NewzIntel.com

Category: Politics

  • MIL-Evening Report: Waste-to-energy in Australia: how it works, where new incinerators could go, and how they stack up

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Abbas, Associate Dean (Research), University of Sydney

    Martin Mecnarowski, Shutterstock.

    Every year, Australia buries millions of tonnes of waste in landfills. But these sites are filling fast, recycling has its own limitations, and most waste export is banned. So councils and state governments are looking for alternatives.

    Several large-scale incinerators have been proposed, to turn municipal solid waste into electricity. One is already up and running in Perth’s outer suburbs.

    The A$1.5 billion Parkes Energy Recovery project planned for New South Wales would be Australia’s biggest. However, community backlash over potential health risks could put the plan in doubt.

    As chemical engineers, we recognise the potential benefits of this technology. Modern facilities operating around the world show these processes can be efficient, safe and environmentally controlled. However, minimal risk does not mean zero risk. Understanding both the benefits and challenges is crucial to address community concerns.

    What is waste-to-energy?

    Waste-to-energy, also known as energy-from-waste, can transform waste otherwise destined for landfill into electricity, heat or fuel.

    This does not replace recycling. Instead, it offers a solution for materials that are difficult or impossible to recycle. Care must be taken, however, to ensure waste-to-energy technologies complement rather than supplant recycling efforts.

    How does it work?

    There are three main types of waste-to-energy technologies:

    1. Thermal: use heat to generate steam, which spins turbines to create electricity. The heat can come from burning waste, producing carbon dioxide, water and ash. Alternatively, solid waste can be turned into gas (hydrogen and carbon monoxide). This process is known as gasification.

    2. Biological: use microorganisms to break down organic matter in the waste stream, producing biogas, mainly methane. This is then used for power or heat generation.

    3. Chemical: use processes such as pyrolysis or hydrothermal liquefaction to convert hard-to-recycle materials into fuels or chemicals. These can feed into industrial and manufacturing processes.

    What’s holding Australia back?

    When most Australians hear about making energy from waste, they think of
    old-fashioned incinerators. Those outdated facilities released smoke and toxins into the air.

    But modern incinerators use advanced air pollution control systems that capture harmful emissions.

    Some use static electricity to remove dust or smoke particles from the gas stream. Other pollution control systems include acid gas scrubbers, catalytic converters and fabric filters.

    This can cut emissions of fine particles by up to 99%.

    The volume of waste sent to landfill is also reduced by up to 90%. What remains includes incinerator bottom ash and fly ash. Often these can be reused in making concrete, pavement and other construction materials. But regulatory issues will need to be overcome before this can happen in Australia.

    Introducing the Parkes project

    The Parkes Energy Recovery project, announced in March, promises to process around 600,000 tonnes of waste a year. This should generate at least 60 megawatts of electricity – enough to power 80,000 homes.

    To receive development approval, the project must comply with stringent environmental and health standards. This includes preparing an Environmental Impact Statement and Human Health Risk Assessment. The NSW Environment Protection Authority may then issue an Environment Protection Licence. Such a licence requires ongoing monitoring and frequent audits.

    Extensive community consultation is underway.

    Other projects around Australia

    There are two waste-to-energy plants in Western Australia, one at Kwinana and another under construction at East Rockingham. A third plant has been given the go-ahead in Victoria, at Maryvale.

    Kwinana received its first delivery of waste in July 2024.

    Licences to build other major waste-to-energy facilities have been issued in Victoria. Various proposals are also being considered in New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia.

    Australia’s first standalone, large-scale waste-to-energy plant in WA | ABC News.

    Taking tips from overseas

    A shortage of landfill sites in cities across Europe and Asia originally promoted investment in waste-to-energy technology. These power plants are now commonplace in Germany, the Netherlands and Japan, substantially reducing reliance on landfill.

    The Amager Bakke plant in Copenhagen shows how such facilities can also enrich a community. This award-winning building doubles as a public recreation space, complete with a rooftop ski slope.

    In China, the proposed Shenzhen East Waste-to-Energy Plant could process 5,000 tonnes of waste a day. That works out to 1.8 million tonnes of waste a year, if run continuously.

    One of the world’s largest waste-to-energy plants is in Shenzhen, China (Dezeen)

    Waste-to-energy and the circular economy

    Waste-to-energy technology is useful in the transition to a circular economy. This is an economy where resources are continually cycled through the system and never wasted.

    Reusing, recycling and reducing waste must remain top priorities. Waste-to-energy technology should then be used as a last resort, extracting value from hard- or impossible-to-recycle materials.

    It’s certainly better than sending waste to landfill. When buried underground, waste can leach toxins into soil, ground and surface water. The potent greenhouse gas methane is also released when food rots in landfill.

    Over-reliance on waste-to-energy could supplant more sustainable circular recycling efforts. But incineration plants are being scaled back in Europe, as the focus shifts to reuse.

    Copenhagen’s power plant is also a ski slope (The Impossible Build)

    The case for waste-to-energy

    Despite its potential, waste-to-energy technology remains controversial in Australia. Some local communities remain concerned about emissions and potential long-term health risks. Environmental groups also question the potential effects on recycling rates.

    Nevertheless, growing awareness of the limitations of recycling, increasing landfill levies, bans on waste exports, and ambitious federal and state circular economy strategies are making waste-to-energy a more pragmatic option. Stringent regulation and community consultation will be necessary to get these projects off the ground.

    Responsible use of modern waste-to-energy technology can generate electricity and heat for homes with minimal emissions, and can extend benefits that serve local communities. It can also complement Australia’s renewable energy targets while taking a better approach to managing waste.

    Professor Ali Abbas is Associate Dean (Research) at the University of Sydney Faculty of Engineering. He is Australia’s Chief Circular Engineer (Circular Australia), and Founder and Executive Director Innovation at Scimita Group, a Deep Tech Innovation House working in sustainable technologies. He has previously advised government and industry on energy-from-waste and circular economy topics.

    Dominic Bui Viet is a Research Fellow at The University of Sydney in the Faculty of Engineering. He has previously received funding from a Cooperative Research Centre projects grant to conduct research into pyrolysis technologies for waste management.

    Eric Sanjaya is a Research Fellow at The University of Sydney, Faculty of Engineering. He has previously advised government and industry on energy-from-waste and circular economy topics

    – ref. Waste-to-energy in Australia: how it works, where new incinerators could go, and how they stack up – https://theconversation.com/waste-to-energy-in-australia-how-it-works-where-new-incinerators-could-go-and-how-they-stack-up-254395

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Pillar Two interactions with other provisions

    Source: New places to play in Gungahlin

    Interaction with other provisions

    Australia’s implementation of the Global Anti-Base Erosion Model RulesExternal Link (GloBE Rules) includes consequential amendments to Australia’s income tax law to clarify its interaction with Pillar Two. The amendments are included in the Multinational—Global and Domestic Minimum Tax (Consequential) Act 2024External Link.

    In particular, the Consequential Act includes amendments to specific Australian cross-border tax provisions. These include rules concerning foreign income tax offsets, controlled foreign companies, hybrid mismatches and foreign hybrids.

    Australia’s foreign income tax offset (FITO) rules do not provide a foreign tax credit for taxes paid under a foreign income inclusion rule (IIR) and foreign undertaxed profits rule (UTPR).

    However, to the extent you satisfy the usual eligibility criteria and integrity rules, a FITO may be claimed in respect of foreign domestic minimum top-up tax (DMT) paid on income included in your Australian assessable income.

    The amount of the FITO allowed in respect of foreign DMT taxes is subject to an additional safeguard.

    New FITO integrity rule for foreign DMT taxes

    The amount of DMT tax which an entity is treated as having paid is reduced by:

    • the amount of a refundable tax credit that is refunded to an entity because the credit exceeds income tax liability
    • consideration received for the transfer of a transferable tax credit to which an entity was entitled in respect of a foreign income tax of that jurisdiction
    • cash or cash equivalent amounts recognised as government grants under International Accounting Standard 20 (or a comparable accounting standard applicable under a foreign law)
    • a benefit of a kind specified by the Minister in respect of a specified jurisdiction.

    This new integrity rule complements the existing FITO integrity rule. The existing rule reduces the amount of foreign income tax that an entity is considered to have paid:

    • to the extent it is entitled to refunds of the foreign income tax, or
    • by any other benefits worked out by reference to the amount of foreign income tax.

    Example: New FITO integrity rule for foreign DMT

    Entity A (a constituent entity located in unlisted country Jurisdiction A) is a Controlled Foreign Company (CFC), wholly owned by Aus Co, which is part of the same multinational enterprise group (MNE group).

    Jurisdiction A has a corporate tax rate of 10% and has enacted a Qualified Domestic Minimum Top-up Tax.

    Entity A receives a $6 grant from the government of Jurisdiction A (recognised as a government grant under an applicable accounting standard).

    Entity A derived $85 of attributable income, which is wholly attributable to Aus Co. In arriving at the $85 of attributable income, a notional deduction of $10 for corporate income tax and $5 for a foreign DMT tax paid in Jurisdiction A is claimed.

    Assuming other relevant conditions in the FITO rules are satisfied, the amount of FITO that could have been available for Aus Co would have been $15 (the combination of $10 CIT and $5 DMT), disregarding the new integrity rule.

    However, under the new integrity rule, the FITO is reduced by the government grant ($6), capped at the amount of foreign DMT tax paid ($5).

    Therefore, the FITO allowed is $15 – $5 = $10.

    End of example

    Controlled foreign company rules

    The CFC rules work to attribute foreign income earned by a foreign company back to Australia in certain circumstances. The interactions between the CFC rules and Pillar Two are such that:

    • Tax imposed under CFC tax regimes (including Australia) are taken into account when calculating the effective tax rate of a jurisdiction for Pillar Two purposes.
    • Foreign DMT, IIR or UTPR taxes are excluded from the meaning of ‘subject to tax’ for CFCs and transferor trusts located in a listed jurisdiction under section 324 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936 (ITAA 1936). This will also impact whether certain income is considered eligible designated concession income (EDCI) and therefore taxed in Australia.
    • Taxpayers are precluded from notionally deducting foreign IIR tax and foreign UTPR tax in calculating attributable income under section 393 of the ITAA 1936.
    • A notionally allowable deduction may be available for payments of foreign DMT tax.

    Australia’s Qualified Domestic Minimum Tax (QDMT) is given priority in its application to Australian income and does not take into account taxes imposed under other CFC tax regimes.

    Example: Eligible designated concessional income

    Australian Entity A Co is an attributable taxpayer in respect of B Co, which is located in an overseas listed country. The listed country has implemented the IIR, UTPR and DMT.

    The listed country applies a QDMT, which includes an item of income from B Co in its Effective Tax Rate (ETR) calculation. This income is otherwise exempt for corporate income tax purposes in the listed country.

    In determining whether the item of income has been subject to tax in a listed country, the taxpayer is required to disregard any imposition of GloBE taxes (IIR, UTPR and DMT). The item is still considered as EDCI.

    The taxpayer is also entitled to a notional deduction for any foreign DMT paid in respect of the EDCI included in its notional assessable income.

    End of example

    Hybrid mismatch rules

    The operation of Australia’s hybrid mismatch rules broadly continues to operate unaffected by the Australian global and domestic minimum tax.

    Foreign DMT, IIR or UTPR and other foreign minimum taxes are disregarded when determining if an amount of income is subject to foreign income tax per the hybrid mismatch rules under section 832-120 of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1997. This ensures that a hybrid mismatch can be identified irrespective of whether a jurisdiction has implemented an IIR, UTPR or DMT.

    The disregarding of such taxes also applies in the context of Australia’s targeted integrity rule in Subdivision 832-J. Specifically, a foreign GloBE tax does not impact whether a payment of interest or an amount under a derivative financial arrangement is subject to foreign income tax at a rate of 10% or less. However, the application of foreign IIR, UTPR and DMT taxes may still be a relevant factor under the principal purpose test in determining whether it is reasonable to conclude that an entity entered a scheme with the requisite purpose.

    Foreign hybrid rules

    Similarly, Australia’s foreign hybrid rules broadly continues to operate unaffected by the Pillar Two regime.

    Australia’s foreign hybrid rules ensure that an entity that qualifies as a ‘foreign hybrid’ is treated as a partnership (rather than a company) for Australian tax purposes.

    One of the requirements for entities to be treated as foreign hybrids is that no foreign income tax is imposed on the entity itself. References to ‘foreign income tax’ do not include foreign IIR, UTPR and DMT taxes and other foreign minimum taxes, ensuring that the foreign hybrid rules are not impacted by a foreign jurisdiction’s decision to impose such taxes at the level of the foreign hybrid entity.

    Example: Foreign hybrid limited partnership

    Polar LLP is located in Jurisdiction A. AusCo, located in Australia, is a limited partner of Polar LLP. Under the corporate income tax regime of Jurisdiction A, Polar LLP is treated as fiscally transparent, and the imposition of taxes are on partners of Polar LLP of which AusCo is one.

    Assuming all other relevant conditions are met under Australia’s foreign hybrid rules, Polar LLP is treated as a fiscally transparent partnership for Australian tax purposes. One of the requirements to be met is that foreign income tax is imposed on the partners of Polar LLP (including AusCo) and not on Polar LLP itself.

    Jurisdiction A implements a IIR, UTPR and DMT, and legislates for these GloBE and DMT related liabilities to be imposed on limited partnerships (such as Polar LLP) instead of on its partners.

    AusCo is required to disregard the imposition of those taxes on the partnership and will continue to treat Polar LLP as a foreign hybrid limited partnership under Division 830.

    End of example

    More information

    For more information, see:

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Transparent, Standardized, and Simplified Review Process for Solar PV Applications, while Keeping Ecological Considerations in Mind

    Source: Republic of China Taiwan

    On March 31, the Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) announced revisions to several key regulations and associated forms to uphold the public’s right to information, clarify approval standards for local governments, and protect residential living environments. These revised regulations include the Regulations on Registration of the Electricity Industry, Regulations on Registration of Power Generation Equipment for Self-Use, Regulations for the Installation and Management of Renewable Energy Generation Equipment, and the Guidelines for Landscape and Ecological Impact Review of Ground-Mounted Solar PV Installations. These updates aim to enhance communication and coordination with local communities by requiring developers to hold public briefings during the application process, standardizing consent forms and criteria for local governments, and mandating appropriate buffer distance between solar facilities and nearby residences to maintain quality of life.

    The MOEA further explained that, to ensure local communities are well-informed, it convened relevant central agencies, local governments, and industry associations to revise the Regulations on Registration of Electricity Industry. Under the amended rules, solar developers are required to conduct public briefings in the villages or neighborhoods where the highest concentration of solar panels, step-up substations, or energy storage facilities will be located, prior to submission of an establishment permit application. Developers must submit records and sign-in sheets to strengthen local participation and clarify project details.

    In addition, the MOEA has revised the Regulations on Registration of the Electricity Industry to provide consistent standards for local governments when approving solar power businesses. As part of these amendments, a standardized Checklist for Local Government Approval of Solar Photovoltaic Power Generation Businesses has been introduced, providing consistent criteria to enhance administrative efficiency across different jurisdictions.

    To protect the quality of residential environments, the MOEA has also updated the Guidelines for Landscape and Ecological Impact Review of Ground-Mounted Solar PV Installations, explicitly requiring an appropriate buffer distance between solar facilities and residential areas. In line with these changes, corresponding amendments have also been made to the Regulations on Registration of the Electricity Industry, Regulations on Registration of Power Generation Equipment for Self-Use, and Regulations for the Installation and Management of Renewable Energy Generation Equipment. These updates ensure that all types of installations must fully consider potential impacts on landscape and ecology, as a way of supporting inclusive and harmonious development.

    Lastly, the MOEA reaffirmed that these regulatory improvements are designed to foster harmony in local communities, as well as their co-existence, co-prosperity, and synergy with solar energy development, building a friendly environment and realizing a sustainable, win-win future for all stakeholders.

    Spokesperson
    Wu, Chih-Wei, Deputy Director General
    Energy Administration, Ministry of Economic Affairs
    Tel: (02) 2775-7750 / 0922-339-410
    Email: cwwu@moeaea.gov.tw

    Contact for Further Information
    Liao, Shih-Wei, Deputy Division Chief
    Energy Administration, Ministry of Economic Affairs
    Tel: 0920-091-081
    Email: swliau@moeaea.gov.tw

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: World-first reusable space debris collector set to revolutionise sector

    Source:

    16 May 2025

    Paladin founder and CEO, Harrison Box, with Triton

    University of South Australia based startup Paladin Space has demonstrated the world’s first space payload capable of capturing debris from multiple targets and storing it on satellites for recycling, reducing the cost of space debris removal and making the process more sustainable.

    The company showcased their technology, called Triton, at a private demonstration event yesterday at UniSA’s Innovation & Collaboration Centre (ICC).

    The next steps will be to demonstrate the technology in orbit, secure pilot customers and perform qualification testing for a space mission. The company is also expecting to share news of an overseas expansion in coming months.

    South Australian Treasurer and Minister for Defence and Space Industries Stephen Mullighan says the potential of this innovative product demonstrates the impact South Australian based space startups are having in leading advances in space technology.

    “Space start-ups play a critical role in accelerating the growth of the South Australian space industry and strengthening our economic resilience and relevance,” Minister Mullighan said.

    “Paladin Space’s innovative technology, which has been developed right here in South Australia, is a perfect example of what’s possible when you foster an environment that nurtures bold ideas. It’s an example of homegrown ingenuity where South Australia is developing innovative ideas aimed at solving global challenges.”

    Space debris is a growing issue that poses significant threats to satellites and space missions. The large volume of debris, combined with its high velocity, creates a collision risk with potential to damage satellites and space infrastructure.

    A report by Northern Sky Research found that the ‘In-Orbit Servicing Market’ is expected to reach $4.7b by 2031, and roughly half of that market is debris removal and salvaging.

    Founder of Paladin Space, Harrison Box says their product will be able to capture multiple pieces of debris in a single mission.

    “Triton will make the process of debris removal more sustainable and cost effective while also being able to eject its contents on space targets, preserving the spacecraft in orbit to be reused for other missions,” he says.

    Their solution means Triton will eject its contents from the parent satellite at a very specific time so that it’s trajectory will not interfere with anyone else’s satellites. Shortly after ejection, Triton will descend into the Earth’s atmosphere, causing it to burn up completely within a matter of hours.

    The team are designing Triton to be compatible with future in-orbit recycling solutions so its contents can be delivered in-orbit as materials for manufacturing.

    “We are designing Triton to be able to dock easily with these in-orbit manufacturing stations so that the contents it collects can be recycled into metal rods or sheets for manufacturing satellites,” Mr Box says.

    “Not only is this practice sustainable, but incredibly cost effective for satellite manufacturers to ‘skip’ the launch phase of a mission and simply build their assets in space.”

    The Triton container is designed to capture many small pieces of debris such as fragments from collisions, however, the product is scalable depending on the mission. If a customer wants a larger volume, they could achieve 600mm (0.6m) cubed, or smaller missions may only require 300mm (0.3m) cubed.

    Paladin Space participated in UniSA’s space accelerator program Venture Catalyst Space in 2023, supported by the South Australian Space Industry Centre.

    Deputy Director: Business Incubation at the University of South Australia Craig Jones says the novel technology has the potential to make a huge impact on the space debris market.

    “Triton is on course to revolutionise the space debris industry and contribute to manufacturing in space, a mind-blowing proposition. We look forward to seeing it in action one day soon,” Jones says.

    “From placing second at an ICC global space hackathon, to participating in the Venture Catalyst Space program in 2023, we are incredibly proud to have played a small part in supporting this team to build their enterprise,” he says.

    Box says UniSA’s support and infrastructure continue to be instrumental to the success of his business.

    L-R, Harrison Box, Stephen Mulligan MP, Peter Stevens and Craig Jones

    “The advice I received in the early days helped to shape everything from our pitch deck to the financial accounting for our business, including areas like employability, beach-head markets, problem validation and general customer acquisition practices.

    “Having an office space to prototype and run our business from was also a game-changer that allowed Paladin Space to be put on the map, and I am still honoured to be a resident at the Innovation & Collaboration Centre – despite the team growing larger.”

    Box says he plans to keep his company headquarters in South Australia as they grow for as long as the government continues to support the space industry.

    Venture Catalyst Space, has supported 40 startups that have collectively raised almost $43 million in additional investment and grants, while creating almost 240 space jobs.

    About Harrison Box:

    • Box has a Masters in Aerospace Engineering with first-class honours from the University of Glasgow.
    • He spent a year of his study at the University of California where he led a team to design and build a liquid rocket engine test stand in the Mojave desert.
    • During his time at university he worked as a Powertrain Engineer at Nissan and a Avionics Engineer for a flight hardware company before becoming a Systems Engineer for BAE Systems. He spent two years working for multiple fast-jets in various countries, then was a Concept Engineer doing a variety of R&D work on military fast-jets for the remaining year before moving to Australia and becoming a Senior Systems Engineer for a novel radar project.

    Media contact: Megan Andrews, Megan.andrews@unisa.edu.au, 0434 819 275

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI China: China Smart Industry Trade Exhibition adds value to Malaysia’s development aspirations: official

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

    Guests attend the opening ceremony of the 2025 China Smart Industry Trade Exhibition (2025 CSITE) in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, May 15, 2025. The 2025 CSITE, together with Chinese technology expositions, is adding momentum to Malaysia’s development aspirations, especially in the adoption of new technologies and digitalization, Deputy Communications Minister Teo Nie Ching said here on Thursday. [Photo/Xinhua]

    The 2025 China Smart Industry Trade Exhibition (2025 CSITE), together with Chinese technology expositions, is adding momentum to Malaysia’s development aspirations, especially in the adoption of new technologies and digitalization, Deputy Communications Minister Teo Nie Ching said here on Thursday.

    Coming at a time when Malaysia, as 2025 chair of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) grouping, is advocating for greater cooperation and regional integration, the exhibition reinforces efforts to improve connectivity in trade, tourism, education, and cultural diplomacy, Teo said in her remarks at the exhibition’s launch.

    “I am heartened to see the participation of nearly 100 companies from China, Malaysia, and around the region. Your presence here speaks volumes about the potential for partnerships that can help shape a smarter, safer, and more connected ASEAN,” she said.

    “China has remained Malaysia’s largest trading partner for 16 consecutive years… What these enormous figures tell us is that there is strong trust, shared aspirations, and a readiness to innovate together. In addition to growing trade and investment links, people-to-people ties between our nations continue to deepen,” she added.

    This year marks the 5th edition of the expo with the theme of “Smart Technology, Digitalization, and Education.” The event also coincides with the 10th anniversary of the China Entrepreneurs Association in Malaysia (PUCM).

    Teo noted PUCM’s key role in building mutual understanding, business collaboration, and cultural exchange between Malaysia and China. “Your dedication has helped develop strong and lasting partnerships across a range of sectors, from technology and telecommunications to culture and education,” she said.

    Meanwhile, Minister of the Chinese Embassy in Malaysia Zheng Xuefang said the cooperation potential and prospects between China and Malaysia in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) are immense and promising.

    “China is now a global AI powerhouse with advanced technology, strong government backing and a huge market, while Malaysia is an emerging player aimed to achieve economic growth and regional competitiveness via AI development. There is great potential in cooperation for both countries,” he said.

    For his part, PUCM president Keith Li said that the 2025 CSITE has emerged as a major platform, serving as a vital bridge, linking Chinese innovation with Malaysian opportunities and continuing its mission to strengthen partnerships between Chinese and Malaysian entrepreneurs.

    “Beyond business, we have cultivated strong people-to-people connections through exhibitions, cultural videos, forums, and outreach efforts. PUCM remains proud to be a trusted platform that advances both commercial ties and community engagement,” he said. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Marshall Joins Newsmax to Discuss President Trump’s One Big, Beautiful Bill and the Justice for Angel Families Act

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall
    Washington – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) today joined Sharla McBride and Marc Lotter on Newsmax to discuss the Justice for Angel Families Act, legislation that would amend the Crime Victims Fund (CVF) to expand financial coverage for Angel Families – the immediate relatives of victims killed by illegal aliens, including in drunk driving accidents. This legislation would allow federal funds to cover medical expenses, lost wages, and funeral costs, easing the financial burden on grieving families.
    They also discussed President Trump’s “One Big, Beautiful Bill,” and what’s next for the reconciliation process.
    You may click HERE or above to watch Senator Marshall’s full interview on Newsmax.
    Highlights from the interview include:
    On what’s next for the reconciliation process:
    Senator Marshall: “I think we should stop and just congratulate President Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, Chairman Jason Smith, over there, for getting the ball this far. They need to get this across the finish line. Let’s give them a little bit of air space. Then let’s bring it over here, and let’s see if we can find some more savings for American families to pay for some of President Trump’s priorities… no tax on tips, no tax on overtime, no tax on Social Security. This bill will be written to help out those middle-class, hardworking Americans who take a lunch pail to work. So, it’s our job to improve it, and then we’ll send it back there.”
    On saving Medicaid and Medicare for vulnerable Americans:
    Senator Marshall: “Our hope is that we save Medicaid, that we strengthen Medicaid for those who need it the most. Now, if you’re an illegal alien in California on Medicaid, the federal government shouldn’t pay for that. I think that’s just one very simple example. If you’re a person who’s getting Medicaid from two different states, that’s not right either.
    “There’s a lot of fraud, waste, and abuse in Medicaid. We’ve seen Medicaid grow 50% in five years. Over 90 million Americans are now on Medicaid – not Medicare. We’re not touching Medicare. We are trying to strengthen Medicaid for those who need it the most.”
    On the need for the Justice for Angels Families Act:
    Senator Marshall: “Well, I wish we could find a Democrat that will support it, but I just want to emphasize why this is so important. When anyone dies an unnatural death, it’s a tragedy. But when a loved one is murdered, when they’re murdered by an illegal alien when they’re hit, killed by a drunken driver, you know, it’s just a deeper kick in the gut.
    “… These Angel Families, we just want to help them bury their loved one. If they had health care costs that we want to help with that a little bit as well. I think it’s the least we could do.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI China: China’s robotics boom fueled by fledged industrial chain

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

    In a smart factory of China’s home appliance giant Midea Group, more than 10 robots are busy screwing and welding. But here’s the twist: these robots are not simply assembling the company’s iconic air conditioners or fridges; instead, they are building other industrial robots.

    This “robots producing robots” production line in Foshan, Guangdong Province, operates fully automated and around the clock, rolling out one robot every 30 minutes on average.

    The factory sits amid a thriving robot industry ecosystem, where suppliers of core components are just a 10-minute drive away. Benefiting from the efficient supply chain, the Midea factory has delivered more than 80,000 industrial robots since it was set up in 2020.

    Midea started its foray into the robotics in 2015, with hopes of harnessing the technology to make its home appliances smarter while gaining a strategic foothold in the futuristic industry of smart robots.

    In March this year, the group unveiled a humanoid robot prototype capable of performing a variety of movements, including shaking hands, dancing, tightening screws, as well as understanding voice commands and doing operations as instructed.

    “We expect that the humanoid robot can be applied and commercialized in specific scenarios such as industry and manufacturing,” said Wei Chang, vice president and chief technology officer of Midea.

    COMPREHENSIVE CHAIN

    Midea epitomizes Guangdong’s robot boom. The manufacturing heartland in south China is home to more than 160,000 robotics enterprises, constituting the country’s largest industrial cluster for intelligent robots.

    According to the provincial government, Guangdong’s industrial robot output exceeded 240,000 units or sets in 2024, marking a year-on-year growth of 31.2 percent. One out of every three industrial robots in China is now made in Guangdong.

    With Shenzhen as its tech hub, Guangdong boasts advantages in mechatronics and digital intelligence technologies, said Lin Yi, deputy head of the industry and information technology bureau of Shenzhen.

    Excellent mechatronics enable rapid assembly of a robot’s body and limbs, while digital intelligence technologies empower a robot with a smart brain. The two strengths help foster a comprehensive industry chain in the province, extending from the production of chips and core components to downstream applications.

    A sophisticated and well-rounded industrial chain is credited with lowering costs for both development and manufacturing of new products. This infrastructure has supported the rapid emergence of many industries in China, ranging from drones to new energy, in recent years.

    Although humanoid robots first emerged abroad, the most likely place for their industrialization and commercialization is China, said Zhang Jin, president of SIASUN Robot & Automation Co., Ltd.

    “In China, there are companies focusing on making robots’ brain, while others specialize in arms, feet and other components. Altogether, they form a complete and vibrant industry eco-system,” Zhang said.

    TALENT, MONEY & POLICIES

    By the end of 2024, China had a total of 451,700 smart robotics firms, marking a staggering 206.7-percent increase from 2020, according to official data.

    Apart from industrial chain prowess, China’s vast pool of engineers has also added momentum to the industry. More than 300 colleges and universities nationwide now offer undergraduate programs in robotics engineering, which was approved as an undergraduate major by the Ministry of Education in 2016.

    Supportive policies also play a crucial role. In 2023, China issued a guidance on the innovative development of humanoid robots, declaring that they were expected to become revolutionary products following computers, smartphones and new energy vehicles.

    China’s government work report this year pledges to establish a mechanism to increase funding for industries of the future including embodied artificial intelligence, which refers to AI with physical bodies such as robots.

    Many local governments have also come up with ambitious plans. In February, Beijing, which boasts a congregation of leading universities and technological startups, issued a detailed action plan for embodied intelligence, setting a national benchmark for the industry.

    By 2027, the city is expected to employ robots in more than 100 scenarios covering areas from manufacturing to logistics, especially taking up jobs that are perilous, repetitive and laborious, it said. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Markey, Van Hollen, Colleagues Question Legality of Trump Administration’s Multi-Million Dollar Payment to El Salvador to Imprison Migrants from U.S.

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts Ed Markey
    Letter Text (PDF)
    Washington (May 15, 2025) – Senator Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.) and Senator Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) led ten colleagues today in writing to Secretary of State Marco Rubio to demand answers regarding the Trump administration’s $6 million payment to the government of El Salvador to support the detention of migrants transferred from the United States, including at the notorious Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo (CECOT) prison.
    The letter was signed by Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee Patty Murray (D-Wash.), and Senators Peter Welch (D-Vt.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Tim Kaine (D-Va.).
    In the letter the lawmakers write, “The Trump administration has boasted of its $6 million payment to the government of El Salvador to support the detention of migrants transferred from the United States, including at Centro de Confinamiento del Terrorismo (CECOT) prison. Given the well-documented and credible allegations of gross violations of human rights at CECOT, including from reputable human rights organizations, it appears that this payment may have violated the State Department ‘Leahy law,’ a statutory prohibition against U.S. assistance to foreign security force units credibly implicated in such brutality. These allegations demand a detailed explanation from the Department of State as to whether, and if so how, it concluded that this payment was lawful.”
    The lawmakers continue, “According to Charles Blaha, the former longtime Director of the State Department’s Office of Security and Human Rights, with responsibility for Leahy law vetting: ‘CECOT is a facility that exposes prisoners to torture, and cruel, degrading, and inhumane treatment and punishment. Under the Leahy [l]aw, this should disqualify CECOT from receiving U.S. assistance.’”
    The lawmakers request responses by May 30, 2025, to questions, including:
    How much has the State Department paid El Salvador to detain migrants from the United States at CECOT? Are future payments anticipated?
    What specific uses are associated with the payment, and who are the defined end users?
    Did the Department comply with the requirements of section 7031(a) of the Act regarding government-to-government assistance?
    Did the State Department determine that the payment complied with its Leahy law, after conducting human rights vetting?
    Did the State Department conduct a full review of all publicly available information sources related to the security operations at CECOT?
    Has the State Department received any reports or submissions through its Human Rights Reporting Gateway (https://hrgshr.state.gov/en/) related to abuses at CECOT or its personnel?
    Prior to sending the payment, did the Department of State receive any assurances — diplomatic or otherwise — from the government of El Salvador regarding its treatment of individuals in CECOT or other carceral facilities in the country?
    Did the Department consult with its Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor or its Office of the Legal Adviser regarding the legality of the payment under the State Department Leahy law or other applicable laws and treaties, such as the Convention Against Torture?
    Which specific State Department account or accounts were used to make the payment to El Salvador?

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn, Colleagues Introduce Bill to Support Development of New Charter Schools

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Chairman Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Senator Michael Bennet (D-CO), and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) today introduced the Empower Charter School Educators to Lead Act, which would authorize existing federal funding to help states streamline the application process for opening new charter schools:
    “Charter schools are an important part of America’s education system, but the process to start one is often bogged down by red tape,” said Sen. Cornyn. “This legislation would make the application process more efficient for teachers, school administrators, and nonprofits interested in opening a charter school and help give parents more choices for their children’s education.”
    “When starting a new charter school, knowing from experience how to help a child succeed is invaluable. Teachers have that expertise,” said Dr. Cassidy. “This bill gives teachers the resources to create their own charter schools and continue to provide a better future for our children.”
    “Every student deserves the opportunity to attend a school that equips them with the skills and high-quality education they need to succeed in today’s economy,” said Sen. Bennet. “Charter schools provide flexibility and innovative educational opportunities for students across Colorado, but too often, they run into burdensome red tape and regulations from the federal government. This bill would ensure that charter schools can access federal grants and reach more families in underserved communities.”
    “Every child deserves access to a high-quality public education,” said Senator Booker. “But the charter school application process is often complex and discouraging. This bipartisan legislation will providing funding to help streamline the charter school application process to make it more accessible for educators and nonprofits and encourage more families to find the best public school for them.”
    Congresswomen Julia Letlow (LA-05) and Jill Tokuda (HI-02) led companion legislation in the House of Representatives.
    Background:
    The Empower Charter School Educators to Lead Act would:
    Authorize state entities receiving Federal Charter Schools Programs (CSP) grants to make pre-planning awards in amounts of no more than $100,000 to prospective applicants, or public or nonprofit entities that will support prospective applicants, provided they:
    Are led by educators with 4.5 years of school-based experience;
    Have successfully completed the development of an initial plan for the opening of a public charter school;
    And have not yet submitted a proposal for approval of a charter to an authorized public chartering agency.

    Permit state entities to use up to 5% of their grant funds for those pre-planning awards;
    Raise the cap on the percentage of state entities’ grant funds that may be used for technical assistance and quality improvement activities from 7% to 10%;
    Raise the cap on the percentage that may be used for state administration from 3% to 5%;
    And clarify that states’ technical assistance activities may include assistance in locating and accessing a facility.
    This legislation is endorsed by the National Alliance for Public Charter Schools, National Associations of Charter School Authorizers, KIPP Public Schools, and Center for Learner Equity.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Cornyn Leads Bill to Reimburse Texas for Border Security Costs

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Texas John Cornyn
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) today introduced legislation to reimburse the State of Texas for the more than $11 billion dollars Texas taxpayers spent on Operation Lone Star, Texas’ border security mission launched due to President Biden’s dereliction of duty. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is a cosponsor of the legislation in the Senate, and Congressman Chip Roy (TX-21) will be a leader for this measure in the U.S. House of Representatives.
    “For four years, Governor Abbott and Texas taxpayers were forced to bear the brunt of the Biden-Harris border crisis. Today, I am proud to introduce my legislation to reimburse Texas for its historic efforts to secure the southern border. My bill will ensure the Lone Star State is repaid for stepping up to protect and defend our nation’s southern border while the Biden-Harris administration abdicated its federal duty,” said Sen. Cornyn. “Thanks to the strong leadership of President Trump, Secretary Kristi Noem, Border Czar Tom Homan, and Border Patrol Chief Mike Banks, our country is finally back to enforcing the immigration laws that have been on the books for years, and I will continue to work with the Trump administration to ensure Texas never again has to endure an open-border disaster like we saw under Joe Biden.”
    “For four years, Texans stood in the breach of the worst border crisis in recent American history. Joe Biden and Alejandro Mayorkas’s dereliction of duty led to an invasion of lawlessness, crime, danger, and drugs, putting Texans, and every American in harms way,” said Rep. Roy. “The states like Texas that stood on the front lines to defend our nation when the federal government would not, deserve to be reimbursed by the very federal government that should have done its job in the first place.  It’s critical states like Texas have these resources to ensure adequate law enforcement funding to partner with the Trump administration to secure our border.”
    Background:
    The State Border Security Assistance Act would:
    Create funds at the Departments of Justice and Homeland Security to reimburse states for actions they took after January 20, 2021, to secure the border;
    Reimburse costs of activities such as construction of border wall, surveillance of the border, and apprehension, detention, and prosecution of individuals who illegally entered the United States;
    Appropriate enough money to the funds to ensure that Texas is fully reimbursed;
    And sunset the funds after the end of the Trump Administration and return any remaining money to the Treasury for debt-reduction purposes.
    Senator Cornyn has led the fight in Washington to secure federal reimbursement for Texas by:

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: 100 Days: Keynote Address by Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham, 39th ISDA Annual General Meeting

    Source: US Commodity Futures Trading Commission

    Thank you to Scott and the entire ISDA team for the invitation to speak today at the 39th ISDA Annual General Meeting (AGM) in Amsterdam.  It’s a real pleasure to see so many friends and colleagues in the room. 
    This year not only marks the 50th anniversary of the CFTC, but it also is the 40th anniversary of ISDA.  That is an impressive milestone, outlasting a few key benchmark rates along the way.  But beyond the longevity is a legacy of real significance, reflected in the documentation and standards that underpin the global derivatives markets. 
    The centerpiece of ISDA’s transformation of derivatives markets is, of course, the ISDA Master Agreement.  The years 1992 and 2002 need no introduction—if you know, you know.  The ISDA Master is the legal and operational foundation for trillions of dollars in transactions each day.  It is no exaggeration to say that standardized ISDA documentation is one of the most important innovations in modern finance. The ISDA Master even made it to Hollywood in the movie The Big Short, featured alongside famous movie stars. 
    Even though the $700 trillion notional derivatives markets are the largest financial markets in the world, the derivatives community is relatively small and close-knit to this day.  That sense of community also brings with it a sense of responsibility, and I believe that is why the derivatives markets have always been characterized by proactive efforts to create industry standards. 
    The scale and reach of ISDA cannot be overstated.  I know from personal experience in the private sector that ISDA has around 150 committees, working groups, and forums to address every product, asset class, and process associated with a swap, in every region around the world, because not only did I personally approve each of the hundreds of firm employees who participated in ISDA, I joined many of these calls myself.  
    So on behalf of the CFTC, I want to thank each of you for the countless hours and wealth of expertise that you contribute to making our markets safer and more efficient.  You create the standard for industry best practices, and then you keep raising that standard and innovating.  I commend all of ISDA’s leaders over the decades for making ISDA what it is today, but I especially want to congratulate ISDA CEO Scott O’Malia for all your success and the tremendous growth in ISDA initiatives and solutions—and not just because you’re my old boss.
    Let me now tell you about the first 100 days of this Administration and all we’ve done at the CFTC to deliver results for not just the American people, but also for all stakeholders in our global markets. 
    Improving Efficiency and Effectiveness
    Cost Savings
    First, pursuant to the President’s executive orders, General Services Administration (GSA) guidance, and at my direction, the CFTC’s Division of Administration has achieved significant cost savings for our agency.  By conducting a comprehensive review of all CFTC contracts and procurement, and then applying basic cost management principles, the CFTC has saved nearly $20 million dollars without compromising CFTC operations or services.
    On an annualized basis, after including other reductions to costs including leasing, the CFTC is on track to save about $50 million dollars.  That is a cost savings of roughly 14% of the CFTC’s appropriated budget, which was $365 million dollars for fiscal year 2025. 
    No magic was involved in achieving these significant savings for the American taxpayer—just prudent and experienced management. 
    Transformation and Optimization 
    We’ve also completed organizational changes to the CFTC’s divisions and offices to break down silos, enhance coordination, and minimize duplication.  It was not necessary to create or eliminate any agency components—instead, we looked at what CFTC organizational structure has been proven to work in the past over many decades. 
    These changes help the CFTC to return to regular order and are expected to generate short-term and long-term improvements to agency operations and other efficiencies.  And, various sections have been realigned within divisions into functional units to enhance operational efficiency and effectiveness.

    The Market Surveillance Section has returned to the Division of Market Oversight (DMO), where it had historically been located, from the Division of Enforcement (DOE).  The Office of the Chief Economist has also moved to DMO and was renamed the Economic Research Section to further enhance the CFTC’s market analysis capabilities. Both of these sections are within DMO’s Product and Market Analytics Branch.
    In addition to the above changes, DMO now has a DCM, SEF, and SDR Branch that includes a Data Reporting Section and a Market Review Section.
    The Market Participants Division (MPD) is now organized into the Examinations Branch; Financial Requirements Branch with a Financial Resources Section and Financial Risk Management Section; and Registration and Compliance Branch with a Registration and Swaps Oversight Section and a Managed Funds and Intermediaries Section.
    The Office of Proceedings and the Whistleblower Office have moved to the Office of the General Counsel to better reflect their adjudicatory functions and minimize conflicts of interest. 

    CFTC FY 2026 Annual Performance Plan
    For the first time since fiscal year (FY) 2018–eight years ago—the CFTC has updated its Annual Performance Plan with key performance indicators (KPIs) that is submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The Annual Performance Plan is the key tool used to measure the CFTC’s performance results against the CFTC’s mission and 5-year strategic plan. 
    The goals included in the FY 2026 Annual Performance Plan prioritize improving market integrity and transparency, promoting derivatives markets’ financial integrity and avoiding systemic risk, promoting smart enforcement, and engaging in robust domestic and international cooperation. Together, the goals and KPIs prepare the CFTC to execute the President’s agenda and measure our success in doing so.
    Importantly, a major change to the CFTC’s approach to KPIs is to measure the CFTC’s efficiency in executing the agency’s core functions by establishing baseline expectations for timeliness of activities such as processing registrations, other applications, or rule submissions; performing examinations; conducting investigations; and other oversight activities. 
    Aging dashboards will be established and routinely monitored so that agency underperformance can be detected and promptly addressed. Appropriate KPIs enable American taxpayers to better assess the value provided by the CFTC and ensure accountability in the use of public funds. 
    Delivering Results
    I want to highlight some of the key accomplishments that the CFTC has achieved in just 100 days, in addition to our day-to-day work.  I’m proud to say we have completed all items that were prioritized based on the inventory of open matters that was identified at the beginning of my chairmanship, and I thank my directors and their teams who have been working so hard these past five months to deliver these results.  Most of these initiatives address proposals or concerns I raised as a Commissioner. 
    Swaps Market and Reducing Regulatory Burdens

    MPD and DMO issued an interpretative letter that FX window forwards and package FX spot transactions are not swaps.  This lack of regulatory clarity has resulted in uncertainty and disruption to the FX market for nearly 10 years.
    MPD issued an interpretative letter providing that swap dealers could post and collect shares of certain U.S. Treasury ETFs as eligible margin collateral for uncleared swap transactions.  This was a recommendation from the CFTC’s Global Markets Advisory Committee (GMAC) and its Global Market Structure Subcommittee to enhance market liquidity and efficiency.
    MPD issued a no-action letter providing relief to swap dealers from the pre-trade mid-market mark disclosure requirement to reduce regulatory burden.  The CFTC has provided such relief for certain swaps since 2012. Notably, the CFTC has never rescinded no-action letters that address unworkable or overly burdensome Dodd-Frank requirements.
    The Division of Clearing and Risk (DCR) and MPD circulated for a Commission vote an amended order to permit an exempt derivatives clearing organization (DCO) to clear certain swaps for U.S. customers through a non-U.S. clearing member affiliate of a futures commission merchant (FCM) to mitigate systemic risk and promote market liquidity.
    DMO withdrew an advisory that created regulatory uncertainty regarding whether certain entities are required to register as swap execution facilities (SEFs).
    The CFTC and SEC adopted a joint final rule extending the compliance date for amendments to Form PF because the original implementation timeframe was unworkable.
    DCR and MPD issued a no-action letter which permits DCOs and FCMs to retain current separate account treatment up to the compliance date for the final rule to reduce regulatory burden.
    DCR and DMO issued a no-action letter from swap data reporting and recordkeeping regulations to reduce regulatory burden.
    MPD and DCR issued a no-action letter which allows a non-U.S. swap dealer to retain exemptions to uncleared margin and clearing mandate requirements for its legacy swap portfolio in connection with an acquisition of another entity.
    DMO issued a no-action letter in connection with KRX’s KOSPI.
    MPD issued an interpretative letter to allow non-U.S. swap dealers domiciled in Japan that elect substituted compliance for capital and financial reporting to file only certain defined schedules of the home country Japanese Annual Business Report to eliminate overly burdensome reporting requirements.

    Innovation and Market Structure

    The CFTC hosted a first-ever Crypto CEO Forum of industry-leading firms to discuss the launch of the CFTC’s digital asset markets pilot program for tokenized non-cash collateral such as stablecoins.  The CFTC’s GMAC and its Digital Asset Markets Subcommittee previously made a recommendation.
    The CFTC will soon participate as an observer in industry tokenization pilot programs.
    DCR and DMO withdrew two advisories relating to virtual currency derivative product listings and clearing that were no longer needed given additional staff experience and increasing digital asset market growth and maturity.
    DCR, DMO, and MPD issued a request for comment on the potential uses, benefits, and risks of trading and clearing of perpetual derivatives contracts in CFTC-regulated markets.
    DCR, DMO, and MPD issued a request for comment on the potential uses, benefits, and risks of trading on a 24/7 basis in derivatives markets and associated clearing risk management.
    MPD will soon issue an interpretative letter regarding the circumstances for which a person that has a place of organization, and the location where its high-level officers primarily direct, control, and coordinate such person’s activities, is in a foreign jurisdiction, that such person is not a “person located in the United States” for purposes of the “foreign futures or foreign options customer” definition in CFTC regulation 30.1(c); is not a “participant located in the United States” for purposes of CFTC regulation 48.2(c); is a “foreign located person” for purposes of CFTC regulation 3.10(c)(1)(ii); and is a “non-U.S. person” as defined in CFTC regulation 23.23(a) and the CFTC’s 2013 cross-border swaps activity guidance, among other things.  The CFTC’s regulation by enforcement approach to crypto and novel interpretations that contravene decades of CFTC precedent have created regulatory uncertainty and disruption to the global derivatives markets, as I predicted in my prior public statement in a CFTC enforcement action.
    DCR and DMO will soon issue an advisory on the benefits of and associated considerations for exchange volatility controls.  This was a recommendation from the CFTC’s GMAC and its Global Market Structure Subcommittee to mitigate systemic risk and promote market resiliency.
    MPD will soon issue a FAQ to remind the public of the significant regulatory obligations associated with registering and operating an FCM.

    Enforcement and Compliance

    DOE dispositioned 50% (representing several hundreds) of its open enforcement matters, including preliminary investigations, investigations, and litigation.  Of these resolved matters, over a dozen had been open for over 15 years and over three dozen had been open for over 10 years.  Resolving this backlog will enable DOE to focus its resources on catching fraudsters and scammers and helping victims.
    DOE issued an advisory on self-reporting, cooperation, and remediation with a first-ever matrix for mitigation credit to provide fair notice to the public and guidance that is designed to ensure due process in DOE’s investigations and enforcement actions.  The advisory provides transparency, predictability, returns to decades of prior CFTC policy on self-reporting, and is aligned with best practices for assessing penalties followed by the Department of Justice and other U.S. financial regulators.  This advisory implements my proposals as a Commissioner.
    DOE launched a 30-day compliance and remediation initiative, or enforcement sprint, in March to expeditiously resolve outstanding investigations and enforcement matters regarding compliance violations without customer harm or market abuse.  Of approximately two dozen firms that expressed interest in participating in the enforcement sprint, over five matters are, or will soon be, in circulation for a Commission vote on administrative settlement orders.  These proposed settlement orders resolve years of investigation, apply the new DOE advisory regarding mitigation credit, and have civil monetary penalties that are reflective of historical amounts—a fraction of DOE’s previous initial demand amounts that were often disproportionately 10, 20, or 100 times larger than in the past.
    MPD, DCR, DMO, and DOE issued a joint advisory on the materiality or other criteria that the operating divisions will use to determine whether to make a referral to DOE for self-reported violations, or supervision or non-compliance issues.  This advisory implements my proposals as a Commissioner.
    MPD and DOE issued a CFTC internal memorandum that establishes the procedures MPD and DOE will follow when non-U.S. swap dealers are suspected of violating foreign comparable standards when relying on substituted compliance.  Any inquiry involving substituted compliance will be handled by MPD, unless MPD determines that a supervision or non-compliance issue is material and makes a referral to DOE pursuant to CFTC Staff Letter 25-13.  Generally, the procedures require CFTC staff to adhere to principles of international comity and deference to the foreign regulator, including that the foreign regulator interprets and applies the home country regulation (not the CFTC), and that MPD and DOE will not pursue an inquiry if the foreign regulator determines that the non-U.S. swap dealer is in compliance with foreign comparable standards, or the foreign regulator is addressing the non-compliance issue through its supervisory process.  This advisory implements my proposals as a Commissioner.
    DOE reorganized its task forces to combat fraud and help victims while ending the practice of regulation by enforcement.  The new task force model allows enforcement attorneys to specialize in categories of cases, thereby enhancing relevant knowledge, practices and mentoring opportunities, and reducing the risk of legal or ethical lapses.  It is also more efficient by enabling staffing assignments irrespective of location in headquarters or regional offices.
    DOE launched a Basic Trial Advocacy Skills training series, with sessions ranging from opening, closing and direct examinations, interactions with jury and opposing counsel, and techniques to avoid creating misimpressions, with more sessions being planned. The sessions offer practical instruction on investigations and litigation as well as opportunities to discuss ethical and discovery dilemmas that can occur in real life litigation scenarios.  These training programs and the following ethical conduct and culture initiatives address concerns I had raised as a Commissioner.
    DOE delivered various ethics training, including ensuring candor and openness in engagement with the Court and defense counsel.  DOE also hosted a training on the American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct as applied to government attorneys, with additional trainings being planned.
    DOE promoted greater transparency with the defense bar by sponsoring open forum discussions with practicing defense attorneys and, where appropriate, providing greater detail about the status of open cases. 

    Recognizing CFTC Staff
    I think we can all agree that based on sheer productivity and impact, these first 100 days have been nothing short of remarkable.  The CFTC has provided an outstanding return on investment for the American taxpayer.  None of this would have been possible if it were not for the unwavering commitment of CFTC staff to our mission and our markets. 
    The work of our dedicated employees—often behind the scenes, but always indispensable—is the bedrock of our balanced, principles-based regulatory framework that promotes market integrity and protects the public from fraud, manipulation, and abuse.  
    It was my great honor to celebrate our core values, recognize the achievements of our talented staff, and commemorate the CFTC’s 50th anniversary last month with special awards for exceptional CFTC employees that exemplify Mission Excellence, Market Excellence, and Mindset Excellence.  We recognized 28 of our staff, some of whom have loyally served the CFTC for over 40 years.
    In addition, we launched a CFTC Leadership Speaker Series, and are working on additional staff development opportunities throughout the year.
    I am especially indebted to my executive management team, especially Harry Jung, acting Chief of Staff; Meghan Tente, acting General Counsel; Brigitte Weyls, Chief Counsel; Taylor Foy, acting Director of Public Affairs; and Nick Elliot, acting Director of Legislative Affairs.  They have each been pulling double duty since January, and their tireless work ethic, positive attitude, collegiality, and genuine care mean so much to me.
    I have been truly lucky to have the benefit of the decades of CFTC leadership by acting MPD Director Tom Smith and acting MPD Deputy Director Frank Fisanich; acting DCR Director Richard Haynes; acting DMO Director Rahul Varma and former acting DMO Director Amanda Olear; DOE Director Brian Young; DOE Deputy Director Paul Hayeck, acting Chief of the Complex Fraud Task Force; DOE Deputy Director Charles Marvine, acting Chief of the Retail Fraud and General Enforcement Task Force; acting Deputy General Counsel Anne Stukes; acting and acting OIA Director Mauricio Melara.  They are the very embodiment of public service, duty, and dedication.
    Conclusion 
    When I became acting Chairman this year, I noted that for the past half century, the CFTC has proudly served our mission to promote market integrity and liquidity in the commodity derivatives markets that are critical to the real economy and global trade—ensuring American growers, producers, merchants and other commercial end-users can mitigate risks to their business and support strong U.S. economic growth. I also said it was time for the CFTC to get back to the basics.  We delivered on that promise.
    It’s a very fitting bookend that I am here today to talk about what the CFTC has accomplished in just 100 days under my leadership as acting Chairman, because three years ago, I was a new Commissioner at the beginning of my term speaking at the ISDA AGM in Madrid.  
    As some of you may have caught on Bloomberg TV last week during my interview at the Milken Institute Global Conference, I have announced that I will be returning to the private sector once Brian Quintenz is confirmed as Chairman.  While I don’t have any specific plans for what’s next for me personally yet, I hope to make some over the next several months. 
    The United States recently celebrated Mother’s Day.  My own mom always told me when I was growing up, that anything is possible if you put your mind to it.  I had a vision of what could be accomplished at the CFTC, the agency where I began as a law student intern, came back for the fourth time as a Commissioner, and will now leave as acting Chairman.  I hope you will agree that I put my mind, heart, body, and soul into this job, and achieved my vision of what was possible.  I hope that this might inspire others to achieve their vision of what is possible too. 
    It has been the honor of a lifetime to serve as a Commissioner and now acting Chairman, and I will leave with deep pride in what we’ve accomplished and great confidence in what the CFTC will continue to achieve in the years ahead.  I am grateful for having had this incredible opportunity to make a difference.  Thank you.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray Hears from Hunger Relief Organizations Across WA State About Challenges and Fears Amid Trump Cuts to USDA, Republicans Advancing Legislation to Cut SNAP By a Staggering $300 Billion

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
    ICYMI: Murray, Hayes, Levin Introduce Bill to Expand Summer EBT Program to School Breaks, Ensure Kids Don’t Go Hungry When School is Closed During the Year
    ICYMI: Senator Murray, WA Food Banks, and Farmers Lay Out How Trump’s Cuts to Local Food Programs Will Hurt Families and Communities
    ***WATCH HERE***
    Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, held a virtual event with hunger relief organizations across Washington state to hear about the challenges they are facing amid recent steep cuts by the Trump administration to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs that provide funding for food banks and schools to purchase locally-produced food and looming draconian Republican cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which helps over 42 million people across the country purchase fresh produce and other groceries. Republicans’ reconciliation legislation—which only requires a simple majority to pass in both the House and Senate—would cut SNAP by a staggering $300 billion, according to legislative text that was advanced by the House Agriculture Committee this week. Participating in the virtual event today were representatives from Food Lifeline, Washington Food Coalition, Second Harvest, Northwest Harvest, Harvest Against Hunger, Feeding the Northwest, EastWest Food Rescue, and the Anti-Hunger & Nutrition Coalition.
    President Trump and Republicans’ cuts to USDA and SNAP come as Washington state has been experiencing a notable rise in food insecurity in recent years. Data from the Washington State Department of Agriculture indicates that food bank visits rose from 10.9 million in 2023 to 13.3 million in 2024, with one in four Washingtonians utilizing food banks in 2024, up from one in five the previous year. Children are particularly affected by food insecurity in Washington state, with nearly 50 percent of students—approximately 538,000 children—qualifying for free or reduced-price school lunches.
    “If we needed any more proof Trump is still trying to take food off the shelves at food banks, and off families’ dinner tables, all you need to do is look at the bill Republicans are marking up right now, which includes the biggest SNAP cut in history—$230 billion over the next decade. We should not be cutting off food assistance so Trump can cut his fellow billionaires a massive check,” Senator Murray said on the call today. “These cuts won’t make things more efficient, they won’t solve any problems. They just take food away from people who need it most. Investing in nutrition assistance? Investing in SNAP? That’s an investment in people.”
    “My family relied on food stamps briefly when I was a kid—our country had our back, and all seven of us kids grew up to give back to our communities in different ways,” Murray continued. “As you all know, Washington state has one of the strongest, most inclusive SNAP programs in the country. So you can bet I am going to continue to be one of its strongest champions in Congress. I am not going to stand by while Republicans push families off this program and slash it to ribbons, and I am not going to be quiet as they take food from our kids.”
    In March, the Trump administration inexplicably ripped away more than $660 million in funding for the Local Food for Schools Program (LFS)—which schools and child care facilities in Washington state use to purchase berries, meat, seafood, and more from local farmers and producers—as well as $500 million from the Local Food Purchase Assistance Program (LFPA) and $500 million from The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), which helps food banks buy nutritious food from local farms for the communities they serve. According to an updated estimate based on data provided by USDA, Washington state is set to lose nearly $12 million in federal funding it was set to receive from these programs this year alone—a $2.9 million cut to LFS, $3.9 million cut to LFPA, and $4.7 million cut to TEFAP—and the Trump administration’s cuts have left schools and food banks scrambling to fill the gap. Last month, Senator Murray held a virtual press conference with local food banks in Washington state raising the alarm over the Trump administration’s senseless cuts to these programs.
    “Food Lifeline is deeply concerned about the proposed cuts to SNAP. Already, Washington’s hunger relief community is overwhelmed with demand. Demand that exceeds what we experienced during the pandemic. Unlike then, the Trump Administration, newly controlled Congress, and USDA, aren’t coming to help. SNAP, the first line of defense against hunger, it must be strengthened, not diminished,” said Aaron Czyzewski, Director of Advocacy & Public Policy at Food Lifeline.
    “The Washington Food Coalition supports our state’s network of food banks and pantries, which are facing unprecedented demand as food insecurity is on the rise. SNAP is the first and best defense against hunger, but the proposed House cuts would do lasting damage to families and communities and overwhelm our food banks,” said Trish Twomey, Executive Director of the Washington Food Coalition.
    “At EastWest Food Rescue, we see every day how layered and fragile our food system truly is, from farmers facing uncertainty to families struggling with hunger. We are deeply grateful to Senator Murray for taking the time to prioritize this complex issue and for recognizing that real solutions require collaboration across sectors. Her leadership brings hope to those working at every level of the food chain,” Monika Whitfield, Executive Director of EastWest Food Rescue.
    “The proposed federal cuts to SNAP and food bank funding would have devastating consequences for Washington families already struggling to put food on the table. At a time when food insecurity remains at alarming levels across our state, our elected representation needs to strengthen our hunger relief systems, not dismantle them. We’re grateful for Senator Murray’s steadfast leadership and commitment to protecting these vital programs that serve as a lifeline for so many in our communities. Today’s summit highlights the critical importance of federal support in our collective fight against hunger, and we stand ready to work alongside Senator Murray and our partners to ensure no Washingtonian has to wonder where their next meal will come from,” said Jamielyn Wheeler, Senior Director of Strategic Initiatives at Northwest Harvest.
    Having relied on food stamps for a brief time during her childhood, Senator Murray knows firsthand the difference a helping hand can make in the lives of children, and as Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Senator Murray is working around the clock to protect vital nutrition assistance and child nutrition programs. Senator Murray was the leading Congressional champion in the more than decade-long fight to reduce child summer hunger by providing families whose children are eligible for free and reduced-price school meals with an electronic benefit transfer (EBT) card to buy groceries over the summer—a policy knows as “Summer EBT.” During the academic year, more than 30 million kids from low-income families rely on free or reduced-priced meals they receive at school—but when school lets out for the summer, those kids lose access to regular meals and frequently go hungry. Senator Murray first introduced legislation to establish a permanent Summer EBT program in 2014, helped to secure and extend the Pandemic EBT (P-EBT) program that provided summer grocery benefits to families during the COVID-19 public health emergency in 2020, 2021, and 2022, and ultimately helped negotiate and pass a permanent Summer EBT program—based on her original Stop Child Summer Hunger Act—as part of the omnibus government funding bill that was signed into law in December 2022. The Summer EBT program officially launched in 2024, with 37 states participating, including Washington state. Nearly 600,000 children in Washington state received Summer EBT—also known as SUN Bucks—last summer.
    Just last week, Senator Murray introduced bicameral legislation to expand the Summer EBT program to include periods when schools are closed or operating remotely for five or more consecutive weekdays—including winter break, spring break, and other prolonged school closures—and provide funding for new implementation grants to help states implement the Summer EBT program more effectively.
    Senator Murray’s full remarks, as delivered, are available below and HERE:
    “It’s so good to see you all. I know this is not an easy moment—not for Washington state families, and not for all of you. You all are on the frontlines serving people in our communities, keeping them fed when times are tough. And that has been especially crucial in recent years.
    “A quarter of people in Washington state used a food bank last year and visits have jumped to 13 million a year. But despite the crucial role you play serving our communities you all have unfortunately had a front row seat to a lot of pointless, lawless chaos President Trump has caused.
    “I know this has turned your work upside down; grants being frozen, cancelled, and unfrozen; tariffs being throttled and reversed; and the threat of painful cuts in just about every proposal Republicans put forward. I have visited food banks, and heard from families and from some of you, about how this has already been incredibly harmful. I am listening—and more than that I am fighting for you. My goal is to lift your stories up, put a spotlight on these problems, and get these disastrous policies reversed.
    “We have seen a few times now that when we push back hard, when we speak up loud, when we name and shame the harms that Trump is causing we can get them to back down, and reverse course—at least while the pressure stays on. Some grants have gotten moving again. Some cuts and firings are being reversed. Tariffs are being walked back a little, though Trump is still committed to an expensive trade war. 
    “But the fight is not over. Not by a long shot, because for every small retreat, we have seen Trump launch another devastating attack on our social safety net. If we needed any more proof Trump is still trying to take food off the shelves at food banks and off families’ dinner tables all you need to do is look at the bill Republicans are marking up right now, which includes the biggest SNAP cut in history—$230 billion over the next decade. We should not be cutting off food assistance so Trump can cut his fellow billionaires a massive check.
    “These cuts won’t make things more efficient. They won’t solve any problems. They just take food away from people who need it most. Investing in nutrition assistance? Investing in SNAP? That’s an investment in people. My family relied on food stamps briefly when I was a kid. Our country had our back, and all seven of us kids grew up to give back to our communities in different ways.
    “This shouldn’t even need saying, but if Republicans won’t listen to common sense and common decency, then we are going to get a megaphone and shout it from the roof tops: ‘Hands off SNAP!’
    “As you all know, Washington state has one of the strongest, most inclusive SNAP programs in the country. So you can bet I am going to continue to be one of its strongest champions in Congress. I am not going to stand by while Republicans push families off this program and slash it to ribbons. I am not going to be quiet as they take food from our kids’ mouths. I am standing up. I am getting loud. And I am making your voices heard.
    “We are going to fight for SNAP and for our families.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Canadian industry urges Carney cabinet to drive transition with ‘ambition and action

    Source: – Press Release/Statement:

    Headline: Canadian industry urges Carney cabinet to drive transition with ‘ambition and action

    Fernando Melo, federal director of policy and government affairs at the Canadian Renewable Energy Association, which represents almost 350 companies in the wind, solar and energy storage sectors, said the government must first ensure the clean economy tax credit is “finalized and improved.” Read more.
    The post Canadian industry urges Carney cabinet to drive transition with ‘ambition and action appeared first on Canadian Renewable Energy Association.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Pipelines? CCS? Clean Energy? All of the Above? Carney Statements Fuel Anxiety, Optimism

    Source: – Press Release/Statement:

    Headline: Pipelines? CCS? Clean Energy? All of the Above? Carney Statements Fuel Anxiety, Optimism

    Fernando Melo, federal director – policy and government affairs at the Canadian Renewable Energy Association, agreed that “if you look at the Liberal Party platform, there were quite a few mentions of renewable electricity and electricity storage in there—including in the proposal to make Canada an ‘energy superpower’. Not being mentioned in every media interview doesn’t worry me or CanREA’s members.” Read more.
    The post Pipelines? CCS? Clean Energy? All of the Above? Carney Statements Fuel Anxiety, Optimism appeared first on Canadian Renewable Energy Association.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for May 16, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on May 16, 2025.

    Waste-to-energy in Australia: how it works, where new incinerators could go, and how they stack up
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ali Abbas, Associate Dean (Research), University of Sydney Martin Mecnarowski, Shutterstock. Every year, Australia buries millions of tonnes of waste in landfills. But these sites are filling fast, recycling has its own limitations, and most waste export is banned. So councils and state governments are looking for

    The sun will come out tomorrow: remembering the life and music of Charles Strouse
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mara Davis Johnson, Lecturer in Creative and Performing Arts, University of Wollongong The Broadway community is today mourning the passing of Charles Strouse at the age of 96, the legendary composer behind hits like Bye Bye Birdie (1960), Applause (1970) and Annie (1976). Strouse was born on

    No chance to say goodbye – defeated MPs will rue not giving valedictory speeches
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Amy Nethery, Associate professor of politics and policy, Deakin University Former Greens leader Adam Bandt’s 15-year career in federal parliament came to an end in a nondescript park in Melbourne, far from the seat of power in Canberra. He was there to concede defeat in the federal

    How accurate are my medical records? You might be surprised how often errors creep in
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sheree Lloyd, Senior Lecturer in Health Services Management, University of Tasmania DC Studio/Shutterstock Medical records of hundreds of patients at a Sydney hospital’s cancer genetics service have been reviewed following irregularities related to care by a single specialist. According to St Vincent’s Hospital, in about 520 records,

    So your primary school child has a ‘boyfriend’ or ‘girlfriend’. Should you be worried?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cher McGillivray, Assistant Professor in Psychology, Bond University Karhut/Shutterstock If you have a child in primary school you may not be expecting to help them manage romantic relationships. Surely this is an issue for the high school years? While young children do not experience romantic love in

    Viral ‘Hongdae boy’ videos expose the fringe group of South Korean men trying to sleep with foreign women
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joanna Elfving-Hwang, Associate Professor (Korean Society and Culture), Dean International (Korea), Curtin University Shutterstock If you’re on TikTok, you may have come across “Hongdae boys” or “Hongdae guys” recently. In a social media context, the term refers to a group of young South Korean men who prey

    A trial is testing ways to enforce Australia’s under-16s social media ban. But the tech is flawed
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexia Maddox, Senior Lecturer in Pedagogy and Education Futures, La Trobe University De Visu/Shutterstock Australia’s move to ban under-16s from social media is receiving widespread praise. Other countries, including the United Kingdom, Ireland, Singapore and Japan, are also now reportedly considering similar moves. The ban was legislated

    Banning young people from social media sounds like a silver bullet. Global evidence suggests otherwise
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jasleen Chhabra, Research Fellow, Centre for Youth Mental Health, The University of Melbourne Monkey Business / Shutterstock Around 98% of Australian 15-year-olds use social media. Platforms such as TikTok, Snapchat and Instagram are where young people connect with friends and online communities, explore and express their identities,

    This election, young people held the most political power. Here’s how they voted
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Intifar Chowdhury, Lecturer in Government, Flinders University This election, a lot of focus was directed at young voters. With Millennials and Gen Z now making up a larger share of the electorate than Baby Boomers, this was deserved. But for all the attempts to reach these cohorts,

    Grattan on Friday: Ley and Littleproud have had a prickly relationship – can they negotiate a smooth future?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra With the future of the Coalition relationship on the line, Nationals leader David Littleproud drove to his Liberal counterpart Sussan Ley’s hometown of Albury this week. They had much to talk about, and it wasn’t going to be easy. Littleproud

    Likely final House seat outcome: 94 Labor, 44 Coalition, 12 Others
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne The ABC has called Labor wins in 93 of the 150 House of Representatives seats. The Coalition has won 43 seats, the Greens one and all Others

    Fresh start for the Greens, with new leader Larissa Waters
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nathan Fioritti, Lecturer in Politics, School of Social Sciences, Monash University Queensland Senator Larissa Waters is the new leader of the Australian Greens, following a two-hour partyroom meeting held in the wake of the party’s lacklustre performance in the May 3 election. Waters was elected unopposed. New

    The new leader of the Greens sits in the Senate. Why is that so unusual in Australian politics?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anne Twomey, Professor Emerita in Constitutional Law, University of Sydney The 2025 federal election resulted in some unexpected outcomes, including the loss by the Greens Leader, Adam Bandt, of his seat in the House of Representatives. The new Greens leader is Senator Larissa Waters. Does it matter

    Trump signed plenty of contracts in the Middle East, but he’s no closer to the two ‘deals’ he really wants
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shahram Akbarzadeh, Convenor, Middle East Studies Forum (MESF), and Deputy Director (International), Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and Globalisation, Deakin University US President Donald Trump’s visit to Arab states in the Middle East this week generated plenty of multibillion-dollar deals. He said more than US$1 trillion (A$1.5

    As the Latrobe Valley moves away from coal jobs, could a green worker’s cooperative offer a solution?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gregory Patmore, Emeritus Professor of Business and Labour History, University of Sydney Workers at Earthworker Energy Manufacturing Co-op Worker cooperatives may sound like something out of the 19th century, but they still exist in the age of global capitalism. In Spain, for instance, the Mondragon Corporation is

    It’s wild mushroom season in Australia. Here’s how to stay safe and avoid poisoning
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darren Roberts, Conjoint Associate Professor in Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent’s Healthcare Clinical Campus, UNSW Sydney dannersjb/Shutterstock A number of Australian states including New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia have issued warnings in recent weeks about the risks of eating wild mushrooms. Mushrooms generally grow

    Dishevelled, dehydrated delirium: new Aussie film The Surfer, starring Nicolas Cage, is an absolute blast
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grace Russell, Lecturer, School of Media, Film and Journalism, Monash University Madman Entertainment Nicolas Cage has made a career from his highly entertaining scenery chewing. He follows a performance style he calls “Nouveau Shamanic” – an exaggerated form of method acting where he acts according to the

    Disheveled, dehydrated delirium: new Aussie film The Surfer, staring Nicolas Cage, is an absolute blast
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Grace Russell, Lecturer, School of Media, Film and Journalism, Monash University Madman Entertainment Nicolas Cage has made a career from his highly entertaining scenery chewing. He follows a performance style he calls “Nouveau Shamanic” – an exaggerated form of method acting where he acts according to the

    ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for May 15, 2025
    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on May 15, 2025.

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: The space race is being reshaped by geopolitics, offering opportunities for countries such as New Zealand

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Zámborský, Senior Lecturer, Management & International Business, University of Auckland, Waipapa Taumata Rau

    NASA/Getty Imges

    The space economy is being reshaped — not just by innovation, but by geopolitics. What was once dominated by state space agencies, and more recently by private ventures, is evolving into a hybrid model in which government priorities and commercial capabilities are intertwined.

    The rise of protectionist policies, tariff wars, export controls and national security concerns is forcing space firms to adapt their strategies – and in many cases, to rethink where and how they operate.

    This offers countries such as New Zealand the opportunity to stand out in the new space race – becoming neutral ground with fewer trade and other regulatory barriers for the growth of the emerging hybrid space economy.

    Looking to space

    The New Zealand government plans to double the size of the space and advanced aviation sectors by 2030. Already, about 20,000 workers are employed in these sectors, generating US$1.8 billion in revenue.

    New Zealand’s flagship player in the space sector is Rocket Lab. Founded in 2006, the integrated space firm was listed on NASDAQ in 2021. By the end of 2024, the company was worth around US$8 billion.

    While its headquarters are in the United States, Rocket Lab also operates in Canada and keeps around 700 of its 2,000 global staff and its key launch site in New Zealand. Recently, it also announced the acquisition of a German optical communications supplier, Mynaric.

    Founded in New Zealand by Peter Beck, Rocket Lab is now headquartered in the United States with sites in Canada and elsewhere.
    Phil Walter/Getty Images

    Opportunities in US trade war

    Rocket Lab’s decision to engage in substantial foreign investment and diversify its operations across the US, New Zealand, Canada and Europe gives it flexibility in responding to the US-initiated trade war.

    The current and possible future US tariffs have created uncertainty for investors. Along with retaliatory measures by China and other nations, these developments have significant consequences for space firms.

    Companies in this field rely on globally sourced components (for example, semiconductors and electronic components) and materials such as steel and specialised fuel for their operations.

    Firms based in just one location can suffer from tariffs or retaliatory restrictions. But those with operations in several countries — especially in more neutral countries such as New Zealand and some Southeast Asian nations — may benefit from geopolitical tensions. Geostrategic diversification gives them more options, including less risky locations for operations, trade and investments in the space sector.

    A recent Deloitte report noted that companies in the space ecosystem may prefer to look for launch sites and satellite providers on neutral ground.

    Initiatives are already emerging in Indonesia and Malaysia to construct commercial spaceports and attract investment in satellite manufacturing.

    The benefits of being neutral

    The rising geopolitical tensions mean new space firms from relatively neutral countries such as New Zealand are increasingly aligning with national defence priorities. The emerging hybrid space economy is, in some ways, a response to this global power realignment.

    New Zealand has historically sought to balance strong trade ties with China, its largest trading partner, with security cooperation with the US as part of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance. But recent developments have prompted a reassessment.

    Notably, the presence of Chinese warships in the Tasman Sea and upheavals in the global security climate after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has led to a review of New Zealand’s defence posture.

    The government is now aiming to double defence spending to 2% of GDP. The US military has held talks with New Zealand about launching more satellites from this country.

    Earlier this year, Rocket Lab also declared it was “ready to serve the Pentagon”. For example, it secured contracts worth about US$500 million to launch a satellite from New Zealand for BlackSky, a US-based space-based intelligence provider.

    Rocket Lab also became one of five launch companies invited to compete for missions under the US National Security Space Launch program. This program puts the most valuable military and spy satellites into orbit, worth up to US$6 billion of Pentagon contracts in the next few years.

    Tapping into foreign investment

    Nations’ increased needs for domestic space defence capabilities also create foreign investment opportunities. For example, Airbus will design and build a new military satellite system costing about US$170 million in the United Kingdom to improve real-time military imagery.

    Ongoing economic strife and possible military conflicts have important implications for the strategies of new space firms and the policies of nations seeking space investment.

    New space firms may redirect their investment to countries where their main customers are located (for example, the US or European Union) or to neutral countries less affected by geopolitical tensions (for example, New Zealand). This allows them to diversify and reduce exposure to tariffs and other restrictions.

    In New Zealand, this may mean more government investment not only by Rocket Lab, but also involvement by other industry players from the US, Japan or Europe.

    Commercial opportunities in the new space sector will remain. But the shape of the sector may move towards a more hybrid space, recognising both commercial and national security interests in times of economic war.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. The space race is being reshaped by geopolitics, offering opportunities for countries such as New Zealand – https://theconversation.com/the-space-race-is-being-reshaped-by-geopolitics-offering-opportunities-for-countries-such-as-new-zealand-256773

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why Anthony Albanese’s presence at Pope Leo’s inauguration is shrewd politics

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Darius von Guttner Sporzynski, Historian, Australian Catholic University

    When Prime Minister Anthony Albanese steps into St Peter’s Square for the inaugural Mass of Pope Leo XIV on Sunday, the optics will be far more than pious courtesy.

    For a day, the Vatican will temporarily be the world’s premier diplomatic stage. And a canny Australian leader can use such an occasion to advance domestic and foreign policy agendas simultaneously.

    Faith optics and domestic politics

    Albanese has lately spoken of “reconnecting” with his Catholic heritage. He called the election of the US-born pontiff “momentous” for believers and non-believers alike.

    In multicultural Australia, where roughly one in four citizens identifies as Catholic, Albanese’s trip to the Vatican allows him to reassure a core constituency that sometimes feels politically overlooked: Catholics.

    This signalling costs Albanese nothing. Yet, it helps to boost Labor’s broader narrative of inclusion and respect for faith communities.

    St Peter’s Square as a diplomatic crossroads

    The inaugural mass will also attract a rare concentration of global powerbrokers in one square kilometre. The head-of-state guest list is still fluid, but several confirmations make the trip worth Albanese’s while.

    Albanese’s most immediate objective will likely be to revive free-trade negotiations with the European Union, which broke down in 2023.

    The Australian has reported that Albanese hopes to bend the ear of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and European Council President António Costa.

    Albanese will also get a chance to meet Prince Edward, who will represent King Charles III, as well as his newly elected counterpart in Canada, Prime Minister Mark Carney.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is also expected to attend after a week of overtures to the new pope concerning Kyiv’s quest for a just peace in its war with Russia.

    Speculation was swirling around the possibility of US President Donald Trump returning to Rome, fresh from his high-visibility appearance at Pope Francis’s funeral on April 26.

    But Vice President JD Vance will lead the US delegation, joined by Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

    For Albanese, a corridor encounter with Vance would allow him to set a personal tone before his expected visit to Washington later this year, without the media glare that accompanies an Oval Office photo-op.

    Why leaders flock to the Vatican

    Some commentators may frame the attendance of world leaders at the mass cynically: a chance to use a sacred event for their own political purposes.

    Yet, politicians have long been a fixture at papal events. Such participation is hardly exceptional. It reflects a centuries-old dynamic in which those with temporal political power seek moral sanction, and the papacy demonstrates its enduring capacity to convene the political order.

    Pope Francis’s inauguration in 2013 drew 31 heads of state and 132 official delegations from national governments or international organisations.

    And John Paul II’s funeral in 2005 assembled more than 80 sitting heads of state. It was one of the largest gatherings of leaders in modern history.

    Why does the Vatican exert such magnetic pull?

    First, it is a neutral micro-state whose moral authority can confer legitimacy on secular, political initiatives. Consider, for example, John Paul II’s role in Poland’s democratic revolution.

    Second, the Holy See’s diplomatic corps is the world’s oldest continuous foreign service. It boasts diplomatic relations with 184 states, including Palestine and Taiwan (one of a dozen states in the world to do so).

    Although every pontiff is first and foremost the universal pastor of the Catholic Church, the Lateran Treaty of 1929 also endowed him with full sovereignty over the territory of Vatican City.

    The pope’s head-of-state status is most visible at multilateral forums. In 2024, for instance, Pope Francis became the first pontiff to address a G7 summit, speaking in a special session on artificial intelligence.

    He also had a string of bilateral meetings on the sidelines with the leaders of the United States, Ukraine, France, Brazil, Turkey, Canada and India, among others.

    When a pope travels, host governments roll out the symbols of a state visit, though the Vatican insists on calling such trips “apostolic journeys”. Conversely, when foreign leaders come to Rome, they are received in the pope’s own apartments, not in a government palace. These meetings therefore take on a spiritual, as well as political, cast.

    In short, the pope moves with ease between being a shepherd and sovereign. His spiritual authority opens doors for dialogue, while his head-of-state status allows him to receive ambassadors, sign treaties and sit across the table from presidents and prime ministers.

    The result is a singular blend of moral voice and diplomatic reach unmatched in global affairs.

    Pragmatic statecraft under the colonnade

    For a middle-power such as Australia, dialogue between a prime minister and a pope can have a multiplier top-down effect. These discussions often echo across chancelleries in the Global South, especially in Catholic Latin America and the Philippines. These are both priority markets for Australian education and green-hydrogen exports.

    In Rome, Albanese can also affirm Australia’s commitment to multilateralism at a moment when Indo-Pacific tensions have nudged Canberra towards increased defence spending and an over-militarised image. The sacred stage permits a softer register: diplomacy as dialogue, not deterrence.

    When the incense clears on Sunday, most viewers will remember the pageantry: the fisherman’s ring (a gold signet ring cast for each new pope), the pallium (the white woollen band draped over the pope’s shoulders during mass), and the roar of 100,000 pilgrims.

    Yet, the quieter choreography in the diplomatic boxes may shape trade flows, security partnerships and refugee corridors for years.

    Albanese appears to have recognised this rare alchemy. Showing up in Rome is pragmatic statecraft, executed under Bernini’s colonnade. This is where religious and political figures have long mingled — and will continue to do so as long as popes and prime minister seize the moment.

    Darius von Guttner Sporzynski 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. Why Anthony Albanese’s presence at Pope Leo’s inauguration is shrewd politics – https://theconversation.com/why-anthony-albaneses-presence-at-pope-leos-inauguration-is-shrewd-politics-256696

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-Evening Report: Saudi Arabia has big AI ambitions. They could come at the cost of human rights

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Niusha Shafiabady, Associate Professor in Computational Intelligence, Australian Catholic University

    This week, on his tour of the Middle East, United States President Donald Trump unveiled a suite of new deals with Saudi Arabia.

    Trump claimed the deals were worth more than US$1 trillion (A$1.5 trillion). This is likely an overestimate. What’s less murky is that many of these deals involve the development of artificial intelligence (AI) technology.

    This news came shortly after Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince and de facto ruler, Mohammed bin Salman, launched a new company known as Humain to develop and manage AI. The company is part of Saudi Arabia’s state-run investment firm, and is seeking to create powerful Arabic large language models. This would be significant for the more than 450 million people who speak Arabic around the world.

    These developments are part of Saudi Arabia’s vision to become a global AI hub, as it tries to diversify its economy away from oil.

    But as AI grows in Saudi Arabia, it could have consequences – including for human rights.

    An absolute monarchy

    Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy in which the unelected king holds total authority in the way the country is run. According to nonprofit organisation Freedom House, the country “restricts almost all political rights and civil liberties”.

    The country has been criticised by Human Rights Watch for human rights issues, including suppressing free speech and targeting government critics.

    In one extreme example, in October 2018, one of the government’s most vocal critics, Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, was assassinated at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. A 2021 US intelligence report concluded Mohammed bin Salman approved the assassination.

    Discrimination against women is another major human rights concern. These issues have led to serious concerns about overall freedoms in the country.

    Becoming a global AI hub

    Saudi Arabia is expanding its efforts to extend economic opportunities while positioning the country at the forefront of global AI innovation. According to the Global AI Index, the country’s public AI spending commitments significantly outrank those of the US and China, totalling more than $40 billion over the next decade.

    The newly-launched AI company, Humain, is at the centre of Saudi Arabia’s efforts to become a global AI hub.

    This week the company announced a partnership with NVIDIA, which develops special computer chips known as graphic processing units – or GPUs – for AI. NVIDIA will support the creation of AI data centres in Saudi Arabia by exporting “several hundred thousand” of its most advanced GPUs over the next five years.

    Humain will also deploy an AI platform developed by NVIDIA to enable industries to create digital twins. These are virtual replicas of physical environments that aim to enhance efficiency and sustainability.

    Alongside its partnership with NVIDIA, Humain also announced a new US$5 billion partnership with Amazon Web Services. This will help build a suite of AI infrastructure in Saudi Arabia.

    More broadly, Saudi Arabia is embedding AI into urban development. The technology is at the heart of its megacity development known as The Line. AI is also being deployed to streamline traffic systems and enhance energy efficiency.

    This is something the general public in Saudi Arabia support. For example, a 2022 survey by Ipsos found 76% of adults in Saudi Arabia believed that products and services using AI have more benefits than drawbacks. This compared to a global country average of 52%.

    Nonprofit organisation Freedom House says the monarchy that governs Saudi Arabia restricts almost all political rights and civil liberties.
    Chaudhary Umair Ahmad/Shutterstock

    A digital authoritarian tool

    Saudi Arabia already uses AI and other digital technologies to monitor citizens and control dissent.

    For example, the country reportedly used spyware on devices belonging to Jamal Khashoggi’s relatives in the lead up to his murder.

    The Line will also incorporate digital tracking systems of citizens. This has led some critics to describe it as a “surveillance city”.

    With the country’s track record in mind, the huge expansion of Saudi Arabia’s AI capabilities creates further opportunities for the regime to use the technology in ways that could be of concern.

    In a 2024 paper political scientist Nayera Mohamed Hamed Ibrahim described AI in Saudi Arabia as being a “digital authoritarian tool” which further entrenched the absolute power of the monarchy and its control over civilian life.

    The technology risks becoming an even more powerful digital authoritarian tool in Saudi Arabia as the country continues its march to becoming one of the world’s biggest developers of AI.

    Niusha Shafiabady 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. Saudi Arabia has big AI ambitions. They could come at the cost of human rights – https://theconversation.com/saudi-arabia-has-big-ai-ambitions-they-could-come-at-the-cost-of-human-rights-256793

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Disarming Hezbollah is key to Lebanon’s recovery − but the task is complicated by regional shifts, ceasefire violations

    Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Mireille Rebeiz, Chair of Middle East Studies and Associate Professor of Francophone and Women’s, Gender and Sexuality Studies, Dickinson College

    Slain Lebanese Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah looms large in Lebanon. Anwar Amro/AFP via Getty Images

    Within a span of two weeks from late April to early May 2025, Israel launched two aerial attacks ostensibly targeting Hezbollah in Lebanon: The first, on April 27, struck a building in Beirut’s southern suburbs; the second, an assault in southern Lebanon, left one person dead and eight others injured.

    While the attacks may not be an aberration in the long history of Israel’s military action in Lebanon, the latest episodes were notable given the context: Israel and Hezbollah have been nominally locked in a truce for five months.

    As an expert on Lebanese history and culture, I believe the latest violations clearly show the fragility of that ceasefire. But more importantly, they complicate the Lebanese government’s mission of disarming Hezbollah, the paramilitary group that remains a powerful force in the country despite a series of Israeli targeted killings of its senior members. That task forms the backbone of a nearly 20-year-old United Nations resolution meant to bring lasting peace to Lebanon.

    The long road to a ceasefire

    In the aftermath of Hamas’ attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, Hezbollah vowed solidarity with the Palestinian movement, resulting in a running series of tit-for-tat attacks with Israel that escalated into a full-blown war in the fall of 2024.

    On Oct. 1, 2024, Israel invaded Lebanon – the sixth time since 1978 – in order to directly confront Hezbollah. That operation led to the killing of an estimated 3,800 Lebanese people and the displacement of over 1 million civilians. The damage to Lebanon’s economy is estimated at US$14 billion, according to the World Bank.

    Hezbollah lost a lot of its fighters, arsenal and popular support as a result. More importantly, these losses discredited Hezbollah’s claim that it alone can guarantee Lebanon’s territorial integrity against Israel’s invasion.

    The United States and France brokered a ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel on Nov. 27, 2024. The agreement was based in part on United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which was adopted in 2006 to end that year’s 34-day war between Israel and Hezbollah. The resolution had as a central tenet the disarmament of armed militias, including Hezbollah, and the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon.

    The 2024 ceasefire built on that resolution. It required Hezbollah’s retreat beyond the Litani River, which at its closest point is about 20 miles from northern Israel. In return, and by February 2025, Israel was to gradually withdraw from Lebanese territories in order to allow the Lebanese army to take control of areas in the south and to confiscate all unauthorized weapons – a nod to Hezbollah’s arsenal.

    Yet, Israel maintained the occupation of several posts in southern Lebanon after that deadline and continued to launch attacks on Lebanese soil, the most recent being on May 8, 2025.

    The challenge of disarming Hezbollah

    Despite these violations, large-scale war between Israel and Hezbollah has not resumed. But the next step, a lasting peace based on the laying down of Hezbollah arms, is complicated by a series of factors, not least the sectarian nature of Lebanese politics.

    Since its inception in 1920, Lebanon’s governance has been defined by a polarized and formally sectarian political system, which seeded the roots of a decades-long civil conflict that began in 1975. A series of invasions by Israel in response to attacks from Lebanese-based Palestinian groups exacerbated sectarianism and instability.

    From this mix, Hezbollah emerged and became a powerful force during the late 1980s.

    The Taif Agreement, ending Lebanon’s civil war in 1989, formally recognized the state’s right to resist the Israeli occupation of Lebanese territories – and with it Hezbollah’s presence as a force of resistance. An uneasy coexistence between the government and Hezbollah emerged, which often spilled over into violence, including assassinations of important public figures.

    More recently, Hezbollah was responsible for a two-year political vacuum as it mobilized members to repeatedly block opposition candidates for the vacant presidency in the hopes of installing a leader that would support its agenda.

    A view from the southern Lebanese district of Marjeyoun shows smoke billowing from the site of Israeli airstrikes on May 8, 2025.
    Rabih Daher/AFP via Getty Images

    In January 2025 that standoff ended when Lebanon’s parliament elected army chief Joseph Aoun, a Maronite Christian, as president.

    The acquiescence of Hezbollah and its allies was in part a sign of how much the power of the Shiite militia had been diminished by Israel during the conflict.

    But it is also the result of a widespread general understanding in Lebanon of the need to end the humanitarian crisis caused by Israel’s war. The new president has brought much-needed hope to a battered country – one that has been plagued by numerous crises, including a collapsed economy that by 2019 had pushed 80% of the population into poverty.

    But Aoun’s presidency signals the changing political environment in another key way; unlike his predecessors, Aoun has not endorsed Hezbollah as a legitimate resistance movement.

    Further, Aoun has announced his intentions to disarm the group
    and to fully implement resolution 1701.

    To this end, Aoun has made impressive gains. According to state officials, the Lebanese army had by the end of April 2025 dismantled over 90% of Hezbollah’s infrastructure south of the Litani River and taken control over these sites.

    Yet Hezbollah’s chief, Naim Kassem, doggedly rejects calls to disarm and integrate the group’s fighters into the Lebanese armed forces.

    Even in Hezbollah’s weakened position, Kassem believes only his movement, and not the Lebanese state, can guarantee Lebanon’s safety against Israel. And Israel violations of the ceasefire only play into this narrative.

    “We will not allow anyone to remove Hezbollah’s weapons,” Kassem said after one recent airstrike, vowing that the group would hand over weapons only when Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon and ended it’s air incursions.

    Can Lebanon’s new president, Joseph Aoun, untangle the Gordian knot of Lebanese politics?
    Ludovic Marin/AFP via Getty Images

    The challenge going forward

    Yet countries including the United States and Qatar – not to mention Israel – consider Hezbollah’s disarmament a prerequisite to both peace and much-needed international assistance.

    And this makes the task ahead for Aoun difficult. He will be well aware that international aid is desperately needed. But pressing too hard to accommodate either Israel’s or Hezbollah’s interests risks, respectively, exacerbating either domestic political pressures or jeopardizing future foreign investment.

    To complicate matters further, the situation in Lebanon is hardly helped by developments in neighboring Syria.

    The fall of Syrian President Bashar Assad in December 2024 has added another element of regional uncertainty and the fear in Lebanon of further sectarian violence. Although Syria’s new leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, has vowed to protect all religious groups, he was not able to prevent the massacre of Alawite civilians in several coastal towns – an attack that triggered a fresh wave of refugees heading toward Lebanon.

    The removal of Assad was another blow for Hezbollah, a strong Assad ally that benefited from years of Syrian interference in Lebanon.

    The challenge of international relations

    For now, a return to full-scale war in Lebanon does not appear to be on the table.

    But what comes next for Lebanon and Hezbollah depends on many factors, not least the state of Israel’s ongoing war on Gaza and any spillover into Lebanon. But the actions of other regional actors, notably Saudi Arabia and Iran, matter too. Should Saudi Arabia be encouraged down the path of normalizing relations with Israel – a process interrupted by the Oct. 7 attack – then it would impact Lebanon in many ways.

    Any deal would, from the Saudi perspective, likely have to include a solution to the question of Palestinian statehood, taking away one of Hezbollah’s main grievances. It would also likely put pressure on Lebanon and Israel to find a solution to its long-standing border dispute.

    Meanwhile, Iran, too, is seemingly turning to diplomatic means to address some of its regional issues, with nascent moves to both improve ties with Saudi Arabia and forge forward with a new nuclear deal with the U.S. This could see Tehran turn away from a policy of trying to impose its influence throughout the region by arming groups aligned with Tehran – first among them, Hezbollah.

    Mireille Rebeiz is affiliated with the American Red Cross.

    – ref. Disarming Hezbollah is key to Lebanon’s recovery − but the task is complicated by regional shifts, ceasefire violations – https://theconversation.com/disarming-hezbollah-is-key-to-lebanons-recovery-but-the-task-is-complicated-by-regional-shifts-ceasefire-violations-255671

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-Evening Report: To boost the nation’s health, the government’s proposed food strategy must put people over profits

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rachael Walshe, Post-doctoral Researcher, University of Canberra

    crbellette/sShutterstock

    On election night, a triumphant Anthony Albanese took to the stage brandishing a Medicare card as a symbol of the nation’s commitment to public healthcare.

    As the re-elected government gets to work on its promised national food security strategy “Feeding Australia”, it has a unique opportunity to build a strategic agenda as bold and transformative as Medicare.

    That agenda is investment in food as a public good – a recognition that a healthy food system is as important to the nation’s health and wellbeing as access to hospitals, bulk-billing doctors and subsidised medicines.

    Feeding Australia

    The new Labor government, with its large majority, has a once-in-a-generation chance to deliver meaningful change in our food system.

    It went into the election promising a new food security strategy, which Agriculture Minister Julie Collins says will improve supply chain resilience and and minimise price volatility at the checkout:

    Australia has an impressive record in agriculture, feeding millions of people both here and abroad, but we can’t afford to be complacent. The Albanese Labor government will protect and strengthen Australia’s food security for the benefit of our farmers and all Australians, as well as the trading partners that rely on our produce. When our food and supply chains are secure, it reduces financial strain on households, helping all Australians.

    Labor has tried this before. In 2013, the Gillard government’s short-lived National Food Plan was critcised for prioritising corporate interests over public health and sustainability.

    Repeating past mistakes will again risk putting corporate hunger first. The Feeding Australia strategy must prioritise the health of people, planet, and care for Country.

    Food for thought

    The food security strategy must address multiple, converging crises:

    • growing food poverty
    • worsening diet-related health
    • biosecurity threats
    • accelerating climate change
    • declining farmer viability
    • supermarket duopoly.

    Australia produces enough food to feed more than twice its population. Yet it struggles to feed its own people well.

    Foodbank Australia estimates one third of Australians now experience some form of food insecurity. A combination of market failures and policy inaction leaves us vulnerable to supply chain disruption and even greater food inequity.

    Biosecurity is also a challenge. The recent outbreak of bird flu means eggs – a basic pantry item – now cost 16.1% more than 2020.

    But it’s not only consumers who are suffering. One-third of vegetable growers are considering leaving agriculture in the next year, due to high costs and what growers’ group AUSVEG has called the “relentless squeeze” on margins.

    A business-as-usual approach will only reinforce the current state of Australia’s supermarket sector, which is among the most concentrated and profitable in the world. Accusations of price gouging and misleading pricing raise concerns for consumers, particularly during a cost-of-living crisis.

    As extreme climate events and biosecurity threats increase in frequency and intensity, the duopoly’s centralised supply chains have occasionally failed. After this year’s floods in Far North Queensland, supermarket shelves were empty once again.

    Empty shelves were a weekly occurance in Far North Queensland after the floods stopped rail and road transport.
    Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

    Yet, independent grocers with shorter supply chains remained stocked – as they did during the Queensland floods in 2011.

    The food strategy must do more than offer a band-aid solution to fix an ailing food system.

    Community networks

    Local food networks have an important role to play in this process.

    They are collectives of people and organisations that are committed to creating food and farming systems that put health, equity, and sustainability first. They gather collective wisdom, mobilise public procurement to support local producers, and secure more democratic, health-oriented, and sustainable food system policies.

    Food networks are flourishing in North America, which has more than 300 active councils as of 2023. The Australian sector is not as mature, but is growing.

    Groups including the South Australian Urban Food Network, Tasmanian Food Security Council, Southern Harvest (NSW/ACT), and Farm 2 Fork Collective (Queensland), demonstrate growing capacity for citizen involvement in food policy and decision making. These networks encourage local initiatives such as community gardens, food hubs, and localised institutional procurement.

    New research points to how community-led food cooperatives can also help improve food security and healthier diets.

    These, and other examples, show the power of community in strengthening food system resilience and security. But they can’t do it alone. Communities need government support and investment.

    Future food

    The question of who feeds Australia – and how we are fed – matters to us all.

    The National Food Security Strategy is an opportunity to forge a more healthy food future. It can lay the foundations for a food and farming system that feeds us well for generations to come.

    Achieving this bold agenda will take an inclusive, participatory process that foregrounds First Nations’ voices and the lived experience of those at the sharp end of the cost-of-living crisis.

    Rachael Walshe works for Sustain: The Australian Food Network

    Kelly Donati is a co-founder and volunteer board director of Sustain: The Australian Food Network.

    Molly Fairweather works for Sustain: The Australian Food Network. She is also a member of Healthy Food Systems Australia (HFSA).

    Nick Rose is the co-founder and Executive Director of Sustain: the Australian Food Network. He is also a Senior Lecturer in the Bachelor of Food Studies at William Angliss Institute.

    Nick Rose was a Partner Investigator on an ARC project, Strengthening Food Governance at the Local Level (2019-2022).

    Sustain currently receives funding from a range of public sector organisations and philanthropic foundations with a shared mission for food system change, including VicHealth and Lord Mayor’s Charitable Organisation.

    – ref. To boost the nation’s health, the government’s proposed food strategy must put people over profits – https://theconversation.com/to-boost-the-nations-health-the-governments-proposed-food-strategy-must-put-people-over-profits-256679

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI China: Business event held in Tel Aviv to promote health industry cooperation between Chinese, Israeli firms

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

    People talk at a business event in Tel Aviv, Israel, on May 15, 2025. The business event aimed at promoting cooperation between Chinese and Israeli enterprises in the life and health industry was held on Thursday in Tel Aviv, Israel’s economic hub. [Photo/Xinhua]

    A business event aimed at promoting cooperation between Chinese and Israeli enterprises in the life and health industry was held on Thursday in Tel Aviv, Israel’s economic hub.

    The event, organized by the China-Israel Changzhou Innovation Park, brought together over 100 representatives from the government and the business, technology, and medical sectors of both countries. During the event, Chinese and Israeli companies inked agreements on technological cooperation, and several Israeli firms signed deals to join the innovation park.

    Speaking at the event, Chinese Ambassador to Israel Xiao Junzheng emphasized that technological innovation is a key driver of the healthy development of China-Israel relations.

    He said that China, boasting a vast, unified market, a comprehensive industrial system, and a growing innovation ecosystem, complements Israel’s strengths in original research and its well-established innovation environment.

    Shen Dong, a senior official from east China’s Changzhou city, home to the innovation park, said the park has become a “key window” for China-Israel scientific cooperation over the past decade, particularly in the health sector. He noted that it has attracted nearly 300 Israeli companies and joint ventures. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Japan’s GDP contracts annualized 0.7 pct in Q1

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

    Japan’s economy contracted an annualized 0.7 percent in the first quarter of 2025, marking the first contraction in four quarters, government data showed Friday.

    Quarter-on-quarter, real gross domestic product in the January-March period, adjusted for inflation, declined 0.2 percent from the October-December period, according to the Cabinet Office. 

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Murray on Trump Defunding Blue State Army Corps Construction: “This is Some Corrupt B-S”

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Washington State Patty Murray
    Washington, D.C. — Today, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Vice Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development, issued the following statement on the release of the Army Corps’ work plans detailing how it will spend the funding provided by Congress under Republicans’ yearlong continuing resolution for fiscal year 2025. The plans show how Trump’s Army Corps of Engineers intends to zero out and significantly cut funding for essential projects in Washington state and across the country. 
    Among other important priorities, the Army Corps’ plans include the complete elimination of construction funding for the Howard Hanson Dam fish passage facility in Washington state–which was otherwise poised to receive $500 million this year in funding Senator Murray secured in the fiscal year 2025 appropriations bill she wrote as Chair and passed through committee in August 2024, as well as in House Republicans’ fiscal year 2025 bill.
    Overall, the Army Corps’ plans would steer hundreds of millions of dollars more in construction funding to red states while cutting hundreds of millions of dollars in construction funding for blue states, relative to the president’s fiscal year 2025 request. This includes the complete elimination of Army Corps construction funding for states like California. The president’s budget request has, historically, been fully funded–and was fully funded in both the Senate and House draft fiscal year 2025 appropriations bills.
    “This is some corrupt B-S from the President. We are witnessing a historic and serious, politically motivated abuse of our taxpayer dollars by President Trump. I am going to fight to make sure our communities get the resources they need.
    “Trump is ripping away taxpayer dollars from blue states like mine for absolutely critical Army Corps projects that maintain and build foundational water infrastructure–whether it’s dredging for our ports, protecting communities from flood waters, or maintaining major dams. President Trump is setting a dangerous precedent—one that Republicans need to think carefully about. This is not how things should ever work in America.
    “I am furious that this administration plans to unilaterally defund construction on the Howard Hanson Dam, which was set to receive $500 million to execute a necessary construction contract this year–funding I fought tooth and nail for in the appropriations bill I cleared unanimously out of committee last year and that was also included in the House Appropriations bill drafted by Republicans. This is a staggering betrayal of Washington state and the entire Pacific Northwest and a tremendous, unacceptable setback in the important work to safeguard our water supply, protect our communities from dangerous flooding, and save our salmon. Eliminating this funding will also prevent the federal government from meeting its legal obligations to finish construction of this passage.
    “I fought so hard against Republicans’ slush fund CR for exactly this reason: it handed authority over to the Trump administration to move money around and unilaterally defund critical projects, just like we are seeing now. I warned that Republicans’ bill, which was drafted without any Democratic input, would be catastrophic for the nearly 8 million people I represent in Washington state and so many others across the country, and I fear that is now exactly what we are witnessing.  
    “It does not pass muster that nearly half a billion dollars is no longer needed for Washington state’s Howard Hanson Dam, nor should anyone believe that the most populous state in America–California–should receive exactly zero dollars for Army Corps construction work.
    “Congress must rein Trump in—or he is going to keep trampling the powers of Congress and the communities we all came here to fight for. It may not be your state today, but all of my colleagues must push back now–and forcefully.”
    Supporting the Howard Hanson Dam has been a longtime priority for Senator Murray, and she has pressed the Army Corps to prioritize funding for the Dam for years. Under the last administration, Senator Murray was able to secure critical funding boosts for Howard Hanson Dam, including $220 million in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and $50 million to begin construction of the Fish Passage facility in the funding bills for Fiscal Year 2024 that Murray wrote as then-Chair of the Appropriations Committee. Back in 2010, Murray secured $44 million in badly needed emergency funds for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to repair the Howard Hanson Dam. In the draft fiscal year 2025 appropriations bill she cleared unanimously out of Committee last year, Senator Murray secured $500 million for the fish passage project, which would also address flood risk and water supply issues for cities like Tacoma and Covington. $500 million was also included in the House’s draft fiscal year 2025 appropriations bill. The funding is needed to execute a construction option on the contract for the project, which would have allowed construction to begin in 2026 as scheduled.
    Congress typically provides specific, detailed instructions in its annual appropriations bills on how the Army Corps (and so many other agencies) must spend funding provided by Congress. Annual appropriations bills note exactly what Army Corps projects must be funded and at what levels. But instead of working with Democrats to pass full-year appropriations bills that deliver for communities across America, Republicans in Congress put forth a yearlong continuing resolution (CR) that failed to include hundreds of specific directives on how funding must be spent. For months, Senator Murray warned of the dangers of passing Republicans’ slush fund CR, noting, for example, that it would allow the administration to zero out funding for Army Corps projects. 
    In a floor speech ahead of the Senate vote on House Republicans’ yearlong CR, Senator Murray warned about the consequences of passing the bill, stating: 
    “This bill is a green light for Donald Trump and Elon Musk to redirect funding to their own pet projects, force states and communities to abide by their directives, and slash, burn, and zero out programs that our families count on… This bill will let them pick which Army Corps, transit, and military construction projects move ahead—and which grind to a halt… That’s not how this should work. That’s not how this should work in America… If you ask Elon really nicely and you also don’t ask too many questions about his billions of dollars in conflicts of interest… maybe he won’t pull the plug on those critical dam repairs the Army Corps was working on. I mean what sort of deal is that? And what do they think is going to happen next?”
    Senator Murray delivered the same warning in another floor speech just the day before:
    “I really want to make sure all of my colleagues understand how bad this bill is… This is not a ‘clean’ CR as some Republicans claim—it cuts programs our communities rely on. That includes a major 44% cut to Army Corps projects that help mitigate against floods, hurricanes, and much else… It also lacks the basic guardrails we include in all of our funding bills—on a bipartisan basis each and every year—to make sure our states and communities are taken care of and not subject to the whims of the Trump administration to pick winners and losers.”
    From Senator Murray’s March 9th, 2025, fact sheet on the yearlong CR:
    “This full-year CR would hand vast discretion over spending decisions to President Trump and his administration to zero out programs and redirect funding as they see fit… ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS: Gives the Trump administration near-absolute discretion to select which Army Corps projects to fund, allowing President Trump to slow and stop particular projects for political reasons. Construction funding is cut by 44%, which will halt progress on some ongoing projects that mitigate the impacts of hurricanes, flooding, and more.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: All rise and explore the law and its role in our community this Law Week

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    As part of ACT Government’s ‘One Government, One Voice’ program, we are transitioning this website across to our . You can access everything you need through this website while it’s happening.

    Released 16/05/2025

    Canberrans are being called upon to deepen their knowledge of the law as the ACT prepares for its annual Law Week.

    Running 16 to 23 May, the week includes a range of events to promote public understanding of the law and its role in society. The theme for 2025 is “exploring law, engaging communities, inspiring change”.

    Attorney-General Tara Cheyne said with the government in the process of progressing important reforms, Law Week provides a timely opportunity for the community to learn more about the justice system and how it works.

    “The law intersects with almost every aspect of our lives, although many of us don’t think about it until it affects us personally. Law Week is a chance for us to reflect on our unique legal system and acknowledge its important role in our society,” the Attorney-General said.

    “Australia’s legal system is one of the key elements that ensure we live in a free and fair society that finely balances individual rights and community safety.

    “The ACT Government is currently consulting on important bail reforms which would seek to improve the framework within which judicial officers need to make often complex decisions. To find out more or provide input visit www.yoursayconversations.act.gov.au/bail-reform.

    “Another key initiative is the proposed introduction of an indicative sentencing framework, which has the potential to streamline criminal court proceedings, reduce uncertainty for defendants and victims, and allow for faster access to support services.

    Law Week events in Canberra are being delivered by the ACT Law Society and its partners. This year they are also raising funds for Roundabout Canberra.

    In addition to fundraising events there are also a number of free educational events, including a series of events for high school and college students at the ACT Courts on Friday 23 May, including:

    • Mock jury empanelment: An interactive role play highlighting the jury process and guided by Sheriff’s Officers.
    • Mock bail hearing:  You be the judge, a simulated court hearing delivered in an engaging, educational format.
    • Local justice organisations: An exhibit of organisations that work in the justice sector, with visits from Court Support Canines.
    • Educational court tours: Showing students the ACT Courts’ history and what happens inside a courtroom.

    For more information on Law Week events, visit: https://actlawsociety.asn.au/about/law-week.

    Quotes attributable to Benjamin Wickham, CEO at ACT Courts and Tribunals:

    “This is our third annual open day as part of Law Week.  As well as the mock bail hearing, our Sheriffs will guide students through the jury empanelment process, and we will have a cohort of local justice agencies onsite to give visitors information about the vital services they provide to the community.

    “The aim of this open day is to give people a view behind the scenes of the courts. Coming before a judge or a magistrate can be extremely stressful, and the open day gives people an opportunity to see how the justice system works and hopefully take away some of the fear and anxiety that people have about what happens here.”

    – Statement ends –

    Tara Cheyne, MLA | Media Releases

    «ACT Government Media Releases | «Minister Media Releases

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: New inclusive scarves bring comfort and pride to breast screening in the ACT

    Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services

    As part of ACT Government’s ‘One Government, One Voice’ program, we are transitioning this website across to our . You can access everything you need through this website while it’s happening.

    Released 16/05/2025

    People from the LGBTIQA+ community who attend a breast screening appointment in the ACT will receive a rainbow scarf to foster inclusivity and encourage health screenings.

    BreastScreen ACT has today launched the Inclusive Rainbow Threads Project ahead of the International Day Against Homophobia, Biphobia, Intersexism, and Transphobia.

    In collaboration with local artist LaToya Kennedy of Kalari Art, BreastScreen ACT has created vibrant rainbow scarves to encourage people from the LGBTIQA+ community to invest in their health and book in for a breast screen.

    Minister for Health Rachel Stephen-Smith emphasised the importance of creating a safe and welcoming environment for all individuals accessing breast screening services in the ACT.

    “The Inclusive Rainbow Threads Project is a positive step towards ensuring that breast and chest screenings are accessible and inclusive for everyone, regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation,” Minister Stephen-Smith said.

    “The rainbow scarves will be given to individuals who identify as part of the LGBTIQA+ community and attend their breast screening appointment.

    “By fostering an environment of support and respect, we aim to encourage regular screenings and promote the health and wellbeing of the LGBTIQA+ community in the ACT.”

    The project is supported by BreastScreen ACT’s community of donors and supporters, Luton Properties, the ACT Government LGBTQIA+ and Social Inclusion Strategy Team, and the Canberra Hospital Foundation.

    Through Canberra Hospital Foundation’s Pay It Forward initiative, members of the community can contribute by purchasing a scarf where a portion of the funds will pay it forward for someone in the LGBTQIA+ community who attends a screening.

    This project builds on the installation of three new mammography machines at ACT community health centres in 2022-23.

    Free mammograms are available to eligible Canberrans over the age of 40 years. People aged 50 to 74 years are actively encouraged to have mammograms every two years. It only takes about 20 minutes and no referral is needed.

    More information on BreastScreen ACT can be found here: www.canberrahealthservices.act.gov.au/services-and-clinics/services/breastscreen-act.

    Quotes attributable to Jodie Kirkness, BreastScreen ACT Quality and Promotions Manager:

    “It’s important to make people feel safe and included when they come in for a breast screen. Health care should be accessible, inclusive and supportive for everyone – regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation.

    “Research shows that people within this group experience increased discrimination, affecting access to health services and ultimately reducing the benefits of early detection.”

    Quotes attributable to LaToya Kennedy of Kalari Art:

    “As a proud Indigenous lesbian, I draw inspiration from my ancestors who have walked this land before us and who have managed and maintained this land for tens-of-thousands of years; and from my Indigenous and LGBTQIA+ communities who have taught me to always be strong and proud of who I am and where I come from.

    “I also get inspiration from my surroundings, recreating elements of Country and telling stories through symbolic representation.”

    “The design shows multiple aspects of traditional elements, such as meeting places, connection pathways, people, symbols that represent the LGBTQIA+ community, footprints, and animal tracks.”

    “The design also demonstrates connections and unique relationships that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have with the country, land and the LGBTQIA+ community.”

    – Statement ends –

    Rachel Stephen-Smith, MLA | Media Releases

    «ACT Government Media Releases | «Minister Media Releases

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Green your verge with our free plant giveaway

    Source: South Australia Police

    Local verges and gardens will soon be greener, with our popular Wannagrow plant giveaway returning next month.

    Wanneroo Deputy Mayor James Rowe said this year’s giveaway would see 8,000 free verge-friendly plants handed out to residents, to support biodiversity and urban greening across the City.

    “There will be volunteers from the Wildflower Society of WA on hand to provide expert advice and help distribute a selection of waterwise native plants for your garden,” he said.

    “Our Wannagrow program is just one of the ways we are working to create a more liveable, waterwise City for all residents.”

    City of Wanneroo residents are eligible for 10 plants each, via a convenient drive-through collection. Pre-registration is essential and proof of residency will be required.

    This initiative is proudly co-funded by Water Corporation’s Waterwise Greening Scheme.

    Event details:

    When: 9am to 2pm, Saturday 15 June 2025

    Where: Kingsway Regional Sporting Complex, Madeley

    RSVP: Registrations are essential. Free tickets will be released in two stages:

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Reconciliation Recommendations of the House Committee on Education and Workforce

    Source: US Congressional Budget Office

    Legislation Summary

    H. Con. Res. 14, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2025, instructed the House Committee on Education and Workforce to recommend legislative changes that would decrease deficits by not less than a specified amount over the 2025-2034 period. As part of the reconciliation process, the House Committee on Education and Workforce approved legislation on April 29, 2025, with provisions that would decrease deficits over that period.

    The reconciliation recommendations of the House Committee on Education and Workforce would amend the federal student aid programs authorized by the Higher Education Act of 1965. Specifically, the legislation would modify the federal student loan program by changing repayment terms, loan limits, and requirements for institutional eligibility and alter eligibility for the Federal Pell Grant Program. The legislation also would limit the administrative authority of the Department of Education, repeal certain regulations, and create a new institutional grant program funded through payments from postsecondary institutions.

    Estimated Federal Cost

    The reconciliation recommendations of the House Committee on Education and Workforce would decrease deficits by $349.1 billion over the 2025-2034 period, CBO estimates. The estimated budgetary effect of the legislation is shown in Table 1. The costs of the legislation fall within budget functions 500 (education, training, employment, and social services) and 700 (veterans benefits and services).

    Return to Reference

    Table 1.

    Estimated Budgetary Effects of Reconciliation Recommendations Title III, House Committee on Education and Workforce, as Ordered Reported on April 29, 2025
     

    By Fiscal Year, Billions of Dollars

    		    
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2031

    2032

    2033

    2034

    2025-2029

    2025-2034
     

    Decreases in Direct Spending

    		    

    Budget Authority

    -199.1

    -14.7

    -14.5

    -16.8

    -19.8

    -20.5

    -20.9

    -21.2

    -21.6

    -21.8

    -264.8

    -370.8

    Estimated Outlays

    -197.9

    -14.3

    -12.7

    -12.7

    -15.7

    -18.5

    -19.1

    -19.2

    -19.4

    -19.6

    -253.3

    -349.1
     

    Decrease in the Deficit

    From Changes in Direct Spending

    		    

    Effect on the Deficit

    -197.9

    -14.3

    -12.7

    -12.7

    -15.7

    -18.5

    -19.1

    -19.2

    -19.4

    -19.6

    -253.3

    -349.1

    Basis of Estimate

    For this estimate, CBO assumes that the legislation will be enacted in summer 2025. CBO’s estimates are relative to its January 2025 baseline and cover the period from 2025 through 2034.

    Budgetary Treatment of Federal Student Loans and Pell Grants

    CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would affect spending both for the federal student loan program and for the Federal Pell Grant Program. Those programs are treated differently in the federal budget than most other federal programs.

    Federal Direct Student Loan Program. As required by the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (FCRA), the costs of the federal student loan program are estimated on a net-present-value basis. A present value is a single number that expresses a flow of current and future payments or receipts in terms of an equivalent lump sum paid or received at a specific time. The value depends on the rates of interest, known as the discount rates, used to translate future cash flows into current dollars. FCRA specifies those discount rates as the rates on Treasury securities with similar terms to maturity. As required by FCRA, changes to the estimated costs of outstanding student loans are shown in the year of the enactment of legislation that modifies their terms. The administrative costs of the student loan program are estimated on a cash basis.

    Federal Pell Grant Program. Pell grants provide need-based aid to undergraduate students; they are funded both through discretionary appropriations and through direct spending. For the 2024‑2025 academic year, which began on July 1, 2024, the maximum award funded by discretionary appropriations that a student can receive is $6,335. The discretionary maximum award amount, and the amount of discretionary funding, are set in the annual appropriation act. CBO’s estimate of the program’s cost is based on an assumption that the maximum award will stay the same through 2034.

    The program also has direct spending authority to support a “mandatory add-on,” which increases the award amount by $1,060 above the discretionary maximum. As a result, for the 2024-2025 academic year, the total maximum award is $7,395.

    The bulk of the Pell Grant Program is subject to the appropriation of federal funds. Although CBO anticipates that implementing the legislation would reduce spending subject to appropriation for the discretionary portion of the program, we have not reviewed the legislation for effects on spending subject to appropriation. Only changes to the cost of the mandatory add-on are included in the estimate.

    Direct Spending

    CBO estimates that enacting the legislation would decrease direct spending outlays, on net, by $349.1 billion over the 2025-2034 period (see Table 2).

    Subtitle A. Student Eligibility

    Subtitle A would amend eligibility for federal student aid based on immigration status and adjust the formula for determining the amount of federal aid for which students and their parents would be eligible.

    CBO estimates that enacting subtitle A would decrease direct spending outlays by $518 million over the 2025-2034 period.

    Changes to Aid Eligibility for Certain Immigrants. The legislation would prevent certain aliens (non-U.S. nationals) from receiving federal student aid, including asylees, refugees, Haitian entrants, certain Cuban parolees, T nonimmigrants (trafficking victims), and certain aliens who are victims of domestic violence.

    Overall, CBO expects that enacting this provision would reduce the number of students receiving federal student aid by less than 1,000 each year. Most of the reduction in eligibility would come from Haitian entrants (roughly 70 percent). On that basis, CBO estimates that enacting this provision would reduce direct spending outlays by $15 million over the 2025‑2034 period: $7 million from reductions in the cost of federal student loans and $8 million from reductions in the mandatory add-on for Pell grants.

    Amending Eligibility for Federal Aid. The legislation would cap the total amount of federal aid a student can receive annually at the median cost of college, defined as the median cost of attendance for students enrolled in similar programs. Because loan limits under current law for subsidized and unsubsidized loans are lower, on average, than the median cost of college for most programs, CBO expects that enacting this provision would mostly affect eligibility for parent PLUS and grad PLUS loans. Under current law, students and parents in those programs may borrow up to their institution’s cost of attendance. Using data from the National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) and the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS), CBO expects enacting this section would reduce annual grad PLUS borrowing by 8 percent and parent PLUS borrowing by 13 percent, primarily for borrowers with the highest cost of attendance.

    In CBO’s estimation, borrowers in the parent PLUS program pay more in principal and interest than they borrow (on a net-present-value basis). On that basis, CBO expects that reducing parent PLUS volume would increase costs to the government. Conversely, CBO estimates that borrowers of other student loans (including grad PLUS loans), on average, repay the government less than they borrowed (on a net-present-value basis). Thus, reducing lending in those programs decreases costs to the government. CBO expects that enacting the provision would reduce net outlays for student loans by $520 million over the 2025-2034 period.

    The legislation also would exclude farm and small business assets from the Student Aid Index (SAI) calculation for Pell grants, generally increasing award levels for students with those assets. Data from a sample of Pell grant recipients indicates that only a small number of recipients or their families own farms or small businesses. CBO estimates that enacting the provision would increase direct spending outlays for Pell grants by $17 million over the 2025-2034 period.

    Subtitle B. Loan Limits

    Beginning July 1, 2026, subtitle B would convert subsidized loans into unsubsidized loans and eliminate the grad PLUS loan program, restrict lending under the parent PLUS program, and amend all annual and aggregate loan limits.

    CBO estimates that enacting the provisions in subtitle B would reduce direct spending outlays by $51.2 billion over the 2025-2034 period. Those savings are estimated on a net-present-value basis and shown in the years in which the loans are originated.

    Eliminate Subsidized Loans and Increase Unsubsidized Loans.The legislation would eliminate subsidized loans and expand borrowing in the unsubsidized loan program for new borrowers starting in academic year 2026-2027, and for all borrowers starting in the 2029‑2030 academic year.

    Under current law, subsidized loans do not accrue interest while the borrower is enrolled in school or in the six months before entering repayment, during the first three years of enrollment in certain income-driven repayment (IDR) plans, and during certain deferment periods. CBO projects that under current law students will borrow roughly $20 billion annually in subsidized loans over the 2026-2034 period. Converting those loans to unsubsidized loans would reduce the cost to the federal government by increasing the interest that borrowers pay on their loans. CBO expects that most students who currently borrow in the subsidized loan program would continue to borrow the same amount in the unsubsidized program. Enacting this provision would reduce outlays by $20.2 billion over the 2025-2034 period, CBO estimates.

    Eliminate Grad PLUS Loans and Amend Limits for Unsubsidized Graduate Loans. The legislation would eliminate grad PLUS loans for new graduate borrowers starting in academic year 2026-2027, and for all borrowers starting in the 2029-2030 academic year.

    The legislation also would amend annual and aggregate loan limits for graduate students in the unsubsidized graduate loan program. Specifically, the legislation would allow graduate students to take out unsubsidized loans up to the median annual cost of their program, with an aggregate maximum of $100,000, or $150,000 if the borrower is enrolled in a graduate professional program. Under current law, graduate students may borrow up to $20,500 each year in unsubsidized loans (with a total aggregate cap for most borrowers of $138,500), and they can borrow up to the cost of attendance in grad PLUS loans, which do not have an aggregate cap.

    Under current law, CBO estimates that borrowers will take out roughly $19 billion in grad PLUS loans annually over the 2026-2034 period. Based on an analysis of current borrowing patterns in NPSAS and NSLDS, CBO expects that students who would have borrowed in the grad PLUS program under current law would instead borrow in the graduate unsubsidized program, up to the new limits.

    CBO expects that enacting both provisions would increase unsubsidized graduate borrowing by 25 percent. On that basis, CBO estimates that eliminating grad PLUS loans and amending unsubsidized loan limits for graduate borrowers would reduce outlays by $34.7 billion over the 2025‑2034 period.

    Restrict Parent PLUS Borrowing and Amend Undergraduate Loan Limits. Beginning on July 1, 2026, the legislation would cap parent PLUS loans at the student’s cost of attendance, by program, minus the maximum in unsubsidized loans the student may borrow in a given year. Students would be required to take out that maximum amount before their parent could borrow under the parent PLUS program. The legislation would set an aggregate cap of $50,000 for parent PLUS loans. There is no aggregate cap on parent PLUS borrowing under current law.

    Additionally, beginning on July 1, 2026, the legislation would allow undergraduate students regardless of dependency status, to take out unsubsidized loans up to the median cost of college for their program of study in a given year, minus any amount awarded in a Pell grant for that year. The aggregate borrowing limit for all undergraduate borrowers would be $50,000.

    Under current law, dependent and independent undergraduate students are subject to different annual and aggregate loan limits based on their class level in school and dependency type. On average, the median cost of college exceeds the current annual loan limits for dependent and independent students. Those current aggregate limits are $31,000 for dependent students and $57,500 for independent students.

    Under current law, CBO estimates that parent PLUS borrowers will take out an average of roughly $13 billion in loans annually over the 2026-2034 period. Under the loan limits specified in the legislation, CBO estimates that parent PLUS borrowing would total roughly $4 billion annually, on average, over the same period.

    The legislation also would permit institutions to cap annual loan amounts according to a student’s program of study, as long as that limit is applied consistently to all students enrolled in a given program. Using information from financial aid associations and other sources, along with data from NPSAS, CBO expects that, under the new loan limits, this provision would limit some of the otherwise expected increase in lending.

    Finally, the legislation would treat pilot-training programs as professional programs, allowing those undergraduate students to borrow up to $150,000. (Currently those students can borrow up to the amount set for their undergraduate aggregate cap, based on dependency).

    CBO estimates that the increases in limits on undergraduate unsubsidized loans, in combination with the restrictions on parent PLUS loans and other provisions, would increase undergraduate borrowing in the unsubsidized program by roughly 15 percent.

    In CBO’s estimation, borrowers in the parent PLUS program pay more in principal and interest than they borrow (on a net-present-value basis). Thus, CBO expects that reducing parent PLUS volume would increase costs to the government. Conversely, CBO estimates that borrowers of undergraduate loans, on average, repay the government less than they borrowed (on a net-present-value basis). Thus, increasing lending of undergraduate loans increases costs to the government. CBO estimates that enacting those provisions together would increase outlays for student loans by $19.1 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Set Annual Loan Limits by Enrollment Intensity.The legislation would reduce annual loan limits for undergraduate and graduate loans for students who are not enrolled full time in proportion to their hours of enrollment. Under current law, students enrolled at least half time (for example, six credit hours per semester) are eligible for the full annual loan amounts. Using data from NPSAS and NSLDS, CBO expects that this provision would reduce the volume of loans made to students by about 5 percent and reduce outlays by $15.4 billion over the 2025‑2034 period, relative to current law.

    Subtitle C. Loan Repayment

    The legislation would amend repayment terms for current and new student loan borrowers by limiting income-driven repayment options and extending terms for standard plans based on the amount of debt a borrower holds.

    CBO estimates that those changes would reduce direct spending outlays for student loans by $294.6 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    For this analysis, CBO used survey data from NPSAS and administrative data from NSLDS. The agency supplemented that information with other data as inputs to project borrowers’ lifetime earnings and repayment of loans. CBO also consulted with a range of experts on postsecondary student aid and reviewed literature on postsecondary enrollment and borrowing.

    Loan Repayment for New Loans.Under the legislation, the Department of Education would offer borrowers two repayment plans for loans originated after June 30, 2026: a standard repayment plan and a new IDR plan. The legislation would eliminate all other plans, including the Saving on a Valuable Education (SAVE) Plan, the IDR plan created administratively in 2023.

    Loans entering repayment would automatically be enrolled in a standard repayment plan, with the length of the repayment term determined by the amount borrowed:

    • 10 years for borrowers with balances less than $25,000;
    • 15 years for borrowers with balances between $25,000 and $50,000;
    • 20 years for borrowers with balances between $50,000 and $100,000; and
    • 25 years for borrowers with balances greater than $100,000.

    Monthly payments would be fixed for the life of the loan. Borrowers with balances greater than $25,000 who fully repay their loans over the longer repayment period would pay more interest, but their monthly payments would be smaller than if they were in a 10-year standard plan.

    Borrowers would be able to select a new IDR plan, called the Repayment Assistance Plan, which would:

    • Set a minimum monthly payment of $10. All existing IDR plans generally allow for payments of zero for borrowers with low income.
    • Set payments to between 1 percent and 10 percent of a borrower’s total adjusted gross income, depending on the borrower’s income, and reduce payments by $50 per month for every dependent child. Under the current SAVE Plan, borrowers pay between 5 percent and 10 percent of their income above 225 percent of the federal poverty guideline, after accounting for family size.
    • Waive 100 percent of unpaid, accrued interest when a borrower’s calculated payment does not cover accrued interest; the same is true for the current SAVE Plan.
    • Match the monthly amount paid by borrowers up to $50 and apply that match to the outstanding principal balance; the current SAVE Plan has no such match.
    • Forgive any remaining balance after 30 years of repayment. The current SAVE Plan forgives balances after 10 to 25 years of repayment, depending on the loan type and amount borrowed.
    • Require borrowers to remain on the plan until their balance is paid in full, or 30 years, whichever is sooner. Currently, borrowers can switch into other plans.

    Under the legislation, CBO estimates that about 40 percent of the loan volume originated after June 30, 2026, would be repaid through the proposed IDR plan. In contrast, under current law, CBO estimates that roughly 70 percent of loan volume would be repaid under existing IDR plans. Borrowers repaying their loans would pay more, on average, under the IDR plan proposed in the legislation than under current law. For new loans, CBO estimates that implementing the new repayment plans would decrease outlays by $133.6 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Borrowers in Repayment.Under subtitle C, borrowers who currently are in any IDR plan would be transferred to a newly proposed IDR plan. Under that plan, payments would be set at 15 percent of a borrower’s discretionary income, with no cap on payment amounts, and borrowers would receive forgiveness of any outstanding debt after 20 years in repayment if they have undergraduate loans only and 25 years if they also have graduate loans. Borrowers could also opt into the new Repayment Assistance Plan (described above) or into a standard repayment plan.

    As required by FCRA, the savings from changes to the costs of existing loans would be recorded in fiscal year 2025. CBO estimates that changes to repayment terms for borrowers currently in repayment would reduce outlays by $162.0 billion in fiscal year 2025.

    Other Changes. Enacting subtitle C also would have other effects:

    • For loans disbursed on or after July 1, 2025, the subtitle would eliminate unemployment and economic hardship deferments and reduce the total period a borrower may be in forbearance. CBO expects borrowers who otherwise would have taken those types of deferments would, under the legislation, enroll in the new IDR plan, begin repaying sooner than under current law, or default. On average, CBO estimates that borrowers would pay less on their loans under the legislation than under current law. CBO estimates that enacting this provision would increase outlays by $340 million over the 2025-2034 period.
    • Loan repayments by new graduate doctors and dentists during residency would not be counted toward the total number of payments needed to qualify for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program. The provision also would allow four years of interest-free forbearance for borrowers in medical or dental internships or residencies on loans disbursed on or after July 1, 2025. CBO estimates that implementing this provision would, on net, decrease outlays by $430 million over the 2025-2034 period.
    • Borrowers would be permitted to rehabilitate defaulted loans twice. CBO estimates that implementing this provision would increase outlays by $130 million over the 2025-2034 period.
    • The legislation would directly appropriate $500 million in fiscal year 2025 and in fiscal year 2026 for servicing student loans. CBO estimates that implementing this provision would increase outlays by $1.0 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Subtitle D. Pell Grants

    Subtitle D would change eligibility rules for the Federal Pell Grant Program. Although the effective date for most of the subtitle’s provisions is July 1, 2025, CBO expects that date would not provide sufficient time to implement the provisions for the 2025-2026 academic year, which begins on July 1, 2025. We assume for this estimate that those provisions will take effect on July 1, 2026, for the 2026-2027 academic year.

    Pell grant eligibility is determined by the Student Aid Index, a formula that accounts for students’ income and assets and, for dependent students, family income and assets. An SAI is calculated for each student and used to determine their award amount; a higher SAI represents lower financial need. Awards are prorated relative to the definition of full-time enrollment for their school’s curriculum type. Students who qualify for an amount below the maximum, or who do not qualify on the basis of their SAI, may still qualify if their adjusted gross income meets thresholds that are based on the federal poverty guideline.

    Most of the estimates below are based on analyzing a sample of aid applicants and Pell grant recipients that CBO received from the Department of Education. Additional sources of data are discussed with each estimate.

    The costs discussed here are for direct spending outlays only; they involve changes to the mandatory add-on. CBO has not reviewed the legislation for changes in spending subject to appropriation, and estimates of the cost for the discretionary portion of the program are not included.

    CBO estimates that enacting subtitle D would increase direct spending outlays by $2.8 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Foreign Income and Federal Pell Grant Eligibility. Subtitle D would amend the eligibility calculation to include foreign income, most of which is excluded from the calculation under current law. That would reduce the award amounts for some recipients with foreign income. CBO estimates that less than 1 percent of Pell grant recipients earn foreign income. On that basis, CBO estimates that enacting this provision would reduce direct spending outlays by $66 million over the 2025-2034 period.

    Change the Definition of Full-Time Enrollment. Subtitle D would increase the number of credits needed to qualify for full-time enrollment from 12 per semester to 30 per year. Under current law, students who are enrolled less than full time receive prorated grants. Raising the number of credits would decrease award amounts for students who currently are enrolled in fewer than 30 credits per year. CBO estimates that under this provision, more than half of students currently enrolled would receive smaller grants. Based on past award increases, National Student Clearinghouse data on time to completion, and existing financial incentives for early graduation, CBO estimates that about one-fifth of expected grant recipients would enroll in additional credits to increase their award amounts. On that basis, CBO estimates that enacting this provision would reduce direct spending outlays by $7.1 billion over the 2025‑2034 period.

    Eliminate Eligibility for Students With a High SAI. Subtitle D would eliminate eligibility for students whose SAI is double the amount for the Pell grant maximum award. CBO estimates that less than 1 percent of Pell grant recipients meet or exceed that threshold, and those who do generally receive the minimum award. On that basis, CBO estimates that enacting this provision would reduce direct spending outlays by $78 million over the 2025‑2034 period.

    Eliminate Eligibility for Students Enrolled Less Than Half Time. Subtitle D would require a student to be enrolled half time, that is, for at least six credits per semester, to receive a grant. Program data indicate that in recent academic years roughly 10 percent of recipients were enrolled for less than half time. Based on past increases under the program and data from the National Student Clearinghouse on time to completion, CBO expects that about one-third of the recipients who would lose their award under this provision would enroll in additional credits to avoid doing so. CBO estimates that enacting this provision would reduce direct spending outlays by $687 million over the 2025-2034 period.

    Workforce Pell Grants. Subtitle D would extend eligibility for Pell grants to students enrolled in workforce programs that can be completed in 150 to 600 clock hours, or an equivalent number of credit hours, provided the program meets standards for certification, completion, and after-graduation earnings. Under current law, students enrolled in programs requiring fewer than 600 clock hours are ineligible for Pell grants.

    Using data from the Department of Education, statistics from the American Association of Community Colleges, and published reports, CBO estimates that, under the legislation, by 2034 about 100,000 new recipients each year would receive Workforce Pell Grants of about $2,200 each (about 20 percent of that amount would come from mandatory funds). On that basis, CBO estimates that enacting the provision would increase the cost of the mandatory add-on by $298 million over the 2025-2034 period.

    To be eligible for Pell grant funds, postsecondary programs would need to demonstrate job placement and completion rates of at least 70 percent. Their tuition and fees must not exceed the difference between the median earnings of students who complete the program and 150 percent of the federal poverty guideline.

    CBO expects that fewer than half of the current short-term programs at institutions that already receive financial aid under title IV of the Higher Education Act would become newly eligible under the legislation. However, using information from community colleges and research on postsecondary education, CBO expects that many of the students already receive Pell grants because they are enrolled in short-term programs that are “stacked” within longer-term programs that are eligible for Pell grant funding. As a result, under current law, those students can receive Pell grants even if they do not complete the longer-term program.

    In addition, many short-term programs that do not currently receive federal financial aid funding, particularly those in the proprietary sector, would not participate in the Pell Grant Program under the legislation. Those institutions would be excluded either because they could not meet the requirements in the legislation or because they would choose not to meet the additional requirements for participation in federal student aid programs.

    Pell Shortfall. Subtitle D would directly appropriate additional mandatory funds to support the portion of Pell grants funded mostly through annual discretionary appropriations: $3.2 billion in 2026, $4.8 billion in 2027, and $2.5 billion in 2028. Enacting the provision would increase direct spending outlays by $10.5 billion over the 2025-2034 period, CBO estimates.

    Subtitle E. Accountability

    Under the legislation, postsecondary institutions could be required to make annual payments, called risk-sharing payments, in order to participate in the federal student loan program. Those payments would be the main source of funding for the Promoting Real Opportunities to Maximize Investments and Savings in Education (PROMISE) grants, which would be made to eligible postsecondary education institutions to help improve affordability and promote success for students.

    CBO estimated the amounts in risk-sharing payments on a cash basis rather than using FCRA procedures because those annual payments are based on cohorts of loans and are not tied directly to, or made on behalf of, any individual loan. The legislation defines loan cohorts as groups of loans to borrowers who exit a program in the same year. CBO estimated the effects of those provisions as if all other provisions in the legislation were enacted simultaneously. For example, the estimate for the amount of risk-sharing payments incorporates the assumptions that borrowers would no longer be eligible for the current SAVE Plan, that grad PLUS loans would no longer be available, and that new loan limits would be in place.

    CBO estimates that enacting subtitle E would reduce direct spending outlays by $6.2 billion over the 2025‑2034 period.

    Risk-Sharing Payments. The legislation would require some institutions to make annual payments to the Department of Education as a condition for participating in the student loan program. Those payments would be recorded as offsetting receipts—that is, as reductions in direct spending. Payments would be based on a formula that considers the amount of loan payments in a cohort that are waived, matched, or forgiven in the new IDR plan or that borrowers fail to make in a timely manner; the total cost of a program for borrowers who complete that program; and borrowers’ expected future earnings.

    CBO calculated risk-sharing payments based on our estimates of repayments under the legislation’s proposed Repayment Assistance Plan, information from the College Scorecard database (which gathers data on institutional costs, graduation and employment rates, and student loan borrowing), and the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System. CBO also analyzed delinquency and default rates using data from NSLDS.

    CBO anticipates that the first risk-sharing payments would be made by institutions late in fiscal year 2028, after the Department of Education issues new rules, and that the department would apply the requirements prospectively on loans made beginning in the 2027-2028 academic year. We expect that initially, risk-sharing payments would be small but would increase as more borrowers entered repayment on loans originated after June 30, 2027. CBO estimates that by 2034, risk-sharing payments would be $1.3 billion and would continue to increase after that year.

    CBO estimates that enacting this provision would reduce outlays by $5.3 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Reduction in Institutional Participation in Federal Student Aid Programs.Given the high cost of risk-sharing payments to institutions and the considerable uncertainty about that cost over the lifetime of any given loan, CBO expects that some institutions would take action to avoid making those payments: Some would choose not to participate in the federal student loan program, others would close certain institutional programs, and still others would close altogether. Based on CBO’s analysis of calculated risk-sharing payments, information from associations of schools and from people with knowledge of postsecondary financial aid programs, we estimate that enacting this provision would reduce projected loan volume, after all other policies in the legislation, by roughly 20 percent.

    By 2028, CBO estimates that, after incorporating all of the provisions of the legislation, 1 dollar of student loan volume would cost the federal government, on average, about 3 cents. On that basis, CBO estimates that the reduction in loan volume would reduce outlays by $3.6 billion over the 2025‑2034 period.

    CBO expects that decisions by institutions to avoid risk-sharing payments also would affect federal spending for the Pell grant mandatory add-on. In general, institutions that leave the federal student loan program would be expected to continue to participate in the Pell Grant Program. However, based on the literature included as part of the Department of Education’s rulemaking on gainful employment and financial transparency (see “Subtitle F, Regulatory Relief” below for more information), CBO expects that some students enrolled in programs or schools that close as a result of the legislation’s risk-sharing requirements would not reenroll in other programs. Thus, CBO estimates that enacting the risk-sharing provision would reduce direct spending outlays for the Pell grant mandatory add-on by $397 million over the 2025‑2034 period.

    PROMISE Grants. The legislation would institute PROMISE grants, funded by institutional risk-sharing payments. Institutions would be required to meet certain requirements to be eligible for the grants, including guaranteeing a maximum total price charged to a student for a given program.

    Under the grant formula, an eligible institution could receive up to $5,000 for each student receiving federal financial aid each year, depending on the availability of funds. Along with additional criteria, the formula compares students’ earnings after completion of a program with the cost of tuition.

    CBO expects that PROMISE grants, which would be classified as direct spending, would be awarded as funds become available. Using information from the College Scorecard database and the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System and considering estimated risk-sharing payments, CBO estimates that PROMISE grants would increase outlays by $3.0 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Return of Title IV Funds for Student Loans and the Pell Grant Mandatory Add-On. The legislation would allow the Department of Education to reallocate federal student aid that is returned to the government under title IV of the Higher Education Act to fund PROMISE grants. CBO estimates that enacting this provision would increase direct spending for student loans because it would change the underlying cost of those loans. Funding PROMISE grants with returned funds from Pell grants also would increase direct spending because the mandatory add-on for Pell grants is not subject to appropriation. CBO estimates that using those returned funds for PROMISE grants would increase direct spending outlays by $111 million over the 2025-2034 period.

    Subtitle F. Regulatory Relief

    The legislation would repeal several rules and regulations affecting institutional eligibility for federal student aid, and the terms under which a student loan borrower could receive forgiveness.

    CBO estimates that enacting subtitle F would reduce direct spending outlays by $9.0 billion over the 2025‑2034 period.

    Repeal the 90/10 Rule. The legislation would repeal the requirement that for-profit institutions receive no more than 90 percent of their revenue from federal financial aid, including veterans’ education benefits. CBO anticipates that repealing the rule would allow schools whose revenue comes primarily from federal sources to expand enrollment and that the schools closest to the 90 percent threshold would be the most likely to do so. CBO estimates that enacting this provision would increase direct spending outlays by about $1.6 billion over the 2025-2034 period: $1.3 billion for increased student loan volume, $297 million for the Pell grant mandatory add-on, and $25 million for veterans’ education benefits.

    Repeal the Gainful Employment Rule. The legislation strikes all references to “gainful employment” from the Higher Education Act. CBO expects that the Department of Education would implement that change by repealing the regulations related to gainful employment. Those regulations establish a debt-to-earnings ratio and an earnings premium test that for-profit institutions, and certain non-degree-granting programs at two-year institutions, would need to meet for the programs to remain eligible for federal student aid. Based on a literature review, CBO estimates that repealing the rules would increase both student borrowing and the number of Pell grant recipients by about 2 percent. On that basis, CBO estimates that enacting the provision would increase direct spending outlays by about $6 billion over the 2025‑2034 period: $5.1 billion for student loans and $918 million for the Pell grant mandatory add-on.

    Repeal the Closed-Schools Discharges Rule. The legislation would repeal a rule that established an automatic process for discharging loans made to borrowers who attended schools that closed, thus increasing the likelihood of loan discharge for those borrowers. Using information from the Department of Education, CBO estimates that repealing the rule would reduce outlays by $5.2 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Repeal the Borrower Defense to Repayment Rule. The legislation would repeal a rule that made it easier for borrowers’ loans to be discharged as a result of a school’s misconduct, including, for example, misrepresentation of student outcomes. Based on an analysis of loan volume at schools that were or are under investigation for issues that could fall under that rule, and using data from the Department of Education, CBO estimates that enacting the change would reduce outlays by $11.5 billion over the 2025-2034 period.

    Subtitle G. Limitation on Authority

    Subtitle G would limit the authority of the Department of Education to issue regulations that would increase the cost of federal student loans or that would have economically significant effects (that is, that would have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more or that would adversely affect the economy in a material way). CBO’s baseline includes costs that reflect the possibility of future administrative actions that would increase the cost to the government of federal student loans.

    CBO estimates that enacting subtitle G would decrease outlays for student loans by $31.8 billion over the 2025‑2034 period.

    Interactions Among Provisions

    Most provisions discussed in this document were estimated relative to current law. The effects on direct spending of simultaneously enacting all of the provisions in the legislation would differ from the sum of effects from enacting each provision separately relative to CBO’s baseline.

    The estimates for provisions to which that does not apply concern the risk-sharing payments and PROMISE grants, which were estimated relative to CBO’s baseline as adjusted to include the effects of all other policies in the legislation. Those estimates contain some interactions not shown in the “Interactions” row in Chief, Finance, Housing, and Education Cost Estimates Unit

    Kathleen FitzGerald 
    Chief, Public and Private Mandates Unit

    Christina Hawley Anthony
    Deputy Director of Budget Analysis

    H. Samuel Papenfuss 
    Deputy Director of Budget Analysis

    Chad Chirico 
    Director of Budget Analysis

    Phillip L. Swagel

    Director, Congressional Budget Office

    [Table 2 begins on the next page.]

    Undergraduate Loan Limits

                       

    Budget Authority

    0

    1,400

    2,060

    2,490

    2,710

    2,710

    2,700

    2,700

    2,710

    2,780

    8,660

    22,260

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    830

    1,640

    2,100

    2,360

    2,430

    2,420

    2,420

    2,420

    2,460

    6,930

    19,080

    Set Annual Loan Limits by Enrollment Intensity

                         

    Budget Authority

    0

    -1,140

    -1,860

    -2,130

    -2,120

    -2,210

    -2,140

    -2,190

    -2,230

    -2,070

    -7,250

    -18,090

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    -680

    -1,430

    -1,800

    -1,870

    -1,920

    -1,910

    -1,910

    -1,950

    -1,880

    -5,780

    -15,350

    Subtotal, Subtitle B

                         

    Budget Authority

    0

    -2,730

    -5,000

    -5,970

    -7,290

    -7,620

    -7,830

    -7,970

    -8,200

    -7,870

    -20,990

    -60,480

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    -1,630

    -3,720

    -4,930

    -6,020

    -6,650

    -6,890

    -7,020

    -7,210

    -7,110

    -16,300

    -51,180

    Subtitle C. Loan Repayment

                         

    Sec. 30021, Loan Repayment

                         

    Budget Authority

    -175,670

    -14,380

    -15,010

    -15,020

    -15,240

    -15,440

    -15,610

    -15,740

    -15,910

    -16,080

    -235,320

    -314,100

    Estimated Outlays

    -174,260

    -12,480

    -13,020

    -13,240

    -13,350

    -13,560

    -13,740

    -13,900

    -13,960

    -14,130

    -226,350

    -295,640

    Sec. 30022, Deferment; Forbearance and

    Sec. 30024, Public Service Loan Forgiveness

                       

    Eliminate Unemployment and Economic Hardship Deferments

                       

    Budget Authority

    20

    40

    40

    40

    40

    40

    40

    40

    50

    50

    180

    400

    Estimated Outlays

    20

    30

    30

    30

    30

    40

    40

    40

    40

    40

    140

    340

    Doctor and Dentist Residency Considerations

                         

    Budget Authority

    50

    70

    20

    -30

    -80

    -100

    -100

    -100

    -100

    -100

    30

    -470

    Estimated Outlays

    50

    50

    30

    -10

    -60

    -90

    -100

    -100

    -100

    -100

    60

    -430

    Sec. 30023, Loan Rehabilitation

                           

    Budget Authority

    0

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    60

    135

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    10

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    15

    55

    130

    Sec. 30025, Student Loan Servicing

                         

    Budget Authority

    500

    500

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    1,000

    1,000

    Estimated Outlays

    50

    300

    450

    200

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    1,000

    1,000

    Subtotal, Subtitle C

                         

    Budget Authority

    -175,100

    -13,755

    -14,935

    -14,995

    -15,265

    -15,485

    -15,655

    -15,785

    -15,945

    -16,115

    -234,050

    -313,035

    Estimated Outlays

    -174,140

    -12,090

    -12,495

    -13,005

    -13,365

    -13,595

    -13,785

    -13,945

    -14,005

    -14,175

    -225,095

    -294,600

                         

    (Continued)

    Table 2.

    Estimated Changes in Direct Spending Under Reconciliation Recommendations Title III, House Committee on Education and Workforce, as Ordered Reported on April 29, 2025

    (Continued)
     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

    		    
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2031

    2032

    2033

    2034

    2025-2029

    2025-2034
     

    Increases or Decreases (-) in Direct Spending

    		    

    Subtitle D. Pell Grants

    		                      

    Sec. 30031, Eligibility

    		                      

    Foreign Income and Federal Pell 
    Grant Eligibility

    		                    

    Budget Authority

    0

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -9

    -32

    -73

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    -2

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -8

    -26

    -66

    Change the Definition of
    Full-Time Enrollment

    		                    

    Budget Authority

    0

    -830

    -840

    -848

    -856

    -874

    -882

    -891

    -898

    -902

    -3,374

    -7,821

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    -216

    -824

    -842

    -850

    -861

    -876

    -884

    -893

    -899

    -2,732

    -7,145

    Eliminate Eligibility for Students With a High SAI

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    -9

    -9

    -9

    -9

    -10

    -10

    -10

    -10

    -10

    -36

    -86

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    -2

    -9

    -9

    -9

    -9

    -10

    -10

    -10

    -10

    -29

    -78

    Eliminate Eligibility for Students Enrolled Less Than Half Time

    		                    

    Budget Authority

    0

    -21

    -43

    -65

    -87

    -109

    -110

    -111

    -112

    -113

    -216

    -771

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    -6

    -27

    -48

    -71

    -93

    -109

    -110

    -111

    -112

    -152

    -687

    Sec. 30032, Workforce 
    Pell Grants

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    18

    21

    36

    41

    42

    42

    42

    43

    43

    116

    328

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    5

    19

    25

    38

    41

    42

    42

    43

    43

    87

    298

    Sec. 30033, Pell Shortfall

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    3,181

    4,822

    2,507

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    10,510

    10,510

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    827

    3,576

    4,204

    1,878

    25

    0

    0

    0

    0

    10,485

    10,510

    Subtotal, Subtitle D

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    2,331

    3,943

    1,613

    -919

    -959

    -968

    -978

    -985

    -991

    6,968

    2,087

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    606

    2,727

    3,322

    978

    -905

    -961

    -970

    -979

    -986

    7,633

    2,832
                         

    (Continued)

    Table 2.

    Estimated Changes in Direct Spending Under Reconciliation Recommendations Title III, House Committee on Education and Workforce, as Ordered Reported on April 29, 2025

    (Continued)
     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

    		    
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2031

    2032

    2033

    2034

    2025-2029

    2025-2034
     

    Increases or Decreases (-) in Direct Spending

    		    

    Subtitle E. Accountability

    		                      

    Sec. 30041, Agreements With Institutions

    		                    

    Risk-Sharing Payments

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    0

    0

    -10

    -160

    -580

    -890

    -1,070

    -1,220

    -1,340

    -170

    -5,270

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    0

    0

    -10

    -160

    -580

    -890

    -1,070

    -1,220

    -1,340

    -170

    -5,270

    Institutional Participation

    		                      

    Student Loans

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    0

    -50

    -160

    -350

    -520

    -690

    -700

    -710

    -710

    -560

    -3,890

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    0

    -30

    -120

    -280

    -460

    -630

    -700

    -710

    -710

    -430

    -3,640

    Pell Grants

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    0

    -8

    -21

    -41

    -61

    -82

    -82

    -82

    -82

    -70

    -459

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    0

    -2

    -11

    -26

    -46

    -66

    -82

    -82

    -82

    -39

    -397

    Sec. 30042, Campus-Based Aid Programs

    		                    

    PROMISE Grants

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    0

    0

    10

    160

    580

    890

    1,070

    1,220

    1,340

    170

    5,270

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    50

    270

    650

    930

    1,110

    0

    3,010

    Return of Title IV Funds

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    0

    0

    14

    20

    20

    20

    20

    20

    20

    34

    134

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    0

    0

    0

    0

    31

    20

    20

    20

    20

    0

    111

    Subtotal, Subtitle E

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    0

    -58

    -167

    -371

    -561

    -752

    -762

    -772

    -772

    -596

    -4,215

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    0

    -32

    -141

    -466

    -1,005

    -1,296

    -1,182

    -1,062

    -1,002

    -639

    -6,186

    Subtitle F. Regulatory Relief

    		                      

    Sec. 30051, Regulatory Relief

    		                      

    Repeal the 90/10 Rule

    		                      

    Student Loans

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    40

    80

    130

    170

    220

    220

    220

    230

    230

    420

    1,540

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    30

    70

    100

    140

    180

    200

    200

    200

    200

    340

    1,320

    Pell Grants

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    17

    25

    34

    42

    42

    42

    42

    43

    43

    118

    330

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    4

    19

    27

    36

    42

    42

    42

    42

    43

    86

    297
                         

    (Continued)

    Table 2.

    Estimated Changes in Direct Spending Under Reconciliation Recommendations Title III, House Committee on Education and Workforce, as Ordered Reported on April 29, 2025

    (Continued)
     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

    		    
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2031

    2032

    2033

    2034

    2025-2029

    2025-2034
     

    Increases or Decreases (-) in Direct Spending

    		    

    Veterans’ Education Benefits

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    0

    2

    2

    3

    3

    3

    3

    3

    3

    3

    10

    25

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    2

    2

    3

    3

    3

    3

    3

    3

    3

    10

    25

    Repeal the Gainful Employment Rule

    		                    

    Student Loans

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    160

    330

    490

    670

    840

    850

    860

    870

    870

    1,650

    5,940

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    100

    250

    400

    560

    710

    760

    770

    780

    780

    1,310

    5,110

    Pell Grants

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    111

    111

    111

    111

    111

    112

    112

    112

    112

    444

    1,003

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    29

    109

    111

    111

    111

    111

    112

    112

    112

    360

    918

    Repeal the Closed-School Discharge Rule

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    -1,450

    -380

    -400

    -430

    -460

    -490

    -520

    -550

    -580

    -620

    -3,120

    -5,880

    Estimated Outlays

    -1,410

    -330

    -350

    -370

    -390

    -420

    -450

    -470

    -500

    -530

    -2,850

    -5,220

    Repeal the Borrower Defense to Repayment Rule

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    -2,180

    -1,070

    -1,100

    -1,130

    -1,160

    -1,190

    -1,220

    -1,250

    -1,280

    -1,320

    -6,640

    -12,900

    Estimated Outlays

    -2,090

    -930

    -960

    -990

    -1,010

    -1,040

    -1,070

    -1,100

    -1,120

    -1,150

    -5,980

    -11,460

    Subtotal, Subtitle F

    		                      

    Budget Authority

    -3,630

    -1,120

    -952

    -792

    -624

    -464

    -513

    -563

    -602

    -682

    -7,118

    -9,942

    Estimated Outlays

    -3,500

    -1,095

    -860

    -719

    -550

    -414

    -404

    -443

    -483

    -542

    -6,724

    -9,010

    Subtitle G. Limitation on Authority

    		                    

    Sec. 30061, Limitation on the Authority of the Secretary to Propose or Issue Regulations and Executive Actions

    		                    

    Budget Authority

    -20,300

    -1,300

    -1,400

    -1,400

    -1,400

    -1,500

    -1,500

    -1,500

    -1,600

    -1,600

    -25,800

    -33,500

    Estimated Outlays

    -20,200

    -1,200

    -1,200

    -1,200

    -1,300

    -1,300

    -1,300

    -1,300

    -1,400

    -1,400

    -25,100

    -31,800
                         

    (Continued)

    Table 2.

    Estimated Changes in Direct Spending Under Reconciliation Recommendations Title III, House Committee on Education and Workforce, as Ordered Reported on April 29, 2025

    (Continued)
     

    By Fiscal Year, Millions of Dollars

    		    
     

    2025

    2026

    2027

    2028

    2029

    2030

    2031

    2032

    2033

    2034

    2025-2029

    2025-2034
     

    Increases or Decreases (-) in Direct Spending

    		    

    Interactions

    		                        

    Student Loans

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    -100

    2,110

    4,230

    5,270

    6,520

    6,600

    6,800

    6,900

    7,020

    6,810

    18,030

    52,160

    Estimated Outlays

    -100

    1,190

    3,090

    4,320

    5,380

    5,860

    6,020

    6,140

    6,250

    6,160

    13,880

    44,310

    Pell Grants

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    0

    -182

    -245

    -310

    -375

    -437

    -440

    -443

    -447

    -448

    -1,112

    -3,327

    Estimated Outlays

    0

    -47

    -196

    -261

    -326

    -391

    -437

    -441

    -444

    -447

    -830

    -2,990

    Total Interactions

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    -100

    1,928

    3,985

    4,960

    6,145

    6,163

    6,360

    6,457

    6,573

    6,362

    16,918

    48,833

    Estimated Outlays

    -100

    1,143

    2,894

    4,059

    5,054

    5,469

    5,583

    5,699

    5,806

    5,713

    13,050

    41,320

    Total Changes

    		                        

    Budget Authority

    -199,130

    -14,653

    -14,452

    -16,791

    -19,779

    -20,491

    -20,928

    -21,186

    -21,630

    -21,767

    -264,805

    -370,807

    Estimated Outlays

    -197,940

    -14,271

    -12,711

    -12,654

    -15,719

    -18,460

    -19,123

    -19,241

    -19,427

    -19,596

    -253,295

    -349,142
     

    Net Decrease in the Deficit 
    From Changes in Direct Spending

    		    

    Effect on the Deficit

    -197,940

    -14,271

    -12,711

    -12,654

    -15,719

    -18,460

    -19,123

    -19,241

    -19,427

    -19,596

    -253,295

    -349,142

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Mount Logan Capital Inc. Announces First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Declared quarterly distribution of C$0.02 per common share in the second quarter of 2025, the twenty-third consecutive quarter of a shareholder distribution

    Asset management segment generated $8.1 million in Fee Related Earnings (“FRE”) for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025, a 25% increase over the prior year period

    Generated $7.8 million of Spread Related Earnings (“SRE”) for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025, which reflects 1.3% of spread earnings on Ability’s assets

    During January 2025, the Company announced it entered into a definitive agreement to combine with 180 Degree Capital Corp. (Nasdaq: TURN) in an all-stock transaction. The surviving entity is expected to operate as Mount Logan Capital Inc. (“New Mount Logan”) and to be listed on Nasdaq under the symbol MLCI

    In January 2025, Mount Logan completed its previously announced investment in Runway Growth Capital LLC, a $1.3 billion private credit asset manager, alongside BC Partners Credit

    All amounts are stated in United States dollars, unless otherwise indicated

    TORONTO, May 15, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Mount Logan Capital Inc. (Cboe Canada: MLC) (“Mount Logan” or the “Company”) announced today its financial results for the three months ended March 31, 2025.

    First Quarter 2025 Highlights

    • FRE for the asset management segment was $2.2 million for the quarter, an increase of 37% compared to the first quarter of 2024, due to improved economics on the Company’s service agreement with Sierra Crest Investment Management over an interval fund, and the decrease in general, administrative and other expenses from the expiry of transition services agreements and other one-time expenses incurred in the first quarter of 2024. FRE for the trailing twelve months was $8.1 million, an increase of 25% from the comparative trailing twelve-month period, primarily attributable to increases in management fees.
    • Total revenue for the asset management segment of the Company was $3.2 million, a decrease of $0.8 million, or 21%, as compared to the first quarter of 2024. The decrease was driven by a reduction in and normalization of incentive fees associated with a single managed fund in winddown, and an increase in net loss from investment activities, both of which we view as transitory elements. First quarter asset management revenues also exclude $1.2 million of management fees associated with Mount Logan’s management of the assets of Ability Insurance Company (“Ability”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. Normalized Ability management fees for the first quarter of 2025 were $1.6 million, excluding one-time expenses, which are not expected to continue throughout the remainder of the year.
    • Total net investment income for the insurance segment was $19.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, a decrease of $2.8 million, or 13%, as compared to the first quarter of 2024, owing to interest expense related to the interest rate swap, decrease in bond yields and decrease in the long term investments portfolio. Excluding the funds withheld assets under reinsurance contracts and Modco, the insurance segment’s net investment income was $14.5 million, an increase of $0.4 million, or 3%, as compared to the first quarter of 2024.
    • Achieved 6.9%1yield on the insurance investment portfolio for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. This was impacted by higher investment expense on funds withheld assets under the Modco arrangement. Excluding the funds withheld under reinsurance contracts and Modco, the yield was 8.8%.
    • Ability’s total assets managed by Mount Logan increased to $645.7 million as of March 31, 2025, an increase of $28.9 million from first quarter 2024 of $616.8 million. As of March 31, 2025, the insurance segment included $1.02 billion in total investment assets, down $23.0 million, or 2%, from the first quarter of 2024 investment assets of $1.04 billion. During the quarter, Mount Logan began managing a portion of Ability’s modified coinsurance assets with Vista.
    • Book value of the insurance segment as of March 31, 2025 was $85.9 million, an increase of $3.3 million as compared to $82.6 million for the first quarter of 2024.
    • SRE for the insurance segment was $7.8 million for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025, down $1.7 million from the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2024 of $9.5 million, primarily driven by an increase in cost of funds, partially offset by increased net investment income and lower operating expenses. The increase in cost of funds was primarily driven by unfavorable in-force update to the Long Term Care business (Guardian block) of $1.8 million for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025, while there was a favorable in-force update to the LTC business (Medico block) observed of $4.8 million for the twelve months ended March 31, 2024.

    Subsequent Events

    • Declared a shareholder distribution in the amount of C$0.02 per common share for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, payable on June 2, 2025 to shareholders of record at the close of business on May 27, 2025. This cash dividend marks the twenty-third consecutive quarter of the Company issuing a C$0.02 distribution to its shareholders. This dividend is designated by the Company as an eligible dividend for the purpose of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and any similar provincial or territorial legislation. An enhanced dividend tax credit applies to eligible dividends paid to Canadian residents.
    • A preliminary joint proxy statement/prospectus was filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) for the previously announced merger of Mount Logan with 180 Degree Capital Corp. (Nasdaq: TURN) (“180 Degree Capital”), in an all-stock transaction (the “Business Combination”). The surviving entity is expected to be a Delaware corporation operating as New Mount Logan listed on Nasdaq under the symbol “MLCI”. As required under U.S. federal securities laws and related rules and regulations, the joint proxy statement/prospectus included Mount Logan’s audited financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023 prepared in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. In connection with the Business Combination, shareholders of Mount Logan will receive proportionate ownership of New Mount Logan determined by reference to Mount Logan’s transaction equity value at signing, subject to certain pre-closing adjustments, relative to 180 Degree Capital’s Net Asset Value (“NAV”) at closing. Shareholders holding approximately 26% of the outstanding shares of Mount Logan and approximately 20% of the outstanding shares of 180 Degree Capital signed voting agreements supporting the Business Combination, and an additional 8% of Mount Logan and 7% of 180 Degree Capital shareholders, respectively, have provided written non-binding indications of support for the Business Combination.
    • Portman Ridge Finance Corporation (Nasdaq: PTMN) and Logan Ridge Finance Corporation (Nasdaq: LRFC) merger remains subject to the receipt of certain shareholder approvals and the satisfaction of other closing conditions. Mount Logan currently earns management fees from LRFC and has a minority stake in PTMN’s manager, Sierra Crest Investment Management.

    Management Commentary

    • Ted Goldthorpe, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of Mount Logan stated, “We are pleased to report our first quarter 2025 results, reflecting the continued earnings power of our asset management and insurance platforms. While AUM growth slowed in Q1 2025, consistent with broader macro challenges, we demonstrated our ability to generate strong, positive Fee Related Earnings on the asset management segment, and Spread Related Earnings in the insurance platform, providing a solid foundation for momentum in 2025. Our managed funds demonstrated performance resilience and low volatility as compared to the public credit and equity markets, which we view as a testament to our focus on private credit assets. Looking ahead, we see ample opportunities to drive AUM growth across our core managed vehicles, enact operational improvements and efficiencies, while also advancing strategic priorities to scale the business through reinvestment across our segments and accretive acquisition opportunities, which includes our recently announced transactions with 180 Degree Capital and Runway, which we believe will be significant catalysts for long-term growth and investment into our business.”

    Selected Financial Highlights

    • Total Capital of the Company was $144.9 million as at March 31, 2025, a decrease of $5.4 million as compared to December 31, 2024. Total capital consists of debt obligations and total shareholders’ equity.
    • Consolidated net income (loss) before taxes was $(13.7) million for the first quarter of 2025, a decrease of $26.8 million from $13.1 million in the first quarter of 2024. The decrease was primarily attributable to the increase in net insurance finance expenses, decrease in net investment income and increase in general, administrative and other expenses under the insurance segment, as well as an increase in corporate transaction costs under the asset management segment related to the Business Combination when compared to the first quarter of 2024.
    • Basic Earnings (loss) per share (“EPS”) was ($0.48) for the first quarter of 2025, a decrease of $0.99 from $0.51 for the first quarter of 2024.
    • Adjusted basic EPS was ($0.29) for the first quarter of 2025, a decrease of $0.83 from $0.54 for the first quarter of 2024.

    Results of Operations by Segment

    ($ in Thousands) Three Months Ended  
      March 31, 2025     December 31, 2024     March 31, 2024  
    Reported Results                
    Asset management                
    Revenue $ 3,192     $ 4,442     $ 4,030  
    Expenses   12,578       13,440       7,615  
    Net income (loss) – asset management   (9,386 )     (8,998 )     (3,585 )
    Insurance                
    Revenue (1)   18,982       (622 )     17,555  
    Expenses   23,280       (16,142 )     822  
    Net income (loss) – insurance   (4,298 )     15,520       16,733  
    Income before income taxes   (13,684 )     6,522       13,148  
    Provision for income taxes   361       37       (56 )
    Net income (loss) $ (13,323 )   $ 6,559     $ 13,092  
    Basic EPS $ (0.48 )   $ 0.25     $ 0.51  
    Diluted EPS $ (0.48 )   $ 0.23     $ 0.50  
    Adjusting Items                
    Asset management                
    Transaction costs (2)   (4,545 )     (1,921 )     (251 )
    Acquisition integration costs (3)   —       —       (250 )
    Non-cash items (4)   (737 )     (2,940 )     (346 )
    Impact of adjusting items on expenses   (5,282 )     (4,861 )     (847 )
    Adjusted Results                
    Asset management                
    Revenue $ 3,192     $ 4,442     $ 4,030  
    Expenses   7,296       8,579       6,768  
    Net income (loss) – asset management   (4,104 )     (4,137 )     (2,738 )
    Income before income taxes   (8,402 )     11,383       13,995  
    Provision for income taxes   361       37       (56 )
    Net income (loss) $ (8,041 )   $ 11,420     $ 13,939  
    Basic EPS $ (0.29 )   $ 0.44     $ 0.54  
    Diluted EPS $ (0.29 )   $ 0.40     $ 0.54  

    (1)    Insurance Revenue line item is presented net of insurance service expenses and net expenses from reinsurance contracts held.
    (2)    Transaction costs are related to business acquisitions and strategic initiatives transacted by the Company.
    (3)    Acquisition integration costs are consulting and administration services fees related to integrating a business into the Company. Acquisition integration costs are recorded in general, administrative and other expenses.
    (4)    Non-cash items include amortization and impairment of acquisition-related intangible assets and impairment of goodwill, if any.


    Asset Management

    Total Revenue – Asset Management

    ($ in Thousands)

        Three Months Ended  
        March 31, 2025     March 31, 2024  
    Management and incentive fee   $ 2,928     $ 3,494  
    Equity investment earning     282       224  
    Interest income     268       271  
    Dividend income     38       112  
    Other Income     299       —  
    Net gains (losses) from investment activities     (623 )     (71 )
    Total revenue — asset management   $ 3,192     $ 4,030  

    Fee Related Earnings (“FRE”)

    FRE is a non-IFRS financial measure used to assess the asset management segment’s generation of profits from revenues that are measured and received on a recurring basis and are not dependent on future realization events. The Company calculates FRE, and reconciles FRE to net income from its asset management activities, as follows:

    ($ in Thousands)

      Three Months Ended  
      March 31, 2025     March 31, 2024  
    Net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss) $ (13,323 )   $ 13,092  
               
    Adjustment to net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss):          
    Total revenue – insurance (1)   (18,982 )     (17,555 )
    Total expenses – insurance   23,280       822  
    Net income – asset management (2)   (9,025 )     (3,641 )
    Adjustments to non-fee generating asset management business and other recurring revenue stream:          
    Management fee from Ability   1,566       1,429  
    Interest income   —       —  
    Dividend income   (39 )     (112 )
    Net gains (losses) from investment activities(3)   623       71  
    Administration and servicing fees   504       366  
    Transaction costs   4,545       251  
    Amortization and impairment of intangible assets   737       346  
    Interest and other credit facility expenses   1,857       1,702  
    General, administrative and other   1,479       1,233  
    Fee Related Earnings $ 2,247     $ 1,645  

    (1)    Includes add-back of management fees paid to ML Management.

    (2)    Represents net income for asset management, as presented in the interim Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income (Loss).

    (3)    Includes unrealized gains or losses on the debt warrants.

    ($ in Thousands) Trailing Twelve Months Ended  
      March 31, 2025     March 31, 2024  
    Net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss) $ (20,826 )   $ 26,088  
               
    Adjustment to net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss):          
    Total revenue – insurance (1)   (65,582 )     (76,512 )
    Total expenses – insurance   60,979       35,450  
    Net income – asset management (2)   (25,429 )     (14,974 )
    Adjustments to non-fee generating asset management business and other recurring revenue stream:          
    Management fee from Ability   6,162       4,853  
    Interest income   (1 )     —  
    Dividend income   (425 )     (640 )
    Net gains (losses) from investment activities(3)   1,995       157  
    Administration and servicing fees   1,743       1,228  
    Transaction costs   6,468       3,814  
    Amortization and impairment of intangible assets   4,369       1,178  
    Interest and other credit facility expenses   8,090       6,425  
    General, administrative and other   5,177       4,481  
    Fee Related Earnings $ 8,149     $ 6,522  

    (1)    Includes add-back of management fees paid to ML Management.

    (2)    Represents net income for asset management, as presented across the interim Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss).

    (3)    Includes unrealized gains or losses on the debt warrants.

    Insurance

    Total Revenue – Insurance

    ($ in Thousands)

        Three Months Ended  
        March 31, 2025     March 31, 2024  
    Insurance service result   $ (2,197 )   $ (3,092 )
    Net investment income     19,004       21,804  
    Net gains (losses) from investment activities     6,958       2,666  
    Realized and unrealized gains (losses) on embedded derivative — funds withheld     (4,783 )     (3,829 )
    Other income     —       6  
    Total revenue — net of insurance services expenses and net expenses from reinsurance   $ 18,982     $ 17,555  

    Spread Related Earnings (“SRE”)

    The Company uses SRE to assess the performance of the insurance segment, excluding the impact of certain market volatility and other one-time, non-core components of insurance segment income (loss). Excluded items under SRE are investment gains (losses), effects of discount rates and other financial variables on the value of insurance obligations (which is a component of “net insurance finance income/(expense)”), other income and certain general, administrative & other expenses. The Company believes this measure is useful to securityholders as it provides additional insight into the underlying economics of the insurance segment, as further discussed below.

    For the insurance segment, SRE equals the sum of (i) the net investment income on the insurance segment’s net invested assets (excluding investment income earned on funds held under reinsurance contracts) less (ii) cost of funds (as described below) and (iii) certain operating expenses.

    Cost of funds includes the impact of interest accretion on insurance and investment contract liabilities and amortization of losses recognized for new insurance contracts that are deemed onerous at initial recognition. It also includes experience adjustments which represents the difference between actual and expected cashflows and includes the impact of certain changes to non-financial assumptions.

    The Company reconciles SRE to net income (loss) before tax from its insurance segment activities, as follows:

      Three Months Ended  
      Q1-2025     Q4-2024     Q3-2024     Q2-2024     Q1-2024     Q4-2023     Q3-2023     Q2-2023  
    Net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss) before tax $ (13,639 )   $ 6,522     $ (17,378 )   $ 3,847     $ 13,148     $ (1,946 )   $ 16,243     $ (903 )
                                                   
    Adjustment to net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss):                                              
    Total revenue – asset management (1)   (3,192 )     (4,442 )     (3,826 )     (3,394 )     (4,030 )     (3,723 )     (3,186 )     (2,996 )
    Total expenses – asset management   12,533       13,440       7,481       6,651       7,615       7,839       6,868       6,133  
    Net income – insurance (2)   (4,298 )     15,520       (13,723 )     7,104       16,733       2,170       19,925       2,234  
    Adjustments to Insurance segment business:                                              
    Management fees to ML Management   (1,167 )     (1,167 )     (1,501 )     (1,529 )     (1,429 )     (1,345 )     (1,110 )     (969 )
    Net (gains) losses from investment activities(3)   (5,718 )     17,681       (13,267 )     887       (2,995 )     (10,116 )     (2,113 )     (1,454 )
    Other Income(4)   —       —       —       —       —       (7,353 )     —       —  
    Net insurance finance (income)/expense(5)   12,506       (28,702 )     30,940       (5,442 )     (11,769 )     14,399       (17,684 )     (5,275 )
    Loss on onerous contracts(6)   (1,548 )     (545 )     (822 )     945       6,884       286       2,451       4,214  
    General, administrative and other(7)   600       338       239       464       447       502       1,289       1,546  
    Spread Related Earnings $ 375     $ 3,125     $ 1,866     $ 2,429     $ 7,871     $ (1,457 )   $ 2,758     $ 296  

    (1)    Includes add-back of management fees paid by Ability to ML Management.

    (2)    Represents net income before tax for the insurance segment, as presented in the annual Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income (Loss).

    (3)    Excludes net (gains) losses from investment activities on assets retained by the Company under funds withheld arrangement with Front Street Re and Vista.

    (4)    Represents non-operating income.

    (5)    Includes the impact of changes in interest rates and other financials assumptions and excludes interest accretion on insurance contract liabilities and reinsurance contract assets.

    (6)    Represents the unamortized portion of future interest accretion and ceded commissions paid at the time of issue of new MYGA insurance contracts. Future interest accretion and ceded commissions are amortized over the average duration of MYGA contracts reinsured which aligns with the recognition of insurance service revenue. Loss on onerous contracts are part of Insurance service expense.

    (7)    Represents certain costs incurred by the insurance segment for purposes of IFRS reporting but not the day to day operations of the insurance company.

    The following table presents SRE, the performance measure of the insurance segment:

    ($ in Thousands)

      Trailing Twelve Months Ended  
      March 31, 2025     March 31, 2024  
    Fixed Income and other investment income, net(1) $ 54,342     $ 50,502  
    Cost of funds   (38,352 )     (32,318 )
    Net Investment spread   15,990       18,184  
    Other operating expenses   (8,195 )     (8,716 )
    Spread Related Earnings $ 7,795     $ 9,468  
    SRE % of Average Net Investments   1.3 %     1.7 %

    (1)    Excludes net investment income from investment activities on assets retained by the Company under funds withheld arrangement with Front Street Re and Vista Life and Casualty Reinsurance Company (“Vista”).

    Spread related earnings (“SRE”) was $7.8 million for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025 compared with $9.5 million for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2024, a decrease of $1.7 million. SRE decreased year over year due to higher cost of funds, partially offset by increased investment income and lower other operating expenses. Cost of funds increased primarily due to unfavorable impact of $1.8 million as a result of in-force update to LTC business (Guardian block) whereas the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2024 had a favorable in-force impact of $4.8 million to LTC business (Medico block). Investment income increased primarily due to an increase in total insurance investment assets as a result of new multi-year guaranteed annuity (“MYGA”) business and improvement in yield across the investment portfolio. Other operating expenses decreased as a result of efforts to reduce overall operating cost.

    SRE as a percentage of average net invested assets was 1.3% for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2025 compared with 1.7% for the trailing twelve months ended March 31, 2024.

    Liquidity and Capital Resources

    As of March 31, 2025, the asset management segment had $77.8 million (par value) of borrowings outstanding, of which $33.8 million had a fixed rate and $44.0 million had a floating rate. As of March 31, 2025, the insurance segment had $17.3 million (par value) of borrowings outstanding, of which $14.3 million had a fixed rate and $3.0 million had a floating rate. Liquid assets, including high-quality assets that are marketable, can be pledged as security for borrowings, and can be converted to cash in a time frame that meets liquidity and funding requirements. As of March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, the total liquid assets of the Company were as follows:

    ($ in Thousands)

    As at   March 31, 2025     December 31, 2024
    Cash and cash equivalents   $ 125,808     $ 85,988
    Restricted cash posted as collateral     12,526       15,716
    Investments     609,514       639,932
    Management fee receivable     2,927       3,268
    Receivable for investments sold     23       17,045
    Accrued interest and dividend receivable     20,959       20,489
    Total liquid assets   $ 771,757     $ 782,438

    The Company defines working capital as the sum of cash, restricted cash, investments that mature within one year of the reporting date, management fees receivable, receivables for investments sold, accrued interest and dividend receivables, and premium receivables, less the sum of debt obligations, payables for investments purchased, amounts due to affiliates, reinsurance liabilities, and other liabilities that are payable within one year of the reporting date.

    As at March 31, 2025, the Company had working capital of $218.8 million, reflecting current assets of $241.7 million, offset by current liabilities of $22.9 million, as compared with working capital of $231.2 million as at December 31, 2024, reflecting current assets of $245.3 million, offset by current liabilities of $14.1 million. The decrease in working capital was primarily attributable to the decrease in cash within the asset management business combined with the increase in accrued expenses across asset management and insurance.

    Interest Rate Risk

    The Company has obligations to policyholders and other debt obligations that expose it to interest rate risk. The Company also owns debt assets and interest rate swaps that are exposed to interest rate risk. The fair value of these obligations and assets may change if base rate changes in interest rates occur.

    The following table summarizes the potential impact on net assets of hypothetical base rate changes in interest rates assuming a parallel shift in the yield curve, with all other variables remaining constant.

    As at   March 31, 2025     December 31, 2024  
    50 basis point increase (1)   $ (8,836 )   $ 7,559  
    50 basis point decrease (1)     5,913       (18,939 )

    (1)    Losses are presented in brackets and gains are presented as positive numbers.

    Actual results may differ significantly from this sensitivity analysis. As such, the sensitivities should only be viewed as directional estimates of the underlying sensitivities for the respective factors based on the assumptions outlined above.

    Conference Call

    The Company will hold a conference call on Friday, May 16, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time to discuss the first quarter financial results. Shareholders, prospective shareholders, and analysts are welcome to listen to the call. To join the call, please use the dial-in information below. A recording of the conference call will be available on our Company’s website www.mountlogancapital.ca in the ‘Investor Relations’ section under “Events”.

    Canada Dial-in Toll Free: 1-833-950-0062
    US Dial-in Toll Free: 1-833-470-1428
    International Dial-ins
    Access Code: 813165

    About Mount Logan Capital Inc.

    Mount Logan Capital Inc. is an alternative asset management and insurance solutions company that is focused on public and private debt securities in the North American market and the reinsurance of annuity products, primarily through its wholly owned subsidiaries Mount Logan Management LLC (“ML Management”) and Ability Insurance Company (“Ability”), respectively. Mount Logan also actively sources, evaluates, underwrites, manages, monitors and primarily invests in loans, debt securities, and other credit-oriented instruments that present attractive risk-adjusted returns and present low risk of principal impairment through the credit cycle.

    ML Management was organized in 2020 as a Delaware limited liability company and is registered with the SEC as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended. The primary business of ML Management is to provide investment management services to (i) privately offered investment funds exempt from registration under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”) advised by ML Management, (ii) a non-diversified closed end management investment company that has elected to be regulated as a business development company, (iii) Ability, and (iv) non-diversified closed-end management investment companies registered under the 1940 Act that operate as interval funds. ML Management also acts as the collateral manager to collateralized loan obligations backed by debt obligations and similar assets.

    Ability is a Nebraska domiciled insurer and reinsurer of long-term care policies and annuity products acquired by Mount Logan in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2021. Ability is also no longer insuring or re-insuring new long-term care risk.

    Non-IFRS Financial Measures

    This press release makes reference to certain non-IFRS financial measures. These measures are not recognized measures under IFRS, do not have a standardized meaning prescribed by IFRS and may not be comparable to similar measures presented by other companies. Rather, these measures are provided as additional information to complement IFRS financial measures by providing further understanding of the Company’s results of operations from management’s perspective. The Company’s definitions of non-IFRS measures used in this press release may not be the same as the definitions for such measures used by other companies in their reporting. Non-IFRS measures have limitations as analytical tools and should not be considered in isolation nor as a substitute for analysis of the Company’s financial information reported under IFRS. The Company believes that securities analysts, investors and other interested parties frequently use non-IFRS financial measures in the evaluation of issuers. The Company’s management also uses non-IFRS financial measures in order to facilitate operating performance comparisons from period to period.

    Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains forward-looking statements and information within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the expressions “seeks”, “expects”, “believes”, “estimates”, “will”, “target” and similar expressions. The forward-looking statements are not historical facts but reflect the current expectations of the Company regarding future results or events and are based on information currently available to it. Certain material factors and assumptions were applied in providing these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements discussed in this release include, but are not limited to, statements about the benefits of the closing of the acquisition of a minority interest in Runway as well as the proposed transaction involving the Company and 180 Degree Capital, including future financial and operating results, the Company’s and 180 Degree Capital’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions, the expected timing and likelihood of completion of the proposed transaction, the regulatory environment in which the Company operates, and the results of, or outlook for, the Company’s operations or for the Canadian and U.S. economies, statements relating to the Company’s continued transition to an asset management and insurance platform business and the entering into of further strategic transactions to diversify the Company’s business and further grow recurring management fee and other income and increasing Ability’s assets; the Company’s plans to focus Ability’s business on the reinsurance of annuity products; the potential benefits of combining Mount Logan’s and Ovation’s platform including an increase in fee-related earnings as a result of the acquisition; the decrease in expenses in the asset management segment; the historical growth in the asset management segment and insurance segment being an indicator for future growth; the growth and scalability of the Company’s business the Company’s business strategy, model, approach and future activities; portfolio composition and size, asset management activities and related income, capital raising activities, future credit opportunities of the Company, portfolio realizations, the protection of stakeholder value; the expansion of the Company’s loan portfolio; synergies to be achieved by both the Company and Runway through the Company’s strategic minority investment in Runway; and the expansion of Mount Logan’s capabilities. All forward-looking statements in this press release are qualified by these cautionary statements. The Company believes that the expectations reflected in forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions; however, the Company can give no assurance that the actual results or developments will be realized by certain specified dates or at all. These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from current expectations, including that the Company has a limited operating history with respect to an asset management oriented business model; Ability may not generate recurring asset management fees, increase its assets or strategically benefit the Company as expected; the expected synergies by combining the business of Mount Logan with the business of Ability may not be realized as expected; the risk that Ability may require a significant investment of capital and other resources in order to expand and grow the business; the Company does not have a record of operating an insurance solutions business and is subject to all the risks and uncertainties associated with a broadening of the Company’s business; ability to obtain the requisite Company and 180 Degree Capital shareholder approvals, as well as governmental and regulatory approvals required for the proposed transaction with 180 Degree Capital, the risk that an event, change or other circumstance could give rise to the termination of the proposed transaction with 180 Degree Capital, the risk that a condition to closing of the proposed transaction with 180 Degree Capital may not be satisfied, the risk of delays in completing the proposed transaction with 180 Degree Capital, the risk that the businesses of the Company and with 180 Degree Capital will not be integrated successfully, the risk that the expected synergies of the acquisition of Ovation may not be realized as expected and the matters discussed under “Risks Factors” in the most recently filed annual information form and management discussion and analysis for the Company. Readers, therefore, should not place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements. Further, a forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which such statement is made. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any such statement or to reflect new information or the occurrence of future events or circumstances except as required by securities laws. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this press release.

    This press release is not, and under no circumstances is it to be construed as, a prospectus or an advertisement and the communication of this release is not, and under no circumstances is it to be construed as, an offer to sell or an offer to purchase any securities in the Company or in any fund or other investment vehicle. This press release is not intended for U.S. persons. The Company’s shares are not and will not be registered under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Company is not and will not be registered under the U.S. Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”). U.S. persons are not permitted to purchase the Company’s shares absent an applicable exemption from registration under each of these Acts. In addition, the number of investors in the United States, or which are U.S. persons or purchasing for the account or benefit of U.S. persons, will be limited to such number as is required to comply with an available exemption from the registration requirements of the 1940 Act.

    Contacts:
    Mount Logan Capital Inc.

    365 Bay Street, Suite 800
    Toronto, ON M5H 2V1
    info@mountlogancapital.ca

    Nikita Klassen
    Chief Financial Officer
    Nikita.Klassen@mountlogancapital.ca

    Scott Chan
    Investor Relations
    Scott.Chan@mountlogan.com

     
    MOUNT LOGAN CAPITAL INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION
    (in thousands of United States dollars, except share and per share amounts)
     
    As at   Notes   March 31, 2025     December 31, 2024  
    ASSETS                
    Asset Management:                
    Cash       $ 2,563     $ 8,933  
    Investments   6     25,605       21,668  
    Intangible assets   9     24,064       24,801  
    Other assets         8,622       8,187  
    Total assets — asset management         60,854       63,589  
    Insurance:                
    Cash and cash equivalents         123,245       77,055  
    Restricted cash posted as collateral   18     12,526       15,716  
    Investments   6     1,019,969       1,045,436  
    Reinsurance contract assets   13     408,492       392,092  
    Intangible assets   9     2,444       2,444  
    Goodwill   9     55,015       55,015  
    Other assets         21,298       38,183  
    Total assets — insurance         1,642,989       1,625,941  
    Total assets       $ 1,703,843     $ 1,689,530  
    LIABILITIES                
    Asset Management                
    Due to affiliates   10   $ 8,994     $ 10,470  
    Debt obligations   12     78,401       78,427  
    Derivatives – debt warrants   12     737       504  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities         9,770       5,097  
    Total liabilities — asset management         97,902       94,498  
    Insurance                
    Debt obligations   12     17,250       14,250  
    Insurance contract liabilities   13     1,069,625       1,048,413  
    Investment contract liabilities   14     222,074       227,041  
    Derivatives   18     1,864       5,192  
    Funds held under reinsurance contracts         238,371       239,918  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities         7,856       2,995  
    Total liabilities — insurance         1,557,040       1,537,809  
    Total liabilities         1,654,942       1,632,307  
    EQUITY                
    Common shares   11     121,372       116,118  
    Warrants   11     1,129       1,129  
    Contributed surplus         8,063       7,917  
    Surplus (Deficit)         (59,805 )     (46,083 )
    Cumulative translation adjustment         (21,858 )     (21,858 )
    Total equity         48,901       57,223  
    Total liabilities and equity       $ 1,703,843     $ 1,689,530  
     
    MOUNT LOGAN CAPITAL INC.
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
    (in thousands of United States dollars, except share and per share amounts)
     
          Three months ended  
        Notes March 31, 2025     March 31, 2024  
                   
    REVENUE              
    Asset management              
    Management and incentive fee   7 $ 2,928     $ 3,494  
    Equity investment earning       282       224  
    Interest income       268       271  
    Dividend income       38       112  
    other Income       299        
    Net gains (losses) from investment activities   4   (623 )     (71 )
    Total revenue — asset management       3,192       4,030  
    Insurance              
    Insurance revenue   8   23,389       22,741  
    Insurance service expenses   8   (25,534 )     (25,184 )
    Net expenses from reinsurance contracts held   8   (52 )     (649 )
    Insurance service result       (2,197 )     (3,092 )
    Net investment income   5   19,004       21,804  
    Net gains (losses) from investment activities   4   6,958       2,666  
    Realized and unrealized gains (losses) on embedded derivative — funds withheld       (4,783 )     (3,829 )
    Other income       —       6  
    Total revenue, net of insurance service expenses and net expenses from reinsurance contracts held — insurance       18,982       17,555  
    Total revenue       22,174       21,585  
    EXPENSES              
    Asset management              
    Administration and servicing fees   10   1,237       1,423  
    Transaction costs       4,545       251  
    Amortization and impairment of intangible assets   9   737       346  
    Interest and other credit facility expenses   12   1,857       1,702  
    General, administrative and other       4,202       3,893  
    Total expenses — asset management       12,578       7,615  
    Insurance              
    Net insurance finance (income) expenses   5   17,808       (7,252 )
    Increase (decrease) in investment contract liabilities   14   1,957       2,279  
    (Increase) decrease in reinsurance contract assets       966       3,556  
    General, administrative and other       2,549       2,239  
    Total expenses — insurance       23,280       822  
    Total expenses       35,813       8,437  
    Income (loss) before taxes       (13,684 )     13,148  
    Income tax (expense) benefit — asset management   15   361       (56 )
    Net income (loss) and comprehensive income (loss)     $ (13,323 )   $ 13,092  
    Earnings per share              
    Basic     $ (0.48 )   $ 0.51  
    Diluted     $ (0.48 )   $ 0.50  
    Dividends per common share — USD     $ 0.01     $ 0.02  
    Dividends per common share — CAD     $ 0.02     $ 0.02  
                       

    1The yield is calculated based on the net investment income less management fees paid to Mount Logan divided by the average of investments in financial assets for the current year and prior year.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: In Zagora, blue gold is giving a new impetus to tourism

    Source: African Development Bank Group

    Climate change has made water stress increasingly acute on the African continent in recent decades. The situation is particularly challenging in North Africa, where several strategic sectors, including tourism, depend on a steady supply of water to survive and develop. Water resources will surely be a recurrent theme at the Annual Meetings of the African Development Bank, which are to be held in Abidjan from 26 to 30 May 2025 under the banner, “Making Africa’s Capital Work Better for Africa’s Development”. 

    Tourism is a vital economic resource for the ancient town of Zagora, dramatically positioned at the gateway to the desert. But tourism depends on a natural resource –water, without which there would be no hotels, no lush gardens nestled in the courtyards of the riads (traditional urban houses), no artisans, and none of the amenities and attractions that bring thousands of visitors to the town each year in search of exotic relaxation. 

    Water stress has been a growing concern for Zagora’s people and businesses. As Saïd Elberkaoui, who has managed the town’s Riad Lamane hotel for the last five years, explained: “Water is a treasure but two years ago it grew scarce. If the situation had continued and intensified, it could have affected tourism.” 

    Nestled in the heart of a palm grove, Riad Lamane offers high-quality services and must ensure that all of its amenities, from rooms to garden to restaurant, are perfectly maintained to satisfy its customers. Scarcity of water was a clear threat to the smooth operation and even the existence of the hotel: “I was fearful that tourists would stop coming and my employees would lose their jobs,” Saïd Elberkaoui says. 

    Investments that are changing the game 

    Recognising the scale of the problem, the Moroccan government has taken timely action. accelerating investments in infrastructure to secure and reinforce drinking water supplies throughout the Kingdom. 

    In the province of Zagora, the National Office for Electricity and Drinking Water (ONEE) has completed the construction of a water treatment plant and a 127-kilometre drinking water supply system. The project, with total cost of over €55 million, was financed by a loan from the African Development Bank. Combined with water conservation and optimization measures, this forward-looking policy has benefited nearly 300,000 people. The towns of Zagora, Agdez, and the surrounding villages now have adequate supplies of this most precious resource. 

    For Firdaous Allouli, a cook at Riad Lamane, a secure water supply means fewer problems in her day-to-day work. “My kitchen runs better, we are more efficient, and we can respond better to customer requests. We can do more,” she says happily. 

    Water security promises a secure future for the tourism industry and gives it the potential to grow. As Saïd Elberkaoui says: “It is an extra reason to develop the riad and perhaps to recruit staff.” 

    However, the improvements in the province of Zagora do not resolve the problem for Morocco as a whole, which continues to suffer from declining water resources. The public authorities are addressing the issue through the National Programme for Drinking Water Supply and Irrigation (PNAEPI 2020-2027), which brings together and unites the capacities of all stakeholders who can help to resolve this complex equation. 

    The African Development Bank has been working in partnership with ONEE since the late 1970s. The Bank has contributed to major infrastructure projects to strengthen and secure access to water, which have improved water systems in nearly 30 Moroccan cities, providing for the water needs of more than 15 million people. 

    The Kingdom has invested more than €1.2 billion to ensure adequate supplies of water. Achraf Hassan Tarsim, Country Manager for Morocco at the African Development Bank, expects further joint work to address remaining challenges. “The urgent need today is to take action where water is starting to run out. We have been, are and will continue to stand alongside Morocco, meeting the water challenge together with our long-standing partner, the National Office for Electricity and Drinking Water,” Mr Tarsim said. 

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Niger’s Bridges to Resilience: Building a Stronger Future

    Source: African Development Bank Group

    Under the glow of solar streetlights, Aichatou Alkassoum marvels at the Djibo Bakary Bridge in Farié, Niger. “At night, it’s like a modern Niamey street,” she says, her voice bright with pride. A leader in Delewa’s School Management Committee, she calls it “the Bridge of Renewal.”

    Previously, crossing the Niger River here meant hours waiting for a shaky ferry under a blazing sun. Since January 2021, this 640-meter bridge, part of the African Development Bank’s Trans-Saharan Road Project-TSRP, has cut travel time, linking Kourthèye and Gothèye with three km of paved roads and 180 solar lamps. Funded with $23 million from the Bank’s $125 million TSRP commitment, it’s a lifeline for trade across an enormous 9,022 km of land connecting the three countries of Niger to Algeria and Nigeria.

    The African Development Bank’s $1.2 billion project in Niger fuels this change. In Maradi, Hachimou Abou Moussam a farmerm once planned to move to Niamey to flee a constant struggle. Then the Water Mobilization Project for Food Security – PMERSA-MTZ  ($13 million since 2011) gave him two wells, pumps, and irrigation pipes. “I grow niébé year-round now,” he says. Across Maradi, Tahoua, and Zinder, PMERSA-MTZ built 47 dams, 74 wells, and 273 km of rural tracks, irrigating 18,000 hectares. Crop yields jumped 94 percent, and Hachimou’s income rose by $680 yearly, rooting him home.

    In Diffa, Arzika Assoumane, director of Kalmaharo Vocational School, credits the Vocational and Technical Education Support Project– PADEFPT, ($47 million since 2010). “We went from 300 students to over 1,000,” he beams. With 474 classrooms built nationwide, 21,000 students trained, and girls’ enrolment up from 2.2 percent to 8.4 percent by 2020, PADEFPT bridges skills to jobs. “The African Development Bank changed our lives,” Arzika says.

    Imagine the transformative power of light. The Niger Rural, Peri-Urban, and Urban Electrification Project ($68 million since 2017) project, did not only expand the Gorou Banda power plant to 100 MW, a 25% increase in available capacity, but also forging connections to 68,400 families, exceeding the ambitious targets by 150%. Now, with the Desert to Power-Project for the Development of Solar Power Plants and Improvement of Access to Electricity ($131 million, since in 2022), Niger is taking a leap towards sustainable energy, adding 30 MW of renewable capacity and bringing the life-changing power of electricity to 800,000 people.

    The Kandadji Ecosystems Program– PA-KRESMIN ($126 million since 2019) irrigates fields and powers 630,000 people. Together, these efforts, backed by $740 million disbursed, turn Niger’s land and people into strength. As Chief Amadou Boubacar notes, TSRP’s 16 classrooms and wells in Farié echo this: “Our market and health centre boost incomes.”

    The Trans-Saharan Fiber Optic Project – TSB in Niger (43 million EUR since 2016) is laying over 1,000 km of high-speed fiber optic network linking Niger with Algeria, Nigeria, Tchad, Benin, and Burkina Faso. In Agadez, where high-speed connectivity was once a luxury, young entrepreneurs will be able to run online businesses from their smartphones.

    It seems an age ago now when the internet was too slow to send a photo. Soon, farmers, small businesses, and artists from Arlit will take orders from Niamey, or even better, Algiers or Lagos. The project is transforming access to education, government services, and markets for thousands in previously disconnected regions. Beyond a cable, it is a pathway to opportunity, inclusion, and innovation in one of Africa’s growing economies.

    Yet, with a $402 billion continental gap, more is needed. Aichatou dreams of wider bridges, literally and figuratively. The African Development Bank’s smart cash builds resilience, one bridge, one harvest, one optic fiber, and one classroom at a time.

    MIL OSI Economics –