NewzIntel.com

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

Category: housing

  • MIL-OSI China: China strengthens supersize market, investment hub position with high-standard opening up in 14th Five-Year Plan period

    Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News

    China strengthens supersize market, investment hub position with high-standard opening up in 14th Five-Year Plan period

    BEIJING, July 18 — China has made significant progress on key tasks related to consumption, foreign trade and investment cooperation in the 14th Five-Year Plan period (2021-2025). These achievements are expected to continue to inject momentum into global economic growth.

    At a press conference held in Beijing on Friday, senior commerce ministry officials highlighted that China has further solidified its position as the world’s second-largest consumption market and biggest goods trader.

    “The vast Chinese market has become a shared market for the world and will surely continue to be the source of growth and vitality for the world economy,” said Chinese Minister of Commerce Wang Wentao at the press conference.

    The country has also worked to improve the business environment for foreign-funded enterprises during the period, with many multi-nationals saying that China is an “ideal, safe and promising” destination for cross-border investment.

    Despite facing challenges from rising unilateralism and protectionism, the officials shared their vision for the upcoming 15th Five-Year Plan period (2026-2030), revealing that China will seek to strengthen international cooperation, increase the resilience of trade and strive to build an international trade pattern, featuring openness, cooperation, common development, and mutual benefits and win-win results.

    SUPERSIZED CONSUMPTION MARKET

    According to Wang, the commerce minister, China’s supersized consumption market has expanded during the 14th Five-Year Plan period, reinforcing the nation’s position as the second-largest consumer market globally.

    With an average annual growth rate of 5.5 percent in the retail sales of consumer goods since 2021 in China, consumption has contributed around 60 percent on average annually to the nation’s economic growth over the past four years, Wang said, who forecast the sales to top 50 trillion yuan (about 7 trillion U.S. dollars) in 2025.

    In terms of absolute value, he revealed, China’s retail sales of consumer goods are about 80 percent of those in the United States. However, in terms of real purchasing power, the nation’s retail sales of consumer goods have surpassed those in the United States, Wang said, citing World Bank data and calculations.

    In illustrating the huge potential of the Chinese consumption market, the minister said that China has ranked top in terms of online retail sales for 12 consecutive years. China has also been the world’s biggest consumption market for cars and home appliances such as air conditioners and washing machines.

    “China has a population of 1.4 billion. Any product, if multiplied by 1.4 billion, means definitely a supersize market,” Wang said, adding that measures will be taken to boost services consumption, which has grown at a much faster rate compared to the consumption of goods.

    “The characteristics of China’s consumption market, which feature great potential, strong resilience and abundant vitality, have not changed,” he said, saying that the ministry will introduce targeted measures in light of the changing times and circumstances to further stimulate goods consumption and tap the potential of service consumption in the next five years.

    IDEAL INVESTMENT HUB

    Data from the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) indicates that as of the end of June this year, China’s actual use of foreign direct investment during the 14th Five-Year Plan period had reached a cumulative total of 708.73 billion U.S. dollars. This figure meant the country has achieved the 700 billion U.S. dollar investment attraction target ahead of schedule.

    Demonstrating confidence in investing in China’s investment climate, 229,000 new foreign-funded enterprises were established during the period in the country, an increase of 25,000 compared with the 13th Five-Year Plan period. “Foreign-funded enterprises have contributed one third of China’s imports and exports, one fourth of its industrial added value and one seventh of its tax revenue, and have created over 30 million jobs, making significant contributions to China’s economic and social development,” Vice Minister of Commerce Ling Ji said.

    Ling revealed at the press conference that foreign investors have increased their allocations in China’s high-tech sectors compared with 2020, with many multinational companies establishing regional headquarters and global R&D centers in China.

    To create a favorable environment for foreign investment, China has expanded opening up by lifting restrictions on foreign investment in the manufacturing industry across the country, Ling said.

    Additionally, the country has improved its market and policy environment by implementing various measures with regard to government procurement, intellectual property protection, cross-border data flow and fiscal and tax incentives. Since 2023, the MOC has held over 30 roundtable meetings for foreign-funded enterprises, helping resolve more than 1,500 various demands raised by foreign-funded enterprises, he said.

    “Investing in China is investing in the future. We hope that the vast number of foreign-funded enterprises can achieve greater development in the process of China’s modernization,” Ling said.

    WIN-WIN RESULTS THROUGH COOPERATION

    During the past several years, economic globalization faced headwinds, with unilateralism and protectionism on the rise, causing significant disruptions to the international economic order and governance system. Despite these challenges, China has firmly upheld the multilateral trading system by promoting both multilateral cooperation and regional cooperation, vice commerce minister Li Chenggang said at the press conference.

    Throughout this period, China’s trading partners have become more diverse. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) has remained China’s largest trading partner for five consecutive years. In 2024, the proportion of China’s trade with countries participating in the Belt and Road Initiative has exceeded 50 percent of its total trade, MOC data showed.

    “We are a major trading partner of over 150 countries and regions. We not only provide high-quality products and services to the world, but also ensure the resilience and stability of the global industrial and supply chains,” Wang said, who stressed that the huge Chinese market is also a shared market for the world.

    From 2021 to 2024, China imported goods worth 7.4 trillion yuan, MOC data showed. Wang said that from the perspective of imports, the Chinese mainland and Hong Kong accounted for approximately 13.3 percent of world’s total goods imports, very close to the 13.6 percent share taken by the United States, quoting data from the World Trade Organization.

    Responding to a journalist’s question about China-U.S. economic and trade cooperation, Wang said that despite the ups and downs in China-U.S. economic and trade relations, the two sides have remained important partners to each other in trade and investment. “In 2024, the trade volume of goods between China and the United States was 688.3 billion U.S. dollars, and the trade volume of services was 155.8 billion U.S. dollars. Both figures increased by 18 percent and 34.7 percent, respectively, compared with 2017.”

    Wang said that it is inevitable that there will be differences and frictions in China-U.S. economic and trade cooperation, but this is a normal situation and that dialogues and consultations are the best choice to solve problems.

    Wang said China is willing to work with the United States, based on the principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation, to continue to strengthen dialogues and communications, enhance consensus and reduce misunderstandings, and jointly promote the China-U.S. economic and trade relations back to the right track and achieve healthy, stable and sustainable development.

    MIL OSI China News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Two District Men Ordered to Be Held Without Bond in Violent Armed Kidnapping and Carjacking

    Source: US FBI

               WASHINGTON – Damon Middleton, 32, and Michael Alston, 27, both of the District of Columbia, were ordered to be held without bond today following their arrests for armed kidnapping and carjacking, announced U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro.

                According to court documents, on May 9, 2025, a male victim was parking his Dodge Caravan at his home in the District when he was approached by two men who hit him on the head and demanded money. One of the subjects allegedly took the victim’s keys, entered his apartment, and ransacked it.

                The two men then drove the victim in the victim’s Dodge Caravan to various Maryland ATMs to withdraw funds from the victim’s CashApp and bank accounts. The men eventually left the victim zip-tied in Hyattsville, Maryland, and drove off in his vehicle. Law enforcement later located the torched remains of the victim’s Dodge Caravan within the District.

                Middleton and Alston were charged in an indictment, which was unsealed on July 11, 2025, on charges of federal kidnapping and transportation of a stolen vehicle, as well as District of Columbia charges of armed carjacking and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence.

                This case is being investigated by the Metropolitan Police Department and the FBI Washington Field Office’s Violent Crimes Task Force. It is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Sabena Auyeung and Mark Levy.

     

    25cr190

    MIL Security OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Discover the Best Chat Lines—Now with 5 Minutes Free from Chatline Network

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Groveland, FL, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) —  The Chatline Network, home to some of the best chat lines in North America, is thrilled to announce a brand-new offer: a 5-minute free trial now available across all of its phone chat brands. This exciting promotion gives callers the perfect opportunity to connect instantly with local singles — no strings attached.

    Known for its suite of high-quality, locally focused chat lines, Chatline Network offers users a chance to meet, flirt, and talk with real people in real time. With this new 5-minute free trial, first-time callers can experience the unique energy and spontaneity of voice-based connections without any upfront commitment.

    The service is simple to use: callers dial in, create a greeting, and are instantly connected to other singles nearby. Whether users are looking for romance, friendship, or a lighthearted chat, the Chatline Network provides a safe, discreet, and lively platform for connection.

    The 5-minute free trial is available now on all Chatline Network brands. To access Chatline Network, dial into one of the following free chat lines:

    • Azule Line: 800-876-4383
    • 24-7 Chat Line: 800-736-7881

    About Chatline Network
    Chatline Network is a trusted provider of live phone chat services, featuring a range of popular chat lines designed to help adults connect through real conversation. With a focus on community, authenticity, and privacy, the network remains a top destination for voice-based dating and social interaction.

    Press Contact:
    Aaron Preisler

    Chatline Specialist
    info@chatlinenetwork.com
    310-746-2366
    www.chatlinenetwork.com

    Attachment

    • Chatline Network

    The MIL Network –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: Coop Pank held an investor webinar to introduce unaudited results of Q2 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    On Friday, 18 July 2025 at 9 am (EET), Coop Pank held an investor webinar, where the Interim Chairman of the Management Board, Heikko Mäe, and the Chief Financial Officer, Paavo Truu, introduced the bank’s unaudited financial results of Second Quarter of 2025. Webinar was held in Estonian language. 

    Coop Pank would like to thank all participants. Webinar recording is available here:
    https://youtu.be/VZ40sRcWj-0

    Coop Pank’s report for unaudited results of Q1 2025 and the presentation is available here:
    https://view.news.eu.nasdaq.com/view?id=1379772&lang=en

    Coop Pank, based on Estonian capital, is one of the five universal banks operating in Estonia. The number of clients using Coop Pank for their daily banking has reached 218,000. Coop Pank aims to put the synergy generated by the interaction of retail business and banking to good use and to bring everyday banking services closer to people’s homes. The strategic shareholder of the bank is the domestic retail chain Coop Eesti comprising 320 stores.

    Additional information:
    Katre Tatrik
    Communication Manager
    Tel: +372 5151 859
    E-mail: katre.tatrik@cooppank.ee

    The MIL Network –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: Libyan University students: Elections are needed urgently

    Source: APO


    .

    Fifty-seven young men and women from universities across Libya joined the United Nations Support Mission in Libya for in a dedicated youth consultation on Wednesday to share their ideas around the Advisory Committee’s recommendations and stressed the need for urgent inclusive election to establish stability and legitimacy. 

    Students from Bent Bayya, Western Mountain, Gharyan, Ain Zara, Azzawya, Abu Salim, Tripoli Center, Sabratha, Zintan, Qasr Ben Ghashir, Sirt, Al-Bayda, Hay Andlus, Sebha, Benghazi, Murzuq, Al-Khums, Al-Araban, and Kabo joined the discussion, with many favouring the first option, which suggests holding near simultaneous presidential and parliamentary elections.  over others to avoid perpetuating division. 

    Participants said it was essential that the military be unified and divisive instituons be institutions to avoiding reproducing the status quo. They highlighted a lack of trust and said that corruption was a significant obstacle to securing fair elections. Others added that cultural components are often marginalized politically in Libya, making the reality of inclusive elections unlikely. 

     “The second option, holding legislative elections first, is a continuation of a vicious cycle that we have tried twice and which has not succeeded since 2011,” said one participant. “We need presidential elections.”  

    Others agreed saying they feared a repeat of the 2014 scenario when a parliament was elected that rejected a peaceful transfer of power and added that the first option avoided the prolongation of transitional periods. 

    “The people’s current priority is to expedite the dismantling of existing institutions,” another participant said, arguing in favour of the Advisory Committee’s fourth option, under which a political dialogue forum would be convened to establish a constituent assembly that would establish an interim government. “National reconciliation is being used to make money by those in power. The fourth option is the best option for the roadmap.” 

    Other participants highlighted that there must be agreement on a clear constitutional basis before moving forward with elections – the Advisory Committee’s third option – saying democracy could not be built in the current distorted situation. 

    “The lack of legitimacy is the greatest challenge,” said another participant. “Therefore, a clear and binding date must be set, under the supervision of UNSMIL, allowing everyone to participate in the elections without excluding any party for any reason, and ensuring the voice of the people is heard.”

    Distributed by APO Group on behalf of United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL).

    MIL OSI Africa –

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

    Source: APO


    .

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

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

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

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

    Half-moons are better than those we dig by hand

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

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

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

    Partners with the European Union

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

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

    MIL OSI Africa –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: The government will compensate the Orenburg region for the costs of helping citizens affected by the natural disaster

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – Government of the Russian Federation –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    More than 1.7 billion rubles will be sent to the Orenburg region as compensation for expenses on assistance to citizens affected by the flood in April 2024. The order to this effect was signed by Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin.

    Document

    Order dated July 17, 2025 No. 1931-r

    The funds were allocated from the Government’s reserve fund. They will be provided to the region in the form of an interbudget transfer.

    Federal funding will cover the regional budget’s costs for financial measures of social support for citizens whose housing was lost or damaged as a result of the spring flood of 2024. Thus, of the total amount, almost 1.2 billion rubles will be compensation for payments to citizens who have completely lost their housing. The remaining funds will be used to reimburse expenses for payments for damaged housing.

    “It is important that our citizens are not left alone with their misfortune in emergency situations. And the relevant departments and local authorities have done everything necessary to prevent such situations,” Mikhail Mishustin noted, commenting on the document signed onGovernment meeting on July 17.

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: Mortgages continued to grow steadily in June.

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Central Bank of Russia –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    According to preliminary data, the population’s mortgage debt increased by 0.6% over the month after 0.5% in May. The bulk of loans issued are still accounted for by state programs.

    The consumer loan portfolio decreased by 0.4% after near-zero dynamics in May, including due to a halt in the growth of debt on credit cards.

    Taking into account investments in bonds, banks’ claims on companies grew by 0.9% in June (0.4% a month earlier). Ruble loans increased mainly (0.7%), with a significant portion of the increase coming from housing developers.

    Household funds in banks increased by a noticeable 1.5% after the seasonally weak dynamics of May (0.2%). Corporate funds, on the contrary, decreased slightly (-0.2% after 0.4% in May).

    The sector’s profit (excluding dividends from Russian subsidiary banks) for the month amounted to 392 billion rubles, which is one third higher than the May result. However, the growth is mainly due to a one-time release of reserves and is not indicative. Since the beginning of the year, banks have earned 1.7 trillion rubles, as in the same period last year.

    Read more in the information and analytical material “On the development of the banking sector of the Russian Federation in June 2025”.

    Preview photo: Fahroni / Shutterstock / Fotodom

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Dmitry Grigorenko: Buryatia is mastering federal standards for the provision of public services.

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – Government of the Russian Federation –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    The Republic of Buryatia is mastering federal standards for the provision of public services. This was reported by Deputy Prime Minister – Head of the Government Staff Dmitry Grigorenko during a working visit to Ulan-Ude.

    In particular, Buryatia launched the “life situation” service for caring for a family member on the public services portal. This service is implemented within the framework of the federal project “State for People”. It is intended for citizens who want to arrange care for loved ones who need constant care: disabled people or elderly people. The service helps to issue a conclusion on the need for care, eliminating the unnecessary need for a personal visit to social services and collecting paper documents. Through the public services portal, residents of Buryatia can also call a doctor to their home or make an appointment with a local therapist.

    In addition, the “life situation” service offers users to undergo training in general care skills for elderly citizens and disabled people. Today, the “Care School” operates in Ulan-Ude. Social workers, junior medical personnel or relatives of people in need of care can undergo free training. In the future, the functionality of the service may be expanded.

    “Life situations are a new standard for providing government services, when a person can quickly and comprehensively resolve their issue without unnecessary bureaucratic barriers. Since last year, we have been implementing this approach in the regions. Now it is in effect in Buryatia. Our goal is to make such high standards the norm throughout the country, so that citizens receive government services at the same high level regardless of their place of residence,” said Dmitry Grigorenko.

    “Our developments, with the support of the Russian Government, are being implemented directly on the public services portal at the federal level and are becoming available to a wider range of people. Now the Deputy Prime Minister has given us guidelines on what else to work on, what to pay attention to. As a result of the meeting, we have a whole list of instructions that we will continue to work on. Thank you Dmitry Yuryevich for the visit and joint work,” said the head of Buryatia, Alexey Tsydenov.

    The unification of government services based on the principle of “life situations” has significantly simplified their receipt. In particular, within the framework of one regional service “life situation” it was possible to reduce the time for receiving government services by an average of 43% (from 44 to 25 days), the number of necessary documents was reduced by 50% (from 8 to 4 units), the number of visits that a person needs to make to departments was reduced by 75% (from 4 to 1).

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: The Law Library Staff Takes on ALA in Philadelphia

    Source: US Global Legal Monitor

    At the beginning of the month, I had the opportunity to represent the Law Library at the annual American Library Association (ALA) conference that took place in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, this year. It was my first year attending the ALA conference, and it was a sight to behold. From all exhibitors, whether publishing houses, universities offering MLIS degrees, or the Library of Congress pavilion, where I spent the majority of my time, there was something for everyone.

    Library of Congress staff with former Librarian of Congress, Dr. Carla Hayden, at the LOC Pavilion at ALA.

    As a representative of the Law Library at the Library of Congress pavilion, I answered questions about the services the Law Library offers and highlighted the work that the Library of Congress continues to provide to the public while communicating with attendees. Additionally, I had the opportunity to be present when former Librarian of Congress, Dr. Carla Hayden, stopped by to greet attendees as well as engage with our acting Librarian of Congress, Robert Newlen, who previously worked in the Law Library. As an employee in the Office of External Relations within the Law Library, the most fulfilling part of my time at the conference was being able to speak with other librarians about the services of the Library of Congress while also networking with other industry professionals, some even being colleagues from other service units in the Library of Congress that I do not get to interact with on a day to day basis.

    There was also time to explore the city of brotherly love, which was exciting. On my walk to the famous Rocky statue, I stumbled upon another famous statue. A cast of the 1902-1904 version of The Thinker by the sculptor Auguste Rodin greets attendees at the entrance of the Rodin Museum, which was installed at the opening of the museum in 1929.

    The Thinker at the entrance of the Rodin Museum in Center City, Philadelphia. Picture courtesy of Taylor Gulatsi.
    One of the two Rocky statues is at the top of the steps of the Philadelphia Museum of Art. Picture courtesy of Taylor Gulatsi.

    I was not the only staff member from the Law Library in attendance at ALA; my colleague Sarah was in attendance and was happy to share her thoughts regarding her experience at the conference:

    ALA was a great opportunity to hear from librarians from across the country who are working in all different types of libraries. I enjoyed attending sessions about tips for better serving library patrons, connecting with librarians around the world, preserving collections, and sharing historical information. Like Taylor, I took the opportunity to do some sightseeing as well, visiting the Liberty Bell, Old City Hall (home to the Supreme Court in the 1790s), and the Philadelphia Museum of Art.

    The Liberty Bell, picture courtesy of Sarah Friedman.

    Did you attend ALA? If so, what was one of your favorite parts of the conference?


    Subscribe to In Custodia Legis – it’s free! – to receive interesting posts drawn from the Law Library of Congress’s vast collections and our staff’s expertise in U.S., foreign, and international law.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Snohomish Man Who Provided Tactical Training to Extremist Groups Sentenced to Prison for Illegal Gun Possession

    Source: US FBI

    Seattle – An Army veteran who illegally possessed high powered firearms was sentenced Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Seattle to two years in prison, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Teal Luthy Miller. Kyle Christopher Benton, 29, was arrested in September 2024, following an investigation of his activities both online and in person involving high-powered weapons. Benton possessed both unregistered, short barrel rifles and machineguns, weapons capable of firing multiple rounds with a single trigger pull. Moreover, he used these weapons to further his standing with various racially or ethnically motivated violent extremist groups and groups espousing white supremacy.

    At the sentencing hearing U.S. District Judge Tana Lin said, “You not only illegally possessed extremely dangerous firearms, but you bragged about it and put on firearms trainings for others while doing so.”

    According to records filed in the case, Benton was investigated by the FBI after he was discharged from the United States Army and after he threatened to kill his wife. The investigation revealed Benton operated multiple social media accounts where he posted violent extremist content, neo-Nazi propaganda, and anti-Semitic materials. But it was not just online activity. Benton participated in “hate rallies” and other gatherings located in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho in furtherance of his white supremacist views. Drawing upon his military training and veteran status, he led workshops about firearms for various white supremacy groups.

    On September 6, 2024, law enforcement executed a court authorized search warrant at Benton’s Snohomish home and seized a firearm resembling an M16 rifle that fired in a fully automatic fashion. They also seized an uninstalled drop-in auto sear (which makes a gun fire like a machinegun) and two rifles with overall barrel lengths of less than 16 inches. Such guns must be registered under the National Firearms Act.

    On March 28, 2025, Benton pleaded guilty to Unlawful Possession of a Machinegun, and Possession of an Unregistered Firearm.

    In asking for a 30-month sentence Assistant United States Attorney Brian Wynne wrote to the court, “while Benton was in possession of these weapons, he was actively engaged with groups encouraging racially or ethnically motivated violence and white supremacy. Benton

     used the firearms along with his military experience to establish himself within the groups. While engaged with these groups he put on workshops about firearms and held tactical trainings for group members.”

    In his letter to the court, Benton now disavows his white supremacist views.

    The case was investigated by the FBI.  The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Brian J. Wynne. 

    MIL Security OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Florida plan to deputize National Guard officers as immigration judges at Alligator Alcatraz would likely violate constitutional rights

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Raquel Aldana, Professor of Law, University of California, Davis

    President Donald Trump visits Alligator Alcatraz in Ochopee, Florida on July 1, 2025. Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images

    Seeking to expand Florida’s role in federal immigration enforcement, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in May 2025 submitted the state’s Immigration Enforcement Operations Plan to the Trump administration.

    The plan, endorsed by President Donald Trump, says all of Florida’s roughly 47,000 law enforcement officers have received, or soon will receive, training to act as immigration officers. It’s part of an effort to, as the plan notes, “maintain state-led border security operations in the absence of federal support.”

    The DeSantis plan includes a proposal to deputize Florida’s nine National Guard Judge Advocate General’s Corps officers to serve as immigration judges. JAG officers are attorneys who serve as legal advisers, prosecutors, defense counsel and military judges in a wide range of matters specific to the armed forces. That includes courts-martial and civil matters involving the military.

    DeSantis has said the move is necessary to create a fast-track deportation system at Florida’s new immigration detention facility in the Everglades, Alligator Alcatraz.

    He has dismissed due process concerns – such as a lack of training and independence – from legal experts, pointing to the backlog in immigration courts. Immigration judges in Florida’s immigration courts have one of the largest backlogs in the country, with over half a million cases.

    Congress establishes immigration policy

    The Constitution grants Congress, not the president or state governments, the power to establish immigration laws.

    Under the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, also known as the McCarran-Walter Act, Congress created a clear process for immigration removal cases.

    In general, a U.S. noncitizen may face removal from the country based on violations to the immigration laws. Those range from unauthorized entry to committing or being convicted of certain crimes.

    Congress designated the Executive Office for Immigration Review, an agency within the Department of Justice that houses the immigration courts and the Board of Immigration Appeals, as the body exclusively responsible for deciding immigration removal cases. The office also details the authority and standards for how immigration judges conduct deportation hearings.

    Immigration judges undergo rigorous vetting and training. And their decisions are subject to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, the administrative appellate body for decisions made by immigration judges.

    The McCarran-Walter Act also contains several provisions that subject most immigration court decisions such as removal or asylum to judicial review in federal courts. That can happen on direct appeal or as part of habeas corpus petitions that challenge the legality of detention or removal.

    The system is far from perfect. But Congress designed it to ensure legal expertise and due process guarantees.

    As an immigration scholar, I believe that allowing Florida JAG officers to serve as immigration judges bypasses this framework that is set in law, and violates the constitutionally mandated separation of powers.

    JAG officers, including those in Florida’s National Guard, are not governed by the McCarran-Walter Act. They are military lawyers in an entirely separate system, overseen by the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which defines the role of military judges. The code retains a unique military character that is substantially different from the judicial appellate system that governs immigration administrative rulings.

    Simply put, neither Trump nor DeSantis can create an entirely new system of immigration judges outside of the one already established by Congress.

    Federal agencies cannot deputize JAGs

    A current immigration provision, known as the 287(g) program, authorizes U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to collaborate with local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration laws.

    But this provision only authorizes deputizing local law enforcement to assist “in relation to the investigation, apprehension, or detention” of immigrants – not the arbitration of deportation cases.

    In the nearly three decades since 287(g) was enacted, no state or local officials – let alone military officers – have been permitted to act as immigration judges.

    DeSantis’ plan seeks to convert Florida’s JAG officers from state to federal officials to function as immigration judges. Trump’s approval of this plan would also exceed the scope of his statutory authority.

    Federal statutes allow the president to federalize the National Guard in limited instances: during times of war or national emergency.

    But neither DeSantis’ rhetoric nor Trump’s framing of undocumented immigration as an “invasion” meet these legal thresholds.

    An aerial view of the migrant detention center in Ochopee, Florida on July 4, 2025.
    Alon Skuy/Getty Images

    JAGs cannot engage in domestic law enforcement

    Even if Florida’s National Guard were federalized, JAG officers still could not legally serve as immigration judges.

    The Posse Comitatus Act, enacted in 1878, restricts the use of federal military personal in civilian law enforcement. It reflects a longstanding American principle: The military should not police civilians.

    Immigration enforcement – including deciding whether someone is deported – is fundamentally a civilian enforcement function.

    The only narrow exceptions to the Posse Comitatus Act’s restrictions require a clear statutory basis, such as Trump invoking the Insurrection Act of 1807, a law that would allow the president to rely on the military for domestic enforcement to quell a rebellion or widespread violence.

    Due process concerns

    The DeSantis plan also compromises constitutionally guaranteed rights to a fair process for immigrants facing removal.

    Immigration law is notoriously complex. Even experienced immigration lawyers struggle to keep up with its constant changes.

    JAG officers, trained primarily in military law, would face immense challenges interpreting and applying immigration statutes. That’s especially true with only weeks of preparation, as DeSantis proposes.

    But due process isn’t only about knowledge of legal technicalities. The Fifth Amendment guarantees due process rights to all persons on U.S. soil, regardless of immigration status.

    For decades, courts have interpreted these protections to include fair hearings before qualified immigration judges – and, in most instances, judicial review.

    By circumventing established procedures, DeSantis’ plan risks creating a system where expedited deportations come at the expense of accuracy and constitutional rights.

    Raquel Aldana 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. Florida plan to deputize National Guard officers as immigration judges at Alligator Alcatraz would likely violate constitutional rights – https://theconversation.com/florida-plan-to-deputize-national-guard-officers-as-immigration-judges-at-alligator-alcatraz-would-likely-violate-constitutional-rights-260677

    MIL OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI USA: Luttrell Votes to Bring Fiscal Sanity Back to Washington

    Source:

    WASHINGTON — Congressman Morgan Luttrell (R-TX) released the following statement after he supported the passage of the Senate Amendment to H.R. 4, the Rescissions Act of 2025, to codify the Trump Administration’s rescissions request:

    “America has been on the wrong track for too long, spending money we don’t have on programs that don’t deliver results for hardworking families. Thankfully, the Trump Administration is taking our national debt crisis seriously and has laid the roadmap for robust, necessary, and commonsense reforms to bring accountability back to Washington. This legislation represents a crucial first step toward fiscal sanity, and I’m proud to stand with President Trump and my Republican colleagues in getting America’s financial house back in order.”

    This legislation would rescind $9 billion in unnecessary funding appropriated in FY24 and FY25 from programs in the State Department and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB).

    View the full bill here.

    MIL OSI USA News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Banking: Samsung Introduces 2025 OLED TVs with Samsung Vision AI and Next-Level Glare-Free Technology

    Source: Samsung

    Samsung Electronics has introduced its 2025 OLED TV line-up featuring three next-gen series (S95F, S90F, and S85F) in screen class sizes up to 83”. The fastest growing OLED TV brand,[1], Samsung is continuing to innovate with its 2025 OLED lineup, delivering powerful full-screen brightness, deep blacks, vibrant, Pantone®-validated colours and our most advanced OLED Glare-Free technology – for distraction-free viewing.
     
    “No two homes are the same, and we recognise that for some shoppers – sunlight and ambient lighting are often a top consideration when choosing which TV to buy for their space. We want to give them even more flexibility to enjoy their content when and where they want, without compromising great picture quality and colour reproduction,” said said Nivash Ramsern, Director, Visual Display at Samsung South Africa. “Our flagship S95F series offers all of that and more, featuring our best OLED Glare-Free technology yet, while maintaining pure blacks, clean whites, dramatic contrast and truly breathtaking, Pantone-validated colour. Paired with our most advanced 4K processor, an upgraded refresh rate and a 30% brightness boost, you’ll experience the most realistic picture possible on a Samsung OLED TV.”
     
    All three series in the lineup also feature Samsung Vision AI,[2] to power not only their cinematic picture and sound, but also AI-backed experiences that will help you engage more deeply with your content and enjoy a viewing experience that’s catered to you.
     

     
    Samsung Vision AI also unlocks new Samsung SmartThings features that simplify and enhance daily life. When you activate “Pet Care[3] ” and “Family Care[4] , you’ll get access to live video of your living room through your connected camera and receive alerts if your pet or child needs your attention – for peace of mind at home or away. Plus, “Home Insights[5] provides notifications from your smart devices right on screen, including a 3D Map View that shows your entire smart home at a glance.
     
    “Universal Gestures[6] even let’s you control your TV through your Galaxy Watch – with simple hand motions like rotating the watch bezel to scroll the screen,or making a fist to return to a previous menu.
     

     
    These intuitive features, along with all your favorite apps and services, will be available through One UI Tizen – the next evolution of our Tizen OS. One UI Tizen enhances the look and feel of Tizen OS, with a refreshed layout that mirrors the interface of many Samsung smartphones, tablets and Galaxy watches.
     
    You can also now create separate profiles for each member of your household and enjoy suggested shows, movies and other content curated just for you. And, we’re maximising your entertainment with up to seven years[7] of OS updates, ensuring you’ll have access to the latest apps and services for many years to come.
     

     
     
    S95F: The Best Samsung OLED TV Gets Even Better
     
     
    The flagship series features our most powerful NQ4 AI Gen3 Processor[8] that optimizes contrast, brightness, depth and colour across every scene. No matter what you enjoy watching, the processor upscales,[9]  it all into brilliant 4K resolution.
     
    For gamers, Motion Xcelerator 165Hz,[10] ensures smooth motion and blazing fast speeds from even the most demanding games. Together, these upgrades make the S95F our best OLED yet, offering a cinematic picture without distractions.
     

    77” Class S95F: R99,999*

    S90F: Vivid Contrast and Breathtaking Clarity through AI-Powered Visuals
     

     
    The S90F series (48” – 83” screen class sizes) also features our powerful NQ4 AI Gen3 Processor that delivers incredible picture and dynamic sound, and powers Samsung Vision AI experiences. You can also watch classic movies and shows like you never have before thanks to 4K AI Upscaling Pro,[11], which transforms everything on screen into impressive 4K resolution.
     
    Experience powerful brightness and deeper contrast as OLED HDR+,[12] analyzes each scene to help you appreciate even the tiniest details – from fireworks in a night sky to the golden hue of a sunset.
     
    With the S90F series, you can enjoy an uninterrupted, fluid picture across games and content with Motion Xcelerator 144Hz.,[13] And, AI Motion Enhancer Pro,[14]sharpens and smooths fast-moving objects – like a golf ball or hockey puck – so you never miss a play.
     
    The S90F also envelops you in multidimensional sound tailored to your space and content – thanks to features like Object Tracking Sound Lite, Active Voice Amplifier Pro,[15] and Adaptive Sound Pro.,[16]
     

    83” Class S90F: R129,999*
    77” Class S90F: R79,999*
    65” Class S90F: R42,998*
    55” Class S90F: R26,999*
    48” Class S90F: R18,999*

     
    S85F: Amazing Detail and Brightness
     
    The S85F series (55” – 65” screen class sizes) is powered by the NQ4 AI Gen2 Processor, which makes movies, TV shows, video games and sports you love look and sound even better.
     
    4K AI Upscaling,[17] can transform content from decades ago into 4K resolution, while Motion Xcelerator 120Hz brings smooth motion to games and sports. The TVs can also analyse each scene and use AI to deliver vivid colours and enhanced detail with Colour Booster Pro.[18]
     
    Plus, you’ll enjoy the same pure blacks, bright whites and Pantone-Validated colour offered across the entire 2025 OLED lineup, so images on screen look as incredible as they do in real life.
     

    65” Class S85F: R32,999*
    55” Class S85F: R22,999*

     
    Our 2025 TVs are also loaded with sleek, minimalist designs that blend with your environment, while SmartThings,[19]  works with over 340 smart home brands, integrating all your devices into one central ecosystem and unlocking exclusive features with select Samsung products. All the while, Samsung Knox,[20] offers triple-layer protection, so your personal data stays safe and secure.
     
    Whichever model you choose, you can shop confidently from the #1 global TV brand for 19 years running. [21]
     
    For more on the newest OLED models and other Samsung TV and audio products, visit www.samsung.com/za .

     
    [1] Circana, LLC, Retail Tracking Service, Display Type: OLED, US Sales, 52 Weeks Ending March 23, 2024.
    [2] Samsung Vision Al is only available on 2025 Neo QLED 8K, Neo QLED, OLED, QLED and The Frame TV models. Samsung Vision Al features vary by TV model. (Excludes Crystal UHD, FHD and HD TV models).
    [3] Available on certain models only, and on terrestrial, cable TV and Samsung TV Plus.
    [4] Works with antenna broadcast only. Available languages vary and may require download. Translation accuracy not guaranteed.
    [5] Samsung Account required for network-based smart services, including streaming apps and other smart features. Separate computer, mobile, or other device may be necessary to create/log in to Samsung Account (free to download and create). Without Samsung Account log in, only external device connections (e.g., via HDMI) and terrestrial/over-the-air TV (only for TVs with tuners) are available. Each device must be signed into same Samsung Account and must have both Wi-Fi. It only works when the TV is turned off. Utilizes AI-based formulas.
    [6] Samsung Account required for network-based smart services, including streaming apps and other smart features. Separate computer, mobile, or other device may be necessary to create/log in to Samsung Account (free to download and create). Without Samsung Account log in, only external device connections (e.g., via HDMI) and terrestrial/over-the-air TV (only for TVs with tuners) are available. Each device must be signed in to same Samsung Account and must have both Wi-Fi. It only works when the TV is turned off.
    [7] Samsung Account required for network-based smart services, including streaming apps and other smart features. Separate computer, mobile, or other device may be necessary to create/log in to Samsung Account (free to download and create). Without Samsung Account log in, only external device connections (e.g., via HDMI) and terrestrial/over-the-air TV (only for TVs with tuners) are available.
    [8] Requires Galaxy Watch 4 and higher / Wear OS 5 and higher.
    [9] Samsung Account required for network-based smart services, including streaming apps and other smart features. Computer, mobile or other device may be necessary to create/log in to Samsung Account (free to download and create). Without Account log in, only external device connections (e.g., via HDMI) and terrestrial/over-the-air TV (only for TVs with tuners) available. One UI Tizen OS updates are available for up to 7 years from the product release year starting in 2023. Availability, features, contents, apps and services are subject to change without notice and may vary by product and model. OS updates does not cover hardware-related performance, features or durability.
    [10] Utilises AI-Based formulas to upscale to 4K resolution. Resulting picture may vary based on source content.
    [11] Utilises AI-Based formulas to upscale to 4K resolution. Resulting picture may vary based on source content.
    [12] 4K 165Hz is only available with PC connected games that support such specifications (PC graphic card required). Performance may vary.
    [13] Utilises AI-Based formulas to upscale to 4K resolution. Resulting picture may vary.
    [14] Compared to OLED HDR, 48″ & 42″ have OLED HDR.
    [15] 4K 144Hz is only available with PC connected games that support such specifications (PC graphic card required). Performance may vary.
    [16] Utilises AI-Based formulas.
    [17] Utilises AI-Based formulas to upscale to 4K resolution. Resulting picture may vary based on source content.
    [18] Utilises AI-Based formulas.
    [19] Samsung Account required for network-based smart services, including streaming apps and other smart features. Additional apps required. A computer, mobile or other device may be necessary to create/log into Samsung Account (free to download and create). Without Account login, only external device connections (e.g., via HDMI) and terrestrial/over-the-air TV (only for TVs with tuners) available.
    [20] Personal data includes directly input PIN-codes and passwords, and IoT device information shared through the SmartThings App. The latest software update is required.
    [21] Source: Omdia, Feb 2025. Results are not an endorsement of Samsung. Any reliance on these results is at the third party’s own risk.

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Submissions: ‘I just couldn’t stop crying’: How prison affects Black men’s mental health long after they’ve been released

    Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Helena Addison, Postdoctoral fellow, Yale University

    Black men who have been incarcerated have elevated rates of PTSD, depression and psychological distress. da-kuk/E+ Collection via Getty Images

    Mike returned home to Philadelphia after a 15-year prison sentence and suffered an emotional breakdown.

    “I just couldn’t stop crying … I don’t know. It was the anxiety. It was just a lot,” he said. “I was under a lot of pressure and it just came crashing down.”

    Mike, who was in his late 40s when we spoke, told me about his childhood filled with abuse, his first arrest at age 14, and the over 20 years of his life that he spent behind bars.

    As a registered nurse and nurse scientist who studies how incarceration affects mental health, I know Mike’s experience after release from prison is not uncommon. Studies show that Black men who have experienced incarceration have higher rates of PTSD, depression and psychological distress compared with Black men who have never been incarcerated.

    Working in psychiatric hospitals in Philadelphia, I met many patients in crisis who had been incarcerated at some point in their lives. As a part of my doctoral research, funded by the National Institute of Nursing Research, I interviewed 29 formerly incarcerated Black men to understand how incarceration has affected their mental health.

    My peer-reviewed findings were published in the journal Social Science & Medicine. All quotes shared here use pseudonyms to protect the men’s privacy.

    Trauma of incarceration

    Mass incarceration in the U.S. has serious health consequences for individuals, families and communities. In Philadelphia alone, over 20,000 people return home from incarceration each year.

    While incarceration rates are declining in Philadelphia, the needs of those coming home remain significant.

    Many formerly incarcerated men described experiencing or witnessing violence, including being beaten by correctional officers and witnessing close friends get assaulted or killed.

    “You know you are not regular because you come from a traumatic situation, right?” said Thomas, 44, who spent 18 years incarcerated.

    The participants expressed that racism was common, especially while incarcerated in facilities located in the rural central and northern regions of Pennsylvania.

    “I ain’t gonna sugar coat it – Black people going up into them white people mountains, they call you [n-word] all day long and you basically there to accept it,” Antonio told me.

    Incarceration was especially difficult for those who were held for months pretrial without ever being convicted and those incarcerated during COVID restrictions who spent more than 23 hours a day in their cells.

    ‘Even though I’m free, I ain’t free’

    Participants described life on parole or probation, or in transitional housing, as another form of confinement.

    Ken, 56, has been out of prison for over a decade but said, “I’m still locked up, even though I’m free, I ain’t free. You just get a whole new set of rules and regulations.”

    Men described significant anxiety related to community supervision requirements, including difficulty sleeping the night before a probation appointment.

    Participants also described distress caused by “no association” restrictions. These are common parole and probation requirements that prohibit people under supervision from interacting with others who have criminal records, are also under supervision or are currently incarcerated. Violating this requirement can lead to a technical violation and reincarceration.

    While these requirements are meant to reduce the risk of reoffending, they often isolate people from supportive relationships and resources, including housing and employment.

    “[There are] a lot of smart brothers in there. And it hurts my heart. And that’s where the depression coming in too,” said Reese, who spent six years incarcerated. “I can’t contact them in jail. … That’s just how it is in the system.”

    Philadelphia has the highest rate of community supervision – including probation and parole – among the largest U.S. cities, according to a 2019 analysis by The Philadelphia Inquirer.

    At that time, the Inquirer reports, 1 in 23 adults in Philadelphia were under community supervision – and 1 in 14 Black adults in Philadelphia.

    The men I interviewed said they felt like parts of them never left jail or prison, while others felt that they brought prison or jail home with them.

    Tyrese, 34, said he stays home as often as he can.

    “I’ve been out of the joint for seven years now and feel like I’m still institutionalized, I guess,” he said. “I know people that don’t even come outside,” referring to other formerly incarcerated men.

    Others had dreams that they were back in a cell, or at home still wearing jail clothing. Long after release, many described constant hypervigilance and anxiety.

    “I can be walking to the bus station and there be people walking around me, I’m constantly watching them,” said Anthony, who was first incarcerated at age 18 and served 16 years. “I’m watching every movement they’re doing. That’s a habit I had from jail.”

    Philly rapper Meek Mill, shown here at a 2018 rally outside a Center City courthouse, was sentenced to probation for 10 years after a conviction on drug and gun charges. He became an advocate of criminal justice reform.
    Michael Candelori/Pacific Press/LightRocket via Getty Images

    Finding work

    People who have been incarcerated often struggle to find employment after release, as many employers are unwilling to hire a person with a criminal record.

    This leaves about 35% of formerly incarcerated Black men unemployed.

    At the time of our interview, Tay, 31, was working part-time in carpentry. “Because I had felonies on my record a lot of places won’t hire me,” he said. “And a couple of places that I was working with, they ended up firing me once they did the background check.”

    These frustrations can easily spill over into family life.

    Mark, 30, also works part-time and said he found himself frequently becoming agitated and snapping at his kids, other family members and his girlfriend. “I can’t get the job I want or the job that I need to do what I need to do for my family and I’ll be frustrated,” he shared.

    Participants struggled with having to depend on others for basic needs upon release. Kenny, who is now self-employed as a caterer, recalled his experience a few years earlier. “I was crying. I was a grown man, almost 40 years old, and my mother had to buy me underwear, socks,” he said.

    The importance of fatherhood

    Despite their many hardships, some of the men spoke with joy about reconnecting with their children.

    “I think the most positive thing that happened since I’ve been out of prison is I got custody of my sons,” said Ken, a father of two. “Them kids saved me.”

    Like many of the other participants with children, however, he was frustrated about being unable to provide for them and worried about repeating harmful cycles.

    “You want to do good, but it makes you think bad stuff when you don’t have the right resources,” he continued. “You don’t want [your kids] to do the same things you did.”

    Others struggled to bond with their children after years of separation.

    John, 29, explained, “The bonding is kind of awkward, because you wasn’t there, especially during the pandemic when there was no visits allowed.”

    Returning to disadvantaged neighborhoods

    Most people released from incarceration return to neighborhoods with high rates of poverty, violence and other disadvantages.

    Shawn, who lives in pubic housing, showed me abandoned buildings and boarded storefronts in his neighborhood and described how the environment made rebuilding his life harder.

    For many participants, returning to divested communities brought stress. They experienced frequent exposure to substance use, violence and negative police encounters, and they had limited access to basic resources and job opportunities needed to support recovery and stability.

    “This is my real life. It’s not fake. It’s not no, ‘Well, why did he go back and do this or that?’” he said. “I live in an underserved, impoverished, danger zone – period.”

    Moving forward

    The experiences these men shared with me demonstrate how traumatic incarceration is, even many years after release.

    Supporting the mental health of formerly incarcerated Black men requires trauma-informed services, such as culturally responsive counseling, peer support and care that acknowledges the lasting effects of incarceration.

    It also means helping them build or rebuild their financial resources, reconnect with their children and loved ones, and supporting the broader communities they return to through investment in housing, employment and accessible health and social services.

    Helena Addison received funding from National Institute of Nursing Research of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number F31NR020434, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration and American Nurses Association Minority Fellowship Program, the University of Pennsylvania’s Presidential PhD Fellowship, and Jonas Philanthropies to support this study and/or her PhD training. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health, or any other funding organizations or institutions. The views expressed in written training materials or publications and by speakers and moderators do not necessarily reflect the official policies of the Department and Human Services; nor does mention of trade names, commercial practices, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

    – ref. ‘I just couldn’t stop crying’: How prison affects Black men’s mental health long after they’ve been released – https://theconversation.com/i-just-couldnt-stop-crying-how-prison-affects-black-mens-mental-health-long-after-theyve-been-released-259975

    MIL OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Sixth Member of Salinas-Based ‘Murder Squad’ Sentenced to 38 Years in Federal Prison for 2017 Killing Spree

    Source: US FBI

    SAN JOSE – Andrew Alvarado was sentenced today to 38 years in federal prison for racketeering conspiracy and 10 years in federal prison for conspiracy to murder in aid of racketeering, to run concurrently, for his role in multiple murders and attempted murders as part of the self-proclaimed “Murder Squad,” a crew of Salinas-based Norteño criminal street gang members falling under the Monterey County Regiment Enterprise affiliated with the Nuestra Familia prison gang.  U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman handed down the sentence.

    Alvarado, 34, of Salinas, pleaded guilty on April 15, 2025, to one count of racketeering conspiracy and one count of conspiracy to murder in aid of racketeering.  According to court documents, the “Murder Squad” conducted more than a dozen “hunts,” tracking and shooting dozens of Salinas residents whom they perceived to be members of a rival gang for reasons as vague as they were Hispanic, bald, or wearing blue.  The squad would often use military-style tactics, traveling in a convoy of vehicles with a designated shooter vehicle and a designated security/spotter vehicle, all of which were in constant communication via conference call.  The security/spotter vehicles would patrol the streets, find a target, and transmit their location to the shooter vehicle.  The shooters in the shooter vehicle would drive up, exit, fire at the victims until their magazines were empty, and speed away.  The security/spotter vehicles would follow behind, ready to distract or intercept law enforcement and allow the shooter vehicle to escape.

    Between 2015 and 2018, 11 people were killed during these hunts.  Another 17 people were shot at but survived.  Most of the victims were not actually members of a rival gang.  Some of the victims were not the intended target at all but were nevertheless hit in the crossfire.  

    In connection with pleading guilty, Alvarado admitted that he personally participated in six “hunts” between January 2017 and May 2017.  He was the shooter in three of those hunts, resulting in the deaths of three victims and the wounding of a fourth.  In one instance, the hunt began when members of the “Murder Squad” gathered at a house to remember a family member killed in a car accident; they decided to commemorate the person’s death and lift their spirits by going out to kill another.  Separately, Alvarado was in the security/spotter vehicle in three other hunts, resulting in the deaths of three victims, the wounding of four victims, and the near-miss of one victim.  

    “Gangs and the drugs and violence they bring with them wreak havoc on our communities and the hardworking families that live within them.  The ruthless actions of the ‘Murder Squad’ shattered the public’s sense of safety and destroyed the lives of so many in Salinas,” said United States Attorney Craig H. Missakian.  “The so-called ‘hunts’ that Alvarado and his crew ran were simply inhumane.  This lengthy sentence means that Alvarado, like many of his fellow gang members, will now answer for his brazen crimes.”

    “HSI San Francisco has a long and impactful history of investigating transnational gangs that threaten the safety of our communities in Northern California.  We are committed to the pursuit of justice for the victims of these criminal enterprises and the violence they perpetuate.  Today’s sentencing is the product of countless investigative hours and the significant investigative resources which HSI brings to bear in combatting violent transnational criminal organizations and apprehending dangerous gang members like Alvarado,” said Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Acting Special Agent in Charge Jeffrey Brannigan.

    In addition to the prison term, Judge Freeman also sentenced the defendant to a five-year period of supervised release on count one and a three-year period of supervised release on count two, to run concurrently.  Alvarado was immediately remanded into custody to begin serving his sentence.

    Alvarado is the sixth member of the “Murder Squad” to be sentenced.  Five other defendants each pleaded guilty to one count of racketeering conspiracy in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1962(d) and one count of conspiracy to murder in aid of racketeering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5) and were previously sentenced on Sept. 10, 2024.

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

    Assistant U.S. Attorney George Hageman is prosecuting the case with the assistance of Nina Burney, Lakisha Holliman, and Yenni Weinberg.  The prosecution is the result of an investigation by HSI, the FBI, the Salinas Police Department, and the Monterey County District Attorney’s Office.
     

    MIL Security OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Security: Former Bishop of AME Zion Church Pleads Guilty to Defrauding Congregations in California

    Source: US FBI

    OAKLAND – Staccato Powell, a former bishop in the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church (“AME Zion”), pleaded guilty in federal court today to wire fraud, mail fraud, and conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud in connection with a far-reaching scheme to obtain control of church properties in California using false statements, forged documents, concealment, and deception.  

    Powell, 65, of Wake Forest, North Carolina, was indicted along with co-defendant Sheila Quintana by a federal grand jury in January 2022.  Quintana pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and mail fraud in April 2025.

    According to court documents and the plea agreement, in 2016, shortly after Powell was selected as bishop and assigned to AME Zion Church’s Western Episcopal District, a geographic division of the church covering several states in the western United States, including California, he formed an entity called Western Episcopal District, Inc. (WED, Inc.).  Powell was the chief executive officer of WED, Inc. and Quintana was the chief financial officer from 2017 to 2019.

    In 2016, Powell instructed pastors of AME Zion Churches throughout the Western Episcopal District to sign deeds granting WED, Inc. title to their congregation’s property – typically the church building, but also any outbuildings, lots, parking lots, and residences used by the pastors.  At Powell’s direction, Quintana and other WED, Inc. officers worked on completing the necessary steps to accomplish the transfer of titles through grant deeds.  

    Starting in early 2017, Powell instructed Quintana and other WED, Inc. officers to obtain loans using the property of local AME Zion Churches acquired through the grant deeds as collateral for the loans.  In response to the lenders’ request for confirmation of the local AME Zion Church’s authorization of the loan, Powell caused to be created documents purporting to be resolutions by churches to support WED, Inc.’s loan applications.  In several instances, Powell directed WED, Inc. to use church resolutions with false statements, and directed Quintana to create the false documents and sign the resolutions in the name of an officer with the local church.

    In pleading guilty, Powell admitted to fraudulently obtaining mortgages on the following church properties:

    • Kyles Temple in Vallejo: Powell formed a group that included co-defendant Quintana to assist with the purchase of a $1.5 million episcopal residence in Granite Bay, with approximately $1 million covered by a bank loan.  At Powell’s direction, to obtain the additional $500,000 in funding, the group identified two church properties, including Kyles Temple in Vallejo, that would be used as collateral to secure the financing to purchase the episcopal residence.  Quintana executed the loan documents using a false resolution, which she drafted at Powell’s direction, that purported to confirm approval of the transaction by the Kyles Temple congregation.  Powell also directed Quintana to draft the resolution to indicate that there had been a church meeting at which the board of trustees approved it and purportedly gave Quintana authority to execute loan documents as chair of the Kyles Temple Board of Trustees.  No such meeting to discuss or approve the resolution had occurred.  
    • First AME Zion Church in San Jose: In 2017, Powell determined that the First AME Zion of San Jose would be used as collateral for a new loan to purchase a parsonage, and instructed Quintana to execute the purchase agreement on the new residential property.  At Powell’s direction, Quintana prepared a resolution of the First AME Zion Church of San Jose’s trustee board approving the transaction including the use of the church’s property as collateral for the loan.  Quintana then prepared, again at Powell’s direction, a second resolution on the San Jose church’s letterhead falsely stating that a membership meeting was held at the church to vote on “deeding all properties to the AME Zion Western Episcopal District, Inc., of The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church” and that the church’s membership unanimously approved the transaction and authorized its pastor to sign all transaction documents.  In fact, the church’s trustee board met twice to consider whether to execute a deed transfer to WED, Inc. and Powell knew that at these meetings the trustee board voted against the deed transfer.  Nevertheless, Powell directed Quintana to proceed with the loan transaction in the amount of $750,000, using the church as collateral based on the false resolution.  Powell later learned that the AME Zion Church of Los Angeles held a title interest in the San Jose church and directed Quintana to prepare another resolution.  This resolution falsely stated that the AME Zion Church in Los Angeles held a membership meeting on October 12 and voted to deed the church in San Jose to WED, Inc.  Subsequently, in December 2019, Powell directed WED, Inc. officers to encumber the San Jose church with an additional debt of $3 million.  Powell admitted that he knew that the San Jose church did not authorize either the $750,000 loan or the $3 million loan.  
    • Greater Cooper AME Zion Church in Oakland: Powell decided in 2018 to use the Greater Cooper AME Zion Church in Oakland as collateral for a loan in the amount of $1.1 million. At Powell’s direction, Quintana obtained a resolution from Greater Cooper signed by the reverend transferring title to WED, Inc., and signed grant deeds in May 2019 transferring the church property to WED, Inc.  Then, in November 2019, the reverend signed a grant deed transferring all interest in title from Greater Cooper AME Zion Church to WED, Inc., which then executed a second loan of $500,000, with the Greater Cooper property used as collateral.  Powell admitted that the Greater Cooper congregation did not authorize the loans.
    • University AME Zion Church of Palo Alto: In 2017, Powell informed the pastor of University AME Church that he planned to use the church as collateral for a $200,000 loan to assist another AME Zion Church in Sacramento.  Powell directed Quintana to prepare a transfer of deed of the University AME Church to WED, Inc.  After the reverend signed the grant deed, Powell directed Quintana to execute the necessary paperwork for a $2 million dollar loan using University AME Zion Church as collateral.  Although Powell told Quintana he would inform the reverend of the $2 million loan, Powell never did so.  Powell encumbered the University AME Church with unauthorized loans totaling approximately $3.9 million.  
    • First AME Zion Church in Los Angeles:  Powell decided in December 2017 that the First AME Zion Church in Los Angeles would be used as collateral for a new loan.  Powell informed Quintana that he had spoken to the pastor of the Los Angeles church and that the pastor told him that the membership had approved the transfer of title from the Los Angeles church to WED, Inc.  Based on Powell’s representation, Quintana prepared a resolution purportedly from the Los Angeles church confirming its approval of the loan and placed a signature on the resolution purporting to be that of the church’s secretary.  Later, in furtherance of Powell’s instructions to use the Los Angeles church as collateral, Quintana prepared an updated resolution which also purported to document a meeting at which the membership approved the transfer of title to WED, Inc. and which authorized Powell to sign all documents pertaining to the transaction, again with the church secretary’s forged signature.  Based on the false resolution with the forged signature, Quintana executed the deed of trust and other loan paperwork for this $1.2 million loan. As a result, WED, Inc. obtained the $1.2 million loan using the Los Angeles church property without the authorization of the congregation.  

    Further, Powell admitted that at his direction, WED, Inc. borrowed $2.15 million in September 2019 to pay off other outstanding loans and $3 million in December 2019 to pay off the September 2019 loan, using several AME church properties in Arizona and California as collateral.  

    In addition, while serving as bishop, Powell diverted some of the funds borrowed by WED, Inc., using properties of local AME Zion Churches as collateral, for his personal benefit, including purchase of real property in North Carolina for two of his children and payment of mortgage debt that he owed on a residence in North Carolina.

    Powell caused WED, Inc. to file for bankruptcy in a July 2020 petition, in which it claimed its assets included 11 churches, a parsonage, and Powell’s official residence. The petition stated that WED, Inc.’s real property was worth over $26 million with debts totaling over $12 million.

    In connection with pleading guilty, Powell agreed to pay restitution in an amount no less than $3,000,000 and no greater than $12,475,453.  He also agreed to forfeit any interest, claim, or right in the properties of the AME Zion Church denomination.

    United States Attorney Craig H. Missakian and FBI Special Agent in Charge Sanjay Virmani made the announcement.

    Powell is currently released on bond.  Powell’s sentencing hearing is scheduled for Sept. 23, 2025, before Senior U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White.  Defendant faces a maximum statutory penalty of 20 years and a $250,000 fine for each count.  Any sentence will be imposed by the court after consideration of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and the federal statute governing the imposition of a sentence, 18 U.S.C. § 3553.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan U. Lee is prosecuting the case with the assistance of Kathy Tat, Helen Yee, and Yenni Weinberg.  The prosecution is the result of an investigation by the FBI. 
     

    MIL Security OSI –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Rosneft presented a new auto route in the Samara region – “Zavolzhskie Gorizonty”

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Rosneft – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Rosneft and the Ministry of Tourism of the Samara Region presented the second joint project for auto tourists “Zavolzhskie Gorizonty”. The route runs through the natural and cultural attractions of the Samara and Saratov Regions.

    The route presentation was organized at the Rosneft gas station in Samara, where the Company’s volunteers held a thematic quiz for car owners with useful prizes. During the presentation, the famous Russian racing driver of the LADA Sport ROSNEFT team Vladimir Sheshenin held an autograph session, during which everyone could take a joint photo with the famous athlete.

    Rosneft actively supports initiatives to develop domestic tourism and aims to create comfortable conditions for car travelers. Developing roadside service and improving the level of customer service provided at Rosneft filling stations is one of the Company’s priority areas of activity.

    The “Zavolzhskie Horizons” route starts in Samara, where the dacha of the merchant Golovkin is located. The building was built in the early 20th century in the Art Nouveau style and is a cultural heritage site. A distinctive feature of the house, located on a steep bank, is two life-size sculptures of elephants. They are clearly visible from ships passing along the Volga.

    On the way out of the capital of the province, travelers can visit the Vertoletka culture and recreation park, which is recognized as the best implemented public space project in Russia and has become the best observation deck in the city. The steep bank offers breathtaking panoramic views of Samara, the majestic Volga and the legendary Zhiguli Mountains.

    The route then leads to the Serebro Severa ethnographic center in the village of Yagodnoye, where guests can get acquainted with northern culture, visit a reindeer camp and a village with sled dogs. In ancient Syzran, tourists will meet history at the Spasskaya Tower, the only surviving structure of the 17th-century Syzran Kremlin, a cultural heritage site of federal significance.

    The journey along the route ends in Khvalynsk, Saratov Region, in the national park – the center of ecotourism, preserving rare species of flora and fauna, with its holy springs, eco-trails and thematic exhibitions and museums dedicated to representatives of flora and fauna.

    “Zavolzhskie Gorizonty” became the second tourist route developed by Rosneft and the Ministry of Tourism of the Samara Region within the framework of the agreement signed in 2024 Memorandum of Cooperation between the Company and the Regional Government.

    Reference:

    The Rosneft network of petrol stations is the most extensive in the region, covering all the main roads in key tourist destinations. There are 78 stations of the company in the Samara Region, where you can fill up your car with guaranteed high-quality fuel, relax in a café or buy necessary goods on the road.

    Rosneft actively supports initiatives to develop domestic tourism – together with partners, over 40 routes for car travel across the regions of the Russian Federation have already been developed. Some of them are already presented on the platformHorizons of Russia“

    Department of Information and AdvertisingPJSC NK RosneftJuly 18, 2025

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Russia: Rosneft presented a new auto route in the Samara region – “Zavolzhskie Gorizonty”

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Rosneft – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Rosneft and the Ministry of Tourism of the Samara Region presented the second joint project for auto tourists “Zavolzhskie Gorizonty”. The route runs through the natural and cultural attractions of the Samara and Saratov Regions.

    The route presentation was organized at the Rosneft gas station in Samara, where the Company’s volunteers held a thematic quiz for car owners with useful prizes. During the presentation, the famous Russian racing driver of the LADA Sport ROSNEFT team Vladimir Sheshenin held an autograph session, during which everyone could take a joint photo with the famous athlete.

    Rosneft actively supports initiatives to develop domestic tourism and aims to create comfortable conditions for car travelers. Developing roadside service and improving the level of customer service provided at Rosneft filling stations is one of the Company’s priority areas of activity.

    The “Zavolzhskie Horizons” route starts in Samara, where the dacha of the merchant Golovkin is located. The building was built in the early 20th century in the Art Nouveau style and is a cultural heritage site. A distinctive feature of the house, located on a steep bank, is two life-size sculptures of elephants. They are clearly visible from ships passing along the Volga.

    On the way out of the capital of the province, travelers can visit the Vertoletka culture and recreation park, which is recognized as the best implemented public space project in Russia and has become the best observation deck in the city. The steep bank offers breathtaking panoramic views of Samara, the majestic Volga and the legendary Zhiguli Mountains.

    The route then leads to the Serebro Severa ethnographic center in the village of Yagodnoye, where guests can get acquainted with northern culture, visit a reindeer camp and a village with sled dogs. In ancient Syzran, tourists will meet history at the Spasskaya Tower, the only surviving structure of the 17th-century Syzran Kremlin, a cultural heritage site of federal significance.

    The journey along the route ends in Khvalynsk, Saratov Region, in the national park – the center of ecotourism, preserving rare species of flora and fauna, with its holy springs, eco-trails and thematic exhibitions and museums dedicated to representatives of flora and fauna.

    “Zavolzhskie Gorizonty” became the second tourist route developed by Rosneft and the Ministry of Tourism of the Samara Region within the framework of the agreement signed in 2024 Memorandum of Cooperation between the Company and the Regional Government.

    Reference:

    The Rosneft network of petrol stations is the most extensive in the region, covering all the main roads in key tourist destinations. There are 78 stations of the company in the Samara Region, where you can fill up your car with guaranteed high-quality fuel, relax in a café or buy necessary goods on the road.

    Rosneft actively supports initiatives to develop domestic tourism – together with partners, over 40 routes for car travel across the regions of the Russian Federation have already been developed. Some of them are already presented on the platformHorizons of Russia“

    Department of Information and AdvertisingPJSC NK RosneftJuly 18, 2025

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: UK sanctions Russian spies at the heart of Putin’s malicious regime

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments 3

    Press release

    UK sanctions Russian spies at the heart of Putin’s malicious regime

    The UK has exposed Russian spies responsible for spreading chaos and disorder on Putin’s orders.

    • UK exposes and sanctions three GRU units and 18 of their military intelligence officers, responsible for spreading chaos and disorder on Putin’s orders.   

    • GRU units exposed for their involvement in the bombing of the Mariupol Theatre, the targeting of Yulia Skripal and cyber operations in support of Putin’s illegal war in Ukraine.  

    • Action by UK and allies comes amid global threat posed by Russian malign activity.

    Russian spies and hackers targeting the UK and others are today exposed and sanctioned in decisive action by the UK Government to deliver security for working people. 

    Today’s measures target three units of the Russian military intelligence agency (GRU) and 18 military intelligence officers who are responsible for conducting a sustained campaign of malicious cyber activity over many years, including in the UK. 

    The GRU routinely uses cyber and information operations to sow chaos, division and disorder in Ukraine and across the world with devastating real-world consequences.  

    In 2022, Unit 26165, sanctioned today, conducted online reconnaissance to help target missile strikes against Mariupol – including the strike that destroyed the Mariupol Theatre where hundreds of civilians, including children, were murdered. 

    Today’s action also hits GRU military intelligence officers responsible for historically targeting Yulia Skripal’s device with malicious malware known as X-Agent – five years before GRU military intelligence officers’ failed attempt to murder Yulia and Sergei Skripal with the deadly Novichok nerve agent in Salisbury.  

    In the UK, Russia has targeted media outlets, telecoms providers, political and democratic institutions, and energy infrastructure. The United Kingdom and our international allies are watching Russia and are countering their attacks both publicly and behind the scenes. 

    Foreign Secretary, David Lammy said:    

    GRU spies are running a campaign to destabilise Europe, undermine Ukraine’s sovereignty and threaten the safety of British citizens.  

    The Kremlin should be in no doubt: we see what they are trying to do in the shadows and we won’t tolerate it. That’s why we’re taking decisive action with sanctions against Russian spies. Protecting the UK from harm is fundamental to this government’s Plan for Change. 

    Putin’s hybrid threats and aggression will never break our resolve. The UK and our Allies support for Ukraine and Europe’s security is ironclad.

    The UK government is committed to accelerating its efforts to counter hybrid threats at home, protecting the UK’s national security – a key foundation of the Plan for Change – and abroad, working in collaboration with a growing international coalition including all 32 NATO Allies, the EU and its member states, and our partners in the FBI. 

    That is why the UK has announced the biggest sustained increase in defence spending – rising to 2.6% of GDP from 2027 – since the Cold War, and as highlighted in the National Security Review, the UK is stepping up our focus on tackling hybrid and technology enabled threats. The new UK-EU Security and Defence Partnership will support this, enabling closer cooperation across a wide range of areas. 

    The Kremlin has also used cyber operations in support of Putin’s illegal war – including targeting critical infrastructure like Viasat satellite communications. Some of these attacks were conducted on the eve of the full-scale invasion in 2022 with the express purpose of degrading Ukraine’s ability to defend itself.   

    Russia’s insidious activity stretches far beyond Europe. In addition to the GRU Units and officers, the UK is also sanctioning three leaders of “African Initiative”, a social media content mill established and funded by Russia and employing Russian intelligence officers to conduct information operations in West Africa. This includes reckless attempts to undermine lifesaving global health initiatives in the region by pushing baseless conspiracy theories to further the Kremlin’s political agenda. 

    Background 

    The Foreign Secretary laid out how the UK is stepping up our approach to combatting Russian hybrid threats in his Mansion House speech. Read more here.

    See this factsheet for further information: GRU Cyber and Hybrid Threat Operations

    Hybrid Threats activity refers to overt or covert actions by foreign governments which fall short of direct armed conflict with the UK but cause harm or threaten the safety or interests of the UK or our allies.

    Examples of this include: 

    • Cyber attacks (e.g. hacking government systems or stealing trade secrets) 
    • Disinformation (e.g. spreading false or misleading information online) 
    • Sabotage (e.g. damaging infrastructure or supply chains) 
    • Political interference (e.g. influencing elections or public opinion) 
    • More information on the Salisbury Poisonings and the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry can be found here: The Dawn Sturgess Inquiry – Inquiry into 2018 Salisbury poisonings 

    Below is a full list of those sanctioned today: 

    • Aleksandr Vladimirovich OSADCHUK 
    • Yevgeniy Mikhaylovich SEREBRIAKOV 
    • Anatoliy Sergeyvich KOVALEV 
    • Artem Valeryvich OCHICHENKO 
    • The 161st Specialist Training Centre (TsPS) (Unit 29155) of the GRU 
    • Vladislav Yevgenyevich BOROVKOV 
    • Nikolay Aleksandrovich KORCHAGIN 
    • Yuriy Federovich DENISOV 
    • Vitaly Aleksandrovich SHEVCHENKO 
    • Ivan Sergeyevich YERMAKOV 
    • Aleksey Viktorovich LUKASHEV 
    • Sergey Sergeyevich VASYUK 
    • Andrey Eduardovich BARANOV 
    • Aleksey Sergeyevich MORENETS 
    • Sergey Aleksandrovich MORGACHEV 
    • Artem Adreyevich MALYSHEV 
    • Yuriy Leonidovich SHIKOLENKO 
    • Victor Borisovich NETYKSHO 
    • Dmitriy Aleksandrovich MIKHAYLOV 
    • African Initiative 
    • Artyom Sergeevich KUREYEV 
    • Anna Sergeevna ZAMARAEVA 
    • Victor Aleksandrovich LUKOVENKO  

    In addition, we have brought new evidence to light on the following existing designations: 

    • The Main Centre for Special Technologies (GTsST) (Unit 74455) of the Russian GRU 
    • The 85th Main Special Services Centre (GTsSS) (Unit 26165) of the Russian GRU

    Share this page

    The following links open in a new tab

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

    Updates to this page

    Published 18 July 2025

    Invasion of Ukraine

    • UK visa support for Ukrainian nationals
    • Move to the UK if you’re coming from Ukraine
    • Homes for Ukraine: record your interest
    • Find out about the UK’s response

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Africa: Justice, Police committees to recommend Ad Hoc Committee on Mkhwanazi allegations

    Source: Government of South Africa

    Justice, Police committees to recommend Ad Hoc Committee on Mkhwanazi allegations

    Parliament’s portfolio committees on Police and Justice will recommend to the National Assembly (NA) that an Ad Hoc Committee be established to probe the allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner, Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkwanazi.

    Mkhwanazi has made several serious claims about, amongst others, an alleged criminal syndicate that has spread into law enforcement and intelligence services, and allegations that Police Minister Senzo Mchunu colluded with criminal elements to disband the Political Killings Task Team based in KZN.

    This led to President Cyril Ramaphosa placing Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on a leave of absence and the establishment of a judicial commission of inquiry, chaired by Acting Deputy Chief Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga.

    “Following consideration of a Parliamentary Legal Service legal opinion, the committees were of the view that an ad hoc committee is the best format to interrogate the allegations. Ad hoc committees are formed as per Rule 253 of the National Assembly. The rationale for this option is that the scope of such a committee is specific and time bound.

    “The [committees were] presented with two alternative options: a full-blown investigative inquiry and two committees exercising their conferring powers in terms of NA Rule 169. The majority of committee members present in the meeting were in favour of the ad hoc committee, as members felt Parliament would thereby remain involved in such a process, exercising their oversight responsibility,” the committees said in a statement.

    The two committees noted the “urgency of the matter” and reiterated the need to reach findings to “protect the integrity and standing of the entire criminal justice system.”

    “Also, the committee highlighted the need to avoid duplication of the work of the commission of inquiry established by the President.

    “Lastly, the [committees] emphasised the need for continuous oversight over the work of the Presidential commission of inquiry and requested that the interim reports submitted to the President be made available to Parliament. At the next meeting, the [committees are] expected to discuss the terms of reference and timelines for such an ad hoc committee.

    “The committees will on 23 July 2025, as per the directive from the Speaker, recommend to the NA that an ad hoc committee be established to consider the matter. Furthermore, the committees’ recommendations will emphasise the need for urgency in considering the matter,” the statement concluded. – SAnews.gov.za

    NeoB
    Fri, 07/18/2025 – 11:20

    MIL OSI Africa –

    July 19, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Analysis: EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Mira Manini Tiwari, Research Associate at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute

    If you choose to buy a sustainable product at the supermarket, or invest in a sustainable portfolio at your bank, how far does that sustainability reach? Does the product’s “sustainable” label account for the environmental and labour costs where the raw materials were extracted? Does the portfolio include renewable energy in countries where the investment is needed most?

    In the EU, whether you are an individual or represent a company or financial institution, these questions are governed by the bloc’s non-financial reporting (NFR) regulations. The latest ones include the European Sustainable Reporting Standards (ESRS), which are gradually coming into force through 2029. The ESRS set out reporting standards and requirements, while the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) determines which companies these standards apply to, to what extent, and when.

    These EU regulations also have strong implications for the Majority World, the countries and territories outside Europe and North America where most people live, at a time when global, systemic policy effects are more important than ever. As supply chains become longer and more interconnected, and as communities involved in them confront the fragilities of economic, political and climate shifts, the regulations that govern the sustainability of these chains and that enable or prohibit participation in them must be crafted and implemented to minimise harm to the most vulnerable.

    In an article in Environment and Development Economics, my co-authors and I developed a set of proposals to improve the global sustainability of the NFR regulations. These call for collaborative development of regulations across the value chain, better data accessibility, measuring of and accounting for cross-border environmental damage, and greater integrity and engagement from financial actors.



    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!


    Cooperation, not compliance

    As the ESRS come into force, reporting requirements are being applied to companies’ full value chains. This means that Majority World actors, such as those that extract raw materials for European products, may be indirectly subjected to the NFR regulations. This is important, as it holds companies and consumers, EU and non, accountable for the ethics of the goods and services they rely on. However, when regulations are built without directly involving those they will affect, they risk causing collateral, longer-term damage. For example, reporting requirements that feel inaccessible to smaller organisations can foster distrust and backlash, or cause companies to withdraw from contexts where data are less accessible, taking away key sources of income for communities.

    While global climate negotiations have come under public scrutiny for their Minority World dominance, there has been relatively less scrutiny of global organisations governing financial and corporate sustainability standards. On their boards, the Majority World is conspicuous by its absence, demonstrating the dearth of attention to its agency in enabling greater sustainability, both locally and globally. European investors and policymakers are already shifting capital from the Majority World back to the EU in response to the NFR regulations, citing the difficulty of accounting for activities along the length of value chains. The damage falls on livelihoods, industries and essential investments, such as in renewable energy, which can suddenly disappear.

    Developing NFR regulations in collaboration with all stakeholders, rather than only at the top, can provide a regulatory landscape that is, from the outset, more implementable, accessible and effective in the long run.

    Democratic data and digitalisation

    Efficacy in global NFR regulations relies on global data cooperation, which could lower the administrative burden on those reporting and enable greater accountability. The increasing number of EU NFR regulations do not exist in a vacuum: they have been accompanied by shifts in global regulations and a proliferation of national regulations. With regulations expanding to cover the full value chain, actors are increasingly likely to be subjected to multiple regulatory bodies, or have to provide data to reporting entities upstream. The time, financial resources and practical challenges involved in identifying, collecting, processing and sharing data are considerable, both for those submitting data and those receiving and verifying them. This makes divestment or significant losses more likely. Furthermore, the expansion of regulations can result in isolated streams of data and closed-circuit processes, which, in turn, cut out civil society organisations and individuals who use data to help hold firms to account for their social and environmental responsibilities.

    Aside from EU calls for a European Single Access Point for corporate data, Majority World contexts offer particularly fertile ground for reimagining and building data infrastructures. Digitalisation in low- and middle-income countries is growing rapidly, and demonstrates the ability to make digital financial and business instruments democratic and accessible to those with the fewest resources. Such efforts should involve statisticians and local data experts from the outset to determine and harmonise appropriate data, along with transnational entities with the mandate of establishing links across data systems.

    Support for international emissions accounting

    Corporate reporting on environmental impacts must be accompanied by their reduction. Indeed, the work and transparency required to identify impacts in the first place, let alone mitigate them, underpins decisions to simply detach from the system, moving economic activity to local contexts where impacts are more traceable.

    Firms that cannot afford to bring their activities onshore must account for emissions that occur from assets not directly under their ownership or control, which are known as Scope 3 emissions. In some cases, these emissions constitute well over half of a firm’s total value chain emissions. However, the implementation of the ESRS has designated the reporting of Scope 3 emissions, and climate impacts in general, to be largely discretionary, under the condition that firms provide evaluations of the economic and material implications of a given activity in their value chains.

    The glaring gaps between some firms’ targets, actions and declarations are in part enabled by reporting systems that allow the omission of more distant climate risks and impacts, maintaining the misalignment between climate pledges and actions aimed at achieving them. While the number of firms showing readiness to comply with Scope 3 accounting is increasing, data on global investor preferences suggests that investors do not necessarily prioritise companies’ performance on these emissions when making investment decisions. For ethics to exist on the ground, they must be prioritised in financial flows.

    Investment with integrity

    In light of the above, financial institutions have a core responsibility to engage with NFR. These institutions’ economic leverage and centrality in the value chains and activities of several sectors give them incentivising power to catalyse a shift from the submission of reports to the building of living data systems and the achievement of fuller value chain accountability. Currently, many investors are not willing to accept reductions in their returns in exchange for the pursuit of social or environmental goals. Surveys suggest this is in part due to perceptions of low quality of environmental information, limited ability to assess the data received, and the difficulty of making investment decisions accordingly. In the current landscape of Minority World-led reporting, such mistrust is likely to be greater with respect to Majority World data, reiterating the need for data systems and reporting mechanisms built on equal footing.

    Financial institutions can operate proactively, using their privileged access to data to bridge Minority and Majority World actors engaging in sustainable practices, such as microfinance bodies, local communities and relevant investors. Doing so could plug, at least in part, an information and trust gap that can hinder Minority World firms’ investment in unfamiliar contexts.

    Regulating for whom?

    The research underpinning our article initially involved a recommendation on streamlining and supporting reporting by small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which account for more than 60% of the EU’s corporate emissions. For these firms, especially, regulators face a critical balance between lowering the entry barrier of the reporting ecosystem and setting robust environmental targets. The nature, data points and timelines of reporting under the CSRD are currently under review following calls for simplification and greater support, and decision-makers are wrestling with the tension between accessibility and integrity.

    Our work also included a recommendation that turns from the supply side, the focus of the preceding proposals, to the demand side: the data and sustainability literacy of the individual who walks into the supermarket to buy that sustainable product, or wants family investments to do more good than harm. Across sectors – public policy, investment and citizen engagement – resources must be dedicated to these literacies, so that actors are better placed to hold each other to account. Regulation becomes easily abstracted, reduced to figures and PDFs, databases and scores. Beneath each regulation is a world of citizens whose homes, livelihoods and health depend on them.

    The author was affiliated with the University of Siena during the period in which she and her colleagues did the original work for the scholarly article that is mentioned in this piece. The author’s affiliation came via a project that, overall, was financed by the Italian National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR). The scholarly article and the present article were not outputs for the project.

    – ref. EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just – https://theconversation.com/eu-efforts-to-measure-companies-environmental-impacts-have-global-effects-heres-how-to-make-them-more-just-261226

    MIL OSI Analysis –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Analysis: EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just

    Source: The Conversation – France – By Mira Manini Tiwari, Research Associate at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute

    If you choose to buy a sustainable product at the supermarket, or invest in a sustainable portfolio at your bank, how far does that sustainability reach? Does the product’s “sustainable” label account for the environmental and labour costs where the raw materials were extracted? Does the portfolio include renewable energy in countries where the investment is needed most?

    In the EU, whether you are an individual or represent a company or financial institution, these questions are governed by the bloc’s non-financial reporting (NFR) regulations. The latest ones include the European Sustainable Reporting Standards (ESRS), which are gradually coming into force through 2029. The ESRS set out reporting standards and requirements, while the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) determines which companies these standards apply to, to what extent, and when.

    These EU regulations also have strong implications for the Majority World, the countries and territories outside Europe and North America where most people live, at a time when global, systemic policy effects are more important than ever. As supply chains become longer and more interconnected, and as communities involved in them confront the fragilities of economic, political and climate shifts, the regulations that govern the sustainability of these chains and that enable or prohibit participation in them must be crafted and implemented to minimise harm to the most vulnerable.

    In an article in Environment and Development Economics, my co-authors and I developed a set of proposals to improve the global sustainability of the NFR regulations. These call for collaborative development of regulations across the value chain, better data accessibility, measuring of and accounting for cross-border environmental damage, and greater integrity and engagement from financial actors.



    A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!


    Cooperation, not compliance

    As the ESRS come into force, reporting requirements are being applied to companies’ full value chains. This means that Majority World actors, such as those that extract raw materials for European products, may be indirectly subjected to the NFR regulations. This is important, as it holds companies and consumers, EU and non, accountable for the ethics of the goods and services they rely on. However, when regulations are built without directly involving those they will affect, they risk causing collateral, longer-term damage. For example, reporting requirements that feel inaccessible to smaller organisations can foster distrust and backlash, or cause companies to withdraw from contexts where data are less accessible, taking away key sources of income for communities.

    While global climate negotiations have come under public scrutiny for their Minority World dominance, there has been relatively less scrutiny of global organisations governing financial and corporate sustainability standards. On their boards, the Majority World is conspicuous by its absence, demonstrating the dearth of attention to its agency in enabling greater sustainability, both locally and globally. European investors and policymakers are already shifting capital from the Majority World back to the EU in response to the NFR regulations, citing the difficulty of accounting for activities along the length of value chains. The damage falls on livelihoods, industries and essential investments, such as in renewable energy, which can suddenly disappear.

    Developing NFR regulations in collaboration with all stakeholders, rather than only at the top, can provide a regulatory landscape that is, from the outset, more implementable, accessible and effective in the long run.

    Democratic data and digitalisation

    Efficacy in global NFR regulations relies on global data cooperation, which could lower the administrative burden on those reporting and enable greater accountability. The increasing number of EU NFR regulations do not exist in a vacuum: they have been accompanied by shifts in global regulations and a proliferation of national regulations. With regulations expanding to cover the full value chain, actors are increasingly likely to be subjected to multiple regulatory bodies, or have to provide data to reporting entities upstream. The time, financial resources and practical challenges involved in identifying, collecting, processing and sharing data are considerable, both for those submitting data and those receiving and verifying them. This makes divestment or significant losses more likely. Furthermore, the expansion of regulations can result in isolated streams of data and closed-circuit processes, which, in turn, cut out civil society organisations and individuals who use data to help hold firms to account for their social and environmental responsibilities.

    Aside from EU calls for a European Single Access Point for corporate data, Majority World contexts offer particularly fertile ground for reimagining and building data infrastructures. Digitalisation in low- and middle-income countries is growing rapidly, and demonstrates the ability to make digital financial and business instruments democratic and accessible to those with the fewest resources. Such efforts should involve statisticians and local data experts from the outset to determine and harmonise appropriate data, along with transnational entities with the mandate of establishing links across data systems.

    Support for international emissions accounting

    Corporate reporting on environmental impacts must be accompanied by their reduction. Indeed, the work and transparency required to identify impacts in the first place, let alone mitigate them, underpins decisions to simply detach from the system, moving economic activity to local contexts where impacts are more traceable.

    Firms that cannot afford to bring their activities onshore must account for emissions that occur from assets not directly under their ownership or control, which are known as Scope 3 emissions. In some cases, these emissions constitute well over half of a firm’s total value chain emissions. However, the implementation of the ESRS has designated the reporting of Scope 3 emissions, and climate impacts in general, to be largely discretionary, under the condition that firms provide evaluations of the economic and material implications of a given activity in their value chains.

    The glaring gaps between some firms’ targets, actions and declarations are in part enabled by reporting systems that allow the omission of more distant climate risks and impacts, maintaining the misalignment between climate pledges and actions aimed at achieving them. While the number of firms showing readiness to comply with Scope 3 accounting is increasing, data on global investor preferences suggests that investors do not necessarily prioritise companies’ performance on these emissions when making investment decisions. For ethics to exist on the ground, they must be prioritised in financial flows.

    Investment with integrity

    In light of the above, financial institutions have a core responsibility to engage with NFR. These institutions’ economic leverage and centrality in the value chains and activities of several sectors give them incentivising power to catalyse a shift from the submission of reports to the building of living data systems and the achievement of fuller value chain accountability. Currently, many investors are not willing to accept reductions in their returns in exchange for the pursuit of social or environmental goals. Surveys suggest this is in part due to perceptions of low quality of environmental information, limited ability to assess the data received, and the difficulty of making investment decisions accordingly. In the current landscape of Minority World-led reporting, such mistrust is likely to be greater with respect to Majority World data, reiterating the need for data systems and reporting mechanisms built on equal footing.

    Financial institutions can operate proactively, using their privileged access to data to bridge Minority and Majority World actors engaging in sustainable practices, such as microfinance bodies, local communities and relevant investors. Doing so could plug, at least in part, an information and trust gap that can hinder Minority World firms’ investment in unfamiliar contexts.

    Regulating for whom?

    The research underpinning our article initially involved a recommendation on streamlining and supporting reporting by small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which account for more than 60% of the EU’s corporate emissions. For these firms, especially, regulators face a critical balance between lowering the entry barrier of the reporting ecosystem and setting robust environmental targets. The nature, data points and timelines of reporting under the CSRD are currently under review following calls for simplification and greater support, and decision-makers are wrestling with the tension between accessibility and integrity.

    Our work also included a recommendation that turns from the supply side, the focus of the preceding proposals, to the demand side: the data and sustainability literacy of the individual who walks into the supermarket to buy that sustainable product, or wants family investments to do more good than harm. Across sectors – public policy, investment and citizen engagement – resources must be dedicated to these literacies, so that actors are better placed to hold each other to account. Regulation becomes easily abstracted, reduced to figures and PDFs, databases and scores. Beneath each regulation is a world of citizens whose homes, livelihoods and health depend on them.

    The author was affiliated with the University of Siena during the period in which she and her colleagues did the original work for the scholarly article that is mentioned in this piece. The author’s affiliation came via a project that, overall, was financed by the Italian National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNRR). The scholarly article and the present article were not outputs for the project.

    – ref. EU efforts to measure companies’ environmental impacts have global effects. Here’s how to make them more just – https://theconversation.com/eu-efforts-to-measure-companies-environmental-impacts-have-global-effects-heres-how-to-make-them-more-just-261226

    MIL OSI Analysis –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Chimamanda’s Lagos homecoming wasn’t just a book launch, it was a cultural moment

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Tinashe Mushakavanhu, Assistant Professor, Harvard University

    When the announcement of Chimamanda Adichie Ngozi’s latest novel Dream Count was made, it was regarded as a major event in African literature. The internationally celebrated Nigerian writer had not published a novel in the past 12 years, and her long-awaited return stirred both anticipation and speculation. In the post-COVID context in which the book comes, so much has changed in the world.

    The first leg of her three city homecoming book tour coincided with my stay in Lagos as a curatorial fellow at Guest Artist Space Foundation, dedicated to facilitating cultural exchange and supporting creative practices. After Lagos, Chimamanda took the tour to Nigeria’s capital city Abuja and finally Enugu, where she was born and grew up.




    Read more:
    Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s new book Dream Count explores love in all its complicated messiness


    As a scholar of African literature, I arrived here in search of literary Lagos. But my attachment to the city may also just be romantic, a nostalgia born out of years of reading about it in fiction. No doubt, Lagos is a city of imagination and creativity.

    Chimamanda’s book event was a reminder that literary celebrity, when it happens in Africa, can exist on its own terms. It’s rooted in a popular imaginary that embraces both the writer and the spectacle.

    Lagos superstar

    The launch in Lagos took place at a conference centre on the evening of Friday 27 June. The MUSON is a multipurpose civic auditorium located in the centre of Lagos Island which can accommodate up to 1,000 guests. And on this night, the auditorium was packed.

    When I arrive, the scene outside is buzzing. A crowd gathers in front of a large canvas banner bearing a radiant image of the author. It’s more than just decoration; it’s a backdrop. It is an occasion for the selfie, a digital marker that you were there. There is even a hashtag for this: #dreamcountlagos. People take turns posing in front of it, curating their presence in the frame of Chimamanda’s aura.

    The atmosphere is festive, electric. And yet beneath the surface shimmer is something more urgent: a hunger for story, for presence, for return. Perhaps that explains why people come not just to witness, but to be counted.

    Inside the lobby, piles of Chimamanda’s books are neatly arranged on long tables. People are not just buying a copy. They are buying several in the hope that the author will autograph them. The sight is striking, almost surreal. In many parts of the continent, a book launch is often a quiet affair. Writers are lucky to sell a handful of copies. But this is something else entirely. This is not just a book launch, it is a cultural moment.

    It would have been easy to mistake the event for a political townhall. There was a VIP section reserved for the who’s who of Lagos, but those class distinctions easily dissolved into the collective energy of the room. The auditorium was filled with genuine enthusiasm.

    Even after a delay of more than an hour, when Chimamanda finally walked in, she was met with rapturous applause. She wore a bright yellow dress, an Instagrammable outfit, suited for the many fans who rushed forward to take selfies with her. Chimamanda, no doubt, is as much a fashion icon as she is a literary figure.

    On stage, she was joined by media personality Ebuka Obi-Uchendu, widely known as the host of the reality TV show Big Brother Africa. But here, he was also something more intimate: the author’s friend. Chimamanda even credited him with being a “great reader”. This is a rare compliment in a literary world that often separates celebrity from critical engagement.

    Their conversation was relaxed and full of laughter, offering the audience both intimacy and insight. Chimamanda addressed the question that had lingered for years: her decade-long silence. She spoke candidly of writer’s block, of the grief that came with losing both her parents in quick succession, and how that loss eventually reignited her desire to write.

    Dream Count, she explained, is shaped by that rupture. It is one of the major post-COVID novels from Africa, and centres on the lives of four women. It is a book about love, friendship and independence.

    Africans do read

    When she spoke about her characters on stage, it was as though she was talking about relatives that the audience recognised. They responded by shouting out the characters’ names, to the delight of the author.

    When I asked people about the launch afterwards, many said that it was a very Nigerian event – big, colourful, exuberant, festive. It was indeed a celebration that felt communal, even joyous. It was also a public demonstration of how literature can still command space and attention, not just in private reading rooms or crammed bookstores, but on a civic scale.




    Read more:
    Lagos fashion: how designers make global trends uniquely Nigerian


    This was a remarkable event because it defied the tired cliché that Africans do not read. People, mostly young, came out in their hundreds. They bought books, they took selfies with their “favourite” author, they screamed the names of fictional characters as though greeting friends.

    But more significant was Chimamanda’s choice to work with a local publisher, Narrative Landscape Press, which produced the Nigerian edition of Dream Count that is now available and accessible locally, at the same time as its release in Europe and North America. That alone is a radical act.

    In returning to Nigeria to launch her book, Chimamanda also disrupts the assumption that African literary prestige must only be validated abroad. Even though she belongs to a cohort of African writers shaped by the diaspora, she actively insists on presence – on homecoming – not as simply nostalgia, but as active engagement.

    Of course, Chimamanda is an exception. Her stature as a global literary figure, combined with her deep connection to home, allows her to move between worlds with remarkable ease. Few writers command the kind of multigenerational, cross-class attention she does. I found myself wishing though that more book launches could carry this same sense of occasion, of meaning, of return. That they could gather people in such numbers, not just to celebrate the writer, but to affirm the African book as something still worth gathering for.

    And perhaps that is what made this book launch unforgettable: not just the celebrity or the spectacle, but the sense that literature still matters here, and that it belongs to the people.

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

    – ref. Chimamanda’s Lagos homecoming wasn’t just a book launch, it was a cultural moment – https://theconversation.com/chimamandas-lagos-homecoming-wasnt-just-a-book-launch-it-was-a-cultural-moment-261112

    MIL OSI Analysis –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Connie Francis was the voice of a generation and the soundtrack of post-war America

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Leigh Carriage, Senior Lecturer in Music, Southern Cross University

    Hulton Archive/Getty Images

    Connie Francis dominated the music charts in the late 1950s and early 1960s with hits like Stupid Cupid, Pretty Little Baby and Don’t Break the Heart That Loves You.

    The pop star, author and actor has died at 87, and will be remembered for recording the soundtrack songs of post-World War II America.

    Francis photographed around 1963.
    Silver Screen Collection/Getty Images

    An early life of music

    Francis was born Concetta Rosa Maria Franconero in Newark, New Jersey, to Italian immigrant parents. At a very early age, Francis was encouraged to take accordion and singing lessons, compete in talent shows, and later she would perform occasionally on the children’s production Star Time Kids on NBC, remaining there until she was 17.

    Within these early recordings you can hear her style begin to develop: her tone, great pitching, her versatility in vocal range. Her vocal delivery is technically controlled and stylistically structured, often nuanced – and even at this early stage demonstrating such power coupled with an adaptability for a broad range of repertoire.

    At 17, Francis signed a contract with MGM Records.

    One of her early recordings was the song Who’s Sorry Now?, written by Ted Snyder with lyrics by Bert Kalmar and Harry Ruby in 1923. Her version was released in 1957 and struggled to get noticed.

    The following year, Francis appeared with the ballad on American Bandstand. This performance exposed Francis’ talent for interpretation and her ability to bridge the teen and adult fanbase.

    The song would become a hit.

    It’s useful to listen to the original version to gain more insight into Francis’ vocal approach and styling. The original is an instrumental song of its time, with light whimsical call and response motives in a foxtrot feel.

    But in Francis’ version, she demonstrates her ability to revitalise a late 1950s pop music aesthetic. In an emotional delivery she croons her own rendition, with the country styling elements of Patsy Cline.

    Connie Francis performing in Milan in 1961.
    Universal Archive/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

    The voice of a generation

    Following Who’s Sorry Now?, Stupid Cupid (1958), Where The Boys Are (1960, the titular song of a feature film starring Francis) and Lipstick on Your Collar (1959) became the soundtrack songs of post-war America.

    Francis was supported with songs penned by the some of the best songwriters from the Brill Building, a creative collective in Manhattan that housed professional songwriters, working with staff writers Edna Lewis and George Goehring.

    In 1960, Francis released her hit Everybody’s Somebody’s Fool written by Jack Keller and Howard Greenfield. It was a teeny-bopper classic, and she became the first women to top the Billboard Hot 100.

    Francis records in the studio with Freddy Quinn at MGM in 1963 in New York.
    PoPsie Randolph/Michael Ochs Archives/Getty Images

    Styled after some of the other greats of the time – such as Frank Sinatra (1915–98), Dean Martin (1917–95) and Louis Prima (1910–70) – Francis’ performance on the Ed Sullivan show highlighted her connection to her Italian heritage and ability to draw from a broad repertoire.

    On the show, she performed Mama and La Paloma. Each performance is very carefully styled, a thoughtful approach to dynamics, sung in both English and Italian.

    Don’t Break the Heart That Loves You, a number one hit from 1962, features Francis’ gorgeous crooning harmonies. Then, the song breaks down into an earnest spoken part and finishes with a powerful belted vocal part of long notes.

    The song is full of confidence and hope.

    Away from the microphone

    Francis had two key roles in films, starring in Where the Boys Are (1960) and the comedy Follow the Boys (1963).

    She was an author of two books. The second, Who’s Sorry Now?, became a New York Times bestseller.

    Francis was involved with humanitarian causes. She was particularly involved with Women Against Rape, following her own violent rape in 1974, and the Valour Victims Assistance Legal Organisation, dedicated to supporting the legal rights of crime victims. A lesser known song in her repertoire, fitting to include here, is her version of Born Free from 1968.

    As a singer, Francis worked at her craft and transitioned effortlessly from one genre to another, performing for over five decades. She will be remembered as a trailblazing solo artist, leaving a strong legacy in popular music culture.

    She was the voice of one generation when she was a star. And in her final year she became the voice of a new generation as Pretty Little Baby, released in 1962, went viral on TikTok, with more than 1.4 million videos using her voice to share stories of their lives.

    Francis performs in Atlantic City, New Jersey, in 2009.
    Bobby Bank/WireImage

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

    – ref. Connie Francis was the voice of a generation and the soundtrack of post-war America – https://theconversation.com/connie-francis-was-the-voice-of-a-generation-and-the-soundtrack-of-post-war-america-261467

    MIL OSI Analysis –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachael Kent, Senior Lecturer in Digital Economy & Society Education, Department of Digital Humanities, King’s College London

    Krakenimages.com/Shutterstock

    On a sunny afternoon, I was scrolling through social media when I came across a video of a young woman tossing her sunscreen into a bin. “I don’t trust this stuff anymore,” she said to the camera, holding the bottle up like a piece of damning evidence.

    The clip had been viewed over half a million times, with commenters applauding her for “ditching chemicals” and recommending homemade alternatives like coconut oil and zinc powder.

    In my research on the effect of digital technology on health, I’ve seen how posts like this can shape real-world behaviour. And anecdotally, dermatologists have reported seeing more patients with severe sunburns or suspicious moles who say they stopped using sunscreen after watching similar videos.

    Sunscreen misinformation created by social media influencers is spreading and this isn’t just a random trend. It’s being fuelled by the platforms designed to host influencer content.


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


    In my book, The Digital Health Self, I explain how social media platforms are not neutral arenas for sharing information. They are commercial ecosystems engineered to maximise engagement and time spent online – metrics that directly drive advertising revenue.

    Content that sparks emotion – outrage, fear, inspiration – is boosted to the top of your feed. That’s why posts questioning or rejecting science often spread further than measured, evidence-based advice.

    Health misinformation thrives in this environment. A personal story about throwing out sunscreen performs well because it’s dramatic and emotionally charged. Algorithms reward such content with higher visibility: likes, shares and comments all signal popularity.

    Each second a user spends watching or reacting gives the platform more data – and more opportunities to serve targeted ads. This is how health misinformation becomes profitable.

    In my work, I describe social media platforms as “unregulated public health platforms”. They influence what users see and believe about health, but unlike public health institutions, they’re not bound by standards for accuracy or harm reduction.

    If an influencer claims sunscreen is toxic, that message won’t be factchecked or flagged – it will often be amplified. Why? Because controversy fuels engagement.




    Read more:
    Misinformation lends itself to social contagion – here’s how to recognize and combat it


    I call this environment “the credibility arena”: a space where trust is built not through expertise, but through performance and aesthetic appeal. As I write in my book: “Trust is earned not by what is known, but by how well one narrates suffering, recovery, and resilience.”

    A creator crying on camera about “toxins” can feel more authentic to viewers than a calm, clinical explanation of ultraviolet radiation from a medical expert.

    This shift has real consequences. Ultraviolet rays are invisible, constant and damaging. They penetrate cloud cover and harm skin even on cool days.

    Decades of research, especially in countries like Australia with high skin cancer rates, show that regular use of broad-spectrum sunscreen dramatically reduces risk. And yet, myths spreading online are urging people to do the opposite: to abandon sunscreen as dangerous or unnecessary.

    This trend isn’t driven solely by individual creators. It’s embedded in how content is designed, framed and presented. Algorithms prioritise short, emotionally-charged videos. Interfaces highlight trending sounds and hashtags. Recommendation systems push users toward extreme or dramatic content.

    These features all shape what we see and how we interpret it. The “For You” page isn’t neutral. It’s engineered to keep you scrolling, and shock value outperforms nuance every time.

    That’s why videos about “ditching chemicals” thrive, even as posts on other aspects of women’s health are shadowbanned or suppressed. Shadowbanning refers to when a platform limits the visibility of content – making it harder to find, without informing the user – often due to vague or inconsistently applied moderation rules.

    The system rewards spectacle, not science. Once creators discover that a particular format, like tossing products into a bin, boosts engagement, it’s replicated over and over again. Visibility isn’t organic. It’s manufactured.

    Those who throw away their sunscreen often believe they’re doing the right thing. They’re drawn to creators who feel relatable, sincere and independent — especially when official health campaigns seem cold, patronising or out of touch. But the consequences can be serious. Sun damage accumulates silently, raising skin cancer risk with every hour spent unprotected.

    Sunscreen isn’t perfect. It needs to be reapplied properly and paired with shade and protective clothing. But the evidence for its effectiveness is clear and robust.

    The real danger lies in a system that not only allows misinformation to spread, but also incentivises it. A system in which false claims can boost an influencer’s reach and a platform’s revenue.




    Read more:
    Four ways you can design social media posts to combat health misinformation


    To resist harmful health trends, we need to understand the systems that promote them. In the case of sunscreen, rejecting protection isn’t just a personal decision – it’s a symptom of a digital culture that turns health into content, and often profits from the harm it causes.

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

    – ref. Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage – https://theconversation.com/scroll-watch-burn-sunscreen-misinformation-and-its-real-world-damage-261137

    MIL OSI Analysis –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Rachael Kent, Senior Lecturer in Digital Economy & Society Education, Department of Digital Humanities, King’s College London

    Krakenimages.com/Shutterstock

    On a sunny afternoon, I was scrolling through social media when I came across a video of a young woman tossing her sunscreen into a bin. “I don’t trust this stuff anymore,” she said to the camera, holding the bottle up like a piece of damning evidence.

    The clip had been viewed over half a million times, with commenters applauding her for “ditching chemicals” and recommending homemade alternatives like coconut oil and zinc powder.

    In my research on the effect of digital technology on health, I’ve seen how posts like this can shape real-world behaviour. And anecdotally, dermatologists have reported seeing more patients with severe sunburns or suspicious moles who say they stopped using sunscreen after watching similar videos.

    Sunscreen misinformation created by social media influencers is spreading and this isn’t just a random trend. It’s being fuelled by the platforms designed to host influencer content.


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


    In my book, The Digital Health Self, I explain how social media platforms are not neutral arenas for sharing information. They are commercial ecosystems engineered to maximise engagement and time spent online – metrics that directly drive advertising revenue.

    Content that sparks emotion – outrage, fear, inspiration – is boosted to the top of your feed. That’s why posts questioning or rejecting science often spread further than measured, evidence-based advice.

    Health misinformation thrives in this environment. A personal story about throwing out sunscreen performs well because it’s dramatic and emotionally charged. Algorithms reward such content with higher visibility: likes, shares and comments all signal popularity.

    Each second a user spends watching or reacting gives the platform more data – and more opportunities to serve targeted ads. This is how health misinformation becomes profitable.

    In my work, I describe social media platforms as “unregulated public health platforms”. They influence what users see and believe about health, but unlike public health institutions, they’re not bound by standards for accuracy or harm reduction.

    If an influencer claims sunscreen is toxic, that message won’t be factchecked or flagged – it will often be amplified. Why? Because controversy fuels engagement.




    Read more:
    Misinformation lends itself to social contagion – here’s how to recognize and combat it


    I call this environment “the credibility arena”: a space where trust is built not through expertise, but through performance and aesthetic appeal. As I write in my book: “Trust is earned not by what is known, but by how well one narrates suffering, recovery, and resilience.”

    A creator crying on camera about “toxins” can feel more authentic to viewers than a calm, clinical explanation of ultraviolet radiation from a medical expert.

    This shift has real consequences. Ultraviolet rays are invisible, constant and damaging. They penetrate cloud cover and harm skin even on cool days.

    Decades of research, especially in countries like Australia with high skin cancer rates, show that regular use of broad-spectrum sunscreen dramatically reduces risk. And yet, myths spreading online are urging people to do the opposite: to abandon sunscreen as dangerous or unnecessary.

    This trend isn’t driven solely by individual creators. It’s embedded in how content is designed, framed and presented. Algorithms prioritise short, emotionally-charged videos. Interfaces highlight trending sounds and hashtags. Recommendation systems push users toward extreme or dramatic content.

    These features all shape what we see and how we interpret it. The “For You” page isn’t neutral. It’s engineered to keep you scrolling, and shock value outperforms nuance every time.

    That’s why videos about “ditching chemicals” thrive, even as posts on other aspects of women’s health are shadowbanned or suppressed. Shadowbanning refers to when a platform limits the visibility of content – making it harder to find, without informing the user – often due to vague or inconsistently applied moderation rules.

    The system rewards spectacle, not science. Once creators discover that a particular format, like tossing products into a bin, boosts engagement, it’s replicated over and over again. Visibility isn’t organic. It’s manufactured.

    Those who throw away their sunscreen often believe they’re doing the right thing. They’re drawn to creators who feel relatable, sincere and independent — especially when official health campaigns seem cold, patronising or out of touch. But the consequences can be serious. Sun damage accumulates silently, raising skin cancer risk with every hour spent unprotected.

    Sunscreen isn’t perfect. It needs to be reapplied properly and paired with shade and protective clothing. But the evidence for its effectiveness is clear and robust.

    The real danger lies in a system that not only allows misinformation to spread, but also incentivises it. A system in which false claims can boost an influencer’s reach and a platform’s revenue.




    Read more:
    Four ways you can design social media posts to combat health misinformation


    To resist harmful health trends, we need to understand the systems that promote them. In the case of sunscreen, rejecting protection isn’t just a personal decision – it’s a symptom of a digital culture that turns health into content, and often profits from the harm it causes.

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

    – ref. Scroll, watch, burn: sunscreen misinformation and its real‑world damage – https://theconversation.com/scroll-watch-burn-sunscreen-misinformation-and-its-real-world-damage-261137

    MIL OSI Analysis –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: OTC Markets Group Welcomes Andean Silver Ltd to OTCQX

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM), operator of regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities, today announced Andean Silver Ltd (ASX: ASL; OTCQX: ADSLF), an Australian mineral exploration and development company, has qualified to trade on the OTCQX® Best Market.

    Andean Silver Ltd begins trading today on OTCQX under the symbol “ADSLF.” U.S. investors can find current financial disclosure and Real-Time Level 2 quotes for the company on www.otcmarkets.com.

    Upgrading to the OTCQX Market is an important step for companies seeking to provide transparent trading for their U.S. investors. For companies listed on a qualified international exchange, streamlined market standards enable them to utilize their home market reporting to make their information available in the U.S. To qualify for OTCQX, companies must meet high financial standards, follow best practice corporate governance and demonstrate compliance with applicable securities laws.

    About Andean Silver Ltd
    Andean Silver Limited (formerly Mitre Mining Corporation Limited) is an Australian mineral exploration and development company focused on advancing its 100% owned Cerro Bayo Silver-Gold project in the Aysen region of Southern Chile which boasts some of the largest precious and base metals in the world. The project currently hosts Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources of 9.8Mt @ 353g/t AgEq for 111Moz AgEq.

    About OTC Markets Group Inc.
    OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM) operates regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities. Our data-driven disclosure standards form the foundation of our public markets: OTCQX® Best Market, OTCQB® Venture Market, OTCID™ Basic Market and Pink Limited™ Market. Our OTC Link® Alternative Trading Systems (ATSs) provide critical market infrastructure that broker-dealers rely on to facilitate trading. Our innovative model offers companies more efficient access to the U.S. financial markets.

    OTC Link ATS, OTC Link ECN, OTC Link NQB, and MOON ATS™ are each SEC regulated ATS, operated by OTC Link LLC, a FINRA and SEC registered broker-dealer, member SIPC. To learn more about how we create better informed and more efficient markets, visit www.otcmarkets.com.

    Subscribe to the OTC Markets RSS Feed

    Media Contact:
    OTC Markets Group Inc., +1 (212) 896-4428, media@otcmarkets.com

    The MIL Network –

    July 18, 2025
  • MIL-OSI: OTC Markets Group Welcomes Andean Silver Ltd to OTCQX

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, July 18, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM), operator of regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities, today announced Andean Silver Ltd (ASX: ASL; OTCQX: ADSLF), an Australian mineral exploration and development company, has qualified to trade on the OTCQX® Best Market.

    Andean Silver Ltd begins trading today on OTCQX under the symbol “ADSLF.” U.S. investors can find current financial disclosure and Real-Time Level 2 quotes for the company on www.otcmarkets.com.

    Upgrading to the OTCQX Market is an important step for companies seeking to provide transparent trading for their U.S. investors. For companies listed on a qualified international exchange, streamlined market standards enable them to utilize their home market reporting to make their information available in the U.S. To qualify for OTCQX, companies must meet high financial standards, follow best practice corporate governance and demonstrate compliance with applicable securities laws.

    About Andean Silver Ltd
    Andean Silver Limited (formerly Mitre Mining Corporation Limited) is an Australian mineral exploration and development company focused on advancing its 100% owned Cerro Bayo Silver-Gold project in the Aysen region of Southern Chile which boasts some of the largest precious and base metals in the world. The project currently hosts Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resources of 9.8Mt @ 353g/t AgEq for 111Moz AgEq.

    About OTC Markets Group Inc.
    OTC Markets Group Inc. (OTCQX: OTCM) operates regulated markets for trading 12,000 U.S. and international securities. Our data-driven disclosure standards form the foundation of our public markets: OTCQX® Best Market, OTCQB® Venture Market, OTCID™ Basic Market and Pink Limited™ Market. Our OTC Link® Alternative Trading Systems (ATSs) provide critical market infrastructure that broker-dealers rely on to facilitate trading. Our innovative model offers companies more efficient access to the U.S. financial markets.

    OTC Link ATS, OTC Link ECN, OTC Link NQB, and MOON ATS™ are each SEC regulated ATS, operated by OTC Link LLC, a FINRA and SEC registered broker-dealer, member SIPC. To learn more about how we create better informed and more efficient markets, visit www.otcmarkets.com.

    Subscribe to the OTC Markets RSS Feed

    Media Contact:
    OTC Markets Group Inc., +1 (212) 896-4428, media@otcmarkets.com

    The MIL Network –

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

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

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

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

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

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

    Other Second Quarter Credit, Capital and Company Highlights

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

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

    Net Interest Income

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

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

    Noninterest Income

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

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

    Noninterest Expense

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

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

    Income Tax

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

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

    Financial Condition

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

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

    Credit Quality

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

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

    Dividend Information

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

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

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

    About Veritex Holdings, Inc.

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

    CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

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

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

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

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


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

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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

    Supplemental Yield Trend

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


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

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The MIL Network –

    July 18, 2025
←Previous Page
1 … 71 72 73 74 75 … 1,471
Next Page→
NewzIntel.com

NewzIntel.com

MIL Open Source Intelligence

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

Twenty Twenty-Five

Designed with WordPress