NewzIntel.com

Category: Donald Trump

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Secures Major Settlement with Brown University

    Source: US Whitehouse

    SECURING HISTORIC SETTLEMENT WITH BROWN UNIVERSITY: Today, President Donald J. Trump secured a historic settlement with Brown University to restore fairness, merit, and safety in higher education.

    • The agreement ensures Brown will not engage in unlawful racial discrimination in admissions or university programming. Brown will provide access to all relevant data and information to rigorously assess compliance with its commitment to merit-based admissions. 
    • Brown will pay $50 million over ten years to state workforce development organizations that comply with anti-discrimination laws, supporting regional economic growth and career opportunities.
    • Brown will adopt the definitions of “male” and “female” from President Trump’s Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism” for women’s sports, programing, facilities, and housing.
    • Brown will not perform gender reassignment surgeries on minors or prescribe them puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones.
    • Brown will take steps to improve the campus climate for Jewish students and combat anti-Semitism.
    • The agreement reinstates all HHS grants, restores Brown’s eligibility for future grants and awards, and closes pending investigations into the university.
    • The agreement establishes a three-year monitoring period to ensure compliance with the agreement and federal laws.

    ADDRESSING DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES AT BROWN: The Trump Administration took action to address concerns about violations of federal civil rights laws, protecting students and upholding fairness in higher education.

    • The settlement comes after public outcry over incidents and civil rights investigations into Brown’s alleged discrimination on the basis of race and national origin.
    • Brown’s failure to address anti-Semitism and ensure fair treatment for all students raised urgent concerns about student safety and equal opportunities.
    • Brown’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs promoted unlawful race-based outcomes, violating anti-discrimination laws.
    • By securing this settlement, the Trump Administration is ensuring that Brown upholds merit-based standards, complies with federal law, and fosters an environment of academic excellence and safety for all students.

    ADVANCING REFORMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION: President Trump is holding elite universities accountable, ensuring they prioritize fairness, merit, and American values.  

    • The Administration has challenged elite universities like Harvard, Columbia, and Brown for discriminating against students and staff, failing to protect students from violent anti-Semitism, and otherwise failing to be a responsible steward of taxpayer dollars.
    • President Trump signed a Proclamation to safeguard national security by suspending the entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. 
    • The Administration successfully negotiated a resolution with the University of Pennsylvania to keep men out of women’s sports and restore the trophies and records of women.
    • President Trump secured a more than $200 million settlement with Columbia University to resolve claims related to discriminatory practices, marking a significant win for accountability in academia.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: House Republicans Hit the Road to Spotlight Historic Wins for Americans in the One Big Beautiful Bill

    Source: US House of Representatives Republicans

    The following text contains opinion that is not, or not necessarily, that of MIL-OSI –

    WASHINGTON— House Republican Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) is hitting the road during the August district work period to kick off the One Big Beautiful Tour, highlighting the wins the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB) delivers for working-class families, manufacturers, farmers, ranchers, and every hardworking American.

    For the first leg of the tour, Chairwoman McClain—the top messenger for House Republicans—is partnering with the National Association of Manufacturers to visit small and mid-sized manufacturers in the districts of Reps. Tom Kean, Jr. (NJ-07), Rob Bresnahan, Jr. (PA-08), and Ryan Mackenzie (PA-07).

    “It’s a privilege to help carry the message of President Trump and the American people’s agenda,” Chairwoman McClain said. “I have been sharing with my constituents in Michigan all the incredible things the One Big Beautiful Bill delivers for them. As Conference Chair, I have the opportunity to join my colleagues during this district work period and share that message across the country. I’m excited to help bring our results directly to more people and communities.”

    “This once-in-a-lifetime historic tax bill is the investment of a generation in America’s manufacturers,” NAM Executive Vice President Erin Streeter said. “These important tax provisions provide businesses of all sizes—across every state and congressional district—with the certainty they need to invest, innovate and grow. The NAM is proud to partner with Chairwoman McClain to tell the story of how these pro-growth tax policies are improving the quality of life for Americans all across the country. Because when manufacturing wins, America wins.”

    “The newly signed reconciliation package delivers real results for the American people,” Rep. Kean said. “By eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay, this bill helps workers keep more of what they earn and strengthens our local economy. I am looking forward to welcoming Conference Chairwoman Lisa McClain and the National Association of Manufacturers to NJ-07 for a tour of Bihler of America in Phillipsburg. Their facility, known for its precision metal stamping and automated assembly systems, is a prime example of American manufacturing in action. This visit is a chance to see firsthand how the legislation is already making a difference for hardworking Americans and the manufacturers who employ them.”

    “I’m honored to welcome Chairwoman McClain to Northeastern Pennsylvania to highlight the real results House Republicans are delivering for our region,” Rep. Bresnahan said. “NEPA is built on the grit and work ethic of our families, small businesses, and local manufacturers that keep our region and our country moving forward. This reconciliation bill delivers meaningful wins for our community, and I’m proud to highlight how we are fighting in Washington for the people of Northeastern Pennsylvania during our visit to i2M next week.”

    “I’m looking forward to welcoming Chairwoman McClain to the Greater Lehigh Valley to showcase the incredible work being done at AMPAL. For decades, AMPAL has supported our local economy and played a key role in powering American manufacturing, defense, and innovation,” Rep. Mackenzie said. “Her visit underscores our shared commitment to growing jobs, strengthening American manufacturing, and highlighting the investments of the One Big Beautiful Bill. I’m proud to work together to deliver results that move our region and our country forward.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: New peace plan increases pressure on Israel and US as momentum grows for Palestinian statehood

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Scott Lucas, Professor of International Politics, Clinton Institute, University College Dublin

    A new vision for Middle East peace emerged this week which proposes the withdrawal of Israel from Gaza and the West Bank, the disarming and disbanding of Hamas and the creation of a unified Palestinian state. The plan emerged from a “high-level conference” in New York on July 29, which assembled representatives of 17 states, the European Union and the Arab League.

    The resulting proposal is “a comprehensive and actionable framework for the implementation of the two-state solution and the achievement of peace and security for all”.

    Signatories include Turkey and the Middle Eastern states of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and Jordan. Europe was represented by France, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Spain and the UK. Indonesia was there for Asia, Senegal for Africa, and Brazil, Canada and Mexico for the Americas. Neither the US nor Israel were present.

    Significantly, it is the first time the Arab states have called for Hamas to disarm and disband. But, while condemning Hamas’s attack on Israel of October 7 2023 and recalling that the taking of hostages is a violation of international law, the document is unsparing in its connection between a state of Palestine and an end to Israel’s assault on Gaza’s civilians.

    It says: “Absent decisive measures toward the two-state solution and robust international guarantees, the conflict will deepen and regional peace will remain elusive.”

    A plan for the reconstruction of Gaza will be developed by the Arab states and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation – a Jeddah-based group which aims to be the collective voice of the Muslim world – supported by an international fund. The details will be hammered out at a Gaza Reconstruction and Recovery Conference, to be held in Cairo.

    It is a bold initiative. In theory, it could end the Israeli mass killing in Gaza, remove Hamas from power and begin the implementation of a process for a state of Palestine. The question is whether it has any chance of success.

    First, there appears to be growing momentum to press ahead with recognition of the state of Palestine as part of a comprehensive peace plan leading to a two-state solution. France, the UK and, most recently, Canada have announced they would take that step at the UN general assembly in September. The UK stated that it would do so unless Israel agreed to a ceasefire and the commencement of a substantive peace process.



    Read more:
    UK and France pledges won’t stop Netanyahu bombing Gaza – but Donald Trump or Israel’s military could

    These announcements follow those made in May 2024 by Spain, Ireland and Norway, three of the other European signatories. By the end of September at least 150 of the UN’s 193 members will recognise Palestinian statehood. Recognition is largely symbolic without a ceasefire and Israeli withdrawal from both Gaza and the West Bank. But it is essential symbolism.

    For years, many European countries, Canada, Australia and the US have said that recognition could not be declared if there was the prospect of Israel-Palestine negotiations. Now the sequence is reversed: recognition is necessary as pressure for a ceasefire and the necessary talks to ensure the security of both Israelis and Palestinians.

    Israel accelerated that reversal at the start of March, when it rejected the scheduled move to phase two of the six-week ceasefire negotiated with the help of the US, and imposed a blockade on aid coming into the Strip.

    The Netanyahu government continues to hold out against the ceasefire. But its loud blame of Hamas is becoming harder to accept. The images of the starvation in Gaza and warnings by doctors, humanitarian organisations and the UN of an effective famine with the deaths of thousands can no longer be denied.

    Saudi Arabia and Qatar, behind the scenes and through their embassies, have been encouraging European countries to make the jump to recognition. Their efforts at the UN conference in New York this week are another front of that campaign.

    Israel and the Trump administration

    But in the short term, there is little prospect of the Netanyahu government giving way with its mass killing, let alone entering talks for two states. Notably neither Israel nor the US took part in the conference.

    Trump has criticised the scenes of starvation in Gaza. But his administration has joined Netanyahu in vitriolic denunciation of France and the UK over their intentions to recognise Palestine. And the US president has warned the Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, that recognition of Palestinian statehood would threaten Canada’s trade deal with the US.

    In response to Trump’s concern over the images of starving children and his exhortation “We’ve got to get the kids fed,” Israel has airdropped a few pallets of aid – less than a truck’s worth. Yet this appears more of a public relations exercise directed at Washington than a genuine attempt to ease the terrible condition on the Strip.

    A small number of lorries with supplies from UN and humanitarian organisations have also crossed the border, but only after lengthy delays and with half still held up. There is no security for transport and delivery of the aid inside Gaza.

    A sacrifice for a state?

    So the conference declaration is not relief for Gaza. Instead, it is yet another marker of Israel’s increasing isolation.

    After France’s announcement, the Netanyahu government thundered: “Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy … A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel.”

    But while recognising Hamas’s mass killing of October 7 2023, most governments and their populations do not perceive Israel as attacking Hamas and its fighters. They see the Netanyahu government and Israeli military slaying and starving civilians.

    Even in the US, where the Trump administration is trying to crush sympathy for Palestine and Gazans in universities, non-governmental organisations and the public sphere, opinion is shifting.

    In a Gallup poll taken in the US and released on July 29, only 32% of respondents supported Israel’s actions in Gaza – an all-time low – and 60% opposed them. Netanyahu was viewed unfavourably by 52% and favourably by only 29%.

    Israel has lost its moment of “normalisation” with Arab states. Its economic links are strained and its oft-repeated claim to being the “Middle East’s only democracy” is bloodstained beyond recognition.

    This will be of no comfort to the people of Gaza facing death. But in the longer term, there is the prospect that this sacrifice will be the catalyst to recognise Palestine that disappeared in 1948.

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

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

    – ref. New peace plan increases pressure on Israel and US as momentum grows for Palestinian statehood – https://theconversation.com/new-peace-plan-increases-pressure-on-israel-and-us-as-momentum-grows-for-palestinian-statehood-262259

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: New peace plan increases pressure on Israel and US as momentum grows for Palestinian statehood

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Scott Lucas, Professor of International Politics, Clinton Institute, University College Dublin

    A new vision for Middle East peace emerged this week which proposes the withdrawal of Israel from Gaza and the West Bank, the disarming and disbanding of Hamas and the creation of a unified Palestinian state. The plan emerged from a “high-level conference” in New York on July 29, which assembled representatives of 17 states, the European Union and the Arab League.

    The resulting proposal is “a comprehensive and actionable framework for the implementation of the two-state solution and the achievement of peace and security for all”.

    Signatories include Turkey and the Middle Eastern states of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt and Jordan. Europe was represented by France, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Spain and the UK. Indonesia was there for Asia, Senegal for Africa, and Brazil, Canada and Mexico for the Americas. Neither the US nor Israel were present.

    Significantly, it is the first time the Arab states have called for Hamas to disarm and disband. But, while condemning Hamas’s attack on Israel of October 7 2023 and recalling that the taking of hostages is a violation of international law, the document is unsparing in its connection between a state of Palestine and an end to Israel’s assault on Gaza’s civilians.

    It says: “Absent decisive measures toward the two-state solution and robust international guarantees, the conflict will deepen and regional peace will remain elusive.”

    A plan for the reconstruction of Gaza will be developed by the Arab states and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation – a Jeddah-based group which aims to be the collective voice of the Muslim world – supported by an international fund. The details will be hammered out at a Gaza Reconstruction and Recovery Conference, to be held in Cairo.

    It is a bold initiative. In theory, it could end the Israeli mass killing in Gaza, remove Hamas from power and begin the implementation of a process for a state of Palestine. The question is whether it has any chance of success.

    First, there appears to be growing momentum to press ahead with recognition of the state of Palestine as part of a comprehensive peace plan leading to a two-state solution. France, the UK and, most recently, Canada have announced they would take that step at the UN general assembly in September. The UK stated that it would do so unless Israel agreed to a ceasefire and the commencement of a substantive peace process.



    Read more:
    UK and France pledges won’t stop Netanyahu bombing Gaza – but Donald Trump or Israel’s military could

    These announcements follow those made in May 2024 by Spain, Ireland and Norway, three of the other European signatories. By the end of September at least 150 of the UN’s 193 members will recognise Palestinian statehood. Recognition is largely symbolic without a ceasefire and Israeli withdrawal from both Gaza and the West Bank. But it is essential symbolism.

    For years, many European countries, Canada, Australia and the US have said that recognition could not be declared if there was the prospect of Israel-Palestine negotiations. Now the sequence is reversed: recognition is necessary as pressure for a ceasefire and the necessary talks to ensure the security of both Israelis and Palestinians.

    Israel accelerated that reversal at the start of March, when it rejected the scheduled move to phase two of the six-week ceasefire negotiated with the help of the US, and imposed a blockade on aid coming into the Strip.

    The Netanyahu government continues to hold out against the ceasefire. But its loud blame of Hamas is becoming harder to accept. The images of the starvation in Gaza and warnings by doctors, humanitarian organisations and the UN of an effective famine with the deaths of thousands can no longer be denied.

    Saudi Arabia and Qatar, behind the scenes and through their embassies, have been encouraging European countries to make the jump to recognition. Their efforts at the UN conference in New York this week are another front of that campaign.

    Israel and the Trump administration

    But in the short term, there is little prospect of the Netanyahu government giving way with its mass killing, let alone entering talks for two states. Notably neither Israel nor the US took part in the conference.

    Trump has criticised the scenes of starvation in Gaza. But his administration has joined Netanyahu in vitriolic denunciation of France and the UK over their intentions to recognise Palestine. And the US president has warned the Canadian prime minister, Mark Carney, that recognition of Palestinian statehood would threaten Canada’s trade deal with the US.

    In response to Trump’s concern over the images of starving children and his exhortation “We’ve got to get the kids fed,” Israel has airdropped a few pallets of aid – less than a truck’s worth. Yet this appears more of a public relations exercise directed at Washington than a genuine attempt to ease the terrible condition on the Strip.

    A small number of lorries with supplies from UN and humanitarian organisations have also crossed the border, but only after lengthy delays and with half still held up. There is no security for transport and delivery of the aid inside Gaza.

    A sacrifice for a state?

    So the conference declaration is not relief for Gaza. Instead, it is yet another marker of Israel’s increasing isolation.

    After France’s announcement, the Netanyahu government thundered: “Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy … A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel.”

    But while recognising Hamas’s mass killing of October 7 2023, most governments and their populations do not perceive Israel as attacking Hamas and its fighters. They see the Netanyahu government and Israeli military slaying and starving civilians.

    Even in the US, where the Trump administration is trying to crush sympathy for Palestine and Gazans in universities, non-governmental organisations and the public sphere, opinion is shifting.

    In a Gallup poll taken in the US and released on July 29, only 32% of respondents supported Israel’s actions in Gaza – an all-time low – and 60% opposed them. Netanyahu was viewed unfavourably by 52% and favourably by only 29%.

    Israel has lost its moment of “normalisation” with Arab states. Its economic links are strained and its oft-repeated claim to being the “Middle East’s only democracy” is bloodstained beyond recognition.

    This will be of no comfort to the people of Gaza facing death. But in the longer term, there is the prospect that this sacrifice will be the catalyst to recognise Palestine that disappeared in 1948.

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

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

    – ref. New peace plan increases pressure on Israel and US as momentum grows for Palestinian statehood – https://theconversation.com/new-peace-plan-increases-pressure-on-israel-and-us-as-momentum-grows-for-palestinian-statehood-262259

    MIL OSI Analysis –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Carbajal Statement on Trump Administration Revoking Approval of Ocean Areas Designated for Wind Power

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Salud Carbajal (CA-24)

    Carbajal Statement on Trump Administration Revoking Approval of Ocean Areas Designated for Wind Power

    Washington, July 30, 2025

    U.S. Representative Salud Carbajal (D-CA-24) released the statement below following the Trump administration’s decision to revoke approval for millions of acres of ocean to be set aside for offshore wind development. 

    “This is another backwards policy decision by the Trump administration that will hurt our wind energy sector and the thousands of jobs it supports,” said Rep. Carbajal. “Wind power is no longer theoretical—it’s vital to our economy and energy security. Undermining renewables not only hurts American workers and businesses, it hands the future of clean energy to global competitors like China. This is an America Last policy approach.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: PREPARED REMARKS: Sanders Forces Vote to Stop Arms Sales to Israel Amid Starvation in Gaza

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Vermont – Bernie Sanders

    WASHINGTON, July 30 – Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) today rose to force a vote on two Joint Resolutions of Disapproval (JRDs) to block offensive arms sales to Israel in light of the daily civilian massacres and unfolding famine created by the Netanyahu government’s policies. The JRD is the only formal mechanism available to Congress to prevent an arms sale noticed by the administration from advancing.

    Sanders’ remarks introducing the vote today, as prepared for delivery, are below and can be watched live HERE:

    M. President, let me begin by stating what this debate is about, and what it is not about. It is not about whether anyone in the Senate disagrees that Hamas is a terrorist organization, which began this war with a brutal terrorist attack on October 7, 2023, that killed 1,200 innocent people and took 250 hostages. Everyone agrees with that.

    The International Criminal Court was right to indict the leaders of Hamas as war criminals for those atrocities. There is also, I believe, no disagreement as to whether or not Israel had a right to defend itself, like any other country suffering an attack like that. Clearly, it did.

    And, in a certain sense, this debate is not really about Israel. It is about the United States of America, and whether we will abide by U.S. and international law, or whether we will continue to contribute billions of dollars to an extremist government in Israel, which has caused an unprecedented humanitarian disaster in Gaza. This debate is over whether or not the United States of America will have any moral credibility on the international scene. Whether or not we will be able, with a straight face, to condemn other countries who commit barbaric acts if we don’t stand up tonight. That is what we are debating.

    M. President, the vast majority of the American people and the world community understand that the Netanyahu government in Israel has gone well beyond defending itself from Hamas. Over the last 21 months, it has waged an all-out, illegal, immoral and horrific war of annihilation against the Palestinian people. 

    This war has already killed some 60,000 Palestinians and wounded more than 143,000 — most of whom are women, children and the elderly. In a population of just over two million, more than 200,000 people have been killed or wounded since this war began. That, M. President, is 10% of the population of Gaza. 

    M. President, to put that into scale so we as Americans can understand the enormity of what is happening there, if that kind of destruction happened in the United States — if 10% of our population were killed or wounded in war, it would mean that 34 million of us would have been killed or wounded.

    The toll on Gaza’s children is unspeakable, and it is literally hard to imagine. The United Nations reports that more than 18,000 children have been killed since this war began. Just this morning, the Washington Post published a list of all these children’s names, and I ask that these names be entered into the Congressional Record.

    I should mention that more than 12,000 of these children were under the age of 12, and more than 3,000 children in Gaza have had one or more limbs amputated. That is how this war has impacted the children in Gaza. But it’s not just the horrific loss of life that we are seeing.

    New satellite imagery shows that Israel’s indiscriminate bombardment has destroyed 70% of all structures in Gaza. The UN estimates that 92% of the housing units have been damaged or destroyed. Most of the population is now living in tents or other makeshift structures.

    And let us not forget, over the last 21 months, these people, most of whom are poor, have been displaced time and time again — told to go here, told to go there, moved around with often no possessions other than the clothing on their backs.

    M. President, the health care system in Gaza has been destroyed. Most of the territory’s hospitals and primary health care facilities have been bombed. More than 1,500 health care workers have been killed, as well as 336 UN staff.

    Gaza’s civilian infrastructure has been totally devastated, including almost 90% of water and sanitation facilities. Raw sewage now runs all over Gaza. Most of the roads have been destroyed. Gaza’s educational system has been obliterated. Hundreds of schools have been bombed, as has every single one of Gaza’s 12 universities. And there has been no electricity in Gaza for 21 months. 

    M. President, all of this is a horror unto itself. But in recent months, the Netanyahu government’s extermination of Gaza has made an unspeakable and horrible situation even worse. 

    From March 2 to May 19, Israel did not allow a single shipment of humanitarian aid into Gaza — no food, no water, no fuel and no medical supplies for a distressed population of two million people over a period of 11 weeks. Since then, Israel has allowed a trickle of aid to get into Gaza, but nowhere near enough to meet the enormous needs of a population besieged for so long. 

    M. President, when you cut off all food to a population, what happens is not surprising. People starve to death. And that is exactly what Israeli policy has deliberately done — it is causing mass starvation and famine.

    Children and other vulnerable people are dying in increasing numbers. In the last two weeks, dozens of young children have died from starvation. Starving mothers cannot breastfeed their infants, and no formula is available, and certainly no clean water to make it, in any case. Hospitals have run out of nutritional treatments, and doctors and nurses who are already treating the desperate, they themselves are going hungry and are fainting from hunger. 

    The World Food Programme says that the food crisis has reached “new and astonishing levels of desperation, with a third of the population not eating for multiple days in a row.” 

    Just yesterday, the gold-standard UN-backed food monitoring group, the IPC, issued a new report saying: “The worst-case scenario of famine is currently playing out in the Gaza Strip.”  

    When mass death from starvation begins, it is difficult to reverse. Aid groups say it will soon be too late to stop a wave of preventable deaths in Gaza, all of which is the direct result of the Israeli government’s policies. 

    M. President, what I’m going to describe now is gruesome, but I think it is important for us to understand what is happening to the children in Gaza.

    Mark Brauner, an American doctor who spent in two weeks in Gaza in June described the situation: “a lot of the children have already passed the point of no return where their physiology has eroded to the point where even refeeding could potentially cause death itself. The gut lining has started to auto-digest and it will no longer have adequate absorptive capacity for water or for nutrition. Death is unfortunately imminent for probably thousands of children.”

    That’s an American physician who was in Gaza in June.

    M. President, what the extremist Netanyahu government is doing now is not an effort to win a war. There is no military purpose in starving thousands and thousands of children. Let us be clear: This is not an effort to win a war, this is an effort to destroy a people.

    Having already killed or wounded more than 200,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children, the extremist Israeli government is using mass starvation to engineer the ethnic cleansing of Gaza. They are trying to drive a desperate people out of their homeland, to God knows where. 

    This is not my speculation; this what Israeli ministers and officials are saying themselves.

    A few months ago, the Finance Minister vowed that “Gaza will be entirely destroyed.” Just last week, another current Israeli minister said: “All Gaza will be Jewish… the government is pushing for Gaza being wiped out. Thank God, we are wiping out this evil.” Another Likud member of the Knesset and former minister called for “Erasing all of Gaza from the face of the earth.”

    And in the West Bank, we see this agenda being carried out clearly and methodically, with more than 500,000 Israeli settlers now illegally occupying land integral to any future Palestinian state. Earlier this month, the Knesset even approved a non-binding motion in favor of formally annexing the West Bank.

    This slow-motion annexation is backed by violence: Israeli security forces and settler extremists have killed thousands of Palestinians in recent years. Israeli settlers brutally beat a young American to death earlier this month, the seventh American killed in the West Bank since 2022. Despite a demand from President Trump’s ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, no one has been held accountable for these deaths.

    M. President, people around the world are outraged by what is going on in Gaza right now, and countries are increasingly demanding that Netanyahu’s government stop what they are doing.

    France and Canada have said they will recognize a Palestinian state. The United Kingdom has said it will do so, as well, if Israel does not immediately end this war and surge humanitarian aid. And at the UN last month, 149 countries voted for a ceasefire resolution condemning the use of starvation as a weapon of war and demanding an end to Israel’s blockade on humanitarian aid. But it is not just the international community. 

    Just yesterday, Gallup, one of the best polling organizations in our country, released a new poll that shows that just 32% of Americans support Israel’s military action in Gaza, while 60% oppose it. To my Democratic colleagues here in the Senate, I would point out that only 8% of Democrats support this war, and just 25% of independents. And to my Republican colleagues, I would point out that more and more Republicans are beginning to speak out against the atrocities of this war and the fact that billions of billions of taxpayer dollars are going to a government in Israel waging an illegal war. 

    Further, M. President, a recent Economist/YouGov poll shows that just 15% of the American people support increasing military aid to Israel, while 35% support decreasing military aid to Israel or stopping it entirely. Just 8% of Democrats support increasing military aid to Israel. 

    M. President, the American people are haunted by the images coming out of Gaza.

    These are desperate children with pots in their hands, crying, begging for food in order to stay alive. That’s what the American people are seeing every night on TV, on the internet and in the newspapers. These are emaciated children, their bodies, in some cases, barely more than skeletons. The American people are seeing miles and miles of rubble where cities and towns once stood. They are seeing innocent people shot down while they wait on line to get food while they are starving.

    M. President, despite these war crimes, carried out daily in plain view, the United States has provided more than $22 billion for Israel’s military operations since this war began. One estimate, based on Brown University research, calculates that the United States has paid for 70% of the Gaza war. In other words, American taxpayer dollars are being used to starve children, bomb schools, kill civilians and support the cruelty of Netanyahu and his criminal ministers. And that, M. President, is why I have brought these two resolutions of disapproval to block offensive arms sales to Israel. 

    S.J.Res.34 would prohibit the U.S.-taxpayer financed $675.7 million sale of thousands of 1,000-pound bombs and many thousands of JDAM guidance kits.

    And S.J.Res.41 would prohibit the sale of tens of thousands of fully automatic assault rifles.

    These arms sales clearly violate the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act, which prohibit sending arms to countries that violate international law by killing civilians and blocking humanitarian aid — and very few people doubt that that is exactly what Israel is doing. If you want to obey the law, vote for these resolutions. 

    The rifles in question will go to arm a police force overseen by far-right, extremist minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has long advocated for the forcible expulsion of Palestinians from the region, who was convicted of support for terrorism by an Israeli court, and who has distributed weapons to violent settlers in the West Bank. Ben-Gvir has formed new police units comprised of extremist settlers and has boasted about how many weapons he has distributed to vigilante settlers in the West Bank. And you want to give him more rifles? That’s what one of these resolutions is about.

    These are rifles the Biden administration held back over fears they would be used by extremist Israeli settlers in the West Bank to terrorize Palestinians and push them from their homes and villages.

    M. President, U.S. taxpayers have spent many, many billions of dollars in support of the racist, extremist Netanyahu government. Enough is enough. 

    Americans want this to end. They do not want to be complicit in an unfolding famine and daily civilian massacres. And we here in Congress tonight have the power to act. No more talks, no more great speeches. But tonight, we have the power to act — the power to force Netanyahu and his extremist government to end this slaughter.

    The time is long overdue for Congress to use the leverage we have — tens of billions in arms and military aid — to demand that Israel end these atrocities.

    At a time when Israeli soldiers are shooting civilians trying to get food aid on a near-daily basis, when extremist settlers are pushing Palestinians from their homes in the West Bank, and when Gaza is witnessing mass starvation as a result of Israeli government policy, the United States should not and must not be providing more weapons to enable these atrocities. 

    M. President, whatever happens tonight, history will condemn those who fail to act in the face of these horrors.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: WATCH: Padilla Questions Former AG Eric Holder on Republican Push for Racial Gerrymandering in Texas During Spotlight Forum on Voter Suppression

    US Senate News:

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

    WATCH: Padilla Questions Former AG Eric Holder on Republican Push for Racial Gerrymandering in Texas During Spotlight Forum on Voter Suppression

    Office of Special Counsel Confirms Hatch Act Investigation Following Padilla Letter

    Holder: “It’s both a sign of weakness and a sign of fear … The President and his party are afraid of the voters, and they are trying to manipulate the maps in Texas so that they can rig the election in 2026.”

    WATCH: Padilla questions Attorney General Holder and Professor Levitt on Republican power grab for five additional Texas congressional seats
     
    Watch the full spotlight forum, including witness opening statements and questioning, here.

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration and California’s former Secretary of State, convened a spotlight forum titled “Protecting the Future of American Democracy: Fighting a Surge in Voter Suppression.” During the forum, he questioned former Attorney General Eric Holder and Loyola Law School Professor Justin Levitt on the Trump Administration’s efforts in Texas and other states to implement mid-decade racial redistricting for partisan political purposes.

    The spotlight forum — co-led by Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee — came as Republicans in the Texas House of Representatives released their new gerrymandered maps, caving to pressure from political appointees at Trump’s White House and U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) in an effort to create five additional Republican congressional seats.

    Padilla highlighted his recent letter to the independent Office of Special Counsel demanding an investigation into senior Trump Administration officials for carrying out the President’s partisan scheme to racially gerrymander Texas and other states, calling it “a clear violation of the Hatch Act.” In response to Padilla’s letter, the Hatch Act Unit at the Office of Special Counsel confirmed they will open a file to address this potential violation.

    While questioning Attorney General Holder, Padilla called the Trump-directed Texas redistricting “nothing short of a power grab” and emphasized that Republicans are “trying to tip the scales because they’re afraid of the response of the people in the 2026 election” to their extreme agenda. Holder further underscored the stakes of the Trump Administration’s partisan attempt at a racial gerrymander and highlighted an ongoing lawsuit on Texas’ previous gerrymander. He emphasized that nearly 90 percent of Texas’ population growth that recently granted them additional congressional seats came from people of color moving to Texas, yet the state previously added two majority white congressional districts.

    • PADILLA: Attorney General Holder, what is your reaction to seeing a President of the United States — it’s not a dog whistle, it’s not saying the quiet part out loud, they’re using bull horns now — publicly call for partisan advantage through mid-decade racial gerrymandering and redistricting from the White House grounds, and is the Department of Justice appropriate to be party to this?
    • HOLDER: Yeah. I mean, it’s both a sign of weakness and a sign of fear, as I indicated before. The President and his party are afraid of the voters, and they are trying to manipulate the maps in Texas so that they can rig the election in 2026, and people need to understand: this is not just a Texas problem. I mean, you know, the margin in the House of Representatives is now, I guess, three seats or so. What they’re trying to get is five seats out of Texas with the thought that that will be an insurance policy to somehow keep an unpopular party with unpopular policies, unpopular candidates in power in the United States House of Representatives. And to have a President of the United States make that kind of statement, I mean, it’s not, it’s as you say. He’s saying the quiet part out loud. He’s not saying that there’s a basis for this other than just “give me five seats so that I will have those protections that we need.” […]
    • HOLDER: I think this is all about power. It’s all about the acquisition and the maintenance of power. It’s about the fear that they have of the people. And I think that this body, this committee and all Americans have to do all that we can to oppose that which they are trying to do, which is, at base, fundamentally un-American.

    Padilla also asked Professor Levitt about the Trump Administration’s potential Hatch Act violations as a result of their partisan redistricting push. Levitt called the redistricting attempt “flatly unlawful,” emphasizing the Supreme Court’s 9-0 ruling that excessive partisan gerrymanders are unconstitutional and criticizing the DOJ Civil Rights Division’s recent letter to Governor Greg Abbott and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton. The DOJ letter purports that they have “serious concerns regarding the legality” of four majority-minority districts represented by Democrats, giving Texas a pretext for their gerrymander, despite the state previously defending their district lines and arguing for several years that they had utilized a race-blind process for developing them.

    • PADILLA: In addition to the disregard, disrespect to voters of this whole exercise, as I mentioned in my opening statement, there’s a genuine significant concern about Hatch Act violations when the President of the United States and those around him are clearly utilizing their position and resources for partisan political purposes. Professor Levitt, are we on track here? Can you share your thoughts?
    • LEVITT: Yeah, lamentably, I think we are, Ranking Member Padilla. To have the Texas legislators violate their oaths of office by acting unconstitutionally and unlawfully to erect an excessive partisan gerrymander — the Supreme Court said nine to nothing in 2019 that excessive partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional. It is inconsistent with democratic principles. So, to have a number of Texas legislators about to violate their own oaths that they have sworn is alarming. I share Attorney General Holder’s concern that to have that cheer-led from the lawn of the White House and from the Department of Justice is even more alarming. It is both unconstitutional and unlawful. You have passed, Congress has passed, laws that prohibit the use of public office, including the offices in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice for any partisan purpose. And the letter that was sent to Texas that Texas relied on a month after disclaiming exactly the same arguments was such shoddy pretext that it is impossible to understand that letter as anything other than a partisan act, and issued from the Department of Justice that’s flatly unlawful.

    Video of Padilla’s first round of questioning is available here, and his second round of questioning is available here.

    Padilla’s opening remarks from today’s spotlight forum are available here.

    In addition to Attorney General Holder and Professor Levitt, Democratic Senators also heard today from North Carolina Supreme Court Associate Justice Allison Riggs and Vet Voice Foundation Chief Executive Officer Janessa Goldbeck on systematic attacks on the right to vote.

    Read Attorney General Eric Holder’s opening testimony here.

    Read Professor Justin Levitt’s opening testimony here and his full written testimony here.

    Read Associate Justice Allison Riggs’ opening testimony here.

    Read Vet Voice CEO Janessa Goldbeck’s opening testimony here. The Rules Committee Democrats’ spotlight forum series continues to underscore the dangers of the Trump Administration’s unprecedented attacks on election security, integrity, and funding required to smoothly administer elections and protect American democracy. The first spotlightforum in May focused on Congressional Republicans’ Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act and Trump’s illegal anti-voter executive order, both of which threaten to disenfranchise millions of eligible American citizens.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Vasquez condemns Gaza starvation policy, calls for end to military aid to Israel until ceasefire is reached

    Source: US Representative Gabe Vasquez’s (NM-02)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – On July 30, 2025, U.S. Representative Gabe Vasquez (NM-02) released the following statement on the urgent need for humanitarian aid in Gaza. 

    “The intentional starvation of innocent children in Gaza is undeniable and abhorrent. It is unacceptable that President Netanyahu openly denies the effect of his own cruel actions in a way that clearly flies in the face of what millions around the world have seen with their own eyes. This stark violation of human rights calls on us to do everything we can to protect the lives of these innocent children.”

    “The administration must use every diplomatic tool possible to put an end to this atrocity and immediately pause all military assistance until a ceasefire is reached. Additionally, sanctions must be placed on Israeli officials who have ordered or condoned the killing of innocent civilians. The United States must hold those who have contributed to the killing of innocent people — including children — accountable, and President Trump must use his power to bring an end to this conflict and humanitarian crisis,” said Vasquez.

    As the first member of the New Mexico delegation to call for a ceasefire, Rep. Vasquez has continued to push the administration to ensure innocent civilians in Gaza are not subjected to mass starvation and indiscriminate killing on the American taxpayer’s dime. 

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray, Health Insurance Marketplace Experts Lay Out How Republicans’ Refusal to Extend Health Care Tax Credits Will Spike Premiums & Health Care Costs for Millions

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    KFF: Individual market insurers are requesting the largest premium increases in more than 5 years; Out-of-pocket premium payments will go up by 75 percent if the tax credits expire

    In Washington state, expiration of health care tax credits will kick 80,000 people off health coverage

    Senator Murray has been fighting for months to extend tax credits that help working families afford health care and has introduced legislation to make them permanent

    ***Watch full press conference HERE; download HERE***

    Washington, D.C. —Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member and former Chair of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee, held a virtual press conference with Jeanne Lambrew, Director of Health Care Reform at The Century Foundation and a former senior official in the Obama administration official who worked on the passage and implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), and Washington Health Benefit Exchange CEO Ingrid Ulrey, to discuss—and sound the alarm on—how Republicans’ refusal to extend critical ACA tax credits that help families and small businesses who purchase their own health insurance on the marketplace will spike premiums and raise health care costs for people in Washington state and across the country.

    At the end of this year, enhanced premium tax credits Congress enacted to lower the cost of health care for working people who buy health insurance on their own are set to expire. For months, Republicans have refused to extend them, including recently as part of their partisan reconciliation bill, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—which was explicitly designed to extend expiring tax credits, and included trillions of dollars in tax breaks for billionaires.

    If Republicans continue to refuse to extend the health care tax credits, 22 million Americans across the country—including more than 216,000 people in Washington state—will see their health care costs and premiums skyrocket in January. The expiration of these tax credits is estimated to drive up out-of-pocket premium payments by an average of over 75 percent for Americans who rely on ACA health plans for coverage, and these higher costs will push 4.2 million people off their health coverage over the next decade—including an estimated 80,000 people in Washington state. Right now, health insurers and state regulators are finalizing premium rates for next year, and marketplace insurers are requesting the largest premium increases in more than 5 years. In Washington state, health insurers have already requested to hike their rates by one fifth—people who purchase health insurance through the marketplace may see their premiums rise between 4.7 percent and 23.6 percent, depending on the plan. A fact sheet from the Washington Health Benefit Exchange on the enhanced premium tax credits and what their expiration would mean for people in Washington state is HERE.

    “While the health care tax credits Republicans refused to extend may not expire until the end of the year, insurers are setting their rates right now, and when credits expire—rates go higher. Marketplace insurers are right now requesting the largest premium increases in more than 5 years. In Washington state, health insurers have already requested to hike their rates by over 20 percent, in no small part because of what Republicans have done—or rather, refused to do,” said Senator Murray. “When premiums spike next year, I am going to make sure everyone knows it’s because Republicans chose to make health care more expensive. Not on accident. Not for reasons unknown. But because Republicans decided to do nothing and let costs skyrocket. Because Republicans decided we can afford to shovel trillions of dollars towards tax breaks for billionaires, but we can’t afford to help working families get health care.”

    Senator Murray played a critical role in passing the enhanced premium tax credits in the American Rescue Plan in 2021 and extending them in the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, and she has been fighting for months to make sure these important health care tax credits don’t expire, including cosponsoring legislation—the Health Care Affordability Act—that would make them permanent.

    “The expiring ACA Marketplace tax credits are critical to keeping meaningful coverage within reach for millions of Americans,” said Jeanne Lambrew, Director of Health Care Reform at The Century Foundation and a former senior official in the Obama administration official who worked on the passage and implementation of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). “Unless Republicans come to the table to lower costs for families by extending these tax credits, Americans across the country are going to see their premiums skyrocket—especially in rural areas and places where access to health care is already challenging.”

    “Enhanced premium tax credits help more than 216,000 Washingtonians afford health coverage and are especially important for older and rural residents, small business owners and self-employed people in our state. If Congress allows them to expire, people will be angry and upset by steep premium increases starting in January 2026. Many will drop coverage and everyone in our state will feel the pain of ripple effects across our health care system and economy,” said Ingrid Ulrey, Chief Executive Officer for Washington Health Benefit Exchange. “These tax credits work. They help make coverage more affordable for working people, families and small businesses all over the state.”

    Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered, are below:

    “Thank you all for joining me today. You know, Republicans have been trying to tell some big fat lies about their big, awful bill, especially when it comes to health care.

    “So, we are here to set the record straight, and to give America a stark warning. When Republicans lined up behind Trump, and jammed through a bill they hardly liked, and hardly even read—they didn’t just vote to throw trillions of dollars in tax cuts at some of the richest people in the world, they also voted to throw working families to the wolves and throw America’s health care into chaos.

    “From cutting Medicaid, something they first said they weren’t doing and now are pretending they want to undo. To shuttering hospitals, something they first said would not happen and then said they could cover with a Band-Aid.

    “To approving Trump’s sabotage of the ACA marketplace something that will kick millions of families off their coverage.

    “To refusing to extend health care tax credits, something that will send premiums skyrocketing, and push another 4.2 million people off their insurance.

    “Let’s be clear about just how big of a deal that is. Right now, these tax credits—passed entirely by Democrats—are saving millions of people across the country hundreds of dollars a month!

    “In Washington state, we have over 200,000 people—who are saving around $1,300 a year on average.

    “But instead of extending that support for working class families, instead of putting health care first, Republicans put billionaires first.

    “And now families are going to be the one stuck footing the cost for Republicans’ big, ugly bill. And unfortunately, the consequences of Republican actions—which they keep trying to deny—are coming sooner than Republicans might think.

    “Because, while the health care tax credits they refused to extend may not expire until the end of this year, insurers are setting their rates right now, and when credits expire—rates go higher.

    “Marketplace insurers are right now requesting the largest premium increases in more than 5 years.

    “In Washington state, health insurers have already requested to hike their rates by over 20 percent, in no small part because of what Republicans have done—or rather, refused to do.

    “Combined with Republican ACA sabotage? That could push as many as 150,000 people off their health care coverage across our state. To say nothing of the people who will get pushed off Medicaid in 2027 and beyond.

    “This is going to be catastrophic—which is why it’s so important we sound the alarm for families about what is coming down the pike.

    “And I want to sound the alarm for Republicans too—if you don’t come to the table ASAP to fix this, you are not going to be able to spin your way out of this reality.  

    “When over 15 million people lose their health care due to Republican health care cuts and sabotage, you are not going to convince them everything is A-Okay.

    “When hospitals shutter because Republicans gutted their funding, you can’t just pretend everything is sunshine and nothing is wrong.

    “When insurance companies jack up premiums across the country and millions of families lose the health care tax credits that saved them thousands of dollars because Republicans refused to lift a finger, you’re not going to get by, by sticking your heads in the sand.

    “You are the ones who put American health care on this collision course. You may try to ignore the warnings, you may try to ignore the voices back home speaking out, but you’re not going to be able to avoid the responsibility.

    “When premiums spike next year, I am going to make sure everyone knows it’s because Republicans chose to make health care more expensive.

    “Not on accident. Not for reasons unknown. But because Republicans decided to do nothing and let costs skyrocket.

    “Because Republicans decided we can afford to shovel trillions of dollars towards tax breaks for billionaires, but we can’t afford to help working families get their health care.

    “They couldn’t be more wrong.

    “So, I’m really glad to be joined today by two speakers who are experts on the ACA tax credits and they can lay out what their expiration will mean for families in Washington state and across the country.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray Speaks Out Against Nomination of Radical, Unqualified Conspiracy Theorist Joe Kent Ahead of Confirmation Vote to Lead National Counterterrorism Center

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    ***WATCH: Senator Murray’s remarks on Senate Floor***

    Washington, D.C. —Today,U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, spoke out on the Senate floor against the nomination of Joe Kent to lead the National Counterterrorism Center. Senator Murray slammed Kent for his lack of experience and long history of promoting conspiracy theories and white supremacist views, and urged her colleagues to vote against his nomination.

    Senator Murray’s remarks, as delivered on the Senate Floor, are below:

    “Thank you, M. President.

    “The National Counterterrorism Center plays a crucial role keeping our country safe. The agency is responsible for collecting and analyzing intelligence to help protect our nation from terrorist threats. It is sober, serious work that requires a level head and a commitment to putting the mission before politics.

    “Which is why I am deeply alarmed that Republicans are charging ahead to put it under the thumb of a conspiracy theorist who espouses white supremacist views, and is patently unqualified for this important role in just about every way imaginable. You are supposed to pick people with qualifications, but just about everything we know about Joe Kent is disqualifying for this role and alarming.

    “There’s his track record chumming it up with white supremacists, from discussing campaign strategy with avowed white supremacist Nick Fuentes, to giving an interview to a guy who has defended Hitler, to rallying with the founder of a far-right paramilitary group, and let’s not forget the Proud Boy that he hired as a consultant!

    “And it’s not just his connections, there’s his own deeply bigoted statements like: claiming Islam is ‘based on conquest at its core,’ and pushing racist ‘replacement theory’ rhetoric.

    “That is alarming stuff. Let’s be frank here: These are white supremacist views—and they should have absolutely no place in our federal government.

    “And then there is his track record of politicizing intelligence, like when he was caught red handed pushing to change intelligence reports—facts be damned—so they would agree with Trump and attack Biden.

    “Joe Kent also has a track record of peddling conspiracies and attacking law enforcement, from saying our country is at war with ‘leftist cabal,’ or calling to completely defund the FBI and ATF, agencies that keep Americans safe from foreign and domestic threats, or pushing the offensive and false conspiracy that the January 6th insurrection was somehow a deep state plot.

    “You want to know who in the federal government was behind the insurrection? How about we start with man in the White House who promised to march to the Capitol with them? How about we start with the President who calls rioters patriots? How about we start with the guy who pardoned violent cop beaters—en masse?

    “If you cannot be honest with the American people about January 6th—you have no business being trusted with protecting our democracy. It should be that simple.

    “And let’s not forget—Joe Kent was on the infamous Signal-gate chat—where classified attack plans were discussed with no regard for security, or law, not to mention the safety of our servicemembers.

    “You know what he had to say about that? He said no classified information was discussed. That was the answer he gave at his Senate confirmation hearing.

    “Now it’s obvious that answer was a complete lie. Last week, the Pentagon’s watchdog confirmed there was classified information in that Signal chat.

    “So, was Kent being intentionally dishonest? Or does he not understand what classified information is?

    “Either way—it is completely disqualifying. Which—as I think I’ve made clear—is pretty much the pattern here. 

    “So here is my warning to Republicans, confirming someone like Joe Kent to lead the National Counterterrorism Center makes about as much sense as putting Donald Trump in charge of releasing the Epstein files after all that we have learned.

    “We have all the evidence we could ever need—in the public record, right now—that he is not going to do the right thing. And we have no reason to believe he will do this important, high-stakes, work in a serious, impartial manner—let alone a competent one.

    “So, M. President, I am here to urge all of my colleagues to join me in doing exactly what people back in Washington state have done each time they were asked to trust Joe Kent, vote no.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Hochul is a Guest on ‘inside City Hall’

    Source: US State of New York

    arlier today, Governor Kathy Hochul was a guest on NY1’s “Inside City Hall” with Errol Louis. The Governor discussed Monday night’s tragic shooting in Midtown Manhattan, the need to implement stronger gun safety legislation nationwide, federal cuts to medicaid and provided a response to redistricting.

    AUDIO: The Governor’s interview is available in audio form here.

    A rush transcript of the Governor’s interview is available below:

    Errol Louis, NY1: Governor Hochul is here. She joins us to talk more about that. Welcome back to the program — good to see you.

    Governor Hochul: Good to see again as well, Errol.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Governor, were State Police or investigators part of the response to the shooting?

    Governor Hochul: We always offer our assistance. We call immediately and certainly NYPD had it under control. But we are there on the periphery.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Your New York City office is really a short walk from 345 Park Ave. Does your building and the neighborhood as a whole feel safe?

    Governor Hochul: Yes, but it’s very much on everyone’s minds since this horrific massacre of four innocent people in New York. Even I walked into my office the day after, and I look at the security guards and I think about what must be going through their minds right now to know that this happened so incredibly, brazenly beyond anything anyone could have ever imagined.

    So, I feel safe where I am. I mean, this is an event the likes of which we’ve never seen here. The last mass shooting in New York City was 25 years ago, so I don’t want people to think this is a regular occurrence. I mean, no one would ever possibly think that, but it does shake that sense of security that everybody should have getting off the subway, walking into their office building, walking past the guards, and you should have the confidence to know you’re going to make it safely.

    I think there’s a lot of people right now who are just feeling really anxious about it. I can feel the — not just the sadness throughout the city, but also the, “Am I going to be okay?”

    I was speaking to one of the victim’s spouses and his advice to me was, “Go home and hug your husband because you don’t know how long you have each other,” and I think that’s a reminder as New Yorkers of never taking for granted the fact that we have people in our lives we cherish, and when they’re gone, there’s nothing more devastating.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Absolutely. You are calling for reinstituting the assault weapons ban that America had for about a decade or so. You are also — I think I heard you talking about how New York laws, if applied nationally or in other states, would really cut down on a lot of these kinds of tragedies.

    Governor Hochul: Absolutely. We have the toughest gun laws in the nation. I have added to them, especially after something we spoke about a number of times, which is the massacre of 10 individuals in my hometown of Buffalo. I went back and toughened our laws and raised the age for acquisition of guns and furthered the red flag laws, expanding them. We now have 4,300 guns that have been taken out of the hands of people who could have used them to harm themselves or others — that’s how you prevent these tragedies.

    So other states could do this — we’ve banned assault weapons, there’s no high capacity magazines — but as long as other states do it and someone can cross our state lines by simply getting into a vehicle, we are not safe. And if every state on their own followed what we’re doing, they can also claim to be safe states.

    We also have the lowest homicide rate using guns of anywhere in the nation of the large states — it’s extraordinary. The laws are working. The data proves there are more people walking our streets that are alive today because our gun laws have protected them.

    Now, every state could manage the way we have, but also with respect to the assault weapons, there needs to be a national ban. It is within the realm of possibility. We had it for an entire decade, and Bill Clinton put it in motion in 1994 and George Bush let it lapse in 2004. And at that moment, we knew that we were more vulnerable to mass casualty events in our schools and at concerts, grocery stores or even in office buildings because of that action. Let’s restore it once again.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Okay. There’s been a lot of political development since 2004 and there’s a large constituency out there, so we’ll see where that goes. Let me switch to a different topic.

    The Republican-controlled Legislature in Texas is proposing a mid-decade redistricting. Normally you wait 10 years and then you do it after the census, but they’re proposing new lines — they were really released today — that would make five Democratic seats majority Republican. Basically, they’re trying to sort of really improve the politics and change, possibly, the control of the House or secure control of the House of Representatives. You’ve suggested that New York might do something similar.

    Governor Hochul: What they’re doing is outlandish. They’re not playing by the rules, but a state like New York who has played by the rules should not be at disadvantage when another state and Donald Trump, at his direction, is basically disenfranchising communities of color represented by Democrats and putting them under Republican control, who, as we know, will never represent their interests. They won’t fight for health care, they won’t fight for nutrition programs, they won’t save them from the Big Ugly Bill which is hurting our country.

    So New York, I’m looking at all of our options — we do have options. I’ve had many conversations at high levels and I’ll be announcing what our plans are going forward. But we’re not going to sit down and just take this, that’s not who we are. We have to fight back, we have to fight back hard, and, as I’ve said, all is fair in love and war. You want to play by new rules, then we’ll get new rules.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Okay, fair enough. Speaking of new rules, there’s a question on the ballot this fall for New York City voters asking whether or not we should change our municipal elections to coincide with the presidential election. I was wondering if you have an opinion about that.

    Governor Hochul: We did this at the state level because there’s not usually a lot of interest in the local election for supervisors and mayors and councilmembers — that’s the world I come out of. I was 14 years as a local official and they used to call it the “off-years,” and the “on-years” were presidential or when the governor runs, which always has a higher turnout.

    It is so important to me that we get more people participating in this process, and I do believe that if all the elections were shifted to the presidential year, there would be a lot of interest. People can process multiple elections at the same time, they can think about who they want for their local officials as well as the President, and it gives an opportunity for a party like the Democrats to have one coherent, strong message to help carry our candidates from the bottom on to the top.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Let me ask you about that, though. Let’s take you back to Kathy Hochul as Mayor of Hamburg, right? I mean if you are dealing with where to put the municipal waste water treatment center and there’s also conversations going on about war and peace and tariffs and everything else, isn’t there a concern — or a likelihood, frankly — that local issues will just get tossed?

    Governor Hochul: No. One of the reasons I think that there’s not the voter participation that we should have in a country like the United States of America — it is a privilege to vote, people shed blood for this right, it was denied to people of color for so many decades — for a hundred years — and people won that right. I want more people to exercise it. And what happens is in a non-presidential election, non-governor’s election year, there’s not as much attention. New York is a little bit different, but there’s not as much attention on this and I do believe that more people will turn out and participate.

    More people vote for president than any election out of this cycle. Why wouldn’t we want those people to also be able to select who their leaders are at the local level? We wish everybody would participate all four years but they don’t, so let’s acknowledge human nature.

    And I also think there’s something that goes on — it’s election fatigue. People need a break, otherwise it’s nonstop campaigning all-year-round for four straight years. And I think when you sometimes have special elections, and vacancies, and the mayor — we have school board races at different times — it’s very confusing to people. So let’s just simplify it and have one big election.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Okay. And you’re comfortable being part of that as Governor?

    Governor Hochul: Absolutely.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Okay, very interesting. We’ll see how that works out. While we’re talking about national issues, one result of the bill that President Trump just signed into law, the Essential Medicaid Plan that covers 1.6 million New Yorkers is being cut back. My understanding is that on January 1, an estimated 700,000 people are going to get kicked off that plan and they’ll have to go to the state-only Medicaid program, which will cost the State almost $3 billion. Is there a contingency in place for that, or is this going to be part of the next Budget?

    Governor Hochul: No, well, we have the time because the number of people who will be affected will be actually more 2027. So it’ll be — in our ‘26 function when we do our ‘27 Budget, we’ll be able to address it then. But, look at what we’re being asked to do.

    The Republicans can make all the cuts they want, save money for themselves and push it out onto the State — something that has always been a shared responsibility and expecting our residents to pay for something that they never had to before. So it’s hard to put this on the State. We receive about $93 billion in assistance from the federal government every year — we can’t make all that up. What we can do is be strategic about this.

    We don’t want people to go hungry in our state — that’s not going to happen. We want people to have health care, it’s critically important, so we’re going to have to prioritize our spending, but we can do that. There’s no urgency right now. I’m not sure for sure that we won’t come back in a special session, but I want people to understand it would not make a difference because what we would do this fall can be done in January or during the Budget process, because these cuts are not going to take place until later

    I want people to understand why there’s not the urgency to go have a special session today. for example.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Let me switch topics. We’ve been reporting that the State Office of Cannabis Management has notified over 150 dispensaries — including 88 here in the city — that they’re out of compliance, that there are laws that require them to be at least 500 feet from schools, and churches and so forth.

    The source of the problem seems to be that it was calculated wrong — the measurements were calculated wrong. What’s the fix that’s needed?

    Governor Hochul: The Legislature, when they wrote the legislation, decided to have 500 feet away from the property line. Some campuses of schools are quite large, so it does push out the opportunity for these businesses quite a bit further out.

    The State Liquor Authority, for example, has it be 500 feet from the front door, which is how it was applied by, interestingly, the previous individuals running Office of Cannabis Management who are no longer there. We went in and did an audit to see what was not working there and this was uncovered that they had applied the law incorrectly.

    But I don’t think it should be born on the backs of these people — so many of them, their life savings, they’re going to these businesses. They’ve worked hard to go through the lengthy process to be licensed and then to have a location. So I have said we are going to stand up for them. These are entrepreneurs, they’re small business owners — many from communities of color — and this is their shot to have a chance to be successful. So, we’re not going to let anything happen to them. We’ll make them whole, and I have got to go back to the Legislature and get them persuaded to change the law to be consistent with what we do for liquor stores, for example.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Got it. And would a solution also possibly include grandfathering in the ones that are already opening up.

    Governor Hochul: I’d like to do that, yes. Yeah, no, absolutely. I don’t want them hurt. They’re part of our community already, they’re working hard, they waited a long time for this, and, basically, I don’t want them screwed.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Okay. Look, we’ve got a lot more to think about as we get closer to the elections. Have you settled on a candidate? I think during the primary when I asked you about it, you said, “We’ll let New York City Democrats figure out who their nominee is and then we’ll figure it out.”

    Governor Hochul: That’s right.

    Errol Louis, NY1: So now that there is a nominee —

    Governor Hochul: I’m having very interesting conversations right now. So, there’s no urgency. The election is in November; it is the last day of July, almost August. We’ll be deciding our path forward, but it’s important to me to have a working relationship, whomever the Mayor is.

    I have said to individuals, “I can be your best friend or your worst enemy, you pick.” I can be a strong supporter — with Mayor Adams, I have been; $1 billion for City of Yes so we can build more housing. I’m paying overtime, the state is paying overtime so our subways are safer at night for the NYPD to be there.

    So, I’ve always been a strong partner. I also represent the 8.3 million people who call New York home. I have an apartment here, I’m here all the time. I’m walking the streets. I have the same complaints — like, why isn’t the garbage picked up here?

    Errol Louis, NY1: Sure.

    Governor Hochul: Why is there a scaffold building, scaffolding everywhere — it’s maddening. So I understand, but relationships are important and I think it’s important for me to have those talks in advance, any decisions I make.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Okay. Be sure to let us know when you have decided.

    Governor Hochul: We will.

    Errol Louis, NY1: Thanks so much for coming by. Great to see you.

    Governor Hochul: Good to see you, Errol.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Duckworth Joins Durbin and Entire Senate Democratic Caucus in Reintroducing John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Illinois Tammy Duckworth

    July 30, 2025

    [WASHINGTON, D.C.] – Ahead of the 60th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act, U.S. Senator Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) joined U.S. Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) and U.S. Senator Reverand Raphael Warnock (D-GA), along with the rest of her Senate Democratic colleagues, in reintroducing the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act, legislation that would update and restore critical safeguards of the original Voting Rights Act of 1965 that have been eroded in recent years by federal court rulings. The legislation would strengthen our democracy by re-establishing preclearance for jurisdictions with a pattern of voting rights violations, protecting minority communities subject to discriminatory voting practices and defending election workers from threats and intimidation. It is named in honor of voting rights champion and former Congressman John Lewis.

    “The right to vote is a fundamental pillar of our democracy,” said Duckworth. “Our democracy is stronger when every voice is heard, yet Trump and Republicans are continuing to build unnecessary barriers to prevent people from voting—especially in communities of color—and undermining the protections that civil rights leaders like John Lewis fought for. Congress must pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act to help safeguard this pillar of democracy and protect the freedom to vote.”

    This legislation is especially relevant in Texas where, following historic disapproval of Congressional Republicans’ tax bill, Texas state lawmakers are looking to add five additional Republicans. The move comes in direct response to President Trump’s fears that voters may flip the House in the 2026 midterms.

    In the wake of the Supreme Court’s damaging Shelby County decision in 2013—which gutted the federal government’s ability under the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to prevent discriminatory changes to voting laws and procedures—states across the country have unleashed a torrent of voter suppression schemes that have systematically disenfranchised tens of thousands of American voters. The Supreme Court’s decision in Brnovich delivered yet another blow to the Voting Rights Act, by making it significantly harder for plaintiffs to win lawsuits under the landmark law against discriminatory voting laws or procedures.

    Along with Duckworth, Durbin and Warnock, the legislation is cosponsored by U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Cory Booker (D-NJ), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Ed Markey (D-MA), John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), John Fetterman (D-PA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Adam Schiff (D-CA), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Jack Reed (D-RI), Andy Kim (D-NJ), Peter Welch (D-VT), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Chris Coons (D-CT), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Tim Kaine (D-VA), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI), Mark Warner (D-VA), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-DE), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), Gary Peters (D-MI), Chris Murphy (D-CT), Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), Tina Smith (D-MN), Angus King (I-VT), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Angela Alsobrooks (D-MD).

    A copy of the bill text is available on Senator Duckworth’s website.

    -30-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Lummis Praises President’s Working Group Report on Digital Assets

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wyoming Cynthia Lummis

    July 30, 2025

    Washington, D.C. –  U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) Chair of the U.S. Senate Banking Subcommittee on Digital Assets, released the following statement applauding the impactful efforts of the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets to continue to secure America’s position as the global financial services leader. 

    “I’m overjoyed we finally have a president who understands the transformative power of digital assets and distributed ledger technology to build America’s financial future,” said Lummis. “I’ve been working on many of the proposals found in President Trump’s report since I took office in 2021, and I look forward to partnering with him to deliver on these transformational policies.”

    Since taking office, Senator Lummis has led the charge on the following policies contained in the President’s Working Group report:

    • Senator Lummis has consistently pressured the Federal Reserve Board and Federal Reserve Banks for their failure to follow existing Federal law on providing master accounts to eligible depository institutions engaged in digital asset activities, resulting in the withdrawal of President Biden’s nominee for Vice Chair of Supervision at the Fed, Sarah Bloom Raskin.
    • She has also been the top advocate on Capitol Hill to end Operation Chokepoint 2.0 and ensure that Federal banking regulators do not discriminate against crypto companies—exposing a secret instruction from the Federal Reserve to consider reputation risk and “controversial commentary” in regulating banks engaged in crypto activities.
    • Building off of Wyoming 2019 legislation, Senator Lummis introduced legislation creating a financial technology sandbox for digital asset companies in 2022, and is currently working on a similar proposal as part of the Senate Banking Committee’s comprehensive market structure legislation.
    • She is also the leading advocate on Capitol Hill to integrate digital assets into our nation’s tax code, having introduced legislation in 2022, 2023 and 2025 to create a de minimis exemption for small digital asset purchases, end the double taxation of digital asset miners and stakers, close the wash sale loophole, enable mark to market accounting and end the unfair application of the corporate alternative minimum tax (CAMT). 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Hassan Statement on the War in Gaza

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New Hampshire Maggie Hassan

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Maggie Hassan released the following statement on the war in Gaza, reiterating her position about the horrific humanitarian crisis and that the Trump Administration must continue to work towards a ceasefire agreement to end the war:

    “The humanitarian situation in Gaza long ago crossed a crisis point and is both horrifying and outrageous. I voted against today’s joint resolutions because blocking these arms sales would not end the starvation but would embolden Hamas and undermine Israel’s security. Yet while I remain steadfast in my support for Israel’s right to defend itself, I also strongly believe that Israel can and must do more, now, to end the suffering in Gaza. All parties, including the United States, must focus on working together to get food into Gaza as the most urgent priority, and then to reach a negotiated ceasefire that returns the hostages, ramps up humanitarian aid, ends Hamas’s reign of terror, and puts an end to this war. That is the only way we can build a future where the Israeli and Palestinian people live together, side-by-side, in peace.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cassidy Joins President Trump at White House, Applauds Effort to Modernize Health System to Put Patients First

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Louisiana Bill Cassidy

    (Click here to see President Trump shout out Senator Cassidy at the event)
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), chair of the U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, joined President Trump at the White House promoting the administration’s new effort to modernize our health care system, improving care for American patients. Cassidy was also joined at the event by U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Director Mehmet Oz.
    “President Trump and I are aligned: it’s time to modernize our health care system to put patients first,” said Dr. Cassidy. “The administration’s new effort will deliver faster, smarter care to patients and reduce administrative burdens on providers. That’s Making America Healthy Again.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: US to end tariff exemption for low-value imports starting Aug. 29

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

    This photo taken on May 10, 2025 shows cargo ships loaded with containers at the Port of Los Angeles in California, United States. [Photo/Xinhua]

    U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order suspending duty-free de minimis treatment for low-value shipments.

    Effective on Aug. 29, imported goods sent through means other than the international postal network that are valued at or under 800 U.S. dollars and that would otherwise qualify for the de minimis exemption will be subject to all applicable duties.

    For goods shipped through the international postal system, packages will instead be subject to a duty equal to the effective tariff rate applicable to the country of origin, or a duty ranging from 80 to 200 dollars per item.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: CTI Chairman Pfluger Congratulates Rep. Garbarino as New Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11)

    CTI Chairman Pfluger Congratulates Rep. Garbarino as New Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security

    Washington, July 22, 2025

    WASHINGTON, DC — Congressman August Pfluger (TX-11), Chairman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence, released the following statement after the House Republican Conference selected Rep. Andrew Garbarino (R-NY) to serve as the next Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security:

    “Congratulations to my colleague, Andrew Garbarino, on his selection as the next Chairman of the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security. His appointment reflects a strong commitment to securing our borders, strengthening cybersecurity, and protecting our critical infrastructure. Under President Trump’s leadership, we have made historic strides in national security, and I am confident that Chairman Garbarino will continue that momentum to meet today’s evolving threats. As Chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, I look forward to working alongside him in our shared mission to safeguard the American people and defend the Homeland.” 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: On the 60th Anniversary of Medicaid and Medicare, Cortez Masto Blasts Republicans for Gutting the Essential Health Care Programs

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto

    FTP for TV stations of her remarks is available here.

    Cortez Masto told the story of a constituent named Hannah whose Type 1 diabetes makes her dependent on Medicaid coverage she may now lose

    Washington, D.C. – To mark the 60th anniversary of Medicaid and Medicare, U.S. Senator Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) took to the Senate floor to call out President Trump and Congressional Republicans for gutting Medicaid in order to pay for a tax giveaway for billionaires.

    Below are her remarks as prepared for delivery:

    Mr. President, as my colleagues have mentioned, today marks 60 years since Medicare and Medicaid were signed into law.

    Democrats and Republicans alike should be celebrating the lives that have been saved as a result of these critical programs. Members of both parties should be sharing stories about Americans who have benefitted from the health care they’ve received thanks to Medicare and Medicaid.

    Unfortunately, today, my Democratic colleagues and I are not celebrating.

    We are angry.

    We’re angry that President Trump lied when he said he would “cherish Medicaid” and that his allies in Congress wouldn’t touch this essential program.

    We’re angry that President Trump and Congressional Republicans slashed nearly $1 trillion from Medicaid so they could hand billionaires a tax cut – and add $4 trillion to our national deficit.

    And, we’re angry that their new law is about to kick 17 million Americans off their health insurance.

    In my home state of Nevada, that means up to 120,000 people will lose their health care.

    100,000 of those Nevadans will lose their access to Medicaid. And another 20,000 Nevadans will lose their affordable health coverage if Republicans continue to refuse to work with Democrats to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits.

    There are a million reasons why this new law gutting Medicaid is terrible for Nevadans and for our country as a whole. But today, I just want to focus on one: Hannah.

    Hannah is a young girl who lives in Nevada, and her parents shared her story with me. Now, I want to share it with you.

    Hannah was diagnosed with a congenital kidney disease while still in utero. The first few years of her life were full of hospital rooms, doctors, and machines trying to keep her alive.

    At just two and a half years old, Hannah underwent a major surgery that finally gave her the opportunity to live like a normal kid. And she did, for a few years.

    But then, at age nine, Hannah fell into a coma. Imagine being her parents, watching completely helpless as your daughter fights something you can’t protect her from.

    Hannah did eventually wake up, but with a new diagnosis: diabetes, a condition nearly 270,000 Nevadans manage every day – not just the disease itself, but the crushing weight of the costs associated with it.

    Over the next two years, Hannah’s parents spent more than $5,000 out-of-pocket because their insurance refused to cover all the costs. Hannah and her family sacrificed so much just to be able to afford medication that would allow Hannah to lead a normal life.

    But just when they thought they would never be able to financially recover, they were able to enroll in Medicaid and receive the support they need to care for Hannah at home.

    Now, Hannah is able to live the life she wants to lead, without the fear of medical debt pulling her family back underwater. I want to read to you what Hannah’s parents wrote me next:

    “But without Medicaid, her insulin would cost more than our mortgage. Let that sink in. The price of the medication keeping my child alive is higher than the roof over her head – even after insurance. How does that make sense? America should be about neighbors caring for neighbors. But instead, we are pushing people with disabilities to the back of the line, treating their lives as less valuable, their futures as an afterthought. I beg you – I beg you – to save Medicaid. Not just for my Hannah, but for every child like her.”

    My Democratic colleagues and I worked hard to save Medicaid. And we tried to reach across the aisle to protect the 17 million Americans just like Hannah who could lose their health insurance because of this bill.

    But President Trump insisted Congressional Republicans pass his tax cut for billionaires, and they did what they were told.

    So now, Hannah and her family, and millions more like them, may be forced back into medical debt.

    And to the proponents of this new law who insist kids like Hannah aren’t the ones they’re targeting to kick off coverage, I’d say they’re either being dishonest, or they simply don’t understand how Medicaid actually works.

    These cuts shrink the entire pot of money states rely on to fund Medicaid. Nevada, and every state in the country, will be forced to stretch fewer dollars to cover everyone. That almost always means tightening eligibility or cutting services, so kids like Hannah end up losing coverage – even if they weren’t the “type” of person Republicans singled out for cuts.

    This is shameful. It’s un-American. We are better than this as a country.

    My Democratic colleagues and I will do everything in our power to restore the health care funding Republicans have gutted.

    And we won’t let them forget what they did.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ranking Member Hoyer Statement on the Cancellation of the IRS Direct File Program

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Steny H Hoyer (MD-05)

    WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Steny H. Hoyer (MD-05), Ranking Member of the Financial Services and General Government (FSGG) Appropriations Subcommittee, released the following statement today after reports that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has cancelled the Direct File program:

    “Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Commissioner Billy Long’s announcement that the Direct File program is cancelled echoes the same message that Donald Trump and his Republican allies have been sending to the American people for years: ‘you’re on your own.’ If you’re among the 72% of Americans who would like a fast, easy, and free method to file your taxes, you’re on your own now that the administration has eliminated Direct File. 

    “Direct File worked. Over the past two years, hundreds of thousands of Americans across 25 states participated in the Direct File pilot program to file their taxes for free. In 2024, 90% of those taxpayers rated their experience with Direct File as ‘excellent’ or ‘above average.’ During the most recent tax season, that figure increased to 94%. Crucially, on average, Direct File saved participants $160 and hours of time they would have normally spent filing their taxes. 

    “That’s why I helped lead Democrats’ efforts to establish Direct File through the Inflation Reduction Act: to save Americans time and money. The federal government requires Americans to pay their taxes, thus it ought to provide them a free and easy way to do so. That logic is lost on the Trump Administration. He may be telling Americans they’re on their own, but I will keep fighting for them by standing up for Direct File and other programs that lower their costs and make their lives easier.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • US President Trump confirms India-US trade talks continue despite 25 per cent tariff threat

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    President Donald Trump has said that India and the US were still negotiating a trade deal despite his threat to impose a 25 per cent tariff, and a final decision may be known by the end of the week.

    “We’re talking to India now, we’ll see what happens,” he said on Wednesday, hours after he had threatened the 25 per cent tariffs and the 100 per cent penalty for buyers of Russian energy he had proposed. He said that India, which he asserted has one of the highest tariffs in the world, was now “willing to cut it very substantially.”

    However, he was silent on the Russian penalty when asked by a reporter and instead spoke of the 10 per cent penalty he had proposed for BRICS members.

    Since he says negotiations are continuing, the morning threat appears to be a negotiating ploy and gives both countries wiggle room to reach an accord. He has also not issued a formal letter on the tariffs.

    India had replied defiantly to the threat, saying the government “will take all steps necessary to secure our national interest.” India indicated that agriculture was likely a sticking point in the negotiations.

    The statement said, “The government attaches the utmost importance to protecting and promoting the welfare of our farmers, entrepreneurs, and MSMEs (Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises).” The US wants India to open its markets to US agriculture and dairy, which could impact its vast agriculture sector.

    Trump and his officials, like Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, had spoken optimistically that India would be among the first to make a deal, but it hasn’t materialised. India was among the first countries to start trade negotiations with Washington on tariffs, and Trump had repeatedly said that an agreement was imminent, most recently last week.

    The negotiations were making fantastic progress, India’s Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal said last week in a media interview in London. “I do hope we’ll be able to conclude a very consequential partnership,” he said.

    In its response, India’s Commerce Ministry said, “India and the US have been engaged in negotiations on concluding a fair, balanced and mutually beneficial bilateral trade agreement over the last few months.”

    “We remain committed to that objective,” it added. Speaking to reporters at the White House, Trump called Prime Minister Narendra Modi “a friend of mine,” as he usually prefaces differences on tariffs.

    He said, nonchalantly, “It doesn’t matter too much whether we have a deal or whether we charge them a certain tariff, but you’ll know at the end of this week.”

    He repeated his tirade about India’s high tariffs, saying that while the US buys a lot from India, the US doesn’t sell as much there because of the tariffs. India had the highest or one of the highest tariffs in the world, with levies going as high as 175 per cent, he said.

    When a reporter asked him about the penalty for buying Russian energy, he did not answer that and, instead, veered off into talking about BRICS and how it was “anti-United States.” “India is a member of that, if you can believe it,” he said.

    “It’s an attack on the dollar, and we’re not going to let anybody attack the dollar,” he said. So, when it comes to India, he said, “It’s partially BRICS, and it’s partially the trade.”

    In the Truth Social post, Trump had said India has “always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia’s largest buyer of energy, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to stop the killing in Ukraine.”

    “All things not good! India will therefore be paying a tariff of 25 per cent, plus a penalty for the above, starting on August first,” he wrote, capitalising parts of the post in his style. (IANS)

  • Trump hits Brazil with tariffs, sanctions but key sectors excluded

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday slapped a 50% tariff on most Brazilian goods to fight what he has called a “witch hunt” against former President Jair Bolsonaro, but softened the blow by excluding sectors such as aircraft, energy and orange juice from heavier levies.

    Trump announced the tariffs, some of the steepest levied on any economy in the U.S. trade war, as his administration also unveiled sanctions on the Brazilian supreme court justice who has been overseeing Bolsonaro’s trial on charges of plotting a coup.

    “Alexandre de Moraes has taken it upon himself to be judge and jury in an unlawful witch hunt against U.S. and Brazilian citizens and companies,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said in a statement.

    Bessent said Moraes “is responsible for an oppressive campaign of censorship, arbitrary detentions that violate human rights, and politicized prosecutions — including against former President Jair Bolsonaro.”

    Last week, the Brazilian justice levied search warrants and restraining orders against Bolsonaro over allegations he courted Trump‘s interference in his criminal case, in which he is accused of plotting to stop President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva from taking office in 2023.

    Trump‘s final tariff order and the sanctions followed weeks of sparring with Lula, who has likened the U.S. president, a close ideological ally of Bolsonaro’s, to an unwanted “emperor.”

    On Wednesday, Lula and his government closed ranks behind Moraes, calling the U.S. sanctions “unacceptable.”

    “The Brazilian government considers the use of political arguments to defend the trade measures announced by the U.S. government against Brazilian exports to be unjustifiable,” it said in a statement.

    Lula added that Brazil was willing to negotiate trade with the U.S., but that it would not give up on the tools it had at hand to defend itself, hinting that retaliation was possible.

    Still, Trump‘s tariff order threatened that if Brazil were to retaliate, the U.S. would also up the ante.

    DIPLOMACY AT WORK

    Despite Trump‘s effort to use the tariffs to alter the trajectory of a pivotal criminal trial, the range of exemptions came as a relief for many in Brasilia, who since Trump announced the tariff earlier this month had been urging protections for major exporters caught in the crossfire.

    “We’re not facing the worst-case scenario,” Brazilian Treasury Secretary Rogerio Ceron told reporters.

    The new tariffs will go into effect on August 6, not on Friday as Trump announced originally.

    Trump‘s executive order formalizing a 50% tariff excluded dozens of key Brazilian exports to the United States, including civil aircraft, pig iron, precious metals, wood pulp, energy and fertilizers.

    Planemaker Embraer EMBR3.SA, whose chief executive has met with officials in Washington and U.S. clients in recent days to plead its case for relief, said an initial review indicated that a 10% tariff imposed by Trump in April remains in place, with the exclusion applying to the additional 40%.

    The exceptions are likely a response to concerns from U.S. companies, rather than a step back from Trump‘s efforts to influence Brazilian politics, said Rafael Favetti, a partner at political consultancy Fatto Inteligencia Politica in Brasilia.

    “This also shows that Brazilian diplomacy did its work correctly by working to raise awareness among U.S. companies,” he said.

    Brazil‘s minister of foreign affairs, Mauro Vieira, said he met with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Wednesday to express the nation’s willingness to discuss tariffs after negotiations stalled in June, though he stressed Bolsonaro’s legal troubles were not up for debate.

    It remains unclear what Brazilian authorities “are bringing to the negotiating table to, for instance, open the domestic market,” Goldman Sachs said in a note to clients.

    IMPACT SMALLER THAN EXPECTED

    The effective tariff rate on Brazilian shipments to the U.S. should be around 30.8%, lower than previously expected due to the exemptions, according to Goldman.

    Oil shipments to the U.S., which had been suspended, are set to restart after being spared, lobby group IBP said. Meanwhile, mining lobby Ibram said the exemptions covered 75% of mining exports.

    However, it was still too soon to celebrate, said former Brazilian trade secretary Welber Barral, estimating that Brazil exports some 3,000 different products to the United States.

    “There will be an impact,” Barral said.

    Trump‘s tariff exemptions did not shield two of Brazil‘s key exports to the U.S., beef and coffee.

    Meatpackers expect to log $1 billion in losses in the second half of the year on the new tariffs, lobby group Abiec, which represents beef producers including JBS JBS3.SA and Marfrig MRFG3.SA, said.

    Coffee exporters will also continue to push for exemptions, they said in a statement.

    The government said it was readying measures to protect Brazil‘s businesses and workers.

    If Brazil were to retaliate against Trump‘s measures, that “would generate a larger negative impact” on activity and inflation, Goldman said.

    “The political inclination may be to retaliate, but exporters and business associations have been urging the Brazilian administration to engage, negotiate and de-escalate.”

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray Votes Yes on Arms Sale Resolutions to Send Message to Netanyahu Government

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray

    Washington, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) issued the following statement on her vote in favor of two Joint Resolutions of Disapproval (JRD) sponsored by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) that would block the sale of certain weapons to Israel:

    “This legislative tool is not perfect, but frankly, it is time to say enough to the suffering of innocent young children and families. As a longtime friend and supporter of Israel, I am voting yes to send a message: the Netanyahu government cannot continue with this strategy. Netanyahu has prolonged this war at every turn to stay in power. We are witnessing a man-made famine in Gaza—children and families should not be dying from starvation or disease when literal tons of aid and supplies are just sitting across the border. Israel has a right to defend itself and Hamas is a brutal terrorist organization that should be eliminated, but the level of suffering and loss of life we are seeing in Gaza must come to an end—I feel strongly that the vast majority of the American public understands these simple truths. It’s on the Trump administration and the Netanyahu government to finally secure a diplomatic end to this conflict, get aid into Gaza, get the hostages returned, and start working toward a permanent and lasting peace for Israelis and Palestinians alike.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • Sensex, Nifty open lower amid concerns over US tariffs effective August 1

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    Indian benchmark indices opened lower on Thursday after US President Donald Trump announced a steep 25 per cent tariff on imports from India, triggering concerns among investors.

    At 9:27 a.m., the Sensex was down 487 points or 0.60 per cent at 80,994, while the Nifty declined 140 points or 0.57 per cent to trade at 24,717.

    Broader markets also witnessed selling pressure. The Nifty Midcap 100 index fell by 457 points or 0.79 per cent to 57,484, and the Nifty Smallcap 100 index was down 100 points or 0.55 per cent at 18,037.

    “From an investor’s perspective, it is important to understand that the 25 per cent tariff is likely to come down after negotiations, which are expected to begin in mid-August. The tariff imposed on India is significantly higher than the rates agreed upon in trade deals with other countries,” said Dr. V.K. Vijayakumar, Chief Investment Strategist at Geojit Financial Services.

    He termed it a typical “Trumpian strategy” aimed at negotiating better deals from India in other areas, likely culminating in a final tariff rate of around 20 per cent or lower.

    “Nifty is unlikely to fall below the support level of 24,500. Investors can consider buying on dips, with a focus on domestic consumption themes. Sectors like private sector banking, telecom, capital goods, cement, hotels, and select auto stocks that performed well in Q1 remain attractive,” he added.

    Almost all sectoral indices turned red in morning trade, with auto, energy, pharma, PSU banks, financial services, metal, realty, and public sector enterprises (PSEs) among the top laggards.

    In the Sensex pack, M&M, Bharti Airtel, Reliance, Infosys, HCL Tech, Titan, SBI, TCS, ICICI Bank, Trent, L&T, HDFC Bank, and NTPC were among the top losers. On the other hand, Power Grid, Tata Steel, ITC, and HUL emerged as the top gainers.

    In terms of institutional activity, foreign institutional investors (FIIs) continued their selling streak for the eighth straight session on July 30, offloading equities worth ₹850 crore. In contrast, domestic institutional investors (DIIs) extended their buying spree for the 18th consecutive session, purchasing equities worth ₹1,829 crore on the same day.

    -IANS

  • MIL-OSI: Credit Agricole Sa: Results for the second quarter and first half 2025 – The Group is accelerating its development

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    THE GROUP IS ACCELERATING ITS DEVELOPMENT  
               
      CRÉDIT AGRICOLE S.A. CRÉDIT AGRICOLE GROUP    
    €m Q2 2025 Change Q2/Q2 Q2 2025 Change Q2/Q2  
    Revenues 7,006 +3.1% 9,808 +3.2%  
    Expenses -3,700 +2.2% -5,872 +3.2%  
    Gross Operating Income 3,306 +4.1% 3,936 +3.1%  
    Cost of risk -441 +4.2% -840 -3.7%  
    Net income group share 2,390 +30.7% 2,638 +30.1%  
    C/I ratio 52.8% -0.5 pp 59.9% +0.0 pp  
    STRONG ACTIVITY IN ALL BUSINESS LINES

    • Confirmation of the upturn of loan production in France, international credit activity still strong and consumer finance at a higher level
    • Record net inflows in life insurance, high net inflows in asset management (driven by the medium/long-term and JVs); in insurance, revenues at a higher level driven by all activities
    • CIB: record half year and strong quarter

    CONTINUOUS FLOW OF STRATEGIC OPERATIONS

    • Gradual achievement of synergies in the ongoing integrations: progress of around 60% for RBC IS Europe and 25% for Degroof Petercam in Belgium
    • Transactions concluded this quarter: launch of partnership with Victory Capital in the United States, increased stake in Banco BPM in Italy, acquisition of Merca Leasing in Germany and Petit-fils and Comwatt in France and acquisition of Santander’s 30.5% stake in CACEIS1
    • New projects initiated: Acquisitions of Banque Thaler in Switzerland, Comwatt and Milleis in France, partnership with the Crelan Group in Belgium and development of Indosuez Wealth Management in Monaco

    HALF-YEARLY AND QUARTERLY RESULTS AT THEIR HIGHEST

    • High profitability (Return on Tangible Equity of 16.6%), driven by high and growing revenues, a low cost/income ratio (53.9% in the first half) and a stable cost of risk (34 basis points on outstandings)
    • Results especially benefiting from the capital gain related to the deconsolidation of Amundi US

    HIGH SOLVENCY RATIOS

    • Crédit Agricole S.A.’s phased-in CET1 at 11.9% and CA Group phased-in CET1 at 17.6%

    CONTINUOUS SUPPORT FOR TRANSITIONS, WITH AN AWARD FROM EUROMONEY

    • Continued withdrawal from fossil energies and reallocation to low-carbon energy sources
    • Support for the transition of households and corporates
    • Crédit Agricole named World’s Best Bank for Sustainable Finance at the Euromoney Awards for Excellence 2025

    PRESENTATION OF THE MEDIUM-TERM PLAN ON 18 NOVEMBER 2025
     

    Dominique Lefebvre,
    Chairman of SAS Rue La Boétie and Chairman of the Crédit Agricole S.A. Board of Directors

    “The high-level results we are publishing this quarter serve our usefulness to the economy and European sovereignty.” ‍
     
     

    Olivier Gavalda,
    Chief Executive Officer of Crédit Agricole S.A.

    “With this high level of results, we are confident in Crédit Agricole S.A.’s ability to achieve a net profit in 2025 higher than 2024, excluding the corporate tax surcharge. These results constitute a solid foundation for Crédit Agricole S.A.’s medium-term strategic plan, which will be unveiled on November 18, 2025.”

    		  

    This press release comments on the results of Crédit Agricole S.A. and those of Crédit Agricole Group, which comprises the Crédit Agricole S.A. entities and the Crédit Agricole Regional Banks, which own 63.5% of Crédit Agricole S.A.

    All financial data are now presented stated for Crédit Agricole Group, Crédit Agricole S.A. and the business lines results, both for the income statement and for the profitability ratios.

    Crédit Agricole Group

    Group activity

    The Group’s commercial activity during the quarter continued at a steady pace across all business lines, with a good level of customer capture. In the second quarter of 2025, the Group recorded +493,000 new customers in retail banking. More specifically, over the year, the Group gained 391,000 new customers for Retail Banking in France and 102,000 new International Retail Banking customers (Italy and Poland). At 30 June 2025, in retail banking, on-balance sheet deposits totalled €838 billion, up +0.6% year-on-year in France and Italy (+0.7% for Regional Banks and LCL and +0.3% in Italy). Outstanding loans totalled €885 billion, up +1.4% year-on-year in France and Italy (+1.4% for Regional Banks and LCL and +1.6% in Italy). Housing loan production continued its upturn in France compared to the low point observed at the start of 2024, with an increase of +28% for Regional Banks and +24% for LCL compared to the second quarter of 2024. For CA Italia, loan production was down -8.1% compared to the high second quarter of 2024. The property and casualty insurance equipment rate (2) rose to 44.2% for the Regional Banks (+0.7 percentage points compared to the second quarter of 2024), 28.4% for LCL (+0.6 percentage point) and 20.6% for CA Italia (+0.9 percentage point).

    In Asset Management, quarterly inflows were very high at +€20 billion, fuelled by medium/long-term assets (+€11 billion) and JVs (+€10 billion). In insurance, savings/retirement gross inflows rose to a record €9.9 billion over the quarter (+22% year-on-year), with the unit-linked rate in production staying at a high 32%. Net inflows were at a record level at +€4.2 billion, spread evenly between euro-denominated funds and unit-linked contracts. The strong performance in property and casualty insurance was driven by price changes and portfolio growth (16.9 million contracts at end-June 2025, +3% year-on-year). Assets under management stood at €2,905 billion, up +5.2% year on year for the three business segments: in asset management at €2,267 billion (+5.2% year on year) despite a negative scope effect linked to the deconsolidation of Amundi US and the integration of Victory, in life insurance at €359 billion (+6.4% year on year) and in wealth management (Indosuez Wealth Management and LCL Private Banking) at €279 billion (+3.7% year on year).

    Business in the SFS division showed strong activity. At CAPFM, consumer finance outstandings increased to €121.0 billion, up +4.5% compared with end-June 2024, with car loans representing 53% (3) of total outstandings, and new loan production up by +2.4% compared with the second quarter of 2024 (+12.4% compared to the first quarter of 2025), driven by traditional consumer finance, but with the automotive market remaining complex in Europe and China. Regarding Crédit Agricole Leasing & Factoring (CAL&F), lease financing outstandings are up +5.0% compared to June 2024 to €20.8 billion; however, production is down -19.4% compared to the second quarter of 2024, mainly in France. Factoring activity remains very strong, with a production of +26.6% year on year.

    Momentum is strong in Large Customers, which again posted record revenues for the half-year in Corporate and Investment Banking and a high-level quarter. Capital markets and investment banking showed a high level of revenues driven by capital markets, especially from trading and primary credit activities, which partially offset the drop in revenues from structured equity activities. Financing activities are fuelled by structured financing with strong momentum in the renewable energy sector, and by CLF activities, driven by the acquisition financing sector. Lastly, Asset Servicing recorded a high level of assets under custody of €5,526 billion and assets under administration of €3,468 billion (+11% and +1.2%, respectively, compared with the end of June 2024), with good sales momentum and positive market effects over the quarter.

    Continued support for the energy transition

    The Group is continuing the mass roll-out of financing and investment to promote the transition. Thus, the exposure of Crédit Agricole Group (4) has increased 2.4 fold between 2020 and 2024 with €26.3 billion at 31 December 2024. Investments in low-carbon energy (5) increased 2.8 fold between end-2020 and June 2025, and represented €6.1 billion at 30 June 2025.

    At the same time, as a universal bank, Crédit Agricole is supporting the transition of all its customers. Thus, outstandings related to the environmental transition (6) amounted to €111 billion at 31 March 2025, including €83 billion for energy-efficient property and €6 billion for “clean” transport and mobility.

    In addition, the Group is continuing to move away from carbon energy financing; the Group’s phased withdrawal from financing fossil fuel extraction resulted in a -40% decrease in exposure in the period 2020 to 2024, equating to €5.6 billion at 31 December 2024. 

    In the field of sustainable finance, Crédit Agricole was named World’s Best Bank for Sustainable Finance at the Euromoney Awards for Excellence 2025. 

    Group results

    In the second quarter of 2025, Crédit Agricole Group’s net income Group share came to €2,638 million, up +30.1% compared to the second quarter of 2024, and up +14.8% excluding capital gains related to the deconsolidation of Amundi US.

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues amounted to €9,808 million, up +3.2% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Operating expenses were up +3.2% in the second quarter of 2025, totalling -€5,872 million. Overall, Credit Agricole Group saw its cost/income ratio reach 59.9% in the second quarter of 2025, stable compared to the second quarter of 2024. As a result, the gross operating income stood at €3,936 million, up +3.1% compared to the second quarter of 2024.

    The cost of credit risk stood at -€840 million, a decrease of -3.7% compared to the second quarter of 2024. It includes a reversal of +€24 million on performing loans (stage 1 and 2) linked to reversals for model updates which offset the updating of macroeconomic scenarios and the migration to default of some loans. The cost of proven risk shows an addition to provisions of -€845 million (stage 3). There was also an addition of -€18 million for other risks. The provisioning levels were determined by taking into account several weighted economic scenarios and by applying some flat-rate adjustments on sensitive portfolios. The weighted economic scenarios for the second quarter were updated, with a central scenario (French GDP at +0.8% in 2025, +1.4% in 2026) an unfavourable scenario (French GDP at +0.0% in 2025 and +0.6% in 2026) and an adverse scenario (French GDP at -1.9% in 2025 and -1.4% in 2026). The cost of risk/outstandings (7)reached 27 basis points over a four rolling quarter period and 28 basis points on an annualised quarterly basis (8).

    Pre-tax income stood at €3,604 million, a year-on-year increase of +19.6% compared to second quarter 2024. This includes the contribution from equity-accounted entities of €56 million (down -24.0%) and net income on other assets, which came to +€452 million this quarter, due to a capital gain of €453 million on the deconsolidation of Amundi US. The tax charge was -€615 million, down +€147 million, or -19.3% over the period.

    Net income before non-controlling interests was up +32.8% to reach €2,990 million. Non-controlling interests increased by +57%, a share of the capital gain on the deconsolidation of Amundi US being reversed to non-controlling interests.

    Net income Group share in first half 2025 amounted to €4,803 million, compared with €4,412 million in first half 2024, an increase of +8.9%.

    Revenues totalled €19,856 million, up +4.3% in first half 2025 compared with first half 2024.

    Operating expenses amounted to -€11,864 million up +5.2% compared to the first half of 2024, especially due to support for business development, IT expenditure and the integration of scope effects. The cost/income ratio for the first half of 2025 was 59.8%, up +0.5 percentage points compared to the first half of 2024.

    Gross operating income totalled €7,992 million, up +3.0% compared to the first half of 2024.

    Cost of risk for the half-year rose moderately to -€1,575 million (of which -€23 million in cost of risk on performing loans (stage 1 and 2), -€1,522 million in cost of proven risk, and +€29 million in other risks, i.e. an increase of +3.4% compared to first half 2024.

    As at 30 June 2025, risk indicators confirm the high quality of Crédit Agricole Group’s assets and risk coverage level. The prudent management of these loan loss reserves has enabled the Crédit Agricole Group to have an overall coverage ratio for doubtful loans (83.3% at the end of June 2025).

    Net income on other assets stood at €456 million in first half 2025, vs. -€14 million in first half 2024. Pre-tax income before discontinued operations and non-controlling interests rose by +10.1% to €7,004 million. The tax charge stood at -€1,66 million, a +9.1% increase. This change is related to the exceptional corporate income tax for -€250 million (corresponding to an estimation of -€330 million in 2025, assuming the 2025 fiscal result being equal to 2024 fiscal result).

    Underlying net income before non-controlling interests was therefore up by +10.4%. Non-controlling interests stood at -€545 million in the first half of 2024, up +26.1%, a share of the capital gain on the deconsolidation of Amundi US being reversed to non-controlling interests.

    Credit Agricole Group, Income statement Q2 and H1 2025

    En m€ Q2-25 Q2-24 ∆ Q2/Q2   H1-25 H1-24 ∆ H1/H1
    Revenues 9,808 9,507 +3.2%   19,856 19,031 +4.3%
    Operating expenses (5,872) (5,687) +3.2%   (11,864) (11,276) +5.2%
    Gross operating income 3,936 3,819 +3.1%   7,992 7,755 +3.0%
    Cost of risk (840) (872) (3.7%)   (1,575) (1,523) +3.4%
    Equity-accounted entities 56 74 (24.0%)   131 142 (7.9%)
    Net income on other assets 452 (7) n.m.   456 (14) n.m.
    Change in value of goodwill – – n.m.   – – n.m.
    Income before tax 3,604 3,014 +19.6%   7,004 6,361 +10.1%
    Tax (615) (762) (19.3%)   (1,656) (1,517) +9.1%
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale ope. 0 – n.m.   0 – n.m.
    Net income 2,990 2,252 +32.8%   5,348 4,843 +10.4%
    Non controlling interests (352) (224) +57.0%   (545) (432) +26.1%
    Net income Group Share 2,638 2,028 +30.1%   4,803 4,412 +8.9%
    Cost/Income ratio (%) 59.9% 59.8% +0.0 pp   59.8% 59.2% +0.5 pp

    Regional banks

    Gross customer capture stands at +285,000 new customers. The percentage of customers using their current accounts as their main account is increasing and the share of customers using digital tools remains at a high level. Credit market share (total credits) stood at 22.6% (at the end of March 2025, source: Banque de France), stable compared to March 2024. Loan production is up +18.8% compared to the second quarter of 2024, linked to the confirmed upturn in housing loans, up +28.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024 and +10% compared to the first quarter of 2025, and also driven by specialised markets up +13.4% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The average lending production rate for home loans stood at 3.02% (9), -16 basis points lower than in the first quarter of 2025. By contrast, the global loan stock rate improved compared to the second quarter of 2024 (+7 basis points). Outstanding loans totalled €652 billion at the end of June 2025, up by +1.2% year-on-year across all markets and up slightly by +0.5% over the quarter. Customer assets were up +2.8% year-on-year to reach €923.3 billion at the end of June 2025. This growth was driven both by on-balance sheet deposits, which reached €606.1 billion (+0.8% year-on-year), and off-balance sheet deposits, which reached €317.2 billion (+7.1% year-on-year) benefiting from strong inflows in life insurance. Over the quarter, demand deposits drove customer assets with an increase of +2.0% compared to the first quarter of 2025, while term deposits decreased by -0.4%. The market share of on-balance sheet deposits is up compared to last year and stands at 20.2% (Source Banque de France, data at the end of March 2025, i.e. +0.1 percentage points compared to March 2024). The equipment rate for property and casualty insurance (10) was 44.2% at the end of June 2025 and is continuing to rise (up +0.7 percentage points compared to the end of June 2024). In terms of payment instruments, the number of cards rose by +1.5% year-on-year, as did the percentage of premium cards in the stock, which increased by 2.2 percentage points year-on-year to account for 17.8% of total cards.

    In the second quarter of 2025, the Regional Banks’ consolidated revenues including the SAS Rue La Boétie dividend stood at €5,528 million, up +4.2% compared to the second quarter of 2024, including the reversal of Home Purchase Saving Plans provisions in the second quarter of 2025 for €16.3 million and in the second quarter of 2024 for +€22 million (11). Excluding this item, revenues were up +4.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024, fuelled by the increase in fee and commission income (+1.9%), driven by insurance, account management and payment instruments, and by portfolio revenues (+9.2%) benefiting from the increase in dividends traditionally paid in the second quarter of each year. In addition, the intermediation margin was slightly down over one year (-2.5%) but remained stable compared to the first quarter of 2025. Operating expenses were up +5.1%, especially relating to IT expenditure. Gross operating income was up year-on-year (+3.4%). The cost of risk was down -13.3% compared with the second quarter of 2024 to -€397 million. The cost of risk/outstandings (over four rolling quarters) was stable compared to the first quarter of 2025, at a controlled level of 21 basis points. Thus, the net pre-tax income was up +7.3% and stood at €2,482 million. The consolidated net income of the Regional Banks stood at €2,375 million, up +5.0% compared with the second quarter of 2024. Lastly, the Regional Banks’ contribution to net income Group share was €182 million in the second quarter of 2025, down -12.7% compared to the second quarter of 2024.

    In the first half 2025, revenues including the dividend from SAS Rue La Boétie were up (+3.1%) compared to the first half of 2024. Operating expenses rose by +3.4%, and gross operating income consequently grew by +2.6% over the first half. Finally, with a cost of risk up slightly by +1.4%, the Regional banks’ net income Group share, including the SAS Rue La Boétie dividend, amounted to €2,721 million, up +0.7% compared to the first half of 2024. Finally, the Regional Banks’ contribution to the results of Crédit Agricole Group in first half 2025 amounted to €523 million (-19.6%) with revenues of €6,716 million (+2.2%) and a cost of risk of -€717 million (+3.7%).

    Crédit Agricole S.A.

    Results

    Crédit Agricole S.A.’s Board of Directors, chaired by Dominique Lefebvre, met on 30 July 2025 to examine the financial statements for the second quarter of 2025.

    In the second quarter of 2025, Crédit Agricole S.A.’s net income Group share amounted to €2,390 million, an increase of +30.7% from the second quarter of 2024. The results of the second quarter of 2025 are based on high revenues, a cost/income ratio maintained at a low level and a controlled cost of risk. They were also favourably impacted by the change in corporate income tax, and the capital gain related to the deconsolidation of Amundi US.

    Revenues are at a high level and increasing. Revenues totalled €7,006 million, up +3.1% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The growth in the Asset Gathering division (+1.3%) is related to strong activity in Insurance, the impact of volatility and risk aversion of customers for Amundi, the deconsolidation of Amundi US (-€89 million) and the integration of Degroof Petercam (+€96 million). Revenues for Large Customers are stable and stood at a high level both for Crédit Agricole CIB and CACEIS. Specialised Financial Services division revenues (-1.0%) were impacted by a positive price effect in the Personal Finance and Mobility business line and by a cyclical drop in margins on factoring. Revenues for Retail Banking in France (-0.3%) were impacted by an unfavourable base effect on the interest margin, offset by good momentum in fee and commission income. Finally, international retail banking revenues (-1.9%) were mainly impacted by the reduction in the intermediation margin in Italy, partially offset by good momentum in fee and commission income over all the entities of the scope. Corporate Centre revenues were up +€214 million, positively impacted by Banco BPM (+€109 million, mainly related to the increase in dividends received).

    Operating expenses totalled -€3,700 million in the second quarter of 2025, an increase of +2.2% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The -€80 million increase in expenses between the second quarter of 2024 and the second quarter of 2025 was mainly due to -€25 million in scope effect and integration costs, (especially including -€51 million related to the deconsolidation of Amundi US, +€89 million related to the integration of Degroof Petercam and -€20 million related to the reduction in ISB integration costs into CACEIS) and +€58 million due to a positive base effect related to the contribution on the DGS (deposit guarantee fund in Italy).

    The cost/income ratio thus stood at 52.8% in the second quarter of 2025, an improvement of -0.5 percentage point compared to second quarter 2024. Gross operating income in the second quarter of 2025 stood at €3,306 million, an increase of +4.1% compared to the second quarter of 2024.

    As at 30 June 2025, risk indicators confirm the high quality of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s assets and risk coverage level. The Non Performing Loans ratio showed little change from the previous quarter and remained low at 2.3%. The coverage ratio (12) was high at 72.2%, down -2.8 percentage points over the quarter. Loan loss reserves amounted to €9.4 billion for Crédit Agricole S.A., relatively unchanged from the end of March 2025. Of these loan loss reserves, 35.3% were for provisioning for performing loans.

    The cost of risk was a net charge of -€441 million, up +4.2% compared to the second quarter of 2024, and came mainly from a provision for non-performing loans (level 3) of -€524 million (compared to a provision of -€491 million in the second quarter of 2024). Net provisioning on performing loans (stages 1 and 2) is a reversal of +€91 million, compared to a reversal of +€31 million in the second quarter of 2024, and includes reversals for model effects and the migration to default of some loans, which offset the prudential additions to provisions for updating macroeconomic scenarios. Also noteworthy is an addition to provisions of -€8 million for other items (legal provisions) versus a reversal of +€37 million in the second quarter of 2024. By business line, 53% of the net addition for the quarter came from Specialised Financial Services (50% at end-June 2024), 21% from LCL (22% at end-June 2024), 14% from International Retail Banking (17% at end-June 2024), 4% from Large Customers (9% at end-June 2024) and 5% from the Corporate Centre (1% at end-June 2024). The provisioning levels were determined by taking into account several weighted economic scenarios and by applying some flat-rate adjustments on sensitive portfolios. The weighted economic scenarios for the second quarter were updated, with a central scenario (French GDP at +0.8% in 2025, +1.4% in 2026) an unfavourable scenario (French GDP at +0.0% in 2025 and +0.6% in 2026) and an adverse scenario (French GDP at -1.9% in 2025 and -1.4% in 2026). In the second quarter of 2025, the cost of risk/outstandings remained stable at 34 basis points over a rolling four quarter period (13) and 32 basis points on an annualised quarterly basis (14).

    The contribution of equity-accounted entities stood at €30 million in second quarter 2025, down -€17 million compared to second quarter 2024, or -35.1%. This drop is related to the impairment of goodwill of a stake in CAL&F and non-recurring items especially the drop in remarketing revenues at CAPFM, offset by the impact of the first consolidation of Victory Capital (+€20 million). The net income on other assets was €455 million in the second quarter of 2025 and includes the capital gain related to the deconsolidation of Amundi US of €453 million. Pre-tax income, discontinued operations and non-controlling interests therefore increased by +19% to €3,350 million.

    The tax charge was -€541 million, versus -€704 million for the second quarter 2024. This quarter’s tax includes positive elements, especially the non-taxation of the capital gain linked to the deconsolidation of Amundi US. The tax charge for the quarter remains estimated and will be reassessed by the end of the year.

    Net income before non-controlling interests was up +33.1% to €2,809 million. Non-controlling interests stood at -€420 million in the second quarter of 2025, up +48.7%, a share of the capital gain on the deconsolidation of Amundi US being reversed to non-controlling interests.

    Stated net income Group share in the first half of 2024 amounted to €4,213 million, compared with €3,731 million in the first half of 2024, an increase of +12.9%.

    Revenues increased +4.9% compared to the first half of 2024, driven by the performance of the Asset Gathering, Large Customers, and Specialised Financial Services business lines and the Corporate Centre. Operating expenses were up +5.5% compared to the first half of 2024, especially in connection with supporting the development of business lines and the integration of scope effects. The cost/income ratio for the first half of the year was 53.9%, an improvement of 0.3 percentage points compared to first half 2024. Gross operating income totalled €6,571 million, up +4.1% compared to first half 2024. The cost of risk increased by +3.8% over the period, to -€-855 million, versus -€824 million for first half 2024.

    The contribution of equity-accounted entities stood at €77 million in first half 2025, down -€13 million compared to first half 2024, or -14.1%. Net income from other assets was €456 million in the first half of 2025. Pre-tax income, discontinued operations and non-controlling interests therefore increased by +11.9% to €6,250 million. The tax charge was -€1,368 million, versus -€1,315 million for first half 2024. This includes the exceptional corporate income tax of -€152 million, corresponding to an estimation of -€200 million in 2025 (assuming 2025 fiscal result being equal to 2024 fiscal result). Net income before non-controlling interests was up +14.3% to €4,882 million. Non-controlling interests stood at -€669 million in first half 2025, up +23.5% compared to first half 2024.

    Earnings per share stood at €0.74 per share in the second quarter 2025, versus €0.58 in the second quarter 2024.

    RoTE (15), which is calculated on the basis of an annualised net income Group share (16) and IFRIC charges, additional corporate tax charge and the capital gain on deconsolidation of Amundi US linearised over the year, net of annualised Additional Tier 1 coupons (return on equity Group share excluding intangibles) and net of foreign exchange impact on reimbursed AT1, and restated for certain volatile items recognised in equity (including unrealised gains and/or losses), reached 16.7% in the first half of 2024, up +1.3 percentage points compared to the first half of 2024.

    Crédit Agricole S.A. – Income statement, Q2 and H1-25

    En m€ Q2-25 Q2-24 ∆ Q2/Q2   H1-25 H1-24 ∆ H1/H1
    Revenues 7,006 6,796 +3.1%   14,263 13,602 +4.9%
    Operating expenses (3,700) (3,621) +2.2%   (7,691) (7,289) +5.5%
    Gross operating income 3,306 3,175 +4.1%   6,571 6,312 +4.1%
    Cost of risk (441) (424) +4.2%   (855) (824) +3.8%
    Equity-accounted entities 30 47 (35.2%)   77 90 (14.1%)
    Net income on other assets 455 15 x 29.4   456 9 x 50.7
    Change in value of goodwill – – n.m.   – – n.m.
    Income before tax 3,350 2,814 +19.0%   6,250 5,587 +11.9%
    Tax (541) (704) (23.2%)   (1,368) (1,315) +4.0%
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale ope. 0 – n.m.   0 – n.m.
    Net income 2,809 2,110 +33.1%   4,882 4,273 +14.3%
    Non-controlling interests (420) (282) +48.7%   (669) (542) +23.5%
    Net income Group Share 2,390 1,828 +30.7%   4,213 3,731 +12.9%
    Earnings per share (€) 0.74 0.58 +29.1%   1.30 1.08 +20.3%
    Cost/Income ratio (%) 52.8% 53.3% -0.5 pp   53.9% 53.6% +0.3 pp

    Analysis of the activity and the results of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s divisions and business lines

    Activity of the Asset Gathering division

    At end-June 2025, the assets under management of the Asset Gathering (AG) division stood at €2,905 billion, up +€27 billion over the quarter (i.e. +1%), mainly due to positive net inflows in asset management, and insurance, and a positive market and foreign exchange effect over the period. Over the year, assets under management rose by +5.2%.

    Insurance activity (Crédit Agricole Assurances) was very strong, with total revenues at a high level of €12.7 billion, up +17.9% compared to second quarter 2024.

    In Savings/Retirement, second quarter 2025 revenues reached €9.9 billion, up +22.3% compared to second quarter 2024, in a buoyant environment, especially in France. Unit-linked rate in gross inflows(17) is stable year-on-year at 32.0%. The net inflows reached a record +€4.2 billion (+€2.7 billion compared to the second quarter of 2024), comprised of +€2.4 billion net inflows from euro funds and +€1.8 billion from unit-linked contracts.

    Assets under management (savings, retirement and funeral insurance) continued to grow and came to €359.4 billion (up +€21.5 billion year-on-year, or +6.4%). The growth in outstandings was driven by the very high level of quarterly net inflows and favourable market effects. Unit-linked contracts accounted for 30.2% of outstandings, up +0.6 percentage points compared to the end of June 2024.

    In property and casualty insurance, premium income stood at €1.4 billion in the second quarter of 2025, up +9.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Growth stemmed from a price effect, with the increase in the average premium benefiting from revised rates induced by climate change and inflation in repair costs as well as changes in the product mix, and a volume effect, with a portfolio of over €16.9 million (18) policies at the end of June 2025 (or +2.8% over the year). Lastly, the combined ratio at the end of June 2025 stood at 94.7% (19), stable year-on-year and an improvement of +1.4 percentage points compared to the last quarter.

    In death & disability/creditor insurance/group insurance, premium income for the second quarter of 2025 stood at €1.4 billion, down slightly by -0.6% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Individual death & disability showed growth of +7.1% related to the increase in the average amount of guarantees. Creditor insurance showed a drop in activity of -4.3% over the period, especially related to international consumer finance. Group insurance was slightly up at +2.2%.

    In Asset Management (Amundi), assets under management by Amundi increased by +0.9% and +5.2% respectively over the quarter and the year, reaching a new record of €2,267 billion at the end of June 2025. They take into account the first integration of Victory Capital over the quarter with a scope effect of -€9.7 billion (effect of the deconsolidation of Amundi US for -€70 billion and the integration of Victory for +€60 billion). US business assets amount to €94 billion at end-June 2025, including €36 billion of assets distributed by Amundi to non-US customers (fully integrated) and €58 billion of assets distributed by Victory to US customers (26% share). In addition to the scope effect, assets benefited from a high level of inflows over the quarter (+€20.5 billion) a positive market effect of +€57 billion, and a strong negative exchange rate impact of -€48 billion related to the drop in the US dollar and Indian rupee. Net inflows are balanced between medium/long term assets (+€11 billion) and JVs (+€10 billion). The Institutionals segment also recorded net inflows of +€8.7 billion over the quarter, driven by strong seasonal activity in employee savings (+€4 billion in MLT assets). The JV segment showed net inflows of €10.3 billion over the period, with an upturn of inflows in India and a confirmed recovery in China. Finally, the retail segment showed net inflows of €1.4 billion over the quarter.

    In Wealth management, total assets under management (CA Indosuez Wealth Management and LCL Private Banking) amounted to €279 billion at the end of June 2025, and were up +3.7% compared to June 2024 and stable compared to March 2025.

    For Indosuez Wealth Management assets under management at the end of June stood at €214 billion (20), up +0.4% compared to the end of March 2025, with slightly negative net inflows of -€0.1 billion. Production is supported by structured products and mandates, partially offsetting the outflow especially linked to liquidity events of large customers. The market and foreign exchange impact of the quarter is positive at €1 billion. Compared to end-June 2024, assets are up by +€9 billion, or +4.5%. Also noteworthy is the announcement of the Banque Thaler acquisition project in Switzerland on 4 April 2025 and that of the plan to acquire the Wealth Management customers of BNP Paribas Group in Monaco on 23 June 2025.

    Results of the Asset Gathering division

    In the second quarter of 2025, Asset Gathering generated €1,970 million of revenues, up +1.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Expenses increased +6.2% to -€864 million and gross operating income came to €1,106 million, -2.2% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The cost/income ratio for the second quarter of 2025 stood at 43.8%, up +2.0 percentage points compared to the same period in 2024. Equity-accounted entities showed a contribution of €58 million, up +77.4%, especially in relation to the first integration of the contribution of Victory Capital of 26% over this quarter in the Asset Management division for €20 million. The net income on other assets is impacted by the recognition of a capital gain of €453 million also related to the partnership with Victory Capital. Consequently, pre-tax income was up by +40.1% and stood at €1,610 million in the second quarter of 2025. The net income Group share showed an increase of +49.3% to €1,100 million.

    In the first semester of 2025, the Asset Gathering division generated revenues of €4,028 million, up +7.9% compared to first half 2024. Expenses increased by +14.8%. As a result, the cost/income ratio stood at 44.7%, up +2.7 percentage points compared to the first half of 2024. Gross operating income stood at €2,229 million, a increase of +2.9% compared to first half 2024. Equity-accounted entities showed a contribution of €86 million, up +39.4%, especially in relation to the first integration of the contribution of Victory Capital of 26% over the second quarter of 2025 in the Asset Management division. The net income on other assets is impacted by the recognition of a capital gain of €453 million also related to the partnership with Victory Capital in second quarter 2025. Taxes stood at €601 million, a +19.8% increase. Net income Group share of the Asset Gathering division includes the additional corporate tax charge in France and amounted to €1,780 million, up +22.5% compared to the first half of 2024. The increase affected all the business lines of the division, (+66.1% for Asset Management, +0.8% for Insurance and +92.3% for Wealth Management).

    In the second quarter of 2025, the Asset Gathering division contributed by 41% to the net income Group share of the Crédit Agricole S.A. core businesses and 28% to revenues (excluding the Corporate Centre division).

    As at 30 June 2025, equity allocated to the division amounted to €13.2 billion, including €10.6 billion for Insurance, €1.9 billion for Asset Management, and €0.7 billion for Wealth Management. The division’s risk weighted assets amounted to €51.4 billion, including €24.0 billion for Insurance, €19.7 billion for Asset Management and €7.7 billion for Wealth Management.

    Insurance results

    In the second quarter of 2025, insurance revenues amounted to €790 million, up +2.1% compared to the second quarter of 2024. They are supported by Savings/Retirement in relation to the growth in activity and a positive financial result over the period, Property & Casualty which benefits from a good level of activity and financial results, and by the performance of Death & Disability, which offsets a tightening of technical margins in creditor. Revenues for the quarter included €587 million from savings/retirement and funeral insurance (21), €89 million from personal protection (22) and €114 million from property and casualty insurance (23).

    The Contractual Service Margin (CSM) totalled €26.8 billion at the end of June 2025, an increase of +6.3% compared to the end of December 2024. It benefited from a contribution of new business greater than the CSM allocation and a positive market effect. The annualised CSM allocation factor was 8.0% at end-June 2025.

    Non-attributable expenses for the quarter stood at -€87 million, down -0.9% over the second quarter of 2024. As a result, gross operating income reached €703 million, up +2.5% compared to the same period in 2024. The net pre-tax income was up +2.2% and stood at €703 million. The tax charge totalled €143 million, down -19.9% during the period. Net income Group share stood at €557 million, up +12.6% compared to the second quarter of 2024.

    Revenues from insurance in the first half of 2025 came to €1,517 million, up +1.5% compared to the first half of 2024. Gross operating income stood at €1,335 million, up +1.4% compared to the first half of 2024. Non-attributable expenses came to €182 million, i.e. an increase of +2.0%. The cost/income ratio is thus 12.0%, below the target ceiling set by the Medium-Term Plan of 15%. The net income Group share includes the additional corporate tax charge in France and reached €997 million, up +0.8% compared to first half 2024.

    Insurance contributed 23% to the net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s business lines (excluding the Corporate Centre division) at end-June 2025 and 10% to their revenues (excluding the Corporate Centre division).

    Asset Management results

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues amounted to €771 million, showing a fall of -10.8% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The deconsolidation of Amundi US (previously fully consolidated) and the integration of Victory Capital (at 26% on the equity-accounted entities line) took effect this quarter. As a result, restated for this scope effect,(24), revenues were stable (-0.6%) compared with the second half of 2024. Net management fee and commission income was up +1.0% (25) compared with second quarter 2024. Amundi Technology’s revenues recorded a significant increase and rose +50% over the second quarter of 2024, thanks to the integration of Aixigo (the European leader in Wealth Tech, the acquisition of which was finalised in November 2024) which amplified the continued strong organic growth. Performance fee income fell -29%25 from the second quarter of 2024 due to market volatility and financial revenues fell in connection with the drop in rates. Operating expenses amounted to -€429 million, a decline of -8.8% from the second quarter of 2024. Excluding the scope effect related to the Victory Capital partnership24, they were up +2.2% over the period. The cost/income ratio was up at 55.7% (+1.2 percentage points compared to second quarter 2024). Gross operating income stood at €341 million, down -13.2% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The contribution of the equity-accounted entities, carrying the contribution of Amundi’s Asian joint ventures as well as the new contribution of Victory Capital starting this quarter, was €58 million (+€20 million of which for Victory Capital, whose contribution is recognised with an offset of one quarter, so excluding the synergies already realised in the second quarter of 2025; the contribution of the joint ventures rose sharply to +16.6%, particularly in India), an increase of +77.4% over the second quarter of 2024. Net income on other assets was impacted by the recognition of a non-monetary capital gain of €453 million, also related to the partnership with Victory Capital, over the second quarter of 2025. Consequently, pre-tax income came to €850 million, double the second quarter of 2024. Non-controlling interests were impacted by the partnership with Victory Capital and amounted to €249 million over the quarter. Net income Group share amounted to €506 million, up sharply (x2.3) compared to the second quarter of 2024, taking account of the impact of the partnership with Victory Capital.

    Over the first half of 2025, revenues remained stable at €1,663 million (-0.3%). Excluding the scope effect related to the partnership with Victory Capital in the second quarter of 2025, it would represent an increase of +5.3% over the period. Operating expenses posted a slight increase of +0.7%. Excluding the scope effect related to the partnership with Victory Capital, they would increase +5.3% over the period. The cost/income ratio was 55.7%, an increase of +0.5 percentage points compared to first half 2024. This resulted in a -1.5% decline in gross operating income from the first half of 2024. The income of the equity-accounted entities rose +39.4%, primarily reflecting the first integration of the Victory Capital contribution over second quarter 2025. Net income on other assets was impacted by the recognition of a non-monetary capital gain of €453 million also related to the partnership with Victory Capital over the second quarter of 2025. In total, net income Group share for the half includes the additional corporate tax charge in France and stood at €689 million, an increase of +66.1%.

    Asset management contributed 16% to the underlying net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s core businesses (excluding the Corporate Centre division) at end June 2025 and by 12% to their underlying revenues.

    At 30 June 2025, equity allocated to the Asset Management business line amounted to €1.9 billion, while risk weighted assets totalled €19.7 billion.

    Wealth Management results (26)

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues from wealth management amounted to €409 million, up +33.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024, benefiting from the impact of the integration of Degroof Petercam in June 2024. Excluding this effect, (27) revenues were sustained by the positive momentum of transactional income and the good resilience of the net interest margin, despite falling rates. Expenses for the quarter amounted to -€348 million, up +36.4% compared to the second quarter of 2024, impacted by a Degroof Petercam scope effect27 and -€22.5 million in integration costs in the second quarter of 2025 (28). Excluding these impacts, expenses rose slightly at +1.7% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The cost/income ratio for the second quarter of 2025 stood at 85%, up +1.9 percentage points compared to the same period in 2024. Excluding integration costs, it amounted to 79.5%. Gross operating income reached €61 million, an increase of (+18.3%) compared to the second quarter of 2024. Cost of risk remained moderate at -€5 million. Net income Group share amounted to €36 million, up +52.7% compared to the second quarter of 2024.

    In the first half of 2025, wealth management revenues rose by +48.6% over the first half of 2024, notably benefiting from the integration of Degroof Petercam(29) in June 2024 to reach €848 million. Expenses rose by +47.5% due to the impact of the integration of Degroof Petercam29 in June 2024 and integration costs. Gross operating income was therefore up +54.0% at €156 million. Net income on other assets was nil in the first half of 2025 compared with -€20 million in the first half of 2024, corresponding to Degroof Petercam acquisition costs. Net income Group share was €94 million over the first half, up +92.3% from first half 2024. The additional net income Group share target of +€150 million to +€200 million in 2028 following the integration of Degroof Petercam is confirmed and the rate of progression in synergies realised was approximately 25%.

    Wealth Management contributed 2% to the net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s business lines (excluding the Corporate Centre division) at end-June 2025 and 6% of their revenues (excluding the Corporate Centre division).

    At 30 June 2025, equity allocated to Wealth Management was €0.7 billion and risk weighted assets totalled €7.7 billion.

    Activity of the Large Customers division

    The large customers division posted good activity in the second quarter of 2025, thanks to good performance from Corporate and Investment banking (CIB) and strong activity in asset servicing.

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues from Corporate and Investment Banking were stable at €1,705 million, which is -0.1% compared to second quarter 2024 (+5% excluding FVA/DVA volatile elements and foreign exchange impact). Capital Markets and Investment Banking activity was down -2.7% from second quarter 2024 (+3% excluding non-recurring items and foreign exchange impact), but remained at a high level at €860 million, supported in part by a new progression in revenues from Capital Market activities (+2.8% over second quarter 2024, +10% excluding FVA/DVA volatile items and foreign exchange impact) particularly on the trading and primary credit activities that partially offset the decline in structured equity revenues. Revenues from financing activities rose to €845 million, an increase of +2.8% compared to the second quarter of 2024 (+7% excluding non-recurring items and foreign exchange impact). This mainly reflects the performance of structured financing, where revenues rose +6.8% compared to the second quarter of 2024, primarily explained by the dynamism of the renewable energy sector (increase in production on wind and solar projects). Commercial Banking was up +0.7% versus second quarter 2024, driven by the activities of Corporate & Leveraged Finance, boosted by the acquisition financing sector.

    Financing activities consolidated its leading position in syndicated loans (#1 in France (30) and #2 in EMEA30). Crédit Agricole CIB reaffirmed its strong position in bond issues (#2 All bonds in EUR Worldwide30) and was ranked #1 in Green, Social & Sustainable bonds in EUR (31). Average regulatory VaR stood at €11.1 million in the second quarter of 2025, up from €10.5 million in the first quarter of 2025, reflecting changes in positions and financial markets. It remained at a level that reflected prudent risk management.

    For Asset Servicing, business growth was supported by strong commercial activity and favourable market effects.

    Assets under custody rose by +1.1% at the end of June 2025 compared to the end of March 2025 and increased by +11.3% compared to the end of June 2024, to reach €5,526 billion. Assets under administration fell by
    -3.0% over the quarter because of a planned customer withdrawal, and were up +1.2% year-on-year, totalling €3,468 billion at end-June 2025.

    On 4 July 2025, Crédit Agricole S.A. announced the finalisation of the buyback of the 30.5% interest held by Santander in CACEIS.

    Results of the Large Customers division

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues of the Large Customers division once again reached a record level at €2,224 million (stable from second quarter 2024), buoyed by an excellent performance in the Corporate and Investment Banking and Asset Servicing business lines.

    Operating expenses increased by +4.4% due to IT investments and business line development. As a result, the division’s gross operating income was down -5.1% from the second quarter of 2024, standing at €967 million. The division recorded a limited addition for provision of the cost of risk of -€20 million integrating the update of economic scenarios and benefiting from favourable model effects, to be compared with an addition of -€39 million in the second quarter of 2024. Pre-tax income amounted to €958 million, down -3.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The tax charge amounted to -€149 million in second quarter 2025. Finally, net income Group share totalled €752 million in the second quarter of 2025, an increase of +8.3% over the second quarter of 2024.

    In first half 2025, the revenues of the Large Customers business line amounted to a historic high of €4,632 million (+3.2% compared to first half 2024). Operating expenses rose +4.6% compared to first half 2024 to €2,617 million, largely related to staff costs and IT investments. Gross operating income for first half of 2025 therefore totalled €2,015 million, up +1.4% from first half 2024. The cost of risk ended the first half of 2025 with a net provision to provisions of -€5 million, which was stable compared with the first half of 2024. The business line’s contribution to underlying net income Group share was at €1,475 million, up +4.1% compared to first half 2024.

    The business line contributed 34% to the net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s core businesses (excluding the Corporate Centre division) at end-June 2025 and 32% to revenues excluding the Corporate Centre.

    At 30 June 2025, the equity allocated to the division was €12.8 billion and its risk weighted assets were €134.7 billion.

    Corporate and Investment Banking results

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues from Corporate and Investment Banking posted a strong performance at €1,705 million (stable in relation to second quarter 2024, +5% excluding FVA/DVA volatile items and foreign exchange impact).

    Operating expenses rose by +6.7% to -€895 million, mainly due to IT investments and the development of business line activities. Gross operating income declined -6.6% compared to second quarter 2024 and recorded a high level of +€810 million. Cost/income ratio was 52.5%, an improvement of +3.3 percentage points for the period. Cost of risk recorded a limited net provision of -€19 million integrating the update of economic scenarios and benefiting from positive model effects. Pre-tax income in second quarter 2025 stands at €793 million, down -5.7% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Lastly, stated net income Group share was up +6.7% to €659 million in the second quarter of 2025.

    In first half 2025, stated revenues rose by +3.7% compared to first half 2024, to €3,591 million, the highest historical half-year level ever. Operating expenses rose +7.1%, mainly due to variable compensation and IT investments to support the development of the business lines. As a result, gross operating income was €1,704 million and stable compared to first half 2024. The cost of risk recorded a net reversal of +€4 million in the first half of 2025, compared to a reversal of +€7 million in the first half of 2024. The income tax charge stood at -€376 million, down -9.3%. Lastly, stated net income Group share for first half 2025 stood at €1,307 million, an increase of +3.0% over the period.

    Risk weighted assets at end-June 2025 were down -€6.6 billion compared to end-March 2025, to €123.6 billion, mainly explained by model effects.

    Asset servicing results

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues for Asset Servicing remained stable compared to second quarter 2024 at €519 million, as the solid performance of the net interest margin was offset by a drop in fee and commission income (notably on foreign exchange). Operating expenses were down by -1.1% to -€361 million, due to the decrease in ISB integration costs compared to the second quarter of 2024 (32). Apart from this effect, expenses were up slightly pending the acceleration of synergies. As a result, gross operating income was up by +3.8% to €158 million in the second quarter of 2025. The cost/income ratio for the second quarter of 2025 stood at 69.6%, down -1.0 percentage points compared to the same period in 2024. Consequently, pre-tax income was up by +8.8% and stood at €165 million in the second quarter of 2025. Net income Group share rose +21.1% compared to second quarter 2024.

    Stated revenues for first half 2025 were up +1.5% compared with first half 2024, buoyed by the strong commercial momentum and a favourable trend in the interest margin over the period. Expenses declined -1.3% and included -€13.7 million in integration costs related to the acquisition of ISB’s activities (versus -€44.3 million in integration costs in the first half of 2024). Gross operating income rose +8.8% increase compared to first half 2024.
    The cost/income ratio stood at 70.1%, down 2.0 points compared to the second half of 2024. The additional net income target (33)of +€100 million in 2026 following the integration of ISB is confirmed and the rate of progression in synergies realised is approximately 60%.

    Finally, the contribution of the business line to net income Group share in the first half of 2025 was €168 million, representing a +13.9% increase compared to the first half of 2024.

    Specialised financial services activity

    Crédit Agricole Personal Finance & Mobility’s (CAPFM) commercial production totalled €12.4 billion in second quarter 2025, an increase of +2.4% from second quarter 2024, and an increase of +12.4% compared to first quarter 2025. This increase was carried by traditional consumer finance, while the automobile activity remained stable in a still complex market in Europe and China. The share of automotive financing (34) in quarterly new business production stood at 49.6%. The average customer rate for production was down slightly by -9 basis points from the first quarter of 2025. CAPFM assets under management stood at €121.0 billion at end-June 2025, up +4.5% from end-June 2024, over all scopes (Automotive +6.6% (35), LCL and Regional Banks +4.2%, Other Entities +2.5%), benefiting from the expansion of the management portfolio with the Regional Banks and the promising development of car rental with Leasys and Drivalia. Lastly, consolidated outstandings totalled €68.0 billion at end-June 2025, down -0.9% from end-June 2024.

    The commercial production of Crédit Agricole Leasing & Factoring (CAL&F) was down -19.4% from second quarter 2024 in leasing, primarily in France in an unfavourable market context (36). In International, production was up, particularly in Poland. Leasing outstandings rose +5.0% year-on-year, both in France (+4.1%) and internationally (+8.6%), to reach €20.8 billion at end-June 2025 (of which €16.4 billion in France and €4.5 billion internationally). Commercial production in factoring was up +26.6% versus second quarter 2024, carried by France, which rose +83.8%, which benefited from the signing of a significant contract; international fell by -27.0%, mainly in Germany. Factoring outstandings at end-June 2025 were up +3.7% compared to end-June 2024, and factored revenues were up by +5.0% compared to the same period in 2024.

    Specialised financial services’ results

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues of the Specialised Financial Services division were €881 million, down -1.0% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Expenses stood at -€438 million, down -1.0% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The cost/income ratio stood at 49.8%, stable compared to the same period in 2024. Gross operating income thus stood at €442 million, down -1.0% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Cost of risk amounted to -€235 million, up +11.7% compared to the second quarter of 2024. Income for the equity-accounted entities amounted to -€13 million, a significant decline from second quarter 2024 which was €29 million, mainly linked to the drop in remarketing revenues for CAPFM as well as a depreciation of goodwill for CAL&F. Pre-tax income for the division amounted to €194 million, down -26.7% compared to the same period in 2024. Net income Group share amounted to €114 million, down -38.9% compared to the same period in 2024.

    In the first half of 2025, revenues for the Specialised Financial Services division were €1,749 million, which was up +0.8% from first half 2024. Operating expenses were up +1.7% from first half 2024 at -€912 million. Gross operating income amounted to €837 million, stable (-0.2%) in relation to first half 2024. The cost/income ratio stood at 52.1%, up +0.5 percentage points compared to the same period in 2024. The cost of risk increased by +12.8% compared to the first quarter of 2024 to -€484 million. The contribution of the equity-accounted entities dropped -62.2% from the same period in 2024, mainly linked to the decline in remarketing revenues CAPFM and a depreciation of goodwill for CAL&F (in the second quarter of 2025). Net income Group share includes the corporate tax additional charge in France and amounted to €263 million, down -20.3% compared to the same period in 2024.

    The business line contributed 6% to the net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s core businesses (excluding the Corporate Centre division) at end-June 2025 and 12% to revenues excluding the Corporate Centre.

    At 30 June 2025, the equity allocated to the division was €7.7 billion and its risk weighted assets were €80.7 billion.

    Personal Finance and Mobility results

    In the second quarter of 2025, CAPFM revenues totalled €697 million, up +0.3% from the second quarter of 2024, with a positive price effect benefiting from the improvement in the production margin rate, which rose +35 basis points compared to second quarter 2024 (and which was down -7 basis points from first quarter 2025), partially absorbed by the increase in subordinated debt (37). Expenses totalled -€339 million, a drop of -1.1% and the jaws effect was positive over the quarter at +1.3 percentage points. Gross operating income thus stood at €358 million, an increase of +1.5% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The cost/income ratio stood at 48.7%, up -0.6 percentage points compared to the same period in 2024. The cost of risk stood at -€228 million, up +19.6% from the second quarter of 2024. The cost of risk/outstandings thus stood at 135 basis points(38), a slight deterioration of +5 basis points compared to the first quarter of 2025, especially in international activities. The Non Performing Loans ratio was 4.6% at end-June 2025, slightly up by +0.1 percentage points compared to end-March 2025, while the coverage ratio reached 73.2%, down -0.2 percentage points compared to end-March 2025. The contribution from the equity-accounted entities fell by -71.4% compared to the same period in 2024, related mainly to the drop in remarketing revenues. Pre-tax income amounted to €140 million, down -27.1% compared to the same period in 2024. Net income Group share amounted to €81 million, down -38.4% compared to the previous year.

    In the first half of 2025, CAPFM revenues reached €1,380 million, i.e. +1.1% over the first half of 2024, benefiting from volume and positive price effects partially offset by the increase in subordinated debt37. The expenses came to -€709 million, up +1.7% compared to the first half of 2024, related primarily to employee expenses and IT expenses. Gross operating income stood at €671 million, up +0.6%. The cost/income ratio stood at 51.4%, up +0.3 percentage points compared to the same period in 2024. The cost of risk rose by +16.3% over the first half of 2024 to -€453 million, notably related to a slight degradation on the international subsidiaries. The contribution from equity-accounted entities fell by -25.9% compared to the same period in 2024, primarily due to the decline in remarketing revenues. Therefore, net income Group share, which includes the additional corporate tax charge in France, amounted to €188 million, down -18.7% from the first half of 2024.

    Leasing & Factoring results

    In the second quarter of 2025, CAL&F revenues totalled €183 million, down -5.4% from second quarter 2024 due to the decline in factoring margins (related to the rate decrease). Revenues were up in leasing. Operating expenses stood at -€99 million, down -0.8% over the quarter, and the cost/income ratio stood at 54.0%, an improvement of +2.6 percentage points compared to the second quarter of 2024. Gross operating income stood at €84 million, down -10.4% compared to the second quarter of 2024. The cost of risk includes a provision reversal on performing loans of +€20 million and thus amounted to -€7 million over the quarter, a drop of -63.9% from the same period in 2024. Cost of risk/outstandings stood at 21 basis points38, down -4 basis points compared to second quarter 2024. Income of the equity-accounted entities totalled -€22 million in second quarter 2025, a sharp decline from second quarter 2024 at -€2 million, due to a depreciation of goodwill. Pre-tax income amounted to €54 million, down -25.4% compared to the same period in 2024. Net income Group share includes the corporate tax additional charge in France and amounted to €33 million, down -40.2% compared to the previous year.

    In the first half of 2025, revenues were stable (-0.6%) from first half 2024 at €369 million with an increase on leasing absorbed by a decrease in factoring margins because of the decrease in rates. Operating expenses increased by +1.9% to -€203 million. Gross operating income was down -3.5% from the first half of 2024 to total €166 million. The cost/income ratio stood at 55.0%, up +1.3 percentage points compared to first half 2024. The cost of risk declined from the first half of 2024 (-21.8%) because of a provision reversal of +€20 million on performing loans in the second quarter of 2025. The contribution of the equity-accounted entities amounted to -€24 million in the first half of 2025, down sharply from the first half of 2024 at -€4 million due to a depreciation of goodwill in first half 2025. Finally, net income Group share includes the additional corporate tax charge in France and amounted to €75 million, down -24.1% from the first half of 2024.

    Crédit Agricole S.A. Retail Banking activity

    In Retail Banking at Crédit Agricole S.A. this quarter, loan production in France continued its upturn compared to the second quarter of 2024. It was down in Italy in a very competitive housing market. The number of customers with insurance is progressing.

    Retail banking activity in France

    In the second quarter of 2025, activity was steady, with an upturn in loan activity, especially real estate loans, compared with the second quarter of 2024, and an increase in inflows. Customer acquisition remained dynamic, with 68,000 new customers this quarter.

    The equipment rate for car, multi-risk home, health, legal, all mobile phones or personal accident insurance rose by +0.6 percentage points to stand at 28.4% at end-June 2025.

    Loan production totalled €6.8 billion, representing a year-on-year increase of +14%. Second quarter 2025 recorded an increase in the production of real estate loans (+24% over second quarter 2024). The average production rate for home loans came to 3.07%, down -11 basis points from the first quarter of 2025 and -77 basis points year on year. The home loan stock rate improved by +3 basis points over the quarter and by +18 basis points year on year. The strong momentum continued in the corporate market (+10% year on year) and the small business market (+15% year on year) and remains up in the consumer finance segment (+2%).

    Outstanding loans stood at €171.5 billion at end-June 2025, representing a quarter-on-quarter increase (+0.5%) and year-on-year (+2.0%, including +1.8% for home loans, +1.7% for loans to small businesses, and +3.4% for corporate loans). Customer assets totalled €256.0 billion at end-June 2025, up +1.7% year on year, driven by off-balance sheet funds and with a slight increase of on-balance sheet deposits. Over the quarter, customer assets remained stable at -0.2% in relation to end-March 2025, with an increase of demand deposits for +2.6% while term deposits dropped -8.5% over the quarter in an environment that remains uncertain. Off-balance sheet deposits benefited from a positive year-on-year market effect and on the quarter and positive net inflows in life insurance.

    Retail banking activity in Italy

    In the second quarter of 2025, CA Italia posted gross customer capture of 54,000.

    Loans outstanding at CA Italia at the end of June 2025 stood at €62.0 billion (39), up +1.6% compared with end-June 2024, in an Italian market up slightly (40), driven by the retail market, which posted an increase in outstandings of +2.8%. The loan stock rate declined by -96 basis points against the second quarter of 2024 and by -24 basis points from the first quarter of 2025. Loan production for the quarter was down -8.1% compared with a high second quarter 2024, in a very competitive home market in the second quarter of 2025. Loan production for the half rose by +1.3% compared with the first half of 2024.

    Customer assets at end-June 2025 totalled €120.5 billion, up +3.2% compared with end-June 2024; on-balance sheet deposits were relatively unchanged (+0.3%) from end-June 2024. Finally, off-balance sheet deposits increased by +6.9% over the same period and benefited from net flows and a positive market effect.

    CA Italia’s equipment rate in car, multi-risk home, health, legal, all mobile phones or personal accident insurance was 20.6%, up +0.9 percentage points over the second quarter of 2024.

    International Retail Banking activity excluding Italy

    For International Retail Banking excluding Italy, loan outstandings were €7.4 billion, up +5.2% at current exchange rates at end-June 2025 compared with end-June 2024 (+6.6% at constant exchange rates). Customer assets rose by +€11.7 billion and were up +6.4% over the same period at current exchange rates (+9.7% at constant exchange rates).

    In Poland in particular, loan outstandings increased by +5.2% compared to end-June 2024 (+3.6% at constant exchange rates) driven by the retail segment and on-balance sheet deposits of +8.2% (+6.6% at constant exchange rates). Loan production in Poland rose this quarter compared to the second quarter of 2024 (+7.9% at current exchange rates and +6.5% at constant exchange rates). In addition, gross customer capture in Poland reached 48,000 new customers this quarter.

    In Egypt, commercial activity was strong in all markets. Loans outstanding rose +6.8% between end-June 2025 and end-June 2024 (+20.9% at constant exchange rates). Over the same period, on-balance sheet deposits increased by +9.0%% and were up +23.3% at constant exchange rates.

    Liquidity is still very strong with a net surplus of deposits over loans in Poland and Egypt amounting to +€2.0 billion at 30 June 2025, and reached €3.5 billion including Ukraine.

    French retail banking results

    In the second quarter of 2025, LCL revenues amounted to €976 million, stable from the second quarter of 2024. The increase in fee and commission income (+3.1% over second quarter 2024) was driven by the strong momentum in insurance (life and non-life). NIM was down -3.4%, under the impact of an unfavourable base effect, but improved compared to the first quarter of 2025 (+7.8%), thanks to the progressive repricing of loans and the decrease in the cost of customer-related funds (which benefited from a positive change in the deposit mix) and of refinancing, offset by a lower contribution from macro-hedging.

    Expenses were up slightly by +1.0% and stood at -€597 million linked to ongoing investments. The cost/income ratio stood at 61.1%, an increase by 0.8 percentage points compared to second quarter 2024. Gross operating income fell by -2.4% to €380 million.

    The cost of risk was stable (-0.3% compared with second quarter 2024) and amounted to -€95 million (including an addition to provisions of -€104 million on proven risk and a reversal of +€10 million on healthy loans, incorporating the impact of the scenario update offset by the model update. The cost of risk/outstandings was stable at 20 basis points, with its level still high in the professional market. The coverage ratio still remains at a high level and was 60.9% at the end of June 2025. The Non Performing Loans ratio was 2.1% at the end of June 2025.

    Finally, pre-tax income stood at €286 million, down -3.4% compared to the second quarter of 2024, and net income Group share was down -5.7% from the second quarter of 2024.

    In the first half of 2025, LCL revenues were stable, up +0.3% compared to first half 2024 and totalled €1,939 million. The net interest margin was down (-2.6%), benefiting from gradual loan repricing and lower funding and refinancing costs, although the impact of macro-hedging remained positive, though less favourable, and there was an unfavourable base effect in the second quarter. Fee and commission income rose +3.4% compared to first half 2024, particularly on insurance. Expenses rose by +2.4% over the period and the cost/income ratio remained under control (+1.3 percentage points compared with first half 2024) at 63.0%. Gross operating income fell by -3.1% and the cost of risk improved by -12.9%. Lastly, the business line’s contribution to net income Group share includes the additional corporate tax charge in France and amounted to €337 million (-14.4% compared to the first half of 2024).

    In the end, the business line contributed 8% to the net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s core businesses (excluding the Corporate Centre division) in the second quarter of 2025 and 13% to revenues excluding the Corporate Centre division.

    At 30 June 2025, the equity allocated to the business line stood at €5.3 billion and risk weighted assets amounted to €55.7 billion.

    International Retail Banking results (41)

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues for International Retail Banking totalled €1,007 million, down compared with the second quarter of 2024 (-1.9% at current exchange rates, -1.3% at constant exchange rates). Operating expenses amounted to -€520 million, down -6.3% (-6.0% at constant exchange rates), and benefited from the end of the contribution to the DGS in 2025, which was recorded for -€58 million in the second quarter of 2024. Gross operating income consequently totalled €487 million, up +3.2% (+4.3% at constant exchange rates) for the period. Cost of risk amounted to -€61 million, down -15.5% compared to second quarter 2024 (-19.8% at constant exchange rates). All in all, net income Group share for CA Italia, CA Egypt, CA Poland and CA Ukraine amounted to €238 million in the second quarter of 2025, up +4.3% (and +6.4% at constant exchange rates).

    In first half 2025, International Retail Banking revenues fell by -2.5% to €2,033 million (-0.7% at constant exchange rates). Operating expenses totalled -€1,035 million, down -2.4% (-4% at constant exchange rates) from the first half of 2024, and benefited from the end of the contribution to the DGS in 2025, which had been recorded for -€58 million in the second quarter of 2024. Gross operating income totalled €998 million, down -2.6% (+2.9% at constant exchange rates). The cost of risk fell by -17.3% (-14.2% at constant exchange rates) to -€128 million compared to first half 2024. Ultimately, net income Group share of International Retail Banking was €483 million, stable in comparison with €485 million in the first half of 2024.

    At 30 June 2025, the capital allocated to International Retail Banking was €4.3 billion and risk weighted assets totalled €44.9 billion.

    Results in Italy

    In the second quarter of 2025, Crédit Agricole Italia’s revenues amounted to €767 million, down -2.2% from second quarter 2024, due to the decline in the net interest margin (-4.4% compared with the second quarter of 2024 related to the decrease in rates). The net interest margin was up +2% compared to first quarter 2025. Fee and commission income on managed assets rose significantly by +11.6% compared to second quarter 2024. Operating expenses were -€398 million, down -9.5% from second quarter 2024, due to the end of the contribution to the DGS in 2025, whereas an amount of -€58 million had been recognised in this respect in the second quarter of 2024. Excluding the DGS, expenses rose by +4.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024 because of employee and IT expenses to support the growth of the business lines.

    The cost of risk was -€45 million in the second quarter of 2025, a decrease of -26.4% from second quarter 2024, and continues to fall with an improvement in the quality of the assets and the coverage ratio. In effect, the cost of risk/outstandings (42) is 36 basis points, an improvement of 3 basis points versus the first quarter of 2025; the Non Performing Loans ratio is 2.7% and is improved from the first quarter of 2025, just like the coverage ratio which is 81.0% (+3.1 percentage points over the first quarter of 2025). This translates into a net income Group share of €172 million for CA Italia, up +12.3% compared to the second quarter of 2024.

    In first half 2025, revenues for Crédit Agricole Italia fell by -0.9% to €1,545 million. Operating expenses amounted to -€781 million, down -4.8% from the first half of 2024, and an increase of +2.4% excluding the DGS for -€58 million in the second quarter of 2024. This took gross operating income to €763 million, up +3.4% compared to first half 2024. The cost of risk amounted to -€102 million, down -17.2% compared to the first half of 2024. As a result, net income Group share of CA Italia totalled €350 million, an increase of +5.2% compared to first half 2024.

    Results for Crédit Agricole Group in Italy (43)

    In the first half of 2025, the net income Group share of entities in Italy amounted to €652 million, down -1.1% compared to the first half of 2024. The breakdown by business line is as follows: Retail Banking 54%; Specialised Financial Services 14%; Asset Gathering and Insurance 19%; and Large Customers 13%. Lastly, Italy’s contribution to net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A. in first half 2025 was 15%.

    International Retail Banking results – excluding Italy

    In the second quarter of 2025, revenues for International Retail Banking excluding Italy totalled €240 million, down -1.1% (+1.7% at constant exchange rates) compared to the second quarter of 2024. Revenues in Poland were up +9.5% in the second quarter of 2024 (+8.3% at constant exchange rates), boosted by net interest margin and fee and commission income. Revenues in Egypt were down -9.2% (-4.8% at constant exchange rates) with a residual base effect related to the exceptional foreign exchange activity of the second quarter of 2024. The increase in fee and commission income does not offset the slight decline in net interest margin. Operating expenses for International Retail Banking excluding Italy amounted to -€123 million, up +6.0% compared to the second quarter of 2024 (+7.5% at constant exchange rates) due to the effect of employee expenses and taxes in Poland as well as employee expenses and IT expenses in Egypt. At constant exchange rates, the jaws effect was positive by +2.6 percentage points in Poland. Gross operating income amounted to €117 million, down -7.5% (-3.6% at constant exchange rates) compared to the second quarter of 2024. The cost of risk is low at -€16 million, compared with -€11 million in the second quarter of 2024. Furthermore, at end-June 2025, the coverage ratio for loan outstandings remained high in Poland and Egypt, at 124% and 135%, respectively. In Ukraine, the local coverage ratio remains prudent (558%). All in all, the contribution of International Retail Banking excluding Italy to net income Group share was €66 million, down -11.9% compared with the second quarter of 2024 (-6.5% at constant exchange rates).

    In the first half of 2025, revenues for International Retail Banking excluding Italy totalled €488 million, down -7.1% (-1.1% at constant exchange rates) compared to the first half of 2024. Operating expenses amounted to -€254 million, up +5.9% compared to the first half of 2024 (+8.4% at constant exchange rates). The cost/income ratio stood at 52.0% at the end of June 2025, decreasing by 6.4 percentage points compared to the first half of 2024. Gross operating income amounted to €235 million, down -17.9% (-9.7% at constant exchange rates) compared to the first half of 2024. Cost of risk amounted to -€26 million, down -17.8% (-19.7% at constant exchange rates) compared to the first half of 2024. All in all, International Retail Banking excluding Italy contributed €133 million to net income Group share.

    At 30 June 2025, the entire Retail Banking business line contributed 19% to the net income Group share of Crédit Agricole S.A.’s core businesses (excluding the Corporate Centre division) and 28% to revenues excluding the Corporate Centre.

    At 30 June 2025, the division’s equity amounted to €9.6 billion. Its risk weighted assets totalled €100.6 billion.

    Corporate Centre results

    The net income Group share of the Corporate Centre was -€22 million in second quarter 2025, up +€217 million compared to second quarter 2024. The contribution of the Corporate Centre division can be analysed by distinguishing between the “structural” contribution (-€60 million) and other items (+€39 million).
    The contribution of the “structural” component (-€60 million) was up by +€184 million compared with the second quarter of 2024 and can be broken down into three types of activity:

    • The activities and functions of the Corporate Centre of the Crédit Agricole S.A. Parent Company. This contribution was -€287 million in the second quarter of 2025, up +€45 million.
    • The businesses that are not part of the business lines, such as CACIF (Private equity), CA Immobilier, CATE and BforBank (equity-accounted), and other investments. Their contribution, at +€217 million in the second quarter of 2025, was up +€140 million compared to the second quarter of 2024, including the positive impact of the Banco BPM dividend linked to an increased stake of 19.8% combined with a rise in the value of the securities (+€143 million).
    • Group support functions. Their contribution amounted to +€9 million this quarter (unchanged compared with the second quarter of 2024).

    The contribution from “other items” amounted to +€39 million, up +€32 million compared to the second quarter of 2024, mainly due to ESTER/BOR volatility factors.

    The underlying net income Group share of the Corporate Centre division in first half 2025 was -€124 million, up +€221 million compared to first half 2024. The structural component contributed -€114 million, while the division’s other items contributed -€10 million over the half-year.
    The “structural” component contribution was up +€237 million compared to first half 2024 and can be broken down into three types of activity:

    • The activities and functions of the Corporate Centre of the Crédit Agricole S.A. Parent Company. This contribution amounted to -€601 million for first half 2025, up +€26 million compared to first half 2024;
    • Business lines not attached to the core businesses, such as Crédit Agricole CIF (private equity) and CA Immobilier, BforBank and other investments: their contribution, which stood at +€469 million in first half 2025, an increase compared to the first half of 2024 (+€207 million).
    • The Group’s support functions: their contribution for the first half of 2025 was +€18 million, up +€4 million compared to the first half of 2024.

    The contribution of “other items” was down -€15 million compared to first half 2024.

    At 30 June 2025, risk weighted assets stood at €38.3 billion.

    Financial strength

    Crédit Agricole Group has the best level of solvency among European Global Systemically Important Banks.

    Capital ratios for Crédit Agricole Group are well above regulatory requirements. At 30 June 2025, the phased Common Equity Tier 1 ratio (CET1) for Crédit Agricole Group stood at 17.6%, or a substantial buffer of 7.7 percentage points above regulatory requirements. Over the quarter, the CET1 ratio remained stable, reflecting the increase in retained earnings of +31 basis points (bp), -29 bp of organic growth in the business lines, +5 bp of methodological impact and -13 bp of M&A transactions, OCI and other items.

    Crédit Agricole S.A., in its capacity as the corporate centre of the Crédit Agricole Group, fully benefits from the internal legal solidarity mechanism as well as the flexibility of capital circulation within the Crédit Agricole Group. Its phased-in CET1 ratio as at 30 June 2025 stood at 11.9%, 3.2 percentage points above the regulatory requirement, -20 bp compared to the March 2025. The change over the quarter was due to the retained earnings of +28 bp, business lines’ organic growth of -23 bp, +4 bp from methodology impacts and -33 bp from M&A transactions, OCI and other44. The proforma CET1 ratio Including M&A transactions completed after 30 June 2025 would be 11.6%.

    The breakdown of the change in Crédit Agricole S.A.’s risk weighted assets by business line is the combined result of:  +€3.4 billion for the Retail Banking divisions linked to changes in the business lines, -€0.3 billion for Asset Gathering, taking into account the increase in insurance dividends, +€1.7 billion for Specialised Financial Services, -€7.0 billion for Large Customers, linked to favourable methodology and FX impact and moderate business line growth, and  +€3.2 billion for the Corporate Centre division, notably linked to the impact of the increase in the Banco BPM stake to 19.8%.

    For the Crédit Agricole Group, the Regional Banks’ risk weighted assets increased by +€6.9 billion. The evolution of the other businesses follows the same trend as for Crédit Agricole S.A.

    Crédit Agricole Group’s financial structure

        Crédit Agricole Group   Crédit Agricole S.A.
        30/06/25 31/03/25 Exigences 30/06/25   30/06/25 31/03/25 Exigences 30/06/25
    Phased-in CET1 ratio45   17.6% 17.6% 9.88%   11.9% 12.1% 8.71%
    Tier1 ratio45   18.9% 19.0% 11.72%   14.0% 14.3% 10.52%
    Total capital ratio45   21.4% 21.8% 14.17%   17.8% 18.4% 12.94%
    Risk-weighted assets (€bn)   649 641     406 405  
    Leverage ratio   5.6% 5.6% 3.5%   3.9% 4.0% 3.0%
    Leverage exposure (€bn)   2,191 2,173     1,445 1,434  
    TLAC ratio (% RWA)45,46   27.6% 28.5% 22.4%        
    TLAC ratio (% LRE)46   8.2% 8.4% 6.75%        
    Subordinated MREL ratio (% RWA)45   27.6% 28.5% 21.6%        
    Subordinated MREL ratio (% LRE)   8.2% 8.4% 6.25%        
    Total MREL ratio (% RWA)45   32.7% 34.0% 26.2%        
    Total MREL ratio (% LRE)   9.7% 10.0% 6.25%        
    Distance to the distribution restriction trigger (€bn)47   46 46     13 14  

    For Crédit Agricole S.A., the distance to the trigger for distribution restrictions is the distance to the MDA trigger48, i.e. 318 basis points, or €13 billion of CET1 capital at 30 June 2025. Crédit Agricole S.A. is not subject to either the L-MDA (distance to leverage ratio buffer requirement) or the M-MDA (distance to MREL requirements).

    For Crédit Agricole Group, the distance to the trigger for distribution restrictions is the distance to the L-MDA trigger at 30 June 2025. Crédit Agricole Group posted a buffer of 209 basis points above the L-MDA trigger, i.e. €46 billion in Tier 1 capital.

    At 30 June 2025, Crédit Agricole Group’s TLAC and MREL ratios are well above requirements49. Crédit Agricole Group posted a buffer of 530 basis points above the M-MDA trigger, i.e. €34 billion in CET1 capital. At this date, the distance to the M-MDA trigger corresponds to the distance between the TLAC ratio and the corresponding requirement. The Crédit Agricole Group’s 2025 target is to maintain a TLAC ratio greater than or equal to 26% of RWA excluding eligible senior preferred debt.

    Liquidity and Funding

    Liquidity is measured at Crédit Agricole Group level.

    As of 31 December 2024, changes have been made to the presentation of the Group’s liquidity position (liquidity reserves and balance sheet, breakdown of long-term debt). These changes are described in the 2024 Universal Registration Document.

    Diversified and granular customer deposits remain stable compared to March 2025 (€1,147 billion at end-June 2025).

    The Group’s liquidity reserves, at market value and after haircuts50, amounted to €471 billion at 30 June 2025, down -€16 billion compared to 31 March 2025.

    Liquidity reserves covered more than twice the short-term debt net of treasury assets.

    This change in liquidity reserves is notably explained by:

    • The decrease in the securities portfolio (HQLA and non-HQLA) for -€7 billion;
    • The decrease in collateral already pledged to Central Banks and unencumbered for -€13 billion, linked to the decline in self-securitisations for -€7 billion and the decrease in receivables eligible for central bank for -€6 billion;
    • The increase in central bank deposits for +€4 billion.

    Crédit Agricole Group also continued its efforts to maintain immediately available reserves (after recourse to ECB financing). Central bank eligible non-HQLA assets after haircuts amounted to €131 billion.

    Standing at €1,696 billion at 30 June 2025, the Group’s liquidity balance sheet shows a surplus of stable funding resources over stable application of funds of €179 billion, down -€18 billion compared with end-March 2025. This surplus remains well above the Medium-Term Plan target of €110bn-€130bn.

    Long term debt was €316 billion at 30 June 2025, slightly up compared with end-March 2025. This included:

    • Senior secured debt of €93 billion, up +€4 billion;
    • Senior preferred debt of €162 billion;
    • Senior non-preferred debt of €38 billion, down -€2 billion due to the MREL/TLAC eligible debt;
    • And Tier 2 securities of €23 billion, down -€1 billion.

    Credit institutions are subject to a threshold for the LCR ratio, set at 100% on 1 January 2018.

    At 30 June 2025, the average LCR ratios (calculated on a rolling 12-month basis) were 137% for Crédit Agricole Group (representing a surplus of €87 billion) and 142% for Crédit Agricole S.A. (representing a surplus of €84 billion). They were higher than the Medium-Term Plan target (around 110%).

    In addition, the NSFR of Crédit Agricole Group and Crédit Agricole S.A. exceeded 100%, in accordance with the regulatory requirement applicable since 28 June 2021 and above the Medium-Term Plan target (>100%).

    The Group continues to follow a prudent policy as regards medium-to-long-term refinancing, with a very diversified access to markets in terms of investor base and products.

    At 30 June 2025, the Group’s main issuers raised the equivalent of €21.3 billion51in medium-to-long-term debt on the market, 84% of which was issued by Crédit Agricole S.A.

    In particular, the following amounts are noted for the Group excluding Crédit Agricole S.A.:

    • Crédit Agricole Assurances issued €750 million in RT1 perpetual NC10.75 year;
    • Crédit Agricole Personal Finance & Mobility issued:
      • €1 billion in EMTN issuances through Crédit Agricole Auto Bank (CAAB);
      • €420 million in securitisations through Agos;
    • Crédit Agricole Italia issued one senior secured debt issuance for a total of €1 billion;
    • Crédit Agricole next bank (Switzerland) issued two tranches in senior secured format for a total of 200 million Swiss francs, of which 100 million Swiss francs in Green Bond format.

    At 30 June 2025, Crédit Agricole S.A. raised the equivalent of €16.5 billion through the market 51,52.

    The bank raised the equivalent of €16.5 billion, of which €7.3 billion in senior non-preferred debt and €2.8 billion in Tier 2 debt, as well as €1.7 billion in senior preferred debt and €4.7 billion in senior secured debt at end-June. The financing comprised a variety of formats and currencies, including:

    • €2.75 billion 52,53 ;
    • 5.4 billion US dollars (€5.1 billion equivalent);
    • 1.6 billion pounds sterling (€1.9 billion equivalent);
    • 179.3 billion Japanese yen (€1.1 billion equivalent);
    • 0.4 billion Singapore dollars (€0.3 billion equivalent);
    • 0.6 billion Australian dollars (€0.4 billion equivalent);
    • 0.3 billion Swiss francs (€0.3 billion equivalent).

    At end-June, Crédit Agricole S.A. had issued 77%52,53 of its funding plan in currencies other than the euro.

    In addition, on 13 February 2025, Crédit Agricole S.A. issued a PerpNC10 AT1 bond for €1.5 billion at an initial rate of 5.875% and announced on 30 April 2025 the regulatory call exercise for the AT1 £ with £103m outstanding (XS1055037920) – ineligible, grandfathered until 28/06/2025 – redeemed on 30/06/2025.

    The 2025 MLT market funding programme was set at €20 billion, with a balanced distribution between senior preferred or senior secured debt and senior non-preferred or Tier 2 debt.

    The programme was 82% completed at 30 June 2025, with:

    • €4.7 billion in senior secured debt;
    • €1.7 billion equivalent in senior preferred debt;
    • €7.3 billion equivalent in senior non-preferred debt;
    • €2.8 billion equivalent in Tier 2 debt.

    Economic and financial environment

    Review of the first half of 2025

    An even more conflict-ridden and unpredictable environment, causing a slowdown

    The first half of the year took place in an even more conflict-ridden and unpredictable environment, marked by open wars and powerful geopolitical and trade tensions. The war in Ukraine remained a major unresolved issue: President Trump’s initiatives aimed at ending the conflict proved fruitless, while signalling a strategic shift in US policy, notably away from protecting European territory. President Trump’s statements on NATO (demanding that military spending be increased to 5% of GDP) forced Europe to accelerate the overhaul of its defence strategy, as evidenced by the announcement of a white paper detailing defence support measures worth €800 billion. With the Israeli-Palestinian conflict continuing without any lasting political solution in sight, international tensions peaked in June with Israel’s attack on Iran, quickly joined by its US ally. After twelve days of clashes, a ceasefire was announced on 24 June.

    Donald Trump’s return to the US presidency has obviously resulted in a protectionist offensive of unexpected violence. This offensive culminated in “Liberation Day” on 2 April, when “reciprocal” tariffs were imposed on all of the United States’ trading partners. While China was particularly targeted, the European Union was also severely affected; even the countries participating in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA, United States, Canada, Mexico) were not spared, as they were subject to sector-specific tariffs applicable everywhere (steel, aluminium, automobiles, semiconductors). However, these announcements were followed by a presidential U-turn on 9 April, with reciprocal tariffs being lowered to 10% and a 90-day truce agreed upon to allow for the negotiation of bilateral trade agreements. At the end of this pause (9 July), the US president decided to extend it (to 1 August), offering hope to major trading partners (the European Union, Japan and South Korea) that agreements could be reached to reduce tariffs, while leaving economic players in uncertainty about international trade conditions. Only the United Kingdom, China and Vietnam have signed an agreement.

    The unpredictability of US trade policy, characterised by dramatic announcements followed by partial reversals, has created ongoing uncertainty. In the first half of the year, this was reflected in mixed economic and financial performances across countries, suggesting a more pronounced global slowdown. The IMF has therefore revised its global growth forecast for 2025 downwards to 2.8% (a decrease of -0.5 percentage points (pp) compared to its January forecast and the growth observed in 2024).

    The US economy has shown early signs of slowing down, hit by weaker consumer spending and, above all, a sharp rise in imports as companies seek to build up stocks ahead of the entry into force of new tariffs. GDP contracted by 0.5% in the first quarter (annualised quarter-on-quarter change). After moderating but remaining above the Federal Reserve’s (Fed) 2% target, inflation (year-on-year) stood at 2.7% in June (after 2.4% in May). Core inflation (excluding volatile components, food and energy) reached 2.9%; the increase in tariffs (although not yet finalised) already seems to be visible in the cost of certain goods (furniture, textiles and clothing, household appliances). Despite this turbulence, the job market has stayed relatively strong (unemployment rate at 4.2% in May, still within the narrow range it has been in since May 2024), providing some stability for an otherwise fragile economy.

    In China, despite a very difficult external environment and punitive US tariffs, growth (5.4% and 5.2% in the first and second quarters) stabilised above the official target of 5% for 2025. While consumption is sluggish, a weakness reflected in the absence of inflation (which has not exceeded 1% year-on-year since February 2024), exports have continued to accelerate, making a surprising contribution to growth. At 2.1 percentage points in the first quarter of 2025, the contribution from net external demand reached an historic high (excluding Covid), reflecting China’s undisputed dominance in global manufacturing, although temporary positive effects (anticipation of US tariffs at the beginning of the year) should not be overlooked.

    In an unfavourable environment, the eurozone held up well, with growth initially estimated at 0.3% (quarter-on-quarter) and then revised upwards (0.6%, or 1.5% year-on-year). Growth in the eurozone was mainly driven by investment, followed by net external demand and finally household consumption (with respective contributions to growth of 0.4 pp, 0.3 pp and 0.1 pp), while inventories subtracted 0.1 pp from growth and final public expenditure was “neutral”. This overall performance continued to mask varying national fortunes: among the largest member countries, Spain continued to post very strong growth (0.6%) and Germany saw an upturn (0.4%), while Italy and France posted fairly sustained (0.3%) and weak (0.1%) growth rates, respectively. Continued disinflation (to 1.9% year-on-year in May after 2.2% in April and 2.6% in May 2024) and anchored expectations made it possible for the ECB to continue its monetary easing, reassured by the convergence of inflation towards its 2% target.

    In France, in particular, after benefiting from the boost provided by the Paris Olympic and Paralympic Games in the third quarter of 2024 (+0.4% quarter-on-quarter), activity declined slightly in the last quarter of last year (-0.1%) due to after-effects. It picked up again in the first quarter of 2025, but growth remained weak (+0.1%). Domestic demand, which contributed negatively to growth, is largely responsible for this sluggishness. Household consumption declined (-0.2%), undermined by a record savings rate (18% of household disposable income, compared with 15.4% in the eurozone) for 45 years (excluding the Covid period), while public consumption slowed (+0.2% after +0.4%). Investment continued to stagnate, reflecting the fact that companies in France are more indebted than in the rest of the eurozone (making them more vulnerable to past interest rate hikes) and the budgetary efforts of public administrations to reduce the public deficit. As a result, domestic demand weighed on growth in the first quarter (-0.1 pp). However, it was mainly foreign trade that undermined growth (-0.8 pp) due to the collapse of exports, particularly in the aerospace sector. Unlike its European peers, France did not benefit from the sharp rise in global trade in the first quarter (+1.7%) in anticipation of US tariffs.

    In terms of monetary policy, the first half of 2025 was marked by a notable divergence between the status quo of the Federal Reserve (Fed) and the continued easing by the European Central Bank (ECB). The ECB cut interest rates four times by 25 basis points (bp) each, bringing the cumulative reduction in the deposit rate (2% since 11 June) to 200 bp since the start of easing (June 2024). However, after cutting its policy rate by 100 bp in 2024 (to 4.50%), the Fed kept rates unchanged due to overly modest progress on inflation, even though growth did not appear to be definitively at risk. Inflationary risks linked to tariffs led it to adopt a very cautious stance, which was widely criticised by President Trump.
    The financial markets, while remaining subject to bouts of nervousness prompted by geopolitical events, generally kept pace with Donald Trump’s stated ambitions, their feasibility and his U-turns. Thus, the theme of the American exception at the beginning of the year (growth exceeding potential, resilience despite interest rates set to rise, the privileged status of the dollar, unlimited capacity to borrow and shift risks to the rest of the world) has been supplanted by disenchantment with US assets following “Liberation Day”. Following the president’s backtracking and announcement of a 90-day pause, serious doubts were raised about his ability to truly deliver on his domestic and international commitments. Periods marked by exaggerated negativity have therefore alternated with periods dominated by equally exaggerated positivity.

    Bond markets therefore experienced mixed movements. During the first half of the year, in the United States, the decline in yields (54) on short maturities was ultimately quite sharp (nearly 60 bp for the two-year swap rate to nearly 3.50%) and exceeded that of the ten-year swap rate (down 38 bp to 3.69%), giving the curve a steeper slope. Despite Moody’s rating downgrade, the yield on 10-year sovereign bonds (US Treasuries) fell in line with the swap rate for the same maturity, which it now exceeds by more than 50 bp (at 4.23%). In the eurozone, the steepening effect was less pronounced and unfolded differently: there was a less marked decline in the two-year swap rate (from 22 bp to 1.90%) and an increase in the ten-year swap rate (from 23 bp to 2.57%). Under the influence of the Merz government’s expansionary budget programme, the German 10-year yield (Bund) rose (24 bp to 2.61%) and exceeded the swap rate for the same maturity by a few basis points. Ten-year swap spreads on benchmark European sovereign bonds narrowed in the first half of the year, with Italy posting the strongest performance (spread down 27 bp to 90 bp). This improvement reflects a more favourable perception of Italy’s public finances and a degree of political stability, in contrast to the turbulence of previous years. Italian growth also showed unexpected resilience in the face of trade tensions. Penalised since the dissolution of parliament in June 2024 by a damaging lack of a parliamentary majority and severely deteriorated public finances, the French spread nevertheless narrowed during the half-year, falling from a high level (85 bp) to 71 bp. It now exceeds the Spanish spread (at 67 bp).

    On the equity markets, European indexes outperformed their US counterparts, with the Euro Stoxx 50 up 10% since the start of the year (and a spectacular rise of nearly 25% for the banking sector), while the S&P 500, which was much more volatile over the period, rose by nearly 7%, buoyed by high-tech stocks. The US dollar lost some of its lustre amid economic and international policy uncertainty, with the euro appreciating by 14% against the dollar and 6% in nominal effective terms. Finally, the price of gold rose by 26% in the first half of the year, reaching a record high of US$3,426 per ounce in April, confirming its status as a preferred safe haven during this period of intense uncertainty.

    2025–2026 Outlook

    An anxiety-inducing context, some unprecedented resistance

    The economic and financial scenario, which has already had to contend with the volatility and unpredictability of US economic policy, is unfolding against an even more uncertain international backdrop, in which the risk of disruptive events (blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, incidents affecting infrastructure in the Gulf etc.) cannot be entirely ruled out.

    Our economic scenario for the United States has always been based on a two-step sequence in line with the pace of the economic policy planned by Donald Trump: a positive impact on inflation but a negative impact on growth from tariffs (which fall within the president’s prerogatives), followed by a positive but delayed effect from aggressive budgetary policy (which requires congressional approval). Although our forecasts for 2025 have been revised slightly downwards, our US scenario remains on track, in line with the timetable for economic policy measures: while avoiding recession, growth is expected to slow sharply in 2025, coupled with a pick-up in inflation, before regaining momentum in 2026.

    Even with the recent de-escalation, tariff rates remain significantly higher than they were before Donald Trump’s second election. The negative impact of the new trade policy is the main driver of the decline in the growth forecast for 2025 (1.5% after 2.8% in 2024), while more favourable aspects (the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, tax cuts and deregulation) should contribute to the expected upturn in 2026 (2.2%). The possibility of a recession in 2025 has been ruled out due to solid fundamentals, including lower sensitivity to interest rates, very healthy household finances and a labour market that remains relatively robust, even if there are signs of deterioration. Despite the expected slowdown in growth, our inflation forecasts have been revised upwards. Tariffs are expected to cause year-on-year inflation to rise by around 80 basis points (bp) at peak impact. Although this effect is temporary, inflation (annual average) is expected to reach 2.9% in 2025 and 2.7% in 2026. It is therefore expected to continue to exceed 2%, with underlying inflation stabilising at around 2.5% at the end of 2026.

    In a conflict-ridden and unpredictable external environment, Europe is expected to find salvation in domestic demand, allowing it to better withstand the global slowdown. Two alternative scenarios, between which the balance is delicate, are likely to unfold: a scenario of resilience in the eurozone economy based on an increase in private spending but also, and perhaps above all, in public spending on defence and infrastructure; a scenario of stagnating activity under the effect of a series of negative shocks: competitiveness shocks linked to higher tariffs, appreciation of the euro and the negative impact of uncertainty on private confidence.

    We favour the scenario of resilience against a backdrop of a buoyant labour market, a healthy economic and financial situation for the private sector and a favourable credit cycle. The effective implementation of additional public spending, particularly the “German bazooka”(55), certainly needs to be confirmed. However, this spending could provide the eurozone with growth driven by stronger domestic demand at a time when global growth is slowing. It would offer a type of exceptionalism, especially compared to the past decade, which would put eurozone growth above its medium-term potential. Average annual growth in the eurozone is expected to accelerate slightly in 2025 to 0.9% and strengthen to 1.3% in 2026. Average inflation is expected to continue to moderate, reaching 2.1% and 1.8% in 2025 and 2026, respectively.

    In Germany, the sluggish economy should return to robust growth. Although more exposed than its partners to protectionist policies, the economy should be boosted by the public investment plan. This plan and the removal of barriers to financing infrastructure and defence investment that had previously seemed insurmountable give hope for a significant, albeit not immediate, recovery. While the effects are likely to be minimal in 2025 due to implementation delays, a significant flow of funds is expected in 2026, with positive spillover effects for Germany’s European neighbours and the eurozone as a whole. German growth could recover significantly, rising from -0.2% in 2024 to 0.1% in 2025 and, above all, 1.2% in 2026. In France, growth is expected to remain sluggish in the second quarter of 2025, before accelerating slightly in the second half of the year. The real upturn would not come until 2026, driven by a recovery in investment and the initial favourable impact of German government measures. The risks remain mainly on the downside for activity in the short term. Our scenario assumes growth rates of 0.6% and 1.2% in 2025 and 2026, respectively (after 1.1% in 2024). In Italy, incomplete catching-up and a recent decline in purchasing power, despite strong employment, are likely to limit the potential for a recovery in household consumption. Positive surprises on the investment front are likely to continue, thanks to improved financing conditions and subsidies for the energy and digital transitions. While the recent weakness in industrial orders may weigh on productive investment, construction is holding up well. However, doubts remain about growth potential, with post-pandemic sector allocation favouring less productive sectors. Growth is expected to reach 0.6% in 2025 and 0.7% in 2026 (after 0.7% in 2024).

    The central scenario for the eurozone (developed and quantified in June) assumes that the tariff dispute with the United States will remain unchanged as of 4 June, i.e. a general increase in tariffs to 10% (except for exempted products), 25% on cars and 50% on steel. The risks associated with this central scenario are bearish. The stagnation scenario could materialise if the trade dispute with the United States were to escalate, if competitive pressures were to intensify, if private confidence were to deteriorate significantly and, finally, if fiscal stimulus were to be implemented more gradually than anticipated.

    Such an uncertain environment, characterised by global slowdown and shrinking export opportunities, would certainly have led in the past (and not so long ago) to underperformance by emerging economies, which are further hampered by risk aversion in the markets, higher interest rates and pressure on their currencies. However, despite tariffs (the effects of which will obviously vary greatly from one economy to another), our scenario remains broadly optimistic for the major emerging countries. These countries could show unprecedented resilience thanks to support measures that are likely to partially cushion the impact of an unfavourable environment: relatively strong labour markets, fairly solid domestic demand, monetary easing (with a few exceptions), and a limited slowdown in China (after holding up well in the first half of the year, growth is expected to approach 4.5% in 2025 due to the anticipated slowdown in the second half linked to the trade war). Finally, emerging market currencies have held up well and the risk of defensive rate hikes, which would weigh heavily on growth, is lower than might have been feared. However, these relatively positive prospects are accompanied by higher-than-usual risks due to the unpredictability of US policy.

    In terms of monetary policy, the end of the easing cycles is drawing nearer. In the US, the scenario (a sharp slowdown in 2025, an upturn in 2026 and inflation continuing to significantly exceed the target) and the uncertainties surrounding it should encourage the Fed to remain patient, despite Donald Trump’s calls for a more accommodative policy. The Fed is likely to proceed with a slight easing followed by a long pause. Our scenario still assumes two cuts in 2025, but pushes them back by one quarter (to September and December, from June and September previously). After these two cuts, the Fed is likely to keep rates unchanged with a maximum upper limit of 4% throughout 2026.

    As for the ECB, although it refuses to rule out any future rate cuts, it may well have reached the end of its easing cycle due to an expected recovery in growth and inflation on target. Of course, a deterioration in the economic environment would justify further easing: the ECB stands ready to cut rates if necessary. Our scenario assumes that the deposit rate will remain at 2% in 2026.

    On the interest rate front, in the United States, persistent inflationary risks and a budgetary trajectory deemed unsustainable, a compromised AAA rating, the volatility of economic decisions and heightened investor concerns are exerting upward pressure. Our scenario assumes a 10-year US Treasury yield of around 4.70% at the end of 2025 and 4.95% at the end of 2026. In the eurozone, resilient growth that is expected to accelerate, inflation on target and the ECB believed to have almost completed its easing cycle point to a slight rise in interest rates and a stabilisation or even tightening of sovereign spreads. The German 10-year yield (Bund) could thus approach 2.90% at the end of 2025 and 2.95% at the end of 2026. For the same maturity, the spread offered by France relative to the Bund would fluctuate around 60/65 bp, while Italy’s would narrow to 90 bp by the end of 2026.

    Finally, the US dollar continues to lose ground. The inconsistency and unpredictability of Donald Trump’s economic policies, the deteriorating US budget outlook and speculation about official plans to devalue the dollar, combined with resistance from other economies, are all factors putting pressure on the dollar, although this does not necessarily spell the end of its status as a key reserve currency in the short term. The euro/dollar exchange rate is expected to settle at 1.17 in the fourth quarter of 2025, before depreciating in 2026 (1.10).

    Appendix 1 – Crédit Agricole Group: income statement by business line

    Credit Agricole Group – Results par by business line, Q2-25 and Q2-24

      Q2-25
    €m RB LCL IRB AG SFS LC CC Total
                     
    Revenues 3,364 976 1,031 1,967 881 2,224 (635) 9,808
    Operating expenses (2,690) (597) (540) (864) (438) (1,257) 514 (5,872)
    Gross operating income 674 380 491 1,104 442 967 (121) 3,936
    Cost of risk (397) (95) (61) (7) (235) (20) (26) (840)
    Equity-accounted entities 1 – – 58 (13) 10 – 56
    Net income on other assets 1 1 0 449 1 0 0 452
    Income before tax 278 286 430 1,604 194 958 (147) 3,604
    Tax (96) (69) (130) (249) (58) (149) 136 (615)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale ope. – – 0 – – – 0 0
    Net income 182 218 300 1,356 136 810 (11) 2,990
    Non-controlling interests (0) (0) (40) (247) (22) (43) 1 (352)
    Net income Group Share 182 217 260 1,108 114 767 (10) 2,638
      Q2-24
    €m RB LCL IRB AG SFS LC CC Total
                     
    Revenues 3,255 979 1,051 1,946 889 2,223 (837) 9,507
    Operating expenses (2,560) (591) (573) (813) (443) (1,204) 497 (5,687)
    Gross operating income 694 389 477 1,133 447 1,019 (340) 3,819
    Cost of risk (444) (95) (75) (2) (211) (39) (6) (872)
    Equity-accounted entities 2 – – 33 29 10 – 74
    Net income on other assets 1 2 0 (12) (1) 2 (0) (7)
    Income before tax 253 296 402 1,152 265 993 (347) 3,014
    Tax (44) (65) (117) (282) (54) (248) 48 (762)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale ope. – – – – – – – –
    Net income 209 231 285 870 210 745 (299) 2,252
    Non-controlling interests (1) (0) (38) (124) (23) (36) (2) (224)
    Net income Group Share 208 231 247 746 187 710 (300) 2,028

    Credit Agricole Group – Results par by business line, H1-25 and H1-24

      H1-25
    €m RB LCL IRB AG SFS LC CC Total
                     
    Revenues 6,716 1,939 2,079 4,016 1,749 4,632 (1,275) 19,856
    Operating expenses (5,220) (1,222) (1,075) (1,799) (912) (2,617) 982 (11,864)
    Gross operating income 1,496 717 1,003 2,217 837 2,015 (293) 7,992
    Cost of risk (717) (186) (128) (17) (484) 5 (48) (1,575)
    Equity-accounted entities 7 – – 86 23 16 – 131
    Net income on other assets 3 2 0 449 1 0 0 456
    Income before tax 790 533 875 2,734 376 2,036 (341) 7,004
    Tax (267) (181) (267) (599) (71) (453) 182 (1,656)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale ope. – – 0 – – – – 0
    Net income 523 352 608 2,135 305 1,583 (159) 5,348
    Non-controlling interests (0) (0) (82) (348) (43) (78) 7 (545)
    Net income Group Share 523 352 526 1,787 263 1,504 (151) 4,803
      H1-24
    €m RB LCL IRB AG SFS LC CC Total
                     
    Revenues 6,568 1,933 2,131 3,739 1,736 4,489 (1,565) 19,031
    Operating expenses (5,044) (1,193) (1,098) (1,567) (897) (2,501) 1,024 (11,276)
    Gross operating income 1,524 740 1,033 2,172 839 1,988 (541) 7,755
    Cost of risk (691) (214) (159) (5) (429) (5) (20) (1,523)
    Equity-accounted entities 7 – – 61 59 14 – 142
    Net income on other assets 3 4 (0) (20) (1) 2 (2) (14)
    Income before tax 842 530 875 2,208 468 1,999 (563) 6,361
    Tax (191) (119) (260) (501) (97) (482) 133 (1,517)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale ope. – – – – – – – –
    Net income 651 412 615 1,707 372 1,517 (430) 4,843
    Non-controlling interests (1) (0) (89) (236) (42) (69) 6 (432)
    Net income Group Share 650 412 525 1,471 330 1,448 (424) 4,412

    Appendix 2 – Crédit Agricole S.A.: ‍ Income statement by business line

    Crédit Agricole S.A. – Results par by business line, Q2-25 and Q2-24

      Q2-25
    €m AG LC SFS FRB (LCL) IRB CC Total
                   
    Revenues 1,970 2,224 881 976 1,007 (51) 7,006
    Operating expenses (864) (1,257) (438) (597) (520) (25) (3,700)
    Gross operating income 1,106 967 442 380 487 (76) 3,306
    Cost of risk (7) (20) (235) (95) (61) (24) (441)
    Equity-accounted entities 58 10 (13) – – (24) 30
    Net income on other assets 453 0 1 1 0 0 455
    Income before tax 1,610 958 194 286 426 (125) 3,350
    Tax (249) (149) (58) (69) (129) 113 (541)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale operations – – – – 0 – 0
    Net income 1,361 810 136 218 297 (12) 2,809
    Non-controlling interests (261) (58) (22) (10) (59) (10) (420)
    Net income Group Share 1,100 752 114 208 238 (22) 2,390
      Q2-24  
    €m AG LC SFS FRB (LCL) IRB CC Total  
                   
    Revenues 1,944 2,223 889 979 1,027 (267) 6,796
    Operating expenses (813) (1,204) (443) (591) (555) (15) (3,621)
    Gross operating income 1,131 1,019 447 389 472 (283) 3,175
    Cost of risk (2) (39) (211) (95) (72) (5) (424)
    Equity-accounted entities 33 10 29 – – (25) 47
    Net income on other assets (12) 2 (1) 2 0 24 15
    Income before tax 1,150 993 265 296 400 (289) 2,814
    Tax (283) (248) (54) (65) (117) 63 (704)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale operations – – – – – – –
    Net income 867 745 210 231 283 (226) 2,110
    Non-controlling interests (131) (51) (23) (10) (55) (12) (282)
    Net income Group Share 736 694 187 220 228 (238) 1,828

    Crédit Agricole S.A. – Results par by business line, H1-25 and H1-24

      H1-25
    €m AG LC SFS FRB (LCL) IRB CC Total
                   
    Revenues 4,028 4,632 1,749 1,939 2,033 (118) 14,263
    Operating expenses (1,799) (2,617) (912) (1,222) (1,035) (106) (7,691)
    Gross operating income 2,229 2,015 837 717 998 (224) 6,571
    Cost of risk (17) 5 (484) (186) (128) (45) (855)
    Equity-accounted entities 86 16 23 – – (47) 77
    Net income on other assets 453 0 1 2 0 0 456
    Income before tax 2,749 2,037 376 533 870 (316) 6,250
    Tax (601) (454) (71) (181) (266) 205 (1,368)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale operations – – – – 0 – 0
    Net income 2,148 1,583 305 352 604 (111) 4,882
    Non-controlling interests (368) (108) (43) (16) (121) (13) (669)
    Net income Group Share 1,780 1,475 263 337 483 (124) 4,213
      H1-24  
    €m AG LC SFS FRB (LCL) IRB CC Total  
                   
    Revenues 3,733 4,489 1,736 1,933 2,085 (374) 13,602
    Operating expenses (1,567) (2,501) (897) (1,193) (1,060) (71) (7,289)
    Gross operating income 2,166 1,988 839 740 1,024 (445) 6,312
    Cost of risk (5) (5) (429) (214) (154) (16) (824)
    Equity-accounted entities 61 14 59 – – (46) 90
    Net income on other assets (20) 2 (1) 4 (0) 24 9
    Income before tax 2,203 1,999 468 530 870 (483) 5,587
    Tax (502) (482) (97) (119) (259) 144 (1,315)
    Net income from discontinued or held-for-sale operations – – – – – – –
    Net income 1,701 1,517 372 412 610 (339) 4,273
    Non-controlling interests (248) (101) (42) (18) (126) (7) (542)
    Net income Group Share 1,453 1,416 330 393 485 (345) 3,731

    Appendix 3 – Data per share

    Credit Agricole S.A. – Earnings p/share, net book value p/share and ROTE
                   
    €m   Q2-25 Q2-24   H1-25 H1-24  
    Net income Group share   2,390 1,828   4,213 3,731  
    – Interests on AT1, including issuance costs, before tax   (141) (83)   (270) (221)  
    – Foreign exchange impact on reimbursed AT1   4 –   4 (247)  
    NIGS attributable to ordinary shares [A] 2,252 1,745   3,947 3,263  
    Average number shares in issue, excluding treasury shares (m) [B] 3,025 3,025   3,025 3,008  
    Net earnings per share [A]/[B] 0.74 € 0.58 €   1.30 € 1.08 €  
                   
    €m         30/06/25 30/06/24  
    Shareholder’s equity Group share         75,528 70,396  
    – AT1 issuances         (8,612) (7,164)  
    – Unrealised gains and losses on OCI – Group share         872 1,305  
    Net book value (NBV), not revaluated, attributable to ordin. sh. [D]       67,787 64,537  
    – Goodwill & intangibles** – Group share         (18,969) (17,775)  
    Tangible NBV (TNBV), not revaluated attrib. to ordinary sh. [E]       48,818 46,763  
    Total shares in issue, excluding treasury shares (period end, m) [F]       3,025 3,025  
    NBV per share, after deduction of dividend to pay (€) [D]/[F]       22.4 € 21.3 €  
    TNBV per share, after deduction of dividend to pay (€) [G]=[E]/[F]       16.1 € 15.5 €  
    ** y compris les écarts d’acquisition dans les participations ne donnant pas le contrôle             
    €m         H1-25 H1-24  
    Net income Group share       4,213 3,731  
    Added value Amundi US         304 0  
    Additionnal corporate tax         -129 0  
    IFRIC         -173 -110  
    NIGS annualised (1) [N]       8,382 7,572  
    Interests on AT1, including issuance costs, before tax, foreign exchange impact, annualised [O]       -536 -689  
    Result adjusted [P] = [N]+[O]       7,846 6,884    
    Tangible NBV (TNBV), not revaluated attrib. to ord. shares – average*** (2) [J]       47,211 44,710    
    ROTE adjusted (%) = [P] / [J]       16.6% 15.4%  
    *** including assumption of dividend for the current exercise         0,0%    
                 

    (1)ROTE calculated on the basis of an annualised underlying net income Group share and linearised IFRIC costs over the year
    (2)Average of the NTBV not revalued attributable to ordinary shares. calculated between 31/12/2024 and 30/06/2025 (line [E]), restated with an assumption of dividend for current exercises

    Alternative Performance Indicators56

    NBV Net Book Value (not revalued)
    The Net Book Value not revalued corresponds to the shareholders’ equity Group share from which the amount of the AT1 issues, the unrealised gains and/or losses on OCI Group share and the pay-out assumption on annual results have been deducted.

    NBV per share Net Book Value per share – NTBV Net Tangible Book Value per share
    One of the methods for calculating the value of a share. This represents the Net Book Value divided by the number of shares in issue at end of period, excluding treasury shares.

    Net Tangible Book Value per share represents the Net Book Value after deduction of intangible assets and goodwill, divided by the number of shares in issue at end of period, excluding treasury shares.

    EPS Earnings per Share
    This is the net income Group share, from which the AT1 coupon has been deducted, divided by the average number of shares in issue excluding treasury shares. It indicates the portion of profit attributable to each share (not the portion of earnings paid out to each shareholder, which is the dividend). It may decrease, assuming the net income Group share remains unchanged, if the number of shares increases.

    Cost/income ratio
    The cost/income ratio is calculated by dividing operating expenses by revenues, indicating the proportion of revenues needed to cover operating expenses.

    Cost of risk/outstandings
    Calculated by dividing the cost of credit risk (over four quarters on a rolling basis) by outstandings (over an average of the past four quarters, beginning of the period). It can also be calculated by dividing the annualised cost of credit risk for the quarter by outstandings at the beginning of the quarter. Similarly, the cost of risk for the period can be annualised and divided by the average outstandings at the beginning of the period.

    Since the first quarter of 2019, the outstandings taken into account are the customer outstandings, before allocations to provisions.

    The calculation method for the indicator is specified each time the indicator is used.

    Doubtful loan
    A doubtful loan is a loan in default. The debtor is considered to be in default when at least one of the following two conditions has been met:

    • a payment generally more than 90 days past due, unless specific circumstances point to the fact that the delay is due to reasons independent of the debtor’s financial situation.
    • the entity believes that the debtor is unlikely to settle its credit obligations unless it avails itself of certain measures such as enforcement of collateral security right.

    Impaired loan
    Loan which has been provisioned due to a risk of non-repayment.

    Impaired (or non-performing) loan coverage ratio 
    This ratio divides the outstanding provisions by the impaired gross customer loans.

    Impaired (or non-performing) loan ratio 
    This ratio divides the impaired gross customer loans on an individual basis, before provisions, by the total gross customer loans.

    Net income Group share
    Net income/(loss) for the financial year (after corporate income tax). Equal to net income Group share, less the share attributable to non-controlling interests in fully consolidated subsidiaries.

    Net income Group share attributable to ordinary shares
    The net income Group share attributable to ordinary shares represents the net income Group share from which the AT1 coupon has been deducted, including issuance costs before tax.

    RoTE Return on Tangible Equity
    The RoTE (Return on Tangible Equity) measures the return on tangible capital by dividing the Net income Group share annualised by the Group’s NBV net of intangibles and goodwill. The annualised Net income Group share corresponds to the annualisation of the Net income Group share (Q1x4; H1x2; 9Mx4/3) excluding impairments of intangible assets and restating each period of the IFRIC impacts in order to linearise them over the year.

    Disclaimer

    The financial information on Crédit Agricole S.A. and Crédit Agricole Group for second quarter and first half 2025 comprises this presentation and the attached appendices and press release which are available on the website: https://www.credit-agricole.com/finance/publications-financieres.

    This presentation may include prospective information on the Group, supplied as information on trends. This data does not represent forecasts within the meaning of EU Delegated Act 2019/980 of 14 March 2019 (Chapter 1, article 1, d).

    This information was developed from scenarios based on a number of economic assumptions for a given competitive and regulatory environment. Therefore, these assumptions are by nature subject to random factors that could cause actual results to differ from projections. Likewise, the financial statements are based on estimates, particularly in calculating market value and asset impairment.

    Readers must take all these risk factors and uncertainties into consideration before making their own judgement.

    Applicable standards and comparability

    The figures presented for the six-month period ending 30 June 2025 have been prepared in accordance with IFRS as adopted in the European Union and applicable at that date, and with the applicable regulations in force. This financial information does not constitute a set of financial statements for an interim period as defined by IAS 34 “Interim Financial Reporting” and has not been audited.

    Note: The scopes of consolidation of the Crédit Agricole S.A. and Crédit Agricole groups have not changed materially since the Crédit Agricole S.A. 2024 Universal Registration Document and its A.01 update (including all regulatory information about the Crédit Agricole Group) were filed with the AMF (the French Financial Markets Authority).

    The sum of values contained in the tables and analyses may differ slightly from the total reported due to rounding.

    Financial Agenda

    30 October 2025                Publication of the 2025 third quarter and first nine months results
    18 November 2025        Presentation of the Medium-Term Plan
    4 February 2026                Publication of the 2025 fourth quarter and full year results
    30 April 2026                Publication of the 2026 first quarter results
    20 May 2026                2026 General Meeting
    31 July 2026                Publication of the 2026 second quarter and the first half-year results
    30 October 2026                Publication of the 2026 third quarter and first nine months results

    Contacts

    CREDIT AGRICOLE PRESS CONTACTS

    CRÉDIT AGRICOLE S.A. INVESTOR RELATIONS CONTACTS

    Institutional investors   investor.relations@credit-agricole-sa.fr
    Individual shareholders + 33 800 000 777 (freephone number – France only) relation@actionnaires.credit-agricole.com
         
    Cécile Mouton + 33 1 57 72 86 79 cecile.mouton@credit-agricole-sa.fr
     

    Equity investor relations:

    		    
    Jean-Yann Asseraf
    Fethi Azzoug    		 + 33 1 57 72 23 81
    + 33 1 57 72 03 75    		 jean-yann.asseraf@credit-agricole-sa.fr fethi.azzoug@credit-agricole-sa.fr
    Oriane Cante + 33 1 43 23 03 07 oriane.cante@credit-agricole-sa.fr
    Nicolas Ianna + 33 1 43 23 55 51 nicolas.ianna@credit-agricole-sa.fr
    Leila Mamou + 33 1 57 72 07 93 leila.mamou@credit-agricole-sa.fr
    Anna Pigoulevski + 33 1 43 23 40 59 anna.pigoulevski@credit-agricole-sa.fr
         
         
    Debt investor and rating agency relations:  
    Gwenaëlle Lereste + 33 1 57 72 57 84 gwenaelle.lereste@credit-agricole-sa.fr
    Florence Quintin de Kercadio + 33 1 43 23 25 32 florence.quintindekercadio@credit-agricole-sa.fr
    Yury Romanov + 33 1 43 23 86 84 yury.romanov@credit-agricole-sa.fr
         
         
         

    See all our press releases at: www.credit-agricole.com – www.creditagricole.info

             

    1 Closing at 4thof July
    (2)Car, home, health, legal, all mobile phones or personal accident insurance.
    (3)CA Auto Bank, automotive JVs and automotive activities of other entities        
    (4)Low-carbon energy exposures made up of renewable energy produced by the clients of all Crédit Agricole Group entities, including nuclear energy exposures for Crédit Agricole CIB.
    (5)CAA outstandings (listed investments managed directly, listed investments managed under mandate and unlisted investments managed directly) and Amundi Transition Energétique.
    (6)Crédit Agricole Group outstandings, directly or via the EIB, dedicated to the environmental transition according to the Group’s internal sustainable assets framework, as of 31/03/2025. Change of method on property compared with the outstandings reported at 30/09/2024: with the same method, the outstandings at 31/03/2025 would be €85.9 billion.
    (7)The cost of risk/outstandings (in basis points) on a four-quarter rolling basis is calculated on the cost of risk of the past four quarters divided by the average outstandings at the start of each of the four quarters
    (8)The cost of risk/outstandings (in basis points) on an annualised basis is calculated on the cost of risk of the quarter multiplied by four and divided by the outstandings at the start of the quarter
    (9)Average rate of loans to monthly production for April to May 2025
    (10)Equipment rate – Home-Car-Health policies, Legal, All Mobile/Portable or personal accident insurance
    (11)Reversal of the provision for Home Purchase Saving Plans: +€16.3m in Q2-25 vs. +€22m in Q2-24 in revenues (+€12.1m in Q2-25 vs. +€17m in Q2-24 in net income Group share)

    (12)Provisioning rate calculated with outstandings in Stage 3 as denominator, and the sum of the provisions recorded in Stages 1, 2 and 3 as numerator.
    (13)The cost of risk/outstandings (in basis points) on a four-quarter rolling basis is calculated on the cost of risk of the past four quarters divided by the average outstandings at the start of each of the four quarters
    (14)The cost of risk/outstandings (in basis points) on an annualised basis is calculated on the cost of risk of the quarter multiplied by four and divided by the outstandings at the start of the quarter
    (15)See Appendixes for details on the calculation of the RoTE (return on tangible equity)
    (16)The annualised net income Group share corresponds to the annualisation of the net income Group share (Q1x4; H1x2; 9Mx4/3) by restating each period for IFRIC impacts, the effects of the additional corporate tax charge and the capital gain related to the deconsolidation of Amundi US to linearise them over the year.
    (17)In local standards
    (18)Scope: property and casualty in France and abroad
    (19)Combined property & casualty ratio in France (Pacifica) including discounting and excluding undiscounting, net of reinsurance: (claims + operating expenses + fee and commission income)/gross premiums earned. Undiscounted ratio: 97.4% (+0.1 pp over the year)
    (20)Excluding assets under custody for institutional clients
    (21)Amount of allocation of Contractual Service Margin (CSM), loss component and Risk Adjustment (RA), and operating variances net of reinsurance, in particular
    (22)Amount of allocation of CSM, loss component and RA, and operating variances net of reinsurance, in particular.
    (23)Net of reinsurance cost, including financial results
    (24)Pro forma scope effect of deconsolidated Amundi US in Q2 2024: €89m in revenues and €51m in expenses.
    (25)Excluding scope effect
    (26)Indosuez Wealth Management scope
    (27)Degroof Petercam scope effect April/May 2025: Revenues of €96m and expenses of -€71m
    (28)Q2-25 Integration costs: -€22.5m vs -€5.4m in Q2-24
    (29)Degroof Petercam scope effect over H1-25: reminder of figures for Degroof Petercam scope effect of Q1-25 revenues of €164m and expenses of -€115m
    (30)Refinitiv LSEG
    (31)Bloomberg in EUR
    (32)ISB integration costs: -€5m in Q2-25 (vs -€24.4m in Q2-24)
    (33)Net income becomes net income Group share following the purchase of minority shares in Santander by Crédit Agricole S.A.
    (34)CA Auto Bank, automotive JVs and auto activities of other entities
    (35)CA Auto Bank and automotive JVs
    (36)Lease financing of corporate and professional equipment investments in France: -7.5% in Q1-25 (source: ASF)
    (37)Increase in RWA of around +€7G primarily connected to the consolidation of the leasing activities in Q4-24
    (38)Cost of risk for the last four quarters as a proportion of the average outstandings at the beginning of the period for the last four quarters.
    (39)Net of POCI outstandings
    (40)Source: Abi Monthly Outlook, July 2025: +0.9% June/June for all loans
    (41)At 30 June 2025 this scope includes the entities CA Italia, CA Polska, CA Egypt and CA Ukraine.

    (42) Over a rolling four quarter period.
    (43)At 30 June 2025, this scope corresponds to the aggregation of all Group entities present in Italy: CA Italia, CAPFM (Agos, Leasys, CA Auto Bank), CAA (CA Vita, CACI, CA Assicurazioni), Amundi, Crédit Agricole CIB, CAIWM, CACEIS, CALEF.
    (44)Banco BPM stake -21 bps; Stake in Victory Capital: – 8 bps or –1 bp including capital gain from the deconsolidation of Amundi US; Additional threshold excess for other financial participations: -7 bps.

    (48)
    (49)

    (54)This refers to the change between the value at 30 June 2025 and the value at 1 (or 2) January 2025; the latter is the value of the variable concerned at 30 June 2025.
    (55)In March, Parliament approved the creation of a €500 billion infrastructure investment fund over 12 years. The first phase of the reform of the debt brake was also approved, allowing regions to run a structural deficit of up to 0.35% of GDP. Finally, defence spending above 1% of GDP will be exempt from the deficit calculation. The adoption of these measures has broken down barriers to financing infrastructure and defence investment that had previously seemed insurmountable.
    (56)APMs are financial indicators not presented in the financial statements or defined in accounting standards but used in the context of financial communications, such as net income Group share or RoTE. They are used to facilitate the understanding of the company’s actual performance. Each APM indicator is matched in its definition to accounting data.

    Attachment

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The Muslim world has been strong on rhetoric, short on action over Gaza and Afghanistan

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amin Saikal, Emeritus Professor of Middle Eastern and Central Asian Studies, Australian National University; and Vice Chancellor’s Strategic Fellow, Australian National University

    When it comes to dealing with two of the biggest current crises in the Muslim world – the devastation of Gaza and the Taliban’s draconian rule in Afghanistan – Arab and Muslim states have been staggeringly ineffective.

    Their chief body, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), in particular, has been strong on rhetoric but very short on serious, tangible action.

    The OIC, headquartered in Saudi Arabia, is composed of 57 predominantly Muslim states. It is supposed to act as a representative and consultative body and make decisions and recommendations on the major issues that affect Muslims globally. It calls itself the “collective voice of the Muslim world”.

    Yet the body has proved to be toothless in the face of Israel’s relentless assault on Gaza, triggered in response to the Hamas attacks of October 7 2023.

    The OIC has equally failed to act against the Taliban’s reign of terror in the name of Islam in ethnically diverse Afghanistan.

    Many strong statements

    Despite its projection of a united umma (the global Islamic community, as defined in my coauthored book Islam Beyond Borders), the OIC has ignominiously been divided on Gaza and Afghanistan.

    True, it has condemned Israel’s Gaza operations. It’s also called for an immediate, unconditional ceasefire and the delivery of humanitarian aid to the starving population of the strip.

    It has also rejected any Israeli move to depopulate and annex the enclave, as well as the West Bank. These moves would render the two-state solution to the long-running Israeli–Palestinian conflict essentially defunct.

    Further, the OIC has welcomed the recent joint statement by the foreign ministers of 28 countries (including the United Kingdom, many European Union members and Japan) calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, as well as France’s decision to recognise the state of Palestine.

    The OIC is good at putting out statements. However, this approach hasn’t varied much from that of the wider global community. It is largely verbal, and void of any practical measures.

    What the group could do for Gaza

    Surely, Muslim states can and should be doing more.

    For example, the OIC has failed to persuade Israel’s neighbouring states – Egypt and Jordan, in particular – to open their border crossings to allow humanitarian aid to flow into Gaza, the West Bank or Israel, in defiance of Israeli leaders.

    Nor has it been able to compel Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan and Morocco to suspend their relations with the Jewish state until it agrees to a two-state solution.

    Further, the OIC has not adopted a call by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and the United Nations special rapporteur on Palestinian territories, Francesca Albanese, for Israel to be suspended from the UN.

    Nor has it urged its oil-rich Arab members, in particular Saudi Arabia and the UAE, to harness their resources to prompt US President Donald Trump to halt the supply of arms to Israel and pressure Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to end the war.

    Stronger action on Afghanistan, too

    In a similar vein, the OIC has failed to exert maximum pressure on the ultra-extremist and erstwhile terrorist Taliban government in Afghanistan.

    Since sweeping back into power in 2021, the Taliban has ruled in a highly repressive, misogynist and draconian fashion in the name of Islam. This is not practised anywhere else in the Muslim world.

    In December 2022, OIC Secretary General Hissein Brahim Taha called for a global campaign to unite Islamic scholars and religious authorities against the Taliban’s decision to ban girls from education.

    But this was superseded a month later, when the OIC expressed concern over the Taliban’s “restrictions on women”, but asked the international community not to “interfere in Afghanistan’s internal affairs”. This was warmly welcomed by the Taliban.

    In effect, the OIC – and therefore most Muslim countries – have adopted no practical measures to penalise the Taliban for its behaviour.

    It has not censured the Taliban nor imposed crippling sanctions on the group. And while no Muslim country has officially recognised the Taliban government (only Russia has), most OIC members have nonetheless engaged with the Taliban at political, economic, financial and trade levels.

    Why is it so divided?

    There are many reasons for the OIC’s ineffectiveness.

    For one, the group is composed of a politically, socially, culturally and economically diverse assortment of members.

    But more importantly, it has not functioned as a “bridge builder” by developing a common strategy of purpose and action that can overcome the geopolitical and sectarian differences of its members.

    In the current polarised international environment, the rivalry among its member states – and with major global powers such as the United States and China – has rendered the organisation a mere talking shop.

    This has allowed extremist governments in both Israel and Afghanistan to act with impunity.

    It is time to look at the OIC’s functionality and determine how it can more effectively unite the umma.

    This may also be an opportunity for its member states to develop an effective common strategy that could help the cause of peace and stability in the Muslim domain and its relations with the outside world.

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

    – ref. The Muslim world has been strong on rhetoric, short on action over Gaza and Afghanistan – https://theconversation.com/the-muslim-world-has-been-strong-on-rhetoric-short-on-action-over-gaza-and-afghanistan-262121

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairman Wicker and Chairman Risch Introduce Bill to Ensure Europe Pays for Ukraine Military Sales

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Mississippi Roger Wicker

    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senators Roger Wicker, R-Miss., Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and James Risch, R-ID, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, announced they will introduce new legislation to support President Trump’s efforts to achieve peace in Ukraine, push back on Russian aggression, and ensure America’s allies are paying their fair share to end this conflict.

    This new legislation, the PEACE Act, builds on the successful NATO summit this summer, which produced a historic agreement to increase NATO defense spending and revitalize alliance burden sharing.  The PEACE Act creates a fund at the U.S. treasury that would allow allies to deposit money to replenish U.S. military equipment donated to Ukraine.

    Upon introducing the bill, Chairman Wicker issued the following statement:

    “President Trump has made clear that he will not tolerate Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin’s continued targeting of civilians in Ukraine.  The death and destruction must end, but Putin will not stop unless it is made clear to him that there is no path to success and that continued war will lead to massive costs for him and Russia. Today, we are introducing the PEACE Act, which gives President Trump and our NATO allies an additional option to deliver military aid to Ukraine. The PEACE Act enables our European partners to finance replenishments so that the U.S. military can continue drawdown packages of weapons to Ukraine. This is the fastest way to arm Ukraine as well as to minimize the strategic and military threat posed by Russia to the U.S. and NATO. The PEACE Act, in conjunction with the purchase of new military equipment and the prospect of imposing a crippling sanctions regime, shows Putin that neither escalation nor attrition will allow him to achieve his war aims.”

    Chairman Risch said: “Peace is only possible through strength. President Trump’s work with our NATO allies ensures they cover the cost of weapons for Ukraine, and this bill will give him the tool he needs to do so. Together, we will send a clear message to Putin that there are consequences for his refusal to negotiate in good faith.”

    Background

    1. The historic agreement by NATO allies to spend 5% of their GDP on defense is the culmination of President Trump’s years long effort to revitalize the alliance and ensure our allies are paying their fair share.
    1. The PEACE Act will transfer American weapons to Ukraine and use NATO allies’ funds to buy more modern equipment, in alignment with President Trump’s plan.
    1. The PEACE Act complements existing tools that the President and our NATO allies are already using, such as the JUMPSTART initiative, which allows Europeans to pay to produce new U.S. equipment, that will be delivered to Ukraine upon completion. The PEACE Act will serve as a bridge to deliver arms in the near-term while new equipment is being built over the long-term.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Attorney General James Fights to Protect Immigrant Communities and Public Safety in Rochester

    Source: US State of New York

    EW YORK – New York Attorney General Letitia James today took action to stand up for vulnerable immigrant communities in Rochester. In an amicus brief filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York, Attorney General James emphasized that localities with laws that limit local authorities’ involvement in federal immigration enforcement keep communities safe and allow local law enforcement to use resources to address local public safety priorities, such as fighting crime and reducing gun violence. Attorney General James further argues that Rochester’s longstanding law, often referred to as a “sanctuary city” law, is constitutional because the Constitution grants states and their localities power over the day-to-day public safety of residents within their jurisdiction. In the brief filed today, Attorney General James asks the court to grant judgment in Rochester’s favor in the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit against the city.

    “For years, these laws in Rochester and cities throughout New York have kept New Yorkers safe,” said Attorney General James. “The Trump administration’s attacks on immigrant communities are cruel and shameful. Rochester’s law is constitutional, and my office will continue to use every tool at our disposal to protect New Yorkers.”

    Rochester’s law, like many other sanctuary city laws, limits local or state agencies’ involvement in federal civil immigration enforcement and is intended to build trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement and ensure local resources are spent on local priorities. Rochester first enacted its law in 1986 and later updated it in 2017. It does not limit cooperation between local and federal authorities on criminal matters. In April, DOJ filed a lawsuit against Rochester, arguing that the city’s law is unconstitutional because it is preempted by federal law. In her brief, Attorney General James argues that Rochester’s law does not violate the Constitution, and that the 10th amendment reserves police power to states and their localities.

    Attorney General James writes that the law helps keep New Yorkers safe because it encourages individuals in immigrant communities to report crimes, serve as witnesses, and seek critical medical care or social services without fearing deportation. Studies have repeatedly indicated that greater involvement of local law enforcement in immigration enforcement makes immigrant communities less likely to interact with police, and more likely to become victims of crime or other exploitation. Other research has concluded that immigrant community members often refrain from seeking vital local services, including health care services, when they fear that local officials could report them to immigration authorities. Delaying medical care for fear of deportation can cause serious health complications for people who need it.

    Attorney General James explains that imposing federal immigration priorities on already strained local officials can detract from local needs. A former Rochester police chief, who held the position at the time of the enactment of the city’s 2017 law, explained that it was intended to avoid diverting scarce resources and time away from the community’s public safety priorities, like reducing gun violence.

    Attorney General James is asking the court to grant judgment in Rochester’s favor in the DOJ’s lawsuit and uphold Rochester’s sanctuary city law. 

    Attorney General James has been a national leader in fighting to protect and defend immigrant communities. In July, Attorney General James joined a coalition of 19 other states in defending essential legal services for unaccompanied immigrant children. Also in July, Attorney General James urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to uphold an order blocking the federal government from mass terminating the Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela parole program. Attorney General James also joined a coalition of 17 other attorneys general in supporting the American Civil Liberties Union’s lawsuit challenging the federal government’s use of unlawful immigration enforcement tactics in Los Angeles, California. In June, Attorney General James co-led a coalition of 17 attorneys general in defending hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan immigrants who had their legal status threatened after the Trump administration attempted to eliminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS).

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • Trump says US to impose 25% tariff on India from August 1

    Source: Government of India

    Source: Government of India (4)

    U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday imposed a 25% tariff on goods imported from India starting August 1, along with an unspecified penalty for buying Russian weapons and oil, potentially straining relations with the world’s most populous democracy.

    The U.S. decision singles out India more severely than other major trading partners, and threatens to unravel months of talks between the two countries, undermining a key strategic partner of Washington’s and a counterbalance to China.

    “While India is our friend, we have, over the years, done relatively little business with them because their Tariffs are far too high, among the highest in the World, and they have the most strenuous and obnoxious non-monetary Trade Barriers of any Country,” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post.

    “They have always bought a vast majority of their military equipment from Russia, and are Russia’s largest buyer of ENERGY, along with China, at a time when everyone wants Russia to STOP THE KILLING IN UKRAINE — ALL THINGS NOT GOOD!”

    The White House has previously warned India about its high average applied tariffs – nearly 39% on agricultural products – with rates climbing to 45% on vegetable oils and around 50% on apples and corn.

    Russia continued to be the top oil supplier to India during the first six months of 2025, making up 35% of overall supplies.

    The U.S. currently has a $45.7 billion trade deficit with India.

    The news pushed the Indian rupee down 0.4% to around 87.80 against the U.S. dollar in the non-deliverable forwards market, from its close at 87.42 during market hours. Gift Nifty futures were trading at 24,692 points, down 0.6%.

    CONTENTIOUS ISSUES

    “Higher tariffs for India compared to countries it competes with, for exports to the U.S., are going to be challenging,” said Ranen Banerjee, a partner of economic advisory services at PwC India.

    India’s commerce ministry, which is leading the trade talks, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    U.S. and Indian negotiators had held multiple rounds of discussions to resolve contentious issues, particularly over market access into India for U.S. agricultural and dairy products.

    Despite progress in some areas, Indian officials resisted opening the domestic market to imports of wheat, corn, rice and genetically modified soybeans, citing risks to the livelihood of millions of Indian farmers.

    The U.S. had flagged concerns over India’s increasing and burdensome import-quality requirements, among its many barriers to trade, in a report released in March.

    The new tariffs are expected to impact India’s goods exports to the U.S., estimated at around $87 billion in 2024, including labour-intensive products such as garments, pharmaceuticals, gems and jewelry, and petrochemicals.

    India now joins a growing list of countries facing higher tariffs under Trump’s “Liberation Day” trade policy, aimed at reshaping U.S. trade relations by demanding greater reciprocity.

    The setback comes despite earlier commitments by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Trump to conclude the first phase of a trade deal by autumn 2025 and expand bilateral trade to $500 billion by 2030, from $191 billion in 2024.

    Indian officials have previously indicated that they view the U.S. as a key strategic partner, particularly in counterbalancing China. But they have emphasized the need to preserve policy space on agriculture, data governance, and state subsidies.

    HOPES FOR A DEAL

    It was not immediately clear whether the announcement was a negotiating tactic. While Trump railed against Japan in a June 30 Truth Social post and said there would likely be no deal with the North Asian nation, a deal was agreed on July 22.

    An Indian government official told Reuters that New Delhi continued to remain engaged with the United States to seal an agreement.

    Economists, too, remained hopeful.

    “While the negotiations seems to have broken down, we don’t think the trade-deal haggling between the two nations is over yet,” Madhavi Arora, an economist at Emkay Global.

    (Reuters)

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congressman Valadao Builds Local Partnerships to Help Feed Our Communities

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman David G Valadao (CA-21)

    WASHINGTON – Congressman David Valadao (CA-22) joined Reps. Rob Bresnahan (PA-08), Chellie Pingree (ME-01), and Josh Riley (NY-19) in introducing the Local Farmers Feeding our Communities Act. This bipartisan bill would allow states, through the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), to establish cooperative agreements connecting regional farmers and producers with local food distribution organizations. Through these agreements, funds would be used to purchase local, fresh, and minimally processed foods like meat, seafood, milk, cheese, eggs, fruit, and poultry.

    “The Central Valley grows the food that feeds our nation, and this bill gives us a chance to connect our farmers directly with local families and food banks to deliver healthy, homegrown food where it’s needed most,” said Congressman Valadao. “The Local Farmers Feeding our Communities Act is a bipartisan effort that invests in our farmers and communities, and I’m proud to stand with my colleagues in support.”

    “Far too often the discussion around alleviating hunger leaves out those who grow, raise, and produce food – our local farmers. Reducing the barriers between our communities and the farmers who produce our food is a commonsense approach to ensure everyone in Northeast Pennsylvania has access to the food they need.” said Rep. Bresnahan. “This bill recognizes the hard work that is needed to supply fresh and nutritious food like fruit, veggies, milk, and cheese, while also creating a clear path to putting this food on the plates of people who need it. This investment in our local farmers is an investment in stronger local food security and healthier communities.”

    “When Trump’s USDA abruptly ended the Local Food Purchase Assistance and Local Food for Schools programs, it pulled the rug out from under farmers, food banks, and schools across the country—including in Maine. These were proven tools for strengthening local food supply chains, supporting small producers, and getting healthy, locally grown food to hungry families,” said Congresswoman Pingree. “Our bipartisan Local Farmers Feeding Our Communities Act restores and improves on that successful model. It’s a practical, community-driven solution that invests in our nation’s farmers, builds regional resilience, and fights hunger.”

    “It doesn’t get more common sense than fighting hunger by supporting local farmers,” said Congressman Riley. “This is about putting food on the tables of people who need it most, and investing directly in the family farmers who power our rural communities.”

    Additional co-sponsors include: Reps. Tony Wied (WI-08), Dan Newhouse (WA-04), Zach Nunn (IA-03), Nikki Budzinski (IL-13), Jim Costa (CA-21), Eugene Vindman (VA-07), Jimmy Panetta (CA-19), and Alma Adams (NC-12).

    “This legislation supports a program with a proven record of increasing access to the fresh fruits and vegetables our farmers work hard to produce,” said Congressman Newhouse. “It cuts down on food waste, supplies food banks with produce, and ensures that those who need food can get it. I thank Rep. Bresnahan for his leadership on this legislation as we work to strengthen our food system and expand access to healthy food across the country.”

    “Iowa farmers work hard to grow high-quality, nutritious food. This bill helps ensure local families and food banks can afford the fresh produce grown right here in our communities,” said Congressman Nunn. “I’m proud to back a plan that strengthens our food system, supports small producers and veterans, and expands access to healthy, Iowa-grown meals.”

    “I’m proud to join this bipartisan bill to support our Illinois family farmers and help my constituents access nutritious, locally-grown food,” said Congresswoman Budzinski. “In Central and Southern Illinois, the Local Food Purchase Assistance and Local Food for Schools have been a win-win-win for growers and producers, food banks, and schools. It was a major setback when these initiatives were abruptly cancelled. The Local Farmers Feeding Our Communities Act would restore these successful programs that are a proven way to fight hunger, strengthen the food supply chain, and bolster the local agricultural economy.”

    “As the only Virginian on the House Agriculture Committee, I know the Local Food Purchase Assistance and Local Food for Schools programs are essential for our farmers and the families they feed across the Seventh. When the Trump Administration suddenly ended both, it caused a ripple effect — hurting local farmers, schools, and food banks across the Commonwealth and the United States. This cannot stand,” said Congressman Vindman. “Earlier this year, I met with Eugene Triplett at his fifth-generation, Black-owned family farm in Culpeper. He told me directly that these programs helped him get healthy, locally grown food to hungry kids and families. I will always work to deliver for Virginia families and farmers like Eugene.”

    The Local Farmers Feeding our Communities Act:

    • Allows USDA to create cooperative agreements with state agencies to purchase and distribute local food.
    • Sets aside a portion of funding specifically for smaller farmers and ranchers, as well as veteran-owned operations.
    • Provides technical assistance to help farmers meet food safety standards and grow their operations.
    • Strengthens local and regional food systems to improve food security, reduce supply chain disruptions, and minimize waste.

    Read the full bill here.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Starmer’s move on Palestinian statehood is clever politics

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Brian Brivati, Visiting Professor of Contemporary History and Human Rights, Kingston University

    Keir Starmer has announced that the UK will recognise Palestinian statehood by September 2025 unless Israel meets certain conditions, marking a significant shift in UK policy.

    For decades, successive UK governments withheld recognition, insisting it could only come as part of a negotiated settlement between Israel and Palestine. This position, rooted in the Oslo accords of the 1990s and aligned with US policy, effectively gave Israel a veto over Palestinian statehood. As long as Israel refused to engage seriously in peace talks, the UK refrained from acting.

    Starmer has now broken with this precedent, potentially aligning the UK with 147 other countries. But the Israeli government must take what the UK calls “substantive steps” toward peace. These include agreeing to a ceasefire in Gaza, allowing full humanitarian access, explicitly rejecting any plans to annex West Bank territory, and returning to a credible peace process aimed at establishing a two-state solution.



    Read more:
    UK to recognise Palestinian statehood unless Israel agrees to ceasefire – here’s what that would mean

    If Israel meets these conditions, the UK would presumably withhold recognition until the “peace process” has been completed. Starmer made clear that Britain will assess Israeli compliance in September and reserves the right to proceed with recognition regardless of Israel’s response. The message was unambiguous: no one side will have a veto.

    This is more than just clever internal politics and party management. Anything that puts any pressure on Israel to move towards peace should be welcomed. But will it amount to much more than that?

    Starmer has faced criticism over the last few years for resisting recognising Palestine as a state. While Labour’s frontbench held the line for much of the past year, rank-and-file discontent has grown – and with it, the political risks.

    At the heart of Labour’s internal tensions lie two irreconcilable blocs. On one side are MPs and activists – both inside the party and expelled from it – who are vocally pro-Palestinian and have been outraged by the government’s failure to act. On the other side are members of the Labour right who continue to back Israel, oppose unilateral recognition of statehood and focus on the terrible crimes of Hamas but not the IDF campaign in Gaza.

    Between them sits a soft-centre majority, for whom foreign policy is not a defining issue. They are not ideologically committed to either side but have become increasingly uneasy with the escalating violence and the UK’s diplomatic inertia.

    As the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza deepens, public outrage in the UK has grown. Mass protests have put mounting pressure on the government to act. Within parliament, over 200 MPs, including many from Labour, signed a letter demanding immediate recognition of Palestine. Senior cabinet ministers reportedly pushed hard for the shift on electoral grounds, as well as principle.

    International dynamics have also played a crucial role. France’s announcement that it would recognise Palestine by September, becoming the first major western power to do so, created additional pressure. Spain, Ireland, Norway and several other European states have already taken the step. Britain chose to align itself with this emerging consensus.

    These pressures combined created a sense of urgency and political opportunity. Starmer’s government appears to be using the threat of recognition as leverage –pressuring Israel to return to negotiations and halt annexation plans.

    The calculation seems to be that Israel will either meet the UK’s conditions or face diplomatic consequences, including recognition of Palestine without its consent. There is also the possibility that Israel will simply ignore the UK and press on with its campaign for “Greater Israel”.

    Challenges ahead

    That is why, while this is a meaningful departure from the past, it is not without problems. Chief among them is the principle of conditionality itself. By making recognition contingent on Israeli behaviour, the UK risks reinforcing the very logic it claims to be rejecting – that Palestinian rights can be granted or withheld based on the actions of the occupying power.

    Recognition of statehood should not be used as a diplomatic carrot or stick. It is a matter of justice, not reward. Palestinians are entitled to self-determination under international law.

    There is also concern that the September deadline could become another missed opportunity. If Israel makes vague or symbolic gestures – such as issuing carefully worded statements or temporarily suspending one settlement expansion – will the UK delay recognition further, claiming that “progress” is being made?

    Palestinians have seen such tactics before. Recognition has been delayed for decades in the name of preserving leverage. But leverage for what?

    The Israeli government, dominated by ultra-nationalists and pro-annexation hardliners, is unlikely to satisfy the UK’s conditions in good faith. The risk is that the deadline becomes a mirage – always imminent, never reached.

    Recognition also comes as part of a proposed new peace plan. This will be supported by the UK, France and Germany, and it allows the government to say it is being consist with its policy that recognition is part of a peace plan.

    If, by some miracle, pressure works and Israel meets all the conditions, then the UK can claim that recognition has played a role in bringing Israel back to the negotiating table.

    But if recognition is then withheld, there will not be two equal actors at that table. The State of Palestine will not have been recognised by key international players, and a new round of western-run peace processes will begin. These do not have a good track record.

    If Israel fails to agree to a ceasefire and let aid into Gaza, then Starmer will be forced to go through with recognition.

    For now, he has defused the internal division in his party. It is clever politics, good party management – it remains to be seen if it is also statesmanship.

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

    Brian Brivati is affiliated with Britain Palestine Project, a Scottish Charity that campaigns for equal rights, justice and security for Israelis and Palestiniains

    – ref. Starmer’s move on Palestinian statehood is clever politics – https://theconversation.com/starmers-move-on-palestinian-statehood-is-clever-politics-262239

    MIL OSI Analysis –