties are further discussed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, under Item 1A – Risk Factors and elsewhere, and subsequent securities filings and should be considered in evaluating forward-looking statements and undue reliance should not be placed on such statements. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims any obligation, to publicly release the result of any revisions which may be made to any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statements or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events.


OceanFirst Financial Corp.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
(dollars in thousands)

	March 31,		December 31,		March 31,
		2025		2024		2024
	(Unaudited)				(Unaudited)
Assets
Cash and due from banks	$	163,721	$	123,615	$	130,422
Debt securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value		746,168		827,500		744,944
Debt securities held-to-maturity, net of allowance for securities credit losses of $898 at March 31, 2025, $967 at December 31, 2024, and $1,058 at March 31, 2024 (estimated fair value of $926,075 at March 31, 2025, $952,917 at December 31, 2024, and $1,029,965 at March 31, 2024)		1,005,476		1,045,875		1,128,666
Equity investments		87,365		84,104		103,201
Restricted equity investments, at cost		102,172		108,634		85,689
Loans receivable, net of allowance for loan credit losses of $78,798 at March 31, 2025, $73,607 at December 31, 2024, and $67,173 at March 31, 2024		10,058,072		10,055,429		10,068,209
Loans held-for-sale		9,698		21,211		4,702
Interest and dividends receivable		44,843		45,914		52,502
Other real estate owned		1,917		1,811		—
Premises and equipment, net		114,588		115,256		119,211
Bank owned life insurance		269,398		270,208		266,615
Assets held for sale		—		—		28
Goodwill		523,308		523,308		506,146
Intangibles		11,740		12,680		8,669
Other assets		170,812		185,702		199,974
Total assets	$	13,309,278	$	13,421,247	$	13,418,978
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Deposits	$	10,177,023	$	10,066,342	$	10,236,851
Federal Home Loan Bank advances		891,021		1,072,611		658,436
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase with customers		65,132		60,567		66,798
Other borrowings		197,808		197,546		425,722
Advances by borrowers for taxes and insurance		28,789		23,031		28,187
Other liabilities		240,388		298,393		337,147
Total liabilities		11,600,161		11,718,490		11,753,141
Stockholders’ equity:
OceanFirst Financial Corp. stockholders’ equity		1,708,322		1,701,650		1,665,112
Non-controlling interest		795		1,107		725
Total stockholders’ equity		1,709,117		1,702,757		1,665,837
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	13,309,278	$	13,421,247	$	13,418,978

OceanFirst Financial Corp.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(in thousands, except per share amounts)

	For the Three Months Ended,
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
		2025			2024			2024
	\|———————- (Unaudited) ———————-\|
Interest income:
Loans	$	133,019		$	135,438		$	137,121
Debt securities		17,270			19,400			19,861
Equity investments and other		3,414			4,782			4,620
Total interest income		153,703			159,620			161,602
Interest expense:
Deposits		51,046			59,889			59,855
Borrowed funds		16,005			16,402			15,523
Total interest expense		67,051			76,291			75,378
Net interest income		86,652			83,329			86,224
Provision for credit losses		5,340			3,467			591
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		81,312			79,862			85,633
Other income:
Bankcard services revenue		1,463			1,595			1,416
Trust and asset management revenue		406			416			526
Fees and service charges		4,712			6,207			4,473
Net gain on sales of loans		858			1,076			357
Net gain (loss) on equity investments		205			(5	)		1,923
Net loss from other real estate operations		(16	)		(20	)		—
Income from bank owned life insurance		1,852			2,538			1,862
Commercial loan swap income		620			86			138
Other		1,153			339			1,591
Total other income		11,253			12,232			12,286
Operating expenses:
Compensation and employee benefits		36,740			36,602			32,759
Occupancy		5,497			5,280			5,199
Equipment		921			1,026			1,130
Marketing		1,108			1,615			990
Federal deposit insurance and regulatory assessments		2,983			2,517			3,135
Data processing		6,647			6,366			5,956
Check card processing		1,170			1,134			1,050
Professional fees		2,425			2,620			2,732
Amortization of intangibles		940			876			844
Merger related expenses		—			110			—
Other operating expense		5,863			6,703			4,877
Total operating expenses		64,294			64,849			58,672
Income before provision for income taxes		28,271			27,245			39,247
Provision for income taxes		6,808			5,083			10,637
Net income		21,463			22,162			28,610
Net (loss) income attributable to non-controlling interest		(46	)		253			(57	)
Net income attributable to OceanFirst Financial Corp.		21,509			21,909			28,667
Dividends on preferred shares		1,004			1,004			1,004
Net income available to common stockholders	$	20,505		$	20,905		$	27,663
Basic earnings per share	$	0.35		$	0.36		$	0.47
Diluted earnings per share	$	0.35		$	0.36		$	0.47
Average basic shares outstanding		58,102			58,026			58,789
Average diluted shares outstanding		58,111			58,055			58,791

OceanFirst Financial Corp.
SELECTEDLOANAND DEPOSIT DATA
(dollars in thousands)

LOANS RECEIVABLE			At
			March 31,			December 31,			September 30,			June 30,			March 31,
				2025			2024			2024			2024			2024
Commercial:
Commercial real estate – investor			$	5,200,137		$	5,287,683		$	5,273,159		$	5,324,994		$	5,322,755
Commercial and industrial:
Commercial and industrial – real estate ⁽¹⁾				896,647			902,219			841,930			857,710			914,582
Commercial and industrial – non-real estate ⁽¹⁾				748,575			647,945			660,879			616,400			677,176
Total commercial and industrial				1,645,222			1,550,164			1,502,809			1,474,110			1,591,758
Total commercial				6,845,359			6,837,847			6,775,968			6,799,104			6,914,513
Consumer:
Residential real estate				3,053,318			3,049,763			3,003,213			2,977,698			2,965,276
Home equity loans and lines and other consumer (“other consumer”)				226,633			230,462			242,975			242,526			245,859
Total consumer				3,279,951			3,280,225			3,246,188			3,220,224			3,211,135
Total loans				10,125,310			10,118,072			10,022,156			10,019,328			10,125,648
Deferred origination costs (fees), net				11,560			10,964			10,508			10,628			9,734
Allowance for loan credit losses				(78,798	)		(73,607	)		(69,066	)		(68,839	)		(67,173	)
Loans receivable, net			$	10,058,072		$	10,055,429		$	9,963,598		$	9,961,117		$	10,068,209
Mortgage loans serviced for others			$	222,963		$	191,279		$	142,394		$	104,136		$	89,555
	At March 31, 2025 Average Yield
Loan pipeline ⁽²⁾:
Commercial	7.37	%	$	375,622		$	197,491		$	199,818		$	166,206		$	66,167
Residential real estate	6.41			116,121			97,385			137,978			80,330			57,340
Other consumer	8.51			12,681			11,783			13,788			12,586			13,030
Total	7.18	%	$	504,424		$	306,659		$	351,584		$	259,122		$	136,537

	For the Three Months Ended
	March 31,					December 31,		September 30,		June 30,		March 31,
	2025						2024		2024		2024		2024
	Average Yield
Loan originations:
Commercial ⁽³⁾	7.61	%	$	233,968		$	268,613	$	245,886	$	56,053	$	123,010
Residential real estate	6.53			167,162			235,370		169,273		121,388		78,270
Other consumer	8.49			15,825			11,204		15,760		16,970		11,405
Total	7.21	%	$	416,955		$	515,187	$	430,919	$	194,411	$	212,685
Loans sold			$	104,991	⁽⁴⁾	$	127,508	$	65,296	$	45,045	$	29,965

_⁽¹⁾	_{During the quarter ended March 31, 2025, the Company retrospectively reclassified loans which were previously referred to as ‘commercial real estate – owner occupied’ and ‘commercial and industrial’ to ‘commercial and industrial – real estate’ and ‘commercial and industrial – non-real estate’, respectively. Collectively, these loans are referred to as ‘commercial and industrial’.}
_⁽²⁾	_{Loan pipeline includes loans approved but not funded.}
_⁽³⁾	_{Excludes commercial loan pool purchases of $24.3 million and $76.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively.}
_⁽⁴⁾	_{Excludes sale of non-performing residential and consumer loans of $5.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025.}

DEPOSITS	At
	March 31,		December 31,		September 30,		June 30,		March 31,
		2025		2024		2024		2024		2024
Type of Account
Non-interest-bearing	$	1,660,738	$	1,617,182	$	1,638,447	$	1,632,521	$	1,639,828
Interest-bearing checking		4,006,653		4,000,553		3,896,348		3,667,837		3,865,699
Money market		1,337,570		1,301,197		1,288,555		1,210,312		1,150,979
Savings		1,052,504		1,066,438		1,071,946		1,115,688		1,260,309
Time deposits ⁽¹⁾		2,119,558		2,080,972		2,220,871		2,367,659		2,320,036
Total deposits	$	10,177,023	$	10,066,342	$	10,116,167	$	9,994,017	$	10,236,851

_⁽¹⁾	_{Includes brokered time deposits of $370.5 million, $74.7 million, $201.0 million, $401.6 million, and $543.4 million at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, June 30, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively.}

OceanFirst Financial Corp.
ASSET QUALITY
(dollars in thousands)

	March 31,			December 31,			September 30,			June 30,			March 31,
ASSET QUALITY⁽¹⁾		2025			2024			2024			2024			2024
Non-performing loans:
Commercial real estate – investor	$	23,595		$	17,000		$	12,478		$	19,761		$	21,507
Commercial and industrial:
Commercial and industrial – real estate		4,690			4,787			4,368			4,081			3,355
Commercial and industrial – non-real estate		22			32			122			434			567
Total commercial and industrial		4,712			4,819			4,490			4,515			3,922
Residential real estate		5,709			10,644			9,108			7,213			7,181
Other consumer		2,954			3,064			2,063			1,933			2,401
Total non-performing loans⁽¹⁾	$	36,970		$	35,527		$	28,139		$	33,422		$	35,011
Other real estate owned		1,917			1,811			—			—			—
Total non-performing assets	$	38,887		$	37,338		$	28,139		$	33,422		$	35,011
Delinquent loans 30 to 89 days	$	46,246		$	36,550		$	15,458		$	9,655		$	17,534
Modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty⁽²⁾
Non-performing (included in total non-performing loans above)	$	8,307		$	3,232		$	3,043		$	3,210		$	3,467
Performing		27,592			27,631			20,652			20,529			8,579
Total modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty⁽²⁾	$	35,899		$	30,863		$	23,695		$	23,739		$	12,046
Allowance for loan credit losses	$	78,798		$	73,607		$	69,066		$	68,839		$	67,173
Allowance for loan credit losses as a percent of total loans receivable⁽³⁾		0.78	%		0.73	%		0.69	%		0.69	%		0.66	%
Allowance for loan credit losses as a percent of total non-performing loans⁽³⁾		213.14			207.19			245.45			205.97			191.86
Non-performing loans as a percent of total loans receivable		0.37			0.35			0.28			0.33			0.35
Non-performing assets as a percent of total assets		0.29			0.28			0.21			0.25			0.26
Supplemental PCD and non-performing loans
PCD loans, net of allowance for loan credit losses	$	21,737		$	22,006		$	15,323		$	16,058		$	16,700
Non-performing PCD loans		7,724			7,931			2,887			2,841			3,525
Delinquent PCD and non-performing loans 30 to 89 days		10,489			2,997			1,279			1,188			2,088
PCD modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty⁽²⁾		22			23			24			26			25
Asset quality, excluding PCD loans⁽⁴⁾
Non-performing loans⁽¹⁾		29,246			27,596			25,252			30,581			31,486
Non-performing assets		31,163			29,407			25,252			30,581			31,486
Delinquent loans 30 to 89 days (excludes non-performing loans)		35,757			33,553			14,179			8,467			15,446
Modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty⁽²⁾		35,877			30,840			23,671			23,713			12,021
Allowance for loan credit losses as a percent of total non-performing loans⁽³⁾		269.43	%		266.73	%		273.51	%		225.10	%		213.34	%
Non-performing loans as a percent of total loans receivable		0.29			0.27			0.25			0.31			0.31
Non-performing assets as a percent of total assets		0.23			0.22			0.19			0.23			0.23

_⁽¹⁾	_{The quarter ended March 31, 2025 included the sale of non-performing residential and consumer loans of $5.1 million and the quarter ended September 30, 2024 included the resolution of a single commercial relationship exposure of $7.2 million.}
_⁽²⁾	_{Balances have been revised to represent only modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty, in accordance with ASU 2022-02 adopted on January 1, 2023.}
_⁽³⁾	_{Loans acquired from acquisitions were recorded at fair value. The net unamortized credit and PCD marks on these loans, not reflected in the allowance for loan credit losses, was $5.6 million, $6.0 million, $5.7 million, $6.1 million and $7.0 million at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, June 30, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively.}
_⁽⁴⁾	_{All balances and ratios exclude PCD loans.}

NET LOAN (CHARGE-OFFS) RECOVERIES	For the Three Months Ended
	March 31,				December 31,			September 30,			June 30,				March 31,
		2025				2024			2024			2024				2024
Net loan (charge-offs) recoveries:
Loan charge-offs	$	(798	)		$	(55	)	$	(124	)	$	(1,600	)		$	(441	)
Recoveries on loans		162				213			212			148				92
Net loan (charge-offs) recoveries	$	(636	)		$	158		$	88		$	(1,452	)		$	(349	)
Net loan (charge-offs) recoveries to average total loans (annualized)		0.03	%			NM	*		NM	*		0.06	%			0.01	%
Net loan (charge-offs) recoveries detail:
Commercial	$	25			$	92		$	129		$	(1,576	)	⁽¹⁾	$	(35	)
Residential real estate		(720	)	⁽²⁾		(17	)		(6	)		87				66
Other consumer		59				83			(35	)		37				(380	)
Net loan (charge-offs) recoveries	$	(636	)		$	158		$	88		$	(1,452	)		$	(349	)

_⁽¹⁾	_{The three months ended June 30, 2024 included a charge-off related to a single commercial real estate relationship of $1.6 million.}
_⁽²⁾	_{The three months ended March 31, 2025 included charge-offs of $720,000 related to the sale of non-performing residential loans.}
_^*	_{Not meaningful as amounts are net loan recoveries.}

OceanFirst Financial Corp.
ANALYSIS OF NET INTEREST INCOME

	For the Three Months Ended
	March 31, 2025							December 31, 2024							March 31, 2024
(dollars in thousands)	Average Balance			Interest		Average Yield/ Cost ⁽¹⁾		Average Balance			Interest		Average Yield/ Cost ⁽¹⁾		Average Balance			Interest		Average Yield/ Cost ⁽¹⁾
Assets:
Interest-earning assets:
Interest-earning deposits and short-term investments	$	95,439		$	983	4.18	%	$	195,830		$	2,415	4.91	%	$	163,192		$	2,226	5.49	%
Securities ⁽²⁾		2,003,206			19,701	3.99			2,116,911			21,767	4.09			2,098,421			22,255	4.27
Loans receivable, net ⁽³⁾
Commercial		6,781,005			98,260	5.88			6,794,158			101,003	5.91			6,925,048			104,421	6.06
Residential real estate		3,065,679			31,270	4.08			3,049,092			30,455	4.00			2,974,468			28,596	3.85
Other consumer		228,553			3,489	6.19			236,161			3,980	6.70			248,396			4,104	6.65
Allowance for loan credit losses, net of deferred loan costs and fees		(61,854	)		—	—			(60,669	)		—	—			(59,141	)		—	—
Loans receivable, net		10,013,383			133,019	5.37			10,018,742			135,438	5.38			10,088,771			137,121	5.46
Total interest-earning assets		12,112,028			153,703	5.13			12,331,483			159,620	5.15			12,350,384			161,602	5.26
Non-interest-earning assets		1,199,865							1,213,569							1,206,336
Total assets	$	13,311,893						$	13,545,052						$	13,556,720
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity:
Interest-bearing liabilities:
Interest-bearing checking	$	4,135,952			21,433	2.10	%	$	4,050,428			22,750	2.23	%	$	3,925,965			20,795	2.13	%
Money market		1,322,003			9,353	2.87			1,325,119			10,841	3.25			1,092,003			9,172	3.38
Savings		1,058,015			1,785	0.68			1,070,816			2,138	0.79			1,355,718			4,462	1.32
Time deposits		1,916,109			18,475	3.91			2,212,750			24,160	4.34			2,414,063			25,426	4.24
Total		8,432,079			51,046	2.46			8,659,113			59,889	2.75			8,787,749			59,855	2.74
FHLB Advances		996,293			11,359	4.62			854,748			10,030	4.67			644,818			7,771	4.85
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase		64,314			428	2.70			76,856			513	2.66			68,500			411	2.41
Other borrowings		283,150			4,218	6.04			396,412			5,859	5.88			500,901			7,341	5.89
Total borrowings		1,343,757			16,005	4.83			1,328,016			16,402	4.91			1,214,219			15,523	5.14
Total interest-bearing liabilities		9,775,836			67,051	2.78			9,987,129			76,291	3.04			10,001,968			75,378	3.03
Non-interest-bearing deposits		1,597,972							1,627,376							1,634,583
Non-interest-bearing liabilities		222,951							227,221							247,129
Total liabilities		11,596,759							11,841,726							11,883,680
Stockholders’ equity		1,715,134							1,703,326							1,673,040
Total liabilities and equity	$	13,311,893						$	13,545,052						$	13,556,720
Net interest income				$	86,652						$	83,329						$	86,224
Net interest rate spread ⁽⁴⁾						2.35	%						2.11	%						2.23	%
Net interest margin ⁽⁵⁾						2.90	%						2.69	%						2.81	%
Total cost of deposits (including non-interest-bearing deposits)						2.06	%						2.32	%						2.31	%

_⁽¹⁾	_{Average yields and costs are annualized.}
_⁽²⁾	_{Amounts represent debt and equity securities, including FHLB and Federal Reserve Bank stock, and are recorded at average amortized cost, net of allowance for securities credit losses.}
_⁽³⁾	_{Amount is net of deferred loan costs and fees, undisbursed loan funds, discounts and premiums and allowance for loan credit losses, and includes loans held for sale and non-performing loans.}
_⁽⁴⁾	_{Net interest rate spread represents the difference between the yield on interest-earning assets and the cost of interest-bearing liabilities.}
_⁽⁵⁾	_{Net interest margin represents net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.}

OceanFirst Financial Corp.
SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA
(in thousands, except per share amounts)

	March 31,		December 31,		September 30,		June 30,		March 31,
		2025		2024		2024		2024		2024
Selected Financial Condition Data:
Total assets	$	13,309,278	$	13,421,247	$	13,488,483	$	13,321,755	$	13,418,978
Debt securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value		746,168		827,500		911,753		721,484		744,944
Debt securities held-to-maturity, net of allowance for securities credit losses		1,005,476		1,045,875		1,075,131		1,105,843		1,128,666
Equity investments		87,365		84,104		95,688		104,132		103,201
Restricted equity investments, at cost		102,172		108,634		98,545		92,679		85,689
Loans receivable, net of allowance for loan credit losses		10,058,072		10,055,429		9,963,598		9,961,117		10,068,209
Deposits		10,177,023		10,066,342		10,116,167		9,994,017		10,236,851
Federal Home Loan Bank advances		891,021		1,072,611		891,860		789,337		658,436
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase and other borrowings		262,940		258,113		501,090		504,490		492,520
Total stockholders’ equity		1,709,117		1,702,757		1,694,508		1,676,669		1,665,837

	For the Three Months Ended,
	March 31,			December 31,			September 30,		June 30,		March 31,
		2025			2024			2024		2024		2024
Selected Operating Data:
Interest income	$	153,703		$	159,620		$	161,525	$	159,426	$	161,602
Interest expense		67,051			76,291			79,306		77,163		75,378
Net interest income		86,652			83,329			82,219		82,263		86,224
Provision for credit losses (excluding Spring Garden)		5,340			2,041			517		3,114		591
Spring Garden opening provision for credit losses		—			1,426			—		—		—
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		81,312			79,862			81,702		79,149		85,633
Other income (excluding equity investments and sale of trust)		11,048			12,237			11,826		10,098		9,201
Net gain (loss) on equity investments		205			(5	)		1,420		887		1,923
Net gain on sale of trust business		—			—			1,438		—		1,162
Operating expenses (excluding FDIC special assessment and merger related expenses)		64,294			64,739			62,067		58,620		58,254
FDIC special assessment		—			—			—		—		418
Merger related expenses		—			110			1,669		—		—
Income before provision for income taxes		28,271			27,245			32,650		31,514		39,247
Provision for income taxes		6,808			5,083			7,464		7,082		10,637
Net income		21,463			22,162			25,186		24,432		28,610
Net (loss) income attributable to non-controlling interest		(46	)		253			70		59		(57	)
Net income attributable to OceanFirst Financial Corp.	$	21,509		$	21,909		$	25,116	$	24,373	$	28,667
Net income available to common stockholders	$	20,505		$	20,905		$	24,112	$	23,369	$	27,663
Diluted earnings per share	$	0.35		$	0.36		$	0.42	$	0.40	$	0.47
Net accretion/amortization of purchase accounting adjustments included in net interest income	$	219		$	20		$	741	$	1,086	$	921

	At or For the Three Months Ended
	March 31,		December 31,		September 30,		June 30,		March 31,
	2025		2024		2024		2024		2024
Selected Financial Ratios and Other Data ^{(1) (2)}:
Performance Ratios (Annualized):
Return on average assets ⁽³⁾	0.62	%	0.61	%	0.71	%	0.70	%	0.82	%
Return on average tangible assets ^{(3) (4)}	0.65		0.64		0.74		0.73		0.85
Return on average stockholders’ equity ⁽³⁾	4.85		4.88		5.68		5.61		6.65
Return on average tangible stockholders’ equity ^{(3) (4)}	7.05		7.12		8.16		8.10		9.61
Return on average tangible common equity ^{(3) (4)}	7.40		7.47		8.57		8.51		10.09
Stockholders’ equity to total assets	12.84		12.69		12.56		12.59		12.41
Tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets ⁽⁴⁾	9.19		9.06		9.10		9.08		8.92
Tangible common equity to tangible assets ⁽⁴⁾	8.76		8.62		8.68		8.64		8.49
Net interest rate spread	2.35		2.11		2.06		2.11		2.23
Net interest margin	2.90		2.69		2.67		2.71		2.81
Operating expenses to average assets	1.96		1.90		1.89		1.75		1.74
Efficiency ratio ⁽⁵⁾	65.67		67.86		65.77		62.86		59.56
Loan-to-deposit ratio	99.50		100.50		99.10		100.30		98.90

	At or For the Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			September 30,			June 30,			March 31,
		2025			2024			2024			2024			2024
Trust and Asset Management:
Wealth assets under administration and management (“AUA/M”)	$	149,106		$	147,956		$	152,797		$	150,519		$	236,891
Nest Egg AUA/M		453,803			431,434			430,413			403,647			407,478
Total AUA/M		602,909			579,390			583,210			554,166			644,369
Per Share Data:
Cash dividends per common share	$	0.20		$	0.20		$	0.20		$	0.20		$	0.20
Book value per common share at end of period		29.27			29.08			29.02			28.67			28.32
Tangible book value per common share at end of period ⁽⁴⁾		19.16			18.98			19.28			18.93			18.63
Common shares outstanding at end of period		58,383,525			58,554,871			58,397,094			58,481,418			58,812,498
Preferred shares outstanding at end of period		57,370			57,370			57,370			57,370			57,370
Number of full-service customer facilities:		39			39			39			39			39
Quarterly Average Balances
Total securities	$	2,003,206		$	2,116,911		$	2,063,633		$	2,058,711		$	2,098,421
Loans receivable, net		10,013,383			10,018,742			9,958,794			10,012,491			10,088,771
Total interest-earning assets		12,112,028			12,331,483			12,232,672			12,203,776			12,350,384
Total goodwill and intangibles		535,657			534,942			513,731			514,535			515,356
Total assets		13,311,893			13,545,052			13,438,696			13,441,218			13,556,720
Time deposits		1,916,109			2,212,750			2,339,370			2,337,458			2,414,063
Total deposits (including non-interest-bearing deposits)		10,030,051			10,286,489			10,175,856			10,173,315			10,422,332
Total borrowings		1,343,757			1,328,016			1,333,245			1,325,372			1,214,219
Total interest-bearing liabilities		9,775,836			9,987,129			9,874,358			9,872,522			10,001,968
Non-interest bearing deposits		1,597,972			1,627,376			1,634,743			1,626,165			1,634,583
Stockholders’ equity		1,715,134			1,703,326			1,689,035			1,674,453			1,673,040
Tangible stockholders’ equity ⁽⁴⁾		1,179,477			1,168,384			1,175,304			1,159,918			1,157,684

Quarterly Yields and Costs
Total securities		3.99	%		4.09	%		4.23	%		4.22	%		4.27	%
Loans receivable, net		5.37			5.38			5.46			5.46			5.46
Total interest-earning assets		5.13			5.15			5.26			5.25			5.26
Time deposits		3.91			4.34			4.58			4.46			4.24
Total cost of deposits (including non-interest-bearing deposits)		2.06			2.32			2.44			2.37			2.31
Total borrowed funds		4.83			4.91			5.07			5.19			5.14
Total interest-bearing liabilities		2.78			3.04			3.20			3.14			3.03
Net interest spread		2.35			2.11			2.06			2.11			2.23
Net interest margin		2.90			2.69			2.67			2.71			2.81

_⁽¹⁾	_{With the exception of end of quarter ratios, all ratios are based on average daily balances.}
_⁽²⁾	_{Performance ratios for each period are presented on a GAAP basis and include non-core operations. Refer to “Non-GAAP Reconciliation.”}
_⁽³⁾	_{Ratios for each period are based on net income available to common stockholders.}
_⁽⁴⁾	_{Tangible stockholders’ equity and tangible assets exclude goodwill and other intangibles. Tangible common equity (also referred to as “tangible book value”) excludes goodwill, intangibles and preferred equity. Refer to “Non-GAAP Reconciliation.”}
_⁽⁵⁾	_{Efficiency ratio represents the ratio of operating expenses to the aggregate of other income and net interest income.}

OceanFirst Financial Corp.
OTHER ITEMS
(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)

NON-GAAP RECONCILIATION

	For the Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			September 30,			June 30,			March 31,
		2025			2024			2024			2024			2024
Core Earnings:
Net income available to common stockholders (GAAP)	$	20,505		$	20,905		$	24,112		$	23,369		$	27,663
(Less) add non-recurring and non-core items:
Spring Garden opening provision for credit losses		—			1,426			—			—			—
Net (gain) loss on equity investments		(205	)		5			(1,420	)		(887	)		(1,923	)
Net gain on sale of trust business		—			—			(1,438	)		—			(1,162	)
FDIC special assessment		—			—			—			—			418
Merger related expenses		—			110			1,669			—			—
Income tax expense (benefit) on items		49			(388	)		270			188			642
Core earnings (Non-GAAP)	$	20,349		$	22,058		$	23,193		$	22,670		$	25,638
Income tax expense	$	6,808		$	5,083		$	7,464		$	7,082		$	10,637
Provision for credit losses		5,340			3,467			517			3,114			591
Less: non-core provision for credit losses		—			1,426			—			—			—
Less: income tax expense (benefit) on non-core items		49			(388	)		270			188			642
Core earnings PTPP (Non-GAAP)	$	32,448		$	29,570		$	30,904		$	32,678		$	36,224
Core earnings diluted earnings per share	$	0.35		$	0.38		$	0.39		$	0.39		$	0.44
Core earnings PTPP diluted earnings per share	$	0.56		$	0.51		$	0.53		$	0.56		$	0.62

Core Ratios (Annualized):
Return on average assets		0.62	%		0.65	%		0.69	%		0.68	%		0.76	%
Return on average tangible stockholders’ equity		7.00			7.51			7.85			7.86			8.91
Return on average tangible common equity		7.34			7.89			8.24			8.26			9.36
Efficiency ratio		65.81			67.74			66.00			63.47			61.05

	March 31,			December 31,			September 30,			June 30,			March 31,
		2025			2024			2024			2024			2024
Tangible Equity:
Total stockholders’ equity	$	1,709,117		$	1,702,757		$	1,694,508		$	1,676,669		$	1,665,837
Less:
Goodwill		523,308			523,308			506,146			506,146			506,146
Intangibles		11,740			12,680			7,056			7,859			8,669
Tangible stockholders’ equity		1,174,069			1,166,769			1,181,306			1,162,664			1,151,022
Less:
Preferred stock		55,527			55,527			55,527			55,527			55,527
Tangible common equity	$	1,118,542		$	1,111,242		$	1,125,779		$	1,107,137		$	1,095,495

Tangible Assets:
Total assets	$	13,309,278		$	13,421,247		$	13,488,483		$	13,321,755		$	13,418,978
Less:
Goodwill		523,308			523,308			506,146			506,146			506,146
Intangibles		11,740			12,680			7,056			7,859			8,669
Tangible assets	$	12,774,230		$	12,885,259		$	12,975,281		$	12,807,750		$	12,904,163

Tangible stockholders’ equity to tangible assets		9.19	%		9.06	%		9.10	%		9.08	%		8.92	%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets		8.76	%		8.62	%		8.68	%		8.64	%		8.49	%

Company Contact:

Patrick S. Barrett
Chief Financial Officer
OceanFirst Financial Corp.
Tel: (732) 240-4500, ext. 27507
Email: pbarrett@oceanfirst.com

The MIL Network –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Padilla Joins Federal and State Emergency Officials to Survey Pacific Palisades Fire Recovery Area; Highlights Bipartisan Legislation to Address Wildfire Risks

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)

Padilla Joins Federal and State Emergency Officials to Survey Pacific Palisades Fire Recovery Area; Highlights Bipartisan Legislation to Address Wildfire Risks

WATCH: Padilla discusses importance of bipartisan solutions like the Senate Fix Our Forests Act to combat wildfire crisisLOS ANGELES, CA — Just over 100 days after the Los Angeles fires first ignited, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and California Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot joined federal and state emergency officials for a tour today of the Pacific Palisades fire recovery area led by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The tour consisted of a visit to businesses and residences impacted by the Pacific Palisades fire — with officials from FEMA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), CAL FIRE, and the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) — followed by a press conference at a cleared debris site where Padilla discussed his new bipartisan legislation to address wildfire risks.
In the aftermath of the devastating Southern California fires, Padilla’s Fix Our Forests Act would help combat catastrophic wildfires, restore forest ecosystems, and make federal forest management more efficient and responsive. The comprehensive Senate bill reflects months of bipartisan Senate negotiations to find consensus on how to best improve forest management practices, accelerate processes to protect communities, advance watershed restoration, and strengthen partnerships between federal agencies, states, tribes, and private stakeholders. The Senate version of the bill would also bolster coordination efforts across agencies through a new Wildfire Intelligence Center, which would streamline the federal response and create a whole-of-government approach to combating wildfires.
A list of Senate Fix Our Forests Act provisions particularly impactful for California is available here. A one-pager on the bill is available here.
“As thousands of Los Angeles families look at a long road to recovery ahead, we need to do everything in our power not just to rebuild, but to prevent devastation from future wildfires,” said Senator Padilla. “That’s why with these LA communities in mind, I convened a bipartisan group of Western Senators to reassess how we prevent and respond to wildfires. Our Senate version of the Fix Our Forests Act would increase the speed and scale of our wildfire prevention and mitigation efforts by expediting the removal of hazardous fuels, building ‘fuel breaks’ to stop mega wildfires, and creating a National Wildfire Intelligence Center to streamline federal response. We’re breaking through this harsh political climate with bipartisan solutions to both fight deadly wildfires and prevent even more greenhouse gas emissions — we can’t take this opportunity for granted.”
“The bipartisan Fix Our Forests Act removes barriers and builds on California’s progress to accelerate more work on federal lands, faster,” said California Natural Resources Secretary Wade Crowfoot. “As an all-lands, all-hands approach, it is one more tool in the arsenal against the threat of wildfires. As we enter peak fire season, reducing catastrophic wildfire risk requires everyone to do their part.”
“Across California, we are working year-round to reduce wildfire risk and enhance prevention efforts, and we are seeing results,” said Josh Nettles, CAL FIRE Assistant Region Chief. “Now by enhancing interagency coordination and promoting fire-resistant building methods and defensible space practices, the Fix Our Forests Act will help protect communities in the wildland-urban interface and elsewhere.”
The American West has long been prone to wildfires, but climate change, prolonged drought, and the buildup of dry fuels have increasingly intensified these fires and extended fire seasons. Wildfires today are more catastrophic — growing larger, spreading faster, and burning more land than ever before. Nationwide, total acres burned rose from 2.7 million in 2023 to nearly 9 million in 2024, a 231 percent increase.
California averages more than 7,500 wildfires a year. Not including the recent Los Angeles fires, six of the top 10 most destructive fires, three of the top five deadliest fires, and all of the state’s nine largest fires have burned since 2017. The status quo is simply unsustainable, and responding to the scale and magnitude of the crisis on the ground is essential to keeping California communities safe.
Additionally, wildfires release carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions that accelerate climate change. California’s 2020 fire season, the worst on record, emitted enough greenhouse gases to erase nearly two decades of progress on emissions reductions in California. Addressing this wildfire emergency is critical to ensuring that our climate progress is not undermined by the devastating impacts of these fires.
In the aftermath of the devastating Southern California fires, Senator Padilla has introduced more than 10 bills to help prevent and respond to future disasters. In February, Padilla introduced bipartisan legislation to create a national Wildfire Intelligence Center to streamline federal response and create a whole-of-government approach to combat wildfires. He also announced a package of three bipartisan bills to bolster fire resilience and proactive mitigation efforts, including the Fire-Safe Electrical Corridors Act, the Wildfire Emergency Act, and the Disaster Mitigation and Tax Parity Act. In January, Padilla introduced another suite of bipartisan bills to strengthen wildfire recovery and resilience, including the Wildland Firefighter Paycheck Protection Act, the Fire Suppression and Response Funding Assurance Act, and the Disaster Housing Reform for American Families Act. Additionally, earlier this month, he introduced the FEMA Independence Act, bipartisan legislation to restore the FEMA as an independent, cabinet-level agency and improve efficiency in federal emergency response efforts.
Senator Padilla also visited Altadena last month, joining Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.), FEMA, local leaders, and representatives from the Small Business Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, and USACE for a tour and briefing on cleanup and recovery efforts in the aftermath of the Eaton Fire.
Video of today’s press conference is available here, and can be downloaded here.
Additional photos from today’s tour are available here.

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Construction Underway on Saratoga County Roundabout

Source: US State of New York

overnor Kathy Hochul today announced that construction is underway on a $3.4 million project that will enhance motorist safety and improve traffic flow along an important travel route in Saratoga County and a key gateway to the historic City of Saratoga Springs. The project is reconfiguring the traditional four-way, signalized intersection of New York State Route 29, Rowland Street and Petrified Sea Gardens Road in the Town of Milton into a modern, single-lane roundabout that will reduce congestion and points of potential vehicle conflict. The intersection is less than three miles away from Saratoga Springs’ bustling downtown district.

“New Yorkers need the best and safest roads so they can travel to work, visit their families and shop for leisure,” Governor Hochul said. “While we are transforming the infrastructure of our state and connecting our roads to ensure safer and more efficient travel, the construction of this new roundabout on State Route 29 in Saratoga County would not be possible without our roadside workers, who risk their lives every day delivering for our state and keep us moving.”

New York State Department of Transportation Commissioner Marie Therese Dominguez said, “Thanks to Governor Hochul’s leadership, New York State continues to lead the way in reimagining our infrastructure to better connect communities and get people where they need to go safely and efficiently. The transformation of this intersection along State Route 29 into a roundabout will reduce vehicle congestion along a vital travel corridor in Saratoga County and make it easier to reach one of the sparkling jewels of upstate New York, the City of Saratoga Springs.”

State Route 29 — also known as Washington Street — is a major east-west artery that connects the Town of Milton with Saratoga Springs and its many popular attractions, including the Saratoga Race Course and the Saratoga Performing Arts Center. Rowland Street is also a key north-south local connector that provides access to local residential communities as well as the Saratoga County Airport.

The new roundabout will improve overall traffic conditions by reducing idling time and allowing vehicles to navigate the intersection more efficiently.

Roundabouts are engineered to maximize safety and minimize congestion. Compared to some traditional intersections, traffic flows more freely through roundabouts, cutting congestion and commute times. Crashes at roundabouts tend to be less severe because they typically occur at slower speeds. Roundabouts also eliminate the need for electric-powered traffic signals. Watch a video about how to safely navigate a roundabout.

To minimize disruptions, the New York State Department of Transportation will maintain traffic in each direction on State Route 29 throughout construction. The project is expected to be in its final stages in early June and is not expected to impact travel to the Belmont Stakes Racing Festival, which runs from June 4 through June 8. Construction is expected to be substantially complete by late June, well before the start of the regular race season at the Saratoga Race Course.

U.S. Senator Charles Schumer said, “The intersection of Rowland Street and Petrified Sea Gardens Road is part of one of Saratoga’s most vital routes. Thanks to $1 million in federal funding from my Bipartisan Infrastructure & Jobs Law, we are paving the way for a safer roundabout that will improve traffic flow. These improvements will make it easier for residents and visitors to reach the historic Saratoga Springs and travel throughout the Capital Region more easily and safely. I’m grateful that Governor Hochul is putting these federal dollars to good use to improve safety along this key gateway.”

Saratoga County Administrator Steve Bulger said, “Saratoga County is pleased to see new infrastructure investments as our County continues to grow. We believe this new roundabout will improve traffic flow at a key intersection that will benefit our constituents moving forward.”

Town of Milton Supervisor Scott Ostrander said, “Our town is one of the fastest growing towns in the County. Unfortunately, it’s growing faster than everyone has expected. I think the roundabout is a positive for our town because it will clear up the congested traffic in our town with the roundabout creating a steady flow of traffic which will hopefully take care of the congestion problem with the population continuously growing.”

About the Department of Transportation
It is the mission of the New York State Department of Transportation to provide a safe, reliable, equitable, and resilient transportation system that connects communities, enhances quality of life, protects the environment, and supports the economic well-being of New York State.

Lives are on the line; slow down and move over for highway workers!

Follow New York State DOT on Twitter: @NYSDOT and @NYSDOT_NYC. Find us on Facebook at facebook.com/NYSDOT.

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s aggressive actions against free speech speak a lot louder than his words defending it

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Daniel Hall, Professor of Justice and Community Studies & Political Science, Miami University

Free speech in the U.S. is being curtailed by the Trump administration. Malte Mueller, fStop/Getty Images

Harvard University took the extraordinary step of suing the Trump administration on April 21, 2025, claiming that the pressure campaign mounted on the school by the president and his Cabinet to force viewpoint diversity on campus violated the Constitution’s guarantees of free speech.

“Defendants’ actions are unlawful,” Harvard’s lawsuit states. “The First Amendment does not permit the Government to ‘interfere with private actors’ speech to advance its own vision of ideological balance.’”

Yet in his first term, President Donald J. Trump declared that free speech mattered.

Trump issued the “Executive Order Restoring Free Speech and Ending Federal Censorship” on March 21, 2019. In it, he expressed the importance of free inquiry and open debate to education and directed federal officials to use the federal government’s funding of higher education to ensure that universities promote free inquiry.

Channeling free-speech champions Benjamin Franklin and James Madison, Trump wrote that “free inquiry is an essential feature of our Nation’s democracy.”

As a professor of constitutional, criminal and comparative law, and as a citizen who enjoys his liberty, I agree.

Free speech is fundamental to human progress. Scientific, medical, technological and social advancements all rely on the free flow of information. Robust discussion and disagreement are equally important to maintaining a healthy constitutional republic.

In the words of the late U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, “If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”

The First Amendment’s free speech and press clauses protect all forms of expression – oral, print, digital and artistic – from governmental interference or punishment.

Of the many types of speech, political speech is the most protected.

On the first day of his second term in office, Trump issued another free speech executive order. It affirms the administration’s commitment to free speech, directs that tax money is not used to abridge free speech and instructs federal employees to “identify and take appropriate action to correct past misconduct by the Federal Government related to censorship of protected speech.”

In a vacuum, Trump’s orders appear to bode well for free speech.

But what is important is free speech reality, not rhetoric. Three months into his second term, where does Trump stand?

The many interconnected orders, letters, statements and actions of Trump’s White House make an assessment of any positive effects difficult. On the other hand, the Trump administration has clearly violated and chilled free speech on many occasions.

At his second inauguration, Donald Trump promised to ‘stop all government censorship’ and ‘bring back free speech.’

Repression and retaliation

Attempts to silence the president’s adversaries are developing as a pattern.

Law firms and attorneys who have sued or prosecuted Trump, or represented his adversaries, have been targeted for retribution and concessions. It began with an executive order on March 6, 2025, directed at the U.S.-based global law firm Perkins Coie, which had once represented Trump’s opponent in the 2016 presidential race, Hillary Clinton. A second order was issued on March 14, 2025, against Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison because it once employed an attorney who investigated Trump. Subsequently, at least six other prominent law firms were also targeted.

Several law firms acceded to the president’s demands, agreeing to accept clients without regard to political beliefs, to eliminate DEI practices, and to perform pro bono work valued in the hundreds of millions of dollars for causes Trump supports.

The firms that didn’t accede to the president’s demands had their security clearances removed, access to federal buildings restricted, and were banned from working for federal agencies. A few of the firms that didn’t relent have won temporary injunctions barring the administration’s actions against them.

The nonpartisan free speech advocacy organization Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression decried the orders as threatening the foundations of justice and free speech. In one of several challenges to these orders, U.S. District Judge Beryl Howell wrote on March 12, 2025, that Trump’s order appeared motivated by “retaliatory animus” and concluded that it “runs head on into the wall of First Amendment protections.” Two other federal courts reached similar conclusions.

In the first three months of his second term, Trump withdrew Secret Service protection of several prominent critics who are former federal government officials, including John Bolton, a former Trump national security adviser. Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, his top aide, Brian Hook, and former high-level health official Anthony Fauci also lost their security protection.

It is hard to imagine that these decisions won’t have a profoundly chilling effect on potential critics of the president, especially since the revocations were publicly announced and each individual has been the subject of credible threats resulting from their governmental service.

Targeting the press

A similar pattern exists for journalists, where Trump is using his power to punish organizations whose reporting he doesn’t like.

AP journalists were banned from the White House and Air Force One on Feb. 11, 2025, for refusing to refer to the Gulf of Mexico as the Gulf of America, the new name Trump had ordered for the body of water. On April 9, 2025, this ban was found to violate the First Amendment by a judge nominated by Trump during his first term.

Denouncing CNN and MSNBC as “illegal” and claiming they are paid political operatives, Trump suggested they should be investigated during a speech at the U.S. Department of Justice.

Trump effectively closed Voice of America, after 83 years of continuous broadcasting, for being “anti-Trump” and radical in its views. By charter, the broadcaster represents “America, not any single segment of American society,” with “accurate, objective, and comprehensive” news and “a balanced and comprehensive projection of significant American thought and institutions” through television, radio, internet, social media and satellite broadcasts to peoples around the world.

The Federal Communications Commission has initiated regulatory actions against the licenses of several television stations for broadcasts that have been accused by the President of being anti-Trump or biased in favor of Kamala Harris. Early in the process, the outcomes of these actions are to be determined.

Protesters in Somerville, Mass., on March 26, 2025, demand the release of Rumeysa Ozturk, a Turkish student at Tufts University, whose recent arrest by federal agents is seen as an assault on free speech.
AP Photo/Michael Casey

Pressuring universities and students

Other administration actions, I believe, raise serious free speech issues.

Harvard isn’t the only university feeling pressure.

The administration is threatening to withhold federal money from universities as a way to coerce many of them to comply with administration policies in ways that implicate free speech and in some instances violate legal processes for the withholding of federal support.

Some of the Trump administration’s recent immigration enforcement efforts have targeted international students who are in the U.S. lawfully but who participated in Palestinian rights protests and disagreed with Israel’s actions during the war in Gaza.

The administration claims that some students whose visas have been revoked were either Hamas supporters or violated criminal laws. The administration has also said that many students are being deported under broad authority the secretary of state has to deport those deemed a danger to national security.

Democracy and free speech

In the past decade, the U.S. has fallen in press freedom, rule of law and democratic governance, resulting in the classification of a “flawed democracy” by the Economist Intelligence Unit, a democratic watchdog. Unsurprisingly, there has been a simultaneous rise in public support for authoritarianism. These changes make support for free speech increasingly important.

On March 4, 2025, Trump declared in a speech before a joint session of Congress that he “stopped all government censorship and brought free speech back to America.”

The record doesn’t support this claim.

Daniel Hall does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Trump’s aggressive actions against free speech speak a lot louder than his words defending it – https://theconversation.com/trumps-aggressive-actions-against-free-speech-speak-a-lot-louder-than-his-words-defending-it-252706

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Kaine, Colleagues Demand Trump Rescind Threat to Transfer Incarcerated U.S. Citizens to El Salvador Prison

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Virginia Tim Kaine

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Tim Kaine, the Ranking Member of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere, (D-VA) and 25 of his Senate colleagues demanded in a letter to President Donald Trump that he immediately rescind the illegal and dangerous claim that he may transfer incarcerated U.S. citizens to a prison in El Salvador.

In the letter, the senators also demanded that Trump follow U.S. law, adhere to all applicable court orders, and immediately facilitate the return to the U.S. of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. The Trump Administration illegally deported Abrego Garcia—a father in Maryland who was legally living in the U.S.—to El Salvador in direct contravention of a court order specifically prohibiting such removal.

“Your unprecedented actions threaten the constitutional protections of all Americans and violate the fundamental principles on which this nation was founded,” wrote the senators.

The senators continued, “With regard to your shocking assertion about transferring Americans to El Salvador, you cannot deport Americans to a foreign country for any reason. This nation’s founding fathers declared independence based on ‘repeated injuries and usurpations’ by the then-King of Great Britain, including ‘transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences’ and ‘depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury.’ Accordingly, Congress has passed no provision into law that would permit exiling United States citizens to a foreign country for any reason.”

“Our laws also do not allow you to send individuals from U.S. soil to El Salvador without due process. Further, the Executive Branch must comply with longstanding domestic and international law that prohibits the United States from transferring any person from our jurisdiction or effective control to a place where the person would face certain serious human rights violations,” wrote the senators.

“You must also end your unlawful attempts to deport noncitizens without due process under the Alien Enemies Act, as the Supreme Court ordered this weekend,” the senators concluded. “You must immediately facilitate the return to the United States of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, follow all court orders, and withdraw your dangerous and offensive claims that you may transfer U.S. citizens to a foreign prison. The Constitution demands it.”

In addition to Kaine, the letter was led by U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and signed by U.S. Senators Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Chris Coons (D-DE), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Rev. Raphael Warnock (D-GA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ed Markey (D-MA), Tina Smith (D-MN), Patty Murray (D-WA), and Martin Heinrich (D-NM).

A copy of letter is available here and text is below.

Dear President Trump:

We call on you to immediately rescind the dangerous and offensive claim that you may transfer incarcerated U.S. citizens to El Salvador. We further urge you to follow the law and adhere to all applicable court orders and immediately facilitate the return to the United States of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whom your Administration illegally deported to El Salvador in direct contravention of a court order specifically prohibiting such removal. Your unprecedented actions threaten the constitutional protections of all Americans and violate the fundamental principles on which this nation was founded.

With regard to your shocking assertion about transferring Americans to El Salvador, you cannot deport Americans to a foreign country for any reason. This nation’s founding fathers declared independence based on “repeated injuries and usurpations” by the then-King of Great Britain, including “transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences” and “depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury.” Accordingly, Congress has passed no provision into law that would permit exiling United States citizens to a foreign country for any reason. One conservative legal scholar called your threats to deport U.S. citizens “obviously illegal and unconstitutional.”

Our laws also do not allow you to send individuals from U.S. soil to El Salvador without due process. Further, the Executive Branch must comply with longstanding domestic and international law that prohibits the United States from transferring any person from our jurisdiction or effective control to a place where the person would face certain serious human rights violations. Your Administration’s actions in sending individuals to a Salvadoran prison notorious for inhumane conditions underscore the urgency and applicability of these requirements. The bedrock principles of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause protect individuals from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Throughout our nation’s history, the Supreme Court has long read the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of due process to require that the government provide persons with certain procedural due process protections, including notice and an opportunity to be heard before any such deprivation of liberty.

Even under extraordinary wartime authorities such as the Alien Enemies Act, the Supreme Court of the United States has held that noncitizens should, at a minimum, have an opportunity to prove whether or not the Act should apply to them. In a statement accompanying the Supreme Court’s recent order for the federal government to facilitate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia and “ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador,” Justice Sotomayor noted that your Administration’s argument suggesting that the government is permitted to leave Mr. Abrego Garcia in the Salvadoran prison after wrongfully sending him there “implies that it could deport and incarcerate any person, including U.S. citizens, without legal consequence, so long as it does so before a court can intervene.” She went on to note that this is a “view [that] refutes itself.”

You must immediately facilitate the return of Mr. Abrego Garcia, which is unquestionably within your power to do since your Administration is paying the government of El Salvador to detain him. As Judge Harvie Wilkinson, a conservative appointee of President Reagan, wrote in a unanimous Fourth Circuit opinion rejecting your Administration’s efforts to delay taking steps to bring Mr. Abrego Garcia back to the United States:

The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order. Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.

You must also end your unlawful attempts to deport noncitizens without due process under the Alien Enemies Act, as the Supreme Court ordered this weekend. You have no authority to openly defy court orders requiring you: (1) to return someone who has been wrongfully deported, or (2) to grant individuals the due process they are owed under our laws. As Judge Boasberg wrote in his order last week concluding that probable cause exists to find the government in criminal contempt:

The Constitution does not tolerate willful disobedience of judicial orders—especially by officials of a coordinate branch who have sworn an oath to uphold it. To permit such officials to freely “annul the judgments of the courts of the United States” would not just “destroy the rights acquired under those judgments”; it would make “a solemn mockery” of “the constitution itself.” …“So fatal a result must be deprecated by all.”

You must immediately facilitate the return to the United States of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, follow all court orders, and withdraw your dangerous and offensive claims that you may transfer U.S. citizens to a foreign prison. The Constitution demands it.

Sincerely,

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Washington state joins coalition of AGs supporting law firm singled out by executive order

Source: Washington State News

OLYMPIA — Attorney General Nick Brown has joined 20 other attorneys general in an amicus brief in support of law firm Susman Godfrey, which is challenging an unconstitutional presidential order issued as retribution against the firm for representing clients in the aftermath of the 2020 election and defending the integrity of that election.

The order, similar to others targeting specific law firms for who they’ve represented, violates the firm’s rights to free speech, due process, and other constitutional protections.

“The president’s order is illegal — yet again — and a direct attack on the right to legal representation,” Brown said. “The Constitution and America’s defining values of fairness are both at risk under these actions.”

President Donald Trump has issued five executive orders retaliating against law firms whose advocacy, clients, and staff he dislikes. These orders require federal officials to suspend any active security clearances held by the law firms’ workers, to refuse to engage with or hire employees of these firms, and to deny the law firms’ personnel entry to federal buildings. The orders also direct federal contractors to disclose any business with the law firms so that agencies can terminate any such contracts. Four courts that have reviewed those orders found they are likely unconstitutional.

Susman Godfrey, a law firm with an office in Seattle, was named in one of these retaliatory executive orders in early April. Susman obtained temporary injunctive relief earlier this month and is now asking a judge to permanently block the executive order against it.

When granting the temporary injunctive relief, a federal judge said, “The executive order is based on a personal vendetta against a particular firm. And, frankly, I think the framers of our Constitution would view it as a shocking abuse of power.”

Washington State Attorney General Nick Brown and the other attorneys general note that a fair and functioning judicial system depends on lawyers being willing to work on controversial cases or represent unpopular clients without fearing retribution by the government. The attorneys general say the orders will harm their states’ residents by making it more difficult for many potential clients — especially those who currently rely on pro bono representation — to obtain legal services and vindicate their rights in court.

The coalition was led by the attorneys general from Washington, Illinois, New Jersey, and Massachusetts. Joining them in filing the briefs were Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

The brief can be found here. More information about previous amicus briefs in support of other law firms are here and here. State attorneys general also wrote a letter to support the legal community, which can be found here.

-30-

Washington’s Attorney General serves the people and the state of Washington. As the state’s largest law firm, the Attorney General’s Office provides legal representation to every state agency, board, and commission in Washington. Additionally, the Office serves the people directly by enforcing consumer protection, civil rights, and environmental protection laws. The Office also prosecutes elder abuse, Medicaid fraud, and handles sexually violent predator cases in 38 of Washington’s 39 counties. Visit www.atg.wa.gov to learn more.

Media Contact:

Email: press@atg.wa.gov

Phone: (360) 753-2727

General contacts: Click here

Media Resource Guide & Attorney General’s Office FAQ

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Founder and Former CEO of Biscayne Capital Sentenced to 10 Years in Prison for $130M Fraud Scheme

Source: US State of California

Roberto Gustavo Cortes Ripalda (Cortes), 58, the co-founder, co-owner, and CEO of international advisory firm Biscayne Capital, was sentenced earlier today in Brooklyn, New York to 10 years in prison for conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Cortes pleaded guilty to the charge in September 2023. Cortes was also ordered to pay $3.4 million in forfeiture and $103million in restitution to over 110 victims.

“For more than five years, Roberto Cortes and his co-conspirators ran Biscayne Capital as a Ponzi scheme, lying to investors — including the defendant’s own friends and family members — and ultimately causing more than $155 million in investor losses,” said Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The sentence will hold Cortes accountable for his years of lies and deception. Thank you to our partners for their hard work and collaboration to achieve this result.”

“Today’s sentence reflects the seriousness of Roberto Cortes’s criminal conduct in orchestrating a years-long scheme with his co-conspirators to prop up a failing business while defrauding Biscayne Capital investors and clients around the globe,” said U.S. Attorney John J. Durham for the Eastern District of New York. “Using illegal Ponzi payments to their victims, Cortes and his co-conspirators were able to disguise and perpetuate this scheme for years until Biscayne Capital finally collapsed under the defendants’ lies. Today’s sentence demonstrates our Office’s commitment to holding accountable investment professionals who abuse the trust of their clients for personal profit.”

“Regardless of the complexity of the investigation, IRS Criminal Investigation Special Agents and our law enforcement partners will utilize their skills and unique authorities to hold bad actors like the defendant accountable,” stated IRS-CI Executive Special Agent in Charge Kareem A. Carter. “This was a brazen scheme of staggering proportions. Mr. Cortes and his co-conspirators prioritized their own greed, stealing $155 million from investors. Today’s sentencing sends a clear message that we remain vigilant and will vigorously pursue those who attempt to enrich themselves through fraudulent means.”

According to court filings, Cortes and his co-defendant Ernesto Heraclito Weisson Pazmino (Weisson) founded Biscayne Capital in 2005 to support the financing of South Bay, their real estate development business focused on acquiring and demolishing properties to build luxury homes. After South Bay began experiencing financial trouble in 2007, Cortes and Weisson recruited investors to inject funds into South Bay’s operations. Rather than using those investor funds to fund South Bay’s real estate development projects, Cortes, Weisson, and their co-conspirators used the bulk of the funds to pay outstanding interest and principal debt obligations to other investors.

Cortes and his co-conspirators took numerous steps to perpetuate and conceal the scheme, including distributing investment documents with false and misleading information, deceiving investors about the purpose, risk, return, and security of their investments, and creating and sending fake account statements to unsuspecting clients to conceal the scheme. By the time the Biscayne Capital/South Bay Ponzi scheme collapsed and Biscayne Capital went into liquidation, Biscayne Capital clients had lost over $155 million.

IRS-CI investigated the case.

Bank Integrity Unit Deputy Chief Randall Warden and Trial Attorney Morgan Cohen of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Drew Rolle and Benjamin Weintraub for the Eastern District of New York are prosecuting the case. Trial Attorney Brandon Burkart of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section assisted with the investigation.

The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs provided significant assistance in securing the arrest and extradition from Spain and obtaining evidence in this case. The Department of Justice also thanks the Governments of the Cayman Islands, Curaçao, Ecuador, Spain and Switzerland for their valuable support.

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Founder and Former CEO of Biscayne Capital Sentenced to 10 Years in Prison for $130M Fraud Scheme

Source: United States Attorneys General 1

Roberto Gustavo Cortes Ripalda (Cortes), 58, the co-founder, co-owner, and CEO of international advisory firm Biscayne Capital, was sentenced earlier today in Brooklyn, New York to 10 years in prison for conspiracy to commit wire fraud. Cortes pleaded guilty to the charge in September 2023. Cortes was also ordered to pay $3.4 million in forfeiture and $103million in restitution to over 110 victims.

“For more than five years, Roberto Cortes and his co-conspirators ran Biscayne Capital as a Ponzi scheme, lying to investors — including the defendant’s own friends and family members — and ultimately causing more than $155 million in investor losses,” said Matthew R. Galeotti, Head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The sentence will hold Cortes accountable for his years of lies and deception. Thank you to our partners for their hard work and collaboration to achieve this result.”

“Today’s sentence reflects the seriousness of Roberto Cortes’s criminal conduct in orchestrating a years-long scheme with his co-conspirators to prop up a failing business while defrauding Biscayne Capital investors and clients around the globe,” said U.S. Attorney John J. Durham for the Eastern District of New York. “Using illegal Ponzi payments to their victims, Cortes and his co-conspirators were able to disguise and perpetuate this scheme for years until Biscayne Capital finally collapsed under the defendants’ lies. Today’s sentence demonstrates our Office’s commitment to holding accountable investment professionals who abuse the trust of their clients for personal profit.”

“Regardless of the complexity of the investigation, IRS Criminal Investigation Special Agents and our law enforcement partners will utilize their skills and unique authorities to hold bad actors like the defendant accountable,” stated IRS-CI Executive Special Agent in Charge Kareem A. Carter. “This was a brazen scheme of staggering proportions. Mr. Cortes and his co-conspirators prioritized their own greed, stealing $155 million from investors. Today’s sentencing sends a clear message that we remain vigilant and will vigorously pursue those who attempt to enrich themselves through fraudulent means.”

According to court filings, Cortes and his co-defendant Ernesto Heraclito Weisson Pazmino (Weisson) founded Biscayne Capital in 2005 to support the financing of South Bay, their real estate development business focused on acquiring and demolishing properties to build luxury homes. After South Bay began experiencing financial trouble in 2007, Cortes and Weisson recruited investors to inject funds into South Bay’s operations. Rather than using those investor funds to fund South Bay’s real estate development projects, Cortes, Weisson, and their co-conspirators used the bulk of the funds to pay outstanding interest and principal debt obligations to other investors.

Cortes and his co-conspirators took numerous steps to perpetuate and conceal the scheme, including distributing investment documents with false and misleading information, deceiving investors about the purpose, risk, return, and security of their investments, and creating and sending fake account statements to unsuspecting clients to conceal the scheme. By the time the Biscayne Capital/South Bay Ponzi scheme collapsed and Biscayne Capital went into liquidation, Biscayne Capital clients had lost over $155 million.

IRS-CI investigated the case.

Bank Integrity Unit Deputy Chief Randall Warden and Trial Attorney Morgan Cohen of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Drew Rolle and Benjamin Weintraub for the Eastern District of New York are prosecuting the case. Trial Attorney Brandon Burkart of the Criminal Division’s Fraud Section assisted with the investigation.

The Justice Department’s Office of International Affairs provided significant assistance in securing the arrest and extradition from Spain and obtaining evidence in this case. The Department of Justice also thanks the Governments of the Cayman Islands, Curaçao, Ecuador, Spain and Switzerland for their valuable support.

MIL Security OSI –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Nations: Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Commend Ukraine’s Presence Despite the Prevailing Circumstances, Raise Questions on the Treatment of Ukraine’s Indigenous Peoples and the Roma Population

Source: United Nations – Geneva

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-fourth to twenty-sixth periodic reports of Ukraine. Committee Experts congratulated the State party for appearing before the Committee despite prevailing circumstances, while raising questions on the treatment of Ukraine’s indigenous peoples and the Roma population.

A Committee Expert congratulated the Ukrainian delegation for making a laudable effort to assess the implementation of the Convention in the country, despite prevailing circumstances. Ukraine should be praised for this effort.

Chinsung Chung, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee noted that the State party adopted the law on indigenous peoples in 2021. However, according to information before the Committee, the law only recognised Crimean Tatars, Karaims and Krymchaks as indigenous peoples in Ukraine, while excluding other groups, such as Hutsuls, Lemkos and Gagauz peoples. Could the delegation provide clarifications on the law on indigenous peoples and how it aligned with international standards? What measures were in place to preserve and promote the identity, language and culture of all indigenous people under the jurisdiction of the State party?

Ms. Chung also said that according to the representative of the Office of the Ombudsman of Ukraine, around 100,000 Roma became refugees, and around the same number of Ukrainian Roma became internally displaced persons. Were accurate statistics available? Did the State party find durable solutions for internally displaced Roma and take measures to ensure that they benefitted from assistance? What were the State’s plans to include Roma people in recovery and reconstruction programmes?

The delegation said in 2021, the Ukrainian Parliament adopted the law on indigenous peoples in Ukraine, which was developed through extensive consultations with indigenous groups and civil society, and represented the aspirations of these groups. In addition, a draft law was developed on the status of the Crimean Tartar people which would be registered in Parliament in the near future.

Officially, Ukraine recognised three indigenous groups of peoples, including Crimean Tartars, Karaims and Krymchaks. The Lemkos people were not considered a national minority group, but rather a cultural group. The public broadcaster of Ukraine produced programmes for national minorities in their national languages, across broadcast, radio and digital formats.

Mr. Lossovskyi said in 2021, the Ukrainian Government approved the Roma strategy, and every two years action plans were prepared for its implementation. The Roma community was a young community, one of the youngest among the national minorities in Ukraine. It would be beneficial to use their innovation and abilities in the process of renovating Ukraine when the war was over. The State was working on providing the Roma with more education. There were many grants provided to Roma for studying in universities.

Introducing the report, Ihor Lossovskyi, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said during the reporting period from 2014 to 2019, fundamental tragic changes took place in Ukraine, in particular the beginning of the Russian aggression. At the height of the Russian invasion, in April 2022, Ukraine applied for membership in the European Union, and in June 2022, it received candidate status along with seven relevant recommendations in all spheres of human activity, including recommendation no. 7 on completion of the reform of legislation in the field of national minorities and interethnic relations.

To implement these recommendations, Ukraine developed and approved three laws, including the new law on national minorities (communities) of Ukraine, as well as 16 subordinate regulatory legal acts (bylaws) approved by the Government.

In concluding remarks, Ibrahima Guisse, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for the dialogue held, particularly given the context. War was ended through negotiation and diplomacy, not capitulation. It was hoped this would happen with Ukraine. The fact that Ukraine was here before the Committee was an example of the State’s willingness to cooperate.

In his concluding remarks, Mr. Lossovskyi thanked the Committee for their time and interest in the situation in Ukraine. The Committee’s recommendations were very much appreciated.

The delegation of Ukraine consisted of representatives of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience; the Coordination Centre for Legal Aid Provision; the State Committee for Television and Radio Broadcasting of Ukraine; and the Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Ukraine after the conclusion of its one hundred and fifteenth session on 9 May 2025. The programme of work and other documents related to the session can be found here. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.

The Committee will next meet in public on Friday, 25 April at 3.p.m for a half day general discussion on reparations for the injustices from the transatlantic trade of enslaved Africans, their treatment as chattel, and the ongoing harms to and crimes against people of African descent.

Report

The Committee has before it the combined twenty-fourth to twenty-sixth periodic reports of Ukraine (CERD/C/UKR/24-26).

Presentation of Report

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said during the reporting period from 2014 to 2019, fundamental tragic changes took place in Ukraine, in particular the beginning of the Russian aggression, Russia’s brazen destruction of international law, the occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, the occupation by the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and terrorist organizations supported by it of certain parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as well as the financing by the Russian Federation of terrorist organizations of the occupation administrations.

Due to these circumstances, collecting information in the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine was difficult. As a result of the temporary occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation, and the aggression of the Russian Federation in eastern Ukraine, ensuring the rights of minorities in these areas, especially Crimea, had sharply deteriorated. Ukrainians and Crimean Tatars, and those who adhered to pro-Ukrainian views, were subject to discrimination in Crimea.

During the reporting period, important changes also took place in the religious sphere in Ukraine. On 15 December 2018, the Unification Council was held, at which representatives of the three Orthodox Churches of Ukraine united into a single church structure, which was called the “Orthodox Church of Ukraine”, and the Metropolitan Epiphany of Kyiv and All Ukraine was elected as its primate. As of the beginning of 2021, this church jurisdiction had 7,097 religious organizations on the territory of Ukraine, handled by 4,537 clergy.

The principles of preventing and combatting discrimination were defined by the 2012 law on the principles of preventing and combatting discrimination in Ukraine. In May 2014, amendments were made to the law, which improved the legislative definition of discrimination. In 2019, the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience was established to deal with State policy in the field of national minorities and interethnic relations, freedom of conscience, and freedom of religion.

At the height of the Russian invasion, in April 2022, Ukraine applied for membership in the European Union, and in June 2022, it received candidate status along with seven relevant recommendations in all spheres of human activity, including recommendation no. 7 on completion of the reform of legislation in the field of national minorities and interethnic relations. To implement these recommendations, Ukraine developed and approved three laws, including the new law on national minorities (communities) of Ukraine, as well as 16 subordinate regulatory legal acts (bylaws) approved by the Government.

The first stages of the negotiation process with the European Commission regarding Ukraine’s membership in the European Union took place, in particular, the screening of Ukrainian legislation for its compliance with European legislation. The screening was provided under four subsections on judiciary and fundamental rights: freedom of conscience, freedom of religion; racism, xenophobia, hate speech; racial and ethnic discrimination, including Roma; and rights of national minorities.

Based on the results, the European Commission prepared a positive report on the state of Ukrainian legislation and its compliance with European legislation in October 2024. The next stage of the negotiation process was the preparation of strategic documents, including an action plan to ensure the rights of national minorities in Ukraine, which were in the final stage of preparation.

Questions by Committee Experts

IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, welcomed that Ukraine had a diverse and high-level delegation. Ukraine’s presence before the Committee despite the difficult context in the country highlighted the country’s commitment to appear before the treaty bodies. Mr. Guisse then paid tribute to Pope Francis who had been a man of peace.

During the period under review, Ukraine had experienced deep upheavals, including the large-scale invasion in 2022, which had given rise to large-scale destruction, human loss and mass displacement. According to information before the Committee, the last census conducted in 2001 showed that the main minority groups included Russians, Belarusians, Moldovans, Crimean Tatars and Bulgarians. Ukraine also has smaller populations of Poles, Romanians, Armenians, Hungarians, Roma and other nationalities. A subsequent census was supposed to be conducted in 2011, which was postponed until 2020, and had not taken place until now.

Other data was also not provided, and the Committee emphasised that the lack of statistics limited the ability to evaluate the enjoyment of different groups of their economic, social and cultural rights. Were there plans to conduct the census based on the principle of self-identification? What were the measures planned to collect data on the enjoyment of economic and social rights by the different groups under the jurisdiction of the State party?

The Committee noted that the legal framework, particularly on principles of preventing and combatting discrimination in Ukraine, did not prohibit discrimination based on all grounds listed in the Convention, particularly national origin and descent. Were there plans to amend and align the national legislation framework with article 1 of the Convention? What measures were taken to ensure that the legislative framework prohibited intersecting forms of discrimination?

Could the delegation inform the Committee on the implementation of the national human rights strategy for 2015–2020 in 2015 and its action plan? Was there a timeframe for developing and adopting a strategy on combatting racial discrimination?

Could the delegation provide information on the mandate and activities of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience? What were the measures to ensure the consultation and participation of groups vulnerable to racial discrimination in the work of the State Service? Was the State party planning to establish a central mechanism to coordinate and monitor the implementation of measures designed to combat racial discrimination?

The Committee was concerned that the legislative framework, including the Criminal Code, did not include a definition of all forms of discrimination, or a specific definition of hate speech or sanction for hate speech and crimes. What measures were being undertaken to review and amend the legislative framework to prohibit all forms of racial discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes in accordance with the Convention?

Was the State party planning to amend its Criminal Code, particularly article 161, to remove the requirements and restrictive approach as recommended by the Committee in 2016? What was the status of the draft law no. 5488 before the Parliament? How were its provisions in line with the Convention?

Could information be provided on the legislative framework on combatting racial discrimination in political discourse, as well as information on complaints received, investigations initiated, and imposed sanctions in this field? The Committee noted that the law on media included provisions on discrimination and incitement to hatred. Could clarifications on the law and how its provisions aligned with the Convention be provided? Could the delegation inform the Committee about measures taken to combat hate speech in the media and over the Internet? Was there a designated entity to monitor hate speech or avenues to submit complaints by victims?

Responses by the Delegation

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said unfortunately, the last census of Ukraine had taken place in 2001, which was 24 years ago. There were several reasons for this, including two Ukrainian political revolutions during this time and the beginning of the war with Russia in 2014. The next census had been planned for 2023, but this had been postponed due to the full-scale invasion by the Russian Federation in 2022. It was impossible in current circumstances to hold another census.

Significant work in combatting racial discrimination had been undertaken in the past three to four years. The State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience was established in 2019 and began its work in 2020. The institute directly dealt with issues of national minorities and ethnic policies and consisted of around 40 people.

Over the past couple of years, three laws had been adopted by the parliament, including the new law on national minority communities of Ukraine. This new law was revolutionary, as it described the ethnic policy for Ukraine and prescribed tasks for the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience. According to the law, all those who considered themselves to be national minorities would be recognised by the State as such. Ukraine had 130 national minorities, and the State took responsibility for all these communities.

There was a lack of strict definitions in Ukrainian laws around hate speech and hate crimes. Ukrainian institutions were working hard to integrate these into Ukrainian legislation. There was an interagency working group dealing with issues of discrimination, hate speech and hate crime.

Questions by Committee Experts

IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, appreciated the answers given, noting the circumstances within the country.

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked for more details on the interagency working group to be provided? Could more information on the national human rights institution be provided?

A Committee Expert said Ukraine’s non-compliance with article 4 was an ongoing issue. It was strongly recommended that the State follow up on this.

Another Expert asked how effective the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience had been in protecting minority rights in Ukraine? What was the level of participation of national minorities in consultations on State decisions? Had there been any improvements based on these discussions?

A Committee Expert said the situation in Ukraine was incomprehensible. What could be done about hate speech? Did Russian people hate Ukrainian people? Personally, the Expert did not feel this was the case. How could this explain why not everyone opposed the war which continued to take more lives? While there was hatred, men would continue to wage war.

FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, expressed gratitude to the State party for responding to the Committee’s request in the one-year time frame, however, many questions by the Committee were not addressed, nor were they provided in the current State report. Could the State party provide the Committee with the previously requested information in paragraph 16 of the concluding observations?

Responses by the Delegation

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said the questions about the war were philosophical. This was an existential war for the Ukrainian nation. According to the Russian dictator, Ukrainians did not exist and needed to be re-educated. To stop the war, the Russian dictator should provide a decree to forces to stop the fight and withdraw from the territory of Ukraine.

The Commissioner of Human Rights had a special department focusing on discrimination. After the screening exercise with the European Union, Ukraine understood there were some gaps in its legislation, particularly when it came to definitions. Many new laws and bylaws had been approved to fill these gaps, and this was a key focus of the State Service for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience. Communication with national minorities was a key step in this regard.

Around seven million Ukrainians had left Ukraine as refugees or moved around Ukraine as internally displaced persons. Many people treated the Roma community differently. The national action plan for the Roma strategy to 2030 was evaluated every two years. Every year, many different roundtables and conferences were organised by the State on the Roma community.

Two forums had been organised for the different minorities to discuss any issues they had and how to address them. A forum was organised in Kiev with Polish national minorities, and another one with Greek national minorities. There was a strategy on the development of the Crimea Tartare language. This year, work had also been finished on the new spelling of the Crimean Tartare language.

Questions by Committee Experts

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked about concrete cases of racially motivated violence and racial profiling, and the measures taken to respond to these cases? What measures had been taken for increasing public awareness-raising campaigns and other measures to counter incitement to hatred and hate crimes? The Committee would also like to receive information on measures to prevent discriminatory violence by the police and other law enforcement officers; measures to ensure accountability for incidents of discriminatory violence; and data on these kinds of incidents?

The Committee was concerned about racist hate speech and discriminatory statements in the public discourse, including by public and political figures and in the media. How did these victims address their cases, and how effectively were these cases treated? How many complaints had been received in the last five years, and what was the number of investigations initiated, cases considered before courts, and sanctions imposed on perpetrators? Could detailed information be provided on complaints registered with the courts, or any other national institution, including the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, concerning acts of racial discrimination, racist hate speech and racist hate crimes?

According to information before the Committee, there were gaps in the implementation of the legal framework, including the lack of specialisation among law enforcement officials and lack of operational standards to handle, register and investigate complaints of racial discrimination and hate crimes. What measures were being taken to address these concerns, particularly to enhance the capacity of law enforcement officials in handling and investigating complaints related to racial discrimination and hate speech?

Information before the Committee indicated that there was a lack of awareness on the rights of victims of racial discrimination and fear of approaching law enforcement officials on this topic. What measures were being taken to address these issues? Could a reason be provided for the low rate of complaints at the National Human Rights Commission? What measures were being taken to enable victims to make complaints more effectively?

The Committee welcomed the adoption of amendments in 2024 on the law on free legal aid to allow victims of hate crimes on specific grounds to benefit from secondary legal aid. However, the information before the Committee indicated that the victims were only entitled to the legal aid at the secondary stage and not to initiate a complaint. In addition, the implementation of the amendment was postponed until one year after the martial law was abolished. Could the delegation provide information on these two concerns?

Could disaggregated data be provided on complaints by ethnic origin such as by Roma, Jews, Africans and other minorities, as well as by national origin and gender? Had the complaints changed during the armed conflict, in terms of quantity, nature and results? What measures were being taken to promote human rights education, including on racial discrimination, in university programmes and teacher training?

What measures were being taken to raise awareness of the public, civil servants, and law enforcement officials in order to combat societal prejudice against certain minority groups, including the Roma?

Could accurate statistics of ethnic minorities, including Roma, be provided? The Committee remained concerned at the persistence of discrimination, stereotypes and prejudices against Roma, including reports of physical attacks and killings.

Recent research also demonstrated that the level of antigypsyism in Ukraine was still very high. According to the social cohesion study, 35 per cent of the Ukrainian population did not want Roma to be in their community at all. What measures had the Government of Ukraine taken to fight antigypsyism?

Could data on the education conditions of Roma be provided? What measures had been taken for improving the situation of education for Roma children? Were they educated in their mother tongue without discrimination?

The Committee noted the various measures taken by the State party to improve the situation of Roma, including the strategy for the protection and integration of the Roma national minority to 2020 and its action plan. Could information on the progress and results of strategies and programmes directed at the Roma be provided, particularly the allocated resources to ensure the effective implementation of the strategy and action plan and monitoring of its implementation? How were members of the Roma ethnic minorities involved in the implementation and monitoring of these policies? Had the Government consulted with Roma communities when planning and implementing such integration measures, including at the local level? How were the low levels of funding for these plans being addressed?

Responses by the Delegation

The delegation said the issues affecting the Roma community were a problem, not just for Ukraine but for all European countries. Prejudices still existed, however, during the war, many Roma men had served in the Ukrainian armed forces and in some cases sacrificed their lives, which had changed the attitude of Ukrainians towards Roma people. A unity and diversity programme was implemented last year, which was a Ukrainian national cultural programme, with training for Ukrainian police officers.

The lack of documents in Roma communities was an issue but this was being addressed through regular visits to regions where the Roma community lived. Thousands of Roma people had been provided with new documents.

In 2023, around 60 consultations were organised with different national minority groups. Permanent consultations and meetings were held with Roma communities. The consultations included members of all relevant ministries. The next meeting had been planned for the end of April. April 8 was International Roma Day and a large event had been organised in Kiev, including a roundtable and an all-day conference with the participation of ambassadors and the diplomatic corps. On the same day, several regions also organised International Roma Day celebrations with different events.

Questions by Committee Experts

A Committee Expert said the implementation of the Committee’s recommendations were lacking. How were the stakeholders in the consultations selected? The Expert expressed hope that the war would end soon with a fair and sustainable solution. It was important to remember that the unity towards Roma people should be sustained after the war, and that the stereotypes did not return.

FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said the Committee’s recommendations regarding measures taken to conduct training to raise awareness on the amendments to article 161 of the Criminal Code had not been addressed, and urged the State party to provide this information.

Another Expert asked what existing mechanisms were in place to receive complaints from victims of hate crimes? Were they user friendly?

A Committee Expert asked whether the education system in the State party allowed for the type of education help to prevent hate crimes and racial intolerance for children? Were there any significant numbers of people of African descent in the State party? Would Ukraine support the Second Decade for People of African Descent?

IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked if Ukraine’s desire to align itself with the European Union’s legislation on hate speech was to address hate speech, or to bring its legislation into line with that of the European Union?

An Expert asked if the outcome of today’s dialogue would be brought to the attention of the media?

Responses by the Delegation

The delegation said if the Committee approved, Ukraine would provide information to the media about the meeting. Regardless of the ethnicity or culture of any citizen, they could contact the police and make a complaint. There were special school curricula on tolerance and education. There should be more education in schools, from the youngest level possible.

There was an African community in Ukraine; it was not very big but its members were consulted on many issues. The African community had never informed the Government about any issues when dealing with the Ukrainian community.

The legal aid system of Ukraine provided several services, including primary and secondary legal aid and access to alternative dispute resolutions. Regular targeted information campaigns were conducted on the right to legal aid, to provide empowerment for vulnerable groups and build trust in the legal aid system in Ukraine. There had been only 91 cases of requests for legal aid during the past three years. There were 500 legal aid centres across Ukraine, as well as an online service.

Six months ago, the Government adopted the list of the languages of the national minorities of Ukraine which were under threat of disappearance, and this included the Roma language. Currently, there was a special working group of experts who were familiar with these languages working on initiatives in this regard.

In a brief comment at the end of the first meeting, MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair, said the dialogue was public and it was up to Ukraine if it wished to produce information on the discussion.

Questions by Committee Experts

IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked if measures were planned to assess and review the law on national minorities (communities) of Ukraine that aimed to eliminate all discriminatory provisions? What measures had been taken to consult and ensure the participation of all ethnic and national minority groups in the process of developing and drafting the law and its amendments?

While noting the measures taken by the State party to protect Crimean Tatars, in particular those who fled Crimea after 2014, the Committee remained concerned about reports that Crimean Tatars in regions under the authority of the State party faced difficulties in accessing employment, social services and education, and did not receive assistance. What mechanisms had been developed to ensure consultations with ethnic minority groups?

Did the State party have information concerning the National Council for Interethnic Harmony? What measures had been taken by the State party to support women belonging to ethnic or national minority groups in exercising their political rights, including participation in public affairs and raising awareness on their rights and the vital impact of their participation? What measures were being taken to mitigate the impact of the ongoing conflict on the participation of women in politics?

According to information received, legislative amendments relating to religious organizations entered into force on 23 September 2024, invoking “national security” as a ground for restricting freedom of religion or belief and freedom of religious association. However, this was not considered a permissible grounds for restriction of freedom of religion under the Convention. What were the measures restricting freedom of religion and belief and their impact on the ethno-religious communities concerned? Information received referred to practices tending to prohibit the activities of religious organizations, specifically the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church. Could information be provided on the necessity and proportionality of such punitive measures?

The situation of migrants, asylum seekers, refugees, and stateless persons in Ukraine had been significantly impacted by recent legal and practical developments, particularly since the introduction of martial law in February 2022. The current legal framework and its implementation presented several challenges that were inconsistent with the Convention.

The refugee status determination process in Ukraine did not align with international standards, leading to inconsistent application of legal interpretations and time limits for lodging asylum applications. This often resulted in the rejection of asylum claims. New practices had restricted access to asylum and statelessness determination procedures, especially for individuals with ties to the Russian Federation and Belarus. The State Migration Service often issued oral refusals for asylum applications without official decisions, citing martial law as a reason. This practice had been recognised by courts as illegal, yet it persisted, leaving applicants in legal limbo.

How would Ukraine address the inconsistencies in the asylum procedures to ensure alignment with international standards and the Convention? What legal amendments were introduced under martial law and what was their impact on the rights of refugees and stateless persons? What procedural safeguards were in place to protect individuals from forcible deportation? What steps were being taken to improve access to the asylum and statelessness determination procedures, particularly for individuals with ties to the Russian Federation and Belarus?

How was the Government addressing the challenges posed by the suspension of diplomatic relations with Russia in verifying nationality in statelessness determination procedures? What plans did the Ukrainian Government have to develop an integration strategy for refugees and improve reception conditions for asylum seekers? What steps were being taken to address the unlawful practice of issuing verbal refusals for asylum applications and ensure that applicants received official decisions?

The Government of Ukraine had made significant strides in addressing statelessness since 2020, including the introduction of a statelessness determination procedure. Despite these efforts, several challenges remained, particularly in the implementation of the procedure and the accessibility of necessary documentation for applicants, which was further exacerbated by the conflict.

On 22 January 2024, draft law no. 11469, titled “on amendments to certain laws of Ukraine on ensuring the right to acquire and preserve Ukrainian citizenship” was registered in the Ukrainian Parliament. The draft law, if passed, could result in the loss of Ukrainian citizenship for residents in Russian-occupied Ukrainian territories, who often had to obtain Russian passports to access basic services, employment, and social benefits. How did the Ukrainian Government plan to address the potential risk of stripping Ukrainian citizenship from residents of occupied territories who acquired Russian citizenship under duress or due to essential needs, such as access to basic services and employment?

MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair, said Kiev had been under attack the night before and there had been casualties. This was a serious and sad situation. The Committee understood the situation and was very concerned about these tragic events.

Responses by the Delegation

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said many members of the delegation had barely slept the night before. Russia had launched missiles from the Black Sea and inside Russia and had bombed Kiev. Up to now, there were 10 citizens who had been killed and 100 wounded, including children. Every day, there were peaceful victims of this tragic and bloody war. The delegation in Ukraine had lost contact with the Committee at the beginning of the session and missed some questions.

Regarding the law on ethnic minorities, several meetings had been organised with national minorities during the development of the law, predominantly online due to the war. In December 2022, Parliament adopted the law. At the request of some national minority organizations, the State used the term “communities” instead of minorities. The law encompassed all groups of ethnic peoples, which was around 130 according to the most recent census.

Ukraine did not have many new asylum seekers as the situation in the country was not sustainable for a peaceful life.

The Ombudsman’s Office was referred to as the Parliamentary Commission of Human Rights. The independence of this Office was guaranteed, ensuring it could function without undue influence from any external entities. This enabled the Office to effectively address human rights and issues of non-discrimination. Its annual report outlined steps taken to combat discrimination. It was a large institution with around 500 employees. There were branches located across 24 regions of Ukraine. In 2024, there were 454 complaints received by the Office. The Office monitored all issues of non-discrimination. All reports of the Office were public and could be found online.

Questions by Committee Experts

IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, expressed sorrow at the recent shocking events which had wracked the Ukrainian capital. What was the impact of martial law on asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons?

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked about the situation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons belonging to minority groups, as well as the situation of elderly people belonging to these groups? What was the situation of migrant workers, particularly in this situation of armed conflict?

A Committee Expert asked how far Ukraine had gone in implementing the decision of the European Court of Human Rights on a case versus Ukraine?

Another Committee Expert congratulated the Ukrainian delegation for making a laudable effort to assess the implementation of the Convention in Ukraine, despite prevailing circumstances. Ukraine should be praised for this effort. The Expert was concerned about allegations of racism at the Ukrainian Polish border. Had there been any follow-up on such reports? How many cases had been brought to court?

There had been allegations of racism in sport, including with a Brazilian footballer who was banned for one game after reacting to crowds calling him monkey. How had this case been handled? Ukraine should be congratulated for adopting the law on stateless in 2021. How many individuals had benefitted from the enforcement of that law? How did the State party plan to provide Roma with national documents?

Another Expert said African nationals had been facing discrimination at the borders.

What measures were being taken by the State party to ensure the protection, safety and security of all persons living in its jurisdiction?

Responses by the Delegation

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said Ukrainian legislation underscored equal rights for men and women. Half of the ministers of the Government were women. Many women in Ukrainian society occupied high-level positions. Women from Roma communities were among the most vulnerable. The State had organised several events, including roundtables, which assisted Roma women to find their place in society.

Due to the war, Ukraine no longer had many migrant workers. It was hoped that this would change after the war. The country would need many workers for innovation and to help rebuild Ukraine. It was hoped workers from many countries would come to Ukraine after the war and help rebuild the hundreds of cities which had been destroyed or partially destroyed.

Mr. Lossovskyi said he had not heard of cases of discrimination on the border between Ukraine and Poland. The case of discrimination regarding the Brazilian football player was an awful occurrence which was not typical for Ukraine. There had been a police investigation, but he could not recall the exact outcome.

The delegation said the aggression by the Russian federation had led to a huge influx across Ukraine’s borders. The Government took all accounts of discriminatory treatment very seriously. Despite difficult conditions, the Government had managed to keep all checkpoints on the borders open.

Mr. Lossovskyi said in 2022, a pilot project was launched to provide documents to Roma people in a more effective way. This was organised in a region where the majority of Roma people lived. Every year, the State continued this work and made several visits to these places.

The delegation said the draft law 5488 was being considered before parliament. It was hoped the law would be adopted during the current session of Parliament. The draft law provided for the term “intolerance” and addressed issues under this topic. All law enforcement agencies were currently working together to introduce the necessary amendments to the Criminal Code. Police officers had completed specialised human rights training. Outreach activities, including in schools, were carried out to combat negative stereotypes on the Roma population.

Questions by Committee Experts

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee believed in the necessity of investigating and documenting all human rights violations and abuses committed in the context of the ongoing armed conflict and invasion initiated by the Russian Federation against the State party on 24 February 2022. What measures had been taken to ensure prompt and impartial investigations? Could the delegation provide information on investigations and prosecutions into allegations of human rights violations and abuses during the armed conflict with the Russian Federation?

On 11 October 2018, the Holy and Sacred Synod of the Istanbul-based Ecumenical Patriarchate granted autocephaly to a new church, the “Orthodox Church of Ukraine”. This led to tensions with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. The Church was formerly linked to the Russian Orthodox Church under the Patriarch in Moscow, but stated that it severed those ties in May 2022, following the full-scale invasion by the Russian Federation.

It was reported that on 23 September 2024 in territory controlled by the Government of Ukraine, new legal provisions regarding religious organizations entered into force, prohibiting the activities of foreign religious organizations based in a State responsible for armed aggression against Ukraine or occupation of its territory, and specifically prohibiting the activities of the Russian Orthodox Church. Could detailed explanations be provided on this and on measures to ensure the respect of the rights to freedom of thought, conscience and religion?

According to media reports in January 2025, the State party announced the capturing in Russia of two soldiers from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and indicated that they were detained and provided with medical care. Could the delegation provide information on the situation of these two prisoners of war? What were the legal measures taken against them? Were there more prisoners of war captured by the State party from other nationalities, including mercenaries?

The Committee noted that the State party adopted the law on indigenous peoples in 2021. However, according to information before the Committee, the law only recognised Crimean Tatars, Karaims and Krymchaks as indigenous peoples in Ukraine, while excluding other groups, such as Hutsuls, Lemkos and Gagauz peoples. Could the delegation provide clarifications on the law on indigenous peoples and how it aligned with international standards?

Were there plans to assess and review the law? What was the situation of the Hutsuls, Lemkos and Gagauz peoples? What measures were in place to preserve and promote the identity, language and culture of all indigenous people under the jurisdiction of the State party? Could information be provided on the situation of internally displaced Crimean Tatars, and measures to ensure their access to education, housing, employment, healthcare services and humanitarian assistance? Was the State party taking measures in consultation with the Crimean Tatar community to find durable solutions for an appropriate settlement of Crimean Tatars in Ukraine?

The Committee was concerned that during the war, persons belonging to minorities, such as Roma, had difficulties in registering as internally displaced persons and having access to social assistance. According to the representative of the Office of the Ombudsman of Ukraine, around 100,000 Roma became refugees, and around the same number of Ukrainian Roma became internally displaced persons. Were accurate statistics available on the Roma? Did the State party find durable solutions for internally displaced Roma and take measures to ensure that they benefitted from assistance? What were the State’s plans to include Roma people in recovery and reconstruction programmes?

What efforts were being made to restore linkages between displaced children and their families? What efforts were being made to ensure access to education and basic services for displaced children?

Ukraine’s inadequate response to hate crimes against migrants, African and Asian students and other foreigners had previously attracted international criticism. What was the situation of non-citizens, particularly migrants, refugees and asylum seekers, and people of African and/or Asian descent during the armed conflict? Could the delegation provide clarification on the situation of detained undocumented migrants and non-citizens? Could the delegation also please provide information on measures to ensure their access to education, housing, employment, healthcare services and humanitarian assistance?

Responses by the Delegation

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said Ukraine did not refer to what was going on in Ukraine as conflict. This was a bloody, existential, colonial war with Russia, not simply a conflict. In 2018, the Ukrainian Church received independence from the Patriarchal Eastern Christianity Church based in Istanbul, Türkiye. This was a revolutionary decision, as Ukraine was a big country and did not have an orthodox church. Now there was an independent church of Ukraine, like all other Christian Orthodox countries. No other activities of other churches were forbidden in Ukraine. The only restrictions were for the Russian Orthodox Church, which had restricted activity on the territory of Ukraine. This was because it was an accompaniment of the Russian aggression which had destroyed the country and killed hundreds of thousands of people.

Ukraine provided the international standard for prisoners of war in their prison facilities, which were regularly visited by the Ukrainian Ombudsman. In 2021, Ukraine adopted the law on indigenous peoples and consulted with many minorities on this law. Indigenous peoples were defined as those who lived on the territory of Ukraine and did not have a mother country. The Lemkos people were not considered a national minority group, but rather a cultural group.

In 2021, the Ukrainian Government approved the Roma strategy, and every two years action plans were prepared for its implementation. The Roma community was a young community, one of the youngest among the national minorities in Ukraine. It would be beneficial to use their innovation and abilities in the process of renovating Ukraine when the war was over. The State was working on providing the Roma with more education. There were many grants provided to Roma for studying in universities.

The delegation said in 2021, the Ukrainian Parliament adopted the law on indigenous people in Ukraine, which was developed through extensive consultations with indigenous groups and civil society, and represented the aspirations of these groups. In addition, a draft law was developed on the status of the Crimean Tartar people which would be registered in Parliament in the near future.

To ensure prisoners of war were not tortured, relevant legislation and policies had been developed. Three legislative acts had been produced to regulate these affairs.

Questions by Committee Experts

CHINSUNG CHUNG, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, asked if there were representative bodies of minorities inside the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine? How did the State party ensure consultations with all indigenous peoples under the framework of this law?

Another Expert said 10 to 20 per cent of Ukrainian Roma did not have identity documents? Was there a provision for determining statelessness in the act on statelessness? Did the Roma community benefit from universal birth registration?

A Committee Expert asked how many of the ethnic and national minorities participated in the relevant bodies in the Government? How many Roma, indigenous, or migrant women had been hired or granted responsibility positions, or were integrated in the responsibility of the work?

Responses by the Delegation

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, said when the law on indigenous peoples was adopted, several bylaws were prepared for the implementation of the law. According to one of the bylaws, Crimean Tatars regularly consulted with the Government. Only during the population census could the Government request information about the ethnic groups. Sometimes women with high-ranking positions did not disclose their ethnicity. It was up to people to declare this.

The delegation said due to the Russian full-scale invasion, there were problems preparing full statistical information on ethnic minorities. The legal aid system in Ukraine had provided legal assistance to more than 1,000 Roma people over the past three years. Most of these related to the processing of identity documents. Secondary legal aid had been provided for 27,000 internally displaced people over the past three years, due to the full-scale invasion.

Officially, Ukraine recognised three indigenous groups of peoples, including Crimean Tartars, Karaims and Krymchaks. Crimean Tartars were represented by an executive body; the spiritual administration of Ukraine represented the Karaim people; and there was no official information regarding a body for the Krymchaks, although they had the full rights to establish such a body under law.

Currently, there was no definition of hate speech under Ukrainian law. The Government of Ukraine had prepared a draft roadmap covering this issue. In Ukraine, a working group made up of State authorities and public organizations was working on a definition of hate speech and establishing administrative and criminal liability depending on the severity of the crime.

The public broadcaster of Ukraine continued to create a single information space for minorities. The broadcaster produced programmes for national minorities in their national languages, across broadcast, radio and digital formats. The State bodies would do their best to cover all the information needs of the national minorities in Ukraine.

Closing Remarks

FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur, said the Committee would send Ukraine concluding observations after the dialogue, with specific recommendations to be enacted within a period of one year.

IBRAHIMA GUISSE, Committee Expert and Co-Rapporteur, thanked the delegation for the dialogue held, particularly given the context. War was ended through negotiation and diplomacy, not capitulation. It was hoped this would happen with Ukraine. The fact that Ukraine was here before the Committee was an example of the State’s willingness to cooperate. Ukraine was also meeting with the Committee against Torture at the same time, which may have weakened Ukraine’s ability to provide comprehensive answers.

IHOR LOSSOVSKYI, Deputy Head of the State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Affairs and Freedom of Conscience, thanked the Committee members for their time and interest in the situation in Ukraine. The Committee’s recommendations were very much appreciated.

MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair, said racial discrimination was about ethnic and national origin. The Committee was concerned when ethnic minorities were denied their identity. This led to wars. It was now the sixtieth anniversary of the Convention, and the first composition of the Committee had included an expert of Ukrainian origin.

___________

Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.

CERD25.002E

MIL OSI United Nations News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: April 24th, 2025 Heinrich Fights Against Trump-Musk Administration’s Tax Cuts for Billionaires, with Tax Cuts for New Mexican Workers Legislation

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich joined U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and 42 democratic senators in introducing the Tax Cut for Workers Act to give millions of hardworking Americans a much-needed tax break.
The existing Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) – the Worker Tax Cut – has been delivering tax relief for millions of workers for decades. But it’s just not enough. This legislation would cut taxes for working class Americans without children, who currently receive a much smaller EITC than workers with children. This expansion would include over 111,000 New Mexicans by nearly tripling the average tax break many of these Americans receive from the existing EITC. It also extends eligibility for the tax cut to workers under the age of 25 and over the age of 64.
“Under this administration, we are seeing incredible tax breaks for the rich like Donald Trump and Elon Musk. Here’s an idea: let’s cut taxes for the middle class instead,” said Heinrich. “Through the Tax Cuts for Workers Act, I am fighting back. I will never stop advocating for the hardworking families New Mexico struggling with rising costs. Because it’s time our economy works for the people who build it — not just those who bankroll it.”
In addition to Heinrich, Cortez Masto, and Bennet, the follow cosponsors include Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Angus King (I-Maine), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
Read the full bill here.

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Payroll Services Company Owner Sentenced to Prison

Source: US State of Vermont

Defendant Defrauded the United States of More than $20M in Taxes While Amassing a Large Collection of Luxury Goods Including 27 Ferraris

A Florida man was sentenced today to 50 months in prison for not paying taxes withheld from his employees’ wages and filing a false tax return.

The following is according to court documents and statements made in court: Matthew Brown, of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, owned and operated multiple businesses in and around Martin County, Florida. One of these businesses was a payroll services company known as Elite Payroll. Elite Payroll provided payroll services to small businesses in and around St. Lucie, Martin, and Palm Beach Counties. Elite Payroll was hired by its clients to collect and pay over the Social Security, Medicare, and federal income taxes withheld from clients’ employees’ wages and to pay over those funds to the IRS each quarter. The timely payment of these taxes is critical to the functioning of the U.S. government, including because they are the primary source of funding for Social Security and Medicare. The federal income taxes that are withheld from employees’ wages also account for a significant portion of all federal income taxes collected each year.

Between 2014 and 2022, Brown did not pay over $20,000,000 in taxes withheld from the wages of employees of clients of Elite Payroll and from other businesses he controlled and instead enriched himself. To effectuate his scheme, Brown charged his clients the full amount of their tax liabilities but then filed false employment tax returns with the IRS that substantially underreported their liabilities, and pocketing the difference. For example, for one quarter in 2021, a client owed approximately $219,000 in taxes. Elite Payroll collected that amount from the client but filed a false tax return with the IRS claiming that the client only owed approximately $32,000, which Elite paid. Brown then kept the remaining approximately $190,000.

Instead of paying over the funds, Brown purchased commercial and residential real estate, including his multimillion-dollar home, a Valhalla 55 Sport Yacht, a Falcon 50 Aircraft, and a large collection of cars including Porsches, Rolls Royces, and 27 Ferraris.

In addition to his prison sentence, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon for the Southern District of Florida ordered Brown to serve two years of supervised release and to pay $22,401,585 in restitution, and a $200,000 fine to the United States.

Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Hayden O’Bryne of the Southern District of Florida made the announcement.

IRS Criminal Investigation investigated the case.

Trial Attorney Andrew Ascencio of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Porter for the Southern District of Florida prosecuted the case.

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Payroll Services Company Owner Sentenced to Prison

Source: United States Attorneys General

Defendant Defrauded the United States of More than $20M in Taxes While Amassing a Large Collection of Luxury Goods Including 27 Ferraris

A Florida man was sentenced today to 50 months in prison for not paying taxes withheld from his employees’ wages and filing a false tax return.

The following is according to court documents and statements made in court: Matthew Brown, of Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, owned and operated multiple businesses in and around Martin County, Florida. One of these businesses was a payroll services company known as Elite Payroll. Elite Payroll provided payroll services to small businesses in and around St. Lucie, Martin, and Palm Beach Counties. Elite Payroll was hired by its clients to collect and pay over the Social Security, Medicare, and federal income taxes withheld from clients’ employees’ wages and to pay over those funds to the IRS each quarter. The timely payment of these taxes is critical to the functioning of the U.S. government, including because they are the primary source of funding for Social Security and Medicare. The federal income taxes that are withheld from employees’ wages also account for a significant portion of all federal income taxes collected each year.

Between 2014 and 2022, Brown did not pay over $20,000,000 in taxes withheld from the wages of employees of clients of Elite Payroll and from other businesses he controlled and instead enriched himself. To effectuate his scheme, Brown charged his clients the full amount of their tax liabilities but then filed false employment tax returns with the IRS that substantially underreported their liabilities, and pocketing the difference. For example, for one quarter in 2021, a client owed approximately $219,000 in taxes. Elite Payroll collected that amount from the client but filed a false tax return with the IRS claiming that the client only owed approximately $32,000, which Elite paid. Brown then kept the remaining approximately $190,000.

Instead of paying over the funds, Brown purchased commercial and residential real estate, including his multimillion-dollar home, a Valhalla 55 Sport Yacht, a Falcon 50 Aircraft, and a large collection of cars including Porsches, Rolls Royces, and 27 Ferraris.

In addition to his prison sentence, U.S. District Judge Aileen M. Cannon for the Southern District of Florida ordered Brown to serve two years of supervised release and to pay $22,401,585 in restitution, and a $200,000 fine to the United States.

Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney Karen E. Kelly of the Justice Department’s Tax Division and U.S. Attorney Hayden O’Bryne of the Southern District of Florida made the announcement.

IRS Criminal Investigation investigated the case.

Trial Attorney Andrew Ascencio of the Tax Division and Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Porter for the Southern District of Florida prosecuted the case.

MIL Security OSI –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: BayFirst Financial Corp. Reports First Quarter 2025 Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BayFirst Financial Corp. (NASDAQ: BAFN) (“BayFirst” or the “Company”), parent company of BayFirst National Bank (the “Bank”) today reported a net loss of $0.3 million, or $0.17 per common share and diluted common share, for the first quarter of 2025, a decrease of 103.4% compared to $9.8 million, or $2.27 per common share or $2.11 per diluted common share, in the fourth quarter of 2024.

“While we were encouraged by net interest margin expansion and steady operating expenses during the quarter, our operating results were impacted by deteriorating economic conditions, resulting in net charge-offs and provision expense continuing to be elevated and lower valuations on our portfolio of loans measured at fair value,” stated Thomas G. Zernick, Chief Executive Officer. “Our business customers have been impacted by inflationary pressures, the continued high interest rate environment, recent macro economic changes and the resulting uncertainty. While we wait for clarity regarding the level and duration of the tariffs and begin to see the impact to the general economy from the recent policy changes, we will continue our practice of robust loan oversight and maintain close contact with our borrowers to better understand the longer-term implication to their businesses.”

“Part of our strategic plan is to grow recurring revenue through net interest income, thereby resulting in less reliance on the gain on sale from government guaranteed loans,” Zernick continued. “A critical element of this strategy focuses on growing our low-cost deposit account base to fund our rapidly expanding conventional commercial and consumer loan portfolios. During the quarter, we did a good job of growing core deposit accounts while letting higher-cost time deposits run off. We serve individuals, families and small businesses, with a focus on checking and savings accounts which are not only less rate sensitive but also are far less volatile. Moreover, our focus on providing checking and savings accounts to a broad segment of the communities we serve expands our overall franchise in the attractive Tampa Bay region and increases opportunities for offering consumer loans, residential mortgages, and small business loans throughout our markets. As management works diligently to address credit concerns moving forward, we are exploring strategies to de-risk unguaranteed SBA loan balances on our balance sheet including portfolio sales and continuing to strengthen credit underwriting on SBA 7(a) loans.”

“One of the highlights of the first quarter was strong loan growth within the community bank, supported by steady loan demand in the greater Tampa Bay market,” said Zernick. “Total loans held for investment increased nearly 2% during the first quarter and 16% over the past year. Community bank loans increased 4% during the current quarter, which included increases in CRE and consumer loans, while government guaranteed loan balances decreased 2% during the quarter. Despite a volatile national economic environment, our focus on local relationships and personalized banking solutions remains at the core of our success. We remain confident in our ability to return to profitability and drive long-term shareholder value while staying true to our mission of supporting the financial well-being of our local communities.”

First Quarter 2025 Performance Review

Net interest margin was 3.77% in the first quarter of 2025, an increase of 17 basis points from 3.60% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and an increase of 35 basis points from 3.42% in the first quarter of 2024.
The Company’s government guaranteed loan team originated $106.3 million in new loans during the first quarter of 2025, a slight decrease from $107.8 million of loans produced in the previous quarter, and a decrease from $130.6 million of loans produced during the first quarter of 2024. Since the launch in 2022 of the Company’s Bolt loan program, an SBA 7(a) loan product designed to expeditiously provide working capital loans of $150 thousand or less, the Company has originated 6,207 Bolt loans totaling $802.0 million, of which 481 Bolt loans totaling $60.5 million were originated during the first quarter.
As we reported last quarter, the Company is pausing the practice of electing to measure SBA 7(a) loans at fair value and continued that in the first quarter, however one originated USDA guaranteed loan for $4.8 million was measured at fair value during the first quarter of 2025 versus no loans in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $37 million in the first quarter of 2024.
Loans held for investment increased by $18.3 million, or 1.7%, during the first quarter of 2025 to $1.08 billion and increased $149.9 million, or 16.0%, over the past year. During the quarter, the Company originated $157.5 million of loans and sold $72.5 million of government guaranteed loan balances.
Deposits decreased $15.0 million, or 1.3%, during the first quarter of 2025 and increased $121.0 million, or 12.0%, over the past year to $1.13 billion. A $19.5 million decrease in deposits during the quarter was in primarily high cost interest-bearing time deposits while noninterest-bearing checking accounts increased $4.5 million during the quarter.
Book value and tangible book value at March 31, 2025 were $22.77 per common share, a decrease from $22.95 at December 31, 2024.

Results of Operations

Net Income (Loss)

The Company had a net loss of $0.3 million for the first quarter of 2025, compared to net income of $9.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $0.8 million in the first quarter of 2024. The change in the first quarter of 2025 from the preceding quarter was primarily the result of the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, which was part of a sale-leaseback transaction. Also contributing to lower earnings was a decrease in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $1.1 million, a decrease in government guaranteed loan fair value gains of $0.7 million, and an increase in noninterest expense of $0.5 million, primarily higher occupancy and data processing costs, partially offset by an increase in net interest income of $0.3 million and a decrease in income tax expense on continuing operations of $3.4 million. The change from the first quarter of 2024 was due to a decrease in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $0.8 million, a decrease in government guaranteed loan fair value gains of $4.1 million, and a decrease in government guaranteed loan packaging fees of $0.7 million. This was partially offset by an increase in net interest income of $2.3 million and a decrease in noninterest expense of $2.0 million.

Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

Net interest income from continuing operations was $11.0 million in the first quarter of 2025, an increase from $10.7 million during the fourth quarter of 2024, and an increase from $8.7 million during the first quarter of 2024. The net interest margin was 3.77% in the first quarter of 2025, an increase of 17 basis points from 3.60% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and an increase of 35 basis points from 3.42% in the first quarter of 2024.

The increase in net interest income from continuing operations during the first quarter of 2025, as compared to the fourth quarter of 2024, was mainly due to a decrease in interest cost on deposits of $1.2 million, partially offset by a decrease in loan interest income, including fees, of $1.0 million.

The increase in net interest income from continuing operations during the first quarter of 2025, as compared to the year ago quarter, was mainly due to an increase in loan interest income, including fees, of $1.5 million and a decrease in interest expense on deposits of $0.8 million.

Noninterest Income

Noninterest income from continuing operations was $8.8 million for the first quarter of 2025, which was a decrease from $22.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and a decrease from $14.3 million in the first quarter of 2024. This $5.5 million decrease is due to lower borrower demand combined with tighter credit guidelines deployed over the past year. The decrease in the first quarter of 2025, as compared to the fourth quarter of 2024, was primarily the result of the pre-tax gain on sale of two branch office properties of $11.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, which was part of a sale-leaseback transaction, and decreases in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $1.1 million and government guaranteed loan fair value gains of $0.7 million. The decrease in the first quarter of 2025, as compared to the first quarter of 2024, was the result of decreases in gain on sale of government guaranteed loans of $0.8 million, fair value gains on government guaranteed loans of $4.1 million, and government guaranteed loan packaging fees of $0.7 million.

Noninterest Expense

Noninterest expense from continuing operations was $15.8 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared to $15.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $17.8 million in the first quarter of 2024. The increase in the first quarter of 2025, as compared to the prior quarter, was primarily due to increases in occupancy expense of $0.4 million, data processing expense of $0.3 million, and loan origination and collection expenses of $0.3 million, partially offset by a decrease in compensation expense of $0.4 million. The decrease in the first quarter of 2025, as compared to the first quarter of 2024, was primarily due to lower compensation expense of $1.5 million, professional fees of $0.6 million, and loan origination and collection expenses of $0.7 million. This was partially offset by higher occupancy expense of $0.5 million and data processing expense of $0.5 million.

Balance Sheet

Assets

Total assets increased $3.7 million, or 0.3%, during the first quarter of 2025 to $1.29 billion, mainly due to increases in loans held for investment of $18.3 million, partially offset by a decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $14.6 million. Compared to the end of the first quarter last year, total assets increased $147.8 million, or 12.9%, driven primarily by growth of loans held for investment of $149.9 million.

Loans

Loans held for investment increased $18.3 million, or 1.7%, during the first quarter of 2025 and $149.9 million, or 16.0%, over the past year to $1.08 billion, due to originations in both conventional community bank loans and government guaranteed loans, partially offset by government guaranteed loan sales.

Deposits

Deposits decreased $15.0 million, or 1.3%, during the first quarter of 2025 and increased $121.0 million, or 12.0%, from the first quarter of 2024, ending March 31, 2025 at $1.13 billion. During the first quarter, there were decreases in savings and money market deposit account balances of $6.7 million and time deposit balances of $17.1 million, partially offset by increases in noninterest-bearing deposit account balances of $4.5 million and interest-bearing transaction account balances of $4.3 million. The majority of the deposits are generated through the community bank in the Tampa Bay/Sarasota area. At March 31, 2025, approximately 81% of total deposits were insured by the FDIC. At times, the Bank has brokered time deposit and non-maturity deposit relationships available to diversify its funding sources. At March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, the Company had $112.3 million, $112.1 million, and $30.5 million, respectively, of brokered deposits.

Asset Quality

The Company recorded a provision for credit losses in the first quarter of $4.4 million, compared to provisions of $4.5 million for the fourth quarter of 2024 and $4.1 million during the first quarter of 2024.

The ratio of ACL to total loans held for investment at amortized cost was 1.61% at March 31, 2025, 1.54% as of December 31, 2024, and 1.62% as of March 31, 2024. The ratio of ACL to total loans held for investment at amortized cost, excluding government guaranteed loan balances, was 1.84% at March 31, 2025, 1.79% as of December 31, 2024, and 1.88% as of March 31, 2024.

Net charge-offs for the first quarter of 2025 were $3.3 million, which was a decrease from $3.4 million for the fourth quarter of 2024 and $3.7 million in the first quarter of 2024. Annualized net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans held for investment at amortized cost were 1.28% for the first quarter of 2025, compared to 1.34% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 1.71% in the first quarter of 2024. Nonperforming assets were 2.08% of total assets as of March 31, 2025, compared to 1.50% as of December 31, 2024, and 0.97% as of March 31, 2024. Nonperforming assets, excluding government guaranteed loan balances, were 1.22% of total assets as of March 31, 2025, compared to 1.06% as of December 31, 2024, and 0.70% as of March 31, 2024. As we discussed in previous quarters, the Bank developed an express modification program for SBA 7(a) borrowers to help those borrowers who are challenged with larger payments in the higher interest rate environment compared to interest rates at the time the loans were originated.

Capital

The Bank’s Tier 1 leverage ratio was 8.56% as of March 31, 2025, compared to 8.82% as of December 31, 2024, and 9.12% as of March 31, 2024. The CET 1 and Tier 1 capital ratio to risk-weighted assets were 10.47% as of March 31, 2025, compared to 10.89% as of December 31, 2024, and 11.04% as of March 31, 2024. The total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio was 11.73% as of March 31, 2025, compared to 12.14% as of December 31, 2024, and 12.29% as of March 31, 2024.

Liquidity

The Bank’s overall liquidity position remains strong and stable with liquidity in excess of internal minimums as stated by policy and monitored by management and the Board. The on-balance sheet liquidity ratio at March 31, 2025 was 8.04%, as compared to 9.17% at December 31, 2024. The Bank has robust liquidity resources which include secured borrowings available from the Federal Home Loan Bank, the Federal Reserve, and lines of credit with other financial institutions. As of March 31, 2025, the Bank had $20.0 million of borrowings from the FHLB and no borrowings from the FRB or other financial institutions. This compared to no borrowings from FHLB, the FRB, or other financial institutions at December 31, 2024.

Recent Events

Share Repurchase Program. During the first quarter of 2025, the Company announced that its Board of Directors has adopted a share repurchase program. Under the repurchase program, the Company may repurchase up to $2.0 million of the Company’s outstanding shares, over a period beginning on January 28, 2025, and continuing until the earlier of the completion of the repurchase, or December 31, 2025, or termination of the program by the Board of Directors. To date, the Company has purchased $335 thousand of shares through this share repurchase program.

Second Quarter Common Stock Dividend. On April 22, 2025, BayFirst’s Board of Directors declared a second quarter 2025 cash dividend of $0.08 per common share. The dividend will be payable June 15, 2025 to common shareholders of record as of June 1, 2025. The Company has continuously paid quarterly common stock cash dividends since 2016.

Conference Call

BayFirst’s management team will host a conference call on Friday, April 25, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. ET to discuss its first quarter results. Interested investors may listen to the call live under the Investor Relations tab at www.bayfirstfinancial.com. Investment professionals are invited to dial (800) 549-8228 to participate in the call using Conference ID 90275. A replay of the call will be available for one year at www.bayfirstfinancial.com.

About BayFirst Financial Corp.

BayFirst Financial Corp. is a registered bank holding company based in St. Petersburg, Florida which commenced operations on September 1, 2000. Its primary source of income is derived from its wholly owned subsidiary, BayFirst National Bank, a national banking association which commenced business operations on February 12, 1999. The Bank currently operates twelve full-service banking offices throughout the Tampa Bay-Sarasota region and offers a broad range of commercial and consumer banking services to businesses and individuals. It was named the best bank in Florida in 2024, according to Forbes and was the 10th largest SBA 7(a) lender by number of units originated and 19th largest by dollar volume nationwide through the SBA’s quarter ended March 31, 2025. As of March 31, 2025, BayFirst Financial Corp. had $1.29 billion in total assets.

Forward-Looking Statements

In addition to the historical information contained herein, this presentation includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of such term in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are subject to many risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, the effects of health crises, global military hostilities, weather events, or climate change, including their effects on the economic environment, our customers and our operations, as well as any changes to federal, state or local government laws, regulations or orders in connection with them; the ability of the Company to implement its strategy and expand its banking operations; changes in interest rates and other general economic, business and political conditions, including changes in the financial markets; changes in business plans as circumstances warrant; risks related to mergers and acquisitions; changes in benchmark interest rates used to price loans and deposits, changes in tax laws, regulations and guidance; and other risks detailed from time to time in filings made by the Company with the SEC, including, but not limited to those “Risk Factors” described in our most recent Form 10-K and Form 10-Q. Readers should note that the forward-looking statements included herein are not a guarantee of future events, and that actual events may differ materially from those made in or suggested by the forward-looking statements.


BAYFIRST FINANCIAL CORP. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA (Unaudited)

	At or for the three months ended
(Dollars in thousands, except for share data)	3/31/2025			12/31/2024			9/30/2024			6/30/2024			3/31/2024
Net income (loss)	$	(335	)	$	9,776		$	1,137		$	866		$	824
Balance sheet data:
Average loans held for investment at amortized cost		1,027,648			1,003,867			948,528			902,417			855,040
Average total assets		1,287,618			1,273,296			1,228,040			1,178,501			1,126,315
Average common shareholders’ equity		96,053			87,961			86,381			84,948			85,385
Total loans held for investment		1,084,817			1,066,559			1,042,445			1,008,314			934,868
Total loans held for investment, excl gov’t gtd loan balances		943,979			917,075			885,444			844,659			776,302
Allowance for credit losses		16,513			15,512			14,186			13,843			13,906
Total assets		1,291,957			1,288,297			1,245,099			1,217,869			1,144,194
Total deposits		1,128,267			1,143,229			1,112,196			1,042,388			1,007,315
Common shareholders’ equity		94,034			94,869			86,242			84,911			84,578
Share data:
Basic earnings (loss) per common share	$	(0.17	)	$	2.27		$	0.18		$	0.12		$	0.11
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share		(0.17	)		2.11			0.18			0.12			0.11
Dividends per common share		0.08			0.08			0.08			0.08			0.08
Book value per common share		22.77			22.95			20.86			20.54			20.45
Tangible book value per common share ⁽¹⁾		22.77			22.95			20.86			20.54			20.45
Performance and capital ratios:
Return on average assets⁽²⁾	(0.10		)%		3.07	%		0.37	%		0.29	%		0.29	%
Return on average common equity⁽²⁾	(3.00		)%		42.71	%		3.48	%		2.26	%		2.06	%
Net interest margin⁽²⁾		3.77	%		3.60	%		3.34	%		3.43	%		3.42	%
Dividend payout ratio	(46.01		)%		3.52	%		43.98	%		68.91	%		75.27	%
Asset quality ratios:
Net charge-offs	$	3,301		$	3,369		$	2,757		$	3,261		$	3,652
Net charge-offs/avg loans held for investment at amortized cost⁽²⁾		1.28	%		1.34	%		1.16	%		1.45	%		1.71	%
Nonperforming loans⁽³⁾	$	24,806		$	17,607		$	15,489		$	12,312		$	9,877
Nonperforming loans (excluding gov’t gtd balance)⁽³⁾	$	15,078		$	13,570		$	10,992		$	8,054		$	7,568
Nonperforming loans/total loans held for investment⁽³⁾		2.42	%		1.75	%		1.62	%		1.34	%		1.15	%
Nonperforming loans (excl gov’t gtd balance)/total loans held for investment⁽³⁾		1.47	%		1.35	%		1.15	%		0.87	%		0.88	%
ACL/Total loans held for investment at amortized cost		1.61	%		1.54	%		1.48	%		1.50	%		1.62	%
ACL/Total loans held for investment at amortized cost, excl government guaranteed loans		1.84	%		1.79	%		1.70	%		1.73	%		1.88	%
Other Data:
Full-time equivalent employees		305			299			295			302			313
Banking center offices		12			12			12			12			12
⁽¹⁾ See section entitled “GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below for a reconciliation to most comparable GAAP equivalent.
⁽²⁾ Annualized
⁽³⁾ Excludes loans measured at fair value

Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures

Some of the financial measures included in this report are not measures of financial condition or performance recognized by GAAP. These non-GAAP financial measures include tangible common shareholders’ equity and tangible book value per common share. Our management uses these non-GAAP financial measures in its analysis of our performance, and we believe that providing this information to financial analysts and investors allows them to evaluate capital adequacy.

The following presents the calculation of the non-GAAP financial measures.


Tangible Common Shareholders’ Equity and Tangible Book Value Per Common Share (Unaudited)
	As of
(Dollars in thousands, except for share data)	March 31, 2025			December 31, 2024			September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024
Total shareholders’ equity	$	110,085		$	110,920		$	102,293		$	100,962		$	100,629
Less: Preferred stock liquidation preference		(16,051	)		(16,051	)		(16,051	)		(16,051	)		(16,051	)
Total equity available to common shareholders		94,034			94,869			86,242			84,911			84,578
Less: Goodwill		—			—			—			—			—
Tangible common shareholders’ equity	$	94,034		$	94,869		$	86,242		$	84,911		$	84,578

Common shares outstanding		4,129,027			4,132,986			4,134,059			4,134,219			4,134,914
Tangible book value per common share	$	22.77		$	22.95		$	20.86		$	20.54		$	20.45

BAYFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Dollars in thousands)	3/31/2025			12/31/2024			3/31/2024
Assets	(Unaudited)						(Unaudited)
Cash and due from banks	$	6,517		$	4,499		$	4,425
Interest-bearing deposits in banks		56,637			73,289			53,080
Cash and cash equivalents		63,154			77,788			57,505
Time deposits in banks		2,025			2,270			3,000
Investment securities available for sale, at fair value (amortized cost $39,507, $40,279, and $46,816 at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively)		36,318			36,291			42,514
Investment securities held to maturity, at amortized cost, net of allowance for credit losses of $12, $12, and $14 (fair value: $2,356, $2,346, and $2,352 at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively)		2,488			2,488			2,487
Nonmarketable equity securities		5,480			4,526			5,228
Government guaranteed loans held for sale		—			—			2,226
Government guaranteed loans held for investment, at fair value		57,901			60,833			77,769
Loans held for investment, at amortized cost		1,026,916			1,005,726			857,099
Allowance for credit losses on loans		(16,513	)		(15,512	)		(13,906	)
Net Loans held for investment, at amortized cost		1,010,403			990,214			843,193
Accrued interest receivable		9,153			9,155			7,625
Premises and equipment, net		32,769			33,249			39,327
Loan servicing rights		16,460			16,534			15,742
Right-of-use operating lease assets		15,484			15,814			2,499
Bank owned life insurance		26,696			26,513			25,974
Other real estate owned		132			132			404
Other assets		13,494			12,490			18,401
Assets from discontinued operations		—			—			300
Total assets	$	1,291,957		$	1,288,297		$	1,144,194
Liabilities:
Noninterest-bearing deposit accounts	$	106,236		$	101,743		$	96,977
Interest-bearing transaction accounts		261,074			256,793			250,478
Savings and money market deposit accounts		467,766			474,425			391,915
Time deposits		293,191			310,268			267,945
Total deposits		1,128,267			1,143,229			1,007,315
FHLB borrowings		20,000			—			15,000
Subordinated debentures		5,957			5,956			5,950
Notes payable		1,820			1,934			2,276
Accrued interest payable		1,053			1,036			1,598
Operating lease liabilities		14,102			14,510			2,673
Deferred income tax liabilities		648			301			728
Accrued expenses and other liabilities		10,025			10,411			7,496
Liabilities from discontinued operations		—			—			529
Total liabilities		1,181,872			1,177,377			1,043,565
Shareholders’ equity:	(Unaudited)						(Unaudited)
Preferred stock, Series A; no par value, 10,000 shares authorized, 6,395 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024; aggregate liquidation preference of $6,395 each period		6,161			6,161			6,161
Preferred stock, Series B; no par value, 20,000 shares authorized, 3,210 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024; aggregate liquidation preference of $3,210 each period		3,123			3,123			3,123
Preferred stock, Series C; no par value, 10,000 shares authorized, 6,446 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024; aggregate liquidation preference of $6,446 at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024		6,446			6,446			6,446
Common stock and additional paid-in capital; no par value, 15,000,000 shares authorized, 4,129,027, 4,132,986, and 4,134,914 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively		54,657			54,764			54,776
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net		(2,378	)		(2,956	)		(3,188	)
Unearned compensation		(1,006	)		(752	)		(1,192	)
Retained earnings		43,082			44,134			34,503
Total shareholders’ equity		110,085			110,920			100,629
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	1,291,957		$	1,288,297		$	1,144,194

BAYFIRST FINANCIAL CORP.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
	For the Quarter Ended
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	3/31/2025			12/31/2024			3/31/2024
Interest income:	(Unaudited)			(Unaudited)			(Unaudited)
Loans, including fees	$	19,751		$	20,747		$	18,228
Interest-bearing deposits in banks and other		934			1,007			959
Total interest income		20,685			21,754			19,187
Interest expense:
Deposits		9,431			10,600			10,215
Other		255			501			230
Total interest expense		9,686			11,101			10,445
Net interest income		10,999			10,653			8,742
Provision for credit losses		4,400			4,546			4,058
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		6,599			6,107			4,684
Noninterest income:
Loan servicing income, net		736			582			795
Gain on sale of government guaranteed loans, net		7,327			8,425			8,089
Service charges and fees		449			451			444
Government guaranteed loans fair value gain (loss), net		(755	)		(80	)		3,305
Government guaranteed loan packaging fees		716			773			1,407
Gain on sale of premises and equipment		—			11,649			—
Other noninterest income		278			476			228
Total noninterest income		8,751			22,276			14,268
Noninterest Expense:
Salaries and benefits		7,998			7,351			8,005
Bonus, commissions, and incentives		71			1,074			1,571
Occupancy and equipment		1,634			1,217			1,110
Data processing		2,045			1,749			1,560
Marketing and business development		487			390			588
Professional services		732			803			1,349
Loan origination and collection		1,035			758			1,719
Employee recruiting and development		617			445			597
Regulatory assessments		339			379			282
Other noninterest expense		855			1,169			992
Total noninterest expense		15,813			15,335			17,773
Income (loss) before taxes from continuing operations		(463	)		13,048			1,179
Income tax expense (benefit) from continuing operations		(128	)		3,272			296
Net income (loss) from continuing operations		(335	)		9,776			883
Loss from discontinued operations before income taxes		—			—			(78	)
Income tax benefit from discontinued operations		—			—			(19	)
Net loss from discontinued operations		—			—			(59	)

Net income (loss)		(335	)		9,776			824
Preferred dividends		385			385			385
Net income available to (loss attributable to) common shareholders	$	(720	)	$	9,391		$	439
Basic earnings (loss) per common share:	(Unaudited)			(Unaudited)			(Unaudited)
Continuing operations	$	(0.17	)	$	2.27		$	0.12
Discontinued operations		—			—			(0.01	)
Basic earnings (loss) per common share	$	(0.17	)	$	2.27		$	0.11

Diluted earnings (loss) per common share:
Continuing operations	$	(0.17	)	$	2.11		$	0.12
Discontinued operations		—			—			(0.01	)
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share	$	(0.17	)	$	2.11		$	0.11

Loan Composition

(Dollars in thousands)	3/31/2025			12/31/2024			9/30/2024			6/30/2024			3/31/2024
	(Unaudited)						(Unaudited)			(Unaudited)			(Unaudited)
Real estate:
Residential	$	339,886		$	330,870		$	321,740		$	304,234		$	285,214
Commercial		296,351			305,721			292,026			288,185			273,227
Construction and land		46,740			32,914			33,784			35,759			36,764
Commercial and industrial		234,384			226,522			200,212			192,140			182,264
Commercial and industrial – PPP		457			941			1,656			2,324			2,965
Consumer and other		93,889			93,826			92,546			85,789			63,854
Loans held for investment, at amortized cost, gross		1,011,707			990,794			941,964			908,431			844,288
Deferred loan costs, net		20,521			19,499			18,060			17,299			16,233
Discount on government guaranteed loans		(8,727	)		(8,306	)		(7,880	)		(7,731	)		(7,674	)
Premium on loans purchased, net		3,415			3,739			3,860			4,173			4,252
Loans held for investment, at amortized cost, net		1,026,916			1,005,726			956,004			922,172			857,099
Government guaranteed loans held for investment, at fair value		57,901			60,833			86,441			86,142			77,769
Total loans held for investment, net	$	1,084,817		$	1,066,559		$	1,042,445		$	1,008,314		$	934,868

Nonperforming Assets (Unaudited)

(Dollars in thousands)	3/31/2025			12/31/2024			9/30/2024			6/30/2024			3/31/2024
Nonperforming loans (government guaranteed balances), at amortized cost, gross	$	9,728		$	4,037		$	4,497		$	4,258		$	2,309
Nonperforming loans (unguaranteed balances), at amortized cost, gross		15,078			13,570			10,992			8,054			7,568
Total nonperforming loans, at amortized cost, gross		24,806			17,607			15,489			12,312			9,877
Nonperforming loans (government guaranteed balances), at fair value		507			—			24			341			94
Nonperforming loans (unguaranteed balances), at fair value		1,419			1,490			1,535			1,284			729
Total nonperforming loans, at fair value		1,926			1,490			1,559			1,625			823
OREO		132			132			—			1,633			404
Repossessed assets		36			36			94			—			—
Total nonperforming assets, gross	$	26,900		$	19,265		$	17,142		$	15,570		$	11,104
Nonperforming loans as a percentage of total loans held for investment⁽¹⁾		2.42	%		1.75	%		1.62	%		1.34	%		1.15	%
Nonperforming loans (excluding government guaranteed balances) to total loans held for investment⁽¹⁾		1.47	%		1.35	%		1.15	%		0.87	%		0.88	%
Nonperforming assets as a percentage of total assets		2.08	%		1.50	%		1.38	%		1.28	%		0.97	%
Nonperforming assets (excluding government guaranteed balances) to total assets		1.22	%		1.06	%		0.88	%		0.82	%		0.70	%
ACL to nonperforming loans⁽¹⁾		66.57	%		88.10	%		91.59	%		112.44	%		140.79	%
ACL to nonperforming loans (excluding government guaranteed balances)⁽¹⁾		109.52	%		114.31	%		129.06	%		171.88	%		183.75	%
⁽¹⁾ Excludes loans measured at fair value

Contacts:
Thomas G. Zernick	Scott J. McKim
Chief Executive Officer	Chief Financial Officer
727.399.5680	727.521.7085

The MIL Network –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Business First Bancshares, Inc., Announces Financial Results for Q1 2025

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

BATON ROUGE, La., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Business First Bancshares, Inc. (NASDAQ: BFST) (Business First), parent company of b1BANK, today announced its unaudited results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. Business First reported net income available to common shareholders of $19.2 million or $0.65 per diluted common share, increases of $4.1 million and $0.14, respectively, compared to the linked quarter ended Dec. 31, 2024. On a non-GAAP basis, core net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, which excludes certain income and expenses, was $19.3 million or $0.65 per diluted common share, a decrease of $0.2 million and $0.01, from the linked quarter.

“We are excited to start the year off with solid earnings,” said Jude Melville, chairman, president and CEO of Business First Bancshares. “We increased our capital, our reserves, and our per share tangible book value at healthy rates, while demonstrating diversity of our revenue streams and growth of margins in our core spread business. We are also proud of our less tangible development, continuing to integrate our latest acquisition and implementing a number of technological initiatives including preparation for our core conversion in the second quarter, investments that will enable us to provide high quality and more efficient service for our client base into the future.”

On Thursday, April 24, 2025, Business First’s board of directors declared a quarterly preferred dividend in the amount of $18.75 per share, which is the full quarterly dividend of 1.875% based on the per annum rate of 7.50%. Additionally, the board of directors declared a quarterly common dividend based upon financial performance for the first quarter in the amount of $0.14 per share of common stock. The preferred and common dividends will be paid on May 31, 2025, or as soon thereafter as practicable, to the shareholders of record as of May 15, 2025.

Quarterly Highlights

Solid Core Performance. Return to common shareholders on average assets, on an annualized basis, was 1.00% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, or 1.01% on a non-GAAP basis, compared to 0.78% or 1.00% on a non-GAAP basis for the linked quarter.

Net Interest Margin (NIM) Expansion. Net interest income totaled $66.0 million and net interest margin and net interest spread were 3.68% and 2.91%, respectively, compared to $65.7 million, 3.61% and 2.77% for the linked quarter. Non-GAAP net interest margin and net interest spread (excluding loan discount accretion of $0.8 million) were 3.64% and 2.86% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to 3.56% and 2.72% (excluding loan discount accretion of $1.0 million) for the linked quarter. The increases of 8 basis points (bps) and 14 bps were driven by a reduction in Business First’s overall cost of funding.

Noninterest Income Investments. Various noninterest income channels produced solid aggregate returns. Loan sales, mostly attributable to Small Business Administration (SBA) loans, produced income of $1.3 million, an increase of $1.0 million when compared to the linked quarter, along with continued consistent performance in the swap business with revenue of $739,000. Appreciation and income from our equity investments also produced income of $751,000 for the quarter.

Capital Growth. Common equity to total assets increased from 9.26% to 9.69% compared to the linked quarter. Tangible common equity to tangible assets increased from 7.63% to 8.06%, 5.64% or 22.89% annualized, compared to the linked quarter. The increase was largely driven by quarterly earnings, which accounted for approximately 69.9%, or 32 bps. On a non-GAAP basis, tangible book value per common share increased from $19.92 at Dec. 31, 2024, to $20.84 at March 31, 2025, 4.62% or 18.73% annualized.

Statement of Financial Condition

Loans

Loans held for investment were flat compared to the linked quarter with a decrease of $480,000 or .01%, .03% annualized. Real estate construction loans decreased $36.8 million from the linked quarter, compared to an increase of $49.8 million from the linked quarter in real estate residential loans, largely due to the conversion of multi- family construction to permanent financing. Based on unpaid principal balances, Texas- based loans represented approximately 41% of the overall loan portfolio as of March 31, 2025, no change from the linked quarter.

Credit Quality

Credit quality metrics regressed with isolated credit migration occurring during the quarter. The ratio of nonperforming loans compared to loans held for investment increased 27 bps to 0.69% at March 31, 2025, while the ratio of nonperforming assets compared to total assets increased 16 bps to 0.55% compared to the linked quarter.

The increase in loans past due 90 days and accruing is attributable to a single $4.6 million relationship. The increase in nonaccrual loans is largely attributable to two relationships with outstanding balances of $8.4 million for which Business First reserved a total of $2.3 million during the quarter.

Securities

The securities portfolio increased $27.0 million, or 3.02%, from the linked quarter, impacted by $12.9 million in positive fair value adjustments and the remainder of the increase was primarily attributed to purchases of mortgage-backed securities. The securities portfolio, based on estimated fair value, represented 11.83% of total assets as of March 31, 2025.

Deposits

Deposits decreased $53.1 million or 0.82%, 3.31% annualized, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to the linked quarter. Noninterest bearing deposits decreased $48.7 million, with the decline driven primarily by customer withdrawals as opposed to full account closures. New account openings continued in the quarter led by our Houston, Dallas, and Southwest Louisiana regions. Business First generated approximately $379.9 million from new deposit accounts during the quarter.

Borrowings

Borrowings decreased $49.2 million or 10.17%, from the linked quarter due primarily to a reduction in short-term Federal Home Loan Bank advances and a $7.0 million redemption of subordinated debt by Business First.

Shareholders’ Equity

Shareholders’ equity increased $26.8 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2025. Accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) increased $10.1 million or 16.12%, during the quarter due to positive after-tax fair value adjustments in the securities portfolio. Book value per common share increased to $25.51 at March 31, 2025, compared to $24.62 at Dec. 31, 2024 due to strong earnings and positive fair value adjustments attributable to the securities portfolio. On a non-GAAP basis, tangible book value per common share increased from $19.92 at Dec. 31, 2024, to $20.84 at March 31, 2025, 4.62% or 18.73% annualized.

Results of Operations

Net Interest Income

For the quarter ended March 31, 2025, net interest income totaled $66.0 million, compared to $65.7 million from the linked quarter. Loan and interest-earning asset yields of 6.99% and 6.35%, decreased 6 and 3 bps, respectively, compared to 7.05% and 6.38% from the linked quarter. However, net interest margin and net interest spread were 3.68% and 2.91% compared to 3.61% and 2.77% for the linked quarter. The overall cost of funds, which included noninterest-bearing deposits, declined 11 bps from 2.93% from the linked quarter to 2.82% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, through continued management of deposit costs.

Non-GAAP net interest income (excluding loan discount accretion of $0.8 million) totaled $65.2 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $64.7 million (excluding loan discount accretion of $1.0 million) for the linked quarter. Non-GAAP net interest margin and net interest spread (excluding loan discount accretion of $0.8 million) were 3.64% and 2.86%, respectively, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to 3.56% and 2.72% (excluding loan discount accretion of $1.0 million) for the linked quarter. Excluding loan discount accretion, loan yields decreased 4 bps to 6.94% from 6.98%, and interest earnings asset yields decreased 3 bps to 6.30% from 6.33%, compared to the linked quarter.

Provision for Credit Losses

During the quarter ended March 31, 2025, Business First recorded a provision for credit losses of $2.8 million, compared to $6.7 million from the linked quarter. The linked quarter’s reserve was primarily associated with the Oakwood acquisition on October 1, 2024. The current quarter’s reserve was largely associated with $2.3 million in additional individual reserves for two commercial lending relationships, resulting in a 30.7% coverage ratio of their remaining book balances as of March 31, 2025.

Other Income

For the quarter ended March 31, 2025, other income increased $1.4 million or 11.55%, compared to the linked quarter. The net increase was largely attributable to a $1.0 million increase in gain on sales of loans, attributable to SBA sales, a $630,000 gain on extinguishment of debt related to an early redemption of $7.0 million in subordinated debt, and a $565,000 increase in pass-through income on equity investments, offset by a $549,000 reduction in swap fee income.

Other Expenses

For the quarter ended March 31, 2025, other expenses increased by $1.0 million or 2.03%, compared to the linked quarter. The increase was largely attributable to a $1.4 million increase in salaries and benefits, of which $430,000 were associated with acquisition-related expenses attributable to retention, severance, and stay payments, and the remainder largely associated with merit increases and annual reset in FICA taxes and bonus accruals.

Return on Assets and Common Equity

Return to common shareholders on average assets and common equity, each on an annualized basis, were 1.00% and 10.48% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to 0.78% and 8.23%, respectively, for the linked quarter. Non-GAAP return to common shareholders on average assets and common equity, each on an annualized basis, were 1.01% and 10.53% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to 1.00% and 10.58%, for the linked quarter.

Conference Call and Webcast

Executive management will host a conference call and webcast to discuss results on Thursday, April 24, 2025, at 4:00 p.m. Central Time. Interested parties may attend the call by dialing toll-free 1-800-715-9871 (North America only), conference ID 8825623, or asking for the Business First Bancshares conference call. The live webcast can be found at https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/ziae6qsd. On the day of the presentation, the corresponding slide presentation will be available to view on the b1BANK website at https://www.b1bank.com/shareholder-info.

About Business First Bancshares, Inc.

Business First Bancshares, Inc., (Nasdaq: BFST) through its banking subsidiary b1BANK, has $7.8 billion in assets, $7.1 billion in assets under management through b1BANK’s affiliate Smith Shellnut Wilson, LLC (SSW) (excludes $0.9 billion of b1BANK assets managed by SSW) and operates Banking Centers and Loan Production Offices in markets across Louisiana and Texas providing commercial and personal banking products and services. b1BANK is a 2024 Mastercard “Innovation Award” winner and multiyear winner of American Banker Magazine’s “Best Banks to Work For.” Visit b1BANK.com for more information.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

This press release includes certain non-GAAP financial measures (e.g., referenced as “core” or “tangible”) intended to supplement, not substitute for, comparable GAAP measures. “Core” measures typically adjust income available to common shareholders for certain significant activities or transactions that, in management’s opinion, can distort period-to-period comparisons of Business First’s performance. Transactions that are typically excluded from non-GAAP “core” measures include realized and unrealized gains/losses on former bank premises and equipment, investment sales, acquisition- related expenses (including, but not limited to, legal costs, system conversion costs, severance and retention payments, etc.). “Tangible” measures adjust common equity by subtracting goodwill, core deposit intangibles, and customer intangibles, net of accumulated amortization. Management believes presentations of these non-GAAP financial measures provide useful supplemental information that is essential to a proper understanding of the operating results of Business First’s core business. These non- GAAP disclosures are not necessarily comparable to non-GAAP measures that may be presented by other companies. Reconciliations of non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP financial measures are provided at the end of the tables below.

Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements contained in this release may not be based on historical facts and are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These forward-looking statements may be identified by their reference to a future period or periods or by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” “may,” “might,” “will,” “would,” “could,” or “intend.” We caution you not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements contained in this news release, in that actual results could differ materially from those indicated in such forward-looking statements as a result of a variety of factors, including those factors specified in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and other public filings. We undertake no obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that occur after the date of this news release.

Additional Information

For additional information about Business First, you may obtain Business First’s reports that are filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) free of charge by using the SEC’s EDGAR service on the SEC’s website at www.SEC.gov or by contacting the SEC for further information at 1-800-SEC-0330. Alternatively, these documents can be obtained free of charge from Business First by directing a request to: Business First Bancshares, Inc., 500 Laurel Street, Suite 101, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70801, Attention: Corporate Secretary.

No Offer or Solicitation

This release does not constitute or form part of any offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to purchase, any securities of Business First. There will be no sale of securities in any jurisdiction in which such an offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of such jurisdiction.

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)
	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)		2025			2024			2024

Balance Sheet Ratios

Loans (HFI) to Deposits		92.61	%		91.86	%		91.32	%
Shareholders’ Equity to Assets Ratio		10.61	%		10.18	%		9.69	%

Loans Receivable Held for Investment (HFI)

Commercial	$	1,862,176		$	1,868,675		$	1,426,957
Real Estate:
Commercial		2,472,121			2,483,223			2,215,889
Construction		633,698			670,502			662,013
Residential		934,357			884,533			717,007
Total Real Estate		4,040,176			4,038,258			3,594,909
Consumer and Other		78,567			74,466			66,973
Total Loans (Held for Investment)	$	5,980,919		$	5,981,399		$	5,088,839

Allowance for Loan Losses

Balance, Beginning of Period	$	54,840		$	42,154		$	40,414
Oakwood – PCD ALLL		–			8,410			–
Charge-offs – Quarterly		(1,648	)		(2,290	)		(533	)
Recoveries – Quarterly		671			654			141
Provision for Loan Losses – Quarterly		3,000			5,912			1,143
Balance, End of Period	$	56,863		$	54,840		$	41,165

Allowance for Loan Losses to Total Loans (HFI)		0.95	%		0.92	%		0.81	%
Allowance for Credit Losses to Total Loans (HFI) (1)		1.01	%		0.98	%		0.88	%
Net Charge-offs (Recoveries) to Average Quarterly Total Loans		0.02	%		0.03	%		0.01	%

Remaining Loan Purchase Discount	$	11,322		$	12,121		$	11,411

Nonperforming Assets

Nonperforming Loans:
Nonaccrual Loans	$	35,915		$	24,147		$	20,778
Loans Past Due 90 Days or More		5,635			860			855
Total Nonperforming Loans		41,550			25,007			21,633
Other Nonperforming Assets:
Other Real Estate Owned		1,282			5,529			1,339
Other Nonperforming Assets		–			–			–
Total Other Nonperforming Assets		1,282			5,529			1,339
Total Nonperforming Assets	$	42,832		$	30,536		$	22,972

Nonperforming Loans to Total Loans (HFI)		0.69	%		0.42	%		0.43	%
Nonperforming Assets to Total Assets		0.55	%		0.39	%		0.34	%

(1) Allowance for Credit Losses includes the Allowance for Loan Loss and Reserve for Unfunded Commitments.

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)		2025			2024			2024

Per Share Data

Basic Earnings per Common Share	$	0.65		$	0.52		$	0.49
Diluted Earnings per Common Share		0.65			0.51			0.48
Dividends per Common Share		0.14			0.14			0.14
Book Value per Common Share		25.51			24.62			22.64


Average Common Shares Outstanding		29,329,668			29,311,111			25,127,187
Average Diluted Common Shares Outstanding		29,545,921			29,520,781			25,429,194
End of Period Common Shares Outstanding		29,572,297			29,552,358			25,485,383


Annualized Performance Ratios

Return to Common Shareholders on Average Assets (1)		1.00	%		0.78	%		0.74	%
Return to Common Shareholders on Average Common Equity (1)		10.48	%		8.23	%		8.51	%
Net Interest Margin (1)		3.68	%		3.61	%		3.32	%
Net Interest Spread (1)		2.91	%		2.77	%		2.36	%
Efficiency Ratio (2)		63.85	%		63.91	%		69.80	%

Total Quarterly/Year-to-Date Average Assets	$	7,750,982		$	7,721,338		$	6,667,527
Total Quarterly/Year-to-Date Average Common Equity		742,930			731,820			577,643

Other Expenses

Salaries and Employee Benefits	$	29,497		$	28,101		$	25,416
Occupancy and Bank Premises		3,401			3,166			2,514
Depreciation and Amortization		2,152			2,278			1,676
Data Processing		3,236			3,856			2,579
FDIC Assessment Fees		1,184			1,009			828
Legal and Other Professional Fees		1,013			975			866
Advertising and Promotions		1,291			1,710			1,145
Utilities and Communications		733			775			674
Ad Valorem Shares Tax		1,125			1,357			900
Directors’ Fees		279			290			282
Other Real Estate Owned Expenses and Write-Downs		23			182			37
Merger and Conversion-Related Expenses		250			168			340
Other		6,394			5,703			5,265
Total Other Expenses	$	50,578		$	49,570		$	42,522

Other Income

Service Charges on Deposit Accounts	$	2,860		$	2,878		$	2,439
Gain (Loss) on Sales of Securities		(1	)		21			(1	)
Debit Card and ATM Fee Income		1,858			2,069			1,776
Bank-Owned Life Insurance Income		808			990			579
Gain on Sales of Loans		1,256			252			139
Mortgage Origination Income		110			36			69
Fees and Brokerage Commission		2,148			2,063			1,937
Gain (Loss) on Sales of Other Real Estate Owned		(268	)		40			63
Loss on Disposal of Other Assets		155			–			–
Gain on Extinguishment of Debt		630			–			–
Swap Fee Income		739			1,288			229
Pass-Through Income (Loss) from Other Investments		751			186			294
Other		2,180			2,034			1,862
Total Other Income	$	13,226		$	11,857		$	9,386


(1) Average outstanding balances are determined utilizing daily averages and average yield/rate is calculated utilizing an actual day count convention.
(2) Noninterest expense (excluding provision for loan losses) divided by noninterest income plus net interest income less gain/loss on sales of securities.

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)		2025			2024			2024

Assets

Cash and Due From Banks	$	312,887		$	319,098		$	185,906
Federal Funds Sold		117,422			197,669			211,292
Securities Purchased under Agreements to Resell		50,589			50,835			–
Securities Available for Sale, at Fair Values		920,573			893,549			872,903
Mortgage Loans Held for Sale		–			717			77
Loans and Lease Receivable		5,980,919			5,981,399			5,088,839
Allowance for Loan Losses		(56,863	)		(54,840	)		(41,165	)
Net Loans and Lease Receivable		5,924,056			5,926,559			5,047,674
Premises and Equipment, Net		81,582			81,953			68,716
Accrued Interest Receivable		33,741			35,872			29,326
Other Equity Securities		40,947			41,100			34,940
Other Real Estate Owned		1,282			5,529			1,339
Cash Value of Life Insurance		117,950			117,645			100,056
Deferred Taxes, Net		25,289			29,591			26,800
Goodwill		121,691			121,572			91,527
Core Deposit and Customer Intangibles		16,538			17,252			11,372
Other Assets		20,181			18,149			13,630

Total Assets	$	7,784,728		$	7,857,090		$	6,695,558

Liabilities

Deposits
Noninterest-Bearing	$	1,308,312		$	1,357,045		$	1,295,050
Interest-Bearing		5,149,869			5,154,286			4,277,700
Total Deposits		6,458,181			6,511,331			5,572,750

Securities Sold Under Agreements to Repurchase		19,046			22,621			17,207
Federal Home Loan Bank Borrowings		317,352			355,875			308,206
Subordinated Debt		92,702			99,760			99,933
Subordinated Debt – Trust Preferred Securities		5,000			5,000			5,000
Accrued Interest Payable		5,356			5,969			3,930
Other Liabilities		60,779			57,068			39,498

Total Liabilities		6,958,416			7,057,624			6,046,524

Shareholders’ Equity

Preferred Stock		71,930			71,930			71,930
Common Stock		29,572			29,552			25,485
Additional Paid-In Capital		501,609			500,024			398,511
Retained Earnings		276,045			260,958			224,742
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss		(52,844	)		(62,998	)		(71,634	)

Total Shareholders’ Equity		826,312			799,466			649,034

Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity	$	7,784,728		$	7,857,090		$	6,695,558

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Income
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,		March 31,
(Dollars in thousands)		2025			2024		2024

Interest Income:
Interest and Fees on Loans	$	102,992		$	104,697	$	85,947
Interest and Dividends on Securities		7,265			7,310		5,599
Interest on Federal Funds Sold and Due From Banks		3,436			4,135		4,465
Total Interest Income		113,693			116,142		96,011

Interest Expense:
Interest on Deposits		42,439			44,862		38,029
Interest on Borrowings		5,271			5,551		6,451
Total Interest Expense		47,710			50,413		44,480

Net Interest Income		65,983			65,729		51,531

Provision for Credit Losses		2,812			6,712		1,186

Net Interest Income After Provision for Credit Losses		63,171			59,017		50,345

Other Income:
Service Charges on Deposit Accounts		2,860			2,878		2,439
(Loss) Gain on Sales of Securities		(1	)		21		(1	)
Gain on Sales of Loans		1,256			252		139
Other Income		9,111			8,706		6,809
Total Other Income		13,226			11,857		9,386

Other Expenses:
Salaries and Employee Benefits		29,497			28,101		25,416
Occupancy and Equipment Expense		7,356			7,087		5,357
Merger and Conversion-Related Expense		250			168		340
Other Expenses		13,475			14,214		11,409
Total Other Expenses		50,578			49,570		42,522

Income Before Income Taxes		25,819			21,304		17,209

Provision for Income Taxes		5,276			4,816		3,639

Net Income		20,543			16,488		13,570

Preferred Stock Dividends		1,350			1,350		1,350

Net Income Available to Common Shareholders	$	19,193		$	15,138	$	12,220

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Consolidated Net Interest Margin
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31, 2025								December 31, 2024								March 31, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)	Average Outstanding Balance			Interest Earned/ Interest Paid		Average Yield/ Rate			Average Outstanding Balance			Interest Earned/ Interest Paid		Average Yield/ Rate			Average Outstanding Balance			Interest Earned/ Interest Paid		Average Yield/ Rate

Assets

Interest-Earning Assets:
Total Loans	$	5,972,120		$	102,992		6.99	%	$	5,911,183		$	104,697		7.05	%	$	5,026,937		$	85,947		6.88	%
Securities		924,693			6,614		2.90	%		936,314			6,707		2.85	%		888,933			5,599		2.53	%
Securities Purchased under Agreements to Resell		50,836			651		5.19	%		44,252			603		5.42	%		–			–		0.00	%
Interest-Bearing Deposit in Other Banks		315,750			3,436		4.41	%		346,035			4,135		4.75	%		330,260			4,465		5.44	%
Total Interest-Earning Assets		7,263,399			113,693		6.35	%		7,237,784			116,142		6.38	%		6,246,130			96,011		6.18	%
Allowance for Loan Losses		(54,711	)			.				(52,130	)							(40,526	)
Noninterest-Earning Assets		542,294								535,684								461,923
Total Assets	$	7,750,982		$	113,693				$	7,721,338		$	116,142				$	6,667,527		$	96,011


Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity

Interest-Bearing Liabilities:
Interest-Bearing Deposits	$	5,141,498		$	42,439		3.35	%	$	5,053,759		$	44,862		3.53	%	$	4,072,600		$	38,029		3.76	%
Subordinated Debt		97,251			1,262		5.26	%		99,797			1,331		5.31	%		99,972			1,356		5.46	%
Subordinated Debt – Trust Preferred Securities		5,000			99		8.03	%		5,000			107		8.51	%		5,000			113		9.09	%
Bank Term Funding Program		–			–		0.00	%		–			–		0.00	%		260,440			2,788		4.31	%
Advances from Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB)		362,092			3,796		4.25	%		373,236			3,975		4.24	%		223,501			2,094		3.77	%
Other Borrowings		18,321			114		2.52	%		21,569			138		2.55	%		16,116			100		2.50	%
Total Interest-Bearing Liabilities		5,624,162			47,710		3.44	%		5,553,361			50,413		3.61	%		4,677,629			44,480		3.82	%

Noninterest-Bearing Liabilities:
Noninterest-Bearing Deposits		1,244,793							$	1,292,623							$	1,282,815
Other Liabilities		67,167								71,604								57,510
Total Noninterest-Bearing Liabilities		1,311,960								1,364,227								1,340,325
Shareholders’ Equity:
Common Shareholders’ Equity		742,930								731,820								577,643
Preferred Equity		71,930								71,930								71,930
Total Shareholders’ Equity		814,860								803,750								649,573
Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity	$	7,750,982							$	7,721,338							$	6,667,527

Net Interest Spread							2.91	%							2.77	%							2.36	%
Net Interest Income				$	65,983							$	65,729							$	51,531
Net Interest Margin							3.68	%							3.61	%							3.32	%
Overall Cost of Funds							2.82	%							2.93	%							3.00	%

NOTE: Average outstanding balances are determined utilizing daily averages and average yield/rate is calculated utilizing an Actual/365/366 day count convention.

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Measures
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)		2025			2024			2024

Interest Income:
Interest income	$	113,693		$	116,142		$	96,011
Core interest income		113,693			116,142			96,011
Interest Expense:
Interest expense		47,710			50,413			44,480
Core interest expense		47,710			50,413			44,480
Provision for Credit Losses: (b)
Provision for credit losses		2,812			6,712			1,186
CECL Oakwood impact (3)		–			(4,824	)		–
Core provision expense		2,812			1,888			1,186

Other Income:
Other income		13,226			11,857			9,386
Gain on former bank premises and equipment		(155	)		–			(50	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities		1			(21	)		1
Gain on extinguishment of debt		(630	)		–			–
Core other income		12,442			11,836			9,337

Other Expense:
Other expense		50,578			49,570			42,522
Acquisition-related expenses (2)		(679	)		(168	)		(715	)
Core conversion expenses		(216	)		(463	)		–
Core other expense		49,683			48,939			41,807

Pre-Tax Income: (a)
Pre-tax income		25,819			21,304			17,209
CECL Oakwood impact (3)		–			4,824			–
Gain on former bank premises and equipment		(155	)		–			(50	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities		1			(21	)		1
Gain on extinguishment of debt		(630	)		–			–
Acquisition-related expenses (2)		679			168			715
Core conversion expenses		216			463			–
Core pre-tax income		25,930			26,738			17,875

Provision for Income Taxes: (1)
Provision for income taxes		5,276			4,816			3,639
Tax on CECL Oakwood impact (3)		–			1,019			–
Tax on gain on former bank premises and equipment		(33	)		–			(11	)
Tax on loss (gain) on sale of securities		0			(4	)		–
Tax on gain on extinguishment of debt		(133	)		–			–
Tax on acquisition-related expenses (2)		143			6			89
Tax on core conversion expenses		46			97			–
Core provision for income taxes		5,299			5,934			3,717

Preferred Dividends:
Preferred dividends		1,350			1,350			1,350
Core preferred dividends		1,350			1,350			1,350

Net Income Available to Common Shareholders:
Net income available to common shareholders		19,193			15,138			12,220
CECL Oakwood impact (3), net of tax		–			3,805			–
Gain on former bank premises and equipment, net of tax		(122	)		–			(39	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities, net of tax		1			(17	)		1
Gain on extinguishment of debt, net of tax		(497	)		–			–
Acquisition-related expenses (2), net of tax		536			162			626
Core conversion expenses, net of tax		170			366			–
Core net income available to common shareholders	$	19,281		$	19,454		$	12,808

Pre-tax, pre-provision earnings available to common shareholders (a+b)	$	28,631		$	28,016		$	18,395
CECL Oakwood impact (3)		–			4,824			–
Gain on former bank premises and equipment		(155	)		–			(50	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities		1			(21	)		1
Gain on extinguishment of debt		(630	)		–			–
Acquisition-related expenses (2)		679			168			715
Core conversion expenses		216			463			–
Core pre-tax, pre-provision earnings	$	28,742		$	33,450		$	19,061

Average Diluted Common Shares Outstanding		29,545,921			29,520,781			25,429,194

Diluted Earnings Per Common Share:
Diluted earnings per common share	$	0.65		$	0.51		$	0.48
CECL Oakwood impact (3), net of tax		–			0.13			–
Gain on former bank premises and equipment, net of tax		–			–			(0.00	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities, net of tax		0.00			(0.00	)		–
Gain on extinguishment of debt, net of tax		(0.02	)		–			–
Acquisition-related expenses (2), net of tax		0.02			0.01			0.02
Core conversion expenses, net of tax		–			0.01			–
Core diluted earnings per common share	$	0.65		$	0.66		$	0.50

Pre-tax, pre-provision profit diluted earnings per common share	$	0.97		$	0.95		$	0.72
CECL Oakwood impact (3)		–			0.16			–
Gain on former bank premises and equipment		(0.01	)		–			(0.00	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities		0.00			(0.00	)		–
Gain on extinguishment of debt		(0.02	)		–			–
Acquisition-related expenses (2)		0.02			0.01			0.03
Core conversion expenses		0.01			0.02			–
Core pre-tax, pre-provision diluted earnings per common share	$	0.97		$	1.14		$	0.75

(1) Tax rates, exclusive of certain nondeductible merger-related expenses and goodwill, utilized were 21.129% for 2025 and 2024. These rates approximated the marginal tax rates.
(2) Includes merger and conversion-related expenses and salary and employee benefits.
(3) CECL non-purchased credit deteriorated (PCD) provision/unfunded commitment expense attributable to Oakwood.

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Measures
(Unaudited)


	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)		2025			2024			2023

Total Shareholders’ (Common) Equity:
Total shareholders’ equity	$	826,312		$	799,466		$	649,034
Preferred stock		(71,930	)		(71,930	)		(71,930	)
Total common shareholders’ equity		754,382			727,536			577,104
Goodwill		(121,691	)		(121,572	)		(91,527	)
Core deposit and customer intangible		(16,538	)		(17,252	)		(11,372	)
Total tangible common equity	$	616,153		$	588,712		$	474,205


Total Assets:
Total assets	$	7,784,728		$	7,857,090		$	6,695,558
Goodwill		(121,691	)		(121,572	)		(91,527	)
Core deposit and customer intangible		(16,538	)		(17,252	)		(11,372	)
Total tangible assets	$	7,646,499		$	7,718,266		$	6,592,659

Common shares outstanding		29,572,297			29,552,358			25,485,383

Book value per common share	$	25.51		$	24.62		$	22.64
Tangible book value per common share	$	20.84		$	19.92		$	18.61
Common equity to total assets		9.69	%		9.26	%		8.62	%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets		8.06	%		7.63	%		7.19	%

Business First Bancshares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Measures
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)		2025			2024			2024


Total Quarterly Average Assets	$	7,750,982		$	7,721,338		$	6,667,527
Total Quarterly Average Common Equity	$	742,930		$	731,820		$	577,643

Net Income Available to Common Shareholders:
Net income available to common shareholders	$	19,193		$	15,138		$	12,220
CECL Oakwood impact (3), net of tax		–			3,805			–
Gain on former bank premises and equipment, net of tax		(122	)		–			(39	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities, net of tax		1			(17	)		1
Gain on extinguishment of debt, net of tax		(497	)		–			–
Acquisition-related expenses, net of tax		536			162			626
Core conversion expenses, net of tax		170			366			–
Core net income available to common shareholders	$	19,281		$	19,455		$	12,808

Return to common shareholders on average assets (annualized) (2)		1.00	%		0.78	%		0.74	%
Core return on average assets (annualized) (2)		1.01	%		1.00	%		0.77	%
Return to common shareholders on average common equity (annualized) (2)		10.48	%		8.23	%		8.51	%
Core return on average common equity (annualized) (2)		10.53	%		10.58	%		8.92	%

Interest Income:
Interest income	$	113,693		$	116,142		$	96,011
Core interest income		113,693			116,142			96,011
Interest Expense:
Interest expense		47,710			50,413			44,480
Core interest expense		47,710			50,413			44,480
Other Income:
Other income		13,226			11,857			9,386
Gain on former bank premises and equipment		(155	)		–			(50	)
Loss (gain) on sale of securities		1			(21	)		1
Gain on extinguishment of debt		(630	)		–			–
Core other income		12,442			11,836			9,337
Other Expense:
Other expense		50,578			49,570			42,522
Acquisition-related expenses		(679	)		(168	)		(715	)
Core conversion expenses		(216	)		(463	)		–
Core other expense	$	49,683		$	48,939		$	41,807

Efficiency Ratio:
Other expense (a)	$	50,578		$	49,570		$	42,522
Core other expense (c)	$	49,683		$	48,939		$	41,807
Net interest and other income (1) (b)	$	79,210		$	77,565		$	60,918
Core net interest and other income (1) (d)	$	78,425		$	77,565		$	60,868
Efficiency ratio (a/b)		63.85	%		63.91	%		69.80	%
Core efficiency ratio (c/d)		63.35	%		63.09	%		68.68	%

Total Average Interest-Earnings Assets	$	7,263,399		$	7,237,784		$	6,246,130

Net Interest Income:
Net interest income	$	65,983		$	65,729		$	51,531
Loan discount accretion		(793	)		(997	)		(785	)
Net interest income excluding loan discount accretion	$	65,190		$	64,732		$	50,746

Net interest margin (2)		3.68	%		3.61	%		3.32	%
Net interest margin excluding loan discount accretion (2)		3.64	%		3.56	%		3.27	%
Net interest spread (2)		2.91	%		2.77	%		2.36	%
Net interest spread excluding loan discount accretion (2)		2.86	%		2.72	%		2.31	%

(1) Excludes gains/losses on sales of securities.
(2) Calculated utilizing an actual day count convention.
(3) CECL non-PCD provision/unfunded commitment expense attributable to Oakwood.

The MIL Network –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Ottawa Bancorp, Inc. Announces 2025 First Quarter Results and Approval of Stock Repurchase Program

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

OTTAWA, Ill., April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Ottawa Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) (OTCQX: OTTW), the holding company for OSB Community Bank (the “Bank”), announced net income of $0.4 million, or $0.19 per basic and diluted common share, for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to net income of $0.3 million, or $0.10 per basic and diluted common share, for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The loan portfolio, net of allowance, decreased to $295.1 million as of March 31, 2025 from $301.7 million as of December 31, 2024 as originations were lower than payments and payoffs. Non-performing loans decreased to $4.1 million at March 31, 2025 from $4.8 million at both December 31, 2024. This was due to the substantial resolution of the multi-loan commercial relationship originally identified as impaired in the third quarter of 2022. Thus, the ratio of non-performing loans to gross loans decreased from 1.58% at December 31, 2024 to 1.36% at March 31, 2025.

“We continued to see improvement in our net interest income and net interest margin during the first quarter as our interest expense continued to decline,” said Craig M. Hepner, President and Chief Executive Officer. “Although we continued to see a reduction in our overall loan portfolio during the quarter, we were able to further reduce our reliance on higher-cost wholesale funding while growing organic deposits and strengthening our liquidity position. Asset quality remains strong, and as noted above, during the first quarter, we were able to resolve a significant portion of the troubled commercial loan relationship identified in 2022 which resulted in a substantial reduction in our classified asset balance at quarter-end.”

Mr. Hepner continued, “I am also very pleased to report that the Board of Directors has approved our seventh stock repurchase plan which authorizes the purchase of 120,996 shares, or 5% of our outstanding common stock. This stock repurchase plan will allow the Company to continue to serve as a source of liquidity to our shareholders and further demonstrates the Board’s commitment to maximizing overall shareholder value.”

Comparison of Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 and March 31, 2024

Net income for the three months ended March 31, 2025 was $0.4 million compared to $0.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. Total interest and dividend income was $4.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 compared to $3.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024 due to an increase in the average yield on interest-earning assets. The yield on interest-earning assets increased by 0.30% to 4.94%. Interest expense remained flat at $1.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and March 31, 2024 as our average cost of funds decreased to 2.18% from 2.19%. Net interest income after provision for credit losses increased by $0.3 million to $2.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 as compared to $2.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. Total other income was $0.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 compared to $0.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. Total other expenses were $2.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 compared to $2.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024.

The multi-loan commercial relationship that was identified in 2022 as being impaired, meaning that it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreements was substantially resolved during the first quarter of 2025. The relationship as of December 31, 2024 had balances of approximately $0.7 million with a specific allocation of $0.2 million. As of March 31, 2025, this relationship has a remaining balance of $0.1 million with no specific allocation. No additional reserves will be required to resolve these impaired loans and we do not anticipate any further losses as we work to resolve the remainder of the relationship.

The Company recorded a recovery of approximately $90 thousand for the three months ended March 31, 2025 to decrease the Allowance for Credit Losses (ACL) position. During the three months ended March 31, 2024, there was a recovery of approximately $37 thousand. The ACL on loans was $4.1 million, or 1.36% of total gross loans, at March 31, 2025 compared to $4.3 million, or 1.40% of gross loans, at March 31, 2024. Net charge-offs during the first quarter of 2025 were approximately $120 thousand compared to net recoveries of $5 thousand during the first quarter of 2024. The current period adjustment to the ACL is the result of the quarterly calculation of Current Expected Credit Losses (CECL). The required reserves on non-performing loans as of March 31, 2025 decreased by $156 thousand from the required reserves as of March 31, 2024.

The Company recorded income tax expense of $0.2 million for the three-month period ended March 31, 2025 as compared to $0.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024 as pre-tax income during the three months ended March 31, 2025 was higher as compared to pre-tax income in the three months ended March 31, 2024.

Comparison of Financial Condition at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024

Total consolidated assets as of March 31, 2025 were $351.7 million, a decrease of $2.0 million, or 0.54%, from $353.7 million at December 31, 2024. The decrease was due primarily to a decrease of $6.6 million in the net loan portfolio, a $0.2 million decrease in loans held for sale, a $0.1 million decrease in furniture, fixtures and equipment, a $0.1 decrease in accrued interest receivable, a decrease of $0.3 million in deferred tax assets and a decrease in other assets of $0.6 million. These decreases were partially offset by an increase of $4.0 million in cash and cash equivalents, a $1.1 million increase in securities available for sale and an increase of $0.9 million in federal fund sold.

Cash and cash equivalents increased $4.0 million, or 31.9%, to $16.5 million at March 31, 2025 from $12.5 million at December 31, 2024. The increase in cash and cash equivalents was primarily the result of cash provided by operating activities of $1.9 and cash provided by investing activities of $5.3 million exceeding cash used in financing activities of $3.2 million.

Securities available for sale increased $1.1 million, or 6.7%, to $17.9 million at December 31, 2025 from $16.8 million at December 31, 2024 as a result of purchases and market value fluctuations during the first three months ended March 31, 2025 exceeding calls, payments and maturities.

Net loans decreased $6.6 million, or 2.2%, to $295.1 million at March 31, 2025 compared to $301.7 million at December 31, 2024 primarily due to a decrease of $3.7 million in one-to-four family loans, a decrease of $5.5 million in multi-family loans and a decrease of $0.5 million in consumer loans. These decreases were partially offset by an increase of $2.9 million in non-residential real estate loans. The allowance for credit losses on loans decreased by $0.2 million at March 31, 2025.

Total deposits increased $0.4 million, or 0.15%, to $283.2 million at March 31, 2025 from $282.8 million at December 31, 2024. During the three months ended March 31, 2025 non-interest bearing checking increased by $3.4 million, interest bearing checking accounts increased by $3.0 million, money market accounts increased $1.7 million, and savings accounts increased by 0.7 million. Offsetting these increases was an $8.4 million decrease in certificate of deposit account balances.

FHLB advances decreased $3.3 million, or 14.6%, to $19.0 million at March 31, 2025 compared to $22.3 million at December 31, 2024.

Stockholders’ equity remained at $40.2 million at March 31, 2025 as compared to $40.2 million at December 31, 2024. Net income was $0.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025. There were $0.3 million in cash dividends paid during the first quarter and a $0.6 million adjustment to increase the maximum cash obligation related to ESOP shares. In addition, there was a $0.5 million increase in other comprehensive income due to an increase in fair value of securities available for sale during the first quarter.

Approval of Stock Repurchase Program

The Company also announced today that the Company’s Board of Directors has approved a stock repurchase program authorizing the purchase of up to 120,996 shares, or 5%, of the Company’s outstanding common stock. Stock repurchases will be conducted through open market purchases, which will include purchases under a trading plan adopted pursuant to Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b5-1, or through privately negotiated transactions. Repurchases will be made from time to time depending on market conditions and other factors. The Company’s stock repurchase program will terminate upon the completion of the purchase of up to 120,996 shares or April 23, 2026 if not all shares have been purchased by that date.

About Ottawa Bancorp, Inc.

Ottawa Bancorp, Inc. is the holding company for OSB Community Bank which provides various financial services to individual and corporate customers in the United States. The Bank offers various deposit accounts, including checking, money market, regular savings, club savings, certificates of deposit, and various retirement accounts. Its loan portfolio includes one-to-four family residential mortgage, multi-family and non-residential real estate, commercial, and construction loans as well as auto loans and home equity lines of credit. OSB Community Bank was founded in 1871 and is headquartered in Ottawa, Illinois. For more information about the Company and the Bank, please visit www.myosb.bank.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Statements in this release that are not strictly historical are forward-looking and are based upon current expectations that may differ materially from actual results. These forward-looking statements, identified by words such as “will,” “expected,” “believe,” and “prospects,” involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by the statements made herein. These risks and uncertainties involve general economic trends and changes in interest rates, increased competition, changes in consumer demand for financial services, the possibility of unforeseen events affecting the industry generally, the uncertainties associated with newly developed or acquired operations, market disruptions, our ability to pay future dividends and if so at what level, our ability to receive any required regulatory approval or non-objection for the payment of dividends from the Bank to the Company or from the Company to stockholders, and our efforts to maximize stockholder value, including our ability to execute any capital management strategies, such as the repurchase of shares of the Company’s common stock, and our ability to execute any controlled growth and balance sheet strategies designed to lower the cost of funds and enhance earnings and liquidity. Ottawa Bancorp, Inc. undertakes no obligation to release revisions to these forward-looking statements publicly to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unforeseen events, except as required to be reported under applicable law.


Ottawa Bancorp, Inc. & Subsidiary
Consolidated Balance Sheets
March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024
(Unaudited)
	March 31,				December 31,
	2025				2024
Assets
Cash and due from banks	$	14,424,496			$	9,863,824
Interest bearing deposits		2,079,797				2,651,481
Total cash and cash equivalents		16,504,293				12,515,305

Federal funds sold		5,433,000				4,493,000
Securities available-for-sale, at fair value		17,944,899				16,821,297
Loans, net of allowance for credit losses of $4,066,885 and $4,276,409
at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively		295,126,036				301,741,977
Loans held for sale		–				232,000
Premises and equipment, net		5,943,682				6,005,515
Accrued interest receivable		1,970,572				2,108,565
Deferred tax assets, net		2,222,252				2,553,346
Cash surrender value of life insurance		528,202				528,129
Goodwill		649,869				649,869
Other assets		5,425,999				6,002,358
Total assets	$	351,748,804			$	353,651,361

Liabilities and stockholders’ equity
Liabilities
Deposits:
Non-interest bearing	$	26,044,253			$	22,663,274
Interest bearing		257,196,977				260,276,358
Total deposits		283,241,230				282,939,632
Accrued interest payable		598,388				853,122
FHLB advances		19,000,000				22,250,000
Long term debt		1,346,347				1,380,988
Allowance for credit losses on off-balance sheet credit exposures		76,629				79,199
Other liabilities		5,006,107				4,365,113
Total liabilities		309,268,701				311,868,054
Commitments and contingencies
ESOP Repurchase Obligation		2,230,729				1,583,522
Stockholders’ Equity
Common stock, $.01 par value, 12,000,000 shares authorized; 2,419,911 and
2,419,911 shares issued at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively		24,199				24,199
Additional paid-in-capital		22,898,558				22,898,558
Retained earnings		21,676,498				21,503,222
Unallocated ESOP shares		(358,737	)			(358,737		)
Unallocated management recognition plan shares		(59,003	)			(70,193		)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(1,701,412	)			(2,213,742		)
		42,480,103				41,783,307
Less:
ESOP Owned Shares		(2,230,729	)			(1,583,522		)
Total stockholders’ equity		40,249,374				40,199,785
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	351,748,804		$			353,651,361


Ottawa Bancorp, Inc. & Subsidiary
Consolidated Statements of Operations
Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 and 2024
(Unaudited)
	Three Months Ended
	March 31,
	2025			2024
Interest and dividend income:
Interest and fees on loans	$	3,791,161		$	3,702,917
Securities:
Residential mortgage-backed and related securities		103,299			78,672
State and municipal securities		19,027			18,601
Dividends on non-marketable equity securities		28,500			37,715
Interest-bearing deposits		192,522			63,541
Total interest and dividend income		4,134,509			3,901,446
Interest expense:
Deposits		1,518,972			1,520,888
Borrowings		169,420			218,041
Total interest expense		1,688,392			1,738,929
Net interest income		2,446,117			2,162,517
Recovery of credit losses – loans		(89,898	)		(37,143	)
Recovery of credit losses – off-balance sheet credit exposures		(2,570	)		(12,709	)
Net interest income after recovery of credit losses		2,538,585			2,212,369
Other income:
Gain on sale of loans		21,239			18,610
Loan origination and servicing income		126,894			132,826
Net Origination (amortization) of mortgage servicing rights		(37,808	)		(23,174	)
Customer service fees		113,760			105,125
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance		74			12,547
Other		–			6,929
Total other income		224,159			252,863
Other expenses:
Salaries and employee benefits		1,207,957			1,181,559
Directors’ fees		45,000			40,000
Occupancy		160,128			157,021
Deposit insurance premium		45,000			41,800
Legal and professional services		82,844			118,047
Data processing		301,461			321,927
Loan expense		63,529			64,452
Other		244,326			184,199
Total other expenses		2,150,245			2,109 005
Income before income tax		612,499			356,227
Income tax expense		176,977			90,602
Net income	$	435,522		$	265,625
Basic earnings per share	$	0.19		$	0.10
Diluted earnings per share	$	0.19		$	0.10
Dividends per share	$	0.11		$	0.11


Ottawa Bancorp, Inc. & Subsidiary
Selected Financial Data and Ratios
(Unaudited)

	At or for the
	Three Months Ended
	March 31,
	2025		2024
Performance Ratios:
Return on average assets (5)	0.49	%	0.30	%
Return on average stockholders’ equity (5)	4.34		2.54
Average stockholders’ equity to average assets	11.36		11.70
Stockholders’ equity to total assets at end of period	11.44		11.61
Net interest rate spread (1) (5)	2.76		2.45
Net interest margin (2) (5)	2.93		2.63
Other expense to average assets	0.61		0.59
Efficiency ratio (3)	80.49		87.33
Dividend payout ratio	61.50		106.19

	At or for the			At or for the
	Three Months Ended			Twelve Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,
	2025			2024
	(unaudited)
Regulatory Capital Ratios (4):
Total risk-based capital (to risk-weighted assets)		17.51	%		18.17	%
Tier 1 core capital (to risk-weighted assets)		16.26			16.92
Common equity Tier 1 (to risk-weighted assets)		16.26			16.92
Tier 1 leverage (to adjusted total assets)		11.47			12.06
Asset Quality Ratios:
Net charge-offs to average gross loans outstanding		0.04			0.01
Allowance for credit losses on loans to gross loans outstanding		1.36			1.41
Non-performing loans to gross loans (6)		1.36			1.58
Non-performing assets to total assets (6)		1.16			1.37
Other Data:
Book Value per common share	$	16.63		$	16.61
Tangible Book Value per common share (7)	$	16.36		$	16.34
Number of full-service offices		3			3

(1) Represents the difference between the weighted average yield on average interest-earning assets and the weighted average cost of funds on average interest-bearing liabilities.
(2) Represents net interest income as a percent of average interest-earning assets.
(3) Represents total other expenses divided by the sum of net interest income and total other income.
(4) Ratios are for OSB Community Bank.
(5) Annualized.
(6) Non-performing assets consist of non-performing loans, foreclosed real estate and other foreclosed assets. Non-performing loans consist of all loans 90 days or more past due and all loans no longer accruing interest.
(7) Non-GAAP measure. Excludes goodwill and core deposit intangible.

Contact:
Craig Hepner
President and Chief Executive Officer
(815) 366-5437

The MIL Network –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Planning strategy faces revision after inspector review 24 April 2025 Isle of Wight’s planning strategy faces revision after inspector review

Source: Aisle of Wight

Planning inspectors have reviewed the Island Planning Strategy (IPS) and shared their initial views.

In a letter to the Isle of Wight Council, they agreed with planning officers that there was not a strong enough reason to lower annual housing targets by claiming ‘exceptional circumstances.’

However, they did not support the proposal to build 453 new homes per year as outlined in the plan, and, instead, effectively offered two alternative options to address their concerns:

Bring forward a short term (1-5 years) IPS with an annual housing target of 703, identifying additional land or sites.
Withdraw the plan from the examination process and start work on a new local plan using the current standard method of 1,100 dwellings per year.

Full Council will consider the options at an extraordinary meeting next month.

He said: “We understand the urgency and importance of addressing these housing figures.

“The council is committed to finding a solution that meets the needs of our community while adhering to the inspectors’ recommendations.

“We recognise the pressing need to resolve these housing issues. Our goal is to find a viable solution that balances the Island’s housing needs with regulatory requirements, ensuring sustainable development and meeting the growing demand and need for housing on the Isle of Wight.”

The IPS, which aims to guide future development on the Island, has recently undergone extensive review and consultation.

The council submitted the IPS to the government’s independent Planning Inspectorate after a Regulation 19 consultation in August 2024, during which more than 700 comments were reviewed.

Inspectors said most policies in the IPS were acceptable or could be made acceptable with minor adjustments.

They found no reasons to remove any proposed housing or employment sites and identified no procedural or legal compliance issues.

However, the inspectors did not agree with the council’s proposals to implement net zero requirements ahead of them becoming national policy.

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Secretary Chavez-DeRemer praises President Trump’s executive order aimed at expanding apprenticeships, modernizing workforce development

Source: US Department of Labor

WASHINGTON – U.S. Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer this evening attended the signing of President Trump’s Executive Order “Preparing Americans for High-Paying, Skilled Trade Jobs of the Future.” The directive calls on the U.S. Department of Labor, Department of Commerce, and Department of Education to “unlock the limitless potential of the American worker” by working toward strengthening Registered Apprenticeships, modernizing workforce development programs, and investing in opportunities to upskill workers to meet current labor market demands.

“This decisive action is yet another example of President Trump keeping his promise to American workers, empowering them to fill good-paying, in-demand jobs that will secure our economic comeback,” Secretary Chavez-DeRemer said. “Under President Trump’s leadership, we are renewing the American Dream by revitalizing and reshaping our workforce into a highly skilled powerhouse of potential. I look forward to working with my colleagues to implement this executive order and usher in a new Golden Age of prosperity for all hardworking Americans.”

The President’s executive order puts American workers first by requiring the three departments to:

Review all federal workforce development programs to identify opportunities to modernize current requirements, invest in upskilling workers, develop educational pathways beyond a four-year degree, and reduce burdensome reporting requirements;
Draft a plan to reach one million active apprentices by expanding access for in-demand occupations, providing consistent support, and improving connections between the education system and apprenticeships; and
Increase transparency and accountability in workforce development programs by collecting relevant data.

Learn more about the executive order here.

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: NASA Engineering Sparks Innovative New Battery

Source: NASA

Nickel-hydrogen technology is safe, durable, and long-lasting – now it’s affordable too.

Battery technology that has powered the International Space Station, the Hubble Space Telescope, and numerous satellites is now storing energy on Earth, enabling intermittent renewable energy sources to provide steady power.
These extremely durable batteries were made more affordable for the average consumer by California-based EnerVenue Inc., which was able to bring down the cost of the technology by removing the need for expensive platinum, making terrestrial applications more feasible. With the cost-saving innovations, the batteries could be used for power plants, businesses, and homes.
NASA first used nickel-hydrogen batteries in 1990 for the Hubble Space Telescope — the technology’s debut in low-Earth orbit on a major project. It was the primary power system for the International Space Station for more than 18 years before eventually being replaced by lithium-ion batteries.
Each nickel-hydrogen cell consists of a nickel cathode — the positive electrode — and a hydrogen-catalyzed anode, which typically uses expensive platinum. Charging the battery generates hydrogen inside the highly pressurized vessel, which then gets reabsorbed on discharge.
Dr. Yi Cui , EnerVenue Chief Technology Advisor, developed a technique to remove platinum from these batteries, dramatically reducing costs of technology that had grown more sophisticated over decades of NASA adapting it to high-level missions. Much of the groundwork for EnerVenue’s batteries was laid by NASA.

Having laid the foundation and tested it in space, NASA paved the way for a durable power source that is now available for several applications on Earth.

MIL OSI USA News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Infringement proceedings against Ireland – E-000739/2025(ASW)

Source: European Parliament

The infringement procedure INFR(2007)4011[1] concerned rules in development plans of the Irish counties favouring applicants who have certain ties to the county concerned.

Such applicants were exceptionally granted the right to apply for a building permit for a house in pre-urban rural areas where in principle construction of houses was not permitted.

The Commission decided to close the case in March 2018.

Member States have a primary responsibility to monitor the application of the relevant legal provisions and to take the necessary steps for enforcement.

In its role as guardian of the Treaties, the Commission remains committed to overview the correct implementation of EU law by Member States.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/atwork/applying-eu-law/infringements-proceedings/infringement_decisions/?langCode=EN&version=v1&typeOfSearch=byDecision&refId=INFR(2007)4011&page=1&size=10&order=desc&sortColumns=decisionDate

Last updated: 24 April 2025

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – Gas supply: MEPs advocate storage refill flexibility to bring down prices

Source: European Parliament

The draft law adopted on Thursday seeks to address speculation on the gas market and bring down prices, by introducing greater flexibility in rules on gas storage refilling.

The Industry, Research and Energy Committee has backed the Commission proposal to extend the EU’s 2022 gas storage scheme until 31 December 2027; it was otherwise set to end in 2025. The provision is designed to ensure security of gas supply ahead of the winter season.

This legislative proposal also provided MEPs with the opportunity to introduce a number of amendments to the existing regulation. These changes are aimed at easing tensions in the gas market partly generated by market anticipations stemming from the scheme’s compulsory target of a 90% fill rate by 1 November each year.

To this end, MEPs propose reducing the filling target from 90% to 83% to help balance energy security with market-based principles and bring down gas prices. Member states would be allowed to deviate by up to four percentage points from the filling target in the event of unfavourable market conditions, such as supply disruptions or high demand. The European Commission may further increase this deviation by up to an additional four percentage points if these market conditions persist.

Member states would however have to ensure that the cumulative effects of flexibilities and derogations do not bring down overall storage filling obligations to below 75%, MEPs agreed.

Next steps

The report, drafted by committee chair Borys Budka (EPP, Poland), was adopted by 64 votes in favour and 10 against, with 12 abstentions. The text will be put to a vote during Parliament’s next plenary session, from 5 to 8 May in Strasbourg.

Background

The European Union’s energy security has been a critical concern in recent years, not least in light of its dependence on non-EU countries for primary energy supplies. The 2022 energy crisis, exacerbated by Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent weaponisation of gas supplies, highlighted the urgent need for additional measures to ensure stable and affordable energy supplies.

In response, the EU introduced new gas storage rules. However, the global gas market remains tight, with increased competition for liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies and persistent price volatility. As the current gas storage provisions are set to expire at the end of 2025, the Commission proposed extending these measures until 31 December 2027 to maintain predictability and transparency in gas storage utilisation across the EU.

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – MEPs push for a more ambitious European defence industry programme

Source: European Parliament

On Thursday, MEPs backed a draft law designed to strengthen Europe’s defence industry, ramp up defence product manufacturing and provide more support for Ukraine.

The Committees on Industry, Research and Energy and Security and Defence have adopted their position on the proposed creation of a European defence industry programme (EDIP). More specifically, MEPs backed measures to boost the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB), to strengthen EU defence and further integrate the EU defence industry. These measures include a significant increase in member states’ financial contributions to the EDIP, more aggregation of orders for the development of defence products, and enhanced use of joint procurement.

MEPs want the new programme to focus on improving the supply of weapons, ammunition and other crisis-relevant products, boosting manufacturing capacities or ensuring their ramp-up, reducing lead times for production and delivery, and increasing stockpiling.

Other principles agreed by MEPs to strengthen Europe’s defence capacity include the following:

Introducing a “buy European” principle by which the EDIP should only fund products where the cost of components originating in the EU or associated countries represents at least the 70% of the estimated end product value.
To be eligible for funds, European defence projects of common interest should involve at least six member states, or at least four that are facing high exposure to the risk of conventional military threats; MEPs want also Ukraine to participate.
A European ‘military sales mechanism’ would work as a centralised catalogue of defence products and services to bolster EU-wide demand.
A new, voluntary, Structure for European Armament Programme would scale up member states’ cooperation throughout the defence equipment lifecycle.
An EU security of supply regime should gradually guarantee continuous access to essential defence products to tackle future supply crises; the regime would be managed by a Defence Industrial Readiness Board.

Military support for Ukraine

As part of the new EDIP regulation, MEPs also backed a Ukraine Support Instrument (USI) to ensure the Ukrainian defence industry’s modernisation and integration within the EDTIB. This EU funding would scale up direct investment in Ukraine’s defence industry, facilitate partnerships between EU and Ukrainian defence actors and increase EU procurement of defence capacities produced in Ukraine, including for Ukraine itself.

Quotes

“Our position on the EDIP sends a strong message to the Council to finalise its own position in order to start interinstitutional negotiations. The European Parliament will insist on establishing a strong regulation that will incentivise EU member states to boost joint procurement in order to build common European defence capabilities – stronger, strategic, efficient and united,” said Marie‑Agnes Strack-Zimmermann (Renew Europe, Germany), Chair of the Committee on Security and Defence.

“Today, Parliament has come together with an unprecedented sense of urgency and purpose. In record time, we’ve forged a broad and determined majority in support of strengthening Europe’s defence industrial base – because this is no longer just an option, it’s a strategic imperative. Europe stands at a historic crossroads. Faced with Russia’s threats, we must act with unity, ambition and resolve. Investing together, developing critical military capabilities jointly, and aligning our spending efforts at EU level is the only way forward. It’s time to end our dependence on external actors. A sovereign Europe is a stronger and safer Europe, and this vote on the EDIP is a clear step in that direction”, said Raphaël Glucksmann (S&D, France), co-rapporteur from the Committee on Security and Defence.

“The adoption of the EDIP report by a large majority today marks a major step for the security of the European continent and the strengthening of our defence industry. With this vote, the European Parliament is setting the bar high for the EU to enhance the sovereignty and resilience of our countries, build an effective governance framework, and design an ambitious and realistic financing solution. Our committees’ work in accelerated procedure means Parliament is ready to tackle the upcoming trilogue stage as soon as the Council has determined its position. This outcome, both in substance and pace, seemed impossible to achieve just a few weeks ago; with this important step, we have shown that our institution is rising to the challenge on this crucial issue for the future of Europe”, said François-Xavier Bellamy (EPP, France), co-rapporteur from the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy.

Next steps

The report was adopted by 70 votes to 46 with 8 abstentions. MEPs also decided to open negotiations with the Council to finalise the law, with 90 votes in favour, 20 against and with 5 abstentions. Parliament as a whole will be notified of this decision during the May plenary session.

Background

The European Commission put forward a proposal for a European defence industry programme (EDIP) regulation on 5 March 2024. The EDIP – with a proposed budget of €1.5 billion – seeks to achieve defence industrial readiness by bridging the gap between short-term emergency measures, such as the Act in Support of Ammunition Production (ASAP) and the European Defence Industry Reinforcement through Common Procurement Act (EDIRPA), that have been implemented since 2023 and will end in 2025, and a more structural, long-term approach.

The EDTIB comprises a number of large multinational companies, mid-caps and over 2,000 small and medium-sized enterprises, with an estimated combined annual turnover of €70 billion.

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Economics: UK general insurance industry to reach $149 billion by 2029, forecasts GlobalData

Source: GlobalData

The UK general insurance industry is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 5.0% from GBP92.9 billion ($119.7 billion) in 2025 to GBP113.0 billion ($149.2 billion) in 2029, in terms of direct written premiums (DWP), according to GlobalData, a leading data and analytics company.

As per GlobalData’s UK General Insurance Report, the general insurance industry in the UK is expected to grow by 5.8% in 2025, driven by the increasing home insurance cost, the rising natural catastrophic events, the government push for greener vehicles, and rising demand for commercial motor insurance.

Swarup Kumar Sahoo, Senior Insurance Analyst at GlobalData, comments: “The UK general insurance industry is navigating change, driven by evolving consumer behaviors, climate challenges, regulatory changes, competition, and price sensitivity. Overall, the sector anticipates steady growth but must adapt to emerging risks and consumer demands.”

Motor insurance is the leading line of business in the UK general insurance industry, estimated to account for a 28.0% share of the DWP in 2025. It is expected to grow at a CAGR of 2.4% during 2025-29. Factors such as recovery of the economy, increased personal injury discount (Ogden) rates, and expansion of commercial fleets will contribute to the growth of motor insurance.

With an increase in commercial activity, government incentives for electric vehicles (EVs), and a push to transition to zero-emission vehicles by 2035, the fleet operators in the UK are increasingly adopting electric vans. This, along with an increase in new car registrations, which grew by 2.6% in 2024, will support the growth of motor insurance in 2025. Fleet sales accounted for 59.6% of the new vehicle registrations in 2024, according to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT).

Sahoo adds: “The increase in Ogden rate from -0.25% to 0.5% starting January 11, 2025, will lower motor insurance claims costs and is expected to increase insurers’ profitability. The motor insurance premiums, which registered an average increase of 40% during 2022 and 2023, will not witness such a steep increase further and will give some relief to the policyholders.”

Property insurance is estimated to account for a 25.7% share of DWP in 2025. It is expected to grow by 5.8% in 2025, driven by rising frequency of extreme weather events, including storms and flooding, rising building costs, rising opportunity for contents and renters insurance, and increasing consumer demand for comprehensive coverage.

Sahoo continues: “The increasing frequency of extreme weather events poses challenges, leading insurers to raise premiums and reassess coverage options in high-risk areas. Collaborative investments in flood adaptation infrastructure are essential to mitigate these risks and expand coverage options for vulnerable communities. The integration of smart home technologies is also transforming the landscape, enabling homeowners to detect issues early, which can reduce claims.”

Liability insurance is estimated to account for a 15.1% share of DWP in 2025. It is expected to grow by 5.1% in 2025, driven by growing awareness of cyber threats, as businesses seek to protect themselves against increasing cyberattacks. Additionally, the fatal injury of workers, expected to grow by 3% in 2025, as reported in the Health and Safety Executive’s annual statistics, along with the increased Ogden rate, will support the growth of employers’ liability insurance. The evolving needs of consumers and businesses in a rapidly changing environment will continue to support the liability insurance to grow at a CAGR of 7.4% during 2025-29.

Personal Accident and Health (PA&H), Marine, Aviation, and Transit (MAT), and Financial Lines insurance products are estimated to account for the remaining 31.2% share of the general insurance DWP in 2025.

Swarup concludes: “The outlook for the UK general insurance market remains positive, with growth driven by regulatory change and evolving consumer needs. Insurers must remain agile and innovative to navigate the challenges posed by climate change and economic pressure. However, the increased Ogden rate is a welcome development for general insurers.”

MIL OSI Economics –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Definition of homelessness – E-000890/2025(ASW)

Source: European Parliament

The number of people experiencing homelessness varies considerably across Member States, and there is no EU-level agreed definition of homelessness.

All Member States have pledged to work together under the umbrella of the European Platform on Combatting Homelessness[1], which represents the policy framework at EU level to fight homelessness and housing exclusion, with the overall objective to promote policies based on a person-centred, housing-led and integrated approach.

As part of the Commission’s contribution to the work of the Platform, the EU-funded Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development Monitoring Framework to Measure Homelessness[2] addresses homelessness measurement challenges in the Member States.

It highlights different socio-demographic groups that are often underreported or ‘missed’ in standard data collection exercises, and the methodological challenges behind this evidence gap.

The monitoring framework is one of the key deliverables under the Platform, and it focuses on improving the evidence on homelessness. It will be further developed into a project aiming to strengthen monitoring and evaluation of current national homelessness strategies.

The possibility of developing a common definition of homelessness is also being explored in a pilot project coordinated by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven on a European homelessness count that took place in 15 cities in 2024; a second count is foreseen in the autumn of 2025 in 35 cities.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=24120&langId=en
[2] https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-monitoring-framework-to-measure-homelessness_3e98455b-en.html

Last updated: 24 April 2025

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Protecting EU consumers against the backdrop of FWU Life Insurance Lux S.A.’s liquidation – E-000794/2025(ASW)

Source: European Parliament

Effective supervision is essential for protecting EU consumers and fostering trust in the single market.

Under the Solvency II Directive[1], the authority of the Member State where an insurer has established its head office has primary responsibility for its supervision and the competence to take necessary measures if its financial condition is not sufficiently sound.

The Insurance Recovery and Resolution Directive (IRRD)[2] and the Solvency II Amending Directive[3] reinforce the regulatory framework, aiming to better protect policyholders and enhance coordination among national authorities.

The IRRD introduces harmonised recovery and resolution measures to protect policyholders, beneficiaries and claimants, and ensure effective crisis management[4].

It also mandates the Commission to issue by January 2027 a report on the potential for minimum common standards for Insurance Guarantee Schemes and, if appropriate, a legislative proposal.

The Solvency II review introduces stronger cooperation and wider information exchange between the home and host Member State supervisors in case of significant cross-border activities[5]. It also enhances the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority’s powers to intervene in complex cross-border cases[6].

Effective and harmonised supervision is also a key objective of the Savings and Investments Union[7]. In this context, the Commission calls on the European Supervisory Authorities and National Competent Authorities to make full use of existing supervisory convergence tools.

Furthermore, it announced its intention to propose measures to strengthen these tools and enhance their effectiveness[8], thereby supporting greater consistency in supervisory practices across the EU.

[1] Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance, OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1-155.
[2] Directive (EU) 2025/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of insurance and reinsurance undertakings and amending Directives 2002/47/EC, 2004/25/EC, 2007/36/EC, 2014/59/EU and (EU) 2017/1132 and Regulations (EU) No 1094/2010, (EU) No 648/2012, (EU) No 806/2014 and (EU) 2017/1129, OJ L, 2025/1, 8.1.2025.
[3] Directive (EU) 2025/2 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 amending Directive 2009/138/EC as regards proportionality, quality of supervision, reporting, long-term guarantee measures, macro-prudential tools, sustainability risks and group and cross-border supervision, and amending Directives 2002/87/EC and 2013/34/EU, OJ L, 2025/2, 8.1.2025.
[4] In particular, it equips national supervisory authorities and national resolution authority with harmonised mandates and tools to intervene when insurers face financial distress.
[5] In particular, the home supervisory authority must promptly inform the host authority if it detects deteriorating financial conditions in an insurance undertaking under its jurisdiction. Under certain conditions, the host authority may also request a joint on-site inspection with the home authority and, if the latter accepts the request, EIOPA is invited to participate. See new Articles 152aa, 152ab, 152b of the Solvency II Directive.
[6] Including by means of binding mediation and, under specific conditions, the disclosure of the names of concerned undertakings
[7] https://finance.ec.europa.eu/publications/commission-unveils-savings-and-investments-union-strategy-enhance-financial-opportunities-eu_en
[8] The proposal is scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2025.

Last updated: 24 April 2025

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – EU competences in forest matters – E-000936/2025(ASW)

Source: European Parliament

The EU has a variety of competences shared with Member States that have an impact on forest protection and forestry, including climate, environment, energy and agriculture, which the Union has exercised respecting the principle of subsidiarity[1].

The EU has exercised these competences through the adoption of legislation using the appropriate legal basis. As forests are natural resources and an integral part of the environment, the Habitats[2] and Wild Birds Directive[3], the Land Use, Land Use Change, and Forestry (LULUCF) Regulation[4], the Deforestation Regulation[5], the Nature Restoration Law[6], the Carbon Removal Certification Framework[7] are based on Article 192(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and so is the proposal for a regulation on a Forest Monitoring Framework[8], currently in the co-decision procedure.

The Renewable Energy Directive[9] has multiple legal bases under TFEU (Article 114 — internal market, Article 192(1) — environment and Article 194(2) — energy), while the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development[10] is based on Articles 42 and 43(2).

EU action on climate, biodiversity and circular economy as well as their benefits inherently relate to natural ecosystems, including forests.

The mentioned Commission proposal for a Forest Monitoring Framework aims at having accurate, timely and comparable data on forests across the EU, in view of increasing pressures and stressors, and their cross-border impacts.

[1] Court of Justice of the European Union judgment of 25 February 1999 in Joined Cases C-164/97 and C-165/97, EU:C:1999:99.
[2] Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7-50.
[3] Directive 2009/147/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010, p. 7-25.
[4] Regulation (EU) 2018/841 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2018 on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry in the 2030 climate and energy framework and amending Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 and Decision No 529/2013/EU, OJ L 156, 19.6.2018, p. 1-25.
[5] Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 May 2023 on the making available on the Union market and the export from the Union of certain commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest degradation and repealing Regulation (EU) No 995/2010, OJ L 150, 9.6.2023, p. 206-247.
[6] Regulation (EU) 2024/1991 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2024 on nature restoration and amending Regulation (EU) 2022/869, OJ L, 2024/1991, 29.7.2024.
[7] Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a Union certification framework for permanent carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage in products, OJ L, 2024/3012, 6.12.2024.
[8] https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-regulation-forest-monitoring-framework_en
[9] Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, as amended, OJ L 328, 21.12.2018, p. 82-209.
[10] https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/european-agricultural-fund-rural-development-eafrd_en

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Wholesale natural gas prices and increasing costs of storage refill – E-000111/2025(ASW)

Source: European Parliament

The Commission is committed to bring down energy prices for households and businesses to support the energy transition and EU’s competitiveness.

As part of the Clean Industrial Deal[1], the Commission adopted an Action Plan for affordable Energy[2] outlining key actions to lower energy costs for European consumers, including by ensuring well-functioning and transparent gas markets.

Mandatory filling targets in the Gas Storage Regulation (EU) 2022/1032[3] have increased transparency and predictability of market participants’ behaviour, contributing to market stability, especially during the 2022-2023 energy crisis[4].

Although the situation has improved, the gas market remains tight and competition for global liquified natural gas has increased. This is why the Commission has proposed to extend this regulation by 2 years[5].

At the same time, understanding the need for greater flexibility, the Commission issued a recommendation[6] to support Member States on how to identify and apply flexibility existing within the existing legislative framework to better coordinate and smartly design their storage filling policies ahead of winter 2025/2026.

The Commission on the other hand will consider actual market conditions when deciding on enforcement of the storage filling targets.

The Commission is carefully monitoring the internal energy market and has a good overview of the situation in individual Member States, including the effects the war against Ukraine may have on their security of supply.

Analysis shows that the impact of the end of Russian gas transit via Ukraine on gas prices has been limited. To address specific challenges, the Commission has established a High-Level Working Group with Slovakia, and is going to launch one with Hungary.

[1] The Clean Industrial Deal: A Joint roadmap for competitiveness and decarbonisation COM(2025) 85 final.
[2] Action Plan for Affordable Energy: Unlocking the true value of our Energy Union to secure affordable, efficient and clean energy for all Europeans COM(2025) 79 final.
[3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/1032/oj/eng
[4] Report from the Commission on solidarity and certain aspects concerning gas storage based on Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 of the European Parliament and of the Council COM(2025) 98 final.
[5] Proposal for Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 as regards the role of gas storage for securing gas supplies ahead of the winter season.
[6] Commission Recommendation on the implementation of the gas storage filling targets in 2025 COM(2025) 1481 final.

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Union Minister Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh hails a decade of Panchayati Raj Reforms under Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi’s leadership on Panchayati Raj Diwas, in Bihar

Source: Government of India

Union Minister Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh hails a decade of Panchayati Raj Reforms under Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi’s leadership on Panchayati Raj Diwas, in Bihar

Finance Commission Grants for Gram Panchayats increased sevenfold in the last 10 years; Panchayat Representatives being trained in Premier Institutions: Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh

Centre Awards Six Panchayats, Three Institutions; Women Sarpanches of Motipur ( Bihar) , Dawwa S (Maharashtra) & Hatbadra (Odisha) Lead the Spotlight

Posted On: 24 APR 2025 6:45PM by PIB Delhi

On the occasion of National Panchayati Raj Day, 24th April 2025, a historic event was organized at Lohna Uttar Gram Panchayat in Madhubani District of Bihar in the august presence of Hon’ble Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi. The national commemoration was marked by vibrant participation from elected representatives of Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs), beneficiaries of several government schemes, and local residents. Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi, on this occasion launched/ laid the foundation stone for multiple development projects amounting to over Rs.13,480 crores. These initiatives spanned across key sectors including housing, rural development, power, transportation, and connectivity. In his address, the Prime Minister reaffirmed the Government’s unwavering commitment to strengthening grassroots democracy and empowering Panchayats as the driving force behind rural transformation. Addressing from the soil of a Gram Panchayat, Shri Modi underlined the spirit of Gram Swaraj and the role of Panchayats in building a developed and inclusive India.

Union Minister of Panchayati Raj, Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh alias Lalan Singh, in his address highlighted the transformation witnessed by Panchayats across India over the past decade. He emphasized how digital tools such as eGramSwaraj have empowered local self-governments, enhancing efficiency, transparency, and ease of living in rural India. The Union Minister underlined the significant increase in financial devolution to PRIs that is nearly seven times more compared to the 13th Finance Commission in the last ten years.

“A truly developed India cannot be imagined until its villages and Panchayats are fully developed,” stated Shri Rajiv Ranjan Singh. The event was also graced by Bihar Governor Shri Arif Mohammed Khan, Chief Minister of Bihar Shri Nitish Kumar, and several Union Ministers, public representatives and senior officials, including Shri Vivek Bharadwaj, Secretary, Ministry of Panchayati Raj.

In his address, Union Minister of Panchayati Raj outlined the transformative progress made under the leadership of the Prime Minister in empowering Panchayati Raj Institutions over the last decade. He highlighted a seven-fold increase in fund devolution to Panchayats, advancements like the e-Gram Swaraj portal for enhanced transparency, weather forecasting at the Panchayat level, and leadership development through training at prestigious institutions like IIMs. The Union Minister emphasized the special focus on strengthening women’s leadership in Panchayats through targeted skill development initiatives. Shri Singh said that Prime Minister’s decision to address the nation from a Gram Panchayat underscores the government’s commitment to grassroots democracy. He called the national celebration at Lohna Uttar a historic moment in India’s journey towards a self-reliant, inclusive, and sustainable rural governance system – a solid foundation for a truly Viksit Bharat.

A major highlight of the event was the conferring of the Climate Action Special Panchayat Award (CASPA), Atma Nirbhar Panchayat Special Award (ANPSA), and Panchayat Kshamta Nirman Sarvottam Sansthan Puraskar (PKNSSP), recognizing exemplary contributions in Climate Action (CASPA), Self-Reliance (ANPSA), and Capacity Building (PKNSSP). A total of six Gram Panchayats and three institutions from eight States were felicitated. Notably, three award-winning Panchayats – Motipur (Bihar), Dawwa S (Maharashtra), and Hatbadra (Odisha) are headed by women Sarpanches, exemplifying the role of women leadership in driving local development.

****

Aditi Agrawal

(Release ID: 2124144) Visitor Counter : 24

Read this release in: Hindi

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Hong Kong celebrates World Intellectual Property Day 2025 (with photos)

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

Hong Kong celebrates World Intellectual Property Day 2025
     Addressing the reception, Mr Lam emphasised that Hong Kong is taking active steps to develop itself into an international innovation and technology centre. To achieve this goal, it is essential to ensure that the legal system offers sufficient protection to IP right as intangible assets, and regulate their use and transfer. This underscores Hong Kong’s unique advantages as the only common law jurisdiction in China under the principle of “one country, two systems”.

     Mr Lam pointed out that Hong Kong’s highly regarded common law system plays two important roles in IP development — serving as a dispute resolution centre and a hub for IP trading. With the rapid growth of the IP industry in both Hong Kong and the Mainland, there is increasing demand for services related to IP disputes and trading. Hong Kong’s user-friendly bilingual common law system and an abundant supply of high quality legal professionals create an ideal environment for IP trading in any form.

     Mr Lam said, “China has become the global technological giant and powerhouse. Hong Kong is also taking active steps to develop itself into an international innovation and technology centre. I am very confident that Hong Kong can and will play a more significant role in future in the area of IP protection and trading, which will in turn contribute to the innovation and technology development of not just Hong Kong but our country as a whole.”

     Echoing the theme of this year’s World IP Day, namely, “IP and music: Feel the beat of IP”, the Director of Intellectual Property, Mr David Wong, in his welcoming remarks cited music as a perfect example of how IP fuels creativity, adding that the vibrant music landscape worldwide owes much to strong copyright protection that rewards originality and entrepreneurial efforts. He stressed that the Government is committed to enhancing the copyright law to encourage creativity and support innovation.

     The pursuit of artificial intelligence (AI) development globally has prompted sea change. In order to enhance the Copyright Ordinance for addressing the copyright issues arising from the rapid development of AI, the Government, having conducted a public consultation, is putting forward a legislative proposal for introducing a new text and data mining exception into the copyright law. This exception will be subject to stringent conditions to ensure a careful balance between the interests of copyright owners in exploiting their works and the public interest in supporting innovation. Importantly, the rights reservation mechanism would be paramount for protecting copyright owners’ legitimate interests.

     About 180 guests including the Acting Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Dr Bernard Chan, the Permanent Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Ms Maggie Wong, stakeholders from the legal community and IP-related associations, academics, consulate representatives, government officials and representatives from the public and business sectors attended the reception.

     Celebrated annually on April 26, the World IP Day aims to increase general understanding of IP, pay tributes to inventors and creators, and explore how IP helps shape the world. The IPD promoted the World IP Day and related activities through various channels, including sponsoring the “Licensing Academy” workshops of the Asian Licensing Conference to offer industry players insights into new developments in IP licensing.
Issued at HKT 21:00

NNNN

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: CE: Hong Kong/Zhejiang Co-operation Conference Mechanism advances mutual benefits to new levels (with photos/videos)

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

CE: Hong Kong/Zhejiang Co-operation Conference Mechanism advances mutual benefits to new levels (with photos/videos)
In the morning, Mr Lee and the Secretary of the CPC Zhejiang Provincial Committee, Mr Wang Hao, jointly attended the High-Level Meeting cum the First Plenary Session of the Hong Kong/Zhejiang Co-operation Conference, witnessing the establishment of the Hong Kong/Zhejiang Co-operation Conference Mechanism, symbolising a new stage of comprehensive exchanges and co-operation between Hong Kong and Zhejiang. The Executive Deputy Director of the Hong Kong and Macao Work Office of the CPC Central Committee and the Hong Kong and Macao Affairs Office of the State Council, Mr Zhou Ji, also attended the meeting.

Officials of the HKSAR Government that attended the meeting included the Chief Secretary for Administration, Mr Chan Kwok-ki; the Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs, Mr Erick Tsang Kwok-wai; the Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development, Mr Algernon Yau; the Secretary for Housing, Ms Winnie Ho; the Secretary for Innovation, Technology and Industry, Professor Sun Dong; the Secretary for Home and Youth Affairs, Miss Alice Mak; and the Director of the Chief Executive’s Office, Ms Carol Yip.

During the meeting, Mr Wang, Mr Lee, and the Governor of Zhejiang Province, Mr Liu Jie, witnessed the signing of the Hong Kong/Zhejiang Co-operation Conference Mechanism and the Co-operation Memorandum of the High-Level Meeting cum First Plenary Session of the Hong Kong/Zhejiang Co-operation Conference, as well as four co-operation agreements signed by representatives of government departments and institutions of the two places, covering areas of innovation and technology (I&T), housing, economic and trade co-operation, and youth development. Hong Kong and Zhejiang established the new Hong Kong/Zhejiang Co-operation Conference Mechanism and reached consensus on 13 co-operation areas.

Mr Lee noted that the new co-operation conference mechanism symbolises a new stage of comprehensive exchanges and co-operation between Hong Kong and Zhejiang, which is of great significance. He expressed gratitude to Zhejiang Province and the Zhejiang Provincial Government for its importance and support attached to the new co-operation conference mechanism. He said he looks forward to Hong Kong and Zhejiang continuing to work together and deepen co-operation on all fronts for mutual benefits. He added that Hong Kong and Zhejiang will seize national opportunities and leverage their respective strengths to make new and greater contributions to the further reform and opening up of the country, and the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.

Mr Lee said that Hong Kong has long been the largest source of external investment in Zhejiang, as well as a favourable platform for Zhejiang enterprises to expand into overseas markets. Hong Kong will give full play to its role as a “super connector” and “super value-adder” to continue serving Zhejiang in expanding international markets.

Mr Lee then met with the Mayor of the Hangzhou Municipal People’s Government, Mr Yao Gaoyuan, and attended a luncheon hosted by Mr Yao. Mr Lee said that Hangzhou has made rapid achievements in the fields of the digital economy and AI in recent years, while the HKSAR Government is also developing the AI industry proactively and has been implementing a series of measures to support AI development. Mr Lee expressed his confidence in the huge potential for co-operation between Hong Kong and Hangzhou in I&T, adding that under the new co-operation mechanism established between Hong Kong and Zhejiang, exchanges and collaboration between Hong Kong and cities in Zhejiang, including Hangzhou, will be even closer.

In the afternoon, Mr Lee arrived in Ningbo to continue his visit. He first visited a local high-end scientific instrument manufacturing enterprise to learn more about its business development and projects in the manufacturing and research of optical instruments.

Mr Lee then met with entrepreneurs of Ningbo descent. Mr Lee commended Ningbo entrepreneurs for their significant contributions to Hong Kong’s economic and social development over the years, as well as acting as a bridge to promote economic and trade co-operation and cultural exchanges between Hong Kong and Ningbo.

In the evening, Mr Lee met with the Secretary of the CPC Ningbo Municipal Committee, Mr Peng Jiaxue, and attended a dinner hosted by Mr Peng. Mr Lee highlighted that Ningbo is a major city in the Yangtze River Delta region, while Hong Kong, the world’s freest economy and the third-largest international financial centre which possesses the advantages of the “one country, two systems” principle, is proactively developing into an international I&T hub. He said he believes that entrepreneurs in Hong Kong and Ningbo will continue to scale new heights and forge closer ties and co-operation, and that Hong Kong and Ningbo can achieve complementarity to make greater contributions to the country’s high-quality development.

Mr Lee will continue his visit tomorrow (April 25). He will attend the Hong Kong Investment Promotion Conference – Zhejiang (Ningbo) Forum cum Ningbo-Hong Kong Economic Co-operation Forum.
Issued at HKT 19:30

NNNN

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

April 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Union Minister Dr. Mansukh Mandaviya Launches Issuance of Sports Certificates via DigiLocker

Source: Government of India

Union Minister Dr. Mansukh Mandaviya Launches Issuance of Sports Certificates via DigiLocker

Inaugurates National Centre for Sports Science and Research at IG Stadium

All sports initiatives undertaken by Modi Government are athlete-centric – Dr. Mandaviya

NCSSR will serve as a hub for high-level research, education, and innovation aimed at enhancing elite athlete performance: Union Minister

Posted On: 24 APR 2025 4:44PM by PIB Delhi

Union Minister of Youth Affairs & Sports and Labour & Employment, Dr. Mansukh Mandaviya today launched the issuance of sports certificates via DigiLocker at the Indira Gandhi Stadium in New Delhi.

Prior to the launch, he inaugurated the National Centre for Sports Science and Research (NCSSR) at the same venue.

Addressing the gathering, Dr. Mandaviya reaffirmed the Government’s commitment to athlete welfare, stating that all sports initiatives undertaken by Modi Government are athlete-centric. Citing examples of the Draft National Sports Governance Bill 2024, Draft National Sports Policy 2024, and the Draft National Code Against Age Fraud in Sports (NCAAFS) 2025, the Minister said these reflect the Government’s resolve to ensure transparency, fairness and good governance in the Indian sports ecosystem.

He announced that sports certificates issued via DigiLocker will soon be integrated with the National Sports Repository System (NSRS), enabling automatic disbursal of Government cash rewards directly into athletes’ bank accounts through Direct Benefit Transfer (DBT), eliminating the need for paper applications.

“In the past what used to happen is that a sportsperson had to apply for Government cash rewards after winning medals in international competitions. I don’t want that the athletes have to suffer or face any roadblocks in getting their well-deserved reward. So, these initiatives are meant to make it smooth for them. If everyone has watched him/her win a medal internationally why do they need to apply,” Union Minister said.

Highlighting future plans, Dr. Mandaviya spoke about the comprehensive roadmap being implemented to support India’s bid to host the 2036 Olympics. He also reiterated India’s interest in hosting the Commonwealth Games in 2030.

Calling on National Sports Federations (NSFs) to prioritize good governance and athlete welfare, Union Minister urged collective efforts from athletes, federations, and the Government to strengthen the sports ecosystem. As a step in this direction, he announced that office space at IG Stadium in Delhi will be made available to interested NSFs.

Dr. Mandaviya also announced the forthcoming launch of a ‘One Sport–One Corporate’ policy aimed at facilitating federation handholding and attracting financial support for sports development. Additionally, Olympic training centres for high-priority sports disciplines will be developed under a Public-Private Partnership (PPP) model, he added.

Speaking on the inauguration of the NCSSR, Dr. Mandaviya said the Centre will serve as a hub for high-level research, education, and innovation aimed at enhancing elite athlete performance. He emphasized that such initiatives will be instrumental in fulfilling India’s long-term sporting vision under Viksit Bharat by 2047.

“Let us all work together to build a strong sports culture for a new India,” Dr. Mandaviya concluded.

Praising the initiative by the government, Olympic silver medallist and Major Dhyan Chand Khel Ratna awardee Mirabai Chanu said: “This is a really good scheme for players. The issuance of sports certificates by DigiLocker will take a lot of stress away from all sportspersons like me. Many times sportspersons have to rush back home for certain documents – for government jobs, visa etc. – as we don’t carry them with us always. I want to thank our Sports Minister on behalf of all players for this initiative.”

*****

Himanshu Pathak

(Release ID: 2124076) Visitor Counter : 43

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

April 25, 2025

Category: housing

Repression and retaliation

Targeting the press

Pressuring universities and students

Democracy and free speech

Union Minister Dr. Mansukh Mandaviya Launches Issuance of Sports Certificates via DigiLockerInaugurates National Centre for Sports Science and Research at IG Stadium

Union Minister Dr. Mansukh Mandaviya Launches Issuance of Sports Certificates via DigiLocker

Inaugurates National Centre for Sports Science and Research at IG Stadium