Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council
As civilians lining up for humanitarian aid in Gaza are being killed, speakers in the Security Council today urged Israel to lift restrictions on aid operations in the Strip, called for a return to United Nations-led delivery mechanisms, and stressed the urgent need for both the release of hostages and a ceasefire.
“Gaza’s soaring humanitarian needs must be met without drawing people into a firing line,” said Tom Fletcher, Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator. He recalled General Assembly resolution 46/182, adopted in 1991, which laid the groundwork for modern international humanitarian assistance by establishing a framework and guiding principles — humanity, impartiality, neutrality, and independence — for the UN’s role in coordinating humanitarian efforts during emergencies.
Israel, as the occupying Power, is obligated to ensure that people have food and medical supplies, he said, adding: “But that is not happening. Instead, civilians are exposed to death and injury, forcible displacement, stripped of dignity.” He went on to urge Council members to consider whether Israel’s rules of engagement incorporate all feasible precautions to avoid and minimize civilian harm, in all circumstances. This means verifying targets, giving effective advance warnings, carefully choosing tactics and weapons, and canceling or suspending an attack if it would cause disproportionate civilian harm, he said.
Number of Aid Trucks Currently Allowed into Gaza ‘Drop in the Ocean’
Between 19 May and 14 July, only 1,633 trucks — or 62 per cent of the roughly 2,600 submitted to the Israeli authorities and 74 per cent of those approved for entry — reached the Kerem Shalom and Zikim crossings. “To be clear, this is a drop in the ocean of needs, compared to the average of 630 truckloads, that entered daily” during an earlier ceasefire, he said. The ceasefire proved what’s possible. It’s time to return to those levels without delay.
Turning to recent remarks by Israel’s Defence Minister about moving Palestinians into a “humanitarian city”, he said the proposal to forcibly displace Palestinians to a designated zone near Rafah is “not humanitarian”, underscoring the need to protect civilians wherever they are, release all hostages held by Hamas, allow humanitarian aid at scale and ensure the safety of humanitarian workers. “You owe that to Israeli and Palestinian civilians, to the last hopes of a sustainable peace, and to the UN Charter,” he said, calling for a ceasefire.
Today’s meeting was called by Denmark, France, Greece, Slovenia and the United Kingdom, following abhorrent reports of human suffering in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including killings at aid distribution sites operated by the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation — a non-UN mechanism established with support from Israel and the United States. Between 27 May and 7 July, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) recorded the killings of 798 Palestinian civilians — including children — desperate to find food, at or near distribution sites and humanitarian convoys.
International Community Failing Gaza’s Children
“Among the survivors was Donia, a mother seeking a lifeline for her family after months of desperation and hunger,” said Catherine Russell, Executive Director of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). Donia’s 1-year-old son, Mohammed, was killed in the attack after speaking his first words just hours earlier. The mother was lying critically injured in a hospital bed, clutching her son’s tiny shoe. “No parent should experience such a horrific tragedy,” she said.
“The simple truth is that we are failing Gaza’s children,” she said, noting that child malnutrition in Gaza has surged 180 per cent since February, with nearly 6,000 cases in June. Most households lack safe water, fueling disease outbreaks — waterborne illnesses now make up 44 per cent of medical consultations. Hospitals are overwhelmed, short on medicine and fuel, and emergency care is collapsing. At least 12,500 patients, including many children, need urgent medical evacuation, but few are being accepted abroad. “History will judge this failure harshly,” she warned, adding: “And the children will judge it too.”
She implored that UNICEF and its humanitarian partners be allowed to do their jobs. “We have proven that essentials like medicine, vaccines, water, food, and nutrition for babies can reach those in need, wherever they are, when we have appropriate access,” she said, calling for an urgent return to the functioning UN-led aid pipeline with safe and sustained humanitarian access through all available crossings.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (7th District of Washington)
WASHINGTON – U.S. Representative Pramila Jayapal (WA-07) and Grace Meng (NY-06) led lawmakers today in introducing the Housing is a Human Right Act, transformative legislation to authorize more than $300 billion for housing infrastructure to reduce homelessness across America. This urgent proposal would invest more than $200 billion in necessary affordable housing and support services and provide $27 billion a year for homelessness services, $100 million a year for community-driven alternatives to criminalization of those experiencing homelessness, and make targeted investments in communities at disproportionate risk of homelessness.
“Homelessness is not a personal failure, it’s a policy failure,” said Jayapal. “At a moment when Trump and Republicans just enacted the largest transfer of wealth from poor and working people to billionaires, while slashing food assistance and health care for millions of Americans, it is more urgent than ever to pass this legislation to invest in our most vulnerable communities. As rents skyrocket across the country and homeownership is out of reach for millions of Americans, we can and must invest in proven solutions to build more affordable housing. Housing is a human right – and every person deserves to have a safe place to call home.”
“Housing is a human right, and no one should be without a safe, stable place to call home,” said Meng. “That’s why I’m proud to reintroduce this landmark legislation, which dedicates billions of dollars toward ending homelessness nationwide. Homelessness is a complex issue with many causes, and simply providing a roof is not always enough. This bill tackles the root causes by funding affordable housing, expanding supportive services, and investing in communities that face the greatest risk. Together, we can build a future where everyone has a place to belong.”
According to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, across the United States, over 750,000 people experienced homelessness in 2024, an increase of 18 percent from 2023. Additionally, as costs have skyrocketed and the minimum wage has stagnated, there are no longer any American cities where a minimum-wage earner can afford the cost to rent a one-bedroom apartment.
This is particularly true in Washington state, which had the third-highest homeless population in the country in 2024. In 2024, on any given night in King County, there were an estimated 16,868 individuals experiencing homelessness, which is a whopping 26 percent higher than the 2022 estimate.
A lack of housing often leads to penalization, both civil and criminal, depending on local laws. It also makes it difficult to seek or hold a job, obtain assistance with accessing resources, find safe housing, and receive regular care for health needs. In fact, the harsh conditions of unsheltered homelessness lead to a mortality rate that is at least four times higher than that of the general public.
Vulnerable groups already targeted by this administration are also disproportionately likely to experience homelessness — including communities of color, LGBTQIA+ people, people with disabilities, seniors, veterans, former foster youth, and formerly incarcerated people. While Black communities make up 13 percent of the general population, they comprise 40 percent of people experiencing homelessness and half of all homeless families. And up to 40 percent of the 4.2 million youth experiencing homelessness identify as LGBTQIA+, while only making up 9.5 percent of the general population.
The Housing is a Human Right Act will address this crisis by:
Investing up to $100 billion for McKinney-Vento Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) and $100 billion for Continuum of Care (COC) grants.
Creating a new grant program to invest in humane infrastructure; providing municipalities with $6 billion a year through a flexible program that will allow them to address their most urgent housing needs to keep people in stable housing and support those experiencing homelessness.
Incentivizing local investments in humane, evidence-based models to support people experiencing homelessness, including alternatives to criminalization and penalization.
Providing $10 billion for FEMA emergency food and shelter grants while improving grants to better represent high rates of homelessness and income inequality.
Authorizing $100 million in grants to public libraries to provide assistance and tailored supports to persons experiencing homelessness.
The Housing is a Human Right Act is sponsored by Representatives Yassamin Ansari (AZ-03), André Carson (IN-07), Greg Casar (TX-35), Judy Chu (CA-28), Yvette D. Clarke (NY-09), Dwight Evans (PA-03), Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04), Jimmy Gomez (CA-34), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (GA-04), Summer Lee (PA-12), Ted Lieu (CA-36), James P. McGovern (MA-02), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC-00), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), Ilhan Omar (MN-05), Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Delia Ramirez (IL-03), Lateefah Simon (CA-12), Melanie Stansbury (NM-01), Shri Thanedar (MI-13), Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), Ritchie Torres (NY-15), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12).
The Housing is a Human Right Act is endorsed by A Way Home America; Bellwether Housing; Downtown Emergency Service Center; Homestead Community Land Trust; Lavender Rights Project; Low Income Housing Institute; Minority Veterans of America; National Alliance to End Homelessness; National Coalition for the Homeless; National Health Care for the Homeless Council; National Homelessness Law Center; National Housing Law Project; National Low Income Housing Coalition; RESULTS; Seattle/King County Coalition on Homelessness; The Southern Poverty Law Center; and Washington Low Income Housing Alliance.
ALBANY, NEW YORK – Kristin Keeble, age 54, of Pageland, South Carolina, was sentenced yesterday to 5 months in jail, to be followed by 3 years of supervised release with 6 months of home detention, for transmitting a threat to injure another in interstate commerce.
Acting United States Attorney John A. Sarcone III and Craig L. Tremaroli, Special Agent in Charge of the Albany Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), made the announcement.
As part of her guilty plea, Keeble admitted that on October 26, 2023, she sent four threatening, profanity-laced and racially derogatory audio messages through Facebook Messenger to a man in Catskill, New York. Keeble threatened to kill the victim by hanging him, along with a woman the victim knew, and the woman’s children, from a tree. Keeble purported to be acting with members of the Ku Klux Klan. Keeble knew, from the victim’s Facebook profile photo, that the victim was Black.
U.S. Attorney John A. Sarcone III stated: “No one should ever receive despicable, hateful threats like this. Those who threaten people over the Internet are going to be prosecuted and held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.”
FBI Special Agent in Charge Craig L. Tremaroli stated: “No individual should live in fear because of someone’s intolerance and hatred. Threats of violence, especially borne from hate, will never be tolerated and the FBI remains committed to working with our law enforcement partners hold the perpetrators accountable for their disturbing actions and bring justice to the victims.”
The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) investigated the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Alexander Wentworth-Ping prosecuted the case.
DAYTON, Ohio – The lead defendant in a $1.5 million chop shop conspiracy pleaded guilty in U.S. District Court.
Kahrese Tracey Scott Lee, 28, of Cincinnati, pleaded guilty to conspiring to transport stolen vehicles in interstate commerce and to knowingly operating a chop shop. He faces up to 15 years in prison.
According to court documents, between at least October 2023 and October 2024, Lee, who is also known as “Reese Lee” and “Bennett Jones,” knowingly worked with others to orchestrate an interstate stolen car ring. The defendant operated a garage in Dayton and received dozens of stolen vehicles. For example, during May 2024 alone, Lee’s Dayton chop shop housed within it more than half a million dollars in stolen cars and vehicle parts.
Lee often disassembled stolen vehicles and removed their parts for resale or for placement in another vehicle. He both received and traded or sold vehicles out of state.
On occasion, Lee also stole vehicles himself or worked with others to do so. During one planned theft incident, Lee and others traveled from Ohio to Indiana, where they stole three vehicles valued at more than $200,000 total from an auto lot.
Law enforcement ultimately discovered Lee and others in possession of the stolen vehicles in Alabama, where Lee planned to establish a new garage. Officers confiscated the cars and returned them to the Indiana dealership that owned them.
Lee and his accomplices had placed a tracking device on one of the stolen cars and tracked it back to Indiana. Lee traveled back to the Indiana dealership and attempted to steal the vehicle again; however, law enforcement apprehended him as he attempted to do so.
Lee and six others were charged by a federal indictment in November 2024.
Kelly A. Norris, Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio; Elena Iatarola, Special Agent in Charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Cincinnati Division; and Dayton Police Chief Kamran Afzal announced the guilty plea entered on July 11 before Senior U.S. District Judge Walter H. Rice. Deputy Criminal Chief Brent G. Tabacchi and Assistant United States Attorney Rob Painter are representing the United States in this case.
CONWAY, Ark., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Home BancShares, Inc. (NYSE: HOMB) (“Home” or the “Company”), parent company of Centennial Bank, released quarterly earnings today.
Quarterly Highlights
Metric
Q2 2025
Q1 2025
Q4 2024
Q3 2024
Q2 2024
Net income
$118.4 million
$115.2 million
$100.6 million
$100.0 million
$101.5 million
Net income, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
$114.6 million
$111.9 million
$99.8 million
$99.0 million
$103.9 million
Total revenue (net)
$271.0 million
$260.1 million
$258.4 million
$258.0 million
$254.6 million
Income before income taxes
$152.0 million
$147.2 million
$129.5 million
$129.1 million
$133.4 million
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR) (non-GAAP)(1)
$155.0 million
$147.2 million
$146.2 million
$148.0 million
$141.4 million
PPNR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
$150.4 million
$142.8 million
$145.2 million
$146.6 million
$141.9 million
Pre-tax net income to total revenue (net)
56.08%
56.58%
50.11%
50.03%
52.40%
Pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net) (non-GAAP)(1)
54.39%
54.91%
49.74%
49.49%
52.59%
P5NR (Pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage) (PPNR to total revenue (net)) (non-GAAP)(1)
57.19%
56.58%
56.57%
57.35%
55.54%
P5NR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
55.49%
54.91%
56.20%
56.81%
55.73%
ROA
2.08%
2.07%
1.77%
1.74%
1.79%
ROA, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
2.02%
2.01%
1.76%
1.72%
1.83%
NIM
4.44%
4.44%
4.39%
4.28%
4.27%
Purchase accounting accretion
$1.2 million
$1.4 million
$1.6 million
$1.9 million
$1.9 million
ROE
11.77%
11.75%
10.13%
10.23%
10.73%
ROE, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
11.39%
11.41%
10.05%
10.12%
10.98%
ROTCE (non-GAAP)(1)
18.26%
18.39%
15.94%
16.26%
17.29%
ROTCE, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
17.68%
17.87%
15.82%
16.09%
17.69%
Diluted earnings per share
$0.60
$0.58
$0.51
$0.50
$0.51
Diluted earnings per share, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
$0.58
$0.56
$0.50
$0.50
$0.52
Non-performing assets to total assets
0.60%
0.56%
0.63%
0.63%
0.56%
Common equity tier 1 capital
15.6%
15.4%
15.1%
14.7%
14.4%
Leverage
13.4%
13.3%
13.0%
12.5%
12.3%
Tier 1 capital
15.6%
15.4%
15.1%
14.7%
14.4%
Total risk-based capital
19.3%
19.1%
18.7%
18.3%
18.0%
Allowance for credit losses to total loans
1.86%
1.87%
1.87%
2.11%
2.00%
Book value per share
$20.71
$20.40
$19.92
$19.91
$19.30
Tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)(1)
$13.44
$13.15
$12.68
$12.67
$12.08
Dividends per share
$0.20
$0.195
$0.195
$0.195
$0.18
Shareholder buyback yield(2)
0.49%
0.53%
0.05%
0.56%
0.67%
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release. (2) Calculation of this metric is included in the schedules accompanying this release.
“I am once again very pleased with our quarterly results. Diluted EPS of $0.60 and net income of $118.4 million are both records for HOMB. The ongoing, consistent performance from our bankers led to numerous other records being set in the second quarter, further highlighting that strength is no accident,” said John Allison, Chairman & CEO of HOMB.
Stock Repurchases and Dividends
During the three-month period ended June 30, 2025, the Company repurchased 1.0 million shares of common stock, which equated to a shareholder buyback yield of 0.49%(1). In comparison, during the three-month period ended March 31, 2025, the Company repurchased 1.0 million shares of common stock, which equated to a shareholder buyback yield of 0.53%(1). The Company defines shareholder buyback yield as the percentage of the Company’s market capitalization spent on share repurchases. It reflects how much the Company is returning to the shareholders by reducing the number of outstanding shares, and it is calculated by dividing the Company’s total share repurchase cost for the period by the Company’s total market capitalization at the beginning of the period.
In addition, during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, the Company paid a dividend of $0.20 per share. This cash dividend represented a $0.005 per share, or 2.6%, increase over the $0.195 cash dividend paid during the first quarter of 2025.
Operating Highlights
Net income for the three-month period ended June 30, 2025 was $118.4 million, or $0.60 diluted earnings per share, both of which were records for the Company. When adjusting for non-fundamental items, net income and diluted earnings per share on an as-adjusted basis (non-GAAP), were $114.6 million(2) and $0.58 per share(2), respectively, for the three months ended June 30, 2025.
Our net interest margin was 4.44% for both of the three-month periods ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025. The yield on loans was 7.36% and 7.38% for the three months ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively, as average loans increased from $14.89 billion to $15.06 billion. Additionally, the rate on interest bearing deposits decreased to 2.64% as of June 30, 2025, from 2.67% as of March 31, 2025, while average interest-bearing deposits increased from $13.20 billion to $13.43 billion.
During the second quarter of 2025, there was $516,000 of event interest income compared to $1.3 million of event interest income for the first quarter of 2025. Purchase accounting accretion on acquired loans was $1.2 million and $1.4 million for the three-month periods ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively, and average purchase accounting loan discounts were $16.2 million and $17.5 million for the three-month periods ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively.
Net interest income on a fully taxable equivalent basis was $222.5 million for the three-month period ended June 30, 2025, and $217.2 million for the three-month period ended March 31, 2025. This increase in net interest income for the three-month period ended June 30, 2025, was the result of a $6.6 million increase in interest income, partially offset by a $1.3 million increase in interest expense. The $6.6 million increase in interest income was primarily the result of a $5.3 million increase in loan income and a $2.3 million increase in income from deposits with other banks, partially offset by a $1.0 million decrease in investment income. The $1.3 million increase in interest expense was due to a $1.7 million increase in interest expense on deposits, partially offset by a $363,000 decrease in FHLB and other borrowed funds.
The Company reported $51.1 million of non-interest income for the second quarter of 2025. The most important components of non-interest income were $13.5 million from other income, $12.6 million from other service charges and fees, $9.6 million from service charges on deposit accounts, $5.2 million from trust fees, $4.8 million in mortgage lending income, $2.7 million from dividends from FHLB, FRB, FNBB and other, $1.4 million from the increase in cash value of life insurance and $972,000 from the gain on sale of branches, equipment and other assets, net. Included within other income was $3.5 million in special income from equity investments and $885,000 in legal fee reimbursements.
Non-interest expense for the second quarter of 2025 was $116.0 million. The most important components of non-interest expense were $64.3 million from salaries and employee benefits, $29.3 million in other operating expense, $14.0 million in occupancy and equipment expenses and $8.4 million in data processing expenses. Included within other expense was $3.3 million in legal claims expense, which was partially offset by a $1.5 million FDIC assessment reduction. For the second quarter of 2025, our efficiency ratio was 41.68%, and our efficiency ratio, as adjusted (non-GAAP), was 42.01%(2).
Financial Condition
Total loans receivable were $15.18 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $14.95 billion at March 31, 2025. Total loans receivable of $15.18 billion were a record for the Company. Total deposits were $17.49 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $17.54 billion at March 31, 2025. Total assets were $22.91 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $22.99 billion at March 31, 2025.
During the second quarter of 2025, the Company had a $228.5 million increase in loans. Our community banking footprint experienced $106.8 million in organic loan growth during the quarter ended June 30, 2025, and Centennial CFG experienced $121.7 million of organic loan growth and had loans of $1.83 billion at June 30, 2025.
Non-performing loans to total loans were 0.63% and 0.60% at June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively. Non-performing assets to total assets were 0.60% and 0.56% at June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, respectively. Net loans charged-off were $1.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025, and net loans recovered were $4.1 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025. The charge-off detail by region for the quarters ended June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025 can be seen below.
For the Three Months Ended June 30, 2025
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Charge-offs
$
2,588
$
462
$
181
$
582
$
245
$
13
$
4,071
Recoveries
(2,172
)
(223
)
—
(22
)
(577
)
(2
)
(2,996
)
Net charge-offs (recoveries)
$
416
$
239
$
181
$
560
$
(332
)
$
11
$
1,075
For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Charge-offs
$
444
$
474
$
—
$
53
$
2,479
$
8
$
3,458
Recoveries
(6,514
)
(228
)
(658
)
(3
)
(117
)
(2
)
(7,522
)
Net (recoveries) charge-offs
$
(6,070
)
$
246
$
(658
)
$
50
$
2,362
$
6
$
(4,064
)
At June 30, 2025, non-performing loans were $96.3 million, and non-performing assets were $137.8 million. At March 31, 2025, non-performing loans were $89.6 million, and non-performing assets were $129.4 million.
The table below shows the non-performing loans and non-performing assets by region as June 30, 2025:
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Non-accrual loans
22,487
16,276
787
11,716
37,833
162
89,261
Loans 90+ days past due
3,557
2,341
—
—
1,133
—
7,031
Total non-performing loans
26,044
18,617
787
11,716
38,966
162
96,292
Foreclosed assets held for sale
17,259
863
22,842
—
565
—
41,529
Other non-performing assets
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Total other non-performing assets
17,259
863
22,842
—
565
—
41,529
Total non-performing assets
43,303
19,480
23,629
11,716
39,531
162
137,821
The table below shows the non-performing loans and non-performing assets by region as March 31, 2025:
(in thousands)
Texas
Arkansas
Centennial CFG
Shore Premier Finance
Florida
Alabama
Total
Non-accrual loans
23,694
15,214
2,766
5,444
39,108
157
86,383
Loans 90+ days past due
3,264
—
—
—
—
—
3,264
Total non-performing loans
26,958
15,214
2,766
5,444
39,108
157
89,647
Foreclosed assets held for sale
15,357
1,052
22,820
—
451
—
39,680
Other non-performing assets
63
—
—
—
—
—
63
Total other non-performing assets
15,420
1,052
22,820
—
451
—
39,743
Total non-performing assets
42,378
16,266
25,586
5,444
39,559
157
129,390
The Company’s allowance for credit losses on loans was $281.9 million at June 30, 2025, or 1.86% of total loans, compared to the allowance for credit losses on loans of $279.9 million, or 1.87% of total loans, at March 31, 2025. As of June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, the Company’s allowance for credit losses on loans was 292.72% and 312.27% of its total non-performing loans, respectively.
Stockholders’ equity was $4.09 billion at June 30, 2025, which increased approximately $42.8 million from March 31, 2025. The net increase in stockholders’ equity is primarily associated with the $78.9 million increase in retained earnings, which was partially offset by the $11.4 million increase in accumulated other comprehensive loss and the $27.5 million in stock repurchases for the quarter. Book value per common share was $20.71 at June 30, 2025, compared to $20.40 at March 31, 2025. Tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP) was $13.44(2) at June 30, 2025, compared to $13.15(2) at March 31, 2025. Book value per common share and tangible book value per common share, as of June 30, 2025, were both records for the Company.
Branches
The Company currently has 75 branches in Arkansas, 78 branches in Florida, 58 branches in Texas, 5 branches in Alabama and one branch in New York City.
Conference Call
Management will conduct a conference call to review this information at 1:00 p.m. CT (2:00 p.m. ET) on Thursday, July 17, 2025. We strongly encourage all participants to pre-register for the conference call webcast or the live call using one of the following links. First, participants can pre-register for the conference call webcast using the following link: https://events.q4inc.com/attendee/133918928. Participants who pre-register will be given a unique webcast link to gain immediate access to the conference call webcast. Second, participants can pre-register for the live call using the following link: https://www.netroadshow.com/events/login?show=862a0326&confId=84106. Participants who pre-register will be given the phone number and unique access codes to gain immediate access to the live call. Participants may pre-register now, or at any time prior to the call, and will immediately receive simple instructions via email. The Home BancShares conference call will also be scheduled as an event in your Outlook calendar.
Those without internet access or unable to pre-register may dial in and listen to the live call by calling 1-833-470-1428, Passcode: 171523. A replay of the call will be available by calling 1-866-813-9403, Passcode: 539251, which will be available until July 24, 2025, at 11:59 p.m. CT. Internet access to the call will be available live or in recorded version on the Company’s website at www.homebancshares.com.
About Home BancShares
Home BancShares, Inc. is a bank holding company headquartered in Conway, Arkansas. Its wholly-owned subsidiary, Centennial Bank, provides a broad range of commercial and retail banking plus related financial services to businesses, real estate developers, investors, individuals and municipalities. Centennial Bank has branch locations in Arkansas, Florida, Texas, South Alabama and New York City. The Company’s common stock is traded through the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “HOMB.” The Company was founded in 1998. Visit www.homebancshares.com or www.my100bank.com for more information.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
This press release contains financial information determined by methods other than in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The Company’s management uses these non-GAAP financial measures–including net income (earnings), as adjusted; pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR); PPNR, as adjusted; pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net); pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage; pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage, as adjusted; diluted earnings per common share, as adjusted; return on average assets, as adjusted; return on average assets excluding intangible amortization; return on average assets, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization; return on average common equity, as adjusted; return on average tangible common equity; return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted; return on average tangible common equity excluding intangible amortization; return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization; efficiency ratio, as adjusted; tangible book value per common share and tangible common equity to tangible assets–to provide meaningful supplemental information regarding our performance. These measures typically adjust GAAP performance measures to include the tax benefit associated with revenue items that are tax-exempt, as well as adjust income available to common shareholders for certain significant items or transactions that management believes are not indicative of the Company’s primary business operating results. Since the presentation of these GAAP performance measures and their impact differ between companies, management believes presentations of these non-GAAP financial measures provide useful supplemental information that is essential to a proper understanding of the operating results of the Company’s business. These non-GAAP disclosures should not be viewed as a substitute for operating results determined in accordance with GAAP, nor are they necessarily comparable to non-GAAP performance measures that may be presented by other companies. Where non-GAAP financial measures are used, the comparable GAAP financial measure, as well as the reconciliation to the comparable GAAP financial measure, can be found in the tables of this release.
(1) Calculation of this metric is included in the schedules accompanying this release. (2) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
General
This release contains forward-looking statements regarding the Company’s plans, expectations, goals and outlook for the future, including future financial results. Statements in this press release that are not historical facts should be considered forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future events, performance or results. When we use words or phrases like “may,” “plan,” “propose,” “contemplate,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “intend,” “continue,” “expect,” “project,” “predict,” “estimate,” “could,” “should,” “would” and similar expressions, you should consider them as identifying forward-looking statements, although we may use other phrasing. Forward-looking statements of this type speak only as of the date of this news release. By nature, forward-looking statements involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Various factors could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to, the following: economic conditions, credit quality, interest rates, loan demand, real estate values and unemployment, including any future impacts from inflation or changes in tariffs or trade policies; the ability to identify, complete and successfully integrate new acquisitions; the risk that expected cost savings and other benefits from acquisitions may not be fully realized or may take longer to realize than expected; diversion of management time on acquisition-related issues; the availability of and access to capital and liquidity on terms acceptable to us; legislative and regulatory changes and risks and expenses associated with current and future legislation and regulations; technological changes and cybersecurity risks and incidents; the effects of changes in accounting policies and practices; changes in governmental monetary and fiscal policies; political instability, military conflicts and other major domestic or international events; the impacts of recent or future adverse weather events, including hurricanes, and other natural disasters; disruptions, uncertainties and related effects on credit quality, liquidity and other aspects of our business and operations that may result from any future public health crises; competition from other financial institutions; potential claims, expenses and other adverse effects related to current or future litigation, regulatory examinations or other government actions; potential increases in deposit insurance assessments, increased regulatory scrutiny or market disruptions resulting from financial challenges in the banking industry; changes in the assumptions used in making the forward-looking statements; and other factors described in reports we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), including those factors set forth in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, filed with the SEC on February 27, 2025.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Donna Townsell Director of Investor Relations Home BancShares, Inc. (501) 328-4625
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated End of Period Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)
(In thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
ASSETS
Cash and due from banks
$
291,344
$
319,747
$
281,063
$
265,408
$
229,209
Interest-bearing deposits with other banks
809,729
975,983
629,284
752,269
829,507
Cash and cash equivalents
1,101,073
1,295,730
910,347
1,017,677
1,058,716
Federal funds sold
2,600
6,275
3,725
6,425
—
Investment securities – available-for-sale, net of allowance for credit losses
2,899,968
3,003,320
3,072,639
3,270,620
3,344,539
Investment securities – held-to-maturity, net of allowance for credit losses
1,265,292
1,269,896
1,275,204
1,277,090
1,278,853
Total investment securities
4,165,260
4,273,216
4,347,843
4,547,710
4,623,392
Loans receivable
15,180,624
14,952,116
14,764,500
14,823,979
14,781,457
Allowance for credit losses
(281,869
)
(279,944
)
(275,880
)
(312,574
)
(295,856
)
Loans receivable, net
14,898,755
14,672,172
14,488,620
14,511,405
14,485,601
Bank premises and equipment, net
379,729
384,843
386,322
388,776
383,691
Foreclosed assets held for sale
41,529
39,680
43,407
43,040
41,347
Cash value of life insurance
218,113
221,621
219,786
219,353
218,198
Accrued interest receivable
107,732
115,983
120,129
118,871
120,984
Deferred tax asset, net
174,323
170,120
186,697
176,629
195,041
Goodwill
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
Core deposit intangible
36,255
38,280
40,327
42,395
44,490
Other assets
383,400
376,030
345,292
352,583
350,192
Total assets
$
22,907,022
$
22,992,203
$
22,490,748
$
22,823,117
$
22,919,905
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Liabilities
Deposits:
Demand and non-interest-bearing
$
4,024,574
$
4,079,289
$
4,006,115
$
3,937,168
$
4,068,302
Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts
11,571,949
11,586,106
11,347,850
10,966,426
11,150,516
Time deposits
1,891,909
1,876,096
1,792,332
1,802,116
1,736,985
Total deposits
17,488,432
17,541,491
17,146,297
16,705,710
16,955,803
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
140,813
161,401
162,350
179,416
137,996
FHLB and other borrowed funds
550,500
600,500
600,750
1,300,750
1,301,050
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities
203,004
207,154
181,080
238,058
230,011
Subordinated debentures
438,957
439,102
439,246
439,394
439,542
Total liabilities
18,821,706
18,949,648
18,529,723
18,863,328
19,064,402
Stockholders’ equity
Common stock
1,972
1,982
1,989
1,989
1,997
Capital surplus
2,221,576
2,246,312
2,272,794
2,272,100
2,295,893
Retained earnings
2,097,712
2,018,801
1,942,350
1,880,562
1,819,412
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
(235,944
)
(224,540
)
(256,108
)
(194,862
)
(261,799
)
Total stockholders’ equity
4,085,316
4,042,555
3,961,025
3,959,789
3,855,503
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
$
22,907,022
$
22,992,203
$
22,490,748
$
22,823,117
$
22,919,905
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Income
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(In thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
Interest income:
Loans
$
276,041
$
270,784
$
278,409
$
281,977
$
274,324
$
546,825
$
539,618
Investment securities
Taxable
26,444
27,433
28,943
31,006
32,587
53,877
65,816
Tax-exempt
7,626
7,650
7,704
7,704
7,769
15,276
15,572
Deposits – other banks
8,951
6,620
7,585
12,096
12,564
15,571
23,092
Federal funds sold
53
55
73
62
59
108
120
Total interest income
319,115
312,542
322,714
332,845
327,303
631,657
644,218
Interest expense:
Interest on deposits
88,489
86,786
90,564
97,785
95,741
175,275
188,289
Federal funds purchased
—
—
—
1
—
—
—
FHLB and other borrowed funds
5,539
5,902
9,541
14,383
14,255
11,441
28,531
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
1,012
1,074
1,346
1,335
1,363
2,086
2,767
Subordinated debentures
4,123
4,124
4,121
4,121
4,122
8,247
8,219
Total interest expense
99,163
97,886
105,572
117,625
115,481
197,049
227,806
Net interest income
219,952
214,656
217,142
215,220
211,822
434,608
416,412
Provision for credit losses on loans
3,000
—
16,700
18,200
8,000
3,000
13,500
Provision for (recovery of) credit losses on unfunded commitments
—
—
—
1,000
—
—
(1,000
)
Recovery of credit losses on investment securities
—
—
—
(330
)
—
—
—
Total credit loss expense
3,000
—
16,700
18,870
8,000
3,000
12,500
Net interest income after credit loss expense
216,952
214,656
200,442
196,350
203,822
431,608
403,912
Non-interest income:
Service charges on deposit accounts
9,552
9,650
9,935
9,888
9,714
19,202
19,400
Other service charges and fees
12,643
10,689
11,651
10,490
10,679
23,332
20,868
Trust fees
5,234
4,760
4,526
4,403
4,722
9,994
9,788
Mortgage lending income
4,780
3,599
3,518
4,437
4,276
8,379
7,834
Insurance commissions
589
535
483
595
565
1,124
1,073
Increase in cash value of life insurance
1,415
1,842
1,215
1,161
1,279
3,257
2,474
Dividends from FHLB, FRB, FNBB & other
2,657
2,718
2,820
2,637
2,998
5,375
6,005
Gain on SBA loans
—
288
218
145
56
288
254
Gain (loss) on branches, equipment and other assets, net
972
(163
)
26
32
2,052
809
2,044
Gain (loss) on OREO, net
13
(376
)
(2,423
)
85
49
(363
)
66
Fair value adjustment for marketable securities
(238
)
442
850
1,392
(274
)
204
729
Other income
13,462
11,442
8,403
7,514
6,658
24,904
14,038
Total non-interest income
51,079
45,426
41,222
42,779
42,774
96,505
84,573
Non-interest expense:
Salaries and employee benefits
64,318
61,855
60,824
58,861
60,427
126,173
121,337
Occupancy and equipment
14,023
14,425
14,526
14,546
14,408
28,448
28,959
Data processing expense
8,364
8,558
9,324
9,088
8,935
16,922
18,082
Other operating expenses
29,335
28,090
27,536
27,550
29,415
57,425
56,303
Total non-interest expense
116,040
112,928
112,210
110,045
113,185
228,968
224,681
Income before income taxes
151,991
147,154
129,454
129,084
133,411
299,145
263,804
Income tax expense
33,588
31,945
28,890
29,046
31,881
65,533
62,165
Net income
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Home BancShares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
PER SHARE DATA
Diluted earnings per common share
$
0.60
$
0.58
$
0.51
$
0.50
$
0.51
$
1.18
$
1.00
Diluted earnings per common share, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
0.58
0.56
0.50
0.50
0.52
1.14
1.01
Basic earnings per common share
0.60
0.58
0.51
0.50
0.51
1.18
1.00
Dividends per share – common
0.20
0.195
0.195
0.195
0.18
0.395
0.36
Shareholder buyback yield(2)
0.49
%
0.53
%
0.05
%
0.56
%
0.67
%
1.02
%
1.12
%
Book value per common share
$
20.71
$
20.40
$
19.92
$
19.91
$
19.30
$
20.71
$
19.30
Tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP)(1)
13.44
13.15
12.68
12.67
12.08
13.44
12.08
STOCK INFORMATION
Average common shares outstanding
197,532
198,657
198,863
199,380
200,319
198,091
200,765
Average diluted shares outstanding
197,765
198,852
198,973
199,461
200,465
198,289
200,909
End of period common shares outstanding
197,239
198,206
198,882
198,879
199,746
197,239
199,746
ANNUALIZED PERFORMANCE METRICS
Return on average assets (ROA)
2.08
%
2.07
%
1.77
%
1.74
%
1.79
%
2.08
%
1.78
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted: (ROA, as adjusted) (non-GAAP)(1)
2.02
%
2.01
%
1.76
%
1.72
%
1.83
%
2.02
%
1.79
%
Return on average assets excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
2.25
%
2.24
%
1.92
%
1.88
%
1.94
%
2.25
%
1.93
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
2.18
%
2.18
%
1.91
%
1.86
%
1.98
%
2.18
%
1.94
%
Return on average common equity (ROE)
11.77
%
11.75
%
10.13
%
10.23
%
10.73
%
11.76
%
10.69
%
Return on average common equity, as adjusted: (ROE, as adjusted) (non-GAAP)(1)
11.39
%
11.41
%
10.05
%
10.12
%
10.98
%
11.40
%
10.76
%
Return on average tangible common equity (ROTCE) (non-GAAP)(1)
18.26
%
18.39
%
15.94
%
16.26
%
17.29
%
18.33
%
17.26
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted: (ROTCE, as adjusted) (non-GAAP)(1)
17.68
%
17.87
%
15.82
%
16.09
%
17.69
%
17.77
%
17.38
%
Return on average tangible common equity excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
18.50
%
18.64
%
16.18
%
16.51
%
17.56
%
18.57
%
17.53
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization (non-GAAP)(1)
17.92
%
18.12
%
16.07
%
16.34
%
17.97
%
18.02
%
17.66
%
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
(2) Calculation of this metric is included in the schedules accompanying this release.
Home BancShares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
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
Efficiency ratio
41.68
%
42.22
%
42.24
%
41.42
%
43.17
%
41.94
%
43.69
%
Efficiency ratio, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
42.01
%
42.84
%
42.00
%
41.66
%
42.59
%
42.42
%
43.50
%
Net interest margin – FTE (NIM)
4.44
%
4.44
%
4.39
%
4.28
%
4.27
%
4.44
%
4.20
%
Fully taxable equivalent adjustment
$
2,526
$
2,534
$
2,398
$
2,616
$
2,628
$
5,060
$
3,520
Total revenue (net)
271,031
260,082
258,364
257,999
254,596
531,113
500,985
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR) (non-GAAP)(1)
154,991
147,154
146,154
147,954
141,411
302,145
276,304
PPNR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
150,404
142,821
145,209
146,562
141,886
293,225
275,614
Pre-tax net income to total revenue (net)
56.08
%
56.58
%
50.11
%
50.03
%
52.40
%
56.32
%
52.66
%
Pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net) (non-GAAP)(1)
54.39
%
54.91
%
49.74
%
49.49
%
52.59
%
54.64
%
52.52
%
P5NR (Pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage) (PPNR to total revenue (net)) (non-GAAP)(1)
57.19
%
56.58
%
56.57
%
57.35
%
55.54
%
56.89
%
55.15
%
P5NR, as adjusted (non-GAAP)(1)
55.49
%
54.91
%
56.20
%
56.81
%
55.73
%
55.21
%
55.01
%
Total purchase accounting accretion
$
1,233
$
1,378
$
1,610
$
1,878
$
1,873
$
2,611
$
4,645
Average purchase accounting loan discounts
16,219
17,493
19,090
20,832
22,788
16,873
23,813
OTHER OPERATING EXPENSES
Advertising
$
2,054
$
1,928
$
1,941
$
1,810
$
1,692
$
3,982
$
3,346
Amortization of intangibles
2,025
2,047
2,068
2,095
2,140
4,072
4,280
Electronic banking expense
3,172
3,055
3,307
3,569
3,412
6,227
6,568
Directors’ fees
431
452
356
362
423
883
921
Due from bank service charges
283
281
271
302
282
564
558
FDIC and state assessment
1,636
3,387
3,216
3,360
5,494
5,023
8,812
Insurance
1,049
999
900
926
905
2,048
1,808
Legal and accounting
2,360
3,641
2,361
1,902
2,617
6,001
4,698
Other professional fees
2,211
1,947
1,736
2,062
2,108
4,158
4,344
Operating supplies
711
711
711
673
613
1,422
1,296
Postage
488
503
518
522
497
991
1,020
Telephone
419
436
438
455
444
855
914
Other expense
12,496
8,703
9,713
9,512
8,788
21,199
17,738
Total other operating expenses
$
29,335
$
28,090
$
27,536
$
27,550
$
29,415
$
57,425
$
56,303
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
Home BancShares, Inc.
Selected Financial Information
(Unaudited)
(Dollars in thousands)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
BALANCE SHEET RATIOS
Total loans to total deposits
86.80
%
85.24
%
86.11
%
88.74
%
87.18
%
Common equity to assets
17.83
%
17.58
%
17.61
%
17.35
%
16.82
%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP)(1)
12.35
%
12.09
%
11.98
%
11.78
%
11.23
%
.
LOANS RECEIVABLE
Real estate
Commercial real estate loans
Non-farm/non-residential
$
5,553,182
$
5,588,681
$
5,426,780
$
5,496,536
$
5,599,925
Construction/land development
2,695,561
2,735,760
2,736,214
2,741,419
2,511,817
Agricultural
315,926
335,437
336,993
335,965
345,461
Residential real estate loans
Residential 1-4 family
2,138,990
1,947,872
1,956,489
1,932,352
1,910,143
Multifamily residential
620,439
576,089
496,484
482,648
509,091
Total real estate
11,324,098
11,183,839
10,952,960
10,988,920
10,876,437
Consumer
1,218,834
1,227,745
1,234,361
1,219,197
1,189,386
Commercial and industrial
2,107,326
2,045,036
2,022,775
2,084,667
2,242,072
Agricultural
323,457
314,323
367,251
352,963
314,600
Other
206,909
181,173
187,153
178,232
158,962
Loans receivable
$
15,180,624
$
14,952,116
$
14,764,500
$
14,823,979
$
14,781,457
ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES
Balance, beginning of period
$
279,944
$
275,880
$
312,574
$
295,856
$
290,294
Loans charged off
4,071
3,458
53,959
2,001
3,098
Recoveries of loans previously charged off
2,996
7,522
565
519
660
Net loans charged off (recovered)
1,075
(4,064
)
53,394
1,482
2,438
Provision for credit losses – loans
3,000
—
16,700
18,200
8,000
Balance, end of period
$
281,869
$
279,944
$
275,880
$
312,574
$
295,856
Net charge-offs (recoveries) to average total loans
0.03
%
(0.11
)%
1.44
%
0.04
%
0.07
%
Allowance for credit losses to total loans
1.86
%
1.87
%
1.87
%
2.11
%
2.00
%
NON-PERFORMING ASSETS
Non-performing loans
Non-accrual loans
$
89,261
$
86,383
$
93,853
$
95,747
$
78,090
Loans past due 90 days or more
7,031
3,264
5,034
5,356
8,251
Total non-performing loans
96,292
89,647
98,887
101,103
86,341
Other non-performing assets
Foreclosed assets held for sale, net
41,529
39,680
43,407
43,040
41,347
Other non-performing assets
—
63
63
63
63
Total other non-performing assets
41,529
39,743
43,470
43,103
41,410
Total non-performing assets
$
137,821
$
129,390
$
142,357
$
144,206
$
127,751
Allowance for credit losses for loans to non-performing loans
292.72
%
312.27
%
278.99
%
309.16
%
342.66
%
Non-performing loans to total loans
0.63
%
0.60
%
0.67
%
0.68
%
0.58
%
Non-performing assets to total assets
0.60
%
0.56
%
0.63
%
0.63
%
0.56
%
(1) Calculation of this metric and the reconciliation to GAAP are included in the schedules accompanying this release.
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated Net Interest Margin
(Unaudited)
Three Months Ended
June 30, 2025
March 31, 2025
(Dollars in thousands)
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
ASSETS
Earning assets
Interest-bearing balances due from banks
$
813,833
$
8,951
4.41
%
$
611,962
$
6,620
4.39
%
Federal funds sold
4,878
53
4.36
%
5,091
55
4.38
%
Investment securities – taxable
3,095,764
26,444
3.43
%
3,179,290
27,433
3.50
%
Investment securities – non-taxable – FTE
1,113,044
10,033
3.62
%
1,135,783
10,061
3.59
%
Loans receivable – FTE
15,055,414
276,160
7.36
%
14,893,912
270,907
7.38
%
Total interest-earning assets
20,082,933
321,641
6.42
%
19,826,038
315,076
6.45
%
Non-earning assets
2,714,805
2,722,797
Total assets
$
22,797,738
$
22,548,835
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Liabilities
Interest-bearing liabilities
Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts
$
11,541,641
$
71,042
2.47
%
$
11,402,688
$
69,672
2.48
%
Time deposits
1,886,147
17,447
3.71
%
1,801,503
17,114
3.85
%
Total interest-bearing deposits
13,427,788
88,489
2.64
%
13,204,191
86,786
2.67
%
Federal funds purchased
46
—
—
%
—
—
—
%
Securities sold under agreement to repurchase
143,752
1,012
2.82
%
155,861
1,074
2.79
%
FHLB and other borrowed funds
566,984
5,539
3.92
%
600,681
5,902
3.98
%
Subordinated debentures
439,027
4,123
3.77
%
439,173
4,124
3.81
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
14,577,597
99,163
2.73
%
14,399,906
97,886
2.76
%
Non-interest bearing liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits
3,981,901
3,980,944
Other liabilities
202,085
190,314
Total liabilities
18,761,583
18,571,164
Shareholders’ equity
4,036,155
3,977,671
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
$
22,797,738
$
22,548,835
Net interest spread
3.69
%
3.69
%
Net interest income and margin – FTE
$
222,478
4.44
%
$
217,190
4.44
%
Home BancShares, Inc.
Consolidated Net Interest Margin
(Unaudited)
Six Months Ended
June 30, 2025
June 30, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
Average Balance
Income/ Expense
Yield/ Rate
ASSETS
Earning assets
Interest-bearing balances due from banks
$
713,455
$
15,571
4.40
%
$
865,686
$
23,092
5.36
%
Federal funds sold
4,984
108
4.37
%
4,718
120
5.11
%
Investment securities – taxable
3,137,296
53,877
3.46
%
3,459,639
65,816
3.83
%
Investment securities – non-taxable – FTE
1,124,351
20,094
3.60
%
1,221,431
18,896
3.11
%
Loans receivable – FTE
14,975,109
547,067
7.37
%
14,568,029
539,814
7.45
%
Total interest-earning assets
19,955,195
636,717
6.43
%
20,119,503
647,738
6.47
%
Non-earning assets
2,718,779
2,660,101
Total assets
$
22,673,974
$
22,779,604
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Liabilities
Interest-bearing liabilities
Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts
$
11,472,548
$
140,713
2.47
%
$
11,078,749
$
153,525
2.79
%
Time deposits
1,844,059
34,562
3.78
%
1,708,902
34,764
4.09
%
Total interest-bearing deposits
13,316,607
175,275
2.65
%
12,787,651
188,289
2.96
%
Federal funds purchased
23
—
—
%
17
—
—
%
Securities sold under agreement to repurchase
149,773
2,086
2.81
%
165,962
2,767
3.35
%
FHLB and other borrowed funds
583,739
11,441
3.95
%
1,301,071
28,531
4.41
%
Subordinated debentures
439,100
8,247
3.79
%
439,686
8,219
3.76
%
Total interest-bearing liabilities
14,489,242
197,049
2.74
%
14,694,387
227,806
3.12
%
Non-interest bearing liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits
3,981,425
4,050,787
Other liabilities
196,232
239,704
Total liabilities
18,666,899
18,984,878
Shareholders’ equity
4,007,075
3,794,726
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity
$
22,673,974
$
22,779,604
Net interest spread
3.69
%
3.35
%
Net interest income and margin – FTE
$
439,668
4.44
%
$
419,932
4.20
%
Home BancShares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Reconciliations
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Six Months Ended
(Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2025
Jun. 30, 2024
EARNINGS, AS ADJUSTED
GAAP net income available to common shareholders (A)
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Pre-tax adjustments
FDIC special assessment
(1,516
)
—
—
—
2,260
(1,516
)
2,260
BOLI death benefits
(1,243
)
—
(95
)
—
—
(1,243
)
(162
)
Gain on sale of premises and equipment
(983
)
—
—
—
(2,059
)
(983
)
(2,059
)
Fair value adjustment for marketable securities
238
(442
)
(850
)
(1,392
)
274
(204
)
(729
)
Special income from equity investment
(3,498
)
(3,891
)
—
—
—
(7,389
)
—
Legal fee reimbursement
(885
)
—
—
—
—
(885
)
—
Legal claims expense
3,300
—
—
—
—
3,300
—
Total pre-tax adjustments
(4,587
)
(4,333
)
(945
)
(1,392
)
475
(8,920
)
(690
)
Tax-effect of adjustments
(817
)
(1,059
)
(208
)
(348
)
119
(1,876
)
(132
)
Deferred tax asset write-down
—
—
—
—
2,030
—
2,030
Total adjustments after-tax (B)
(3,770
)
(3,274
)
(737
)
(1,044
)
2,386
(7,044
)
1,472
Earnings, as adjusted (C)
$
114,633
$
111,935
$
99,827
$
98,994
$
103,916
$
226,568
$
203,111
Average diluted shares outstanding (D)
197,765
198,852
198,973
199,461
200,465
198,289
200,909
GAAP diluted earnings per share: (A/D)
$
0.60
$
0.58
$
0.51
$
0.50
$
0.51
$
1.18
$
1.00
Adjustments after-tax: (B/D)
(0.02
)
(0.02
)
(0.01
)
0.00
0.01
(0.04
)
0.01
Diluted earnings per common share, as adjusted: (C/D)
$
0.58
$
0.56
$
0.50
$
0.50
$
0.52
$
1.14
$
1.01
ANNUALIZED RETURN ON AVERAGE ASSETS
Return on average assets: (A/E)
2.08
%
2.07
%
1.77
%
1.74
%
1.79
%
2.08
%
1.78
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted: (ROA, as adjusted) ((A+D)/E)
2.02
%
2.01
%
1.76
%
1.72
%
1.83
%
2.02
%
1.79
%
Return on average assets excluding intangible amortization: ((A+C)/(E-F))
2.25
%
2.24
%
1.92
%
1.88
%
1.94
%
2.25
%
1.93
%
Return on average assets, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization: ((A+C+D)/(E-F))
2.18
%
2.18
%
1.91
%
1.86
%
1.98
%
2.18
%
1.94
%
GAAP net income available to common shareholders (A)
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Amortization of intangibles (B)
2,025
2,047
2,068
2,095
2,140
4,072
4,280
Amortization of intangibles after-tax (C)
1,530
1,547
1,563
1,572
1,605
3,077
3,210
Adjustments after-tax (D)
(3,770
)
(3,274
)
(737
)
(1,044
)
2,386
(7,044
)
1,472
Average assets (E)
22,797,738
22,548,835
22,565,077
22,893,784
22,875,949
22,673,974
22,779,604
Average goodwill & core deposit intangible (F)
1,435,480
1,437,515
1,439,566
1,441,654
1,443,778
1,436,492
1,444,840
Home BancShares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Reconciliations
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
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
ANNUALIZED RETURN ON AVERAGE COMMON EQUITY
Return on average common equity: (A/D)
11.77
%
11.75
%
10.13
%
10.23
%
10.73
%
11.76
%
10.69
%
Return on average common equity, as adjusted: (ROE, as adjusted) ((A+C)/D)
11.39
%
11.41
%
10.05
%
10.12
%
10.98
%
11.40
%
10.76
%
Return on average tangible common equity: (ROTCE) (A/(D-E))
18.26
%
18.39
%
15.94
%
16.26
%
17.29
%
18.33
%
17.26
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted: (ROTCE, as adjusted) ((A+C)/(D-E))
17.68
%
17.87
%
15.82
%
16.09
%
17.69
%
17.77
%
17.38
%
Return on average tangible common equity excluding intangible amortization: (B/(D-E))
18.50
%
18.64
%
16.18
%
16.51
%
17.56
%
18.57
%
17.53
%
Return on average tangible common equity, as adjusted, excluding intangible amortization: ((B+C)/(D-E))
17.92
%
18.12
%
16.07
%
16.34
%
17.97
%
18.02
%
17.66
%
GAAP net income available to common shareholders (A)
$
118,403
$
115,209
$
100,564
$
100,038
$
101,530
$
233,612
$
201,639
Earnings excluding intangible amortization (B)
119,933
116,756
102,127
101,610
103,135
236,689
204,849
Adjustments after-tax (C)
(3,770
)
(3,274
)
(737
)
(1,044
)
2,386
(7,044
)
1,472
Average common equity (D)
4,036,155
3,977,671
3,950,176
3,889,712
3,805,800
4,007,075
3,794,726
Average goodwill & core deposits intangible (E)
1,435,480
1,437,515
1,439,566
1,441,654
1,443,778
1,436,492
1,444,840
EFFICIENCY RATIO & P5NR
Efficiency ratio: ((D-G)/(B+C+E))
41.68
%
42.22
%
42.24
%
41.42
%
43.17
%
41.94
%
43.69
%
Efficiency ratio, as adjusted: ((D-G-I)/(B+C+E-H))
42.01
%
42.84
%
42.00
%
41.66
%
42.59
%
42.42
%
43.50
%
Pre-tax net income to total revenue (net) (A/(B+C))
56.08
%
56.58
%
50.11
%
50.03
%
52.40
%
56.32
%
52.66
%
Pre-tax net income, as adjusted, to total revenue (net) ((A+F)/(B+C))
54.39
%
54.91
%
49.74
%
49.49
%
52.59
%
54.64
%
52.52
%
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income (PPNR) (B+C-D)
$
154,991
$
147,154
$
146,154
$
147,954
$
141,411
$
302,145
$
276,304
Pre-tax, pre-provision, net income, as adjusted (B+C-D+F)
$
150,404
$
142,821
$
145,209
$
146,562
$
141,886
$
293,225
$
275,614
P5NR (Pre-tax, pre-provision, profit percentage) PPNR to total revenue (net)) (B+C-D)/(B+C)
57.19
%
56.58
%
56.57
%
57.35
%
55.54
%
56.89
%
55.15
%
P5NR, as adjusted (B+C-D+F)/(B+C)
55.49
%
54.91
%
56.20
%
56.81
%
55.73
%
55.21
%
55.01
%
Pre-tax net income (A)
$
151,991
$
147,154
$
129,454
$
129,084
$
133,411
$
299,145
$
263,804
Net interest income (B)
219,952
214,656
217,142
215,220
211,822
434,608
416,412
Non-interest income (C)
51,079
45,426
41,222
42,779
42,774
96,505
84,573
Non-interest expense (D)
116,040
112,928
112,210
110,045
113,185
228,968
224,681
Fully taxable equivalent adjustment (E)
2,526
2,534
2,398
2,616
2,628
5,060
3,520
Total pre-tax adjustments (F)
(4,587
)
(4,333
)
(945
)
(1,392
)
475
(8,920
)
(690
)
Amortization of intangibles (G)
2,025
2,047
2,068
2,095
2,140
4,072
4,280
Adjustments:
Non-interest income:
Fair value adjustment for marketable securities
$
(238
)
$
442
$
850
$
1,392
$
(274
)
$
204
$
729
Gain (loss) on OREO
13
(376
)
(2,423
)
85
49
(363
)
66
Gain (loss) on branches, equipment and other assets, net
972
(163
)
26
32
2,052
809
2,044
Special income from equity investment
3,498
3,891
—
—
—
7,389
—
BOLI death benefits
1,243
—
95
—
—
1,243
162
Legal expense reimbursement
885
—
—
—
—
885
—
Total non-interest income adjustments (H)
$
6,373
$
3,794
$
(1,452
)
$
1,509
$
1,827
$
10,167
$
3,001
Non-interest expense:
FDIC special assessment
(1,516
)
—
—
—
2,260
(1,516
)
2,260
Legal claims expense
3,300
—
—
—
—
3,300
—
Total non-interest expense adjustments (I)
$
1,784
$
—
$
—
$
—
$
2,260
$
1,784
$
2,260
Home BancShares, Inc.
Non-GAAP Reconciliations
(Unaudited)
Quarter Ended
Jun. 30, 2025
Mar. 31, 2025
Dec. 31, 2024
Sep. 30, 2024
Jun. 30, 2024
TANGIBLE BOOK VALUE PER COMMON SHARE
Book value per common share: (A/B)
$
20.71
$
20.40
$
19.92
$
19.91
$
19.30
Tangible book value per common share: ((A-C-D)/B)
13.44
13.15
12.68
12.67
12.08
Total stockholders’ equity (A)
$
4,085,316
$
4,042,555
$
3,961,025
$
3,959,789
$
3,855,503
End of period common shares outstanding (B)
197,239
198,206
198,882
198,879
199,746
Goodwill (C)
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
1,398,253
Core deposit and other intangibles (D)
36,255
38,280
40,327
42,395
44,490
TANGIBLE COMMON EQUITY TO TANGIBLE ASSETS
Equity to assets: (B/A)
17.83
%
17.58
%
17.61
%
17.35
%
16.82
%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets: ((B-C-D)/(A-C-D))
Congressman Russell Fry (SC-07) Introduces the Kayla Hamilton Act to Protect American Communities from Dangerous UAC Placements
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Congressman Russell Fry (SC-07) introduced the Kayla Hamilton Act, critical legislation designed to close dangerous loopholes in the federal government’s handling of unaccompanied alien children (UACs) and to prevent tragedies like the murder of Kayla Hamilton, an autistic 20-year-old woman from Maryland. Congressmen Troy Nehls (TX-22) and Barry Moore (AL-01) are original cosponsors of this legislation.
Kayla was brutally murdered by Walter Javier Martinez, a UAC who was released to a sponsor—an individual responsible for housing and supervising the UAC—by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) before any background checks were completed. Because the Biden-Harris administration did not complete background checks prior to a UAC’s release, authorities were unaware that Martinez was in fact an El Salvadorian with a criminal history and affiliation with the MS-13 gang. Once authorities then took him into custody, Martinez also admitted to having committed four murders, two rapes, and other crimes.
To prevent such tragedies from happening again, the Kayla Hamilton Act mandates that the HHS Secretary consider whether the UAC poses a danger to themselves or the community when determining potential placements for them.
Additional reforms in the Kayla Hamilton Act include:
Requires HHS to contact the consulate or embassy of a UAC’s home country to determine any criminal history or gang affiliation for UACs aged 12 and older.
Mandates that HHS screen for gang tattoos during standard medical assessments and requires UACs with such indicators to be placed in secure facilities.
UACs with known gang ties or tattoos must be housed in secure HHS facilities, not released into communities.
Prohibits UAC placement with sponsors who are in the United States illegally.
Requires HHS to collect and share background information on all potential sponsors and their adult household members—including immigration status and results of FBI fingerprint checks—with the Department of Homeland Security.
Removes discretionary authority that previously allowed HHS to ignore risk factors such as gang activity or criminal history during placement decisions.
“The tragic murder of Kayla Hamilton was preventable,” said Congressman Fry. “The Biden Administration’s policies opened the door to criminal exploitation of our immigration system—and the Kayla Hamilton Act ensures that no future administration can make those same reckless decisions. It’s time we put public safety, accountability, and the protection of American citizens first. This bill makes clear that the integrity of our immigration system can no longer be an afterthought.”
“No one else should ever again have to suffer the way my daughter Kayla did,” said Tammy Nobles, Kayla Hamilton’s mother. “The Biden-Harris Administration’s policies prioritized the comfort of illegal aliens, like Kayla’s killer, over the safety of innocent Americans. The Kayla Hamilton Act is necessary to ensure background checks of unaccompanied alien children occur before they are released. If that had happened in the case of Kayla’s killer, authorities would have known he was an MS-13 gang member.”
“The Biden Administration’s failed policies regarding unaccompanied alien children put the American people at risk and resulted in one of the largest state-sponsored child trafficking operations in human history,” said Congressman Nehls. “The failure to conduct criminal background checks on the UACs cost the life of Kayla Hamilton, and the failure to vet UAC sponsors resulted in thousands of children likely being trafficked for labor or sex. I’m proud to cosponsor Congressman Fry’s Kayla Hamilton Act to prevent any future administration from releasing UAC gang members into our communities or failing to vet UAC sponsors, putting the safety of the American people first.”
“The tragic murder of Kayla Hamilton should have never happened,” said Congressman Moore. “This heartbreaking case is a direct result of reckless catch and release policies seen under the Biden Administration and the failure of Democrats in Congress to put the safety of American citizens first. We must ensure unaccompanied minors aren’t placed with dangerous individuals or illegal aliens without proper vetting. I am proud to be a co-sponsor of Rep. Fry’s bill, The Kayla Hamilton Act, which gives us the opportunity to close threatening loopholes, stop the flow of gang members like MS-13 into our communities, and restore common sense and accountability to our immigration system.”
Congressman Fry serves on both the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the House Judiciary Committee. To stay up to date with Congressman Fry and his work for the Seventh District, follow his official Facebook, Instagram, and X pages and visit his website at fry.house.gov.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Press release
PM set to reshape how Government works with communities to tackle Britain’s biggest challenges
The Prime Minister will launch the Civil Society Covenant – a new way of working that puts people at the heart of government.
Charities, faith groups, social enterprises and impact investors recognised as essential partners in tackling the country’s biggest challenges and deliver on the Plan for Change
Ministers and community leaders gather at a national summit to show how collaboration is already delivering – and will go further.
The Prime Minister will join community leaders, campaigners, and charities from across the UK to launch the Civil Society Covenant – a new approach that listens, learns and delivers alongside those on the frontline.
In his keynote speech, the Prime Minister will reflect on a promise made 18 months ago in opposition: to work in genuine partnership with civil society in the national interest. Since taking office, that promise has become reality – resetting the relationship between government and the people working every day to make their communities stronger.
At its core, the Covenant is about delivering real change for working people – strengthening public services, creating safe communities, and providing new opportunities for communities to thrive. It gives civil society a home at the heart of government and recognises that national renewal can’t be delivered from Westminster alone.
The summit brings together leaders from charities, faith organisations, philanthropists, social investors and grassroots groups to focus on the UK’s most urgent issues – from healthcare access to tackling violence against women and girls. These are challenges that disproportionately affect working families, and the Covenant ensures their voices are heard and their needs are met.
It will show how civil society leadership, backed by government support, is already delivering results. As seen by:
Tackling domestic abuse: The Drive Project, a third-sector initiative, has seen percentages of perpetrators using physical abuse cut by 82%. The government is investing £53 million to expand the programme across England and Wales, working to tackle the behaviour of perpetrators and protect victims.
Supporting vulnerable children and families: Newly launched £500 million Better Futures Fund will support up to 200,000 children and families through early intervention. This is being matched by local and philanthropic investment.
Transparent immigration: Over 10 million people have transitioned to a digital immigration status, supported by 72 local organisations helping vulnerable communities. This system strengthens border security, reduces fraud, and ensures only those with the right to be here can access services.
Building the workforce we need: A new Labour Market Evidence Group is helping reduce reliance on overseas recruitment by boosting domestic skills and training.
This is about rebalancing power and responsibility,” the Prime Minister will say.
Not the top-down approach of the state working alone. Not the transactional approach of markets left to their own devices. But a new way forward – where government and civil society work side by side to deliver real change.
The Civil Society Covenant has been shaped by over 1,200 organisations since it was first announced in October 2024. From national charities, trade unions and local campaigners, it sets out how government and communities will work together to deliver lasting change.
Ahead of speaking at the Summit later today, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said:
The Civil Society Covenant is about delivering real results for working people. It marks a shift from a government that kept civil society at arm’s length to one that actively partners with it, on equal footing.
Our charities, volunteers, and social enterprises are embedded in the communities they serve and trusted by the people they support. That makes them the perfect partners for shaping the change we need.
By working together, we’ll improve public services, make them more responsive and rooted in local needs, and ensure that every community benefits as part of our Plan for Change.
The summit will spotlight how this partnership works in practice. Following the Prime Minister’s keynote, mission-led sessions will include:
Jess Phillips, Minister for Safeguarding, and Alex Davies-Jones, Minister for Victims and Violence Against Women and Girls, chairing a Safer Streets panel with campaigners.
Bridget Phillipson, Education Secretary, outlining how civil society will support the Opportunity Mission.
Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, talking about how a mission-driven government can work in partnership with impact investors and philanthropists
They will be joined by civil society leaders delivering change across the country, in areas such as early years support, health and violence against women and girls.
The Covenant will play a key role in delivering the government’s Plan for Change—supporting the opportunity mission by breaking down barriers for young people, helping to build an NHS fit for the future, and ensuring that no community is left behind.
As part of the Summit, the government will also announce:
A new Joint Civil Society Covenant Council to drive delivery. The Joint Council will set direction and provide strategic oversight for implementation of the Covenant. It will have cross-sector membership comprising senior leaders from civil society and senior representatives from government departments to provide a key forum for driving progress in the reset of the relationship between government and civil society.
A Local Covenant Partnerships programme to support collaboration between civil society, councils and public services in communities that need it most.
ENDS
Additional quotes:
Sarah Elliott & Jane Ide, CEO’s of National Council for Voluntary Organisations & Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations on behalf of the Civil Society Advisory Group said:
The challenges our country face can only be tackled by working together. The launch of the Civil Society Covenant is a key step forward in building a more collaborative and sustainable relationship between civil society and the UK government, while recognising our sector’s independence. Real and lasting change requires a partnership that is equal, honest and fair, with an intention to put lived experience at the heart of policy decision making.
The Civil Society Covenant sets out solid principles for how we work together. Now the test is putting them into practice, both nationally and locally. As organisations rooted in communities across the UK, we’ll hold ourselves and the government accountable, speaking up on behalf of the people and communities we represent and working together to ensure meaningful and lasting impact.
Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations Chief Executive Anna Fowlie, said:
SCVO welcomes the publication of the UK Government’s Civil Society Covenant, which recognises the independence of, and the vital role played by, voluntary organisations in our communities, society, and democracy.
Today is a starting point. The words on the page must now be made real—and that requires sustained effort, open dialogue, and, crucially, a genuine commitment to a partnership of equals.
We welcome the Covenant’s recognition of the different contexts in which the voluntary sector operates across the UK—and, importantly, its commitment to respect and complement these.
Wales Council for Voluntary Action, Chief Executive Lindsay Cordery-Bruce said:
We welcome the Civil Society Covenant as a first step towards building a stronger, more respectful relationship between civil society and UK Government.
We’re pleased to have been part of shaping this new approach, and welcome its alignment with the strong partnership structures we already have in place in Wales. The real test will now be in its implementation.
We look forward to working together to ensure the Covenant is embedded in day-to-day practice and delivers meaningful improvements in how government and the sector work in partnership across the UK.
Chief Executive of the Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action, Celine McStravick said:
We warmly welcome the launch of the Civil Society Covenant as an important step in recognising the vital role civil society plays across the UK. In a devolved context like Northern Ireland, where community voices are central to local progress and peacebuilding, this commitment to partnership is especially significant.
We look forward to ensuring the Covenant is embedded alongside our own partnership structures in Northern Ireland, and supports communities here to thrive.
Notes to editors:
More information will be available at the Civil Society Covenant Hub on GOV.UK.
The summit is supported by Lloyds Bank Foundation for England and Wales and Pro Bono Economics. More information will be available at the Civil Society Covenant Hub on GOV.UK.
The Covenant is intended to complement and respect existing governance and partnership arrangements in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, working alongside the distinct frameworks in each nation. The UK government will continue to work in partnership with civil society organisations in all four parts of the UK.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
News story
Landmark package to pursue domestic abuse perpetrators
Victims of domestic abuse to be protected under a £53 million drive to target most dangerous offenders.
Thousands more women and children will be better protected from domestic abuse through the direct targeting of perpetrators, the Home Secretary has announced today.
Backed by a £53 million investment over the next 4 years, domestic abuse perpetrators who pose the highest risk will be forced to change their behaviour and stop their offending as more police and agencies roll out tactics shown to reduce abuse.
It will form a central part of the government’s Plan for Change and pledge to tackle the epidemic of domestic abuse, which sees the police record a domestic abuse-related crime every 30 seconds.
The Drive Project has been piloted since 2016 to address the root causes of abuse through intensive one-to-one case management for up to 12 months. This includes using protection orders to keep offenders away from victims, alongside work to address drug misuse and alcohol dependency. A dedicated independent domestic violence advisor (IDVA) supports the victim in parallel, ensuring their safety and needs are prioritised at every stage.
The results have seen percentages of perpetrators using physical abuse cut by 82%, sexual abuse by 88%, stalking behaviours by 75% and jealous and controlling behaviours by 73%.
The multi-million pound investment will see up to 15 new areas going live by March 2026, with full roll-out across England and Wales to follow.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said:
The roll out of these new programmes means the relentless pursuit of perpetrators who pose a risk to women and girls whether they operate at home or on the streets – and intervening early to prevent further harm.
Through our mission to make our streets safer, we will take every opportunity to challenge and change dangerous behaviours, intensively monitor and manage perpetrators who pose a risk, and give victims the support they need to take back their lives.
The Drive Partnership, a consortium of 3 organisations – Respect, SafeLives, and Social Finance – is working to end domestic abuse and protect victim-survivors. The Drive Project is their flagship intervention working with those causing harm in their relationships to prevent abusive behaviour.
Rolling out The Drive Project demonstrates that the government is committed to doing things differently, working closely with civil society and bringing experts into policy development to improve the lives of working people. Today’s announcement comes ahead of the Civil Society Summit being held on Thursday 17 July, where the Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips will join a violence against women and girls panel with Beyond Equality, the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and Minister Davies-Jones.
Alongside tackling domestic abuse, the government is also funding 3 police forces to step up efforts to prevent predatory behaviour in public spaces and night time economy venues through Project Vigilant.
Currently being trialled by Thames Valley Police, alongside several other forces across the country, specially trained plain-clothed officers are patrolling nightlife hotspots to hunt down predatory behaviour, with uniformed officers then stepping in to keep the public safe.
A further £230,000 will enable specialist deployments in 3 police forces, support the trial of new tools – including sniffer dogs trained to detect drugs commonly used in spiking – and help to gather evidence on how the approach works in different settings.
Minister for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls, Jess Phillips said:
Through bold initiatives like the Drive Project and Project Vigilant, we’re going after perpetrators wherever they pose a threat. We are shifting the focus onto those who cause harm, challenging dangerous behaviours and making it clear that the responsibility for ending abuse lies with perpetrators, not those who suffer from it.
Through our mission to make our streets safer, every penny we invest in holding perpetrators to account is a step towards a better and safer future for every victim.
The Drive Project will be delivered in partnership with police and crime commissioners, police forces, domestic abuse services and the Drive Partnership, and supported by national training and resources.
Case managers work closely with high-risk perpetrators for up to 12 months, building their capacity to manage emotions and relationships differently, removing opportunities for abuse through close monitoring and disruption tactics and ensuring dedicated support for victims.
Interventions are tailored to each perpetrator’s risk level and pattern of abuse and can include:
disruption tactics such as police intervention and the use of protection orders
engagement with social services to safeguard families and children
alternative accommodation to prevent perpetrators from returning to victims’ homes
addressing drug and alcohol dependencies that can fuel abusive behaviour
behaviour change to address patterns of control and violence
monitoring and accountability to prevent reoffending
dedicated support for victims to help them rebuild their lives and move on
Kyla Kirkpatrick, Director, The Drive Partnership, said
We welcome this investment from the Home Office into the expansion of the Drive Project across England and Wales because victim-survivors tell us that as well as more support for themselves, they want and need better responses to the people causing harm in their lives. They need them to be seen, held to account and stopped. The Drive Project does that and with 10 years of delivery, development and evaluation behind us know that it works.
This work can only happen if the focus is absolutely on the safety and wellbeing of the victim-survivors. This investment will see the vast majority of funding flow directly to local domestic abuse perpetrator services and victim-survivor support services, and we will be working in partnership with local services to ensure that the Drive Project is tailored to meet the needs of local communities. We look forward to the forthcoming VAWG strategy to support victim-survivor services with much-needed investment and cross-departmental commitment.
Detective Superintendent Jon Capps, Head of Rape and Sexual Offences and Project Vigilant at Thames Valley Police, said:
We welcome funding which supports vital proactive initiatives to disrupt those who behave in a predatory manner and offend against women and girls.
Our Project Vigilant officers are specially trained to spot predatory behaviour, intervening and preventing it escalating into an offence.
This year we have conducted 50 Vigilant deployments across the Thames Valley, all of which highlight our commitment to keep people safe, specifically in the night time economy and increasingly with large public events.
Our aim is to take a suspect-focused approach, creating safer public spaces and building trust and confidence in our policing response.
Michael Kill, CEO, Night Time Industries Association:
We welcome today’s announcement and fully support the government’s £53 million package to target the most dangerous domestic abuse perpetrators. A perpetrator-focused approach is essential – accountability must lie with those who commit these crimes, not the women who endure them.
We understand that predatory behaviour is a pervasive issue within society and must be addressed wherever it occurs – across communities, public spaces, and institutions. Over recent years, the industry has worked hard to drive awareness and put robust mitigations in place – through staff training, use of CCTV, awareness campaigns and strengthened partnerships with key stakeholders and policing.
Today’s announcement – particularly the expansion of the Drive Project and Project Vigilant, as well as the introduction of specially-trained officers to address predatory behaviour – is a vital step toward tackling the root causes of abuse. It will provide greater protection for women and support operators in disrupting harmful behaviours early.
The NTIA is committed to supporting the government’s Plan for Change and its goal to halve violence against women within a decade. We will continue working closely with government, policing, and local authorities to embed a perpetrator-focused culture of safety and accountability throughout the night time economy.
This investment comes after the government announced a boost of nearly £20 million in support for victims of abuse, including £6 million for helplines which can offer life-saving support.
A relentless pursuit of perpetrators will form a central part of the government’s upcoming strategy on violence against women and girls, shifting the burden of safety away from victims and onto the perpetrators responsible for these devastating crimes. The strategy will also set out action to transform the system’s response to VAWG, including on prevention, early intervention, enforcement and victim support.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Press release
UK-Germany landmark agreement to help smash smuggling gangs and boost defence exports
Brits and Germans alike will benefit from a closer partnership on the issues that matter most to them, as Prime Minister Keir Starmer is set to host Chancellor Friedrich Merz for a comprehensive visit to London.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer will welcome Chancellor Merz to London today for his first official visit to the UK as Chancellor
The leaders will sign a new Treaty to strengthen their partnership and deliver benefits for UK and German citizens
PM set to welcome German commitment to criminalise facilitating illegal migration to the UK this year, as leaders agree to boost joint defence exports
Brits and Germans alike will benefit from a closer partnership on the issues that matter most to them, as Prime Minister Keir Starmer is set to host Chancellor Friedrich Merz for a comprehensive visit to London today (Thursday 17 July) to revamp the UK-Germany friendship and sign a first of its kind Bilateral Friendship and Cooperation Treaty.
Alongside the Treaty, Germany is expected to make a landmark commitment to make it illegal in Germany to facilitate illegal migration to the UK with the law change to be adopted by the end of the year.
The change will give law enforcement the tools they need to investigate and take action against warehouses and storage facilities used by migrant smugglers to conceal dangerous small boats intended for illegal crossings to the UK. This will bolster efforts to prosecute those involved in smuggling and support the dismantling of the criminal networks driving unacceptable and unlawful journeys through Europe.
This significant and long-awaited step is further evidence that the Prime Minister’s approach to working more closely with our European partners is bearing fruit, and demonstrates progress on delivering the Joint Action Plan on Irregular Migration agreed with Germany last year. Through increased cooperation between UK and German law enforcement bodies we are expanding efforts to tackle people smuggling and bring criminal networks to justice. In the last 18 months the NCA has worked with partners across Europe to seize more than 600 boats and engines, with this change expected to drive that number up further.
It will also complement bolstered UK efforts to smash the criminal gangs responsible for dangerous, illegal journeys to the UK via small boats, through the game-changing pilot returns agreement reached with France last week, and the continued work upstream of the Border Security Command to disrupt and deter criminal smuggling networks.
The new Treaty will detail closer collaboration on issues ranging from migration and security to business, commercial and infrastructure links. This joint commitment to pursue a range of ambitious projects demonstrates how closer partnerships with our trusted allies will help deliver the Prime Minister’s Plan for Change.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer said:
“The progress we are making today is further proof that by investing in our relationships with likeminded friends and partners, we can deliver real change for working people.
“The Treaty we will sign today, the first of its kind, will bring the UK and Germany closer than ever. It not only marks the progress we have already made and the history we share. It is the foundation on which we go further to tackle shared problems and invest in shared strengths.
“Chancellor Merz’s commitment to make necessary changes to German law to disrupt the supply lines of the dangerous vessels which carry illegal migrants across the Channel is hugely welcome. As the closest of allies, we will continue to work closely together to deliver on the priorities that Brits and Germans share.”
Deepening our security and defence cooperation is also high on the agenda, with the leaders set to discuss their strong shared support for Ukraine.
Building on the landmark Trinity House Agreement on Defence signed in October, the leaders will unveil a new agreement to boost world-class UK defence exports such as Boxer armoured vehicles and Typhoon jets, with the two countries set to pursue joint export campaigns for jointly produced equipment. The agreement is likely to lead to billions of pounds additional defence exports in the coming years – excellent news for the UK economy and thousands of highly skilled defence industrial workers.
The leaders are also set to make a new commitment to deliver their new Deep Precision Strike capability in the next decade. The rapid development of this capability will safeguard the British public and reinforce NATO deterrence, while boosting the UK and European defence sectors through significant industrial investment. The new capability is set to have a range of over 2,000 km, and will be among the most advanced systems ever designed by the UK.
The Treaty also includes the establishment of a new UK-Germany Business Forum in order to improve business and investment relationship between the UK and Germany, with trade between the two countries already accounting for 8.5% of all UK trade and supporting almost 500,000 jobs. This is further illustrated by a series of commercial investment announced today worth more than £200 million and creating more than 600 new jobs.
One such example is German defence tech company, STARK, which has announced a landmark investment in the UK, marking its first production expansion outside of Germany. The move will create over 100 highly skilled jobs in the UK within the first year, including through STARK’s new 40,000 square feet facility in Swindon.
Mike Armstrong, Managing Director of STARK UK, said:
“The UK and Germany are world-leaders in new technology that will define the battlefields of the future. We need rapid and scalable production to protect our people, defend our sovereignty and deter aggression. That means resilient supply chains stretching across Europe.
“That is why STARK has chosen the UK as our first production location outside of Germany – taking advantage of the vast technological, industrial and defence expertise that exists here to create AI-powered, unmanned systems to defend Europe and NATO.”
Other announcements from German companies in the UK today include:
Conversational AI firm Cognigy plans to invest £50 million in the UK, expanding its team from 13 to 150.
AI ESG platform osapiens plans to invest £30 million in the UK, creating 150 high-skilled jobs.
Siemens Energy is creating 200 new jobs as well as 100 new apprentices and graduates starting this autumn.
Venture Capital fund, HV Capital, has the ambition to deploy around £150 million in the UK as part of their next fund generation.
MORRISVILLE, VT., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Union Bankshares, Inc. (NASDAQ – UNB) today announced results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025 and declared a regular quarterly cash dividend. Consolidated net income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was $2.4 million, or $0.53 per share, compared to $2.0 million, or $0.45 per share, for the same period in 2024, and $4.9 million, or $1.08 per share, for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $4.4 million, or $0.98 per share, for the same period in 2024.
Balance Sheet
Total assets were $1.48 billion as of June 30, 2025 compared to $1.40 billion as of June 30, 2024, an increase of $81.9 million, or 5.9%. Loan growth was the primary driver of the increase in total assets with total loans increasing $99.8 million, or 9.8%, to reach $1.11 billion as of June 30, 2025 including $9.0 million in loans held for sale, compared to $1.01 billion as of June 30, 2024, with $6.2 million in loans held for sale. Despite the economic uncertainty in the future, asset quality remains strong with minimal past due loans and net recoveries of $5 thousand and $6 thousand for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, respectively.
In addition to the balance sheet growth in loans, qualifying residential loans of $31.0 million and $56.8 million were sold to the secondary market for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, respectively, compared to sales of $19.3 million and $41.0 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2024, respectively.
Total deposits were $1.10 billion as of June 30, 2025 compared to deposits of $1.05 billion as of June 30, 2024, and included purchased brokered deposits of $65.3 million and $65.0 million for the respective periods. Borrowed funds consisted of Federal Home Loan Bank advances of $270.7 million as of June 30, 2025 compared to $212.1 million as of June 30, 2024. There were also $35.0 million in advances from the Federal Reserve’s Bank Term Funding Program outstanding as of June 30, 2024.
The Company had total equity capital of $71.3 million and a book value per share of $15.66 as of June 30, 2025 compared to $64.0 million and a book value of $14.16 per share as of June 30, 2024. Total equity capital is reduced by accumulated other comprehensive loss as it relates to the fair market value adjustment for investment securities. Accumulated other comprehensive loss as of June 30, 2025 was $31.2 million compared to $35.2 million as of June 30, 2024.
Income Statement
Consolidated net income was $2.4 million for the second quarter of 2025 compared to $2.0 million for the second quarter of 2024, an increase of $376 thousand, or 18.6%. Interest income increased $2.2 million, or 13.1%, to $18.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to $16.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2024, due to an increase in yield on earning assets and an increase in volume for the comparison periods. Similarly, interest expense increased $1.2 million, or 17.1%, to $8.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to $7.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2024 due to an increase in rates paid on customer deposits and to a lesser extent an increase in volumes. As a result of these changes during the comparison periods, net interest income increased $962 thousand, or 10.1%.
Credit loss expense of $221 thousand was recorded for the second quarter of 2025 compared to $388 thousand recorded for the second quarter of 2024. The credit loss expense was primarily related to the growth and mix of the loan portfolio at both June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024. Management continues to assess the adequacy of the Allowance for Credit Losses quarterly.
Noninterest income was $2.8 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024. Noninterest expenses increased $706 thousand, or 7.2%, to $10.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to $9.8 million for the same period in 2024. The increase during the comparison period was due to increases of $311 thousand in salaries and wages, $340 thousand in employee benefits, $2 thousand in occupancy expenses, and $83 thousand in equipment expenses, partially offset by a decrease of $31 thousand in other expenses. Income tax expense was $102 thousand for the three months ended June 30, 2025, an increase of $41 thousand compared to income tax expense of $61 thousand for the three months ended June 30, 2024.
Dividend Declared
The Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.36 per share for the quarter payable August 7, 2025 to shareholders of record as of July 26, 2025.
About Union Bankshares, Inc.
Union Bankshares, Inc., headquartered in Morrisville, Vermont, is the bank holding company parent of Union Bank, which provides commercial, retail, and municipal banking services, as well as, wealth management services throughout northern Vermont and New Hampshire. Union Bank operates 18 banking offices, three loan centers, and multiple ATMs throughout its geographical footprint.
Since 1891, Union Bank has helped people achieve their dreams of owning a home, saving for retirement, starting or expanding a business and assisting municipalities to improve their communities. Union Bank has earned an exceptional reputation for residential lending programs and has been recognized by the US Department of Agriculture, Rural Development for the positive impact made in lives of low to moderate home buyers. Union Bank is consistently one of the top Vermont Housing Finance Agency mortgage originators and has also been designated as an SBA Preferred lender for its participation in small business lending. Union Bank’s employees contribute to the communities where they work and reside, serving on non-profit boards, raising funds for worthwhile causes, and giving countless hours in serving our fellow residents. All of these efforts have resulted in Union receiving and “Outstanding” rating for its compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) in its most recent examination. Union Bank is proud to be one of the few independent community banks serving Vermont and New Hampshire and we maintain a strong commitment to our core traditional values of keeping deposits safe, giving customers convenient financial choices and making loans to help people in our local communities buy homes, grow businesses, and create jobs. These values–combined with financial expertise, quality products and the latest technology–make Union Bank the premier choice for your banking services, both personal and business. Member FDIC. Equal Housing Lender.
Forward-Looking Statements
Statements made in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements. Investors are cautioned that all forward-looking statements necessarily involve risks and uncertainties, and many factors could cause actual results and events to differ materially from those contemplated in the forward-looking statements. When we use any of the words “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates” or similar expressions, we are making forward-looking statements. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results and events to differ from those contemplated in the forward-looking statements: uncertainties associated with general economic conditions; changes in the interest rate environment; inflation; political, legislative or regulatory developments; acts of war or terrorism; the markets’ acceptance of and demand for the Company’s products and services; technological changes, including the impact of the internet on the Company’s business and on the financial services market place generally; the impact of competitive products and pricing; and dependence on third party suppliers. For further information, please refer to the Company’s reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission atwww.sec.govor on our investor page atwww.ublocal.com.
MORRISVILLE, VT., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Union Bankshares, Inc. (NASDAQ – UNB) today announced results for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025 and declared a regular quarterly cash dividend. Consolidated net income for the three months ended June 30, 2025 was $2.4 million, or $0.53 per share, compared to $2.0 million, or $0.45 per share, for the same period in 2024, and $4.9 million, or $1.08 per share, for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $4.4 million, or $0.98 per share, for the same period in 2024.
Balance Sheet
Total assets were $1.48 billion as of June 30, 2025 compared to $1.40 billion as of June 30, 2024, an increase of $81.9 million, or 5.9%. Loan growth was the primary driver of the increase in total assets with total loans increasing $99.8 million, or 9.8%, to reach $1.11 billion as of June 30, 2025 including $9.0 million in loans held for sale, compared to $1.01 billion as of June 30, 2024, with $6.2 million in loans held for sale. Despite the economic uncertainty in the future, asset quality remains strong with minimal past due loans and net recoveries of $5 thousand and $6 thousand for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, respectively.
In addition to the balance sheet growth in loans, qualifying residential loans of $31.0 million and $56.8 million were sold to the secondary market for the three and six months ended June 30, 2025, respectively, compared to sales of $19.3 million and $41.0 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2024, respectively.
Total deposits were $1.10 billion as of June 30, 2025 compared to deposits of $1.05 billion as of June 30, 2024, and included purchased brokered deposits of $65.3 million and $65.0 million for the respective periods. Borrowed funds consisted of Federal Home Loan Bank advances of $270.7 million as of June 30, 2025 compared to $212.1 million as of June 30, 2024. There were also $35.0 million in advances from the Federal Reserve’s Bank Term Funding Program outstanding as of June 30, 2024.
The Company had total equity capital of $71.3 million and a book value per share of $15.66 as of June 30, 2025 compared to $64.0 million and a book value of $14.16 per share as of June 30, 2024. Total equity capital is reduced by accumulated other comprehensive loss as it relates to the fair market value adjustment for investment securities. Accumulated other comprehensive loss as of June 30, 2025 was $31.2 million compared to $35.2 million as of June 30, 2024.
Income Statement
Consolidated net income was $2.4 million for the second quarter of 2025 compared to $2.0 million for the second quarter of 2024, an increase of $376 thousand, or 18.6%. Interest income increased $2.2 million, or 13.1%, to $18.7 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to $16.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2024, due to an increase in yield on earning assets and an increase in volume for the comparison periods. Similarly, interest expense increased $1.2 million, or 17.1%, to $8.3 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to $7.1 million for the three months ended June 30, 2024 due to an increase in rates paid on customer deposits and to a lesser extent an increase in volumes. As a result of these changes during the comparison periods, net interest income increased $962 thousand, or 10.1%.
Credit loss expense of $221 thousand was recorded for the second quarter of 2025 compared to $388 thousand recorded for the second quarter of 2024. The credit loss expense was primarily related to the growth and mix of the loan portfolio at both June 30, 2025 and June 30, 2024. Management continues to assess the adequacy of the Allowance for Credit Losses quarterly.
Noninterest income was $2.8 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024. Noninterest expenses increased $706 thousand, or 7.2%, to $10.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2025 compared to $9.8 million for the same period in 2024. The increase during the comparison period was due to increases of $311 thousand in salaries and wages, $340 thousand in employee benefits, $2 thousand in occupancy expenses, and $83 thousand in equipment expenses, partially offset by a decrease of $31 thousand in other expenses. Income tax expense was $102 thousand for the three months ended June 30, 2025, an increase of $41 thousand compared to income tax expense of $61 thousand for the three months ended June 30, 2024.
Dividend Declared
The Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.36 per share for the quarter payable August 7, 2025 to shareholders of record as of July 26, 2025.
About Union Bankshares, Inc.
Union Bankshares, Inc., headquartered in Morrisville, Vermont, is the bank holding company parent of Union Bank, which provides commercial, retail, and municipal banking services, as well as, wealth management services throughout northern Vermont and New Hampshire. Union Bank operates 18 banking offices, three loan centers, and multiple ATMs throughout its geographical footprint.
Since 1891, Union Bank has helped people achieve their dreams of owning a home, saving for retirement, starting or expanding a business and assisting municipalities to improve their communities. Union Bank has earned an exceptional reputation for residential lending programs and has been recognized by the US Department of Agriculture, Rural Development for the positive impact made in lives of low to moderate home buyers. Union Bank is consistently one of the top Vermont Housing Finance Agency mortgage originators and has also been designated as an SBA Preferred lender for its participation in small business lending. Union Bank’s employees contribute to the communities where they work and reside, serving on non-profit boards, raising funds for worthwhile causes, and giving countless hours in serving our fellow residents. All of these efforts have resulted in Union receiving and “Outstanding” rating for its compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) in its most recent examination. Union Bank is proud to be one of the few independent community banks serving Vermont and New Hampshire and we maintain a strong commitment to our core traditional values of keeping deposits safe, giving customers convenient financial choices and making loans to help people in our local communities buy homes, grow businesses, and create jobs. These values–combined with financial expertise, quality products and the latest technology–make Union Bank the premier choice for your banking services, both personal and business. Member FDIC. Equal Housing Lender.
Forward-Looking Statements
Statements made in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements. Investors are cautioned that all forward-looking statements necessarily involve risks and uncertainties, and many factors could cause actual results and events to differ materially from those contemplated in the forward-looking statements. When we use any of the words “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates” or similar expressions, we are making forward-looking statements. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results and events to differ from those contemplated in the forward-looking statements: uncertainties associated with general economic conditions; changes in the interest rate environment; inflation; political, legislative or regulatory developments; acts of war or terrorism; the markets’ acceptance of and demand for the Company’s products and services; technological changes, including the impact of the internet on the Company’s business and on the financial services market place generally; the impact of competitive products and pricing; and dependence on third party suppliers. For further information, please refer to the Company’s reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission atwww.sec.govor on our investor page atwww.ublocal.com.
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
Two papers published in NEJM look at the use of mitochondrial donation an preimplantation genetic testing for mitochondrial disease.
Dr David J Clancy, Lecturer in Biogerontology, Lancaster University, said:
“This comment is to discuss Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy (MRT) in terms of costs and benefits in light of what we now know.
Benefits
“Mitochondrial replacement therapy allows women with pathogenic mitochondrial DNA to have a baby which bears her own chromosomes, while reducing or replacing the pathogenic mtDNA. If the primary purpose is to avoid mitochondrial disease, then women could also have IVF by donor sperm or donor egg (or donor embryo), or they might choose adoption if IVF technologies don’t suit them for clinical or personal reasons.
“In chromosomal dominant diseases like Huntington’s disease, affected people are offered pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT) and they are also offered IVF using donor eggs or embryos if the patient is a woman. For these sorts of genetic disease there is currently no alternative. In these cases a woman cannot have a child bearing her own chromosomes.
“When having a family there are two ways to break genetic lineages – inheritance down generations: one is to adopt and another is to have IVF by donor sperm or donor egg (or donor embryo). It is difficult to value genetic lineage. It will be more valuable to some, less to others. While maternity is never in doubt, paternity often is. Perhaps we should then value maternal genetic lineage more than paternal. Mitochondrial replacement therapy allows unbroken maternal lineage.
I cannot determine whether the Mitochondrial Reproductive Advice Clinic suggests IVF by donor egg or embryo (or adoption). The paper says “Patients with heteroplasmy (part pathogenic mitochondrial DNA, part healthy) were offered PGT, and patients with homoplasmy or elevated heteroplasmy (all or mostly pathogenic mitochondrial DNA) were offered pronuclear transfer.”
Costs
“The money cost is presumably significant. The work was funded by Wellcome and NHS England and carried out by Newcastle University, UK and the Newcastle upon Tyne Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust. Presumably they could give an idea of the cost. This might be considered important, in an environment of limited resources for national healthcare.
Possible harms
“Because these babies would not exist without the MRT intervention, we want to know about possible problems; in medicine the saying is “First, do no harm”, though in current healthcare, harm is often inevitable. While the babies so far seem probably unaffected, assessing the potential for future harm as they develop by looking at the degree of heteroplasmy in the infants is a large part of the reason for the publications.
“Measurements were on white blood cells so we don’t know about tissue mosaicism, which is where you can have high heteroplasmy in some tissues and low in others, and is common in many mitochondrial diseases. In tissues demanding high energy production (e.g. neurons), lower levels of heteroplasmy can still be symptomatic. In a mouse model, a proportion of >20% energy-deficient neurons in the brain was necessary for observable symptoms.
“Three of eight newborns from MRT had heteroplasmy levels of 5%, 12%, and 16% (the other five were
“All of these things were mostly known before these publications, so apparently the Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority (HFEA), who approved it, is happy with the cost-benefit ratio. It also appears that other countries also approve, because the technique is spreading; there is a clinic in North Cyprus, and Prof Mary Herbert, the study’s lead, has moved to a pioneer institution in IVF, Monash University in Melbourne, Australia, partly to introduce a mitochondrial replacement program.”
Prof Joanna Poulton, Professor and Honorary Consultant in Mitochondrial Genetics, Nuffield Department of Women’s and Reproductive Health, said:
“From this study, it isn’t clear that MD (mitochondrial donation) has any advantage over PGT (pre-implantation genetic testing, an alternative strategy) for heteroplasmic mtDNA disorders (where patients have mixtures of normal and mutant mtDNA and severity depends on the “dose” of mutant). The “take home baby” rate and the reduction in mutant load is similar (if anything less good for MD).
“MD has a clear theoretical advantage for homoplasmic disorders (where the mother’s mtDNA is 100% mutant), because while PGT while can be used to reduce risk, it cannot be used to reduce the load of mutant mtDNA. Over half of the MD children were from Leber Hereditary Optic Neuropathy (LHON) families, where the chance of male offspring going blind in adolescence is around 20% but only 4% for females. The risk of blindness can be reduced 5 fold using PGT to select female embryos, but they risk transmitting it to their children. Happily, male identical twins were born by MD with undetectable mutant mtDNA, they will be very low risk for blindness and as males, they will not transmit the problem to their children (because LHON is a maternally transmitted disorder). Slightly worryingly, one baby from a m.4300A>G family, where the mother has a heart disorder (cardiomyopathy) for which she may ultimately need a heart transplant, has an unspecified heart defect: they conclude it is probably unrelated to m.4300A>G but this remains uncertain. Another from a m.3260A>G family had a mutant load of 16% in blood. While this probably means the risk of symptoms is low, one symptomatic m.3260A>G woman had a blood level that was lower than this (11% with 81% in muscle). Happily, male identical twins were born by MD with undetectable mutant mtDNA, they will be very low risk for blindness and as males, they will not transmit the problem to their children because LHON is a maternally transmitted disorder.
“A great deal of research funding has been channelled into the centre that has developed MD. While this has generated fascinating scientific data and this treatment option is now available on the NHS, it hasn’t yet resulted in a dramatic clinical advance. Time will tell.”
Prof Dusko Ilic, Professor of Stem Cell Science, King’s College London, said:
“A remarkable accomplishment! State-of-the-art technology. Kudos to the team!”
Prof Dagan Wells,Professor of Reproductive Genetics, University of Oxford, and Director, Juno Genetics, Oxford, said:
“This is an important study which has been eagerly anticipated ever since the first license to carry out mitochondrial replacement therapy to avoid mitochondrial disease was granted eight years ago.
“The results indicate that established methods for avoiding mitochondrial DNA diseases, such as preimplantation genetic testing, perform well and will be suitable for most women at risk of having an affected child.
“A minority of patients are unable to produce any embryos free of mitochondrial disease, and for those women the study provides hope that they may be able to have healthy children in the future.
“The treatment has succeeded in producing 8 babies, and although mitochondrial DNA mutations can be detected in the cells of most of the children, the great majority of their mitochondria are functional, and consequently they do not have mitochondrial disease.
“The published results are very valuable, but some scientists will be a little disappointed that so much time and effort has, so far, only led to the birth of 8 children.
“Larger studies will be needed to truly understand the value of mitochondrial replacement therapy, and to understand whether there are any risks associated with the treatment.
“Three of the eight children born have some evidence of ‘reversal’, a phenomenon where the therapy initially succeeds in producing an embryo with very few defective mitochondria, but by the time the child is born the proportion of abnormal mitochondria in its cells has significantly increased.
“It is not understood why reversal sometimes occurs. Taking data from the new study as well as previous research, it seems that it may affect as many as one-third of embryos produced using mitochondrial replacement therapy. Importantly, all the children in the study have low levels of abnormal mitochondria in their cells, including those where a degree of reversal has occurred. However, the fact that reversal can happen suggests there is a chance that mitochondrial replacement therapy might occasionally fail, and consequently the procedure should be seen as a way of reducing the risk of mitochondrial disease inheritance, not guaranteeing it.”
Dr Andy Greenfield, Honorary Fellow at the Nuffield Department of Women’s & Reproductive Health, University of Oxford, said:
“Mitochondria are the energy-producing organelles of the body’s cells. They contain DNA (mitochondrial DNA, mtDNA) and as such are prone to changes to that DNA (mutations) that can disrupt mitochondrial function and cause disease. The paper by Hyslop et al describes the first clinical use in the UK of a technique – mitochondrial donation (MD) – aimed at reducing the risk of transmitting a class of mitochondrial diseases (mtDNA diseases) from mother to offspring. This is an often devastating and life-limiting group of diseases for which no curative treatments exist. The specific technique described, based on IVF, is pronuclear transfer (PNT), one of the two MD techniques made lawful in the UK in 2015. The last preclinical review of the safety and effectiveness of MD, commissioned by the HFEA and published in 2016, recommended its clinical use as a risk reduction strategy – to be used only in those women for whom preimplantation genetic testing (PGT, an established procedure that is used to detect genetic abnormalities, including the amount of disease-causing (pathogenic) mtDNA, in an embryo) followed by selection of an embryo with low levels of pathogenic mtDNA for transfer was unlikely to be a successful strategy i.e. only in those women with high levels of pathogenic mtDNA (elevated heteroplasmy) in all eggs or with exclusively pathogenic mtDNA in their eggs (homoplasmy). This cautious approach is at the heart of this new report, which, along with an accompanying paper by McFarland et al, assesses MD alongside PGT in an integrated programme performed at Newcastle Fertility Centre, UK, under the regulatory framework developed by the HFEA.
“Whilst PGT for mtDNA is an established procedure that acts as a useful comparator, the attention here will be rightly focused on the MD clinical data: 22 women at high risk of transmitting mitochondrial disease to their offspring were treated using PNT, resulting in 8 live births and one ongoing pregnancy. Firstly, this headline result alone is highly significant: PNT is compatible with embryo viability in humans. Secondly, levels of pathogenic mtDNA (in blood) from the infants varied from 0% to 16%. Whilst the last figure hints at a degree of reversion to the maternal mtDNA type, it is also sufficiently low to conclude that the procedure has successfully reduced the risk of mtDNA in all children born. The amount of maternal mtDNA could, however, vary from tissue to tissue and so follow-up of these children is vitally important. McFarland et al report that none of the children has any health condition that could be straightforwardly attributed to the presence of mtDNA disease. As the authors note, there are reasons to be optimistic about the outcome of this first MD treatment in the UK.
“The data in the last paragraph, whilst summarised very briefly, are the culmination of decades of work: from the earliest investigations in mice aimed at understanding the impacts of nuclear transfer, through to targeted experiments in human embryos to provide preclinical evidence of safety and effectiveness. But this is to focus only on some of the scientific/technical challenges that have been overcome. There were parallel activities over a similar time frame concerning ethical inquiry, public and patient engagement, law-making, drafting of regulations and execution of those regulations by committees. And last but not least: the careful establishment of a clinical pathway by which the health of the mothers and infants born could be monitored and they could be cared for (detailed in McFarland et al). This all represents a vast amount of work by a large number of people over a long period.
“The Hyslop et al paper itself is a treasure trove of data, which will likely to be the starting points of new avenues of research and opportunities for refinement. What is the explanation for the somewhat elevated maternal mtDNA levels (still beneath the clinical threshold for disease) detected in two babies born following PNT? Further studies of mitochondrial DNA replication, segregation and interaction with the nuclear DNA may provide clues. The reduction in normally fertilized eggs in the PNT group also requires explanation and may indicate that some mtDNA pathogenic variants can compromise fertilisation of the egg, which is an energy-demanding process. This observation opens up a whole area of research concerning the role of played by mitochondria in fertility. Of course, numbers analysed here are still low and a larger and more diverse cohort will be required to draw firm conclusions about efficacy and safety of MD at a population level. We can look forward to future assessments of maternal spindle transfer (the other lawful MD technique in the UK) and even, possibly, the use of targeted, enzymatic degradation of pathogenic mtDNA to eliminate the risk of carry-over and reversion.
“How do we summarise what this all means? It is a triumph of scientific innovation in the IVF clinic – a world-first that shows that the UK is an excellent environment in which to push boundaries in IVF; a tour de force by the embryologists who painstakingly developed and optimised the micromanipulation methods; an example of the value of clinical expertise, developed over decades of working with children and adults suffering from these devastating diseases, being used to support a new intervention and subsequent follow-up, potentially for many years. And it is so much more, depending on whether one’s perspective is that of an historian, sociologist, ethicist or philosopher. It is tempting to suggest that this report marks the end of a process – but it is actually the beginning, of a new era in which technologies that change how we think about human reproduction are introduced into a tightly regulated environment – the only way in which they should be introduced.
“In time, there will no doubt be retrospective studies and assessments of how all this was done – some critical – and there will be much to learn. It is hoped that other papers will follow, detailing different aspects of the process by which these first UK children were born, because this whole exercise has been a steep learning curve for all involved and future progress relies on such learning being shared. Safety assessment should be at the heart of all these and future reports. Some may wonder about the time taken for these current reports to see the light of day – but that would be to underestimate what is required to transition from preclinical research activities in an academic setting to offering a bona fide clinical service on the NHS (with the spanner of COVID-19 thrown into the works for good measure). Others will wonder whether supporting the desire to have biological children merits all this time and effort, when ‘unmet clinical need’ is the focus and budgetary constraints are the norm. But this evaluation unnecessarily attempts to marginalise a human activity – ‘having children’ – that is actually central to the health and wellbeing of a significant proportion of the population. And those ordinary resemblances that parents and children often share also matter to them. Of course, the results of clinical follow-up of the children born using PNT will be a major determinant of the future prospects for mitochondrial donation in the IVF clinic, as this report acknowledges.
“There will be many responses to this work, but I see these reports, despite their matter-of-fact understatement, as an extraordinary reminder of what well intentioned science, collaborating with medicine, can do to improve the lives of human beings.”
Mr Stuart Lavery, Divisional Clinical Director Women’s Health and Consultant in Reproductive Medicine/Honorary Associate Professor, University College Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, said:
“The concept of nuclear transfer has attracted much commentary and occasionally concern and anxiety.
“The Newcastle team have demonstrated that it can be used in a clinically effective and ethically acceptable way to prevent disease and suffering.
“The HFEA has shown that regulation need not always be restrictive, and that permissive regulation can lead to innovation at the highest level, allowing scientists to push boundaries, patients to be successfully treated and the public to be reassured.
“This truly represents the very best of British science and regulation.”
Prof Bert Smeets, Professor in Clinical Genomics with focus on Mitochondrial Diseases, said:
“These are papers, the scientific community has waited for, for a long time, as they describe the experience of the Newcastle team on pronuclear transfer to prevent the transmission of mtDNA disease, for which they got approval in 2017. The papers describe the current experience in PNT and PGT for preventing the transmission of mtDNA disease. It is good to present a reproductive care pathway, although it is not fully complete and some of the criteria might be reevaluated based on the presented data. The care pathway starts with carriers of mtDNA mutations. I would also include women who have affected children with de novo mtDNA mutations. This concerns about 25% of the mtDNA patients. The recurrence risk is low and generally prenatal diagnosis is offered for reassurance. Furthermore, women with a very low mtDNA mutation load, with skewing mtDNA mutations or large scale deletions could also opt for prenatal diagnosis. For a reproductive care pathway for mtDNA disease, these groups should be included as well. It is clear that for the remainder according to the HFEA guidelines PNT should only be offered if PGT is unsuitable. It is great that the PNT as an addition to the reproductive choices for mtDNA disease seems to deliver as 8 children without the mtDNA condition were born. However, there are still concerns, as 2 PNT children had a higher mutation load than the carry-over, which means that reversal can occur and could be a risk for having affected children in future treatments. Also, two children had rare medical complications, which according to the authors were not related to the treatment, as this would then be expected for all of them. I do not think that is true as technical variation occurs and donors will be different. It is good to carefully monitor this, as one of the aims of HFEA guided clinical application is to find-out if PNT by itself is safe, not only to prevent mtDNA disease. The discussion on this is not very strong. Finally, a key unanswered question is why it took so long to come out with these results. Eight births with no mtDNA disease in 7 years deviates largely from the expected150 yearly births, as described by the same group in NEJM in 2015, if all women would opt for this procedure. It seems that the children born are quite recent (only one >18 months), so one wonders if there is a learning curve, change in procedure or whatsoever, explaining the increasing success rate. It would be fair to discuss this in more detail as it would make it much clearer and more realistic which women of the target group will benefit from MD. And that is still a positive message.”
Comments on the broader story:
Kevin McEleny, Chair, British Fertility Society, said:
“These landmark papers provide compelling evidence that mitochondrial donation through pronuclear transfer can massively reduce the transmission of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA variants and are a terrific example of how a regulatory framework can be adapted to permit world-leading scientific discovery. Although the number of babies conceived through this novel treatment is small and their long-term follow-up will be required, the study provides hope to people affected by mitochondrial DNA disease and their loved ones.”
Sarah Norcross, Director of the Progress Educational Trust (PET), said:
“We could not be more delighted by the news that eight babies with donated mitochondria have been born in the UK, and that all of these children have made normal developmental progress.
“Our charity spent many years campaigning for UK law to be changed, to permit the use of mitochondrial donation in treatment. We salute the patients who had the courage to attempt these novel treatments, and we thank the team at Newcastle for justifying patients’ confidence in them.
“Mitochondrial donation will not necessarily be appropriate for every patient who carries disease-causing mitochondrial DNA mutations – rather, its appropriateness depends on various factors that are explored in detail in the new studies. Importantly, the studies place mitochondrial donation within the context of a broader NHS care pathway, that offers a variety of options for people carrying mitochondrial DNA mutations who wish to have children.
“Nonetheless, the studies demonstrate that mitochondrial donation is a feasible option – indeed, a positive reproductive choice – for some patients. An important consideration is that women considering mitochondrial donation are advised to start their fact-finding early, because of the decline of egg quality with age.
“The medical and scientific work at Newcastle, and the policy and legal work that preceded it, have set a high standard for introducing new reproductive technology in a careful and scrupulously regulated way. We are pleased to see that Australia is following a similarly responsible path, having recently introduced its own law that permits the use of mitochondrial donation for the purpose of avoiding mitochondrial disease.
“The work at Newcastle will no doubt inform – and in future, will perhaps also be informed by – the mitoHOPE pilot programme for mitochondrial donation in Australia.”
Nick Meade, Chief Executive Genetic Alliance,said:
“Most rare conditions do not yet have a cure or treatment, so for families affected, reproductive choice techniques are the only opportunities to take control of the impact of the condition. For serious conditions caused by nuclear DNA, these opportunities have existed for many years (through preimplantation genetic testing), with today’s news, we know more families have that opportunity now. These techniques have the potential to work for hundreds of conditions caused by mitochondrial DNA, and they are an example of how innovative research can be applied to take steps forward for multiple rare conditions in parallel. With more than 7,000 rare conditions affecting people in the UK, we need this kind of progress.”
Beth Thompson, Executive Director for Policy & Partnerships at Wellcome, said:
“This is a remarkable scientific achievement, which has been years in the making and we are overjoyed for the families of the eight children born so far.
“The pioneering work behind mitochondrial donation is a powerful example of how discovery research can change lives. The UK has led the way and has demonstrated the importance of science grounded in close and careful co-ordination between researchers, funders and regulators – and, very importantly, working closely with families affected.
“Wellcome has proudly supported this work since the earliest days, including advocating for legislation and licensing. As the science progresses, we will continue championing brave investment in science and for policy and regulation to keep pace. The success of this research should inspire us move forward on other updates, opening the way for further innovation. The groundwork for review of Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, for example, has been done, it now needs to move forward. We must ensure the UK stays a world leader in life sciences.”
Danielle Hamm, Director of the Nuffield Council on Bioethics, said:
“Today we have seen the first evidence that for a small number of UK families the use of pronuclear transfer (PNT) to prevent the transfer of maternally inherited mitochondrial DNA disorders has resulted in what everyone hoped it would: children who are thriving and appear free of the devastating symptoms of mitochondrial disease.
“The Nuffield Council on Bioethics’ landmark ethical review of techniques for the prevention of maternally inherited mitochondrial disorders has been instrumental in creating the right regulatory environment to allow this innovative treatment to reach the clinic and change lives for the better.
“The HFEA’s licensing conditions followed our recommendation and ensured that PNT is only available through a specialist centre. The establishment of the NHS Highly Specialised Mitochondrial Reproductive Care Pathway has ensured that families referred to the service are fully supported and have access to appropriate information, and that long term follow up of participants has been secured.
“We welcome this great progress, but continued follow-up is crucially important to inform our understanding of the long-term efficacy of the treatment.”
Peter Thompson, Chief Executive of the HFEA, said:
“Ten years ago, the UK was the first country in the world to licence mitochondrial donation treatment to avoid passing the condition to children. For the first time, families with severe inherited mitochondrial illness have the possibility of a healthy child. Although it’s still early days, it is wonderful news that mitochondrial donation treatment has led to eight babies being born.
“Only people who are at a very high risk of passing a serious mitochondrial disease onto their children are eligible for this treatment in the UK, and every application for mitochondrial donation treatment is individually assessed in accordance with the law. These robust but flexible regulatory processes allow the technique to be used safely for the purposes that Parliament agreed in 2015.”
Prof Frances Flinter, Chair of the HFEA’s Statutory Approvals Committee, said:
“We are pleased to see the peer-reviewed papers published in the New England Journal of Medicine that explain what has happened to those patients who the HFEA authorised to have mitochondrial donation treatment at the Newcastle Centre at Life. These are patients for whom there was no other option to have a healthy baby who is genetically related to them, and we are delighted for those families.
“The HFEA will continue to oversee the safe use of mitochondrial donation treatment and assess each application as families come through the programme. These results are testimony to how the UK continues to be a world leader in the use of new medical techniques to change lives.”
Comment from the editor of the journal the papers are published in (so NOT third party):
Eric Rubin, MD, PhD, Editor-in-Chief, The New England Journal of Medicine, said:
“These studies unite scientific rigor, clinical innovation, and deep ethical reflection to illustrate the full research continuum from bench to bedside. At the New England Journal of Medicine, we chose to publish this work in its full context, not only to highlight the outcomes, but also to surface the critical questions it raises about translating breakthroughs into patient care. Where allowed by government regulations, this research has the potential to prevent serious inherited disease and gives parents truly meaningful new options for their children. Its publication also reminds us that preserving the infrastructure and integrity of biomedical research in the U.S. and around the world is essential if we are to continue delivering such transformative treatments to patients.”
Comments via colleagues at other international SMCs:
Prof. Dr. Marcus Deschauer, Head of the Working Group on Rare Hereditary Neurological Diseases and Senior Physician at the Clinic and Polyclinic for Neurology, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), said:
“To my knowledge, this is the first publication of a larger cohort of families/mothers with mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) disorders who have given birth to children after pre-implantation genetic diagnosis or mitochondrial donation. The work is therefore very important for assessing the effectiveness and risks of these methods in practice.”
“Per se, the study includes well-studied families with reliable data, but it was not possible to prevent the transmission of the disease-causing mtDNA variants in all families.””A certain carry-over of mtDNA with a disease-causing variant occurs during pre-cell nucleus transfer. It cannot be ruled out that the proportion of mutated mtDNA will continue to increase over the course of a lifetime after carry-over. However, this is unlikely: for example, in patients with the m.3243A>G variant, the degree of heteroplasmy in the blood decreases over the course of life.“
”The follow-up periods are not yet sufficient to assess the risks of later disease. Manifestation of an mtDNA disease at a later stage is conceivable in children.””A pathological mtDNA variant is identified in women who can pass it on by means of molecular genetic testing if the woman has symptoms of a mitochondriopathy. There are also cases in which molecular genetic diagnostics are performed for another indication – such as the search for another genetic disease – and a pathological mtDNA is detected. However, according to the ACMG recommendations, this should not be disclosed by genetic laboratories.“
”Until now, the lack of data has made it difficult to advise women with mitochondrial diseases on their desire to have children. The DGN guideline ‘Mitochondrial Diseases’ states: ‘Human genetic counselling is particularly complex when it comes to the desire to have children. Prenatal diagnosis can be routinely performed for nuclear mutations, but is more limited for mutations of mitochondrial DNA. The data on preimplantation diagnosis as a means of preventing or reducing the risk of inheritance of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA mutations is extremely limited, and the method is subject to the Preimplantation Diagnosis Ordinance in Germany. These two studies from Newcastle are helpful for counselling.“
”Whether a woman with mtDNA disease can expect an uncomplicated pregnancy also depends on the manifestation/severity of the woman’s disease. In cases of significant muscle weakness (including respiratory muscle weakness), this may increase during pregnancy. Natural childbirth may be difficult, making a caesarean section necessary.”
“If the mitochondrial donation procedure were also permitted in Germany, this would be an option for selected women with an mtDNA disease to significantly reduce the risk of passing on a disease-causing mtDNA variant with a heteroplasmy level above a disease-causing threshold. This would increase the chances of healthy children for families.”
“However, the data from Newcastle do not suggest that the methods used can guarantee that the disease will not be passed on. In some mtDNA variants, the severity of the disease clearly depends on the degree of heteroplasmy in the blood, so that a reduction in the degree of heteroplasmy in such cases could lead to a milder form of the disease in children.”
“In the short term, there are no good therapeutic methods for treating mtDNA diseases, so preventing the transmission of mtDNA diseases is the better option. I also consider it difficult to successfully treat children who have inherited an mtDNA variant in the medium term, as gene therapy must reach the DNA in the mitochondria. There is the example of 5q-associated spinal muscular atrophy, in which infants diagnosed in newborn screening can be treated very successfully. Unfortunately, this is not expected to be the case for mtDNA diseases in the near future.””I consider it unlikely that the two children who were symptomatic have a maternally inherited mitochondriopathy. In the case of the child with epilepsy, I would even classify this as very unlikely. I consider the authors’ assessment that the reproductive technology procedure itself or pregnancy complications or metabolic disorders in the mother may be responsible for the symptoms of the two children to be plausible.”
Nuno Costa-Borges, researcher and embryologist, scientific director and CEO of Embryotools, Barcelona Science Park, says:
“As a pioneering center in mitochondrial replacement therapies (MRT), Embryotools welcomes the recent publication by Hyslop et al. in The New England Journal of Medicine, reporting outcomes from pronuclear transfer (PNT) to prevent the transmission of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) disease. The study reports the birth of eight babies—four girls and four boys, including one set of identical twins—born to seven women at high risk of transmitting severe mtDNA disorders. Importantly, all infants are healthy and show no signs of mitochondrial disease. However, the detection of low-level postnatal mtDNA heteroplasmy (“reversal”) in 3 of the 8 infants (5%–16%) deserves particular discussion.
“Due to UK regulations that prohibit testing for heteroplasmy in embryos, the timing of this reversal could not be pinpointed. Their analysis relied on arrested embryos and blood samples from newborns, which limits interpretation. In contrast, our recent pilot trial using maternal spindle transfer (MST)—a form of MRT where mitochondrial replacement occurs in the oocyte before fertilization—in infertile patients led to seven live births, two of which also showed reversal, a comparable frequency. However, our approach included direct assessment of heteroplasmy in blastocysts and, longitudinally, in multiple tissues including amniotic fluid. This allowed us to accurately define that reversal occurred between the blastocyst stage and mid-gestation (~15 weeks), reinforcing the importance of prenatal testing to detect reversal early and guide clinical decision-making. In our study, all infants are also healthy and have been followed up showing no adverse events.
“This phenomenon—mtDNA ‘reversal’—has previously been described in human cells in vitro but not in MRT-derived children. Minimal levels of maternal mtDNA carryover can expand substantially, potentially compromising the efficacy of MRTs to prevent mitochondrial disease. The biological mechanisms underlying this selective amplification remain unclear but appear to occur early in development, and instances may therefore be detectable using prenatal testing. It is worth noting that the impact of mtDNA reversal in infertility treatments is likely less concerning, as maternal mtDNA in these cases does not carry pathogenic mutations. Moreover, with appropriate matching of mtDNA haplotypes between the mother and donor, the biological consequences of low-level heteroplasmy could be further minimized or even rendered clinically irrelevant.
“Currently, only the UK and Australia have regulated the use of MRT to prevent transmission of mtDNA mutations. We believe that other countries should adopt similar regulatory models. In particular, MRT should also be contemplated for infertility treatment. Infertility is a disease recognized by the WHO, and MRT can offer a genetic link to the mother for patients who would otherwise rely on egg donation. This justification aligns with the ethical principles underpinning MRT for disease prevention. As a pioneer group in this technology, Spain should lead in regulating these applications to ensure patient safety and prevent reproductive tourism to countries where such techniques may be offered without appropriate oversight.
“In light of these findings, we reaffirm the urgent need to continue performing well-regulated, larger, long-term studies to fully evaluate the safety, efficacy, and clinical implications of MRTs. Ongoing research under appropriate oversight is essential to ensure the responsible development of these technologies, improve genetic counseling, and support informed decision-making by patients and clinicians alike.
“We also advocate for thoughtful regulatory evolution that upholds patient autonomy, scientific excellence, and the principle of reproductive justice.”
Dr. Dunja M. Baston-Büst, Deputy Head of the IVF Laboratory, UniCareD Cryobank, and UniKiD Research, University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany, said:
“Since there are currently no curative therapies for mitochondrial diseases, advances in assisted reproductive technology open up new possibilities for reducing the transmission of such variants. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis, which is commonly used to detect defects in nuclear DNA, can also be used to identify embryos with a low proportion of maternal pathogenic mitochondrial DNA variants, thereby reducing the risk of disease.
“The replacement of the donor’s zygote pronuclei with the patient’s pronuclei was successful in 127 of 160 cases (79.4 per cent). Of the 127 embryos resulting from this, 122 (96.1 per cent) were still intact on the following day (day 1). The number of intact zygotes per pre-nuclear transfer performed (33 procedures in total) ranged from zero to seven.
“In 37 of the 39 patients (95 per cent) in the preimplantation diagnosis group, the embryos were assessed on the third day after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). For preimplantation diagnosis, a blastomere was biopsied on day three of embryonic development and transfer was usually performed in the fresh cycle after analysis of the mitochondrial DNA from the blastomere.
“Implementation in Germany is not possible under the current legal requirements (Embryo Protection Act), as egg donation is prohibited.
“The earlier and more severe a mitochondrial disease occurs, the earlier patients can be identified. Patients in Germany receive comprehensive human genetic or interdisciplinary counselling in accordance with the current S1 guideline ‘Mitochondrial Diseases’. A decision regarding the options for reproductive measures and possible preimplantation diagnosis is made in consultation with the patients and depending on the degree of heteroplasmy. Pre-implantation genetic screening is not possible in Germany due to the ban on egg donation. The alternatives are egg donation abroad or adoption.
“A patient registry for mitochondrial diseases was established in Germany in 2009. It would be beneficial for reproductive medicine if reproductive outcomes were also collected there, or analysis results if preimplantation diagnosis was performed. Unfortunately, there is no cross-linking between the registries. “Furthermore, the search for biomarkers is generally supported in Germany in order to increase the diagnostic accuracy for mitochondrial diseases.
“For reproductive medicine, I currently see no application of the technology presented in the study in Germany without a comprehensive revision of the Embryo Protection Act and the legalization of egg donation.
“The new EU SOHO Regulation will come into force in the next few years. Its main purpose is to provide greater protection for the genetic background of children born from egg and sperm donation (in addition to the amendments to the sperm donation register), so that many questions will still arise in the case of three-parent constellations.
“In mitochondrial donation using pre-nucleation transfer, the nuclear genome is transferred from a fertilized egg cell of the affected woman to an enucleated, fertilized egg cell from a healthy donor. The pronuclei are removed individually from the patients’ zygotes and, after brief treatment with a fusion agent (haemagglutinating virus from the Japanese shell), are placed together under the zona pellucida (protective shell around the egg cell; editor’s note) of the enucleated donor egg cell. Based on findings from preclinical studies, it is standard practice to freeze (vitrify) the eggs of patients for whom pre-nuclear transfer is planned, as donor eggs are not always available at the same time and in sufficient quantities.
“Pathological variants of mitochondrial DNA can be either homoplasmic (present in all mitochondrial DNA copies) or heteroplasmic (present in only some of the copies). Homoplasmic variants are passed on completely to all offspring, but their expression (penetrance) can vary from individual to individual.
“Clinical pregnancies were confirmed in eight of 22 patients (36 per cent) who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) as part of preimplantation genetic testing, and in 16 of 39 patients (41 per cent) who underwent ICSI as part of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Pronuclear transfer resulted in eight live births and one ongoing pregnancy. PGD resulted in 18 live births.
“Heteroplasmy levels in the blood of the eight infants after pronuclear transfer ranged from undetectable to 16 per cent. Compared to the enucleated zygotes, the proportion of diseased maternal mitochondrial DNA was reduced by 95 to 100 percent in six newborns and by 77 to 88 per cent in two newborns. Heteroplasmy data were also available for ten of the 18 infants after preimplantation genetic diagnosis, with values ranging from undetectable to seven percent.
“For reasons that are still unclear, the small amount of transferred maternal mitochondrial DNA can rise to homoplasmic levels in about 20 per cent of embryonic stem cell lines derived from embryos after mitochondrial donation. In addition, one in six infants born after maternal spindle transfer for the treatment of infertility had elevated heteroplasmy levels (40 to 60 per cent) of maternal mtDNA. These observations raise the question of whether mitochondrial donation can reliably prevent the transmission of diseased mitochondrial DNA in all cases, especially in homoplasmic variants.
“Approximately one in 5,000 people develop a mitochondrial disease, making it one of the most common hereditary diseases, although the symptoms can often vary greatly. The symptoms of mitochondrial diseases are very diverse and can affect various organs, for example the muscles with muscle weakness and pain, the nervous system with encephalopathy, epilepsy and neurological disorders, the heart with heart muscle disease, the eyes with blindness and visual impairment, the ears with hearing loss and the endocrine system with diabetes mellitus.
“Other examples of mitochondriopathies with named syndromes include: autosomal dominant optic atrophy (ADOA) with slowly progressive, usually bilateral, central vision loss; Kearns-Sayre syndrome with cardiac conduction disorders, degenerative changes in the retina, and external ophthalmoplegia; chronic progressive external ophthalmoplegia, which is an incomplete form of Kearns-Sayre syndrome and is characterized by external ophthalmoplegia; MERRF syndrome with cerebellar ataxia, myoclonus, generalized seizures, short stature, and dementia; MELAS syndrome with seizures, dementia, and headaches.
“In addition to the disease entities listed here, there are a number of other, sometimes very rare syndromes that can be classified as mitochondriopathies but have often been little researched or not yet described.”
Dr Holger Prokisch, Head of the Mitochondrial Genetics Research Group, Helmholtz Centre Munich – German Research Centre for Health and Environment, Munich, said:“The field of mitochondrial medicine has been eagerly awaiting the results of this study. The robust data describe a real breakthrough for women with a (nearly) homoplasmic pathogenic mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) variant in terms of their ability to probably have healthy genetically related children. The risk of the children to develop the disease after preimplantation genetic testing is minimal. All gene variants tested require very high heteroplasmy for the disease to manifest, or are typically homoplasmic.“”There is an observation in the literature that in a few cases, the mother’s mutated DNA is revised. Interestingly, this also involves an LHON mutation (Leber’s hereditary optic neuropathy) [3][4], which is almost always homoplasmic in the population and, according to recent data, has a low penetrance of less than five percent for LHON disease [5](only five percent of gene carriers also develop the disease; editor’s note). In this respect, the selection of mutation carriers for this study with four LHON mutations is not entirely fortunate. The homoplasmy of the LHON variants suggests that they may offer a selective advantage [6]. Since mitochondrial transfer does not eliminate the mutation, there is a risk that the mutation will be passed on to the next generation. This often leads to significant shifts in heteroplasmy, sometimes to the detriment of patients. However, disease-causing variants tend to have a selection pressure [6].“Human studies show no risk of incompatibility between the donor mtDNA and the parents’ nuclear DNA.””There is no newborn screening for mitochondrial DNA mutations. Women are identified as mutation carriers when they or one of their children develop the disease. Prediction or risk assessment for the next generation is difficult for mtDNA mutations in the mother. Many centers for mitochondrial diseases work with the group in Newcastle to provide information about the options available there or to offer preimplantation genetic diagnosis.”[3] Hudson G et al. (2019): Reversion after replacement of mitochondrial DNA. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1623-3. [4] Kang E et al. (2016): Mitochondrial replacement in human oocytes carrying pathogenic mitochondrial DNA mutations. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/nature20592. [5] Mackey DA et al. (2022): Is the disease risk and penetrance in Leber hereditary optic neuropathy actually low?. The American Journal of Human Genetics. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2022.11.014. [6] Kotrys AV et al. (2024): Single-cell analysis reveals context-dependent, cell-level selection of mtDNA. Nature. DOI: 10.1038/s41586-024-07332-0.
Prof. Dr. Nils-Göran Larsson, Group Leader “Maintenance and expression of mtDNA in disease and ageing”, Department of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics, Karolinska-Institut, Stockholm, Schweden, said: “The study in NEJM is very important and represents a breakthrough in mitochondrial medicine. It should be remembered mitochondrial diseases can be devastating and cause substantial suffering in affected children, sometimes leading to an early death. Families are profoundly affected and the paper in NEJM describe how birth of affected children can be prevented by mitochondrial donation.
“This advanced procedure is not a disease-treatment but rather an intervention that minimizes the transmission of mutated mtDNA from mother to child. For affected families this is a very important reproductive option. The paper describes a relatively small series of 8 babies born after mitochondrial donation by pronuclear transfer. The paper is carefully done and of very high quality but as always in science the results need to be confirmed by independent studies. Also, long-term clinical follow-up studies of born babies will give additional information about the safety and efficacy of mitochondrial donation.”
“Before this procedure was applied to human reproduction there was a very long development and evaluation process. There has been a lot of constructive discussion in the scientific community, and the UK Parliament approved legislation allowing mitochondrial donation in 2015.”
“Mitochondrial donation by the pronuclear transfer procedure always leads to carry-over of some mitochondria from the mother and mutant mtDNA can be transferred. The data presented in the NEJM paper shows that mutant mtDNA was not detected in blood of 5 of the born children. However, in three children, low levels of mutant mtDNA were detected in blood. These low levels of mutant mtDNA are unlikely to cause mitochondrial disease but additional follow-up studies are needed. As pointed out by the authors, the mitochondrial donation by pronuclear transfer should be regarded as a risk-reduction strategy. As always, when it comes to new medical procedures there is a need for validation by independent studies. Also, additional long-term follow-up studies of children born after mitochondrial donation will be needed.”
“The authors report that the transferred mtDNA has no mutations and the donor mtDNA is therefore unlikely to cause disease or impact ageing. During normal ageing, mtDNA acquires mutations (somatic mutations), e.g., during the massive cell division when the embryo is formed and develops. These mutations are typically present at low levels but accumulate to high levels in a subset of cells in many different ageing tissues. The mitochondrial donation involves transfer of mtDNA without mutations and there is no reason to believe that the donor mtDNA will additionally impact the ageing process.”
“When it comes disease-causing mtDNA mutations that are present in all copies (i.e., homoplasmic mtDNA mutations) there is currently no alternative to mitochondrial donation to prevent transmission of mutated mtDNA from mother to child. It is possible that alternate methods will be available in the future, e.g., correction of mutant mtDNA by gene editing techniques. There are currently a few promising pharmacological therapies for mitochondrial disease, e.g., nucleoside therapy for mtDNA depletion disorders. It is likely that more treatments will be available in the near future because this field is rapidly developing.”
Prof. Dr. Heidi Mertes, Associate Professor in Medical Ethics, Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Belgien, said:
“I am happy to see that the first results from the Newcastle University group are now finally published, after being granted a license by the HFEA in 2017, and that the eight resulting children are in good health. However, while the results show that the technique is feasible and can lead to a substantial reduction of the mutation load in the resulting children, it also shows that we need to tread very carefully.”
“In line with previous research by the group of Nuno Costa-Borges [1], this research confirms the possibility of reversal (meaning that although there is only a small fraction of the intended mother’s mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in the embryo, this fraction sometimes increases substantially as the foetus develops), which could still result in mitochondrial diseases in the resulting children. Fortunately, preliminary research does indicate that while the mutation loads appear to increase between the embryonic phase and birth, they appear to remain stable after birth.”
“These are very important results as there was a lot of uncertainty over the safety of MRT. Using PGT when possible and reserving MRT for those cases in which PGT cannot offer a solution was a prudent approach given the experimental nature of MRT. It will be interesting to see more data in the future on whether reversal is more frequent in MRT or PGT, so that the safest procedure can be selected.”
“Although the heteroplasmy-levels are limited in this study, it does show that reversal is a real danger for the offspring, which can have serious health implications. At least three things follow from this.”
“First, people entering into this and future clinical trials will need to be extensively counselled that this is not a risk-elimination treatment, but a risk-reduction treatment.” “Second, we need more research into the mechanisms that trigger reversal, so that it can be prevented before this technique is implemented in routine care + We need follow-up research in the children born after MRT.”
“Third, it is important to keep in mind that by framing this as a risk-reduction strategy, we are ignoring the possibility of conceiving through a traditional egg donation procedure. While genetic parenthood is evidently important to many people, the trade-off that we are making here is that between a genetically related child with a high risk of mitochondrial disease (natural conception), a genetically related child with a reduced risk of mitochondrial disease (PGT or MRT) and a non-genetically related child with the near-absence of a risk of mitochondrial disease (through donor conception). If people who would have chosen for donor conception now opt for MRT, this is actually a risk-increasing technology, rather than a risk-reducing one.”
“This strategy lowers the risk of mitochondrial disorders in the children when the point of comparison is natural reproduction by the parents, but the safest option is still donor conception, which eliminates the risk of passing on the mitochondrial condition, rather than reducing it.”
“While the donor plays an essential role in the birth of the child, attributing them a parenthood-status based on a small genetic contribution appears unwarranted. At the same time it would be correct to call them a ‘genetic progenitor’ or ‘genetic contributor’.”
“While the group of Nuno Costa-Borges ([1] [2]) received a lot of backlash for performing their MRT clinical trial in people with repeated IVF failure, rather than people with mitochondrial diseases, we must acknowledge in hindsight that given the phenomenon of reversal, their approach might have been the more prudent one. In their study they observed reversal in one infant going from
Prof David Thorburn, co-Group Leader of Brain & Mitochondrial Research at Murdoch Children’s Research Institute and the University of Melbourne, said:
“Mitochondrial donation was legalised in the UK in 2015 and in Australia in 2022. It was clearly a complex process in the UK to develop the approvals processes, the clinical and lab pathways, cope with delays from COVID and accumulate sufficient outcomes to publish them without impinging on the privacy of the families involved.So it is very exciting to see the first publications describing results for the first 8 babies born in the UK program. The initial results demonstrate that the approach is effective in reducing the risk of having a child with mitochondrial DNA disease for women who are at high risk. For about three quarters of couples participating in the pronuclear transfer method, at least one suitable embryo was generated. About 40% of these couples had a baby and all were healthy and had undetectable or low levels of the abnormal mitochondrial DNA. Three babies had short-term symptoms that resolved and did not appear to relate to mitochondrial disease. All babies are developing normally to date, with the oldest 5 years of age.The studies emphasise that longer-term followup needs to be performed, and the efficiency of the method could be further improved to achieve higher pregnancy rates. They demonstrate the value of offering the program in conjunction with other reproductive options, such as pre-implantation genetic testing, which can be effective in women with lower risk. I regard these results as very encouraging and supporting the ongoing development and use of mitochondrial donation in the UK and Australia.
Dr Santiago Restrepo Castillo, biomedical engineer and postdoctoral researcher at the University of Texas at Austin (USA), said:
“Mitochondrial diseases are a group of chronic metabolic disorders that can be fatal. These diseases are caused by mutations in the human genome, which consists of nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA. In particular, metabolic disorders caused by mutations in mitochondrial DNA, which affect one in five thousand people, are maternally inherited and currently incurable. In recent years, there have been major advancements in the development of strategies for the treatment or prevention of genetic disorders caused by mutations in nuclear DNA. In contrast, similar strategies for diseases caused by alterations in mitochondrial DNA have remained largely understudied. Aiming to establish a preventive strategy for metabolic diseases caused by mitochondrial DNA mutations, the authors of this pair of studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine developed an integrated program of preimplantation genetic testing and pronuclear transfer (PGT and PNT, respectively). In this program, female patients carrying mitochondrial mutations underwent PGT to identify embryos with low levels of mitochondrial DNA mutations. In cases where an embryo with these characteristics was identified, the embryo was implanted in the patient and the course of the pregnancy was monitored. In addition, in cases where it was not possible to identify embryos with low levels of genetic alterations, the patients underwent PNT, a procedure in which mitochondrial DNA without mutations is obtained from a donor. Encouragingly, through this integrated PGT and PNT program, at the time of publication, the authors have already demonstrated a significant reduction in the maternal transmission of mitochondrial mutations in eight cases. Furthermore, the children born from these cases have shown normal development. In conclusion, this study represents a major advancement in the field of medical genetics and genomics. Understanding the current limitations of mitochondrial gene editing, which would allow genetic alterations to be corrected in different contexts, the authors chose to explore a procedure that cuts the problem off at the root by preventing the transmission of the mutated genetic material. Furthermore, this pair of studies demonstrates clinical benefits in children who, without the integrated PGT and PNT program, would likely have been born with debilitating or fatal genetic mutations. It will be exciting to see if the benefits are maintained over time, and it will be critical to further develop this integrated process to increase its success rates”.
Prof Lluís Montoliu, Research Professor at the National Biotechnology Centre (CNB-CSIC) and at the CIBERER-ISCIII, Spain, says:
“In 2016, John Zhang, a specialist doctor at an assisted reproduction clinic in New York called the New Hope Fertility Center, crossed the border into Mexico to perform a procedure that was banned in the US and not yet regulated in Mexico. A couple from Jordan had come to this clinic hoping to have viable offspring. The couple had already had two children who had died from Leigh syndrome, one of several mitochondrial diseases that are often devastating and untreatable. Mitochondria (our energy factories) are usually inherited from the mother, from the egg. The mother had approximately 25% of her mitochondria affected, and these were the ones she had passed on to her two deceased children. Dr. Zhang did not use the procedure pioneered in the UK because of the couple’s Muslim faith, which opposed the destruction of human embryos. Instead, he chose to extract the nucleus from the mother’s egg (actually the metaphase plate, an incomplete nuclear division, which is the stage at which all eggs are ready for fertilization) and transferred it to the egg of another woman (with healthy mitochondria), from which he had also previously removed the nucleus. Once the nucleus from the mother had been transferred to the egg of the second woman, he used this resulting egg to perform in vitro fertilization with sperm from the father to obtain embryos. Dr. Zhang created five embryos in this way, only one of which developed normally, was implanted in the mother’s uterus, and resulted in the birth of a healthy baby. It was the first newborn obtained using the “three-parent technique”: two mothers and one father.
“In the United Kingdom, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) had approved another procedure in 2015, technically different but also called the “three-parent technique,” to solve problems related to mitochondrial diseases. In this case, the father’s sperm is used to fertilize (through intracytoplasmic sperm injection, ICSI) two eggs, one from the mother carrying the affected mitochondria and one from another woman with healthy mitochondria. After fertilization begins, the two pronuclei (paternal and maternal) that appear temporarily are destined to fuse and form the first nucleus of the zygote. Before this happens, researchers can extract the two pronuclei from the in vitro fertilization between the mother’s egg and the father’s sperm and transfer them to the egg of the woman fertilized by the same sperm from the father, from which the pronuclei will have been previously removed. The result is that the egg with the woman’s healthy mitochondria hosts the two pronuclei of the couple, whose baby will be born without the mitochondrial genetic disease and will be genetically from both the father and the mother. The healthy mitochondria will come from the female donor. In this procedure, which is methodologically somewhat more aggressive than the previous one but less risky, one embryo is destroyed to create another, something that the Muslim couple assisted by Dr. Zhang considered unacceptable. The first baby in the United Kingdom obtained through the authorized British three-parent procedure was born in 2023.
“Ten years later [after the approval of this technique in the UK], a team of British and Australian doctors and researchers published the results of applying the British “three-parent” technique to 22 women carrying pathogenic mutations in their mitochondria (and therefore at high risk of having children born with these incurable diseases) in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM). Of the 22 women treated, only 8 gave birth (36%), and one more pregnancy is still in progress. The eight babies born are healthy, with no signs or very low levels of affected mitochondria, which are not sufficient to cause the disease. So far, all eight children are doing well. Only a couple of them developed minor clinical problems, initially unrelated to the procedure, which were resolved with treatment or spontaneously. In addition, the researchers applied a second technique (preimplantation genetic testing, or PGT) to women with heteroplasmy (a mixture of healthy and affected mitochondria) to assess the percentage of affected mitochondria in babies obtained through in vitro fertilization and select those with lower values of affected mitochondria. In this case, they obtained 16 pregnancies from 39 women (41%) with the result of 18 babies born with a percentage of affected mitochondria of less than 7%.
“In Spain, our Law 14/2006 of May 26 on assisted human reproduction techniques does not explicitly refer to this technique (which did not exist when this legislation was passed), so sensu stricto the procedure is neither expressly prohibited nor explicitly authorized in our country. Essentially, it is not regulated. The legal and ethical doubts that remain have so far prevented the three-parent technique from being applied in Spain.However, this new study shows that the technique has a remarkable success rate (36%) that could well be offered to couples in which the mother is a carrier of affected mitochondria to have offspring free from terrible mitochondrial diseases. Personally, I believe that we should allow this technique in our country in assisted reproduction clinics that have adequate training in this sophisticated method of embryo intervention.”
Dr Paul Wuh-Liang Hwu, Professor, College of Medicine, Pediatrics, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan / Distinguished Research Fellow, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan, said:
“In this week’s New England Journal of Medicine, two research articles published by groups of researchers from the UK describe the success of mitochondrial donation treatments for mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) diseases. Each human cell contains a few hundred mitochondria. The mitochondrion is a double membrane-bound organelle, and each mitochondrion contains a few copies of double-stranded, circular DNA molecules of around 16,500 genetic units (base pairs).
“Mitochondria are responsible for energy (ATP) production, fatty acid oxidation, and some other functions for the cells. Pathological variations or deletions of mitochondrial DNA can impair mitochondrial function, and when the proportion of defective mitochondria (heteroplasmy level) is high, cause serious symptoms involving the brain, muscle, and metabolism. During reproduction, all mitochondria are inherited from the mother (the egg). However, the level of defected mitochondria in offspring can be very different from their mothers, leaving reproduction planning almost impossible.
“In the two studies, mitochondrial donation by pronuclear transfer (PNT) was conducted to reduce the reproductive risk of women with mitochondrial diseases. Both the mitochondrial donor and patient eggs were fertilized first. The nucleus of the donor’s fertilised egg was removed and discarded, leaving behind a fertilised egg without a nucleus but with healthy mitochondria. The nucleus from the patient’s fertilised egg was then transferred into this enucleated donor egg.
“The PNT zygote was then cultured and implanted to continue pregnancy. All live births were in good health and with low levels of defective mitochondria. PNT has been widely used in animal research and now proved to be safe and efficient in humans. This breakthrough gives a reproductive choice for women affected with mitochondrial diseases, which is very important for the patients and their families. However, this study also broke the ban for continuing pregnancy of genetically manipulated human embryos. One argument is that PNT does not really touch the genetic materials but only provides normal mitochondria. The excellent outcome of this study also eases the concerns of nuclear/mitochondrial genome compatibility and other safety issues. Nevertheless, one may still worry if this technology will be abused to improve human physiological quality, for example, creating a body with more efficient energy production. Then, how about adding a little bit of normal, or good, DNA to the nuclear genome, if we can do that safely?
“As doctors and researchers who take care of patients with genetic disease, we welcome inventions, including reproduction medicine, that can help patients. Certainly, before the safety of new treatments can be confirmed, they should be used in patients with no other choices, or with a favorable benefit over risk. Recently, gene therapies, including gene editing treatments, are rapidly developing, offering hope to patients who previously have no option for treatment. However, we need to ask people to restrain themselves, not to apply PNT or gene therapy to improve the health of people without a medical condition, but to let these new treatments be developed to rescue lives of patients.”
Prof Lee Chung-HisProfessor, Graduate Institute of Health and Biotechnology Law, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan, said:
“Pronuclear Transfer Technology: Advancing with Cautious Innovation and International Consensus. While early clinical results show promise in reducing the level of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA in newborns, the application of Pronuclear transfer (PNT) raises significant ethical and regulatory questions that must be addressed through both national oversight and international dialogue. From a bioethical standpoint, germline modification—defined as altering genetic material in a way that affects future generations—has long been met with caution. This is because it involves irreversible changes to the human genome, with potential consequences not only for the individuals born from such interventions but also for society’s understanding of what it means to be human.
“Pronuclear transfer, however, occupies a unique space in this debate. It targets mitochondrial DNA, which, although essential for cellular energy production, contributes relatively little to traits traditionally associated with identity, such as physical appearance, personality, or intelligence. Because of this limited influence on key phenotypic characteristics, PNT is viewed by some as an acceptable “ethical testing ground” for germline-level intervention. Rather than resorting to high-risk gene therapy after the onset of a hereditary disease, using PNT technology to reduce the likelihood of disease is a more ethically acceptable option. It provides a possible pathway to explore the responsible use of reproductive technologies without crossing the bright-line boundaries typically drawn around nuclear DNA modification.
“Nonetheless, mitochondrial DNA modification is not without ethical complexity. Even if its direct functional role is narrower, it still involves heritable changes and the creation of embryos with genetic contributions from three individuals—the intended mother and father, and a mitochondrial donor. This raises questions about identity, kinship, and the rights of the resulting child, especially regarding disclosure and autonomy. Moreover, the long-term health effects of such interventions remain unknown. To prevent a gradual erosion of ethical boundaries, transparent ethical review processes and long-term clinical monitoring must be established as foundational requirements for any country considering the use of PNT.
“From a clinical perspective, preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) should remain the first-line option for reducing the risk of mitochondrial disease transmission. PGT is a more established and less invasive method that allows for the selection of embryos with minimal or undetectable levels of pathogenic mitochondrial DNA. In many cases, this approach has proven effective and carries fewer biological and ethical uncertainties than PNT. In contrast, PNT is a more complex and experimental procedure that combines nuclear DNA from the parents with mitochondrial DNA from a donor egg, and it may result in lower fertilization rates or higher embryonic loss. Therefore, in keeping with the precautionary principle in bioethics, PNT should be considered only when PGT is not feasible or has been shown to be ineffective.
“The United Kingdom currently leads in the clinical implementation of PNT, having established a strict licensing and regulatory regime through the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA). The UK’s model reflects a commitment to enabling scientific advancement while maintaining ethical vigilance. However, reproductive technologies such as PNT are inherently transnational. If only a few countries offer access to such procedures, it may prompt “reproductive tourism”, whereby patients travel abroad to seek unregulated or less strictly governed treatments, potentially undermining safety standards and ethical norms.
“For this reason, a coordinated international approach is urgently needed. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Medical Association (WMA) are well-positioned to initiate global discussions and help formulate shared ethical guidelines and governance frameworks. These discussions should encompass not only scientific and medical dimensions but also social, cultural, and legal implications. Establishing minimum ethical standards and oversight mechanisms will help ensure that the benefits of PNT are pursued responsibly and that global health equity and ethical integrity are preserved.”
‘Mitochondrial Donation and Preimplantation Genetic Testing for mtDNA Disease’ by Louise A. Hyslop et al. and ‘Mitochondrial Donation in a Reproductive Care Pathway for mtDNA Disease’ by Robert McFarland et al. was published in The New England Journal of Medicine at 22:00 UK time on Wednesday 16th July.
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2415539
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2503658
Declared interests
Dr David J Clancy: No interests to declare
Prof Joanna Poulton: Nothing to declare
Prof Dusko Ilic: No conflicts of interest
Prof Dagan Wells: I don’t think I have any declarations relevant to this.
Dr Andy Greenfield: Andy was a member of the board of the Human Fertilisation & Embryology Authority (HFEA) from 2009 to 2018; he was a member of its Scientific & Clinical Advances Advisory Committee (SCAAC) and Chair of its Licence Committee. He chaired the 3rd and 4th preclinical scientific reviews of the safety and efficacy of mitochondrial donation, in 2014 and 2016. Andy chairs the Independent Advisory Committee of the MitoHOPE Program in Australia. He is also a member of the board of the Human Tissue Authority (HTA), the Regulatory Horizons Council (RHC), the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes (ACNFP) and Singapore’s Ministry of Health Regulatory Advisory Panel. Andy’s programme of research in developmental genetics was funded by the Medical Research Council at its Harwell Unit from 1996 to 2021. All opinions expressed are his own and not necessarily shared by any organisations with which he is associated.
Mr Stuart Lavery: No DOIs
Prof Bert Smeets: I am scientific advisor for the HFEA on PNT applications.
Sarah Norcross: PET – https://www.progress.org.uk/ – is a charity that improves choices for people affected by infertility and genetic conditions, and that campaigned for the introduction of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology (Mitochondrial Donation) Regulations 2015 into UK law.
Beth Thompson: Wellcome funded research into mitochondrial donation and co-funded the clinical trial to assess the safety and effectiveness of the treatment.
Danielle Hamm: The Nuffield Council on Bioethics conducted an ethical review of new techniques that aim to prevent the transmission of maternally-inherited mitochondrial DNA disorders in 2012. The report and key findings of the review are available here.
HFEA: As of 1 July 2025, 35 patients have been given approval for mitochondrial donation treatment by the HFEA Statutory Approvals Committee. These decisions are made on an individual case by case basis where there are no other options for the families involved and in strict accordance with the law. The published papers set out that 25 of those patients have undergone pronuclear transfer (mitochondrial donation treatment.)
Prof. Dr. Marcus Deschauer: “Apart from the fact that I spent six months as a researcher in the Mitochondrial Research Group over 20 years ago and subsequently collaborated with the group on scientific projects, and that I am of course well acquainted with some of the co-authors of the two papers, I have no conflicts of interest.”
Dr. Dunja M. Baston-Büst: “I have no conflict of interest.”
Dr Holger Prokisch: “I have no conflicts of interest.”
Prof. Dr. Nils-Göran Larsson: “I have no conflicts of interest with this work.”
Prof. Dr. Heidi Mertes: “I have no conflicts of interest.”
Prof David Thorburn: David has declared he has no financial conflicts of interest and has the following unpaid positions:
Board Member of the Mito Foundation (the major relevant mito advocacy group) and he played a prominent role in their advocacy for legalising mitochondrial donation in Australia.
He is also a Member of the MitoHOPE Executive, funded by the Medical Research Future Fund to deliver an Australian clinical trial of mitochondrial donation.
Dr Santiago Restrepo Castillo: No conflicts of interest
Prof Lluís Montoliu: He declares that he has no conflicts of interest
For all other experts, no reply to our request for DOIs was received.
New financial support will enable remediation efforts and help Jasper residents return home safely and swiftly.
July 16, 2025 Jasper, Alberta Parks Canada
One year after the Jasper Wildfire forced residents from their homes, Parks Canada, the Municipality of Jasper, the Canadian Red Cross, and Prairies Economic Development Canada continue to work as partners in the recovery and rebuild of Jasper, with a shared focus on quickly returning residents to safe and permanent homes.
Today, Parks Canada and the Canadian Red Cross jointly announced up to $5 million in additional support for Jasper residents. This will be intended for Jasperites who require contaminated soil testing and removal prior to rebuilding permanent housing. This new funding will ensure a swift, safe and dignified path forward for those most impacted.
New financial assistance, administered by the Canadian Red Cross, will provide support to residents for uninsured costs related to soil remediation and testing that will ensure the long-term health of residents.
The Government of Canada, through Parks Canada and other federal partners, has invested more than $180 million in rebuilding Jasper, and the work continues.
Together, we have:
· expedited reconstruction efforts through streamlined processes to make rebuilding as efficient as possible;
· secured interim housing for 300 Jasper families to allow them to return to the community as soon as possible;
· coordinated debris removal on 100 per cent of affected lots; and
· welcomed a number of residents back to permanent housing.
With debris removal complete and development permits issued through a streamlined process, the focus has now shifted to soil remediation and ensuring the future health of residents. Parks Canada is continuing to work closely with homeowners to provide clear and timely information, practical solutions, and flexibility throughout this phase. A coordinated plan to guide expedited soil remediation efforts and support residents will be shared very soon. We remain focussed on quickly getting building permits for residents who lost their homes and businesses so that they can move forward with their lives.
Together, these efforts reflect a shared commitment to helping Jasper rebuild stronger and faster, with the well-being of residents at the heart of every decision.
Thank you, Chairman [Chris] Hayward. You have once again gone out of your way to make me feel welcome in London. Thank you also to all of you who are here today. Before I begin, I must remind you that my views are my own as a Commissioner of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission and not necessarily those of the SEC or my fellow Commissioners or of anyone else in U.S. Government.
It is an honor to stand before you in this grand and historic room. The Guildhall is a symbol of resilience—the site is rich with centuries of history that enliven a vibrant present—and renewal—when fire or war has damaged the place, reconstruction followed. Notably, the Guildhall survived London’s Great Fire of 1666, though not fully intact.[1] Samuel Pepys, the go-to eyewitness of the fire that burned much of London to the ground, described watching “the fire grow . . . in a most horrid malicious bloody flame” so that it “made [him] weep to see it.”[2]
Although the fire’s official death toll was remarkably low at six people, the four-day conflagration caused years of immeasurable human suffering for an overwhelmingly homeless, and universally, haunted population.[3] Pepys, whose house survived the blaze—as presumably did the Parmesan cheese he had buried before fleeing the oncoming flames[4]—remarked a few days after the fire that he “sleeping and waking had a fear of fire in my heart”[5] and in 1667 still could not “sleep at night without great terrors of fire.”[6] Rebuilding began right away but took decades to complete. In December 1667, Pepys observed that “the city [had] got a pace on in the rebuilding of Guildhall.”[7] As with any large-scale reconstruction, conflicting architectural plans, regulatory uncertainty,[8] and legal wrangling about how to rebuild and who foots the bill sometimes slowed progress. But, with the help of its financial markets,[9] the city rebuilt itself from the ashes, this time with less flammable materials.[10]
London’s ability to survive and thrive after the Great Fire served as a precedent for its later perseverance through and recovery from the ravages of World War II bombings of the city. Pepys was not around to document those events, but photographic evidence tells of the destruction and suffering in a way that words could not.[11] Photos of the post-air-raid Guildhall reveal a pile of rubble against a still-standing grand backdrop.[12]
Again, London rebuilt the Guildhall and the rest of itself from its bombed ruins into a thriving metropolis. The United States through the Marshall Plan and other measures helped to finance that effort. That assistance, a continuation of the wartime alliance, is evidence of a relationship that runs deep between our nations. Physical manifestations of that connection exist in the damaged London church that was reconstructed as a memorial to Winston Churchill in Missouri[13] and in the bomb detritus that was shipped from the United Kingdom in empty aid ships returning to the United States and used to build parts of New York City.[14] The US-UK bond also reveals itself in the intertwining of our markets for human talent, capital, physical goods, and services, including financial services.
Smart financial regulation embraces and perpetuates the knitting together of our two nations. Because we share so many of the same principles, the United Kingdom is a natural partner with the United States in the endeavor to foster resilient and robust global capital markets. We have a long history of working together. We both have common-law systems that afford strong legal protections to investors. We share an appreciation for the role capital markets play in empowering our people to build a vibrant, prosperous society. We both recognize the importance of market-driven capital allocation decisions in ensuring that society builds the right things and builds them well. We both acknowledge the importance of innovation and competition in serving people’s needs. Both jurisdictions value an environment in which incumbents and new entrants can try new things and change the way old systems work. Both jurisdictions, by promulgating and implementing generally sensible and properly focused regulatory frameworks, have fostered capital markets that attract global investors and talent.
Shared principles alone are not enough to bind our markets together. Regulatory cooperation, which takes many forms, helps too. I have benefited on this trip, for example, from bilateral meetings with my UK counterparts, and similar meetings happen frequently between UK and US officials. Supervisory colleges bring regulators and supervisors together to compare notes on multinational market participants. Substituted compliance—a tool we have used in security-based swaps regulation[15]—enables a market participant that meets one jurisdiction’s regulatory requirements to satisfy the rules of the other jurisdiction geared toward a similar objective. UK and US regulators have worked together to overcome data access challenges to clear the way for US examinations of the more than 270 UK investment advisers serving clients in the US and for additional UK advisers to join their ranks.[16] UK and US authorities also routinely cooperate on enforcement matters by, for example, facilitating one another’s investigations of potential securities law violations.
Just over a year ago, I suggested another tool for regulators to use in bringing our markets together. In a comment letter to the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority on their consultation on a digital securities sandbox, I suggested a cross-border sandbox.[17] The UK government had proposed a digital securities sandbox, which was limited to UK firms, to generate real-world insights about whether distributed ledger technology could streamline the issuance, trading, and settlement of securities without undermining investor protection, market integrity, or financial stability.[18] I posited that a cross-border version of the sandbox could be even more effective: innovators could benefit from simultaneously serving UK and US markets; regulators, relying on information sharing agreements, could benefit by seeing more data on how complex emerging technologies operate in different contexts; and the British and American public could benefit by being served by a greater pool of product and service providers.
As I envisioned it, a very flexible US micro-innovation sandbox would pair well with a UK sandbox; participants could adhere to a single set of conditions in both jurisdictions. Details matter, and I ended the letter by welcoming a discussion on how we might bring a cross-border sandbox to life. I have appreciated expressions of interest from the public and private sector in the UK, including much useful feedback gathered by Chairman Hayward and his colleagues at the City of London. Several months ago, referring to my sandbox, Chancellor Reeves advocated “explor[ing] opportunities to support industry to innovate cross-border . . . potentially allowing greater digital collaboration between capital markets in New York and London.”[19] And at last night’s Mansion House Speech, Chancellor Reeves reiterated her support for “proposals for greater digital collaboration between our two financial centres.”[20]
The goal of future conversations between our two jurisdictions should be a financial system better able to serve UK and US investors, innovators, and entrepreneurs. A sandbox can serve as a bridge between our current rulebooks and future financial markets by allowing people to experiment with technology that may underpin the markets of the future.
As I have thought more about the sandbox idea in the past year and talked with others, several themes have emerged. First, perhaps the term “sandbox” undersells the efficacy of the tool. “Sandbox” describes a regulatory mechanism that the UK and other jurisdictions have put to productive use.[21] Yet the term evokes for some an isolated laboratory environment with no prospect of long-term commercialization and for others children at play. Innovators are childlike only in their healthy sense of curiosity, which enables them to identify and solve societal problems. As I have said before, beaches are better than sandboxes. Beaches give innovators more room to formulate and reformulate ideas within eyeshot of the regulator—in this analogy the lifeguard—but lifeguards do not opine every time a beachgoer adds a turret to her sandcastle, as a regulator sitting in a sandbox with the innovator might be tempted to do.[22] Despite its appeal to this freedom-lover, “cross-border beach” is unlikely to catch on as a term. Maybe we can come up with another descriptor such as technology incubator, but meanwhile we are stuck with “sandbox.”
Second, a sandbox has limited utility unless it comes with a smooth exit ramp that takes the participant into a workable permanent regulatory environment. Incorporating an effective exit ramp facilitates commercial experiments that lead to better, cheaper products and services and a more resilient and efficient financial market infrastructure.
Third, and related, a sandbox with time, customer, or activity limits, absent a nimble mechanism to extend the timeline or raise the limits, could put sand in the gears of a growing company or even bring it to a screeching halt. After a period of slow and steady growth, user interest might spike suddenly. If a regulator were not able to react quickly, the company would have to turn new users away, which could color adversely the public’s perception of the company. Similarly, regulators must stand ready to work with participants to change conditions as needed. As part of the standard innovation process, a team may start with one idea and pivot in response to market demand.
Fourth, incumbent firms and new entrants should have equal access to the sandbox. Some observers worry that if entry criteria are not transparent, the sandbox could become a mechanism for regulators to pick winners. Everyone should be able to participate on the same terms, but the whole point of a sandbox is to accommodate experimentation with different ways of doing things. Transparent terms available to everyone with an option to iterate may address this concern. In operating a sandbox, regulators also must be cognizant of the cost of participating, which can be prohibitive for small entities or even for large firms if long-term commercialization is not a reality. A proactive invitation to firms of all shapes, ages, and sizes to come in and talk about whether the sandbox is right for them can help not only to combat perceptions of favoritism, but to build trust, and inform regulators of market developments.
Fifth, regulators cannot force participants into a sandbox. A cross-border sandbox only makes sense if it streamlines the road to commercial viability for a company that wants to serve both the UK and the US. Sandbox projects need to be organically generated, not planned by government working groups. As London found out in rebuilding after the 1666 fire and after the wartime firebombing, grand plans drawn up by experts often give way to organic building in response to real and immediate human needs. Operationalization of a sandbox may have to wait until a company with a concrete idea for cross-border activity approaches both regulators, though I look forward to preparatory discussions in the meantime, including joint discussions with firms and both sets of regulators in the same room.
Sixth, the conditions imposed by a cross-border sandbox would need to be workable for both jurisdictions. For example, I would not support conditioning a sandbox on sustainability or diversity objectives. Extracting conditions unrelated to—and potentially distracting from—the safe and effective functioning of the project would be an improper use of financial regulation to achieve political outcomes.[23]
Seventh, although not a new thought, many people have underscored the importance of protecting investors and markets from harm caused by sandbox activities. These objectives align with the SEC’s mission, but an often-forgotten part of protecting investors and markets is ensuring that new competitors, products, services, and ways of doing things can come into the market. A sandbox constrains, but does not eliminate, risk, which is consistent with sound regulation. As Chancellor Reeves noted last night, regulation can “go too far in seeking to eliminate risk.”[24]
Much of my thinking about a potential sandbox has been in connection with crypto. Blockchain technology, given its early stage and potential for transforming the way our financial system and perhaps other systems work, is ripe for experimentation. The SEC’s Crypto Task Force has received written comment on the issue of sandboxes.[25] The topic of fostering experimentation also comes up in some of the Task Force’s meetings with the public.[26] Market participants are looking to experiment with bitcoin and other crypto assets, stablecoins, non-fungible tokens, digital identity solutions, collateral management, and tokenization of securities and assets such as real estate, among other issues. Blockchain allows for increased transparency, enhanced efficiency, lower costs, increased liquidity, and decentralization. In recent years, many use cases for the technology likely remained unexplored in the face of regulatory hostility or died in the labyrinth of regulatory ambiguity before they could achieve commercial success. The unique challenges and opportunities raised by blockchain technology and crypto assets and their borderless nature would lend themselves well to a mechanism for facilitating experiments and could help to identify where and how existing regulations might need to change in response. Because market participants are exploring numerous models, a sandbox for tokenizing securities might make sense. Building in cross-border interoperability will be easier now than later when business models have matured. I head back to the US today with the hope that the Crypto Task Force can collaborate with the FCA in coordination with our domestic colleagues across the government and in the context of the Administration’s broader cooperation with the United Kingdom.
Because I prize the ability of capital to flow to its highest and best use, regardless of borders, and of investors to share in the wealth created by entrepreneurs all over the world, I also hope that our cross-jurisdiction partnership can serve as an example of how more than just our two nations can align interests in pursuit of a freer and more prosperous society. Fundamental differences in approaches to and objectives of financial regulation, however, could impede such efforts. Securities markets are key to solving all manner of problems, but only if market participants are free to respond to market incentives rather than serving as robotic mercenaries in a government-orchestrated initiative to achieve objectives unrelated to investor protection, efficiency, competition and capital formation. As Europe’s embrace of double materiality in corporate reporting and export of its sustainability disclosure requirements have laid bare, market integration suffers when two jurisdictions diverge on core matters such as the purpose of financial statements and other securities disclosures.
On a related note that may be relevant to some people in the room, the SEC recently asked for comment on the definition of a Foreign Private Issuer (“FPI”), which provides a number of specific accommodations from which eligible FPIs may currently benefit as compared to domestic issuers.[27] One of the few comments to date came from an FPI based in the UK urging us “to consider carve-outs or refined eligibility criteria that preserve FPI status for companies with genuine foreign governance and infrastructure, regardless of shareholder geography or incorporation jurisdiction.”[28] That first-hand perspective is valuable, and I look forward to hearing from other interested members of the public, including UK companies, on this topic with similar or differing views.
Thank you for indulging me today with your attention. I hope that the coming months will bring continuing discussions about how people from our two countries can work together for our mutual prosperity and benefit. Cross-border cooperation, whether in the context of crypto or capital markets, is a good way to fan the flames of our long friendship.
[3] For an interesting discussion of the fire and its aftermath see Not Just the Tudors Podcast: Great Fire of London (May 28, 2023).
[8] Pepys gives us a glimpse of the effect of regulatory uncertainty, when he notes in his diary that a friend told him in “his opinion that the City will never be built again together, as is expected, while any restraint is laid upon them. He hath been a great loser, and would be a builder again, but, he says, he knows not what restrictions there will be, so as it is unsafe for him to begin.” Samuel Pepys, Diary Entry on February 27, 1667, https://www.pepysdiary.com/diary/1667/02/28/.
[9] Judy Stephenson, Nathan Sussman & D’Maris Coffman, The financing of the rebuilding of London after the Great Fire, Economic Historical Society Blog (Feb. 9, 2022), https://ehs.org.uk/the-financing-of-the-rebuilding-of-london-after-the-great-fire/ (“London’s financial market extended the Corporation credit at an average of 4 per cent in the key period of rebuilding. . . . Remarkably, as the costs of rebuilding mounted, and war with the Dutch began, in addition to political upheaval, the Corporation was able to tap considerable funds for most of the cost of initial reconstruction at declining interest rates.”).
[15] See, e.g., Order Granting Conditional Substituted Compliance in Connection with Certain Requirements Applicable to Non-U.S. Security-Based Swap Dealers and Major Security-Based Swap Participants Subject to Regulation in the United Kingdom, Securities Act Release No. 34-92529, (July 30, 2021), https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/other/2021/34-92529.pdf.
[21] See, e.g., Stuart Alderoty, Sameer Dhond & Deborah McCrimmon, Ripple May 28, 2025 Written Input Submission to SEC Crypto Task Force, https://www.sec.gov/files/ctf-written-input-ripple-letter-regulatory-sandboxes-052825.pdf (mentioning, in addition to the UK’s Digital Securities Sandbox, Singapore’s Project Guardian, the EU Blockchain Regulatory Sandbox, the Swiss Sandbox and Fintech License, the UAE Sandbox, and the Dubai Sandbox).
[23] SeeAll. for Fair Bd. Recruitment v. Sec. & Exch. Comm’n, 125 F.4th 159 (5th Cir. 2024). See also Commissioner Hester M. Peirce, Statement on the Commission’s Order Approving Proposed Rule Changes, as Modified by Amendments No. 1, to Adopt Listing Rules Related to Board Diversity submitted by the Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (Aug. 6, 2021), https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/peirce-nasdaq-diversity-statement-080621.
SANTA FE – Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham today announced that three completed broadband projects have connected more than 500 rural locations to high-speed internet in Cibola and McKinley counties through the Office of Broadband Access and Expansion (OBAE).
“Rural New Mexicans need reliable internet access and we’re delivering it,” said Gov. Lujan Grisham. “These projects deliver real results—connecting families to telehealth, students to online learning, and businesses to new markets.”
“These projects define our mission to bring sustainable, reliable broadband to communities that lack this vital service,” said Jeff Lopez, director of OBAE. “It’s extremely satisfying to connect locations that now have access to critical online programs, services and opportunities. I’m proud of our OBAE team that has worked closely with internet service providers and others to make this happen.”
Cibola County Project: OSO Internet Solutions deployed a nearly 50-mile fiber network connecting 109 homes in Pine Meadow Ranches near Ramah. The $5,789,283 ARPA grant project connects through Oso’s mainline with Lumen Technologies and crosses sections of Ramah Navajo Tribal allotments to reach the Pine Meadows areas.
McKinley County Projects: Sacred Wind/Ethos Broadband used a $1,041,926 ARPA grant to install fixed wireless systems serving 410 locations in two areas:
162 locations in the Western Skies subdivision in Gallup.
248 locations in the unincorporated community of Thoreau, east of Gallup.
“I’m proud to welcome $6.8 million from legislation I helped pass into law to connect New Mexicans living in Cibola and McKinley counties to high-speed internet,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich. “This funding will connect New Mexicans in rural areas to careers they can build their families around, help local small businesses boost their sales online, and provide the next generation with the tools they need to succeed in their education and beyond.”
“In today’s digital era, reliable internet access is a necessity for New Mexico families,” said Sen. Ben Ray Luján. “The completion of these critical broadband projects will bring much-needed, high-speed internet to rural communities across Cibola and McKinley Counties. I’m proud to have secured over $6.8 million in federal funding for these projects through the American Rescue Plan. As Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Media, I will continue to fight to deliver federal dollars to help connect New Mexicans to high-speed internet.”
“High-speed internet is not a luxury—it’s essential for school, work, health care, and opportunity. That’s why I fought to make sure our rural and Tribal communities weren’t left behind when Democrats invested in America’s future with the historic American Rescue Plan,” said Rep. Teresa Leger Fernández. “The new connections in Gallup and Thoreau are life-changing for hundreds of families in McKinley County. With this over $6.8 million investment paid for by that Democratic reconciliation bill, we’re not just laying down internet lines—we’re building the foundation for our children’s success and building ‘the good life’ Democrats believe in.”
“The completion of these three broadband projects is a big win for our district, as more New Mexicans living in Cibola and McKinley counties will now be able to access the online opportunities and resources they need to thrive in today’s digital world,” said Rep. Gabe Vasquez. “From online education platforms to telehealth medicine and more, the doors unlocked by expanded broadband access make day to day life easier for our communities, and I am proud to support this effort.”
“The Navajo Nation Broadband Office is pleased to collaborate with OBAE and the state of New Mexico in delivering broadband access to Ramah Chapter and surrounding areas, with over 560 homes already successfully connected to fiber internet by Oso Internet Solutions,” said Sonia Nez, department manager for Navajo Nation Broadband Office. This achievement means more Navajo families now have the vital tools to access online healthcare, attend virtual classes, and stay connected with loved ones, all from the comfort of their homes.”
All projects provide broadband speeds of 100/100 mbps download/upload to customers.
###
The Office of Broadband Access and Expansion is dedicated to serving New Mexico with a commitment to make high-speed broadband accessible to all New Mexicans. OBAE’s mission is to expand and improve high-speed internet service with passionate leadership that drives bold, equitable, affordable and inclusive broadband solutions. OBAE seeks results that honor the state’s rich heritage and elevate quality of life for all.
SANTA FE – The state of New Mexico today received partial approval for a federal emergency declaration for flood-damaged communities, providing immediate federal personnel resources to support response and recovery efforts in Ruidoso while work continues to secure additional federal assistance.
“This federal declaration is a critical first step, but it’s not everything Ruidoso needs and deserves,” said Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham. “We will continue working with the federal government for every dollar and resource necessary to help this resilient community fully recover from these devastating floods.”
What was approved: The emergency declaration provides immediate assistance to the community for life saving activities like urban search and rescue teams and the support staff for the incident management team to begin work.
What remains under federal review: The governor’s original request also sought additional assistance that remains pending including:
Direct financial assistance for individuals, households, and businesses in the affected areas of Lincoln and Valencia counties, including grants for:
Repair or replacement of homes destroyed in the disaster.
Necessary expenses and essential needs including medical, dental, funeral, personal property, and transportation costs.
A one-time payment for emergency supplies including water, food, first aid, breastfeeding supplies, infant formula, diapers, personal hygiene items, and fuel for transportation.
Temporary housing including hotels, staying with family or friends, or other suitable options for displaced residents.
Transitional sheltering assistance.
Federal reimbursement for emergency work, including debris removal for Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, and Valencia counties.
Permanent repair of disaster-damaged facilities and public infrastructure for Chaves, Lincoln, Otero, and Valencia counties including:
Roads and bridges.
Water control facilities.
Public buildings and equipment.
Public utilities.
Parks, recreational, and other facilities.
In support of the governor’s request, the New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management is actively working with FEMA to conduct preliminary damage assessments and provide additional documentation requested by FEMA.
A state Disaster Recovery Center is available from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. at ENMU-Ruidoso, 709 Mecham Dr, Ruidoso, N.M. 88345. State disaster case managers are on site, along with state agencies who can help residents replace documents, ask insurance questions, and find resources.
Residents can also call the State Disaster Helpline at 1-833-663-4736 from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. or visit the New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management’s website.
MINNEAPOLIS – Vance Boelter, 57, has been indicted on six federal charges in connection with the stalking and murders of Minnesota House of Representatives Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark Hortman, the stalking and shooting of Minnesota State Senator John Hoffman and his wife Yvette Hoffman, and the attempted shooting of their daughter Hope Hoffman, announced Acting U.S. Attorney Joseph H. Thompson.
“Vance Boelter planned and carried out a night of terror that shook Minnesota to its core,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Joseph H. Thompson. “He carried out targeted political assassinations the likes of which have never been seen in Minnesota. We grieve with the Hortman family and continue to pray for the recovery of the Hoffmans. Today, a grand jury indicted Boelter with the most serious of federal charges for these heinous political assassinations. Let me be clear: Boelter will see justice.”
According to court documents, after extensive research and planning, Boelter embarked on a murderous rampage targeting Minnesota’s elected officials and their families. On June 14, 2025, the defendant disguised himself as a member of law enforcement and traveled to the homes of Democratic elected officials with the intent to intimidate and murder. Early that morning, the defendant traveled to the Hoffmans home in Champlin, Minnesota. By posing as a police officer, Boelter compelled the Hoffmans to answer their door. He then repeatedly shot Senator Hoffman and Yvette Hoffman and he attempted to shoot their daughter, Hope Hoffman.
Boelter then traveled to the homes of two other Minnesota elected officials, only to find that no one at those locations was home. He next drove to the home of Speaker Emerita and Representative Melissa Hortman. There, Boelter repeatedly shot, and killed, Representative Hortman and her husband, Mark. Following a two-day manhunt, law enforcement arrested the defendant near his family residence in Green Isle, Minnesota.
The defendant is charged with numerous counts, including the stalking and murders of Melissa and Mark Hortman, the stalking and shooting of John and Yvette Hoffman, and the attempted shooting of Hope Hoffman. The defendant faces charges which include maximum penalties of up to life in prison or death.
“Last month, the State of Minnesota experienced fear and panic. Today, Vance Boelter was indicted by a federal grand jury, marking another step forward in our pursuit of justice,” said Special Agent in Charge Alvin M. Winston Sr. of FBI Minneapolis. “As alleged in the indictment, Boelter’s actions took the lives of Minnesota House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman and her husband Mark Hortman, both beloved members of our community. The indictment also alleges that Boelter seriously wounded Minnesota State Senator John Hoffman and his wife. This targeted violence was an attack on the rule of law, resulting in a manhunt involving hundreds of law enforcement officers who worked tirelessly until Boelter was apprehended. The FBI remains grateful to our federal, state, and local law enforcement partners for their dedication throughout this investigation. Together, we will ensure that justice is served and that a price is paid for the reign of terror and violence our community endured.”
“Vance Boelter’s evil acts did unspeakable harm and terrorized our entire state that night,” Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension Superintendent Drew Evans said. “A lot of work has been happening and we are glad to see these next steps taken toward holding Mr. Boelter accountable for his actions.”
“Political violence has no place in our society and Boelter will be held accountable for his crimes. Today’s indictment reflects the tireless efforts of the dedicated professionals who work every day to protect our communities,” said Brooklyn Park Police Chief Mark Bruley.
“Today marks a significant milestone in our pursuit of justice. This case transcends headlines; it highlights the collaboration between local, state, and federal agencies who refused to rest until Vance Boelter was taken into custody, and it also captures the importance of due process in bringing justice,” said Hennepin County Sheriff Dawanna Witt. “I’m grateful for everyone involved, including the HCSO staff who spent countless hours during the manhunt—responding to tips, conducting searches, offering intelligence and data support, and more to help bring accountability. As we move forward, our thoughts will remain with the victims and their families affected by this tragedy.”
“The path to justice for the lives torn apart by Vance Boelter’s actions is far from over, but this indictment is a powerful step forward,” said Travis Riddle, Special Agent in Charge of the ATF St. Paul Field Division. “What began as fear and chaos is now moving toward accountability thanks to the tireless work of so many law enforcement partners. ATF is honored to stand with them in pursuit of a prosecution that brings answers and a measure of peace to the communities impacted by this violence.”
“The harm caused by Boelter’s actions was not confined to any one place—it was felt widely, including here in Minneapolis. His conduct endangered the safety of our communities and undermined trust in police. We are thankful to our U.S. Attorney’s Office and all federal, state, and local law enforcement that have worked tirelessly to hold this killer accountable,” said Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara.
This case is the result of an investigation conducted by the FBI, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension, ATF, Brooklyn Park Police Department, Minneapolis Police Department, Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, Champlin Police Department, and New Hope Police Department, together with several other state and local partners. The National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section also assisted in the investigation. This investigation has proceeded with the U.S. Attorney’s Office in strong partnership with the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Harry M. Jacobs, Bradley M. Endicott, Matthew D. Forbes, and Daniel W. Bobier are prosecuting the case.
An indictment is merely an allegation, and the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law
Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Padilla, Chu, Colleagues Join Union Workers to Announce Legislation to Protect Workers from Extreme Heat
WATCH: Padilla pushes for enforceable workplace heat stress protections after hottest year on record
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, on the heels of another harsh heat wave across California, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Representative Judy Chu (D-Calif.-28) joined union workers from the United Farm Workers (UFW), American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and United Steelworkers to announce their bipartisan, bicameral legislation to implement federal enforceable workplace heat stress protections.
Co-leads of the legislation include U.S. Senators Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), and Representatives Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (D-Va.-03), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Education and Workforce, and Alma Adams (D-N.C.-12).
To address the increasing risks from extreme temperatures, the lawmakers introduced the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act, legislation to protect the safety and health of indoor and outdoor workers who are exposed to dangerous heat conditions in the workplace. The legislation would protect workers against occupational exposure to excessive heat by requiring the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to establish an enforceable federal standard to protect workers in high-heat environments with commonsense measures like paid breaks in cool spaces, access to water, limitations on time exposed to heat, and emergency response for workers with heat-related illness. The bill also directs employers to provide training for their employees on the risk factors that can lead to heat illness and guidance on the proper procedures for responding to symptoms.
The bill is named in honor of Asunción Valdivia, who died in 2004 after picking grapes for 10 hours straight in 105-degree temperatures. Mr. Valdivia fell unconscious, but instead of calling an ambulance, his employer told Mr. Valdivia’s son to drive his father home. On his way home, he died of heat stroke at the age of 53.
“Asunción Valdivia’s death was completely preventable, yet his story is sadly not unique. As the planet continues to grow hotter, there is still no federally enforceable heat safety standard for workers. That’s not just dangerous for the farm workers and construction workers who work all day outside in the sun — it’s also dangerous for the factory and restaurant workers in boiling warehouses and kitchens,” said Senator Padilla. “Every family deserves to know that even on the hottest day, their loved one will come back home. A national heat safety standard would provide that peace of mind and finally give workers the safety they deserve.”
“Even as heat waves become more frequent, longer-lasting, and more severe, red state politicians are rolling back heat protections and child labor protections across the country. It’s not rocket science—you cannot be pro-worker if you are anti-heat protection,” said Senator Markey. “Our legislation would provide workers with basic, effective protections: access to water, access to shade, time limits on high heat exposure, and procedures for emergency medical response. Every worker deserves to know when they clock in that they will return home safe at the end of their shift. The thermometer is rising and the clock is ticking. Republicans want to sacrifice working Americans. Let’s save our workers instead.”
“From farmhands to construction workers, America’s essential workforce is doing important work while under extreme heat conditions,” said Senator Cortez Masto. “Temperatures continue to reach record highs in Nevada and across the United States. We must act now to protect our communities’ vital workers.”
“As we continue to experience record-breaking summer heat waves, we’re also seeing a distressing increase in cases of workers collapsing and even losing their lives due to excessive heat. I will never forget people like Asunción Valdivia or Esteban Chavez Jr., who passed away in Pasadena, California in 2022 after a day of delivering packages in 90-degree heat in a truck without air conditioning. Unfortunately, their tragic deaths were entirely preventable,” said Representative Chu. “Whether on a farm, driving a truck, or working in a warehouse, workers like Asunción and Esteban keep our country running while enduring some of the most difficult conditions—often without access to water or rest. To protect our workforce and save lives, we must pass this bill into law and establish comprehensive and enforceable federal standards addressing heat stress on the job.”
“This summer, Americans across the country are grappling with some of the hottest temperatures on record. Yet workers in this country still have no legal protection against excessive heat—one of the oldest, most serious, and most common workplace hazards. Heat illness affects workers in our nation’s fields, warehouses, and factories, and climate change is making the problem more severe every year,” said Ranking Member Scott, House Committee on Education and Workforce. “This legislation will require OSHA to issue a heat standard on a much faster track than the normal OSHA regulatory process. I was proud to advance this important bill in 2022, and I urge Chairman Walberg and Committee Republicans to do so again this Congress. Workers deserve nothing less, particularly as heat-related illnesses and deaths rise.”
“As we face record temperatures, it has never been more important that we protect our workers facing extreme heat in the workplace,” said Representative Adams. “Last year, a North Carolina postal worker Wendy Johnson lost her life to heat illness after spending hours in the back of a postal truck on a 95-degree day with no air conditioning. Her death was entirely preventable, and Wendy should still be with us today. I’m proud to introduce this bill so we can honor her memory and ensure every worker has the protections from extreme heat that Wendy deserved.”
According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2024 was the warmest year on record for the United States. The past decade, including 2024, was the hottest on record, marking a decade of extreme heat that will only get worse. Heat-related illnesses can cause heat cramps, organ damage, heat exhaustion, stroke, and even death. Between 1992 and 2017, heat stress injuries killed 815 U.S. workers and seriously injured more than 70,000. The Washington Center for Equitable Growth estimates hot temperatures caused at least 360,000 workplace injuries in California from 2001 to 2018, or about 20,000 injuries a year. The failure to implement simple heat safety measures costs U.S. employers nearly $100 billion every year in lost productivity.
From 2011-2020, heat exposure killed at least 400 workers and caused nearly 34,000 injuries and illnesses resulting in days away from work; both are likely vast underestimates. Farm workers and construction workers suffer the highest incidence of heat illness. And no matter what the weather is outside, workers in factories, commercial kitchens, and other workplaces, including ones where workers must wear personal protective equipment (PPE), can face dangerously high heat conditions all year round.
The Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act has the support of a broad coalition of over 250 groups, including: Rural Coalition, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, AFL-CIO, UNITE HERE!, Communication Workers of America, Alianza Nacional de Campesinas, Sierra Club, United Farm Workers, Farmworker Justice, Public Citizen, International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Union of Concerned Scientists, United Steelworkers, National Resources Defense Council, American Lung Association, and Health Partnerships.
“Every worker safety rule in America is written in blood,” said UFW President Teresa Romero. “The UFW has been fighting for heat safety protections for decades. Over 20 years later, Asuncion Valdivia’s death still hurts. There are so many other farm workers — many whose names we do not know — who have also been killed by extreme heat on the job in the years since. Enough is enough. Every farm worker deserves access to water, shade, and paid rest breaks — it’s past time for Congress get this done.”
“Too many workers – including AFSCME members – have lost their lives on the job as a result of blistering heat waves and record-breaking temperatures,” said AFSCME President Lee Saunders. “As the number of heat-related illnesses and fatalities continue to rise, it is well past time we adopt nationwide safeguards to better protect the workers who maintain our infrastructure, keep our streets clean, harvest our food, and keep our economy moving. We at AFSCME thank Senator Padilla and Representative Chu for introducing the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act, which will ensure essential workers who brave the heat can do their jobs safely and effectively, and most importantly, make it home alive.”
“For the Steelworkers Union, we represent workers in manufacturing settings and in a host of other areas where not only is it hot outside, but the areas that they work around are as hot as up to 3,000 degrees and they must wear protective equipment. The Asunción Valdivia Heat, Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act is important because it will provide a basic standard for not just outdoor, but indoor workplaces as well to ensure that there is proper rest breaks and the ability to stay cool. The Steelworkers are absolutely supportive of this bill and are going to work with Republicans and Democrats to ensure that heat illness is the last thing a worker should worry about,” said Roy Houseman, Legislative Director of United Steelworkers.
“Everyone deserves safe working conditions, but powerful corporations have not done enough to protect their workers from hot working environments, exacerbated by the climate crisis,” said Liz Shuler, President of the AFL-CIO. “Extreme heat is increasingly causing indoor and outdoor workers to collapse or even die on the job, and our union family has already lost too many members to preventable, work-related heat illness. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) must issue a strong heat rule, not a weak one, to ensure workers have specific protections they need and to be able to raise unsafe working conditions without fear of retaliation.”
“It’s long past time for meaningful legislation to protect Teamsters and other workers from the effects of prolonged heat exposure and dangerous heat levels while at work,” said Teamsters General President Sean M. O’Brien. “Paid breaks in cool spaces, access to water, and limitations on time exposed to heat are simple common sense steps that should be mandated immediately. Waiting to implement these measures is unacceptable and will result in the further loss of lives.”
“Workers in America are facing unprecedented dangers from climate-driven heat and extreme weather, and things are only getting worse. It is far past time for a strong national standard to protect workers from illness and death caused by exposure to extreme heat. The provisions mandated in this bill, including temperature triggers, acclimatization, water, shade and paid rest breaks, would save countless lives. They represent a common sense and common decency approach that employers could quickly adopt. American workers deserve no less, and they urgently need it. Today, OSHA is in the final stage of issuing a final rule on this issue. It is imperative that the rule maintain the integrity and high standards called for in the Asuncíon Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act. We applaud Senators Padilla, Markey, and Cortez Masto and Representatives Chu, Adams, and Scott, as well as the dozens of Senators and Congresspersons who have joined them in this long effort. It’s time to bring a high quality, protective standard to the finish line for American workers,” said Ernesto Archila, Climate and Financial Regulation Policy Director, Public Citizen.
“Every summer high temperature records get broken in states across the country, and while public health officials urge residents to stay inside and stay safe millions of workers have to report for work. From fields to warehouses, airports to schools, construction sites to manufacturing plants, and many more industries, too many workers are at risk of not getting home safely at the end of the day due to exposure to heat on the job. We know how to prevent these dangers. In fact, both outdoor and indoor workers in states like Oregon, California, and Maryland have strong, enforceable protections in place already. And in Washington, Colorado, and Minnesota at least some categories of workers are being kept safe from heat. But millions labor in other states where there are no protections; worker safety is left to the federal government in these states, and absent strong rules workers are left to protect themselves and hope for the best. We must extend workplace protections from heat to all workers. The National Employment Law Project thanks Senator Padilla and Representative Chu, as well as the dozens of Senators and Congresspersons who have cosponsored the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act of 2025,” said Anastasia Christman, Senior Policy Analyst, National Employment Law Project.
The bill is cosponsored by Senators Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), John Fetterman (D-Pa.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).
Senator Padilla has acted urgently to address the threats posed by extreme heat as the climate crisis becomes more severe. Padilla successfully called on OSHA to establish the first-ever federal safety standard to protect workers from the severe risks of excessive heat, implementing key provisions from the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act. Padilla and his colleagues also led 112 members of Congress in calling on the Biden Administration to implement a workplace federal heat standard as quickly as possible. The letter urged OSHA to model the standard after the provisions in the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act. Additionally, Padilla and Markey’s Preventing Health Emergencies and Temperature-related (HEAT) Illness and Deaths Act advanced out of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation last year.
Padilla previously joined union members and workers from UFW and the Kern, Inyo, and Mono Counties Central Labor Council, AFL-CIO in Forty Acres, California in 2023 to announce his legislation to implement an enforceable federal workplace heat standard.
A one-pager on the Asunción Valdivia Heat Illness, Injury, and Fatality Prevention Act is available here.
A section-by-section of the bill is available here.
Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
TULSA, Okla. – A Mexican national was sentenced today for Possession of Methamphetamine with Intent to Distribute, Possession of Firearms in Furtherance of a Drug Trafficking Crime, and Unlawful Reentry of a Removed Alien, announced U.S. Attorney Clint Johnson.
U.S. District Judge Gregory K. Frizzell sentenced Marcos Javier Suazo-Mancilla, 23, to 270 months imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release.
In October 2024, the Drug Enforcement Administration began investigating a drug trafficking organization believed to be responsible for trafficking methamphetamine and cocaine in the Tulsa area. When law enforcement conducted a search warrant at a residence, Suazo-Mancilla was present, and documentation showed that he was residing in the home. During a search of the residence, approximately 26 pounds of methamphetamine, 41 grams of cocaine, seven firearms, and more than $9k in cash were found. The investigation further revealed that this organization rented an auto body shop. When law enforcement searched that business, they found an additional 39 pounds of methamphetamine.
Suazo-Mancilla was previously removed from the United States in August 2018. He will remain in custody pending transfer to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and is expected to face removal proceedings following the sentence.
The Drug Enforcement Administration, the Tulsa County Sheriff’s Office, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives investigated the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney David Nasar prosecuted the case.
This case is part of Operation Take Back America a nationwide initiative that marshals the full resources of the Department of Justice to repel the invasion of illegal immigration, achieve the total elimination of cartels and transnational criminal organizations (TCOs), and protect our communities from the perpetrators of violent crime. Operation Take Back America streamlines efforts and resources from the Department’s Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETFs) and Project Safe Neighborhood (PSN).
SAN JOSE, Calif., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Synaptics® Incorporated (Nasdaq: SYNA) today announced that it will report financial results for the fourth quarter and full year of fiscal 2025 on Thursday, August 7, 2025, after the market closes. The Company will host a corresponding conference call for analysts and investors at 2:00 p.m. PT (5:00 p.m. ET), to discuss the results.
Registrants will receive dial-in information and a unique passcode to access the call. We encourage participants to dial-in at least ten minutes before the scheduled start time.
A live and archived webcast of the conference call, as well as associated materials, will be accessible from the “Investor Relations” section of the Company’s website at https://investor.synaptics.com.
About Synaptics Incorporated: Synaptics (Nasdaq: SYNA) is driving innovation in AI at the Edge, bringing AI closer to end users and transforming how we engage with intelligent connected devices, whether at home, at work, or on the move. As a go-to partner for forward-thinking product innovators, Synaptics powers the future with its cutting-edge Synaptics Astra™ AI-Native embedded compute, Veros™ wireless connectivity, and multimodal sensing solutions. We’re making the digital experience smarter, faster, more intuitive, secure, and seamless. From touch, display, and biometrics to AI-driven wireless connectivity, video, vision, audio, speech, and security processing, Synaptics is a force behind the next generation of technology enhancing how we live, work, and play.
LUBBOCK, Texas, July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — South Plains Financial, Inc. (NASDAQ:SPFI) (“South Plains” or the “Company”), the parent company of City Bank (“City Bank” or the “Bank”), today reported its financial results for the quarter ended June 30, 2025.
Second Quarter 2025 Highlights
Net income for the second quarter of 2025 was $14.6 million, compared to $12.3 million for the first quarter of 2025 and $11.1 million for the second quarter of 2024.
Diluted earnings per share for the second quarter of 2025 was $0.86, compared to $0.72 for the first quarter of 2025 and $0.66 for the second quarter of 2024.
Average cost of deposits for the second quarter of 2025 was 214 basis points, compared to 219 basis points for the first quarter of 2025 and 243 basis points for the second quarter of 2024.
Net interest margin, on a tax-equivalent basis, was 4.07% for the second quarter of 2025, compared to 3.81% for the first quarter of 2025 and 3.63% for the second quarter of 2024.
Return on average assets for the second quarter of 2025 was 1.34%, compared to 1.16% for the first quarter of 2025 and 1.07% for the second quarter of 2024.
Tangible book value (non-GAAP) per share was $26.70 as of June 30, 2025, compared to $26.05 as of March 31, 2025 and $24.15 as of June 30, 2024.
The consolidated total risk-based capital ratio, common equity tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, and tier 1 leverage ratio at June 30, 2025 were 18.17%, 13.86%, and 12.12%, respectively.
Curtis Griffith, South Plains’ Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, commented, “We delivered solid second quarter results highlighted by steady margin expansion, continued loan growth despite high levels of loan payoffs, which were expected, and healthy capital levels that continued to build through the quarter. Additionally, we believe the credit quality of our loan portfolio remained solid through the quarter. We believe that we are in a strong position to take advantage of opportunities as they present themselves and are pursuing a strategy to increase the assets of the Bank primarily focused on expanding our lending capabilities. Our community-based deposit franchise continues to provide a stable, lower-cost funding source for loan growth across our markets and our team has done a terrific job growing our loan portfolio over the last five years. We believe that we have opportunities to accelerate that growth by further expanding our lending platform and adding experienced commercial lenders who share our culture and values, and who can bring high quality customer relationships to the Bank. We recruited several experienced lenders in the Dallas market during the second quarter and will continue to add talent in the quarters to come as we expand our reach and continue to work to take market share.”
Results of Operations, Quarter Ended June 30, 2025
Net Interest Income
Net interest income was $42.5 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $38.5 million for the first quarter of 2025 and $35.9 million for the second quarter of 2024. Net interest margin, calculated on a tax-equivalent basis, was 4.07% for the second quarter of 2025, compared to 3.81% for the first quarter of 2025 and 3.63% for the second quarter of 2024. The average yield on loans was 6.99% for the second quarter of 2025, compared to 6.67% for the first quarter of 2025 and 6.60% for the second quarter of 2024. The average cost of deposits was 214 basis points for the second quarter of 2025, which is 5 basis points lower than the first quarter of 2025 and 29 basis points lower than the second quarter of 2024. There was a recovery of $1.7 million in interest during the second quarter of 2025, related to a full repayment of a loan that had previously been on nonaccrual. This recovery positively impacted the net interest margin by 17 basis points and the loan yield by 23 basis points during the second quarter of 2025.
Interest income was $64.1 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $59.9 million for the first quarter of 2025 and $59.2 million for the second quarter of 2024. Interest income increased $4.2 million in the second quarter of 2025 from the first quarter of 2025, which was primarily comprised of an increase of $3.3 million in loan interest income and an increase of $888 thousand in interest income on other earning assets. The increase in loan interest income was due primarily to the $1.7 million recovery of interest and growth of $20.0 million in average loans outstanding during the second quarter of 2025. The increase in interest income on other earning assets was mainly due to an increase of $69.8 million in average other interest-earning assets during the second quarter of 2025. Interest income increased $4.9 million in the second quarter of 2025 compared to the second quarter of 2024. This increase was primarily due to the $1.7 million recovery of interest and an increase of average loans of $12.0 million and higher loan interest rates during the period, resulting in growth of $3.3 million in loan interest income.
Interest expense was $21.6 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $21.4 million for the first quarter of 2025 and $23.3 million for the second quarter of 2024. Interest expense increased $237 thousand compared to the first quarter of 2025 and decreased $1.7 million compared to the second quarter of 2024. The $237 thousand increase was primarily as a result of a $21.2 million increase in average interest-bearing deposits during the second quarter of 2025 as compared to the first quarter of 2025. The $1.7 million decrease was primarily as a result of a 42 basis point decline in the cost of interest-bearing deposits, partially offset by an increase of $151.3 million in average interest-bearing deposits in the second quarter of 2025 as compared to the second quarter of 2024.
Noninterest Income and Noninterest Expense
Noninterest income was $12.2 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $10.6 million for the first quarter of 2025 and $12.7 million for the second quarter of 2024. The increase from the first quarter of 2025 was primarily due to an increase of $1.5 million in mortgage banking revenues, mainly as a result of an increase of $1.4 million in the fair value adjustment of the mortgage servicing rights assets as interest rates that affect the value stabilized in the second quarter of 2025 after declining in the first quarter of 2025. The decrease in noninterest income for the second quarter of 2025 as compared to the second quarter of 2024 was primarily due to a decrease of $523 thousand in income from investments in Small Business Investment Companies.
Noninterest expense was $33.5 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $33.0 million for the first quarter of 2025 and $32.6 million for the second quarter of 2024. The $513 thousand increase from the first quarter of 2025 was largely the result of an increase of $267 thousand in personnel expenses and $144 thousand in increased professional service expenses. The $971 thousand increase in noninterest expense for the second quarter of 2025 as compared to the second quarter of 2024 was largely the result of an increase of $509 thousand in personnel expenses, mainly a result of annual salary adjustments.
Loan Portfolio and Composition
Loans held for investment were $3.10 billion as of June 30, 2025, compared to $3.08 billion as of March 31, 2025 and $3.09 billion as of June 30, 2024. The increase of $23.1 million, or 3.0% annualized, during the second quarter of 2025 as compared to the first quarter of 2025 occurred primarily as a result of organic loan growth experienced broadly across the portfolio, partially offset by a decrease of $52.6 million in multi-family property loans mainly due to the payoff of three loans totaling $49.1 million. As of June 30, 2025, loans held for investment increased $4.7 million, or 0.2%, from June 30, 2024.
Deposits and Borrowings
Deposits totaled $3.74 billion as of June 30, 2025, compared to $3.79 billion as of March 31, 2025 and $3.62 billion as of June 30, 2024. Deposits decreased by $53.6 million, or 1.4%, in the second quarter of 2025 from March 31, 2025. Deposits increased by $114.4 million, or 3.2%, at June 30, 2025 as compared to June 30, 2024. Noninterest-bearing deposits were $998.8 million as of June 30, 2025, compared to $966.5 million as of March 31, 2025 and $951.6 million as of June 30, 2024. Noninterest-bearing deposits represented 26.7% of total deposits as of June 30, 2025. The quarterly change in total deposits was mainly due to a seasonal decrease of $73.7 million in public fund deposits, partially offset by organic growth in retail and commercial deposits. The year-over-year increase in total deposits was primarily the result of continued organic growth in retail and commercial deposits.
Asset Quality
The Company recorded a provision for credit losses in the second quarter of 2025 of $2.5 million, compared to $420 thousand in the first quarter of 2025 and $1.8 million in the second quarter of 2024. The provision during the second quarter of 2025 was largely attributable to an increase in specific reserves, net charge-off activity, increased loan balances, and several credit quality downgrades.
The ratio of allowance for credit losses to loans held for investment was 1.45% as of June 30, 2025, compared to 1.40% as of March 31, 2025 and 1.40% as of June 30, 2024.
The ratio of nonperforming assets to total assets was 0.25% as of June 30, 2025, compared to 0.16% as of March 31, 2025 and 0.57% as of June 30, 2024. Annualized net charge-offs were 0.06% for the second quarter of 2025, compared to 0.07% for the first quarter of 2025 and 0.10% for the second quarter of 2024.
Capital
Book value per share increased to $27.98 at June 30, 2025, compared to $27.33 at March 31, 2025. The change was primarily driven by $12.2 million of net income after dividends paid, partially offset by a decrease in accumulated other comprehensive income of $2.3 million. The ratio of tangible common equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP) increased 34 basis points to 9.98% during the second quarter of 2025.
Conference Call
South Plains will host a conference call to discuss its second quarter 2025 financial results today, July 16, 2025, at 5:00 p.m., Eastern Time. Investors and analysts interested in participating in the call are invited to dial 1-877-407-9716 (international callers please dial 1-201-493-6779) approximately 10 minutes prior to the start of the call. A live audio webcast of the conference call and conference materials will be available on the Company’s website at https://www.spfi.bank/news-events/events.
A replay of the conference call will be available within two hours of the conclusion of the call and can be accessed on the investor section of the Company’s website as well as by dialing 1-844-512-2921 (international callers please dial 1-412-317-6671). The pin to access the telephone replay is 13754259. The replay will be available until July 30, 2025.
About South Plains Financial, Inc.
South Plains is the bank holding company for City Bank, a Texas state-chartered bank headquartered in Lubbock, Texas. City Bank is one of the largest independent banks in West Texas and has additional banking operations in the Dallas, El Paso, Greater Houston, the Permian Basin, and College Station, Texas markets, and the Ruidoso, New Mexico market. South Plains provides a wide range of commercial and consumer financial services to small and medium-sized businesses and individuals in its market areas. Its principal business activities include commercial and retail banking, along with investment, trust and mortgage services. Please visit https://www.spfi.bank for more information.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
Some of the financial measures included in this press release are not measures of financial performance recognized in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”). These non-GAAP financial measures include Tangible Book Value Per Share, Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets, and Pre-Tax, Pre-Provision Income. The Company believes these non-GAAP financial measures provide both management and investors a more complete understanding of the Company’s financial position and performance. These non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and are not a substitute for any analysis based on GAAP financial measures.
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 as in effect from time to time in the United States in our statements of income, balance sheets or statements of cash flows. Not all companies use the same calculation of these measures; therefore, this presentation may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures as presented by other companies.
A reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP financial measures is provided at the end of this press release.
Available Information
The Company routinely posts important information for investors on its web site (under www.spfi.bank and, more specifically, under the News & Events tab at www.spfi.bank/news-events/press-releases). The Company intends to use its web site as a means of disclosing material non-public information and for complying with its disclosure obligations under Regulation FD (Fair Disclosure) promulgated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Accordingly, investors should monitor the Company’s web site, in addition to following the Company’s press releases, SEC filings, public conference calls, presentations and webcasts.
The information contained on, or that may be accessed through, the Company’s web site is not incorporated by reference into, and is not a part of, this document.
Forward Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements reflect South Plains’ current views with respect to future events and South Plains’ financial performance. Any statements about South Plains’ expectations, beliefs, plans, predictions, forecasts, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not historical facts and may be forward-looking. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipate,” “believes,” “can,” “could,” “may,” “predicts,” “potential,” “should,” “will,” “estimate,” “plans,” “projects,” “continuing,” “ongoing,” “expects,” “intends” and similar words or phrases. South Plains cautions that the forward-looking statements in this press release are based largely on South Plains’ expectations and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that are subject to change based on factors which are, in many instances, beyond South Plains’ control. Factors that could cause such changes include, but are not limited to, the impact on us and our customers of a decline in general economic conditions and any regulatory responses thereto; potential recession in the United States and our market areas; the impacts related to or resulting from uncertainty in the banking industry as a whole; increased competition for deposits in our market areas and related changes in deposit customer behavior; the impact of changes in market interest rates, whether due to a continuation of the elevated interest rate environment or further reductions in interest rates and a resulting decline in net interest income; the lingering inflationary pressures, and the risk of the resurgence of elevated levels of inflation, in the United States and our market areas; the uncertain impacts of ongoing quantitative tightening and current and future monetary policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; changes in unemployment rates in the United States and our market areas; adverse changes in customer spending and savings habits; declines in commercial real estate values and prices; a deterioration of the credit rating for U.S. long-term sovereign debt or uncertainty regarding United States fiscal debt, deficit and budget matters; cyber incidents or other failures, disruptions or breaches of our operational or security systems or infrastructure, or those of our third-party vendors or other service providers, including as a result of cyber-attacks; severe weather, natural disasters, acts of war or terrorism, geopolitical instability or other external events, including as a result of the policies of the current U.S. presidential administration or Congress; the impacts of tariffs, sanctions and other trade policies of the United States and its global trading counterparts and the resulting impact on the Company and its customers; competition and market expansion opportunities; changes in non-interest expenditures or in the anticipated benefits of such expenditures; the risks related to the development, implementation, use and management of emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence and machine learnings; potential costs related to the impacts of climate change; current or future litigation, regulatory examinations or other legal and/or regulatory actions; and changes in applicable laws and regulations. Additional information regarding these risks and uncertainties to which South Plains’ business and future financial performance are subject is contained in South Plains’ most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q on file with the SEC, including the sections entitled “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” of such documents, and other documents South Plains files or furnishes with the SEC from time to time, which are available on the SEC’s website, www.sec.gov. Actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those contemplated, expressed, or implied by the forward-looking statements due to additional risks and uncertainties of which South Plains is not currently aware or which it does not currently view as, but in the future may become, material to its business or operating results. Due to these and other possible uncertainties and risks, the Company can give no assurance that the results contemplated in the forward-looking statements will be realized and readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements contained in this press release. Any forward-looking statements presented herein are made only as of the date of this press release, and South Plains does not undertake any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect changes in assumptions, new information, the occurrence of unanticipated events, or otherwise, except as required by applicable law. All forward-looking statements, express or implied, included in the press release are qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement.
(1) Average loan balances include nonaccrual loans and loans held for sale.
(2) Net interest margin is calculated as the annualized net interest income, on a fully tax-equivalent basis, divided by average interest-earning assets.
South Plains Financial, Inc. Average Balances and Yields – (Unaudited) (Dollars in thousands)
(1) Average loan balances include nonaccrual loans and loans held for sale.
(2) Net interest margin is calculated as the annualized net interest income, on a fully tax-equivalent basis, divided by average interest-earning assets.
South Plains Financial, Inc. Consolidated Balance Sheets (Unaudited) (Dollars in thousands)
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Jacky Rosen (D-NV) helped introduce legislation that would prohibit ICE officers and other federal immigration agents from concealing their identity during routine immigration enforcement operations. The VISIBLE Act requires these officers to clearly identify themselves with their names, badge number, or agency name, except in covert operations. This is a direct response to the Trump Administration’s widespread use of masked, plainclothes agents in immigration raids — often without badges or agency markings — who are targeting law-abiding people without accountability.
“The Trump Administration is using immigration officers wearing masks to target law-abiding immigrants, Green Card holders, and even American citizens,” said Senator Rosen. “As with any other law enforcement official, ICE officers have a responsibility to the public to act with transparency and accountability. I’m helping introduce this commonsense bill to ensure immigration officers properly identify themselves.”
Senator Rosen has consistently opposed the Trump Administration’s aggressive and unlawful mass deportation enforcement tactics while championing transparency and fairness in the immigration system. Earlier this year, she helped introduce legislation to protect sensitive locations—such as schools, hospitals, churches, and courthouses—from immigration raids, ensuring families can access essential services without fear. She also urged Senate leadership to pursue real, bipartisan immigration reform that balances strong border security with protections for Dreamers and immigrant families. Additionally, Senator Rosen has called on the Trump Administration to guarantee legal representation for unaccompanied children in immigration custody, defending the basic rights of the most vulnerable.
Source: United States Senator for New Jersey Cory Booker
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Patty Murray (D-WA) led the reintroduction of the Access to Birth Control Act. The legislation would guarantee patients’ timely access to birth control at pharmacies nationwide—including by addressing pharmacies’ refusals of contraception that prevent patients from obtaining their preferred form of birth control medication. U.S. Representative Robin Kelly (D-IL-02) introduced companion legislation in the House.
Contraception is an essential part of reproductive health care, and protecting access to contraception at the pharmacy is more important than ever given the relentless attacks on reproductive health care currently ongoing throughout the country. In addition to ensuring that patients have access to contraception at the pharmacy without delay, the bill would also ensure that pharmacies do not operate an environment where patients are intimidated, threatened, or harassed when seeking access to contraception or medication related to contraception. In the event that a pharmacy violates one of these requirements, the bill establishes liability for civil penalties for the pharmacy and a private cause of action for patients to seek relief.
“Three years ago, the Supreme Court unjustly overturned Roe v. Wade, and opened the door to attacks on contraception,” said Senator Booker. “Since then, Republicans have used every tool they can to undercut access to reproductive health care, and Congress must act to ensure everyone has the freedom to make their own decisions about contraception without fear of intimidation or threats. The Access to Birth Control Act will remove barriers to accessing birth control, and ensure Americans have full autonomy over their bodies and reproductive choices.”
“Birth control is essential health care—there is no reason it shouldn’t be available to every woman, without exception,” said Senator Murray. “As contraception comes under attack by Republican anti-abortion extremists, it is more important than ever that women can access birth control, free from fear and intimidation. Our bill ensures no one seeking birth control experiences harassment, denials, or delays from providers. I will never stop fighting to defend reproductive health care and make it more accessible and affordable for women everywhere.”
“Birth control is safe, effective, and essential for healthcare,” said Representative Kelly. “No pharmacy employee or politician should weigh into such a private decision as to if or when to start a family. My bill removes barriers that obstruct a patient’s right to birth control so everyone can access birth control without intimidation, harassment, or discrimination.”
Although Supreme Court precedent recognizes a protected right to contraception, conservatives on the Court have ignored precedent to undermine reproductive rights. In the radical Dobbs decision, the Court reversed the nearly 50-year precedent of Roe v. Wade that guaranteed a right to access abortion care. Access to contraception in the United States should not hinge on the Supreme Court’s ideological balance or the willingness of individual pharmacists to fill prescriptions. Providers, including pharmacists, play a key role in providing contraceptive services and important information about prescription and over-the-counter birth control options to people across the country.
According to the National Women’s Law Center, pharmacists have refused to fill prescriptions for birth control or provide emergency contraception over the counter to patients in 24 states and the District of Columbia. These refusals are based on personal beliefs and can negatively impact a patient’s health. Additionally, these refusals disproportionately affect people of color, low-income people, LGBTQ+ people, and those who live in rural and other underserved areas.
The bill is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD), Tina Smith (D-MN), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Mark Warner (D-VA), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Ed Markey (D-MA), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Ron Wyden (D-OR).
The Access to Birth Control Act is endorsed by more than 20 organizations, listed here.
Remarks by Brad Callaghan, Associate Deputy Commissioner of the Policy, Planning and Advocacy Directorate; and Jonathan Fonberg, Senior Behavioural Scientist, Behavioural Insights Unit
Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, Commissioners and Commission staff. Thank you for the opportunity to appear here today on unceded Algonquin Anishinabeg land just north of the Kichi Zibi.
My name is Brad Callaghan, and I am the Associate Deputy Commissioner of the Policy, Planning and Advocacy Directorate at the Competition Bureau of Canada.
Let me begin by introducing the members of our panel. To my right is:
Ben Klass: Competition Law Officer, Policy, Planning and Advocacy Directorate; and
Derek Leschinsky: Senior Counsel, Competition Bureau Legal Services.
To my left is:
Jonathan Fonberg, Senior Behavioural Scientist, Behavioural Insights Unit; and
Émilie-Ève Gravel, head of the Competition Bureau’s Behavioural Insights Unit.
The Competition Bureau is an independent law enforcement agency that protects and promotes competition for the benefit of Canadian consumers and businesses. We are an evidence-based agency we’re not influenced by commercial interests, but by the public interest just like the CRTC.
We hope that our participation in this consultation will help to deliver outcomes that serve the public interest by creating the conditions for competition.
Telecommunications services like home internet and mobile connectivity have become an essential part of modern life. Since the pandemic, Canadians across the country have come to rely on their connections more than ever before to stay in touch with family and community, to learn, work, play, and to do business.
Policies promoting marketplace competition are helping get us to a place where most people have access to a range of innovative services that meet their needs at affordable prices.
At the same time, your consumer codes for wireless, internet, and television services have helped empower consumers to make choices between services and providers on their own terms.
Despite these positive steps, there are signs telling us there’s still work to be done and competition is key to achieving your policy objectives.
So, as technology, markets, and patterns of communication evolve, we see this consultation as an opportunity to build on past successes and keep the momentum going.
In oursubmission, we’ve shared several recommendationsthat we hope will help improve competitive dynamics and consumer choice in Canada’s telecom markets.
Our recommendations are grounded in the general principle that good information and freedom from barriers to switching are key ingredients in the recipe for competition. When either or both of these components are lacking, it makes room for the exercise of market power, which can be harmful for consumers and the economy more broadly.
To develop our input, we conducted desk research, consulted with stakeholders including other domestic and international regulators and engaged our behavioural insights experts, who are here with us today, to sharpen the focus on providing evidence-based best practices for empowering consumers.
So, with that in mind, I’ll now briefly outline our recommendations and some of the key ideas why we think adopting them will help.
First, we support the adoption of a ‘nutrition label’ format for providing customers with information.
Four out of five participants in the CRTC’s public opinion research felt that ‘standardized information in a recognizable format, like the nutrition label but for home Internet services’ would be beneficial.
We agree the label is a good idea and Canadians are already familiar with it: their experience in the food products sector shows that labels are an effective, adaptable tool for conveying complex yet crucial information about goods and services.
From a competition perspective, enabling people to more easily compare services and providers gives them the power to make choices based on their own specific needs and circumstances. When consumers have good information that they can act on to switch, providers will work harder to make sure people’s needs are being met.
The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has already put in the legwork to adapt the nutrition label for the fixed and mobile broadband services. We believe that the record of their extensive rulemaking process represents a helpful resource to consult as the CRTC develops its own ‘made for Canada’ version of the label.
So what does a ‘made for Canada’ label look like?
For the most part, we think it should look a lot like the FCC’s label information about price, performance, and other important service characteristics is presented in a format that’s already familiar for Canadian consumers from their experience in the grocery aisle with just a few key differences.
In our view, the monthly price on a ‘made for Canada’ label should show an ‘all-in’ price that includes all fixed and obligatory charges or fees as opposed to the approach favoured by the FCC where a baseline monthly price is followed by additional monthly fees. The reason is that Canada’s Competition Act prohibits ‘drip pricing’. Keeping the label consistent with the drip pricing provisions means making sure that the carriers can not be permitted to display a price that is unattainable because of additional fixed and obligatory charges or fees that drive up the price consumers ultimately pay for their services.
Adopting an ‘all-in’ approach to pricing would help the label to work in harmony with the Competition Act’s provisions on drip pricing.
Similarly, all relevant ads and information contained in policies and disclaimers must be consistent with information in the label. To the extent that the label refers or links to disclaimers, they cannot be used or relied upon to restrict, contradict, or negate any marketing messages, or otherwise cure misleading or deceptive marketing practices.
Overall, this approach would help keep information simple, relevant, and it would facilitate apples-to-apples comparisons.
Second, we think the label would benefit wireless phone customers and competition in that market, too.
Like home internet services, wireless phones are essential for nearly all Canadians. CCTS and CRTC data show that Canadians have similar issues with both services, too.
Every Canadian wireless network operator also offers home Internet – meaning that they will already be developing labels as a result of this proceeding.
From our perspective, extending the labels’ application to wireless phone services could deliver significant benefits for minimal additional cost. Doing so would help to simplify and harmonize the consumer information environment in general while avoiding the need to duplicate efforts down the road.
Third, we think the labels would be especially beneficial for customers who are actively shopping, and for subscribers whose contracts are about to expire.
Dr. Fonberg will explain how we can think about making sure the labels are as useful for consumers as possible.
[Jonathan Fonberg, Senior Behavioural Scientist]
Thank you.
Consumers are less likely to engage with information if the effort required to identify and understand that information is high.
That means difficulties in accessing critical information about broadband plans and alternatives can create barriers to switching.
Our recommendations draw on key principles and best practises from behavioural science.
They aim to empower consumers by reducing the effort required to identify and understand critical information; thereby reducing barriers to switching.
To that end, these recommendations address both the format and availability of the label.
First, the label design should allow consumers to quickly grasp key information. It should be easily accessible and comprehensible.
This is intended to reduce the effort required by customers to interpret complex plan information.
But beyond what’s in the label, when and where it’s found is also important.
We recommend that it be widely available anywhere specific plan information is displayed. We are also asking that the label be included in notices sent to customers whose contracts are set to expire.
This will reduce the need for customers to search for key details buried in the fine print, making the process more convenient and increasing their chances of engaging with it.
These recommendations are intended to ensure that customers will be able to easily access the label when they need it the most, maximizing its benefit.
[Brad Callaghan, Associate Deputy Commissioner]
Thank you, Dr. Fonberg.
The CRTC has taken important steps in recent years to empower consumers in their relationships with their service providers. Ensuring that phone numbers are portable, placing limits on contract length, and unlocking devices are just some of the actions the CRTC has taken to foster competition in the marketplace for the benefit of consumers and the economy.
The Competition Bureau is pleased that the CRTC continues to build on these achievements. A broadband nutrition label can put consumers in the driver’s seat of the switching process and improve competition in telecommunication markets. With clear, standardized information to compare their options, consumers can take advantage of competition more easily, and companies will compete harder to keep them.
We’d like to thank the Commission for the opportunity to participate in these proceedings. We will endeavour to answer any questions you may have.
In early June, the Labor opposition moved a motion of no confidence in the Liberal Premier, Jeremy Rockliff. The motion passed with the support of three crossbench MPs, the Greens, and a casting vote from the speaker.
Rockliff refused to step aside and Opposition Leader Dean Winter ruled out doing a deal with the Greens to govern in minority, which left the Governor with no choice but to call an election just 16 months after the last.
Some Tasmanians would be forgiven for feeling a bit of election fatigue. On top of the March 2024 state election, there was the federal election on May 3, voting for three legislative council seats on May 24 and now this poll.
Trudging along the campaign trail
The vibe of the campaign has veered wildly between pedestrian and acrimonious.
Candidates have struggled to connect with a disgruntled public, and a combination of the stadium saga and political mudslinging have distracted from Tasmania’s serious challenges.
Despite the election being brought about by Labor’s no confidence motion, the party seemed curiously unprepared. Its candidate announcements were slow and disjointed, and red corflutes have been greatly outnumbered by blue.
Labor’s campaign has picked up some momentum in recent weeks by following the federal party’s playbook of making big health policy announcements.
In contrast to Labor, the Liberals hit the ground running with a slew of candidate announcements. They have presented themselves as the only party with a realistic chance of winning a majority, and sought to frame Labor’s Dean Winter as a power-hungry wrecker. They have also campaigned hard on health, attempting to neutralise Labor’s traditional strength in this area.
A bevy of former federal candidates are running, which could lead to changes in personnel, if not a big shift in the distribution of seats in parliament. Ones to watch include:
Liberal’s Bridget Archer (who lost her seat of Bass in May) and Gavin Pearce (retired Braddon MP)
Labor’s Brian Mitchell, the Lyons MP who stood aside for Rebecca White
Peter George, the anti-salmon farming independent in Franklin
and Vanessa Bleyer, a two-time Greens Senate candidate running in Braddon.
The Nationals are also in the mix following the latest in a series of Tasmanian “reboots” over the past few decades. Their candidate list includes former Jacqui Lambie Network and Liberal MPs, which could create a tense and chaotic party room if they win seats.
Disappointingly, both Labor and Liberal leaders have repeatedly demanded the other side stop playing “political games”, while merrily engaging in skulduggery of their own.
Labor was indignant when the Liberals challenged the eligibility of one of their star candidates, unionist Jessica Munday.
A few days later, Rockliff was righteously outraged when Labor grandee and former premier Paul Lennon registered the business “Tasinsure” – the name of the Liberals’ proposed state-owned insurance company.
Subpar signage
It’s fair to say no one has covered themselves in glory here.
The Liberals went with “Let’s finish the job for Tasmania”. I’m sure this isn’t meant to be read as a threat, but I can’t help but hear it in Alan Rickman’s voice.
Even if we leave aside the (unintended?) menacing implications, the slogan encourages voters to wonder why the job hasn’t been finished in the previous 11 years of Liberal government.
Labor is using “A Fresh Start for Tasmania”: a cliche, but serviceably simple.
The problem is, they stretched the slogan to the point of collapse by applying it to all of their policy headings. This meant that we ended up enduring “a fresh start for cost of living relief”, “a fresh start for our society”, and so on.
A special mention to Labor’s social media ads, which had all the gravitas of a toddler demanding their turn on the playground swings.
The Greens didn’t limit themselves to one slogan. Instead, they used various taglines on the theme of “the mess made by the major parties”, or simply stated their main policy pillars: stopping the stadium, investing in health and housing, protecting the environment, and stopping privatisation.
There were also some questionable offerings from the menagerie of independents. Surely the voters are entitled to expect more from their MPs than the “familiar face in Clark” offered by former Liberal MP Elise Archer? And as an experienced journalist, I’m sure Peter George could have done better than the derivative “Time for Change”.
What can we expect?
What will Tasmanians end up with after a campaign that has been less sound and fury and more white noise and niggle?
It looks like more of the same.
Polling shows that the two major parties are on the nose, particularly with younger voters. Labor and Liberal are fairly aligned on some of the headline issues that divide the electorate, including the stadium and salmon farming.
All this points to no party winning a majority of the 35 seats. If this happens, the convention is that the Governor gives the party with the most seats the first crack at cobbling together enough support from the crossbench to form a minority government.
Minority governments can come in lots of different shapes and sizes, from loose “confidence and supply” agreements to more formal power-sharing coalitions.
If the party with the most seats fails to form government, the Governor would typically let the second-largest party try.
Both the Liberals and Labor will face big challenges if they are given the opportunity to form minority government.
The Liberal Party has its nose ahead in most polls. However, several of the crossbench MPs the previous Liberal government relied on for support voted in favour of the no confidence motion in Rockliff.
Most of these MPs are likely to be re-elected, and will be wary of doing deals that essentially put in place the same government that they recently helped to bring down.
Labor have backed themselves into a corner by repeatedly ruling out working with the Greens. This would leave them needing to negotiate with a diverse array of crossbench MPs. Depending on the final distribution of seats, this might not secure them enough votes on the floor of parliament.
If – as seems likely – Tasmania ends up with another hung parliament, it will fall to our MPs to move beyond point scoring and gamesmanship. We urgently need budget repair, alongside ambitious reforms in health, housing, education, sustainability and productivity.
Here’s hoping that the next government is willing to collaborate and compromise – for the good of the state and to restore trust in our political system.
Robert Hortle 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.
In early June, the Labor opposition moved a motion of no confidence in the Liberal Premier, Jeremy Rockliff. The motion passed with the support of three crossbench MPs, the Greens, and a casting vote from the speaker.
Rockliff refused to step aside and Opposition Leader Dean Winter ruled out doing a deal with the Greens to govern in minority, which left the Governor with no choice but to call an election just 16 months after the last.
Some Tasmanians would be forgiven for feeling a bit of election fatigue. On top of the March 2024 state election, there was the federal election on May 3, voting for three legislative council seats on May 24 and now this poll.
Trudging along the campaign trail
The vibe of the campaign has veered wildly between pedestrian and acrimonious.
Candidates have struggled to connect with a disgruntled public, and a combination of the stadium saga and political mudslinging have distracted from Tasmania’s serious challenges.
Despite the election being brought about by Labor’s no confidence motion, the party seemed curiously unprepared. Its candidate announcements were slow and disjointed, and red corflutes have been greatly outnumbered by blue.
Labor’s campaign has picked up some momentum in recent weeks by following the federal party’s playbook of making big health policy announcements.
In contrast to Labor, the Liberals hit the ground running with a slew of candidate announcements. They have presented themselves as the only party with a realistic chance of winning a majority, and sought to frame Labor’s Dean Winter as a power-hungry wrecker. They have also campaigned hard on health, attempting to neutralise Labor’s traditional strength in this area.
A bevy of former federal candidates are running, which could lead to changes in personnel, if not a big shift in the distribution of seats in parliament. Ones to watch include:
Liberal’s Bridget Archer (who lost her seat of Bass in May) and Gavin Pearce (retired Braddon MP)
Labor’s Brian Mitchell, the Lyons MP who stood aside for Rebecca White
Peter George, the anti-salmon farming independent in Franklin
and Vanessa Bleyer, a two-time Greens Senate candidate running in Braddon.
The Nationals are also in the mix following the latest in a series of Tasmanian “reboots” over the past few decades. Their candidate list includes former Jacqui Lambie Network and Liberal MPs, which could create a tense and chaotic party room if they win seats.
Disappointingly, both Labor and Liberal leaders have repeatedly demanded the other side stop playing “political games”, while merrily engaging in skulduggery of their own.
Labor was indignant when the Liberals challenged the eligibility of one of their star candidates, unionist Jessica Munday.
A few days later, Rockliff was righteously outraged when Labor grandee and former premier Paul Lennon registered the business “Tasinsure” – the name of the Liberals’ proposed state-owned insurance company.
Subpar signage
It’s fair to say no one has covered themselves in glory here.
The Liberals went with “Let’s finish the job for Tasmania”. I’m sure this isn’t meant to be read as a threat, but I can’t help but hear it in Alan Rickman’s voice.
Even if we leave aside the (unintended?) menacing implications, the slogan encourages voters to wonder why the job hasn’t been finished in the previous 11 years of Liberal government.
Labor is using “A Fresh Start for Tasmania”: a cliche, but serviceably simple.
The problem is, they stretched the slogan to the point of collapse by applying it to all of their policy headings. This meant that we ended up enduring “a fresh start for cost of living relief”, “a fresh start for our society”, and so on.
A special mention to Labor’s social media ads, which had all the gravitas of a toddler demanding their turn on the playground swings.
The Greens didn’t limit themselves to one slogan. Instead, they used various taglines on the theme of “the mess made by the major parties”, or simply stated their main policy pillars: stopping the stadium, investing in health and housing, protecting the environment, and stopping privatisation.
There were also some questionable offerings from the menagerie of independents. Surely the voters are entitled to expect more from their MPs than the “familiar face in Clark” offered by former Liberal MP Elise Archer? And as an experienced journalist, I’m sure Peter George could have done better than the derivative “Time for Change”.
What can we expect?
What will Tasmanians end up with after a campaign that has been less sound and fury and more white noise and niggle?
It looks like more of the same.
Polling shows that the two major parties are on the nose, particularly with younger voters. Labor and Liberal are fairly aligned on some of the headline issues that divide the electorate, including the stadium and salmon farming.
All this points to no party winning a majority of the 35 seats. If this happens, the convention is that the Governor gives the party with the most seats the first crack at cobbling together enough support from the crossbench to form a minority government.
Minority governments can come in lots of different shapes and sizes, from loose “confidence and supply” agreements to more formal power-sharing coalitions.
If the party with the most seats fails to form government, the Governor would typically let the second-largest party try.
Both the Liberals and Labor will face big challenges if they are given the opportunity to form minority government.
The Liberal Party has its nose ahead in most polls. However, several of the crossbench MPs the previous Liberal government relied on for support voted in favour of the no confidence motion in Rockliff.
Most of these MPs are likely to be re-elected, and will be wary of doing deals that essentially put in place the same government that they recently helped to bring down.
Labor have backed themselves into a corner by repeatedly ruling out working with the Greens. This would leave them needing to negotiate with a diverse array of crossbench MPs. Depending on the final distribution of seats, this might not secure them enough votes on the floor of parliament.
If – as seems likely – Tasmania ends up with another hung parliament, it will fall to our MPs to move beyond point scoring and gamesmanship. We urgently need budget repair, alongside ambitious reforms in health, housing, education, sustainability and productivity.
Here’s hoping that the next government is willing to collaborate and compromise – for the good of the state and to restore trust in our political system.
Robert Hortle 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.
PORTLAND, Ore., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — RadarFirst, a leader in regulatory risk automation, today announced the launch of Radar AI Risk, the industry’s first end-to-end solution purpose-built for AI governance under global frameworks such as the EU AI Act, with U.S. and U.K. regulations close behind.
“Radar AI Risk gives enterprises a dynamic, future-ready foundation for AI governance,” said Lauren Wallace, Chief Legal Officer at RadarFirst. “Guided by our principles of transparency, adaptability, and proactive legal alignment, we’ll continue extending coverage, partnering with customers as regulations evolve and new use cases emerge.”
As organizations deploy hundreds of new AI applications every month, legacy tools such as spreadsheets, siloed committees, and generic GRC systems can’t keep up. Radar AI Risk replaces these fragmented approaches with a unified platform designed to evolve alongside emerging requirements:
Conversational Intake: Capture rich, context-driven model details via a streamlined web interface.
Automated Classification: Instantly map models to EU AI Act risk tiers with a transparent scoring framework built to flexibly incorporate new regulations and policies as they emerge
Mapped Regulatory Guidance: Receive explicit risk-assessment rationale tied directly to applicable laws and regulations.
Versioned System Inventory: Maintain a centralized, version-controlled registry of AI systems, assessments, and documentation for effortless audits.
Rapid Assessments: Turn model reviews from hours into minutes, backed by continuous updates from your legal review team.
Third-Party Coverage: Apply the same rigorous risk process to in-house and vendor-sourced AI systems.
Audit-Ready Documentation: Generate timestamped, versioned assessments with a single click and review enhanced dashboard exports.
Unified Dashboards: Gain real-time visibility across Legal, Risk, Audit, and Executive teams.
Remediation & Overrides: Accept recommended actions or document custom responses, all tracked in one secure system of record.
Built on the Patented Radar® Platform: Leverage our proven, nine-patent-backed foundation for regulatory automation and control.
Early adopters in finance, healthcare, and insurance report dramatic drops in manual errors and audit-prep time while unifying stakeholders around a single source of truth.
“Our clients needed more than static scripts; they wanted a purpose-built platform that grows with their AI ambitions,” said Zach Burnett, CEO of RadarFirst. “Radar AI Risk delivers continuous innovation, automation, and real-time insights so teams can confidently chart the course ahead.”
RadarFirst is a regulatory risk automation platform that empowers global enterprises to simplify complex decision-making and ensure the responsible and legal use of data across the organization. With patented workflows, real-time risk assessments, and built-in compliance intelligence, RadarFirst helps teams respond faster, reduce exposure, and unify stakeholders around a single source of truth. From incident response to third-party oversight, RadarFirst transforms regulatory risk into a strategic advantage, building trust, improving defensibility, and fueling enterprise growth.
WILMINGTON, Mass., July 16, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Symbotic Inc. (Nasdaq: SYM), a leader in A.I.-enabled robotics technology for the supply chain, today announced it will release third quarter fiscal 2025 financial results after the market close on Wednesday, August 6, 2025. The press release will also be available on the Symbotic Investor Relations website: www.ir.symbotic.com. The company will host a live webcast to discuss its financial results for the quarter at 5:00 p.m. ET on the same date.
Please direct any questions regarding obtaining access to the webcast to Symbotic Investor Relations at ir@symbotic.com.
ABOUT SYMBOTIC
Symbotic is an automation technology leader reimagining the supply chain with its end-to-end, A.I.-powered robotic and software platform. Symbotic reinvents the warehouse as a strategic asset for the world’s largest retail, wholesale, and food & beverage companies. Applying next-generation technology, high-density storage and machine learning to solve today’s complex distribution challenges, Symbotic enables companies to move goods with unmatched speed, agility, accuracy and efficiency. As the backbone of commerce, Symbotic transforms the flow of goods and the economics of the supply chain for its customers. For more information, visit www.symbotic.com.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Jonathan Jackson – Illinois (1st District)
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
“As a father, a son, and as someone who has seen hunger’s impact up close, I am appalled and heartbroken by the Trump administration’s decision to destroy nearly 500 metric tons of life-saving emergency food rather than deliver it to starving children and families across the globe.
This food, worth more than $800,000, had the power to nourish 1.5 million children for a week. Instead, it will be incinerated at a further cost of $130,000 to U.S. taxpayers. Only bureaucratic delays and callous indifference stood between these meals and the children for whom they were intended.
While over 66,000 tons of emergency food sits unused in warehouses worldwide, children are dying from hunger that humanitarian programs could alleviate. Just recently, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, six children lost their lives after vital nutrition programs were shuttered due to a freeze in U.S. aid. We cannot accept this senseless waste when the United States has long been a beacon of hope and compassion for the world’s most vulnerable.
The destruction of this food is not just a loss of resources; it is a tragic failure of moral leadership. I call on my colleagues in Congress, and all Americans, to join me in demanding greater accountability and urgent action so that American aid feeds the hungry, not the flames of waste. People’s lives depend on it, our humanity demands it.”
Contact: Congressman Jonathan L. Jackson 1641 Longworth House Office Building Washington, DC 20515 (202) 225-4372
Craters filled with muddy water pocket the landscape of the Kono district in Sierra Leone – the result of past diamond mining ventures which sparked a vicious local battle over resources.
But now, parts of the land have been restored. Crops are beginning to flourish and bees are buzzing around once again.
The people responsible for this change are a hodgepodge group – former taxi drivers and miners, people who barely finished secondary school and some with higher education degrees. The unifying factor? Most have youth on their side.
“There is life beyond mining [but] we all grew up with the mentality that diamond is the only solution,” said Sahr Fallah, chairman of the Youth Council in Kono.
Over 44 percent of the 1.3 billion people aged 15-24 are employed in agrifood systems. However, this group often does not have the same access to resources as older generations. Moreover, they are sidelined in the conversations which might change this systemic exclusion.
“A lot of the time, what we find is that young people are included in policy processes but it is a little bit tokenistic. They don’t feel like their voice really matters,” said Lauren Phillips, a deputy director at the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
Decent work = economic growth
The High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development in New York has been convened this week and next, to discuss progress – or lack thereof – towards the globally agreed Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), one of which guarantees decent work for all.
Despite this commitment, over half of the global workforce remains in informal employment, according to the Secretary-General’s report on the SDGs released Monday. This means that they do not have adequate social or legal protections.
“Decent work must be at the heart of macroeconomic planning, climate and diesel transitions and social recovery strategies,” said Sangheon Lee, director of employment policy at the International Labor Organization (ILO).
Don’t ignore youth
Like other vulnerable groups, young people face unique challenges in the agrifood sector. Specifically, they often lack land rights and will struggle to act collectively to protect their interests.
“If you are not looking at data with a lens of age or gender, you are actually missing part of the story,” Ms. Phillips said.
Among these assets are land titles – which the elderly may be reluctant to pass down because of insufficient social protections. Youth also are less able to access credit so they can invest in themselves and their families.
Betty Seray Sam, one of the young farmers in Kono, said that her family never used to come to her when they were going through a crisis – they knew that she had no money and a child to support.
But now, through an agricultural job in Kono, she can support her family during times of crisis.
“This project has had a rippling effect for the youth in terms of not only improving their livelihoods but also the livelihoods of their families,” said Abdul Munu, president of Mabunduku, a community-based farmer’s organization in Kono.
Bee a farmer
Providing training to young people in agrifood systems is absolutely essential to ensure that they can practice sustainable agriculture.
In Chegutu, Zimbabwe, FAO has helped establish Bee Farmers Schools where young people are taught how to support apiaries through hands-on training activities.
“The idea is that one of the apiaries can be turned into a classroom where youth from different parts of a district can come just like a school,” said Barnabas Mawire, a natural resource specialist at FAO.
This training has helped support local youth beekeepers to move beyond local and small-scale honey production to a fully-fledged business model that has the potential to not just fight poverty but actually create local wealth.
Evelyn Mutuda, the young entrepreneurs representative in Chegutu, aspires to plant Jacaranda trees which she says will improve the quality of the bees’ honey and enable the beekeepers to export beyond local markets.
“We want to maximize all the profits so we can become better and bigger,” Ms. Mutuda said.
From Facebook to TikTok
Being able to form labour associations is one of the key factors of decent work. This sort of collective action is even more important for youth in agrifood who often lack the social capital to enact real policy change.
“Young people are just starting out, making bonds within their group but also with people outside of their group. Those bonds are important…because there is power in numbers,” Ms. Phillips said.
She also noted that young people are forming these bonds across geographic distances, often by using technology. Agrifood influencers on Instagram and TikTok, for example, are increasingly shaping conversations about the sector.
Ms. Phillips also noted that it is important to think of collective action for youth as intergenerational.
“While the report is focused on young people, it’s not ignorant of the fact that young people live in families…There is a lot which talks about the need for solidarity between generations,” Ms. Phillips said.
Youth optimism
The next generation will be the stewards of the food we eat, so integrating them into that system now is essential for future food security and sustainability.
“Many youth integrate tradition with innovation, creating sustainability and community resilience,” said Venedio Nala Ardisa, a youth representative at the Asia Indigenous Peoples Pact, at an online side event during the high-level forum.
Angeline Manhanzva, one of the beekeepers in Chegutu, said that the opportunity to become a beekeeper changed her life. One day, she dreams of owning her own bee farm.
“I will be an old person who has so much wealth and is able to buy her own big land to keep my hives and process my own honey.”