Category: Politics

  • MIL-OSI USA: Chairmen Guthrie and Griffith Along with Vice Chairman Joyce and Reps. James and Obernolte Issue Statement on Passage of Bills to Stop California EV Mandates

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jay Obernolte (R-Hesperia)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Congressman Brett Guthrie (KY-02), Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, and Congressman Morgan Griffith (VA-09), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Environment, along with other members of the Committee applauded the passage of three resolutions of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act to repeal disastrous electric vehicle (EV) mandates. 

    “The passage of these resolutions is a victory for Americans who will not be forced into purchasing costly EVs because of California’s unworkable mandates,”said Chairmen Guthrie and Griffith. “If not repealed, the California waivers would lead to higher prices for both new and used vehicles, increase our reliance on China, and strain our electric grid. The passage of these three resolutions will help to protect Americans from some of the worst policies of the Biden-Harris Administration. Thank you to Vice Chairman Joyce, Congressman James, and Congressman Obernolte for your work to ensure that families and businesses can continue choosing the vehicles they need.”

    “American consumers, not out-of-touch politicians, should decide what vehicle best fits their individual needs,”said Congressman John Joyce, M.D.“Since I arrived in Washington, I have led this fight to protect consumer freedom and save the American auto industry from dangerous environmental regulations. As this legislation takes its first step toward reaching President Trump’s desk, I urge my colleagues in the Senate to support this bill to save our auto industry and protect the freedom of the open road.”

    “Michigan is not afraid of the future, but we demand to be a part of it. The Biden Administration left behind comply-or-die Green New Deal mandates that threaten to crush our trucking industry and drive-up costs for hardworking Americans,” said Congressman James. “I know — my family has a trucking company. Republicans are working hard to implement President Trump’s America First Agenda, and the first step is repealing the rules and waivers that fueled Bideninflation.”

    “I’m proud that the House passed my resolution to stop California’s unworkable engine emission standards from becoming national policy,”said Congressman Obernolte. “These regulations would raise costs for consumers, crush small businesses, and threaten critical supply chains across the country. It is Congress’ job to ensure that one state’s overreach doesn’t dictate how all Americans live, work, or drive.”

    Read an Op-ed from Chairman Guthrie, Vice Chairman Joyce, Congressman James, and Congressman Obernolte on these resolutions here.

    Background:

    The Clean Air Act generally preempts individual states from setting their own vehicle emission standards. However, section 209 of the Clean Air Act allows the Environmental Protection Agency to waive state preemption for California. This carveout was intended to allow California to implement stricter air vehicle emission standards to address “compelling and extraordinary circumstances” involving local air pollution – not to remake the auto industry and limit consumer choice nationwide. 

    The Biden EPA granted these waivers that have allowed California to ban sales of new gas, diesel, and hybrid vehicles, as well as heavy-duty trucks, while also mandating 100% electric vehicle sales by 2035. With approval of these resolutions, Congress is exercising its important oversight responsibilities and reining in the regulatory overreach of the previous administration. 

    • H.J.Res. 88, led by Rep. John Joyce (PA-13), Vice Chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, will repeal California’s Advanced Clean Cars II (ACCII) waiver, allowing the State to ban the sale of gas-powered vehicles by 2035.
    • H.J.Res. 87, led by Rep. John James (MI-10), will repeal California’s Advanced Clean Trucks (ACT) waiver, which currently would allow the State to mandate the sale of zero-emission trucks.
    • H.J.Res. 89, led by Rep. Jay Obernolte (CA-23), will put an end to California’s implementation of its most recent nitrogen oxide (NOx) engine emission standards, which create burdensome and unworkable standards for heavy-duty on-road engines.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Strickland, Randall Re-Launch Puget Sound Recovery Caucus

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Marilyn Strickland (WA-10)

    Washington, D.C. – Today, during the annual Puget Sound Day on the Hill, U.S. Representatives Marilyn Strickland (WA-10) and Emily Randall (WA-06) announced the re-launch of the Puget Sound Recovery Caucus for the 119th Congress.

    The Caucus, which was founded in 2013 by then-Representatives Denny Heck and Derek Kilmer, focuses on recovering Puget Sound through steps like preventing pollution from urban stormwater runoff, protecting and restoring habitat, and restoring and re-opening shellfish beds. Representative Emily Randall, who was elected in 2024, replaces Kilmer as Co-Chair.

    “The Puget Sound is a national treasure, not only because of its breathtaking beauty, but also because of how critical it is to our economy, jobs, tribal treaty rights, and the environment. We all know how vital the Puget Sound is to our fish and wildlife habitat, biodiversity, and water supply – which is all the more reason to act now. I look forward to the re-launch of the Puget Sound Recovery Caucus, alongside my colleague, Congresswoman Randall, to ensure that we have federal support for the Puget Sound’s recovery and revitalization,” said Strickland.

    “I am elated to join Rep. Strickland in co-leading the Puget Sound Recovery Caucus. The Puget Sound is a cornerstone of our region’s natural beauty, and a vital ecosystem whose health is inextricably linked to our communities, culture, and economy. Yet, it faces persistent and growing threats that demand urgent and sustained action,” said Rep. Emily Randall. “Through the work of this Caucus, we hope to help direct the federal government’s enduring commitment to protecting and restoring this irreplaceable resource — from revitalizing salmon populations and safeguarding critical habitats to advancing broader climate resilience. I am deeply grateful to our partners for their unwavering dedication to preserving the Puget Sound for generations to come.”

    “The Puget Sound Recovery Caucus has long been a strong advocate in Congress for the recovery and protection of Puget Sound, and we are proud to support the relaunch of this important effort,” said Larry Epstein, Deputy Director of the Puget Sound Partnership. “We are fortunate to have such dedicated leadership in our congressional delegation. Through their support, we can continue making investments that protect public health, strengthen local economies, restore vital salmon habitats, and build resilience against flooding.”

    “We welcome the continued leadership of Rep. Marilyn Strickland and fresh energy from Rep. Emily Randall as they carry on the work that Reps. Denny Heck and Derek Kilmer began when they created the Puget Sound Recovery Caucus in 2013,” said Ed Johnstone, Chairman of the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission. “Recovering Puget Sound is absolutely essential to the protection and continued exercise of our treaty-protected rights. The Puget Sound Recovery Caucus can help us build climate resilience and face ongoing challenges from unchecked human development and recreational impacts from an ever-expanding population.”

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Congresswoman Harshbarger Joins Senator Cruz to Help Americans Save

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Diana Harshbarger (R-TN)

    WASHINGTON — Today, Congresswoman Diana Harshbarger joined Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) in introducing the House companion bill of the Universal Savings Account (USA) Act.

    This legislation is an innovative tax policy reform to reduce taxes on savings and help families build their own financial security through a single, flexible savings account.

    The USA Act would be all-purpose tax-advantaged accounts that allow individuals to decide what to use their savings for and when, without the government micromanaging their choices.

    Congresswoman Harshbarger issued the following statement.

    “It’s an honor to partner with Senator Cruz on this commonsense legislation to empower Americans to take control of their financial futures. The Universal Savings Account Act cuts through red tape and gives every American a flexible, tax-free way to save, invest, and spend — without government interference or penalties.

    “Washington shouldn’t be in the business of micromanaging how people use their own money. This bill is a win for working families, a win for personal freedom, and a win for financial independence.”

    Senator Cruz added the following.

    “A simple and accessible incentive savings plan will provide families with a way to establish financial security and prosperity. This bill provides a straightforward solution to those challenges. I strongly urge my colleagues to pass this bill for the future generations of Americans.”

    Learn more about the legislation by clicking HERE.

    View the bill text HERE

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Jayapal Leads 142 Members in Demanding Answers Regarding the Revocation of Student Visas

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal (7th District of Washington)

    WASHINGTON, DC — U.S. Representative Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Ranking Member of the Immigration Integrity, Security, and Enforcement Subcommittee, is leading 142 Members of Congress in demanding answers regarding the termination of students’ legal status. Despite the Trump Administration’s claim last week that it would reverse course, only Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has made any policy change.  While students are no longer immediately deportable, they will be unable to return to the United States once they go home after the semester ends, as the State Department is not restoring students’ visa status. 

    “This is not about national security. It is about using immigration enforcement as a weapon to stifle political dissent, restrict due process, and enforce an exclusionary and nativist vision of America that runs counter to everything our institutions of higher learning stand for,” wrote the Members. “Across the country, students are being picked up – in some cases by masked immigration agents in unmarked cars – and being held in detention facilities with no warning and limited information as to why they are being deported.”

    According to recent reporting, more than 1,800 students and recent graduates across 280 colleges and universities have had their visas revoked. Since Trump took office, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has also confirmed that at least 4,736 have had their legal status terminated in the Student and Exchange Visitor Information System (SEVIS). However, DHS does not have the authority to terminate this legal status except under very specific circumstances, none of which have been met in the vast majority of these cases.

    “Our campuses have been spaces where students and scholars from around the world come together to challenge assumptions, push the boundaries of knowledge, and foster the innovation that has made our country a global leader,” continued the Members. “But today, the Trump administration’s heavy-handed and politically motivated immigration enforcement is turning university campuses into places of fear, rather than learning, and these actions deter students from coming to study at U.S. institutions.”

    Reporting has also shown that the State Department has been using Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to identify students to target through their social media accounts. This aspect is especially troubling as social media accounts may not feature students’ names, and AI facial recognition is often prone to mistakes, at significantly higher rates when identifying people of color.

    The full text of the letter can be read here. 

    The letter was signed by Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Jamie Raskin (MD-08), Gabe Amo (RI-01), Yassamin Ansari (AZ-03), Jake Auchincloss (MA-04), Becca Balint (VT-At Large), Nanette Barragán (CA-44), Joyce Beatty (OH-03), Wesley Bell (MO-01), Ami Bera (CA-06), Donald S. Beyer, Jr. (VA-08), Suzanne Bonamici (OR-01), Shontel Brown (OH-11), Julia Brownley (CA-26), Nikki Budzinski (IL-13), Salud Carbajal (CA-24), André Carson (IN-07), Troy Carter (LA-02), Greg Casar (TX-35), Sean Casten (IL-06), Kathy Castor (FL-14), Joaquin Castro (TX-20), Judy Chu (CA-28), Gilbert Cisneros (CA-31), Yvette Clarke (NY-09), Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05), Steve Cohen (TN-09), Gerald Connolly (VA-11), J. Luis Correa (CA-46), Angie Craig (MN-02), Jason Crow (CO-06), Danny K. Davis (IL-07), Madeleine Dean (PA-04), Diana DeGette (CO-01), Rosa DeLauro (CT-03), Suzan DelBene (WA-01), Chris Deluzio (PA-17), Mark DeSaulnier (CA-10), Maxine Dexter (OR-03), Lloyd Doggett (TX-37), Veronica Escobar (TX-16), Adriano Espaillat (NY-13), Dwight Evans (PA-03), Cleo Fields (LA-06), Lizzie Fletcher (TX-07), Bill Foster (IL-11), Valerie Foushee (NC-04), Laura Friedman (CA-30), Maxwell Frost (FL-10), John Garamendi (CA-08), Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04), Robert Garcia (CA-42), Sylvia Garcia (TX-29), Jimmy Gomez (CA-34), Maggie Goodlander (NH-02), Al Green (TX-09), Jahana Hayes (CT-05), Jim Himes (CT-04), Steven Horsford (NV-04), Val Hoyle (OR-04), Jared Huffman (CA-02), Glenn Ivey (MD-04), Jonathan Jackson (IL-01), Sara Jacobs (CA-51), Henry C. “Hank” Johnson, Jr. (GA-04), Julie Johnson (TX-32), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (CA-37), William Keating (MA-09), Robin Kelly (IL-02), Timothy Kennedy (NY-26), Ro Khanna (CA-17), Raja Krishnamoorthi (IL-08), Rick Larsen (WA-02), John Larson (CT-01), Summer Lee (PA-12), Teresa Leger Fernandez (NM-03), Mike Levin (CA-49), Sam Liccardo (CA-16), Ted Lieu (CA-36), Zoe Lofgren (CA-18), Stephen Lynch (MA-08), Seth Magaziner (RI-02), John Mannion (NY-22), Doris Matsui (CA-07), Jennifer McClellan (VA-04), Betty McCollum (MN-04), James P. McGovern (MA-02), LaMonica McIver (NJ-10), Gregory Meeks (NY-05), Robert Menendez (NJ-08), Dave Min (CA-47), Gwen Moore (WI-04), Joe Morelle (NY-25), Kelly Morrison (MN-03), Seth Moulton (MA-06), Kevin Mullin (CA-15), Jerrold Nadler (NY-12), Eleanor Holmes Norton (DC), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14), Johnny Olszewski (MD-02), Ilhan Omar (MN-05), Jimmy Panetta (CA-19), Nancy Pelosi (CA-11), Scott Peters (CA-50), Brittany Pettersen (CO-07), Chellie Pingree (ME-01), Mark Pocan (WI-02), Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Mike Quigley (IL-05), Delia Ramirez (IL-03), Emily Randall (WA-06), Luz Rivas (CA-29), Deborah Ross (NC-02), Andrea Salinas (OR-06), Linda Sánchez (CA-38), Mary Gay Scanlon (PA-05), Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (VA-03), Terri Sewell (AL-07), Lateefah Simon (CA-12), Adam Smith (WA-09), Melanie Stansbury (NM-01), Marilyn Strickland (WA-10), Suhas Subramanyam (VA-10), Eric Swalwell (CA-14), Mark Takano (CA-39), Shri Thanedar (MI-13), Mike Thompson (CA-04), Bennie G. Thompson (MS-02), Dina Titus (NV-01), Rashida Tlaib (MI-12), Jill Tokuda (HI-02), Paul Tonko (NY-20), Lori Trahan (MA-03), Lauren Underwood (IL-14), Juan Vargas (CA-52), Gabe Vasquez (NM-02), Marc Veasey (TX-33), Nydia M. Velázquez (NY-07), Maxine Waters (CA-43), Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ-12), and Nikema Williams (GA-05).

    It was also endorsed by AFL-CIO; American Friends of Combatants for Peace; American Friends Service Committee; Amnesty International USA; Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC; Asian Americans Advancing Justice | Chicago; Asian Americans Advancing Justice Southern California; Brooklyn for Peace; Center for Constitutional Rights; Center for International Policy Advocacy; Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights (CHIRLA); CODEPINK; Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); DAWN; Friends Committee on National Legislation; Habonim Dror North America; Hindus for Human Rights; HIstorians for Peace and Democracy; IfNotNow Movement ; Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights; IMEU Policy Project; Immigrant Legal Resource Center (ILRC); Indivisible; International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW); J Street; Jewish Voice for Peace Action; MADRE; Minnesota Peace Project; MPower Change Action Fund; National Immigrant Justice Center; New Jewish Narrative; Nonviolence International; OneAmerica; Partners for Progressive Israel; Peace Action; Presbyterian Church (USA), Office of Public Witness; Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration; Reconsider; Service Employees International Union (SEIU); Southeast Asia Resource Action Center (SEARAC); Stop AAPI Hate; United Church of Christ.

    Issues: Arts & Education, Immigration

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Trahan, Connolly Demand Answers on DOGE’s Alleged Privacy Act Violations and Data Risks at NLRB

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Lori Trahan (D-MA-03)

    WASHINGTON, DC – Today, Congresswoman Lori Trahan (MA-03), who previously announced an effort to update the Privacy Act of 1974 to better protect Americans’ sensitive data, and House Oversight and Government Reform Ranking Member Gerald E. Connolly (VA-11) demanded information from the National Labor Relations Board regarding potential violations of federal privacy laws by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) staffers at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
    “We write with an urgent request for information related to the disclosure by a National Labor Relations Board whistleblower that agency officials possibly affiliated with the Department of Government Efficiency may have illegally exfiltrated multiple gigabytes of sensitive data, including the personal information of Americans who reported unfair labor practices,” the lawmakers wrote. “We are deeply concerned that these actions may constitute violations of the Privacy Act of 1974, which can carry criminal penalties, and the Federal Information Security Modernization Act, which requires agency heads to notify Congress of major data breaches.”
    The request follows a whistleblower at NLRB sounding the alarm about DOGE representatives removing approximately ten gigabytes of sensitive data, including the personal information of Americans who have previously reported unfair labor practices, and then attempting to cover up their actions. The data removed from the agency could also include companies’ proprietary information.
    In addition to concerns about Musk’s conflicts of interest with his company SpaceX currently fighting NLRB complaints, the unverified and unreported exfiltration of Americans’ personal data could constitute violations of both the Privacy Act of 1974, which regulates how the federal government stores and uses Americans’ sensitive data, and the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA), which requires that federal agencies notify Congress when Americans’ data is breached.
    “Based on our understanding of the whistleblowers’ disclosure, we are concerned that NLRB officials, especially those affiliated with DOGE, may have violated both the Privacy Act and FISMA. With respect to the Privacy Act, it is overwhelmingly likely that one or more NLRB employees–and not foreign actors or criminals–perpetrated the massive data exfiltration on March 4th, violating the Act’s disclosure requirements. Moreover, it appears that these officials did so without obtaining written consent nor receiving agency approval for an ‘exception’ to the consent requirement, meaning they could be subject to criminal penalties,” the lawmakers concluded. “And with respect to FISMA, it appears that the whistleblower discovered a ‘major incident’ under any definition of the term proposed by OMB. NLRB subsequently failed to notify Congress, in apparent violation of its statutory requirements: as of writing, neither the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee nor House Education & the Workforce Committee have received notification with the required information about the incident.”
    The lawmakers are requesting answers to the following questions by May 16, 2025:

    All reports, communications, and written documentation produced during NLRB’s investigation into Mr. Berulis’s concerns that Tim Bearese, the NLRB’s acting press secretary, confirmed took place in a statement to National Public Radio (NPR).
    A signed attestation that NLRB determined the events which Mr. Berulis discovered qualify as a “major incident” under the definitions proposed by OMB or, alternatively, an explanation of why the NLRB did not make such a determination.
    Why has the NLRB failed to notify relevant Congressional committees as required by FISMA, including the House Oversight and Government Reform and House Education & the Workforce Committees?
    For each official who holds, or has previously held since January 20th, 2025, access to NLRB information technology systems:

    a.    What is the nature of that employee’s relationship with NLRB?
                                          i.        If the employee is full-time, to what other agencies are they detailed?
                                         ii.        If the employee is detailed to NLRB, from what agency are they detailed?
                                        iii.        If the employee is a contractor, what firm do they work for?
    b.    For each NLRB system that the employee previously had access to, currently has access to, or will have access to:
                                          i.        What level of access to the system does the employee currently possess?
                                         ii.        Who provided such access to the system?
                                        iii.        What was the justification for providing such access to the system, especially if no other agency official had previously been granted the same level of access?
                                       iv.        When was access to the system provided?
                                         v.        What training, including security and privacy, were provided to the employee regarding their access to the system? Did this training take place before or after access was provided?
                                       vi.        To the extent that access to the system was provided under a Privacy Act exception, what exception was invoked?
                                      vii.        What security controls were implemented, if any, as a result of your granting the employee their access to the system?
                                     viii.        Did the NLRB official who granted access to the system consider the cyber, operational, or privacy risks before doing so?
                                       ix.        Has the employee modified, copied, shared, or removed any records from the system?
                                         x.        Has the employee modified the system in any way?
                                       xi.        Has the employee granted, revoked, or otherwise modified access to the system for any other users?
    c.     Can you commit to preserving all system logs related to access, development, exfiltration consistent with the Federal Records Act?
    d.    Can you commit to otherwise documenting all critical decisions related to information technology systems at NLRB?
    A copy of the letter sent today can be accessed HERE.
    This request for information follows an effort Trahan led last month requesting an independent investigation into DOGE’s alleged mishandling of Americans’ sensitive data housed in the Treasury Department’s payment system. In March, Trahan announced that she will be introducing legislation to rewrite the Privacy Act for the first time since its passage in 1974.
    ###

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Asure Announces First Quarter 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Reports First Quarter 2025 Total Revenues of $34.9 million

    Recurring Revenues Grew 10% from Prior Year

    AUSTIN, Texas, May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Asure Software, Inc. (“we”, “us”, “our”, “Asure” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: ASUR), a leading provider of cloud-based Human Capital Management (“HCM”) software solutions, today reported results for the first quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    First Quarter 2025 Financial Highlights

    • Revenue of $34.9 million, up 10% year over year, excluding ERTC revenue up 13% from the prior year first quarter
    • Recurring revenue of $33.2 million versus $30.3 million during the prior year first quarter
    • Net loss of $2.4 million versus a net loss of $0.3 million during the prior year first quarter
    • EBITDA(1) of $4.1 million versus $4.4 million during the prior year first quarter
    • Adjusted EBITDA(1) of $7.3 million versus $6.8 million during the prior year first quarter
    • Gross profit of $24.6 million versus $22.6 million during the prior year first quarter
    • Non-GAAP gross profit(1) of $26.3 million (Non-GAAP gross margin(1) of 75%) versus $23.8 million (and 75% in prior year first quarter)

    Recent Business Highlights

    • New Payroll Tax Management solution launched which is designed specifically for large Canadian companies and global enterprises with employees in Canada. Our ability to serve enterprise clients with international workforces with this innovative solution creates further opportunities to grow our business and the seamless integration of payroll tax services into major platforms such as Workday, Oracle, and SAP is a key benefit. The Canadian payroll tax solution addresses critical compliance needs for organizations managing cross-border payroll processes, reducing complexity and ensuring accurate, timely filing.
    • In April 2025 we entered into a credit agreement primarily with MidCap Financial Trust, whereby the Company may borrow up to $60 million. At closing, which occurred on April 10, we received $20 million of gross proceeds.

    (1)This financial measure is not calculated in accordance with GAAP and is defined on page 3 of this press release. A reconciliation of this non-GAAP measure to the most applicable GAAP measure begins on page 11 of this release.

    Management Commentary

    “We are excited to be off to a great start to 2025 with healthy results for our first quarter of 2025 with our revenues increasing 10% from the prior year first quarter. Our results were driven by strong performance coming from our Payroll Tax Management and initial contribution from our recently acquired product offerings,” said Asure Chairman and CEO Pat Goepel.

    “Our team is focused on continuing to execute our growth strategy. Our revenues are now more than 95% recurring, our contracted revenue backlog sits at an all-time high, and we believe that the investments we have made in the business will continue to drive greater adoption of our broadened product suite for the remainder of 2025.”

    Second Quarter 2025 and Full Year 2025 Revenue Guidance Ranges

    The Company is providing the following guidance for the second quarter of 2025 and the full year 2025 based on the Company’s year-to-date results and recent business trends. The guidance for our second quarter of 2025 and the full year 2025 excludes any contribution from future potential acquisitions.

    Guidance for 2025

    Guidance Range   Q2-2025   FY-2025
    Revenue $ 30.0 M – 32.0 M $ 134.0 M -138.0 M
    Adjusted EBITDA(1) $ 5.0 M -6.0 M   23% -24%
             

    Management uses GAAP, non-GAAP and adjusted measures when planning, monitoring, and evaluating the Company’s performance. The primary purpose of using non-GAAP and adjusted measures is to provide supplemental information that may prove useful to investors and to enable investors to evaluate the Company’s results in the same way management does.

    Management believes that supplementing GAAP disclosures with non-GAAP and adjusted disclosures provides investors with a more complete view of the Company’s operational performance and allows for meaningful period-to-period comparisons and analysis of trends in the Company’s business. Further, to the extent that other companies use similar methods in calculating adjusted financial measures, the provision of supplemental non-GAAP and adjusted information can allow for a comparison of the Company’s relative performance against other companies that also report non-GAAP and adjusted operating results.

    Management has not provided a reconciliation of guidance of GAAP to non-GAAP or adjusted disclosures because management is unable to predict the nature and materiality of non-recurring expenses without unreasonable effort.

    Management’s projections are based on management’s current beliefs and assumptions about the Company’s business, and the industry and the markets in which it operates; there are known and unknown risks and uncertainties associated with these projections. There can be no assurance that our actual results will not differ from the guidance set forth above. The Company assumes no obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements, including its 2025 earnings guidance, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Please refer to the “Use of Forward-Looking Statements” disclosures on page 5 of this press release as well as the risk factors in our quarterly and annual reports on file with the Securities and Exchange Commission for more information about risk that affect our business and industry.

    Conference Call Details

    Asure management will host a conference call on Thursday, May 1, 2025, at 3:30 pm Central (4:30 pm Eastern). Asure Chairman and CEO Pat Goepel and CFO John Pence will participate in the conference call followed by a question-and-answer session. The conference call will be broadcast live and available for replay via the investor relations section of the Company’s website. Analysts may participate on the conference call by dialing 877-407-9219 or 201-689-8852.

    About Asure Software, Inc.

    Asure (Nasdaq: ASUR) provides cloud-based Human Capital Management (HCM) software solutions that assist organizations of all sizes in streamlining their HCM processes. Asure’s suite of HCM solutions includes HR, payroll, time and attendance, benefits administration, payroll tax management, and talent management. The company’s approach to HR compliance services incorporates AI technology to enhance scalability and efficiency while prioritizing client interactions. For more information, please visit www.asuresoftware.com

    Non-GAAP and Adjusted Financial Measures

    This press release includes information about non-GAAP gross profit, non-GAAP sales and marketing expense, non-GAAP general and administrative expense, non-GAAP research and development expense, EBITDA, EBITDA margin, adjusted EBITDA, and adjusted EBITDA margin. These non-GAAP and adjusted financial measures are measurements of financial performance that are not prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and computational methods may differ from those used by other companies. Non-GAAP and adjusted financial measures are not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for comparable GAAP measures and should be read only in conjunction with the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements prepared in accordance with GAAP. Non-GAAP and adjusted financial measures are reconciled to GAAP in the tables set forth in this release and are subject to reclassifications to conform to current period presentations.

    Non-GAAP gross profit differs from gross profit in that it excludes amortization, share-based compensation, and one-time items.

    Non-GAAP sales and marketing expense differs from sales and marketing expense in that it excludes share-based compensation and one-time items.

    Non-GAAP general and administrative expense differs from general and administrative expense in that it excludes share-based compensation and one-time items.

    Non-GAAP research and development expense differs from research and development expense in that it excludes share-based compensation and one-time items.

    EBITDA differs from net income (loss) in that it excludes items such as interest, income taxes, depreciation, and amortization. Asure is unable to predict with reasonable certainty the ultimate outcome of these exclusions without unreasonable effort.

    Adjusted EBITDA differs from EBITDA in that it excludes share-based compensation, other income (expense), net and one-time expenses. Asure is unable to predict with reasonable certainty the ultimate outcome of these exclusions without unreasonable effort.

    All adjusted and non-GAAP measures presented as “margin” are computed by dividing the applicable adjusted financial measure by total revenue.

    Specifically, as applicable to the respective financial measure, management is adjusting for the following items when calculating non-GAAP and adjusted financial measures as applicable for the periods presented. No additional adjustments have been made for potential income tax effects of the adjustments based on the Company’s current and anticipated de minimis effective federal tax rate, resulting from the Company’s continued losses for federal tax purposes and its tax net operating loss balances.

    Share-Based Compensation Expenses. The Company’s compensation strategy includes the use of share-based compensation to attract and retain employees and executives. It is principally aimed at aligning their interests with those of our stockholders and at long-term employee retention, rather than to motivate or reward operational performance for any particular period. Thus, share-based compensation expense varies for reasons that are generally unrelated to operational decisions and performance in any particular period.

    Depreciation. The Company excludes depreciation of fixed assets. Also included in the expense is the depreciation of capitalized software costs.

    Amortization of Purchased Intangibles. The Company views amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, such as the amortization of the cost associated with an acquired company’s research and development efforts, trade names, customer lists and customer relationships, and acquired lease intangibles, as items arising from pre-acquisition activities determined at the time of an acquisition. While these intangible assets are continually evaluated for impairment, amortization of the cost of purchased intangibles is a static expense, one that is not typically affected by operations during any particular period.

    Interest Expense, Net. The Company excludes accrued interest expense, the amortization of debt discounts and deferred financing costs.

    Income Taxes. The Company excludes income taxes, both at the federal and state levels.

    One-Time Expenses. The Company’s adjusted financial measures exclude the following costs to normalize comparable reporting periods, as these are generally non-recurring expenses that do not reflect the ongoing operational results. These items are typically not budgeted and are infrequent and unusual in nature.

    Settlements, Penalties and Interest. The Company excludes legal settlements, including separation agreements, penalties and interest that are generally one-time in nature and not reflective of the operational results of the business.

    Acquisition and Transaction Related Costs. The Company excludes these expenses as they are transaction costs and expenses that are generally one-time in nature and not reflective of the underlying operational results of our business. Examples of these types of expenses include legal, accounting, regulatory, other consulting services, severance and other employee costs.

    Other non-recurring Expenses. The Company excludes these as they are generally non-recurring items that are not reflective of the underlying operational results of the business and are generally not anticipated to recur. Some examples of these types of expenses, historically, have included write-offs or impairments of assets, demolition of office space and cybersecurity consultants.

    Other (Expense) Income, Net. The Company’s adjusted financial measures exclude Other (Expense) Income, Net because it includes items that are not reflective of the underlying operational results of the business, such as loan forgiveness, adjustments to contingent liabilities and credits earned as part of the CARES Act, passed by Congress in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic.

    Use of Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains certain statements made by management that may constitute “forward- looking” statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements about our financial results may include expected or projected U.S GAAP and other operating and non-operating results. The words “believe,” “may,” “will,” “estimate,” “projects,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “expect,” “should,” “plan,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Examples of “forward-looking statements” include statements we make regarding our operating performance, future results of operations and financial position, revenue growth, earnings or other projections. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy, short-term and long-term business operations and objectives, and financial needs. The achievement or success of the matters covered by such forward-looking statements involves risks, uncertainties and assumptions, over many of which we have no control. If any such risks or uncertainties materialize or if any of the assumptions prove incorrect, our results could differ materially from the results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements we make.

    The risks and uncertainties referred to above include—but are not limited to—risks associated with breaches of the Company’s security measures; risks related to material weaknesses; possible fluctuations in the Company’s financial and operating results; privacy concerns and laws and other regulations may limit the effectiveness of our applications; the financial and other impact of any previous and future acquisitions; domestic and international regulatory developments, including changes to or applicability to our business of privacy and data securities laws, money transmitter laws and anti-money laundering laws; regulatory pressures on economic relief enacted as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic that change or cause different interpretations with respect to eligibility for such programs; risk of our software and solutions not functioning adequately; interruptions, delays or changes in the Company’s services or the Company’s Web hosting; may incur debt to meet future capital requirements; volatility and weakness in bank and capital markets; access to additional capital; significant costs as a result of operating as a public company; the expiration of Employee Retention Tax Credits (“ERTC”) and the impact of the Internal Revenue Service recent measures regarding ERTC claims and the corresponding cash collections of existing receivables; the inability to continue to release timely updates for changes in laws; the inability to develop new and improved versions of the Company’s services and technological developments; customer’s nonrenewal of their agreements and other similar changes could negatively impact revenue, operating results and financial conditions; the exposure of market, interest, credit and liquidity risk on client funds held int rust; the Company’s operation in highlight competitive markets; risk that our clients could have insufficient funds that could result in limitations in the ability to transmit ACH transactions; impairment of intangible assets; litigation and any related claims, negotiations and settlements, including with respect to intellectual property matters or industry-specific regulations; various financial aspects of the Company’s Software-as-a-Service model; adverse effects to our business a result of claims, lawsuits, and other proceedings; issues in the use of artificial intelligence in our HCM products and services; adverse changes to financial accounting standards to the Company; inability to maintain third-party licensed software; evolving regulation of the Internet, changes in the infrastructure underlying the Internet or interruptions in Internet; factors affecting the Company’s deferred tax assets and ability to value and utilize them; the nature of the Company’s business model; inability to adopt new or correctly interpret existing money service and money transmitter business status; the Company’s ability to hire, retain and motivate employees and manage the Company’s growth; interruptions to supply chains and extended shut down of businesses; potential enactment of adverse tax laws, regulation, political, economic and social factors; potential sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock along with its volatility; risks associate with potential equity-related transactions including dividends, rights under the stockholder plan to discourage certain actions and other impacts as a result of actions of our stockholders.

    Please review the Company’s risk factors in its annual report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on March 6, 2025.

    The forward-looking statements, including the financial guidance and 2025 outlook, contained in this press release represent the judgment of the Company as of the date of this press release, and the Company expressly disclaims any intent, obligation or undertaking to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect any change in the Company’s expectations with regard to these forward looking statements or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statements are based. © 2025 Asure Software, Inc. All rights reserved

     
    ASURE SOFTWARE, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (in thousands, except per share amounts)
           
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024
           
    ASSETS      
    Current assets:      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 14,076     $ 21,425  
    Accounts receivable, net of allowance for credit losses of $6,545 and $6,328 at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively   15,800       18,154  
    Inventory   220       195  
    Prepaid expenses and other current assets   5,970       4,888  
    Total current assets before funds held for clients   36,066       44,662  
    Funds held for clients   257,019       192,615  
    Total current assets   293,085       237,277  
    Property and equipment, net   20,999       19,669  
    Goodwill   94,724       94,724  
    Intangible assets, net   73,003       69,114  
    Operating lease assets, net   4,403       4,041  
    Other assets, net   12,727       11,813  
    Total assets $ 498,941     $ 436,638  
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERSEQUITY      
    Current liabilities:      
    Current portion of notes payable $ 7,948     $ 7,008  
    Accounts payable   2,475       1,364  
    Accrued compensation and benefits   2,911       4,485  
    Operating lease liabilities, current   1,432       1,438  
    Other accrued liabilities   6,071       6,600  
    Deferred revenue   4,662       8,363  
    Total current liabilities before client fund obligations   25,499       29,258  
    Client fund obligations   258,586       194,378  
    Total current liabilities   284,085       223,636  
    Long-term liabilities:      
    Deferred revenue   3,321       3,430  
    Deferred tax liability   2,903       2,612  
    Notes payable, net of current portion   6,172       5,709  
    Operating lease liabilities, noncurrent   3,892       3,578  
    Other liabilities   905       358  
    Total long-term liabilities   17,193       15,687  
    Total liabilities   301,278       239,323  
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    Preferred stock, $0.01 par value; 1,500 shares authorized; none issued or outstanding          
    Common stock, $0.01 par value; 44,000 shares authorized; 27,122 and 26,671 shares issued, 27,122 and 26,671 shares outstanding at December 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively   271       267  
    Treasury stock at cost, zero(1)at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024          
    Additional paid-in capital   507,149       504,849  
    Accumulated deficit   (309,624 )     (307,226 )
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (133 )     (575 )
    Total stockholders’ equity   197,663       197,315  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 498,941     $ 436,638  
    (1) The aggregate Treasury stock of prior repurchases of the Company’s own common stock was retired and subsequently issued effective January 1, 2024. See the Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity for the impact of this transaction.
     
     
    ASURE SOFTWARE, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
    (in thousands, except per share amounts)
     
      Three Months Ended
    March 31,
      2025   2024
           
    Revenue:      
    Recurring $ 33,187     $ 30,273  
    Professional services, hardware and other   1,667       1,379  
    Total revenue   34,854       31,652  
    Cost of sales   10,246       9,045  
    Gross profit   24,608       22,607  
    Operating expenses:      
    Sales and marketing   8,386       7,767  
    General and administrative   11,900       10,063  
    Research and development   2,029       1,769  
    Amortization of intangible assets   4,308       3,449  
    Total operating expenses   26,623       23,048  
    Loss from operations   (2,015 )     (441 )
    Interest income   171       336  
    Interest expense   (451 )     (180 )
    Other income, net   188       10  
    Loss from operations before income taxes   (2,107 )     (275 )
    Income tax expense   291       33  
    Net loss   (2,398 )     (308 )
    Other comprehensive income (loss):      
    Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable securities   442       (244 )
    Comprehensive loss $ (1,956 )   $ (552 )
           
    Basic and diluted loss per share      
    Basic $ (0.09 )   $ (0.01 )
    Diluted $ (0.09 )   $ (0.01 )
           
    Weighted average basic and diluted shares      
    Basic   26,961       25,334  
    Diluted   26,961       25,334  
                   
     
    ASURE SOFTWARE, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
    (in thousands)
       
      Three Months Ended March 31,
      2025   2024
           
    Cash flows from operating activities:      
    Net loss $ (2,398 )   $ (308 )
    Adjustments to reconcile loss to net cash provided by (used in) operations:      
    Depreciation and amortization   5,972       4,860  
    Amortization of operating lease assets   374       335  
    Amortization of debt financing costs and discount   253       142  
    Non-cash interest expense   197        
    Net accretion of discounts and amortization of premiums on available-for-sale securities   (110 )     (78 )
    Provision for expected losses   93       46  
    Provision for deferred income taxes   291       24  
    Net realized gains on sales of available-for-sale securities   (656 )     (652 )
    Share-based compensation   1,863       1,902  
    Changes in operating assets and liabilities:      
    Accounts receivable   2,261       (919 )
    Inventory   (24 )     (50 )
    Prepaid expenses and other assets   (1,049 )     (473 )
    Operating lease right-of-use assets         30  
    Accounts payable   903       (960 )
    Accrued expenses and other long-term obligations   (1,737 )     (2,665 )
    Operating lease liabilities   (427 )     (141 )
    Deferred revenue   (3,810 )     (5,040 )
    Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities   1,996       (3,947 )
    Cash flows from investing activities:      
    Acquisition of intangible assets   (6,346 )     (710 )
    Purchases of property and equipment   (192 )     (240 )
    Software capitalization costs   (2,769 )     (2,435 )
    Purchases of available-for-sale securities   (6,589 )     (3,516 )
    Proceeds from sales and maturities of available-for-sale securities   3,266       2,406  
    Net cash used in investing activities   (12,630 )     (4,495 )
    Cash flows from financing activities:      
    Payments made on amounts due for the acquisition of intangibles   (723 )     (236 )
    Net proceeds from issuance of common stock   441       176  
    Net change in client fund obligations   64,207       21,122  
    Net cash provided by financing activities   63,925       21,062  
    Net increase in cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents   53,291       12,620  
    Cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents, beginning of period   145,712       177,622  
    Cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents, end of period $ 199,003     $ 190,242  
                   
     
    ASURE SOFTWARE, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (continued)
    (in thousands)
       
      Three Months Ended March 31,
      2025
      2024
           
    Reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents to the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 14,076     $ 23,166  
    Restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents included in funds held for clients   184,927       167,076  
    Total cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash, and restricted cash equivalents $ 199,003     $ 190,242  
           
    Supplemental information:      
    Cash paid for interest $ 125     $  
           
    Non-cash investing and financing activities:      
    Acquisition of intangible assets $ 750     $ 6,345  
    Notes payable issued for acquisitions $ 1,150     $ 827  
    Shares issued for acquisitions $     $ 4,494  
                   
     
    ASURE SOFTWARE, INC.
    RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP AND ADJUSTED FINANCIAL MEASURES
    (unaudited)
                     
    (in thousands) Q1-25 Q4-24 Q3-24 Q2-24 Q1-24 Q4-23 Q3-23 Q2-23
    Revenue(1) $ 34,854   $ 30,792   $ 29,304   $ 28,044   $ 31,652   $ 26,264   $ 29,334   $ 30,420  
                     
    Gross Profit to non-GAAP Gross Profit                
    Gross Profit $ 24,608   $ 20,928   $ 19,704   $ 18,868   $ 22,607   $ 17,839   $ 21,280   $ 22,018  
    Gross Margin   70.6 %   68.0 %   67.2 %   67.3 %   71.4 %   67.9 %   72.5 %   72.4 %
                     
    Share-based Compensation   44     44     44     43     40     32     28     46  
    Depreciation   1,369     1,190     1,232     1,145     1,110     921     984     1,309  
    Amortization – intangibles   50     50     50     50     50     50     50     50  
    One-time expenses                
    Settlements, penalties & interest   29     25     2     3         (6 )   8      
    Acquisition and transaction costs   167     221     367     264     39              
    Other non-recurring expenses       84                          
    Non-GAAP Gross Profit $ 26,267   $ 22,542   $ 21,399   $ 20,373   $ 23,846   $ 18,836   $ 22,350   $ 23,423  
    Non-GAAP Gross Margin   75.4 %   73.2 %   73.0 %   72.6 %   75.3 %   71.7 %   76.2 %   77.0 %
                     
    Sales and Marketing Expense to non-GAAP Sales and Marketing Expense
    Sales and Marketing Expense $ 8,386   $ 6,945   $ 6,680   $ 6,924   $ 7,767   $ 6,422   $ 6,597   $ 8,515  
                     
    Share-based Compensation   322     251     269     237     243     180     210     149  
    Depreciation   1         1         1     1          
    One-time expenses                
    Settlements, penalties & interest   51     78     (5 )   5     18     6     30     4  
    Acquisition and transaction costs   30     9     68     37     11              
    Other non-recurring expenses       52                         180  
    Non-GAAP Sales and Marketing Expense $ 7,982   $ 6,555   $ 6,347   $ 6,645   $ 7,494   $ 6,235   $ 6,357   $ 8,182  
                     
    General and Administrative Expense to non-GAAP General and Administrative Expense
    General and Administrative Expense $ 11,900   $ 9,940   $ 10,378   $ 10,118   $ 10,063   $ 9,747   $ 9,294   $ 10,336  
                     
    Share-based Compensation   1,407     1,081     1,187     1,122     1,535     980     936     1,298  
    Depreciation   244     269     264     256     251     225     200     234  
    One-time expenses                
    Settlements, penalties & interest   492     142     377     304     98     284     101     432  
    Acquisition and transaction costs   491     282     371     245     57     51          
    Other non-recurring expenses   136     220     253         86     53         453  
    Non-GAAP General and Administrative Expense $ 9,130   $ 7,946   $ 7,926   $ 8,191   $ 8,036   $ 8,154   $ 8,057   $ 7,919  
                     
    Research and Development Expense to non-GAAP Research and Development Expense
    Research and Development Expense $ 2,029   $ 2,103   $ 1,973   $ 1,962   $ 1,769   $ 1,739   $ 1,803   $ 1,325  
                     
    Share-based Compensation   90     87     90     86     85     69     76     89  
    Depreciation   1       $   $   $   $   $   $  
    One-time expenses                
    Settlements, penalties & interest   9     21         27     31              
    Acquisition and transaction costs   91     153     195     369     147              
    Other non-recurring expenses       29                          
    Non-GAAP Research and Development Expense $ 1,838   $ 1,813   $ 1,688   $ 1,480   $ 1,506   $ 1,670   $ 1,727   $ 1,236  
                     

    (1)Note that first quarters are seasonally strong as recurring year-end W2/ACA revenue is recognized in this period.

     
    ASURE SOFTWARE, INC.
    RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP AND ADJUSTED FINANCIAL MEASURES (cont.)
    (unaudited)
                     
    (in thousands) Q1-25 Q4-24 Q3-24 Q2-24 Q1-24 Q4-23 Q3-23 Q2-23
    Revenue(1) $ 34,854   $ 30,792   $ 29,304   $ 28,044   $ 31,652   $ 26,264   $ 29,334   $ 30,420  
                     
    GAAP Net Loss to Adjusted EBITDA
    GAAP Net Loss $ (2,398 ) $ (3,204 ) $ (3,901 ) $ (4,360 ) $ (308 ) $ (3,582 ) $ (2,206 ) $ (3,765 )
                     
    Interest expense, net   280     211     109     (53 )   (156 )   (24 )   782     1,593  
    Income taxes   291     499     170     231     33     (158 )   (123 )   627  
    Depreciation   1,614     1,460     1,497     1,402     1,361     1,148     1,185     1,542  
    Amortization – intangibles   4,358     4,482     4,345     4,096     3,499     3,743     3,384     3,343  
    EBITDA $ 4,145   $ 3,448   $ 2,220   $ 1,316   $ 4,429   $ 1,127   $ 3,022   $ 3,340  
    EBITDA Margin   11.9 %   11.2 %   7.6 %   4.7 %   14.0 %   4.3 %   10.3 %   11.0 %
                     
    Share-based Compensation   1,863     1,463     1,591     1,488     1,902     1,260     1,251     1,582  
    One Time Expenses                
    Settlements, penalties & interest   581     266     375     339     147     283     140     436  
    Acquisition and transaction costs   779     665     1,001     914     254     51          
    Other non-recurring expenses   136     385     253         86     53         633  
    Other expense (income), net   (188 )   2             (10 )   1     1,800     93  
    Adjusted EBITDA $ 7,316   $ 6,229   $ 5,440   $ 4,057   $ 6,808   $ 2,775   $ 6,213   $ 6,084  
    Adjusted EBITDA Margin   21.0 %   20.2 %   18.6 %   14.5 %   21.5 %   10.6 %   21.2 %   20.0 %
                                                     

    (1)Note that first quarters are seasonally strong as recurring year-end W2/ACA revenue is recognized in this period.

    Investor Relations Contact
    Patrick McKillop
    Vice President, Investor Relations
    617-335-5058
    patrick.mckillop@asuresoftware.com 

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Monolithic Power Systems Earnings Commentary for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    KIRKLAND, Wash., May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — MPS will report its results after the market closes on May 1, 2025 and host a question-and-answer webinar at 2:00 p.m. PT / 5:00 p.m. ET. The live event will be held via a Zoom webcast, which can be accessed at https://mpsic.zoom.us/j/92570889542.

    Q1 2025 Financial Summary  (Unaudited)
      GAAP
      Q1’25
      Q4’24
      Q1’24
        QoQ Change YoY Change
    Revenue ($k) $ 637,554   $ 621,665   457,885     Up 2.6% Up 39.2%
    Gross Margin 55.4%   55.4%   55.1%     Flat Up 0.3 pts
    Opex ($k) $ 184,471   $ 181,101   156,954     Up 1.9% Up 17.5%
    Operating Margin 26.5%   26.3%   20.9%     Up 0.2 pts Up 5.6 pts
    Net income ($k) $ 133,791   $ 1,449,363   92,541     Down 90.8% Up 44.6%
    Diluted EPS $ 2.79   $ 29.88   1.89     Down 90.7% Up 47.6%
      Non-GAAP
      Q1’25
      Q4’24
      Q1’24
        QoQ Change YoY Change
    Revenue ($k) $ 637,554   $ 621,665   $ 457,885     Up 2.6% Up 39.2%
    Gross Margin 55.7%   55.8%   55.7%     Down 0.1 pts Flat
    Opex ($k) $ 133,526   $ 126,117   $ 103,426     Up 5.9% Up 29.1%
    Operating Margin 34.7%   35.5%   33.1%     Down 0.8 pts Up 1.6 pts
    Net income ($k) $ 193,813   $ 198,401   $ 137,492     Down 2.3% Up 41.0%
    Diluted EPS $ 4.04   $ 4.09   $ 2.81     Down 1.2% Up 43.8%
    Tax Rate 15.0%   12.5%   12.5%     Up 2.5 pts Up 2.5 pts
    Revenue by End Market
     
        Revenue   YoY Change   % of Revenue
    End Market ($M)   Q1’25
    Q1’24   $   %     Q1’25   Q1’24  
    Storage & Computing   $ 188.5 $ 106.1   $ 82.4   77.7%     29.6 23.2
    Automotive   144.9 87.1   57.8   66.4%     22.7   19.0  
    Enterprise Data   132.9 149.7   (16.8 (11.2%   20.8   32.7  
    Communications   71.8 46.7   25.1   53.7%     11.3   10.2  
    Consumer   56.9 38.1   18.8   49.3%     8.9   8.3  
    Industrial   42.6 30.2   12.4   41.1%     6.7   6.6  
    Total   $ 637.6 $ 457.9   $ 179.7   39.2%     100 100
                               

    Ongoing Business Conditions

    In Q1 2025, MPS achieved record quarterly revenue of $637.6 million, slightly higher than revenue in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 39.2% higher than revenue in the first quarter of 2024.

    Our performance during the quarter reflected the continued strength of our diversified market strategy and a continued trend of the ordering patterns we saw at the end of 2024.

    Q1 2025 highlights include:

    • At our March 20th investor day, we showcased MPS innovation across a range of areas including new opportunities in Robotics, Automotive, Data Center, Building Automation, Medical, and Audio.
    • In Q1, Storage and Computing segment revenue increased 38% quarter-over-quarter on strong demand for both memory and notebook solutions.
    • We continue to win designs across all major Enterprise Data customers with revenue ramps expected in the second half of this year.
    • Finally, Q1 ’25 Automotive revenue increased 13% from Q4’24, the third consecutive quarter of sequential double-digit growth.

    MPS continues to focus on innovation, solving our customers’ most challenging problems, and maintaining the highest level of quality. We continue to invest in new technology, expand into new markets, and to diversify our end-market applications and global supply chain. This will allow us to capture future growth opportunities, maintain supply stability, and swiftly adapt to market changes as they occur.

    “Our proven, long-term growth strategy remains intact as we continue our transformation from being a chip-only, semiconductor supplier to a full service, silicon-based solutions provider,” said Michael Hsing, CEO and founder of MPS.

    Q1’25 Revenue Results

    MPS reported first quarter revenue of $637.6 million, slightly higher than the fourth quarter of 2024 and 39.2% higher than the first quarter of 2024. Compared with the fourth quarter of 2024, sales in Storage & Computing, Automotive, Communication and Industrial improved sequentially.

    First quarter 2025 Storage and Computing revenue of $188.5 million increased 38.1% from the fourth quarter of 2024. The sequential increase was primarily driven by higher sales of power solutions for storage and notebooks. First quarter 2025 Storage and Computing revenue was up 77.7% year over year. Storage and Computing revenue represented 29.6% of MPS’s first quarter 2025 revenue compared with 22.0% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    First quarter Automotive revenue of $144.9 million increased 12.9% from the fourth quarter of 2024 primarily from higher sales in ADAS, body electronics, and infotainment power solutions. First quarter 2025 Automotive revenue was up 66.4% year over year. Automotive revenue represented 22.7% of MPS’s first quarter 2025 revenue compared with 20.6% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    First quarter 2025 Communications revenue of $71.8 million was up 12.3% from the fourth quarter of 2025 primarily on higher sales into networking and optical solutions. First quarter 2025 Communications revenue was up 53.7% year over year. Communications sales represented 11.3% of our total first quarter 2025 revenue compared with 10.3% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    First quarter 2025 Industrial revenue of $42.6 million increased 4.3% from the fourth quarter of 2024 primarily due to higher sales for industrial meters. First quarter 2025 Industrial revenue was up 41.1% year over year. Industrial revenue represented 6.7% of our total first quarter 2025 revenue compared with 6.6% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    First quarter Consumer revenue of $56.9 million decreased 0.6% from the fourth quarter of 2024 primarily from lower sales in gaming partially offset by higher sales for TV solutions. First quarter 2025 Consumer revenue was up 49.3% year over year. Consumer revenue represented 8.9% of MPS’s first quarter 2025 revenue compared with 9.2% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    In our Enterprise Data market, first quarter 2025 revenue of $132.9 million decreased 31.8% from the fourth quarter of 2024. First quarter 2025 Enterprise Data revenue was down 11.2% year over year. Enterprise Data revenue represented 20.8% of MPS’s first quarter 2025 revenue compared with 31.3% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Q1’25 Gross Margin & Operating Income

    GAAP gross margin was 55.4%, flat to the fourth quarter of 2024. Our GAAP operating income was $168.8 million compared to $163.3 million reported in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Non-GAAP gross margin for the first quarter of 2025 was 55.7%, down 0.1 percentage points compared to the fourth quarter of 2024. Our non-GAAP operating income was $221.5 million compared to $220.7 million reported in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Q1’25 Operating Expenses

    Our GAAP operating expenses were $184.5 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared with $181.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Our Non-GAAP operating expenses were $133.5 million, up from $126.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    The differences between non-GAAP operating expenses and GAAP operating expenses for the quarters discussed here are primarily stock-based compensation and related expenses and deferred compensation plan income.

    Total stock-based compensation and related expenses, including approximately $1.7 million charged to cost of goods sold, was $53.8 million compared with $56.3 million recorded in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    The Bottom Line

    First quarter 2025 GAAP net income was $133.8 million or $2.79 per fully diluted share, compared with $1.4 billion or $29.88 per share in the fourth quarter of 2024. Fourth quarter 2024 GAAP net income and EPS included the recognition of a tax benefit granted to a foreign subsidiary.

    First quarter 2025 non-GAAP net income was $193.8 million or $4.04 per fully diluted share, compared with $198.4 million or $4.09 per fully diluted share in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    The first quarter 2025 non-GAAP tax rate increased to 15% from 12.5% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

    There were 48.0 million fully diluted shares outstanding at the end of the first quarter of 2025.

    Balance Sheet and Cash Flow

    Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments were $1,026.7 million at the end of the first quarter of 2025 compared to $862.9 million at the end of the fourth quarter of 2024. For the first quarter of 2025, MPS generated operating cash flow of $256.4 million compared with the fourth quarter of 2024 operating cash flow of $167.7 million.

    Accounts receivable at the end of the first quarter of 2025 were $214.9 million, representing 31 days of sales outstanding, which was 6 days higher than the 25 days reported at the end of the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Our internal inventories at the end of the first quarter of 2025 were $454.8 million, up from $419.6 million at the end of the fourth quarter of 2024. Days of inventory of 146 days at the end of the first quarter of 2025 was 8 days higher than at the end of the fourth quarter of 2024.

    We have carefully managed our internal inventories throughout the year, balancing the uncertainty in the market with being prepared to capture market upturns when they occur. Comparing current inventory levels using next quarter’s projected revenue, days of inventory at the end of the first quarter of 143 days was 9 days higher than at the end of the fourth quarter of 2024.

    Selected Balance Sheet and Inventory Data (Unaudited)
           
      Q1’25 Q4’24 Q1’24
    Cash, Cash Equivalents, and Short-Term Investments $ 1,026.7 M $ 862.9 M $ 1,286.4 M
    Operating Cash Flow $ 256.4 M $ 167.7 M $ 248.0 M
    Accounts Receivable $ 214.9 M $ 172.5 M $ 194.4 M
    Days of Sales Outstanding 31 Days 25 Days 39 Days
    Internal Inventories $ 454.8 M $ 419.6 M $ 396.0 M
    Days of Inventory (current quarter revenue) 146 Days 138 Days 175 Days
    Days of Inventory (next quarter revenue) 143 Days 134 Days 159 Days
           

    Q2’25 Business Outlook

    For the second quarter of 2025 ending June 30, we are forecasting:

    • Revenue in the range of $640 million to $660 million.
    • GAAP gross margin in the range of 54.9% to 55.5%.
    • Non-GAAP gross margin in the range of 55.2% to 55.8%, which excludes the impact from stock-based compensation and related expenses as well as the impact from amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets.
    • Total stock-based compensation and related expenses in the range of $58.3 million to $60.3 million including approximately $1.9 million that would be charged to cost of goods sold.
    • GAAP operating expenses between $189 million and $195 million.
    • Non-GAAP operating expenses in the range of $132.6 million to $136.6 million. This estimate excludes stock-based compensation and related expenses in the range of $56.4 million to $58.4 million.
    • Interest and other income in the range from $6.2 million to $6.6 million before foreign exchange gains or losses.
    • Non-GAAP tax rate of 15% for 2025.
    • Fully diluted shares outstanding in the range of 47.9 to 48.3 million shares.

    For further information, contact:

    Bernie Blegen
    Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
    Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
    408-826-0777
    MPSInvestor.Relations@monolithicpower.com 

    Safe Harbor Statement

    This earnings commentary contains, and statements that will be made during the accompanying webinar will contain, forward-looking statements, as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including under the “Q2’25 Business Outlook” section herein, our statement regarding our business focus, our statement regarding the expansion and diversification of our global supply chain and the quote from our CEO and founder, including, among other things, (i) projected revenue, GAAP and non-GAAP gross margin, GAAP and non-GAAP operating expenses, stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, other income before foreign exchange gains or losses, and fully diluted shares outstanding, (ii) our outlook for the second quarter of fiscal year 2025 and the near-term, medium-term and long-term prospects of MPS, including our ability to adapt to changing market conditions, performance against our business plan, our ability to grow despite the various challenges facing our business, our industry and the global economic environment, revenue growth in certain of our market segments, potential new business segments, our continued investment in research and development (“R&D”), expected revenue growth, customers’ acceptance of our new product offerings, the prospects of our new product development, our expectations regarding market and industry segment trends and prospects, and our projected expansion of capacity and the impact it may have on our business, (iii) our ability to penetrate new markets and expand our market share, (iv) the seasonality of our business, (v) our ability to reduce our expenses, and (vi) statements regarding the assumptions underlying or relating to any statement described in (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v). These forward-looking statements are not historical facts or guarantees of future performance or events, are based on current expectations, estimates, beliefs, assumptions, goals, and objectives, and involve significant known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to be materially different from the results expressed by these statements. Readers of this earnings commentary and listeners to the accompanying conference call are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. Factors that could cause actual results to differ include, but are not limited to, continued uncertainties in the global economy, including due to the Russia-Ukraine and Middle East conflicts, global tariffs and retaliatory measures, inflation, consumer sentiment and other factors; adverse events arising from orders or regulations of governmental entities, including such orders or regulations that impact our customers or suppliers, and adoption of new or amended accounting standards; adverse changes in laws and government regulations such as tariffs on imports of foreign goods, export regulations and export classifications, and tax laws or the interpretation of same, including in foreign countries where MPS has offices or operations; the effect of export controls, trade and economic sanctions regulations and other regulatory or contractual limitations on our ability to sell or develop our products in certain foreign markets, particularly in China; our ability to obtain governmental licenses and approvals for international trading activities or technology transfers, including export licenses; acceptance of, or demand for, our products, in particular the new products launched recently, being different than expected; our ability to increase market share in our targeted markets; difficulty in predicting or budgeting for future customer demand and channel inventories, expenses and financial contingencies (including as a result of any continuing impact from the Russia-Ukraine and Middle East conflicts); our ability to efficiently and effectively develop new products and receive a return on our R&D expense investment; our ability to attract new customers and retain existing customers; our ability to meet customer demand for our products due to constraints on our third-party suppliers’ ability to manufacture sufficient quantities of our products or otherwise; our ability to expand manufacturing capacity to support future growth; adverse changes in production and testing efficiency of our products; any political, cultural, military, regulatory, economic, foreign exchange and operational changes in China, where a significant portion of our manufacturing capacity comes from; any market disruptions or interruptions in our schedule of new product development releases; our ability to manage our inventory levels; adequate supply of our products from our third-party manufacturing partners; adverse changes or developments in the semiconductor industry generally, which is cyclical in nature, and our ability to adjust our operations to address such changes or developments; the ongoing consolidation of companies in the semiconductor industry; competition generally and the increasingly competitive nature of our industry; our ability to realize the anticipated benefits of companies and products that MPS acquires, and our ability to effectively and efficiently integrate these acquired companies and products into our operations; the risks, uncertainties and costs of litigation in which MPS is involved; the outcome of any upcoming trials, hearings, motions and appeals; the adverse impact on our financial performance if its tax and litigation provisions are inadequate; our ability to effectively manage our growth and attract and retain qualified personnel; the effect of epidemics and pandemics on the global economy and on our business; the risks associated with the financial market, economy, global tariffs and retaliatory measures, and geopolitical uncertainties, including the Russia-Ukraine and Middle East conflicts; and other important risk factors identified under the caption “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in our Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings, including, but not limited to, our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 3, 2025. MPS assumes no obligation to update the information in this earnings commentary or in the accompanying webinar.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    This CFO Commentary contains references to certain non-GAAP financial measures. Non-GAAP net income, non-GAAP net income per share, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating expenses, non-GAAP other income, net, non-GAAP operating income and non-GAAP income before income taxes differ from net income, net income per share, gross margin, operating expenses, other income, net, operating income and income before income taxes determined in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”). Non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP net income per share exclude the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, which include stock-based compensation expense and employer payroll taxes in relation to the stock-based compensation, net deferred compensation plan expense (income), amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and related tax effects. Non-GAAP gross margin excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and deferred compensation plan expense (income). Non-GAAP operating expenses exclude the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and deferred compensation plan income (expense). Non-GAAP operating income excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and deferred compensation plan expense (income). Non-GAAP other income, net excludes the effect of deferred compensation plan expense (income). Non-GAAP income before income taxes excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and net deferred compensation plan expense (income). Projected non-GAAP gross margin excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, and amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets. Projected non-GAAP operating expenses exclude the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses. These non-GAAP financial measures are not prepared in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered as a substitute for, or superior to, measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. A schedule reconciling non-GAAP financial measures is included at the end of this press release. MPS utilizes both GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures to assess what it believes to be its core operating performance and to evaluate and manage its internal business and assist in making financial operating decisions. MPS believes that the inclusion of non-GAAP financial measures, together with GAAP measures, provides investors with an alternative presentation useful to investors’ understanding of MPS’s core operating results and trends. Additionally, MPS believes that the inclusion of non-GAAP measures, together with GAAP measures, provides investors with an additional dimension of comparability to similar companies. However, investors should be aware that non-GAAP financial measures utilized by other companies are not likely to be comparable in most cases to the non-GAAP financial measures used by MPS. See the GAAP to Non-GAAP reconciliations in the tables set forth below.

    RECONCILIATION OF NET INCOME TO NON-GAAP NET INCOME
    (Unaudited, in thousands, except per share amounts)
     
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Net income   $ 133,791     $ 92,541  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile net income to non-GAAP net income:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     53,811       51,769  
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     320       291  
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income), net     (6 )     47  
    Tax effect     5,897       (7,156 )
    Non-GAAP net income   $ 193,813     $ 137,492  
                     
    Non-GAAP net income per share:                
    Basic   $ 4.05     $ 2.83  
    Diluted   $ 4.04     $ 2.81  
                     
    Shares used in the calculation of non-GAAP net income per share:                
    Basic     47,851       48,635  
    Diluted     48,006       48,928  
    RECONCILIATION OF GROSS MARGIN TO NON-GAAP GROSS MARGIN
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Gross profit   $ 353,230     $ 252,441  
    Gross margin     55.4 %     55.1 %
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile gross profit to non-GAAP gross profit:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     1,706       1,900  
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     287       258  
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income)     (163 )     440  
    Non-GAAP gross profit   $ 355,060     $ 255,039  
    Non-GAAP gross margin     55.7 %     55.7 %
    RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING EXPENSES TO NON-GAAP OPERATING EXPENSES
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
     
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Total operating expenses   $ 184,471     $ 156,954  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile total operating expenses to non-GAAP total operating expenses:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     (52,105 )     (49,869 )
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     (33 )     (33 )
    Deferred compensation plan income (expense)     1,193       (3,626 )
    Non-GAAP operating expenses   $ 133,526     $ 103,426  
                     
    RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME TO NON-GAAP OPERATING INCOME
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
     
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Total operating income   $ 168,759     $ 95,487  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile total operating income to non-GAAP total operating income:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     53,811       51,769  
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     320       291  
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income)     (1,356 )     4,066  
    Non-GAAP operating income   $ 221,534     $ 151,613  
                     
    RECONCILIATION OF OTHER INCOME, NET, TO NON-GAAP OTHER INCOME, NET
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
     
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024  
    Total other income, net   $ 5,131     $ 9,540  
                   
    Adjustments to reconcile other income, net to non-GAAP other income, net:              
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income)     1,350       (4,019 )
    Non-GAAP other income, net   $ 6,481     $ 5,521  
                     
    RECONCILIATION OF INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES TO NON-GAAP INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
     
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Total income before income taxes   $ 173,890     $ 105,027
                   
    Adjustments to reconcile income before income taxes to non-GAAP income before income taxes:              
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     53,811       51,769
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     320       291
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income), net     (6 )     47
    Non-GAAP income before income taxes   $ 228,015     $ 157,134
                   
    2025 SECOND QUARTER OUTLOOK
    RECONCILIATION OF GROSS MARGIN TO NON-GAAP GROSS MARGIN
    (Unaudited)
        Three Months Ending
    March 31, 2025
                     
        Low   High
    Gross margin     54.9 %     55.5 %
    Adjustment to reconcile gross margin to non-GAAP gross margin:                
    Stock-based compensation and other expenses     0.3 %     0.3 %
    Non-GAAP gross margin     55.2 %     55.8 %
                     
    RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING EXPENSES TO NON-GAAP OPERATING EXPENSES
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ending
    March 31, 2025
                     
        Low   High
    Operating expenses   $ 189,000     $ 195,000  
    Adjustments to reconcile operating expenses to non-GAAP operating expenses:                
    Stock-based compensation and other expenses     (56,400 )     (58,400 )
    Non-GAAP operating expenses   $ 132,600     $ 136,600  
                     

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Viper Energy, Inc. Announces Closing of Drop Down Transaction

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    MIDLAND, Texas, May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Viper Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: VNOM) (“Viper” or the “Company”), a subsidiary of Diamondback Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: FANG) (“Diamondback”), today announced that it and its operating subsidiary, Viper Energy Partners LLC (the “Operating Company”), have closed their previously announced acquisition of all of the equity interests in certain mineral and royalty interest-owning subsidiaries of Diamondback (the “Drop Down”). The total consideration for the Drop Down consisted of (i) $1.0 billion in cash and (ii) the issuance (the “Equity Issuance”) of 69,626,640 units representing limited liability company interests in the Operating Company and an equivalent number of shares of Viper’s Class B Common Stock, in each case, subject to transaction costs and certain customary post-closing adjustments.

    The mineral and royalty interests acquired by the Operating Company in the Drop Down represent approximately 22,847 net royalty acres in the Permian Basin, approximately 69% of which are currently operated by Diamondback. Viper funded the cash consideration for the Drop Down with (i) proceeds from its previously announced underwritten public offering of shares of its Class A Common Stock, completed on February 3, 2025, and (ii) borrowings under the Operating Company’s revolving credit facility. Immediately following the completion of the Drop Down, Diamondback beneficially owned approximately 53.7% of Viper’s outstanding voting common stock.

    The Drop Down was approved by Viper’s audit committee comprised of all independent directors and the full board of directors, in each case, on January 30, 2025, and by the majority of the Company’s stockholders, other than Diamondback and its subsidiaries, at the special meeting of the Company’s stockholders held on May 1, 2025 (the “Special Meeting”). At the Special Meeting, Viper’s stockholders also approved the Equity Issuance, as required under the rules of The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC.

    About Viper Energy, Inc.

    Viper is a corporation formed by Diamondback to own, acquire and exploit oil and natural gas properties in North America, with a focus on owning and acquiring mineral and royalty interests in oil-weighted basins, primarily the Permian Basin. For more information, please visit www.viperenergy.com.

    About Diamondback Energy, Inc.

    Diamondback is an independent oil and natural gas company headquartered in Midland, Texas focused on the acquisition, development, exploration and exploitation of unconventional, onshore oil and natural gas reserves primarily in the Permian Basin in West Texas. For more information, please visit www.diamondbackenergy.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This news release contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, which involve risks, uncertainties, and assumptions. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, including statements regarding Viper’s: future performance; business strategy; future operations; estimates and projections of operating income, losses, costs and expenses, returns, cash flow, and financial position; production levels on properties in which Viper has mineral and royalty interests, developmental activity by other operators; reserve estimates and Viper’s ability to replace or increase reserves; anticipated benefits or other effects of strategic transactions (including the Drop Down and other acquisitions or divestitures); and plans and objectives (including Diamondback’s plans for developing Viper’s acreage and Viper’s cash dividend policy and common stock repurchase program) are forward-looking statements. When used in this news release, the words “aim,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “forecast,” “future,” “guidance,” “intend,” “may,” “model,” “outlook,” “plan,” “positioned,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “will,” “would,” and similar expressions (including the negative of such terms) as they relate to Viper are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. Although Viper believes that the expectations and assumptions reflected in its forward-looking statements are reasonable as and when made, they involve risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict and, in many cases, beyond its control. Accordingly, forward-looking statements are not guarantees of Viper’s future performance and the actual outcomes could differ materially from what Viper expressed in its forward-looking statements.

    Factors that could cause the outcomes to differ materially include (but are not limited to) the following: changes in supply and demand levels for oil, natural gas, and natural gas liquids, and the resulting impact on the price for those commodities; the impact of public health crises, including epidemic or pandemic diseases, and any related company or government policies or actions; changes in U.S. energy, environmental, monetary and trade policies, including with respect to tariffs or other trade barriers, and any resulting trade tensions; actions taken by the members of OPEC and Russia affecting the production and pricing of oil, as well as other domestic and global political, economic, or diplomatic developments, including any impact of the ongoing war in Ukraine and the Israel-Hamas war on the global energy markets and geopolitical stability; instability in the financial sector; higher interest rates and their impact on the cost of capital; regional supply and demand factors, including delays, curtailment delays or interruptions of production on Viper’s mineral and royalty acreage, or governmental orders, rules or regulations that impose production limits on such acreage; federal and state legislative and regulatory initiatives relating to hydraulic fracturing, including the effect of existing and future laws and governmental regulations; physical and transition risks relating to climate change and the risks and other factors disclosed in Viper’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K, which can be obtained free of charge on the Securities and Exchange Commission’s web site at http://www.sec.gov.

    In light of these factors, the events anticipated by Viper’s forward-looking statements may not occur at the time anticipated or at all. Moreover, new risks emerge from time to time. Viper cannot predict all risks, nor can it assess the impact of all factors on its business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by any forward-looking statements it may make. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements made in this news release. All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this news release or, if earlier, as of the date they were made. Viper does not intend to, and disclaims any obligation to, update or revise any forward-looking statements unless required by applicable law.

    Investor Contact:
    Chip Seale
    +1 432.247.6218
    cseale@viperenergy.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Monolithic Power Systems Announces Results for the First Quarter Ended March 31, 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    KIRKLAND, Wash., May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (“MPS”) (Nasdaq: MPWR), a fabless global company that provides high-performance, semiconductor-based power electronics solutions, today announced financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

    The financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 were as follows:

    • Revenue was $637.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, a 2.6% increase from $621.7 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and a 39.2% increase from $457.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • GAAP gross margin was 55.4% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared with 55.1% for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Non-GAAP gross margin (1) was 55.7% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, excluding the impact of $1.7 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses, $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and $0.2 million for deferred compensation plan income, compared with 55.7% for the quarter ended March 31, 2024, excluding the impact of $1.9 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses, $0.4 million for deferred compensation plan expense and $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets.
    • GAAP operating expenses were $184.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared with $157.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Non-GAAP operating expenses (1) were $133.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, excluding $52.1 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses and $1.2 million for deferred compensation plan income, compared with $103.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024, excluding $49.9 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses and $3.6 million for deferred compensation plan expense.
    • GAAP operating income was $168.8 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared with $95.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Non-GAAP operating income (1) was $221.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, excluding $53.8 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses, $1.4 million for deferred compensation plan income and $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, compared with $151.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024, excluding $51.8 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses, $4.1 million for deferred compensation plan expense and $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets.
    • GAAP other income, net was $5.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared with $9.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Non-GAAP other income, net (1) was $6.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, excluding $1.4 million for deferred compensation plan expense, compared with $5.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024, excluding $4.0 million for deferred compensation plan income.
    • GAAP income before income taxes was $173.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared with $105.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Non-GAAP income before income taxes (1) was $228.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, excluding $53.8 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses and $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, compared with $157.1 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2024, excluding $51.8 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses and $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets.
    • GAAP net income was $133.8 million and $2.79 per diluted share for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. Comparatively, GAAP net income was $92.5 million and $1.89 per diluted share for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Non-GAAP net income (1) was $193.8 million and $4.04 per diluted share for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, excluding $53.8 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses, $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and $5.9 million for related tax effects, compared with $137.5 million and $2.81 per diluted share for the quarter ended March 31, 2024, excluding $51.8 million for stock-based compensation and related expenses, $0.3 million for amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and $7.2 million for related tax effects.

    The following is a summary of revenue by end market (in thousands):

        Three Months Ended March 31,
    End Market   2025   2024
    Storage and Computing   $ 188,511   $ 106,121
    Automotive     144,904     87,092
    Enterprise Data     132,924     149,727
    Communications     71,671     46,645
    Consumer     56,947     38,074
    Industrial     42,597     30,226
    Total   $ 637,554   $ 457,885

    “Our proven, long-term growth strategy remains intact as we continue our transformation from being a chip-only, semiconductor supplier to a full service, silicon-based solutions provider,” said Michael Hsing, CEO and founder of MPS. 

    Business Outlook

    The following are MPS’s financial targets for the second quarter ending June 30, 2025:

    • Revenue in the range of $640.0 million to $660.0 million.
    • GAAP gross margin between 54.9% and 55.5%. Non-GAAP gross margin (1) between 55.2% and 55.8%, which excludes the impact from stock-based compensation and related expenses as well as the impact from amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets.
    • GAAP operating expenses between $189.0 million and $195.0 million. Non-GAAP operating expenses (1) between $132.6 million and $136.6 million, which excludes estimated stock-based compensation and related expenses in the range of $56.4 million to $58.4 million.
    • Total stock-based compensation and related expenses of $58.3 million to $60.3 million including approximately $1.9 million that would be charged to cost of goods sold.
    • Interest and other income in the range of $6.2 million to $6.6 million before foreign exchange gains or losses.
    • Non-GAAP tax rate of 15% for 2025.
    • Fully diluted shares outstanding between 47.9 million and 48.3 million.

    (1) Non-GAAP net income, non-GAAP net income per share, non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP operating expenses, non-GAAP operating income, non-GAAP other income, net and non-GAAP income before income taxes differ from net income, net income per share, gross margin, operating expenses, operating income, other income, net and income before income taxes determined in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (“GAAP”). Non-GAAP net income and non-GAAP net income per share exclude the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, which include stock-based compensation expense and employer payroll taxes in relation to the stock-based compensation, net deferred compensation plan expense (income), amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and related tax effects. Non-GAAP gross margin excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and deferred compensation plan expense (income). Non-GAAP operating expenses exclude the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and deferred compensation plan income (expense). Non-GAAP operating income excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and deferred compensation plan expense (income). Non-GAAP other income, net excludes the effect of deferred compensation plan expense (income). Non-GAAP income before income taxes excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets and net deferred compensation plan expense (income). Projected non-GAAP gross margin excludes the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses, and amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets. Projected non-GAAP operating expenses exclude the effect of stock-based compensation and related expenses. These non-GAAP financial measures are not prepared in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered as a substitute for, or superior to, measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. A schedule reconciling non-GAAP financial measures is included at the end of this press release. MPS utilizes both GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures to assess what it believes to be its core operating performance and to evaluate and manage its internal business and assist in making financial operating decisions. MPS believes that the inclusion of non-GAAP financial measures, together with GAAP measures, provides investors with an alternative presentation useful to investors’ understanding of MPS’s core operating results and trends. Additionally, MPS believes that the inclusion of non-GAAP measures, together with GAAP measures, provides investors with an additional dimension of comparability to similar companies. However, investors should be aware that non-GAAP financial measures utilized by other companies are not likely to be comparable in most cases to the non-GAAP financial measures used by MPS. See the GAAP to non-GAAP reconciliations in the tables set forth below.

    Earnings Commentary
    Earnings commentary on the results of operations for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 is available under the Investor Relations page on the MPS website.

    Earnings Webinar
    MPS plans to host a question-and-answer webinar covering its financial results at 2:00 p.m. PT / 5:00 p.m. ET, May 1, 2025. The live event will be held via a Zoom webcast, which can be accessed at: https://mpsic.zoom.us/j/92570889542. The Zoom webcast can also be accessed live over the phone by dialing (669) 444-9171; the webcast ID is 92570889542. A replay of the event will be archived and available for replay for one year under the Investor Relations page on the MPS website.

    Safe Harbor Statement
    This press release contains, and statements that will be made during the accompanying earnings webinar will contain, forward-looking statements, as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including under the “Business Outlook” section and the quote from our CEO herein, including, among other things, (i) projected revenue, GAAP and non-GAAP gross margin, GAAP and non-GAAP operating expenses, stock-based compensation and related expenses, amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, other income before foreign exchange gains or losses, and fully diluted shares outstanding, (ii) our outlook for the second quarter of fiscal year 2025 and the near-term, medium-term and long-term prospects of MPS, including our ability to adapt to changing market conditions, performance against our business plan, our ability to grow despite the various challenges facing our business, our industry and the global economic environment, revenue growth in certain of our market segments, potential new business segments, our continued investment in research and development (“R&D”), expected revenue growth, customers’ acceptance of our new product offerings, the prospects of our new product development, our expectations regarding market and industry segment trends and prospects, and our projected expansion of capacity and the impact it may have on our business, (iii) our ability to penetrate new markets and expand our market share, (iv) the seasonality of our business, (v) our ability to reduce our expenses, and (vi) statements regarding the assumptions underlying or relating to any statement described in (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), or (v). These forward-looking statements are not historical facts or guarantees of future performance or events, are based on current expectations, estimates, beliefs, assumptions, goals, and objectives, and involve significant known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results to be materially different from the results expressed by these statements. Readers of this press release and listeners to the accompanying earnings webinar are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date hereof. Factors that could cause actual results to differ include, but are not limited to, continued uncertainties in the global economy, including due to the Russia-Ukraine and Middle East conflicts, global tariffs and retaliatory measures, inflation, consumer sentiment and other factors; adverse events arising from orders or regulations of governmental entities, including such orders or regulations that impact our customers or suppliers, and adoption of new or amended accounting standards; adverse changes in laws and government regulations such as tariffs on imports of foreign goods, export regulations and export classifications, and tax laws or the interpretation of same, including in foreign countries where MPS has offices or operations; the effect of export controls, trade and economic sanctions regulations and other regulatory or contractual limitations on our ability to sell or develop our products in certain foreign markets, particularly in China; our ability to obtain governmental licenses and approvals for international trading activities or technology transfers, including export licenses; acceptance of, or demand for, our products, in particular the new products launched recently, being different than expected; our ability to increase market share in our targeted markets; difficulty in predicting or budgeting for future customer demand and channel inventories, expenses and financial contingencies (including as a result of any continuing impact from the Russia-Ukraine and Middle East conflicts); our ability to efficiently and effectively develop new products and receive a return on our R&D expense investment; our ability to attract new customers and retain existing customers; our ability to meet customer demand for our products due to constraints on our third-party suppliers’ ability to manufacture sufficient quantities of our products or otherwise; our ability to expand manufacturing capacity to support future growth; adverse changes in production and testing efficiency of our products; any political, cultural, military, regulatory, economic, foreign exchange and operational changes in China, where a significant portion of our manufacturing capacity comes from; any market disruptions or interruptions in our schedule of new product development releases; our ability to manage our inventory levels; adequate supply of our products from our third-party manufacturing partners; adverse changes or developments in the semiconductor industry generally, which is cyclical in nature, and our ability to adjust our operations to address such changes or developments; the ongoing consolidation of companies in the semiconductor industry; competition generally and the increasingly competitive nature of our industry; our ability to realize the anticipated benefits of companies and products that MPS acquires, and our ability to effectively and efficiently integrate these acquired companies and products into our operations; the risks, uncertainties and costs of litigation in which MPS is involved; the outcome of any upcoming trials, hearings, motions and appeals; the adverse impact on our financial performance if its tax and litigation provisions are inadequate; our ability to effectively manage our growth and attract and retain qualified personnel; the effect of epidemics and pandemics on the global economy and on our business; the risks associated with the financial market, economy, global tariffs and retaliatory measures, and geopolitical uncertainties, including the Russia-Ukraine and Middle East conflicts; and other important risk factors identified under the caption “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in our Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) filings, including, but not limited to, our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 3, 2025. MPS assumes no obligation to update the information in this press release or in the accompanying earnings webinar.

    About Monolithic Power Systems
    Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. (“MPS”) is a fabless global company that provides high-performance, semiconductor-based power electronics solutions. MPS’s mission is to reduce energy and material consumption to improve all aspects of quality of life. Founded in 1997 by our CEO Michael Hsing, MPS has three core strengths: deep system-level knowledge, strong semiconductor expertise, and innovative proprietary technologies in the areas of semiconductor processes, system integration, and packaging. These combined advantages enable MPS to deliver reliable, compact, and monolithic solutions that are highly energy-efficient, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible while providing a consistent return on investment to our stockholders. MPS can be contacted through its website at www.monolithicpower.com or its support offices around the world.

    Monolithic Power Systems, MPS, and the MPS logo are registered trademarks of Monolithic Power Systems, Inc. in the U.S. and trademarked in certain other countries. 

    Contact:
    Bernie Blegen
    Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
    Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
    408-826-0777
    MPSInvestor.Relations@monolithicpower.com

    Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
    Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
    (Unaudited, in thousands, except par value)
        March 31,   December 31,
        2025   2024
    ASSETS                
    Current assets:                
    Cash and cash equivalents   $ 637,354     $ 691,816  
    Short-term investments     389,310       171,130  
    Accounts receivable, net     214,866       172,518  
    Inventories     454,793       419,611  
    Other current assets     92,063       109,978  
    Total current assets     1,788,386       1,565,053  
    Property and equipment, net     527,348       494,945  
    Acquisition-related intangible assets, net     9,651       9,938  
    Goodwill     25,944       25,944  
    Deferred tax assets, net     1,318,457       1,326,840  
    Other long-term assets     135,974       194,377  
    Total assets   $ 3,805,760     $ 3,617,097  
                     
    LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY                
    Current liabilities:                
    Accounts payable   $ 127,310     $ 102,526  
    Accrued compensation and related benefits     74,785       63,918  
    Other accrued liabilities     161,306       128,123  
    Total current liabilities     363,401       294,567  
    Income tax liabilities     69,535       65,193  
    Other long-term liabilities     105,814       111,570  
    Total liabilities     538,750       471,330  
    Commitments and contingencies                
    Stockholders’ equity:                
    Common stock and additional paid-in capital: $0.001 par value; shares authorized: 150,000; shares issued and outstanding: 47,877 and 47,823, respectively     764,959       706,817  
    Retained earnings     2,545,375       2,487,461  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (43,324 )     (48,511 )
    Total stockholders’ equity     3,267,010       3,145,767  
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 3,805,760     $ 3,617,097  
    Monolithic Power Systems, Inc.
    Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

    (Unaudited, in thousands, except per share amounts)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Revenue   $ 637,554     $ 457,885  
    Cost of revenue     284,324       205,444  
    Gross profit     353,230       252,441  
    Operating expenses:                
    Research and development     92,227       75,990  
    Selling, general and administrative     92,244       80,964  
    Total operating expenses     184,471       156,954  
    Operating income     168,759       95,487  
    Other income, net     5,131       9,540  
    Income before income taxes     173,890       105,027  
    Income tax expense     40,099       12,486  
    Net income   $ 133,791     $ 92,541  
                     
    Net income per share:                
    Basic   $ 2.80     $ 1.90  
    Diluted   $ 2.79     $ 1.89  
    Weighted-average shares outstanding:                
    Basic     47,851       48,635  
    Diluted     48,006       48,928  
    RECONCILIATION OF NET INCOME TO NON-GAAP NET INCOME
    (Unaudited, in thousands, except per share amounts)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Net income   $ 133,791     $ 92,541  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile net income to non-GAAP net income:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     53,811       51,769  
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     320       291  
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income), net     (6 )     47  
    Tax effect     5,897       (7,156 )
    Non-GAAP net income   $ 193,813     $ 137,492  
                     
    Non-GAAP net income per share:                
    Basic   $ 4.05     $ 2.83  
    Diluted   $ 4.04     $ 2.81  
                     
    Shares used in the calculation of non-GAAP net income per share:                
    Basic     47,851       48,635  
    Diluted     48,006       48,928  
    RECONCILIATION OF GROSS MARGIN TO NON-GAAP GROSS MARGIN
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Gross profit   $ 353,230     $ 252,441  
    Gross margin     55.4 %     55.1 %
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile gross profit to non-GAAP gross profit:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     1,706       1,900  
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     287       258  
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income)     (163 )     440  
    Non-GAAP gross profit   $ 355,060     $ 255,039  
    Non-GAAP gross margin     55.7 %     55.7 %
    RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING EXPENSES TO NON-GAAP OPERATING EXPENSES
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Total operating expenses   $ 184,471     $ 156,954  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile total operating expenses to non-GAAP total operating expenses:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     (52,105 )     (49,869 )
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     (33 )     (33 )
    Deferred compensation plan income (expense)     1,193       (3,626 )
    Non-GAAP operating expenses   $ 133,526     $ 103,426  
    RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING INCOME TO NON-GAAP OPERATING INCOME
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Total operating income   $ 168,759     $ 95,487  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile total operating income to non-GAAP total operating income:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     53,811       51,769  
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     320       291  
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income)     (1,356 )     4,066  
    Non-GAAP operating income   $ 221,534     $ 151,613  
    RECONCILIATION OF OTHER INCOME, NET, TO NON-GAAP OTHER INCOME, NET
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Total other income, net   $ 5,131     $ 9,540  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile other income, net to non-GAAP other income, net:                
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income)     1,350       (4,019 )
    Non-GAAP other income, net   $ 6,481     $ 5,521  
    RECONCILIATION OF INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES TO NON-GAAP INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ended March 31,
        2025   2024
    Total income before income taxes   $ 173,890     $ 105,027  
                     
    Adjustments to reconcile income before income taxes to non-GAAP income before income taxes:                
    Stock-based compensation and related expenses     53,811       51,769  
    Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets     320       291  
    Deferred compensation plan expense (income), net     (6 )     47  
    Non-GAAP income before income taxes   $ 228,015     $ 157,134  
    2025 SECOND QUARTER OUTLOOK
    RECONCILIATION OF GROSS MARGIN TO NON-GAAP GROSS MARGIN
    (Unaudited)
        Three Months Ending
        June 30, 2025
        Low   High
    Gross margin     54.9 %     55.5 %
    Adjustment to reconcile gross margin to non-GAAP gross margin:                
    Stock-based compensation and other expenses     0.3 %     0.3 %
    Non-GAAP gross margin     55.2 %     55.8 %
    RECONCILIATION OF OPERATING EXPENSES TO NON-GAAP OPERATING EXPENSES
    (Unaudited, in thousands)
        Three Months Ending
        June 30, 2025
        Low   High
    Operating expenses   $ 189,000     $ 195,000  
    Adjustments to reconcile operating expenses to non-GAAP operating expenses:                
    Stock-based compensation and other expenses     (56,400 )     (58,400 )
    Non-GAAP operating expenses   $ 132,600     $ 136,600  

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: GSI Technology, Inc. Reports Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SUNNYVALE, Calif., May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — GSI Technology, Inc. (NASDAQ: GSIT) today reported financial results for its fourth fiscal quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2025.

    Summary Financial Results Table (in thousands, except per share amounts)

      Three Months Ended 12 Months Ended
      Mar. 31,
    2025
    Dec. 31,
    2024
    Mar. 31,
    2024
    Mar. 31,
    2025
    Mar. 31,
    2024
    Net revenues $ 5,883     $ 5,414     $ 5,152     $ 20,518     $ 21,765  
    Gross margin (%)   56.1 %     54.0 %     51.6 %     49.4 %     54.3 %
    Operating expenses $ 5,575     $ 6,978     $ 7,172     $ 20,975     $ 32,254  
    Operating loss $ (2,276 )   $ (4,055 )   $ (4,514 )   $ (10,835 )   $ (20,431 )
    Net loss $ (2,230 )   $ (4,029 )   $ (4,321 )   $ (10,639 )   $ (20,087 )
    Net loss per share, diluted $ (0.09 )   $ (0.16 )   $ (0.17 )   $ (0.42 )   $ (0.80 )
                                           

    Lee-Lean Shu, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, stated, “Our fourth quarter revenue increased 14% year-over-year and 9% sequentially to $5.9 million, reflecting strong demand for our legacy SRAM chips. This performance, combined with disciplined cost management, led to a significantly reduced net loss and lower cash burn for the quarter.”

    Mr. Shu continued, “ I am excited to announce that we secured an initial order for our radiation-hardened SRAM from a North American prime contractor, with follow-on orders expected in fiscal 2026. This sale also carries a significantly higher gross margin than our traditional SRAM chips. In parallel, we are actively pursuing heritage status for this chip, which will improve our market readiness and open important new sales channels. On the APU front, we expect to receive production-ready Gemini-II chips and Leda-2 boards by the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2026. In addition, our Gemini-II SBIR programs with the Space Development Agency (SDA) and US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) remain on schedule. We delivered a server with a Leda-2 board to AFRL and will soon ship a Gemini-II card to SDA. Funds from these programs are offsetting our R&D expenditures for Gemini-II.”

    Mr. Shu concluded, “We are especially excited about a recent enhancement to Plato: adding the integration of a camera interface directly into the chip. This and other enhanced connectivity features create a compact, all-in-one optimized AI and LLM engine for edge devices, particularly well suited for agents requiring object recognition. With the ability to process data locally, without relying on cloud infrastructure, Plato now offers a powerful and flexible accelerator for next-generation edge computing applications. The new capability has increased strategic interest in Plato, and we are currently in preliminary discussions with multiple parties to secure partnerships to fund the next phase of development.”

    Commenting on the outlook for GSI’s first quarter of fiscal 2026, Mr. Shu stated, “Our current expectations for the upcoming first quarter of fiscal 2026 is for net revenues in a range of $5.5 million to $6.3 million, with gross margin of approximately 56% to 58%.”

    Fiscal Year 2025 Summary Financials

    The Company reported net revenues of $20.5 million for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025, compared to $21.8 million for fiscal 2024. Gross margin was 49.4% for fiscal 2025 compared to 54.3% in fiscal 2024. The decrease in gross margin was primarily due to product mix and the effect of lower revenue on the fixed costs in our cost of revenues.

    Total operating expenses were $21.0 million in fiscal 2025, compared to $32.3 million in fiscal 2024. Research and development expenses were $16.0 million, compared to $21.7 million in the prior fiscal year. Selling, general and administrative expenses were $10.8 million, compared to $10.6 million in fiscal 2024. The decline in research and development expenses was primarily due to cost reductions announced in August 2024. Research and development expense in fiscal 2024 included pre-production mask costs of $2.4 million related to our Gemini-II product.

    Research and development expenses in fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024 were reduced by $1.2 million and $440,000, respectively, reflecting government funding under the SBIR programs. Operating expenses in fiscal 2025 include a gain on the sale of assets of $5.8 million from the sales of the Company’s headquarters building in Sunnyvale, CA, in a sales and leaseback transaction.

    The operating loss for fiscal 2025 was $(10.8) million compared to an operating loss of $(20.4) million in the prior year. The fiscal 2025 net loss included interest and other income of $326,000 and a tax provision of $130,000, compared to $414,000 in interest and other income and a tax provision of $70,000 in the prior fiscal year.

    Net loss for fiscal 2025 was $(10.6) million, or $(0.42) per diluted share, compared to a net loss of $(20.1) million, or $(0.80) per diluted share, for fiscal 2024.

    Fourth Quarter Fiscal Year 2025 Summary Financials

    The Company reported net revenues of $5.9 million for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025, compared to $5.2 million for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024 and $5.4 million for the third quarter of fiscal 2025. Gross margin was 56.1% in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 compared to 51.6% in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024 and 54.0% in the preceding third quarter of fiscal 2025. The sequential increase in gross margin in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 was primarily due to higher revenue and product mix.

    In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025, sales to KYEC were $1.7 million, or 29.5% of net revenues, compared to $544,000, or 10.6% of net revenues, in the same period a year ago and $1.2 million, or 22.7% of net revenues, in the prior quarter. In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025, sales to Nokia were $444,000, or 7.5% of net revenues, compared to $694,000, or 13.5% of net revenues, in the same period a year ago and $239,000, or 4.4% of net revenues, in the prior quarter. Military/defense sales were 30.7% of fourth quarter shipments compared to 35.5% of shipments in the comparable period a year ago and 30.0% of shipments in the prior quarter. SigmaQuad sales were 39.3% of fourth quarter shipments compared to 42.4% in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024 and 39.1% in the prior quarter.

    Total operating expenses in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 were $5.6 million, compared to $7.2 million in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024 and $7.0 million in the prior quarter. Research and development expenses were $3.0 million, compared to $4.8 million in the prior-year period and $4.0 million in the prior quarter. Research and development expenses in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 were reduced by $870,000, reflecting government funding under the SBIR programs. Selling, general and administrative expenses were $2.6 million in the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $2.4 million in the prior year quarter and $3.0 million in the previous quarter.

    Fourth quarter fiscal 2025 operating loss was $(2.3) million compared to an operating loss of $(4.5) million in the prior-year period and $(4.1) million in the prior quarter. Fourth quarter fiscal 2025 net loss included interest and other income of $52,000 and a tax provision of $6,000, compared to $108,000 in interest and other income and a tax benefit of $(85,000) for the same period a year ago. In the preceding third quarter, net loss included interest and other income of $70,000 and a tax provision of $44,000.

    Net loss in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2025 was $(2.2) million, or $(0.09) per diluted share, compared to a net loss of $(4.3) million, or $(0.17) per diluted share, for the fourth quarter of fiscal 2024 and a net loss of $(4.0) million, or $(0.16) per diluted share, for the third quarter of fiscal 2025.

    Total fourth quarter pre-tax stock-based compensation expense was $512,000 compared to $693,000 in the comparable quarter a year ago and $429,000 in the prior quarter.

    At March 31, 2025, the Company had $13.4 million in cash and cash equivalents, compared to $14.4 million at March 31, 2024. Working capital was $16.4 million as of March 31, 2025 versus $24.7 million at March 31, 2024. Stockholders’ equity as of March 31, 2025 was $28.2 million, compared to $36.0 million as of the fiscal year ended March 31, 2024.

    Conference Call

    Management will conduct a conference call to review the Company’s financial results for the fourth quarter and fiscal year 2025 and its current outlook for the first quarter of fiscal 2026 at 1:30 p.m. Pacific time (4:30 p.m. Eastern Time) today.

    To participate in the call, please dial 1-877-407-3982 in the U.S. or 1-201-493-6780 for international approximately 10 minutes prior to the above start time and provide Conference ID 13753362. The call will also be streamed live via the internet at www.gsitechnology.com.

    A replay will be available from May 1, 2025, at 7:30 p.m. Eastern Time through May 8, 2025, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time by dialing toll-free for the U.S. 1-844-512-2921 or international 1-412-317-6671 and entering pin number 13753362. A webcast of the call will be archived on the Company’s investor relations website under the Events and Presentations tab.

    About GSI Technology

    Founded in 1995, GSI Technology, Inc. is a leading provider of semiconductor memory solutions. GSI’s resources are focused on bringing new products to market that leverage existing core strengths, including radiation-hardened memory products for extreme environments and Gemini-I, the associative processing unit designed to deliver performance advantages for diverse artificial intelligence applications. GSI Technology is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, and has sales offices in the Americas, Europe, and Asia. For more information, please visit www.gsitechnology.com.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    The statements contained in this press release that are not purely historical are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements regarding GSI Technology’s expectations, beliefs, intentions, or strategies regarding the future. All forward-looking statements included in this press release are based upon information available to GSI Technology as of the date hereof, and GSI Technology assumes no obligation to update any such forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements involve a variety of risks and uncertainties, which could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. These risks include those associated with the normal quarterly and fiscal year-end closing process. Examples of risks that could affect our current expectations regarding future revenues and gross margins include those associated with fluctuations in GSI Technology’s operating results; GSI Technology’s historical dependence on sales to a limited number of customers and fluctuations in the mix of customers and products in any period; global public health crises that reduce economic activity; the rapidly evolving markets for GSI Technology’s products and uncertainty regarding the development of these markets; the need to develop and introduce new products to offset the historical decline in the average unit selling price of GSI Technology’s products; the challenges of rapid growth followed by periods of contraction; intensive competition; the continued availability of government funding opportunities; delays or unanticipated costs that may be encountered in the development of new products based on our in-place associative computing technology and the establishment of new markets and customer and partner relationships for the sale of such products; and delays or unexpected challenges related to the establishment of customer relationships and orders for GSI Technology’s radiation-hardened and tolerant SRAM products. Many of these risks are currently amplified by and will continue to be amplified by, or in the future may be amplified by, economic and geopolitical conditions, such as changing interest rates, worldwide inflationary pressures, policy unpredictability, the imposition of tariffs and other trade barriers, military conflicts and declines in the global economic environment. Further information regarding these and other risks relating to GSI Technology’s business is contained in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including those factors discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in such filings.

    Source: GSI Technology, Inc.

    Contacts:

    Investor Relations:

    Hayden IR
    Kim Rogers
    385-831-7337
    kim@haydenir.com

    Media Relations:

    Finn Partners for GSI Technology
    Ricca Silverio
    415-348-2724
    gsi@finnpartners.com

    Company:

    GSI Technology, Inc.
    Douglas M. Schirle
    Chief Financial Officer
    408-331-9802

           
    GSI TECHNOLOGY, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
    (in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)
                 
      Three Months Ended   Twelve Months Ended
      March 31, Dec. 31, March 31, March 31, March 31,
        2025     2024     2024       2025     2024  
                 
    Net revenues $ 5,883   $ 5,414   $ 5,152     $ 20,518   $ 21,765  
    Cost of goods sold   2,584     2,491     2,494       10,378     9,942  
                 
    Gross profit   3,299     2,923     2,658       10,140     11,823  
                 
    Operating expenses:            
                 
    Research & development   2,966     4,037     4,818       16,005     21,689  
    Selling, general and administrative   2,609     2,997     2,354       10,763     10,565  
    Gain from sale of assets       (56 )         (5,793 )    
    Total operating expenses   5,575     6,978     7,172       20,975     32,254  
                 
    Operating loss   (2,276 )   (4,055 )   (4,514 )     (10,835 )   (20,431 )
                 
    Interest and other income (expense), net   52     70     108       326     414  
                 
    Loss before income taxes   (2,224 )   (3,985 )   (4,406 )     (10,509 )   (20,017 )
    Provision (benefit) for income taxes   6     44     (85 )     130     70  
    Net loss $ (2,230 ) $ (4,029 ) $ (4,321 )   $ (10,639 ) $ (20,087 )
                 
                 
    Net loss per share, basic $ (0.09 ) ($ 0.16 ) $ (0.17 )   $ (0.42 ) $ (0.80 )
    Net loss per share, diluted $ (0.09 ) ($ 0.16 ) $ (0.17 )   $ (0.42 ) $ (0.80 )
                 
    Weighted-average shares used in            
    computing per share amounts:            
                 
    Basic   25,604     25,546     25,297       25,498     25,144  
    Diluted   25,604     25,546     25,297       25,498     25,144  
                 
                 
    Stock-based compensation included in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations:
                 
      Three Months Ended   Twelve Months Ended
      March 31, Dec. 31, March 31,   March 31, March 31,
        2025     2024     2024       2025     2024  
                 
    Cost of goods sold $ 42   $ 50   $ 53     $ 199   $ 228  
    Research & development   263     121     331       1,010     1,411  
    Selling, general and administrative   207     258     309       1,053     1,199  
      $ 512   $ 429   $ 693     $ 2,262   $ 2,838  
                 
    GSI TECHNOLOGY, INC.
    CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
    (in thousands)
    (Unaudited)
             
        March 31, 2025 March 31, 2024
    Cash and cash equivalents   $ 13,434   $ 14,429
    Accounts receivable     3,169     3,118
    Inventory     3,891     4,977
    Other current assets     2,961     1,954
    Assets held for sale     0     5,629
    Net property and equipment     808     1,148
    Operating lease right-of-use assets     9,547     1,553
    Other assets     9,507     9,656
    Total assets   $ 43,317   $ 42,464
             
    Current liabilities   $ 7,074   $ 5,365
    Long-term liabilities     8,017     1,129
    Stockholders’ equity     28,226     35,970
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity   $ 43,317   $ 42,464

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-Evening Report: As Dutton champions nuclear power, Indigenous artists recall the profound loss of land and life that came from it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Josephine Goldman, Sessional Academic, School of Languages and Cultures, Discipline of French and Francophone Studies, University of Sydney

    Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s promise to power Australia with nuclear energy has been described by experts as a costlymirage” that risks postponing the clean energy transition.

    Beyond this, however, the Coalition’s nuclear policy has, for many First Nations peoples, raised the spectre of the last time the atomic industry came to Australia.

    Indigenous peoples across Oceania share memories of violent histories of nuclear bomb testing, uranium mining and waste dumping – all of which disproportionately affected them and/or their ancestors.

    Two sides of the same coin

    While it may be tempting to separate them, the links between military and civilian nuclear industries – that is, between nuclear weapons and nuclear energy plants – are well established. According to a 2021 paper by energy economists Lars Sorge and Anne Neumann: “In part, the global civilian nuclear industry was established to legitimatise the development of nuclear weapons.”

    The causative links between military and civilian uses of nuclear power flow in both directions.

    As Sorge and Neumann write, many technologies and skills developed for use in nuclear bombs and submarines end up being used in nuclear power generation. Another expert analysis suggests countries that receive peaceful nuclear assistance, in the form of nuclear technology, materials or skills, are more likely to initiate nuclear weapons programs.

    Since the first atomic bombing of Hiroshima in 1945, Indigenous peoples across the Pacific have been singing, writing and talking about nuclear colonialism. Some were told the sacrifice of their lands and lifeways was “for the good of mankind”.

    Today, they continue to use their bodies and voices to push back against the promise of a benevolent nuclear future – a vision that has often been used justify their and their ancestors’ suffering and displacement.

    Black mist and brittle landscapes

    In 2023, Bangarra Dance Company produced Yuldea. This performance centres on the Yooldil Kapi, a permanent desert waterhole.

    For millennia, this water source sustained the Aṉangu and Nunga peoples and a multitude of other plant and animal life across the Great Victorian Desert and far-west South Australia.

    In 1933, Yuldea became the site of the Ooldea Mission. Then, in 1953, when the British began testing nuclear bombs at nearby Emu Field (1953) and Maralinga (1956–57), the local Aṉangu Pila Nguru were displaced from their land to the mission.

    Directed by Wirangu and Mirning woman Frances Rings, Yuldea tells the story of this Country in four acts: act one, Supernova; act two, Kapi (Water); act three, Empire; and act four, Ooldea Spirit.

    The impacts of nuclear testing are directly confronted in a section titled Black Mist (in act three, Empire). Dancers’ bodies twist and spasm as a black mist falls from the sky, representing the fog of radioactive particles that resulted from weapons testing. In reality, this fog could cause lifelong injuries when inhaled or ingested, including blindness.

    But Yuldea is more than just a story of destruction. By exploring Aṉangu and Nunga relationships with Country before and after nuclear testing, it affirms their enduring presence in the region. This is captured in the opening prose:

    We are memory.
    Glimpsed through shimmering light on water.
    A story place where black oaks stand watch.
    Carved into trees and painted on rocks.
    North – South – East – West.
    A brittle landscape of life and loss.

    To acknowledge is to remember

    The podcast Nu/clear Stories (2023-), created by Mā’ohi (Tahitian) women Mililani Ganivet and Marie-Hélène Villierme, uses storytelling to grapple with the consequences of colonial nuclear testing.

    Ganivet and Villierme address the memories of French nuclear testing on the islands of Moruroa and Fangataufa in Mā’ohi Nui (French Polynesia) from 1963 to 1996.

    Rather than using a linear understanding of time, which keeps the past in the past and idealises a future of “progress”, Nu/clear Stories draws on Indigenous philosophies of cyclical or spiral time to insist that by turning to the past, we can understand how history shapes the present and future.

    As Ganivet says when introducing the first episode, Silences and Questions:

    We are part of a long genealogy of people who found the courage to speak before us. […] To acknowledge them here is to remember that without them we would not be able to speak today. And so today, we stand on their shoulders, with the face firmly turned towards the past, but with our eyes gazing deep into the future.

    Protest march against French nuclear testing in the Pacific, Willis Street, Wellington. Evening post (Newspaper. 1865-2002) :Photographic negatives and prints of the Evening Post newspaper.
    Ref: 1/4-020364-F. Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington, New Zealand. /records/22809366, CC BY-NC

    Stories in the Tomb

    In her 2018 poem video Anointed, Part III of the series Dome, Marshall Islander woman Kathy Jetn̄il-Kijiner pays homage to Runit Island. This island in the Enewetak Atoll was transformed into a dumping site for waste from US nuclear bomb tests between 1946 and 1958.

    A huge concrete dome was built on Runit Island in the 1970s to cover about 85,000 cubic metres of radioactive waste. The island became known as “the Tomb” to the Enewetak people – a tomb that still leaks nuclear radiation into the ocean today.

    Nuclear bombs were exploded above ground and underwater on the Bikini and Enewetak Atolls. A huge concrete dome on Runit Island, built to contain nuclear waste, has given the island the nickname ‘the Tomb’.
    Wikimedia

    However, like the creators behind Yuldea and Nu/clear Stories, Jetn̄il-Kijiner refuses to remember Runit Island as only a nuclear graveyard. Instead, she approaches it like a long-lost family member or ancestor who she hopes will be full of stories.

    Jetn̄il-Kijiner speaks to the island through her poem, drawing a devastating contrast between what it once was and what it is now:

    You were a whole island, once. You were breadfruit trees heavy with green globes of fruit whispering promises of massive canoes. Crabs dusted with white sand scuttled through pandanus roots. Beneath looming coconut trees beds of ripe watermelon slept still, swollen with juice. And you were protected by powerful irooj, chiefs birthed from women who could swim pregnant for miles beneath a full moon.

    Then you became testing ground. Nine nuclear weapons consumed you, one by one by one, engulfed in an inferno of blazing heat. You became crater, an empty belly. Plutonium ground into a concrete slurry filled your hollow cavern. You became tomb. You became concrete shell. You became solidified history, immoveable, unforgettable.

    While Jetn̄il-Kijiner describes herself as “a crater empty of stories”, she continues to find stories in the Tomb: namely, the legend of Letao, the son of a turtle goddess who turned himself into fire and, in the hands of a small boy, nearly burned a village to the ground.

    Juxtaposing this fire with the US’s nuclear bombs, she ends her poem with “questions, hard as concrete”:

    Who gave them this power?
    Who anointed them with the power to burn?

    The link between past and future

    In their book Living in a nuclear world: From Fukushima to Hiroshima (2022), Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent and others explore how “nuclear actors” frame nuclear technology as “indispensable”, “mundane” and “safe” by neatly severing nuclear energy from nuclear history.

    This framing helps nuclear actors avoid answering concrete questions. It also helps to hides the colonial history of nuclear technologies – histories which leak into the present. But not everyone accepts this framing.

    Indigenous artists remind us the nuclear past must be front-of-mind as we look to shape the future.

    During her PhD thesis – funded by the Australian Government Research Training Program – Josephine worked on photographic works by Marie-Hélène Villierme. She has also interviewed Villierme in the past, and worked with her collaboratively on a book chapter on her work (published in Francophone Oceania Today (2024)).

    ref. As Dutton champions nuclear power, Indigenous artists recall the profound loss of land and life that came from it – https://theconversation.com/as-dutton-champions-nuclear-power-indigenous-artists-recall-the-profound-loss-of-land-and-life-that-came-from-it-249371

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Schools today also teach social and emotional skills. Why is this important? And what’s involved?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kristin R. Laurens, Professor, School of Psychology and Counselling, Queensland University of Technology

    DGLImages/Shutterstock

    The school curriculum has changed a lot from when many parents and grandparents were at school.

    Alongside new approaches to learning maths and increasing attention on technology, there is a compulsory focus on social and emotional skills.

    Children start developing these skills by watching and observing others as babies. But they also need to be taught about them more actively – think about parents telling kids to say “thank you” or making sure they take turns when playing with friends.

    How do schools teach social and emotional skills? And why is it important? Our new research shows how these lessons can improve students’ wellbeing and lead to better academic results.

    What do schools teach about social and emotional skills?

    As the Productivity Commission noted in 2023, schools should support students’ social and emotional wellbeing to help them “cope with the various stresses of life”. It also found strong social and emotional skills support students’ ability to engage and learn at school.

    Since 2010, social and emotional skills have been a compulsory part of the Australian Curriculum. This involves four key strands for students from the first year of school to Year 10:

    1. self-awareness: understanding your strengths and limitations and having confidence you can achieve goals

    2. self-management: identifying and managing your emotions, thoughts and behaviours in different situations. This includes managing stress and controlling impulses

    3. social awareness: understanding other perspectives, empathising with others from different backgrounds and cultures and understanding social expectations for behaviour

    4. relationship skills: forming and maintaining healthy relationships, communicating and cooperating. This also includes responsible decision-making and understanding morals and consequences.

    How are these skills taught?

    Teaching these skills can be done in two ways.

    The first is by incorporating them into core academic subjects. For example, an English teacher might ask students to discuss the emotions, behaviours and relationships of characters in a novel. Teachers should also model the skills in their interactions with students.

    To do this effectively, teachers need specific knowledge of how to teach these skills. Busy schools may not prioritise this professional development for teachers because, unlike academic knowledge, these skills are not assessed.

    The second approach is to use a structured program designed to develop these skills. These programs can particularly help teachers with less training in social and emotional teaching.

    However, we know these programs are not always available or implemented adequately in schools. For example, in 2015 we surveyed 600 public, Catholic and independent NSW primary schools. Fewer than two-thirds (60%) taught social and emotional skills using formal programs. And of the programs used, one in three (34%) had either never been tested or showed no positive effects on students’ social-emotional skills.

    Why is this important?

    But research tells us formal programs can work. Our 2025 study looked at the social and emotional skills of 18,600 Year 6 students in NSW government and non-government primary schools. We also used data from their school leaders about the types of social and emotional skills programs they used – or did not use.

    We found students who received structured, evidence-based programs (on average, over three to four years) had better social and emotional skills on our self-report survey than those who did not.

    Students who received these programs had social and emotional skills that were 7-10 percentile points better than those who did not. That is, in a group of 100 students, they ranked 7-10 places higher.

    But it showed there was only a benefit if programs were evidence-based – this means they had been formally tested to check they could be taught effectively by teachers in the classroom.

    Social and emotional skills include being able to identify your emotions and cooperating with others.
    DGLImages/Shutterstock

    There are academic benefits as well

    In another 2025 study, we followed students as they went to high school. We wanted to see how their social and emotional skills in primary school related to their later academic achievement.

    We linked our survey data on NSW Year 6 students’ self-awareness and self-management skills with their NAPLAN reading and numeracy scores in Year 7. We could do this for almost 24,000 students who participated in our survey and in NAPLAN.

    We found increases in these skills were linked to increases in NAPLAN scores. Standard gains ranged between 8–20 percentile points.

    This fits with other research which shows students with strong self-awareness and self-management are more confident about achieving academic goals and more engaged and focused on their learning. This in turn helps them engage and persevere with challenges, so they achieve more academic learning.

    What now?

    Our research shows how programs teaching social and emotional skills can give young people fundamental skills to navigate learning and life beyond school. But implementation is patchy and not always based on evidence. School today involves more than reading, maths and facts. This means all schools need resources and access to effective programs to teach social and emotional skills.

    Kristin R. Laurens received funding for this research from the Australian Research Council and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia.

    Emma Carpendale received an Australian Government Research Training Program Stipend scholarship and a Queensland University of Technology Faculty of Health Excellence Top-Up scholarship.

    ref. Schools today also teach social and emotional skills. Why is this important? And what’s involved? – https://theconversation.com/schools-today-also-teach-social-and-emotional-skills-why-is-this-important-and-whats-involved-253342

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Logging devastated Victoria’s native forests – and new research shows 20% has failed to grow back

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Maldwyn John Evans, Senior Research Fellow, Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University

    Old growth mountain ash forest in the Maroondah water supply catchment, Victoria. Chris Taylor

    Following the end of native logging in Victoria on January 1 2024, the state’s majestic forests might be expected to regenerate and recover naturally. But our new research shows that’s not always the case.

    We quantified the extent of regeneration following logging in the eucalypt forests of southeastern Australia between 1980 and 2019. This included nearly 42,000 hectares of logged mountain ash forest in Victoria’s Central Highlands.

    We analysed satellite data, logging records, on-ground surveys and drone photography, and discovered that nearly 20% of logged areas failed to regenerate. This represents more than 8,000 hectares of forest lost. All that remains in these areas are grassy clearings, dense shrublands or bare soils.

    We also found the rate of regeneration failure has increased over the past decade. While failure was rare in the 1980s, it became much more common over time – affecting more than 80% of logged sites by 2019.

    These regeneration failures weren’t random. They were found mostly in close proximity to each other, on areas with steep slopes, relatively low elevation, and where the area of clear-felled forest was long and narrow.

    Our research shows more needs to be done to restore Victoria’s forest after logging.

    Failed regeneration in the Upper Thomson water supply catchment.
    Chris Taylor/Lachie McBurnie

    Restoring majestic forests and their vital services

    Victoria is home to some of the most spectacular forests on the planet. They include extensive stands of mountain ash, the tallest flowering plant on Earth, which can grow to almost 100 metres in height. Alpine ash, another giant, can grow up to 60m tall.

    These forests have great cultural significance to Indigenous people and support many recreational and tourism activities.

    Healthy forest ecosystems also deliver clean water and carbon storage services. In fact, mountain ash forests contain more carbon per hectare than most other forests around the world.

    But Victoria’s forests have long been logged for timber and pulp. The main method of logging – clearfelling – scars the landscape, leaving large areas devoid of trees if natural tree regeneration fails.

    Mountain ash is especially vulnerable

    Our research revealed 19.2% of areas logged between 1980 and 2019 in our study area (8,030ha out of 41,819ha cut) failed to regenerate naturally.

    We also found strong evidence of a significant increase in the extent of failed regeneration over 40 years, increasing from less than two hectares per cutblock in 1980 (about 7.5%) to more than nine hectares per cutblock in 2019 (about 85%), on average.

    We found regeneration failure was more likely in mountain ash forests compared with other forest types.

    This adds to the case for listing the mountain ash forests of the Central Highlands of Victoria as a threatened ecological community.

    The presence of non-eucalypt categories of vegetation indicates large areas of regeneration failure in forest near Mt Matlock, in the Central Highlands of Victoria.
    Chris Taylor

    A responsibility to restore

    Under Victoria’s Code of Forest Practice for Timber Production, logged native forests must be properly regenerated within two to three years of harvest.

    That’s because it is nearly impossible for the native forest to regenerate after three years without human intervention. The young trees face too much competition from grass and shrubs.

    These degraded areas no longer hold the value they once did and they cannot provide the same level of ecosystem services such as carbon storage, water purification, or habitat for wildlife.

    With no current government restoration plan, these landscapes will remain degraded indefinitely. The Victorian government retains legal responsibility to restore these degraded forests, but currently lacks any large-scale restoration strategy, making action urgently required.

    Photographs of vegetation categories on logged sites: Eucalyptus regeneration near Toolangi (A), grass-dominated area near Mt Matlock (B), shrubby vegetation at Ballantynes Saddle (C), Daviesia vegetation near Mt Matlock (D), Acacia near Mt Baw Baw (E), and bare earth near Mt Matlock (F).
    Chris Taylor

    A way forward: using green bonds to fund regeneration

    Our research shows the regeneration of forests after logging is not guaranteed. Nature often needs a helping hand. But we need to find ways to fund these projects.

    Globally, governments have used “green bonds” to lower the cost of borrowing tied explicitly to measurable environmental results.

    Victoria already has green bonds “to finance new and existing projects that offer climate change and environmental benefits”. But funds are typically used to finance investments in transport, renewable energy, water and low carbon buildings.

    As part of a coalition of researchers, environmental organisations, and finance sector partners we proposed a A$224 million green bond for forest regeneration. This proposal was put to the Victorian government via the Treasury Corporation of Victoria.

    Green bond funding would help leverage co-investment from the Commonwealth government and philanthropic partners to improve monitoring and biodiversity outcomes in native forests.

    As part of the proposed green bond, areas of logged forest where natural regeneration has failed would be restored.

    Other investments under the green bond could include creating tourism ventures (and associated jobs), controlling feral animals such as deer, and biodiversity recovery – creating habitat for endangered species such as the southern greater glider and Leadbeater’s possum, for example.

    The $224 million required for the ten years of the green bond — or around $22.4 million per year — is less than the substantial losses Victoria incurred on its investment in VicForests over the past decade.

    Our research suggests leaving nature to its own devices would mean losing a fifth of the forests logged over the past 40 years. Bringing the trees back has multiple benefits and would be well worth the investment.

    Maldwyn John Evans receives funding from the Australian Government.

    David Lindenmayer receives funding from The Australian Government, the Australian Research Council and the Victorian Government. He is a Councillor with the Biodiversity Council and a Member of Birdlife Australia.

    Chris Taylor 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. Logging devastated Victoria’s native forests – and new research shows 20% has failed to grow back – https://theconversation.com/logging-devastated-victorias-native-forests-and-new-research-shows-20-has-failed-to-grow-back-254465

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: How the US ‘war on woke’ and women risks weakening its own military capability

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bethan Greener, Associate Professor of Politics, Te Kunenga ki Pūrehuroa – Massey University

    US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth during a visit with Michigan Air National Guard troops, April 29. Getty Images

    With US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth’s “proud” cancellation this week of the military’s Women, Peace and Security (WPS) program, the “war on woke” has found its latest frontier – war itself.

    Stemming from a United Nations Security Council resolution in 2000, the WPS initiative aimed to increase the participation of women in public institutions, including in the security sector and in peace-making roles.

    The WPS agenda aims to better understand how women, men, boys and girls experience war, peace and security differently. It increases operational effectiveness and supports the underlying goal of gender equality, described by the UN as the “number one predictor of peace”.

    In the military context, it emphasises the need to increase the participation of women and to better protect non-combatant women in war, particularly from the prevalence of conflict-related sexual violence.

    The decision to end the program as part of a wider war on diversity, equity and inclusion seems to assume national security and military power are incompatible with the promotion of racial and gender equality.

    In other words, it assumes certain types of people aren’t really cut out to be “warfighters”. And it asserts that anything other than basic skill (such as weapons handling) undermines readiness and ability in warfare.

    History and the available evidence suggest both ideas are wrong.

    The archetypal warrior envisaged by Hegseth and others is one who relies on very traditional concepts of what constitutes a warrior and who that might be: not female, definitely not transgender, ideally also not gay.

    Recent bans on transgender personnel in the US military, the removal of mandatory mental resilience training, and the
    disappearance” from US museums and memorials of the records of the military contribution of women and minorities, reinforce these ideas.

    The ideal soldier, according to the new doctrine, is straight, white, physically fit, stoic and male. Yet people of all stripes have served their countries ably and with honour.

    Hard-won progress in retreat

    Military service is allocated a privileged kind of status in society, despite (or perhaps because of) the ultimate sacrifice it can entail. That status has long been the preserve of men, often of a particular class or ethnicity.

    But women and minorities around the world have fought for the right to enter the military, often as part of broader campaigns for greater equality within society in general.

    But there remains resistance to these “interlopers”. No matter their individual capabilities, women are painted as too physically weak, as a threat to combat unit cohesion, or a liability because of their particular health needs.

    Women, in particular, are often perceived as being too emotional or lacking authority for military command. Minorities are seen as requiring distracting rules about cultural sensitivity, presenting language challenges, or are stereotyped as not cut out for leadership.

    But problem solving – a key military requirement – is best tackled with a range of views and approaches. Research from the business world shows diverse teams are more successful, including delivering higher financial returns.

    At a more granular level, we also know that minority groups have often outperformed other military units, as exemplified by the extraordinary feats of the New Zealand Māori Pioneer Battalion in World War I and the 28th Māori Battalion in World War II.

    Women, too, have proved themselves many times over, most recently in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As well as matching the skills of their male counterparts, they also had different, useful approaches to roles such as intelligence gathering in conflict zones.

    US Marines on a military exercise – but history shows us there’s more than one type of successful soldier.
    Getty Images

    The ‘woke warrior’

    The competence of military personnel is not determined by sex, gender, sexuality or ethnicity. Rather, competence is determined by a combination of learned skills, training, education, physical ability, mental agility, resilience, experience, interpersonal skills and leadership qualities.

    Any suggestion that military units are best served by being made up of only heterosexual men with “alpha” tendencies is undermined by the evidence. In fact, a monocultural, hypermasculine military may increase the potential for harrassment, bullying or worse.

    Modern military roles also involve a much wider range of skills than the traditional and stereotypically male infantry tasks of digging, walking with a pack, firing guns and killing an enemy.

    In modern warfare, personnel may also need to engage in “hearts and minds” counterinsurgency, or in “grey zone” tactics, where specialisations in intelligence, cyber or drone piloting are more highly prized. Militaries are also much more likely to be deployed to non-warfighting roles, such as humanitarian aid and disaster relief.

    This isn’t to say “controlled aggression” and other traditionally alpha-male attributes don’t have their place. But national military strategies increasingly stress the need to train ethical and compassionate soldiers to successfully carry out government objectives.

    The evolution of war requires the evolution of the military forces that fight them. The cancellation of the Women, Peace and Security program in the US threatens to put a stop to this process, at least in that country.

    Despite Pete Hegseth’s claim to be increasing “warfighting” capability, then, there is a real chance the move will decrease operational effectiveness, situational awareness and problem solving in conflict situations.

    Far from being peripheral, the Women, Peace and Security program is central to the future of all military activity, and to developing conceptions of war, peace and security. Hegseth’s “proud moment” looks less like winning a “war on woke” and more like a retreat from an understanding of the value a diverse military has created.

    Bethan Greener 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. How the US ‘war on woke’ and women risks weakening its own military capability – https://theconversation.com/how-the-us-war-on-woke-and-women-risks-weakening-its-own-military-capability-255710

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI USA: SCHUMER REVEALS: ‘DOGE’ & TRUMP JUST SLASHED $26+ MILLION FOR AMERICORPS PUBLIC SERVICE COMMUNITY PROJECTS ACROSS NEW YORK, AXING 3,600 AMERICORPS NATIONAL SERVICE MEMBERS, WITH MORE DEVASTATING CUTS…

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for New York Charles E Schumer
    Thousands Of AmeriCorps Members Were Just Fired By ‘DOGE’ And NY Community Grants Ripped Away, Cancelling Funds To Help Build Houses, Provide Rural Health Care, Respond To Disasters, Tutor Students, And More
    Every Year Over 22,000 AmeriCorps National Service Participants Work On 1,700+ Projects In Every Corner Of NY, But Now Grants Are Being Cancelled Across The State With Even More Cuts Expected – Senator Breaks Down Impact Region By Region Thus Far And Demands Funding Be Restored
    Schumer: Calling Service-Led Community Projects ‘Government Waste’ Makes No Sense, AmeriCorps Is One Of The Best Bang For Your Buck Programs That Helps NY Communities In Need
    After Trump and ‘DOGE’ placed a majority of AmeriCorps employees on leave and terminated nearly $400 million in AmeriCorps grants nationally earlier this month, U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer today revealed this has impacted over 3,600 NY community service members slashing over $26 million in federal funding for local community projects in every corner of New York State, and with more potential cuts on the horizon the senator broke down the impacts region by region to show just how deep these cuts go. 
    Schumer said this is the first step towards dismantling AmeriCorps entirely would devastate New York, which has over 1,700 AmeriCorps projects, and is demanding that NY House Republicans stand up to protect this vital public service and join him in his push to immediately reverse these cuts. All of these AmeriCorps programs have long-standing bipartisan support having been previously authorized by Congress and funded by the annual appropriations bill passed by Congress and signed into law, making ‘DOGE’s’ cuts unlawful.
    “AmeriCorps is one of the world’s greatest service programs, and one of the best bang for your buck federal investments in addressing community needs and in the future of our country. But across New York hundreds of AmeriCorps community service participants were just egregiously fired and had their funding ripped away halting their critical work helping the communities they serve. This is funding that provides rural healthcare in the Southern Tier, helps children learn to read in Buffalo, expands job training opportunities in Albany, and so much more to fill in the gaps by linking national service participants with opportunities to gain experience serving their country. This critical work will now cease as these members are dismissed and funding is ripped away from our communities by Trump and ‘DOGE,’” said Senator Schumer. “I am all for cutting out inefficiency, but you use a scalpel, not a chainsaw. You don’t dismiss thousands of members who have dedicated their time to public service and giving back to underserved communities – it makes no sense. These are community projects that wouldn’t happen without AmeriCorps and we need these cuts reversed NOW and for NY Republicans to stand up in opposition to eliminating funding for AmeriCorps.”
    In recent days, Trump and ‘DOGE’ cut roughly 75% of full-time AmeriCorps employees and dismissed thousands of national service participants working on projects in every corner of the country, including over 3,600 community service participants across New York and cancelling over $26 million in grant funding, meaning in many instances these projects will not continue. You can find a full list of cut projects across Upstate NY according to AmeriCorps linked HERE. Some projects cut or facing threats by the Trump administration include:
    In Buffalo, AmeriCorps members were tutoring more than 2,500 students across 4 schools in the school district through City Year, helping students improve attendance and academic performance. In addition, more AmeriCorps members were building homes through Habitat for Humanity.
    In the Southern Tier, AmeriCorps members based in Binghamton were providing health care services to rural communities across the Southern Tier through the Rural Health Network of South Central New York.
    In Rochester, AmeriCorps members were improving academic engagement and college and career readiness throughout the Rochester City School District through Monroe Community College and providing public health apprenticeships through Flower City Public Health Corps.
    In the Capital Region, AmeriCorps members were providing free support for high schoolers applying for federal student aid through SUNY and training to be dispute resolution practitioners.
    In Central NY and the North Country, AmeriCorps members were working with local children providing mentoring, nutrition, and fitness education through Oswego AmeriCorps and working supporting outdoor-based education initiatives in the Adirondacks community through the Wild Center.
    In the Hudson Valley, AmeriCorps members were working with local children through We Prosper Family Organization.
    A breakdown of dismissed volunteers and cut federal funding by region for Upstate NY can be found below:

    Region

    Federal Funding

    Capital Region

    $6,439,224

    Rochester-Finger Lakes

    $2,556,668

    Western NY

    $2,285,041

    Southern Tier

    $647,910

    Central NY & North Country

    $636,020

    Hudson Valley

    $132,300

    TOTAL FOR UPSTATE NY-BASED PROJECTS

    $12,697,163

    Across New York State, there are over 22,000 national service members working on over 1,700 projects. AmeriCorps and its partners generated more than $20 million in outside resources from businesses, foundations, public agencies, and other sources in New York last year. Schumer said AmeriCorps members and communities that are impacted by these latest cuts are just the tip of the iceberg, with more cuts being announced every day that could soon hit other projects such as the Rockland Head Start program which provides child care, Interfaith Works in Syracuse which supports Central New York seniors, and Lifespan which provides services to seniors across Upstate NY such as training for part time jobs as senior companions in Central New York and health and wellness programs for seniors in the Rochester Finger-Lakes region.
    ‘There is no rhyme or reason to the project and grant terminations, other than DOGE was forcing AmeriCorps to get to a bottom-line dollar amount. The reason for eliminating over half the staff is very clear: This administration does not value the contributions of public servants who have been quietly administering an extremely efficient agency that engages Americans all across the country in service, which in addition to providing critical services, strengthens civic engagement and ties between people of all backgrounds,” said Kelly Daly, President, AFSCME Local 2027.
    “AmeriCorps gets things done by filling unmet local needs, while bolstering a sense of community,  advancing personal responsibility, and boosting the upward mobility of its participants.  We have used AmeriCorps members to build the capacity of anti-hunger organizations throughout the state. In many ways, AmeriCorps is a conservative program. You don’t get a penny unless you work, most program funding decisions are made by states rather than the federal government, and the vast majority of participants serve with nonprofit groups (not government agencies). AmeriCorps is one the most cost-effective ways to solve social problems because it harnesses the immense energy of citizen service. Thus, if conservatives were ideologically consistent, they would increase rather than gut AmeriCorps funding. We thank Leader Schumer for keeping the government running and keep many AmeriCorps projects alive as long as possible, and for taking on the fight to protect AmeriCorps,” said Joel Berg, CEO of Hunger Free America, a national nonpartisan nonprofit organization headquartered in New York.
    Executive Director of PEACE, Inc., Carolyn D. Brown said, “PEACE, Inc.’s AmeriCorps Seniors Foster Grandparent Program allows our community’s seniors to share their time and their expertise through mentoring. Statistics show how the program improves the lives of our Foster Grandparent volunteers and both the academic performance and the social emotional skills of youth in elementary schools, Head Starts, and children’s centers. If our program was eliminated, 68 Foster Grandparent volunteers would lose their positions, and 225 vulnerable youth would lose critical interventions. These numbers would prove devastating for a city like Syracuse where nearly 1 out of 2 children live in poverty.”
    “InterFaith Works’ Senior Companion Program connects older volunteers with older adults and caregivers, for in home companionship and friendly visits. For as little as $3000 per year, vulnerable older adults stay socially connected, get help with daily activities, and age well at home – and out of costly nursing homes. Working caregivers get free in home respite for up to 40 hours per week, so they can maintain their jobs and attend to their personal needs. Senior Companion volunteers are all low-income older adults who receive a small stipend, stay active, and keep themselves healthy, too. Funding cuts would eliminate these critical and cost-effective supports for over 300 vulnerable older adults and their caregivers throughout the Central New York community,” said Lori Klivak, Director of the Center for Healthy Aging at InterFaith Works of CNY.
    “In the past five years, City Year AmeriCorps members have served in Buffalo schools to help thousands of students engage more deeply with their learning, stay on track to graduate, and reach their full potential, and these corps members receive professional development and gain skills that prepare them to enter the workforce as our region’s most in-demand employees,” said City Year Buffalo Executive Director Jacqueline Ashby. “We’re grateful to Senator Schumer for his steadfast support in championing the national service program AmeriCorps that makes this important work possible, and that benefits our community, local economy, education system and workforce development here in Western New York.”
    Across the country, AmeriCorps deploys more than 200,000 Americans annually to carry out results-driven projects at over 35,000 locations. National service participants serve in hundreds of nonprofit organizations, public agencies, and community and faith-based organizations, in rural and urban communities throughout the country. They mentor youth, build affordable housing, help communities respond to disasters, and build the capacity of nonprofit groups to extend and improve their impact by leveraging community service participants. In exchange for their services, AmeriCorps members earn an education award to pay for college or to pay off qualified student loans. A non-partisan study showed that there are an estimated $17 in benefits returned for every taxpayer dollar spent. In addition, Schumer said AmeriCorps is a long-standing, bipartisan program and failing to use AmeriCorps funding for its intended purpose as appropriated by Congress would be a violation of the law.
    Schumer led dozens of his colleagues’ in a recent letter to the President on these devastating cuts, which can be found HERE.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: King, Daines Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Preserve America’s Parks and Public Lands

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Maine Angus King

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — U.S. Senators Angus King (I-ME) and Steve Daines (R-MT), leaders of the Senate National Parks Subcommittee, are introducing bipartisan legislation to strengthen and better manage public lands across the country. The America the Beautiful Act would reauthorize the National Parks and Public Land Legacy Restoration Fund (LRF) and increase its funding to address serious maintenance backlog and ensure that America’s public lands can be enjoyed for generations to come. 

    Senator King first introduced the bipartisan Restore Our Parks Act in July 2018 which established the “National Park Service Legacy Restoration Fund” to reduce the maintenance backlog by allocating existing revenues the government collects from on and offshore energy development. It was passed in the 2020 Great American Outdoors Act, but now requires reauthorization.

    “People travel from across the globe to experience the natural beauty of America’s public lands from Maine to Montana and across the nation,” said Senator King, Ranking Member of the Senate National Parks Subcommittee. “However, deferred repairs on aging infrastructure like roads and trails can become unsafe and diminish the visitor experience for those enjoying our public lands and National Parks. By addressing maintenance backlog and reauthorizing the Legacy Restoration Fund, the bipartisan America the Beautiful Act will help better protect our lands and the visitor experience. This is an important step forward in creating lasting protections for our public lands and continues to demonstrate that stewardship is not partisan.”

    “When President Trump signed my Great American Outdoors Act into law in 2020, it was the greatest conservation win for Montana and the entire country in 50 years. I’m proud to work with my colleagues to strengthen that win and protect our outdoor way of life for generations to come,” said Senator Daines, Chairman of the Senate National Parks Subcommittee. “The America the Beautiful Act will fund crucial projects and address maintenance backlogs, so that people can get outside and enjoy the natural beauty we’re lucky to have here in the U.S.” 

    “America’s parks are our legacy to uphold — and bold action is essential to fulfill that promise. The National Park Foundation applauds Senators Daines and King for their leadership in introducing bipartisan legislation to reauthorize the Legacy Restoration Fund,” said Jeff Reinbold, President and CEO of the National Park Foundation. “Since its establishment through the Great American Outdoors Act, this vital program has already delivered billions toward transformative infrastructure projects across our national parks. As we approach America’s 250th anniversary, reauthorizing this investment affirms a bold democratic ideal — that every generation deserves to experience our parks as we do today. We look forward to working with Congress to ensure these magnificent landscapes and historic sites can continue welcoming visitors for generations to come.”

    “We applaud the leadership of U.S. Senators Steve Daines (R-MT) and Angus King (I-ME) in reintroducing legislation to reauthorize the Legacy Restoration Fund. This proven, bipartisan investment keeps national parks running. The reauthorization of this bill will allow Acadia National Park to continue to make progress against a long list of needed projects that are essential for protecting resources and elevating the visitor experience. With nearly 4 million visits to Acadia in 2024 alone, and over 330 million to national parks nationwide, continued investment to maintain park infrastructure is critical,”  said Eric Stiles, President & CEO, Friends of Acadia.

    The America the Beautiful Act reauthorizes the LRF for through 2033 and increases funding to $2 billion per year to help address the maintenance backlog in national parks and public lands. Currently, the maintenance backlog for each agency is as follows:

    1. U.S. Park Service: $23.26 billion
    2. U.S. Forest Service: $8.695 billion
    3. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: $2.65 billion
    4. U.S. Bureau of Land Management: $5.72 billion
    5. U.S. Bureau of Indian Education: $804.5 million

    Senators Kevin Cramer (R-ND), Mark Warner (D-VA), Tim Sheehy (R-MT), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) are original cosponsors of the America the Beautiful Act. The legislation is supported by over 40 public lands, conservation and recreation groups. 

    Read the bill text HERE and a one pager on the bill HERE.

    As a lifelong advocate for conservation and Chairman of the Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks, Senator King is among the Senate’s most prominent voices advocating for conservation. Senator King helped lead the passage the Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) into law; the legislation that included the Legacy Restoration Fund (LRF). Because of his work, in 2020, Senator King was awarded the inaugural National Park Foundation (NPF) “Hero” Award. Since the creation of the LRF, Senator King has pushed park leaders to discuss funding maintenance efforts, maintaining a sufficient NPS workforce, and managing growing park visitation.

    Senator King’s work on this legislation is the culmination of more than four decades of work on land conservation efforts in Maine, including helping to establish the Land for Maine’s Future program in 1987 and supporting extensive conservation projects during his time as Governor. Under King’s leadership in his eight years as Maine governor, he put more Maine land under conservation than in the state’s 175 year history.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Establishment of the Religious Liberty Commission

    Source: The White House

    class=”has-text-align-left”>
    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, it is hereby ordered:
    Section 1Purpose and Policy.  It shall be the policy of the executive branch to vigorously enforce the historic and robust protections for religious liberty enshrined in Federal law.  The Founders envisioned a Nation in which religious voices and views are integral to a vibrant public square and human flourishing and in which religious people and institutions are free to practice their faith without fear of discrimination or hostility from the Government.  Indeed, the roots of religious liberty stretch back to the early settlers who fled religious persecution in Europe, seeking a new world where they could choose, follow, and practice their faith without interference from the Government.  The principle of religious liberty was enshrined in American law with the First Amendment to the Constitution in 1791.  Since that time, the Constitution has protected the fundamental right to religious liberty as Americans’ first freedom.
    During my first term, I issued Executive Order 13798 of May 4, 2017 (Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty).  Pursuant to that order, the Attorney General issued a memorandum for all executive departments and agencies (agencies) titled “Federal Law Protections for Religious Liberty” on October 6, 2017.  The Supreme Court has also continued to vindicate the Founders’ commitment to religious liberty, including by giving effect to the principle that religious voices should be welcomed on an equal basis in the public square.
    In recent years, some Federal, State, and local policies have threatened America’s unique and beautiful tradition of religious liberty.  These policies attempt to infringe upon longstanding conscience protections, prevent parents from sending their children to religious schools, threaten loss of funding or denial of non-profit tax status for faith-based entities, and single out religious groups and institutions for exclusion from governmental programs.  Some opponents of religious liberty would remove religion entirely from public life.  Others characterize religious liberty as inconsistent with civil rights, despite religions’ vital roles in the abolition of slavery; the passage of Federal civil rights laws; and the provision of indispensable social, educational, and health services.
    President Ronald Reagan reminded us that “freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”  Americans need to be reacquainted with our Nation’s superb experiment in religious freedom in order to preserve it against emerging threats.  Therefore, the Federal Government will promote citizens’ pride in our foundational history, identify emerging threats to religious liberty, uphold Federal laws that protect all citizens’ full participation in a pluralistic democracy, and protect the free exercise of religion.

    Sec. 2Establishment of the Religious Liberty Commission.  (a)  There is hereby established the Religious Liberty Commission (Commission).
    (b)  The Commission shall function as follows:
    (i)     The Commission shall be composed of up to 14 members appointed by the President.  Members of the Commission shall include individuals chosen to serve as educated representatives of various sectors of society, including the private sector, employers, educational institutions, religious communities, and States, to offer diverse perspectives on how the Federal Government can defend religious liberty for all Americans.  The President shall designate a Chairman and Vice Chairman from among the members.  The Commission shall also include the following ex officio members or such senior officials as those members may designate:
                     (A)  the Attorney General;
                     (B)  the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; and
                     (C)  the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy.
    (ii)    Members appointed to the Commission shall serve one term ending on July 4, 2026, which marks the 250th anniversary of American Independence.  If the term of the Commission is extended by the President beyond July 4, 2026, members shall be eligible for reappointment for a 2-year term.  Members may continue to serve after the expiration of their terms until the appointment of a successor.
    (iii) The Commission shall produce a comprehensive report on the foundations of religious liberty in America, the impact of religious liberty on American society, current threats to domestic religious liberty, strategies to preserve and enhance religious liberty protections for future generations, and programs to increase awareness of and celebrate America’s peaceful religious pluralism. Specific topics to be considered by the Commission under these categories shall include the following areas: the First Amendment rights of pastors, religious leaders, houses of worship, faith-based institutions, and religious speakers; attacks across America on houses of worship of many religions; debanking of religious entities; the First Amendment rights of teachers, students, military chaplains, service members, employers, and employees; conscience protections in the health care field and concerning vaccine mandates; parents’ authority to direct the care, upbringing, and education of their children, including the right to choose a religious education; permitting time for voluntary prayer and religious instruction at public schools; Government displays with religious imagery; and the right of all Americans to freely exercise their faith without fear or Government censorship or retaliation.
     (iv)    The Commission shall advise the White House Faith Office and the Domestic Policy Council on religious liberty policies of the United States.  Specific activities of the Commission shall include, to the extent permitted by law, recommending steps to secure domestic religious liberty by executive or legislative actions as well as identifying opportunities for the White House Faith Office to partner with the Ambassador at Large for International Religious Freedom to further the cause of religious liberty around the world.
    (v)     Members of the Commission shall serve without any compensation for their work on the Commission.  Members of the Commission, while engaged in the work of the Commission, may be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, to the extent permitted by law for persons serving intermittently in Government service (5 U.S.C. 5701-5707), consistent with the availability of funds.
    (vi)    To advise members of the Commission:
                 (A)  An Advisory Board of Religious Leaders shall be designated by the President and shall consist of not more than 15 members.  The Advisory Board of Religious Leaders shall be a subcomponent of the Commission and report to the Chairman of the Commission; 
                  (B)  An Advisory Board of Lay Leaders from religious congregations shall be designated by the President and shall consist of not more than 15 members.  The Advisory Board of Lay Leaders shall be a subcomponent of the Commission and report to the Chairman of the Commission; and
                  (C)  An Advisory Board of Legal Experts shall be designated by the President and shall consist of the Attorney General, or the Attorney General’s designee, and not more than 10 attorneys.  The Advisory Board of Legal Experts shall be a subcomponent of the Commission and report to the Chairman of the Commission.
    (vii)   The Commission shall terminate on July 4, 2026, which marks the 250th anniversary of American Independence, unless extended by the President.
    (viii)  The Department of Justice shall provide such funding and administrative and technical support as the Commission may require, to the extent permitted by law and as authorized by existing appropriations.
    (ix)    Insofar as the Federal Advisory Committee Act (chapter 10 of title 5, United States Code) may apply to the Commission or any of its Advisory Boards, any functions of the President under that Act, except for those in sections 1005 and 1013 of that Act, shall be performed by the Attorney General, in accordance with the guidelines and procedures established by the Administrator of General Services.

    Sec. 3.  Severability.  If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any agency, person, or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other agencies, persons, or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

    Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
    (i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or
    (ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
    (b)  This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
    (c)  This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

                                  DONALD J. TRUMP

    THE WHITE HOUSE,
        May 1, 2025.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Prime Minister Carney speaks with United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres

    Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

    Today, the Prime Minister, Mark Carney, spoke with the Secretary-General of the United Nations (UN), António Guterres.

    The Secretary-General congratulated the Prime Minister on his election. Prime Minister Carney emphasized Canada’s relationship and shared history with the UN, and Canada’s continued support of human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. The leaders also discussed a wide range of issues, including UN reform, climate finance, the security and humanitarian crises in Haiti, and the war in Ukraine.

    The leaders agreed to strengthen this relationship and to stay in close contact.

    Associated Link

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Global Safe Hub

    Source: UNISDR Disaster Risk Reduction

    Mission

    The Global Safe Hub’s mission is to provide a one-stop shop platform for sharing knowledge, best practices, and training in innovative disaster risk reduction and management by providing communities, researchers, relevant organisations and governments with reliable data and effective tools.

    These are its objectives:

    Data Management

    • Provide up-to-date datasets from reputable and reliable sources.
    • Provide real-time data analysis and visualization to support decision-making.

    Training

    • Offer free online and specialized certified courses in disaster risk reduction.
    • Collaborate with institutions to provide high-quality training materials.

    Knowledge sharing

    • Provide a knowledge-sharing platform for communities and professionals to share experiences and best practices.

    Spatial Analysis Services

    • Provide customized spatial analysis solutions to empower your decision-making.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Calls for Proposals: Strengthening Community Multi-Hazard Early Warning Systems in the Caribbean Region

    Source: UNISDR Disaster Risk Reduction

    UNDRR is the United Nations’ focal point for coordinating disaster risk reduction, working closely with countries and a wide range of partners and stakeholders to support the implementation, monitoring, and review of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030. This work is aligned with the 2030 Agenda and other relevant instruments, with the ultimate goal of achieving multi-hazard management of disaster risk in development and significantly reducing disaster risk and losses.

    In accordance with UN Financial Regulations and Rules, UNDRR provides grants to apolitical and non-profit-making organizations to facilitate, implement, or carry out activities that align with UNDRR’s and its partners’ mandates and work programs.

    To this end, UNDRR is pleased to invite non-profit-making organizations to submit grant proposals that focus on the following project: Strengthening Community Multi-Hazard Early Warning Systems in the Caribbean Region.

    Rationale

    As an implementing partner of the Climate Risk and Early Warning Systems (CREWS) Caribbean Initiative, the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR) recognizes the critical role that strategic partnerships play in enhancing multi-hazard early warning systems (MHEWS) across the Caribbean. The Caribbean’s unique vulnerabilities, including its geographic isolation and dependence on climate-sensitive sectors, make community-based multi-hazard early warning systems a critical component of long-term disaster resilience. Effective multi-hazard early warnings at the community level enable timely evacuations, safeguard livelihoods, and minimize disruptions to essential services, ultimately protecting development gains. A well-funded and coordinated approach to strengthening community MHEWS will ensure that warnings are not only issued but also understood and acted upon, closing the last-mile gap in disaster risk reduction.

    Strengthening community-based MHEWS is essential to enhancing disaster resilience in the Caribbean, where vulnerable populations are often the first to experience the impacts of hydro-meteorological hazards. Community MHEWS serve as the frontline of disaster preparedness, ensuring that multi-hazard early warnings are effectively communicated to those most at risk, including marginalized groups, persons with disabilities, and remote communities. By supporting a grant that prioritizes community engagement, capacity-building, and localized risk communication strategies, UNDRR and its regional partners can bridge the gap between national multi-hazard early warning mechanisms and community action. This alignment will foster a culture of preparedness where residents have the knowledge, tools, and networks necessary to respond proactively to disasters, reducing loss of life and property.

    Investing in community-driven MHEWS also strengthens the sustainability and effectiveness of broader these systems by integrating local and scientific knowledge. Traditional warning methods, such as the use of community leaders and cultural practices, can complement modern technologies, enhancing the accessibility and trustworthiness of alerts. Additionally, empowering local actors-such as community disaster committees, schools, and civil society organizations-to participate in the co-design of warning messages ensures that information is context-specific and actionable. By establishing this grant, resources can be allocated to expand risk awareness campaigns, improve response, and provide targeted training, all of which are vital to building a robust, inclusive, and people-centered multi-hazard early warning system.

    Purpose

    Establish a grant between UNDRR and an experienced (sub) regional partner to enhance existing community level disaster preparedness and response capacity including training on community vulnerability assessment.

    Outcome

    Strengthened MHEWS at the community levels within CDEMA Participating Sates through improved local level disaster risk knowledge, enhanced community disaster response team and improved local level MHEWS strategies.

    Outputs and suggested activities

    1. Improved and contextualized MHEWS guidelines for addressing vulnerabilities of specific groups in the Caribbean region.
    2. Strengthened sub-national coordination mechanisms for MHEWS through supporting the development and implementation of local strategies for disaster risk reduction.
    3. Enhanced MHEWS local coordination in the Caribbean through participatory approaches
    4. Improved understanding of community vulnerabilities and exposure.
    5. Improved community response capabilities.

    Suggested activities

    1. Output 1: Improved and contextualized MHEWS guidelines for addressing vulnerabilities of specific groups in the Caribbean region
      • Development of a regional workshop with Ministries in charge of addressing gender concerns and the needs of vulnerable groups and last-mile communities, including those with disabilities and Gender Bureaus, to discuss how MHEWS can be more inclusive, gender-responsive and transformative.
      • Development of guidelines, recommendations and commitments that will strengthen MHEWS in at least 3 countries that are inclusive, gender responsive and transformative.
    2. Output 2: Strengthened sub-national coordination mechanisms for MHEWS through supporting the development and implementation of local strategies for disaster risk reduction
      • Implementation of the MHEWS addendum of the resilience scorecard in 4 selected Caribbean local government in close coordination with UNDRR and the grantee.
      • At least four local governments have improved sub-national coordination for MHEWS through the developed local resilience plans with the implementation of the MCR2030 MHEWS Addendum and resilience scorecard
    3. Output 3: Enhanced MHEWS local coordination in the Caribbean through participatory approaches
      • Facilitate consultation between national, local stakeholders, civil society and community organizations to support the review and alignment of MHEWS strategies within the Caribbean region to improve national level coordination.
      • Develop reports on at least 4 local government areas on consultations aligning MHEWS with community resilience.
    4. Output 4: Improved understanding of community vulnerabilities and exposure
      • Facilitate regional training on Enhanced Vulnerability Capacity Assessment (eVCA) for Red Cross-National Societies and National Disaster Risk Management Offices for improved capacity for community engagement and assessment.
      • Improved risk knowledge with one regional baseline survey on knowledge and capacities of Red Cross-National Societies and National Disaster Risk Management Offices in the Caribbean.
      • Strengthened capacity of national stakeholders with one regional training on the Enhanced Vulnerability Capacity Assessment in a selected Caribbean territory with an eVCA and report.
      • A second eVCA conducted in a selected sub-national Caribbean territory with a report being developed.
    5. Output 5: Improved community response capabilities
      • Establishment, training and equipping of Community Disaster Response Teams (CDRTs) for prioritized hazards.
      • At least one in-person regional training on community early warning system.
      • Enhanced preparedness and response capacity in countries with at least four Community Disaster Response Teams established and equipped to respond to hazard impacts

    Resources

    Elements specific to the project that the grantee should know

    1. All International, (sub) regional and national non-governmental organizations that wish to be considered for partnership opportunities with UNDRR will need to register and create a profile on the United Nations Partner Portal (UNPP).
      1. Following verification of the profile information, partners will be eligible to apply to partnership opportunities with UNDRR as well as the UN Secretariat and all other participating UN Organizations.
      2. We encourage you to start the registration as soon as possible to avoid delays. Only registered organizations whose profile has been successfully verified will be considered eligible partners to apply for grant opportunities with UNDRR.
      3. For more details on registration procedures please visit the UN Section of UNPP (https://www.unpartnerportal.org/registration)
    2. Furthermore, the United Nations system requires all partners to be assessed regarding their capacity to prevent and respond to sexual exploitation and abuse. UNDRR encourages implementing partners to use the Protection from Sexual Exploitation and Abuse (PSEA) module in the UNPP. PSEA Module User Guide CSO Partner Members
    3. The grantee must have a proven track record in working with government authorities, both at the national and local levels with experience in risk data aggregation to improve early warning and impact-based forecasting [Mandatory].
      1. Applicant to confirm that it has expertise in disaster risk reduction and community resilience sector and to provide certificates or qualifications of persons implementing the grant.
      2. Applicant to confirm that it has a minimum 20 years’ experience in disaster risk reduction and community resilience sector, demonstrated with clear examples of at least 10 programmes/projects of similar scope.
      3. Applicant is expected to provide relevant information of their local expertise, including experience of working with regional and local key stakeholders, and established consultation and feedback mechanisms with local communities
    4. For all training, workshops, consultative meetings, etc., grantee must provide a summary outcome of the events, list of participants with disaggregate information including names, affiliation, gender, email address, city, and country of representation. All events must be accompanied by relevant reports with photos as proof of evidence. [Mandatory].

    Budget and administrative-related aspects

    The duration of the proposed project cannot exceed December 31st 2026. The maximum amount requested from UNDRR for the implementation of this project cannot exceed USD$315,000.00. The project proposal must not exceed 10 pages (attachments such as scanned copies of entity’s registration, CVs of staff etc. do not count).

    For this purpose, please fill in duly all the sections of the application form, include the required documents (scanned copy of NGO/IGO’s registration certificate, CVs of staff etc.) and budget excel sheets, and send the complete application package (application form, budget excel sheets, entity registration certificate, CVs of staff, etc.) to the following email address: [email protected] cc: [email protected] and [email protected]

    Reference: UNDRR CfP 2025/003Call for Proposals – Strengthening Community Multi-Hazard Early Warning Systems in the Caribbean Region

    Deadline for applications: May 9th 2025 midnight New York, USA EST (Eastern Standard Time). Incomplete and/or late applications will not be considered.

    Projects’ activities can include, amongst others, the following:

    • seminars, workshops, trainings;
    • capacity building activities;
    • institutional strengthening activities and
    • advocacy

    The following types of activity will not be covered:

    • capital expenditure, e.g. land, buildings, equipment and vehicles;
    • individual scholarships for studies or training courses;
    • supporting political parties; and
    • sub-contracting

    Due to the number of applications, only short-listed applicants will be notified.

    Please note that UNDRR may publish information about the grant agreement. Please note that the grant payment schedule will be determined with the selected grantee when finalizing the agreement. UNDRR standard practice is: not to exceed 40% of the requested amount upon signature of the grant agreement; remaining payments made based on a schedule of payments linked to production of project milestones and the final payment, 20%, will be paid after the end of the project, once final documents have been received, verified and approved by UNDRR.

    Refund of grants: UNDRR may request organizations to refund, either in part or in whole any amounts paid in respect of a grant when:

    • the project was not implemented in full or in part;
    • the grant was spent for ineligible expenditures other than those mentioned in the budget proposal submitted to, and approved by UNDRR;
    • no narrative, financial or audit report was submitted within the deadline established by the grant agreement;
    • a narrative report and/or a financial report submitted was determined to be unsatisfactory;
    • a negative evaluation of the project by UNDRR;
    • any other valid reason provided by the UNDRR.

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI United Nations: Experts of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Commend Gabon on Special Contingent Composed of Indigenous Persons, Ask Questions on Treatment of Hausa Gabonese Population and Human Trafficking

    Source: United Nations – Geneva

    The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the tenth periodic report of Gabon, with Committee Experts commending the State on the establishment of a special contingent in the National Guard made up of indigenous persons, while asking questions on the treatment of the Hausa Gabonese population and steps taken to combat human trafficking.

    Régine Esseneme, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the Committee was informed that the President of the Transition, the current Head of State, had set up a special contingent in the National Guard composed of members of the indigenous peoples’ communities, with a view to protecting the environment, which was a commendable action.

    Ms. Esseneme asked about the situation of the Hausa Gabonese since their naturalisation as Gabonese citizens in 2015, in terms of facilitating their national integration? What measures were being taken to ensure effective access to birth registration for members of ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples and to ensure the issuance of official identity documents and passports, especially in remote areas?

    Bakri Sidiki Diaby, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked what was the proportion of Gabonese nationals who were victims of trafficking? What were the main forms of trafficking found in Gabon? What was the profile of the perpetrators of human trafficking, their gender and their nationality? What were the measures for reparation and rehabilitation of victims of trafficking? What was being done by the State to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, including for the purpose of labour exploitation, sexual exploitation and domestic servitude, including of non-citizens, especially children?

    The delegation said the Hausa Gabonese benefitted the same as any other citizen who held Gabonese nationality. A naturalisation decree had been implemented which granted Gabonese nationality to all Hausa people living in the country at the time; this was around 1,000 people. Some people had tried to fall through the cracks and benefit from this decree without actually meeting the requirements, which had a negative impact on the administrative situation. The Ministry of Justice was currently verifying the validity of these documents.

    The delegation said in 2023, Gabon completed the procedure required for the State to be in a position to proactively identify cases of human trafficking by identifying irregular movements. The country was also collecting data in this regard, to identify trends and receive up to date information on this phenomenon in Gabon. Underground networks operated the trafficking of women and children, and irregular migration was the driving force behind this phenomenon. Gabon was working with Benin to find a solution to this issue. The State was fully committed to rolling out the project to have practical solutions to these issues, including police investigations into these cases.

    Introducing the report, Paul-Marie Gondjout, Minister of Justice, Keeper of the Seals of Gabon and head of the delegation, apologised for the late submission of the report, which should have been submitted more than 20 years ago. Since the “ coup of liberation” of 30 August 2023, the country had been engaged in a democratic transition process under the aegis of the President of the Transition. Structured around profound institutional reforms, this inclusive process had laid the foundations for more transparent and democratic governance. A new Constitution was adopted in December 2024, which brought substantial innovations in governance; and the Electoral Code adopted in January 2025 introduced greater involvement of electoral observers, two seats of deputies for the Gabonese diaspora, and the guarantee of the right to vote for incarcerated citizens.

    In concluding remarks, Ms. Esseneme congratulated Gabon for the multi-sectoral approach taken to the dialogue, which had been productive and fruitful. Gabon was urged to do its utmost to implement the recommendations contained in the concluding observations, to ensure ongoing collaboration with the Committee.

    Mr. Gondjout, in his concluding remarks, thanked the Committee for the constructive and respectful exchange which had taken place. Gabon would continue engaging with the Committee and looked forward to the concluding observations and follow-up. It would respond within the timeframes indicated.

    The delegation of Gabon consisted of representatives of the Transitional National Assembly; Ministry of the Interior; Ministry of Health; Ministry of Energy and Water Resources; Ministry of Women and Child Protection; Ministry of National Education; Directorate of Human Rights Protection; Directorate of Criminal Affairs; Directorate of Equal Opportunities; Labour Inspectorate; Central Directorate of Financial Affairs; Directorate of Documentation and Immigration; Immigration Task Force; and the Permanent Mission of Gabon to the United Nations Office at Geneva.

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

    The Committee will next meet in public on Thursday, 1 May at 3 p.m. to consider the combined eleventh and twelfth periodic reports of Kyrgyzstan (CERD/C/KGZ/11-12).

    Report

    The Committee has before it the tenth periodic report of Gabon (CERD/C/GAB/10).

    Presentation of Report

    PAUL-MARIE GONDJOUT, Minister of Justice, Keeper of the Seals of Gabon and head of the delegation , apologised for the late submission of the report, which should have been submitted more than 20 years ago. It covered the period from 1999 to 2021 and was drafted in an inclusive, participatory process. Since gaining sovereignty, Gabon had promoted equal dignity among all citizens by prohibiting any distinction of race, origin or religion. The country had made the fight against all forms of discrimination one of the priorities in its resolute commitment to building a State governed by the rule of law that respected and protected human rights and guaranteed access to rights for all.

    Since the “ coup of liberation” of 30 August 2023, the country had been engaged in a democratic transition process under the aegis of the President of the Transition. Structured around profound institutional reforms, this inclusive process had laid the foundations for more transparent and democratic governance. A new Constitution was adopted in December 2024, which brought substantial innovations in governance; and the Electoral Code adopted in January 2025 introduced greater involvement of electoral observers, two seats of deputies for the Gabonese diaspora, and the guarantee of the right to vote for incarcerated citizens. The presidential election was held on 12 April, which would be followed on 3 May by the inauguration of the President of the Republic, thus putting an end to the transition. Transitional authorities had taken determined action to periodically update the legislative arsenal to bring it into line with ratified international treaties.

    Statistical data was a major challenge for Gabon. To address this, the Directorate General of Statistics had set up a technical body to carry out the seventh national census, which would provide data on age, gender, ethnicity, nationality and language spoken for the total population, indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities and migrants, as well as information on employment, income level and social protection. The project for the harmonisation and improvement of statistics in West and Central Africa was providing financing of statistical activities between 2025 and 2029, ensuring the production of reliable and regularly updated statistics.

    The Convention was directly applicable in Gabon and took precedence over national laws. To raise awareness of the Convention, several initiatives were implemented during the reporting period, from capacity-building workshops to the dissemination of multilingual communications. In various training schools, the Convention was presented in the module on human rights.

    No Gabonese text defined racial discrimination in the same terms as those in article one of the Convention. However, the Constitutions of 1991 and 2024 had adopted and enshrined the main principles of article one, targeting discrimination based on race, colour, national or ethnic origin and covering several sectors of the population. The Constitution also enshrined the equality of citizens before the law and the courts and the presumption of innocence for accused persons. The Government envisaged developing a national plan of action to combat racial discrimination and related intolerance in the coming year. Training sessions on the issue had been organised and a committee had been set up to develop a draft.

    A law on the reorganisation of the National Human Rights Commission was promulgated in November 2024. The process of re-establishing the institution would be completed in the coming weeks after the selection of the commissioners by the Bureau of the National Assembly. Premises for the Commission were made available in 2014, and it had recruited staff since 2012. Its budget has increased from 12,000,000 CFA francs in 2016 to 592,000,000 in 2025.

    During the period under review, measures were taken to ensure that the Criminal Code and other legislation complied with the Convention. State laws prohibited and penalised acts of racial, religious and ethnic discrimination and regionalist propaganda; secular or religious associations that provoked hatred between ethnic groups; and the dissemination, including online, of racist hate speech, which constituted an aggravating circumstance.

    The High Authority for Communication had imposed sanctions on media outlets on several occasions, but no decision condemning hate speech had been handed down by courts to date. A digital campaign entitled “Gabon against hate” was launched in December 2023 to educate citizens on the dangers of hate speech and disinformation, and in December 2024, the Government organised a workshop on the Central African strategy and action plan for the prevention and response to hate speech and incitement to violence, which led to the drafting of a national action plan.

    The new Constitution recognised civil society organizations as a part of pluralist and participatory democracy. A bill was also submitted in September 2024 on the protection of human rights defenders. Civil society organizations, including the network of human rights defenders, were strongly involved in the transition process, both in the Government and in Parliament.

    To align legislation on migrants with international standards, Gabon prepared a draft law establishing rules governing the admission and residence of foreigners in the Republic. The Government planned to integrate the issue of migrants into the curricula of training schools, particularly at the National School of the Judiciary and the National Police Academy, which also had a module on trafficking in persons.

    Gabon had made commitments at international, regional and national levels to combat trafficking in persons through local initiatives and partnerships with international actors. In 2023, the State party created a commission that was mandated to strengthen the capacities of actors addressing trafficking and establish coordinated mechanisms for the identification, care and protection of victims in each province. In addition, a proposed strategy and action plan on trafficking for the period 2025-2029 would implement actions to prevent the phenomenon, protect victims and prosecute perpetrators.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur , extended warm congratulations to the elected President of the Republic, Brice Oligui Nguema. She said the Committee had considered Gabon’s last report in 1998 in the absence of a delegation. The State submitted its next report 26 years late in 2024. The report did not provide sufficient information on the implementation of the Committee’s previous concluding observations. However, Ms. Esseneme congratulated the State party on significant developments that had been made in the legal and institutional framework, particularly the prohibition of hate speech.

    Gabon’s new Constitution of 2024 did not contain all the grounds of discrimination provided for in article one of the Convention, including skin colour, national origin and ancestry. Was this Constitution currently in effect? By what mechanism could the Convention be invoked before national courts? Could the delegation give examples of court cases in which Convention provisions had been applied? Were there plans to adopt comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation in line with the Convention? Gabon’s Common Core Document dated from 1998 and did not contain precise information on equality and non-discrimination. Were there plans to update it?

    Was there any legislation in the State party explicitly prohibiting racial profiling by police? Gabonese police reportedly carried out racial profiling checks and extorted foreigners staying in Gabon, demanding sums of money from them that varied depending on whether they held a residence permit. What measures were envisaged to prevent, prohibit and expressly punish racial profiling?

    Was the Government drafting a new Criminal Code that incorporated all the provisions of article four of the Convention? Since the events of 30 August 2023, there had reportedly been a rise in racist hate speech against Gabonese of foreign origin, including the Hausa Gabonese group, and foreigners. What measures had the State party taken to counter this hate speech? Had the Prosecutor’s Office received cases of discriminatory acts against Hausa Gabonese?

    The situation seemed to have deteriorated since the presidential election. Some 500 vehicles belonging to non-nationals employed in a private scheme for disadvantaged people had been seized and impounded. Could the State party provide an update on this case, which appeared to amount to racially motivated violence?

    Did Gabon’s law hold persons from a dominant group to account when they destroyed the property of or committed violence against a member of a minority group? What measures were in place to improve the reporting and monitoring of racist hate crimes and hate speech? What progress had been made through the “Gabon against hate” campaign?

    BAKRI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, called for data on the demographic composition of the population based on self-identification, disaggregated by ethnic origin; data on migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and stateless people; and disaggregated economic and social indicators on the different groups living in the territory, in particular minority groups? The Committee was concerned about the State’s general lack of disaggregated data, including on ethnicity, needed to monitor progress on human rights and inform policymaking. How was the State addressing this? Did it plan to establish a comprehensive data collection and reporting system that would provide insight into racial discrimination, socio-economic inequalities and implementation of the Convention?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation apologised for Gabon’s lateness in submitting the report. The State party was fully committed to working with the Committee. The transitional authorities sought to fulfil the country’s international obligations.

    The Constitution reflected the principles of the Convention, even though it did not reproduce its provisions word for word. There had been no complaints submitted to courts on racial discrimination. The President would take office in three days’ time, when the new Constitution would enter into force.

    The Convention had supremacy over all domestic laws, and when there were Convention provisions that were contrary to the Constitution, the Constitutional Court could recommend amendments to the Constitution. The Criminal Code was last revised in 2020 and Gabon was engaging in work to further revise the Code to formalise within it all elements of article one of the Convention.

    Police officers apprehended persons based on the acts that they conducted. They did not consider persons’ racial or ethnic identity; State law prohibited racial profiling. The Government worked to promote unity between different ethnic groups and ensure that hate speech did not gain ground.

    Data on ethnic origin was not collected in the previous census of 2013, though data on nationality was. The next census would collect data on age, gender, ethnic origin and languages spoken. The Government had undertaken a project to reform the national statistics system, which aimed to provide more resources to the national statistics institute and to establish officers on statistics in each ministerial department, who would collect data on the implementation of the Convention.

    Last year, a leader of a political party made a statement against an ethnic group; investigations into this incident were ongoing. The State party embraced the Hausa Gabonese and other populations of foreign origin, promoting their integration into society. It sought to resolve institutional friction to ensure such integration. It was not aware of reports of seizing of non-nationals’ vehicles.

    Follow-Up Questions by Committee Experts

    RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked whether the President would need to approve legislation to bring the new Constitution into force. What happened when constitutional or domestic legal provisions ran counter to international norms? Did victims need to lodge complaints related to hate speech for criminal investigations to start? Did the law on the protection of personal data include measures to prevent racial profiling?

    A Committee Expert said the Committee was very pleased to see the delegation of Gabon after nearly a quarter-century and looked forward to continued dialogue with the State. In 2011, a law was implemented that addressed ritualistic crimes against children. What measures had the State party taken to protect children from these crimes? How many children were affected by such crimes?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said the new Constitution was in force, but its content on ceasing the transitional process was not applicable immediately. The Constitutional Court assessed new laws to ensure that they were aligned with the Convention and the Constitution. It informed the Government when laws contained provisions that did not align with the Convention and called for their revision.

    The Higher Authority on Communication could suggest administrative sanctions against media agencies that disseminated hate speech.

    There were no legal provisions that specifically referred to “ritualistic crimes”, but there were provisions punishing related acts, such as murder and removal of vital organs, as aggravated crimes.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said Gabon had not adopted a plan of action to combat racial discrimination. What measures had the State party taken to develop such a plan and implement the Durban Programme of Action, and what results had it obtained?

    The National Human Rights Commission was reorganised in November 2024. Had the State party applied for accreditation from the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions? The Commission received and examined complaints from individuals and victims. What was the procedure for this, and how many complaints had it examined, including related to racial discrimination? How was the Commission raising awareness about human rights protections? The Commission’s financial resources had been significantly increased; the Committee hoped that this would strengthen the Commission’s ability to combat racial discrimination.

    The registration procedure for non-governmental organizations was reportedly very expensive and inconsistent, which discouraged organizations from carrying out their activities. The Committee had not received any alternative report from civil society. How was the State party encouraging this? What progress had been made in establishing a consultation framework between the State and civil society, and in developing a law on human rights defenders? Human and environmental rights defenders in the country were highly vulnerable to abuses and reprisals, including women, farmers and indigenous peoples fighting against deforestation. What measures were being taken to ensure the protection of human rights defenders who fought against racial discrimination and defended indigenous peoples and migrants?

    The Committee welcomed that the State automatically appointed a lawyer to accused persons who could not afford one, and that such persons benefitted from the presumption of innocence. How many persons had benefitted from legal aid in the last two years, including persons from ethnic minorities?

    What continuous training or awareness raising activities were being carried out for the judiciary, law enforcement officials and the public on human rights, international human rights treaties, non-discrimination and minority rights? Did training on human rights for security and defence forces address the Convention? What measures had been implemented to support the filing of complaints and claims for redress in cases of racial discrimination, particularly for ethnic minorities, indigenous peoples and non-citizens? Victims often struggled to prove that they had been discriminated against when perpetrators held positions of authority. Did the State party intend to introduce a reversal of the burden of proof in favour of victims of discrimination? How would the State bring the administration of justice closer to rural areas inhabited by indigenous peoples, and remove obstacles related to linguistic diversity?

    What progress had been made on introducing human rights education into school curricula and higher education? Did curricula address the Convention, combatting racial discrimination, and the history, culture and traditions of the different ethnic groups and indigenous peoples? What difficulties did the State party encounter in promoting education on national languages? Were there any community radio stations in the State party where information was disseminated in local languages and indigenous languages such as Baka? What programmes were in place to promote ethnic cultures and traditions and social cohesion?

    BAKRI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the new Constitution stipulated that citizens’ gatherings, demonstrations or parades in public spaces needed to be authorised under the conditions provided for by law. This seemed to restrict freedom of assembly and contradict 2017 legislation calling only for a declaration of planned gatherings. Why had this regressive change been made? How would the State party bring its rules on freedom of assembly in line with international standards? Were remedies available for persons whose demonstrations had been banned?

    In February 2021, tear gas and grenades were used in Libreville and Port Gentil to disperse a crowd demonstrating in opposition to the restrictions imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic. What justified this use of public force? Had investigations been carried out to establish responsibility? Could legislation on assembly be used to restrict private meetings? What measures had the State party adopted to ensure that indigenous peoples, ethnic minorities and non-citizens could exercise their right to freedom of assembly without discrimination, including at demonstrations in opposition to infrastructure projects or calling for protection of the environment and natural resources?

    FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-Up Rapporteur , said she was encouraged by the State’s desire to strengthen its institutions. How were the members of the National Human Rights Commission appointed and to whom were they accountable? The State party had not ratified the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance. Did it plan to do so?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said that the National Human Rights Commission would apply for accreditation with the Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions. Funding for the Commission had increased exponentially. Legislation on the re-establishment of the Commission was in line with the Paris Principles; it had been developed with the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. There had not been any complaints of racial discrimination submitted to the Commission yet. The State party would work to raise awareness of the Commission’s complaints mechanism.

    The Commission and civil society were involved in drafting the State party’s reports to treaty bodies. Civil society had submitted alternative reports to the Human Rights Committee, and training had been provided to civil society on preparing such reports. Reports that the procedure for creating non-governmental organizations was onerous were false. There were no costs associated with creating such organizations in Gabon.

    Gabon sought to rebuild its institutions based on justice. It had set up a legal aid office, which provided legal aid to vulnerable persons, and sought to strengthen this system and make it accessible throughout the country. There was no discrimination in the provision of legal aid. All plaintiffs appearing before a criminal court needed to be represented by a lawyer. The State party would consider revising the Criminal Code to reverse the burden of proof for cases involving racial discrimination.

    The new Constitution enshrined the principles of freedom of expression and assembly for all citizens. Legislation set up a system of declaration for public demonstrations; there was no authorisation system. Individuals who had been banned from holding demonstrations could file administrative appeals and appeals with the courts. There were no barriers to the freedom of expression in Gabon.

    Human rights education was part of the Gabonese civic education programme from primary level onwards. There had been an initiative to bolster this programme and to provide human rights education in vocational training institutions. Teaching on national languages was provided in religious establishments, and there were plans to include national language education in the general primary and secondary curricula.

    The new members of the National Human Rights Commission would be appointed by an ad-hoc committee within the National Assembly through a transparent process that ensured appropriate geographic balance. These members would be standing, independent members. Members’ reports would be sent to relevant institutions for follow-up.

    Initial training for members of the magistracy included a module on human rights, and ongoing training was provided on certain issues, for example concerning migrants and trafficking.

    Questions by a Committee Expert

    RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked which groups in Gabon self-determined as national minorities, even though the State declared it did not grant them legal status? What was the situation of the Hausa Gabonese since their naturalisation as Gabonese citizens in 2015, in terms of facilitating their national integration? According to information received by the Committee, the State was struggling to issue birth certificates and national identity cards to ethnic and indigenous minorities. What measures were being taken to ensure effective access to birth registration for members of ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples and to ensure the issuance of official identity documents and passports, especially in remote areas?

    It was reported that in 2022, people returning from holidays, whose surnames sounded foreign, had had their passports taken away by border police officers, and they had to go and collect them and justify their Gabonese nationality. What was at the origin of this search for the original “Gabonness” that seemed to be coming back in force since the events of August 2023? What was the State party doing to ensure social cohesion in these circumstances?

    How many members of the indigenous peoples’ communities held positions of responsibility in the central and local State administration? What measures were being taken to strengthen the political and administrative capacities of the members of these communities for better representation? What was the proportion of women, and particularly women from indigenous peoples and the Hausa Gabonese minority, in elective and decision-making positions in the civil service? Did it mean the State would prefer to appoint a less qualified man to a senior job in the State rather than a highly qualified woman, if the 30 per cent quota for women was reached? What measures had the State party taken to prevent and combat racial discrimination in the workplace, as well as abusive practices and labour exploitation, in particular against indigenous peoples and other minorities?

    From the report, it appeared the State party was made up of the Baka, Babongo, Bakoya, Baghame, Barimba, Akoula and Akwoa ethnic groups that were settled in different regions of Gabonese territory. What were the legal and institutional frameworks, as well as policies and programmes established for the promotion and protection of the specific rights of these indigenous peoples? What measures had been taken to enable indigenous peoples to enjoy genuine equality of opportunity and treatment with other members of the population? How many indigenous peoples were there in Gabon?

    What mechanism had been implemented to conduct prior consultations to obtain the free and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned by projects, including the deployment of fibre optics, and to involve them in their implementation? Was there a permanent framework for cooperation with community leaders or associations that represented these populations? Who were the ethnic groups of the indigenous inhabitants of the 26 villages concerned by the development project, being conducted with the United Nations Children’s Fund?

    The Committee was informed that the President of the Transition, the current Head of State, had set up a special contingent in the National Guard composed of members of the indigenous peoples’ communities, with a view to protecting the environment, which was a commendable action. It was hoped this would not be an isolated act.

    According to available information, entire villages populated by indigenous communities had been displaced without prior consent for mining projects in Bakoumba, and had been relocated to undesirable and polluted areas, with no action taken by the authorities to follow up on the complaints of those affected by the pollution. Could information on this situation be provided? What measures were being taken to ensure the right of indigenous peoples to own, develop, control and use the lands, resources and community territories that they traditionally occupied or used? What tools did the Government use to promote equal opportunities in education and training? How were the specific needs of indigenous peoples taken into account? Did pre-primary and primary education include the teaching of mother tongue languages?

    The Gabonese Government had adopted a commendable housing policy with the home savings plan put in place since March 2019. However, a World Bank report from 2020 revealed that more than one in two households did not have access to decent housing. What was the real situation in terms of housing? Could information be provided on the poverty rate among indigenous peoples and other minorities and their access to basic services?

    The education system had specialised facilities for children with hearing impairments, including those belonging to indigenous peoples and other minorities. What was the situation of the education of other children with special needs, such as autistic children, considered in some societies to be evil or sorcerous children? Given that some 50 national languages were spoken in Gabon, what languages were used within the media and what methodology was used to choose these languages? Were there programmes in the Baka and Koya languages that were spoken by indigenous peoples? What measures had been taken to promote the dissemination of and respect for the traditions and culture of the different ethnic groups in Gabon, and to protect indigenous languages, such as Baka and Koya?

    Responses by the Delegation

    Regarding the Hausa whose passports were removed if their names sounded foreign, the delegation said there were people who had not been careful to keep up with the administrative situation in the country in which they lived. They may not see the importance of having birth and identity documents. This meant today, when the State was focused on restoring its institutions, these matters came to the surface. There had been some confusing situations which arose because many people had held fake documents for a long time before. The Government was looking into this issue as a matter of national security.

    Members of the Hausa population benefitted the same as any other citizen who held Gabonese nationality. A naturalisation decree had been implemented which granted Gabonese nationality to all Hausa people living in the country at the time; this was around 1,000 people. Some people had tried to fall through the cracks and benefit from this decree without actually meeting the requirements, which had a negative impact on the administrative situation. The Ministry of Justice was currently verifying the validity of these documents.

    It was true that there were more women than men in Gabon. However, when it came to elections, not many women wanted to participate in political life, and the State wanted to change this. This was why legislation had been developed which established quotas; this aimed to be positive discrimination for women. The quotas intended to encourage more women to become involved in political life at the local and national level. The 30 per cent minimum quota was in place for all political parties, with the requirement that 30 per cent of all candidates should be women. The State also aimed to encourage more young people and persons with disabilities to become involved in political life.

    Indigenous peoples were included in Gabon’s social protection coverage. They were covered by the social protection system and received unemployment and health benefits. The 26 villages covered by the support programme were villages with people from Baka, Bango and other groups. Work was done with pregnant women to ensure neonatal services were provided, especially in remote parts of the country where many indigenous groups lived. The State had set up a centre for autistic children and aimed to roll this out to other parts of the country.

    In 2016, a programme was launched to combat all forms of discrimination in employment, healthcare and education, and other areas of public life. The State sought to support all levels of society in Gabon through this programme, which covered indigenous peoples, women and other vulnerable groups. All programmes were intended to promote equality of opportunity for all. Indigenous peoples, regardless of where they were located in the country, could benefit from State programmes.

    In Gabon, there was an observatory which focused on the issue of equality and undertook various studies, including a recent one on the equality of opportunity for indigenous peoples in Gabon. On the basis of this study, an action plan had been developed, with policies to be rolled out to address the situation of indigenous peoples in the country. The most recent census had enabled the State to identify 15,000 persons with disabilities who needed additional support, and actions relating to education and health were carried out in this regard. Gabon was on the right track in terms of indigenous peoples, as the State was pursuing inclusive policies, taking into account all persons on the territory of the country.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said several questions had not been answered, namely on the languages used in the media; the use of land by indigenous peoples; and the medicinal practices of indigenous peoples. There had been a case where indigenous peoples were forcibly removed from their village and transported to polluted areas; could this be addressed? Was it correct that the 30 per cent quota was a minimum? If there was a list of candidates which did not reach the minimum threshold, was it then rejected? Was the State considering an individualised approach to the Hausa Gabonese?

    A Committee Expert asked if the State looked at issues which might be particularly harmful to indigenous peoples, and then adopted policies and programmes to address these issues?

    Another Committee Expert asked what members of the delegation meant when they said they did not recognise minorities as a legal concept? Did this mean these minorities did not qualify for legal protection?

    An Expert asked if the State had investigated what held women back from applying for election posts?

    A Committee Expert said Gabon had last reviewed the Constitution in 2011. How had Gabon addressed the issues of discrimination in education?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation clarified that Gabon had a brand-new Constitution. The law on data protection stated that it was prohibited to collect or process any data which revealed the racial or ethnic background of an individual, their political or religious views, and data related to their sex life or health, among other points. The profiling of children was strictly prohibited, except when strictly necessary. Personal data could be accessed on the grounds of State security defence. When the police were carrying out controls or checks, they treated all passengers in stopped vehicles the same; everyone was asked to show their identity documents.

    When the 30 per cent quotas were not achieved, steps were taken to encourage favourable treatment for women, by ensuring a male and female alternance for candidates in electoral lists, to achieve the 30 per cent representation. This was a “carrot rather than stick” approach. Women were being encouraged to overcome cultural blocks and stand for leadership roles. A workshop had been held last week which sought to address the grassroot social issues, including that women were typically viewed as homemakers and housewives. The quota law aimed to break these traditional mindsets.

    Gabon had enacted specific measures, including the law on persons with disabilities, which mandated that education was compulsory for all children with disabilities. Education was compulsory by law for all children between ages three and 16 in Gabon. A forum was organised in 2019 on the implementation of inclusive education. New schools being built were required to meet accessibility standards, to ensure free and easy access for children with motor disabilities.

    The relocation of individuals in certain areas had been required, but the fact that they were relocated to polluted areas was refuted. Some people had to accustom themselves to living in a new location, but it was the sovereign right of the State to ensure they could tap their resources for the overall benefit of the country. More information about the claims would be appreciated. There were community radio stations which broadcast programmes in local indigenous languages.

    Questions by Committee Experts

    RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said there had been no shadow report received from Gabonese civil society. The information regarding the relocation of indigenous peoples had been received by the Committee members which was why they asked the question. State sovereignty should not be used against the population, but rather for their wellbeing.

    What measures had been adopted, including special measures or affirmative action measures, with a view to combatting inequalities and multiple forms of discrimination, including racial discrimination, with regard to ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples, such as the Baka, Babongo, Bakoya, Baghame, Barimba, Akoula and Akwoa? To what extent did the 2018 national strategy to combat gender-based violence and the law on the elimination of violence against women take into account the specific needs of indigenous girls and women? What other measures had been adopted to address the multiple and intersecting forms of discrimination faced by women belonging to ethnic minorities, indigenous peoples, and other vulnerable groups?

    BAKRI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said law no. 5/86, establishing the regime for the admission and residence of foreigners in the Gabonese Republic, provided for severe fines and imprisonment for foreigners in an irregular situation, which considerably reduced the scope of protection for persons who arrived in Gabon irregularly or those already in Gabon in need of international protection. What measures had been taken by the State party to harmonise its national legislation, including this law, with international obligations, in particular to decriminalise irregular migration? What measures had been adopted to prevent and combat racial discrimination and xenophobia against migrants, asylum seekers, refugees and stateless persons, and to facilitate the integration of non-citizens?

    What measures had been adopted by the State party to ensure that the practical application of the policy of “Gabonisation” of employment did not lead to cases of discrimination in hiring and dismissal on the basis of race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin? According to a provision within the refugee act, the majority of refugees in Gabon lived with families. What was the profile of these families? How was the legal integration of refugees carried out? What were the socio-demographic, spatial and legal-administrative characteristics of the descendants of refugees in Libreville? Clear procedures were needed to ensure the prompt identification of persons seeking international protection at land borders and arrivals by sea; what measures were being taken in this regard? What had been done to strengthen the National Commission for Refugees?

    The Committee had been told that asylum seekers remained excluded from the national medical insurance scheme and did not have access to medical services pending a decision on their refugee status. What steps had been taken to extend primary health care to asylum seekers who were awaiting a final decision on their refugee status? What efforts had the Gabonese Government made to develop and implement a statelessness determination procedure? The Committee had been informed that many foreigners were forced by the administrative services to add so-called “Gabonese” surnames to their surnames, which discouraged some parents of children born in Gabon from finalising the procedures for obtaining Gabonese nationality or identity documents; what measures had been taken to address these situations?

    What was the proportion of Gabonese nationals who were victims of trafficking? What were the main forms of trafficking found in Gabon? Did forced labour include domestic servitude, commercial exploitation and sexual exploitation? What was the profile of the perpetrators of human trafficking, their gender, and their nationality? How many cases had been prosecuted and convicted? What were the measures for reparation and rehabilitation of victims of trafficking? What was being done by the State to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, including for the purpose of labour exploitation, sexual exploitation and domestic servitude, including of non-citizens, especially children? Had appropriate resources been allocated to the National Commission for the Prevention and Combatting of Trafficking in Persons to enable it to carry out its mandate?

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said a guide had been produced to inform people on how to tackle different forms of violence, including sexual violence, and how to support victims. A specific programme had been developed for indigenous children with nomadic lifestyles. Gabon provided support to refugees and asylum seekers as required. The right to health was recognised as a universal human right. Those in an irregular situation received healthcare regardless of their status.

    There was a small number of cases of irregular migration in Gabon today. In recent years, it was ensured that migrants in an irregular situation had been provided with documents and put into a regular situation.

    In 2023, Gabon completed the procedure required for the State to be in a position to proactively identify cases of human trafficking by identifying irregular movements. The country was also collecting data in this regard, to identify trends and receive up to date information on this phenomenon in Gabon. Transnational networks existed, operating by both land and sea. Underground networks operated trafficking of women and children, and irregular migration was the driving force behind this phenomenon. Gabon was working with Benin to find a solution to this issue. The State was fully committed to rolling out the project to have practical solutions to these issues, including police investigations into these cases. Trafficking was a transnational problem, and it was important to go back to the country of origin.

    Everyone in Gabon enjoyed the right to freedom of assembly. Indigenous peoples were dealt with on an equal footing, the same way as other citizens in Gabon. They were appropriately supported if they wished to establish associations. If the laws on equal treatment were not respected, appropriate penalties would be handed down.

    Legislation established the National Commission for the Prevention of Human Trafficking in Gabon. The Commission spearheaded a national strategy to counter trafficking. Gabon was a party to the 1951 Geneva Convention on Refugees. An appeals mechanism existed for those who were not satisfied with their asylum decision. There were no refugee camps in Gabon; refugees and asylum seekers shared the same schools and hospitals as Gabonese citizens. A refugee held the same rights as a Gabonese citizen. A refugee card was issued and gave access to many of the same rights as an identity card.

    BAKRI SIDIKI DIABY, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, congratulated Gabon on the mechanism adopted to tackle human trafficking. Could statistics on the number of stateless people be provided? 

    A Committee Expert asked what steps had been taken by the Gabonese Government to push back against hate speech and xenophobia? Would Gabon ratify the Convention on the Rights of Migrants and Members of their Families?

    Another Expert asked if history education was compulsory in the State party at all levels of the education system? Given the colonial legacy of the State party, to what extent did the educational curricula cover this issue? Was Gabon supportive of the concept of reparations for colonial wrongs?

    A Committee Expert asked if any measures had been taken to eradicate malaria, particularly among migrants and asylum seekers?

    Another Expert asked how refugees were cared for in Gabon, including accommodation needs, in light of the fact that there were no camps?

    An Expert said Gabon had made good progress in regard to the education of children with disabilities. Had Gabon ratified the Convention on the Protection of Persons with Disabilities, and instruments on displaced persons.

    One Expert paid tribute to the father of the Gabonese nation.

    Responses by the Delegation

    The delegation said in history classes in public schools, there was no political link with colonialism. The curriculum was based on the programme drafted by a national pedological institution.

    Closing Remarks

    FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur , said it would be the first time that Gabon would receive recommendations with a follow-up. Several recommendations would be highlighted for follow-up within one year.

    RÉGINE ESSENEME, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, congratulated Gabon for the multi-sectoral approach taken to the dialogue, which had been productive and fruitful. Ms. Esseneme thanked all those who had made the dialogue possible, especially in the hybrid format. Gabon was urged to do its utmost to implement the recommendations contained in the concluding observations, to ensure ongoing collaboration with the Committee.

    PAUL-MARIE GONDJOUT, Minister of Justice, Keeper of the Seals of Gabon and head of the delegation , thanked the Committee for the constructive and respectful exchange which had taken place. The Committee’s questions had provided an opportunity to share more information about the situation in Gabon. Gabon would continue engaging with the Committee and looked forward to the concluding observations and follow-up. Gabon would respond within the timeframes indicated. Gabon would take steps to ensure the optimal implementation of the provisions enshrined within the Convention, working with all stakeholders involved in human rights.

    _______________

    CERD25.007E

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

    MIL OSI United Nations News

  • MIL-OSI USA: California’s population increases — again

    Source: US State of California 2

    May 1, 2025

    What you need to know: For the second year in a row, California’s Department of Finance released data showing the Golden State’s population grew. In 2024, the state added more than 100,000 residents.

    SACRAMENTO — Today, Governor Gavin Newsom announced that California’s population grew by 108,000 people in calendar year 2024, reaching 39,529,000 people as of January 1st, 2025 — according to new data from the California Department of Finance.

    “People from across the nation and the globe are coming to the Golden State to pursue the California Dream, where rights are protected and people are respected. As the fourth largest economy in the world — from the Inland Empire to the Bay Area — regions throughout California are growing, strengthening local communities and boosting our state’s future. We’ll continue to cut tape, invest in people, and seek real results from government to ensure we build on this momentum – all of which are at risk with the extreme and uncertain tariffs.”

    Governor Gavin Newsom

    This increase marks the second consecutive calendar year of population growth. Additionally, this report reflects an upward revision of California’s January 2024 population, which saw a growth of 192,219 people (year over year) — up from the previously estimated increase of 67,104 people. And an upward revision of California’s January 2023 population, which saw a growth of 48,764 people (year over year) — up from the previously estimated decrease of 53,727 people.

    Factors for growth

    • Higher 2024 K-8 enrollment by 13,890 compared to 2023.

    • An increase in the 65-and-older population of 25,298 people in 2024, up from 6,622,031 people reported last year.

    • Natural increase — the net result of births minus deaths — contributed 114,805 to overall population growth in 2024, largely in line with the growth of 105,550 in 2023.

    • More data sources to better estimate California’s share of recent increases in legal immigration to the U.S. from 2021 to 2024, showing 277,468 more immigrants to the state during this period than in the 2023 estimate. This data only includes legal immigration.

    A look at city and county data

    The report contains preliminary year-over-year January 2025 and revised January 2021 through January 2024 population data for California cities, counties, and the state. It’s important to note that these estimates are based on information as of January 1, 2025, and therefore do not include data for the Los Angeles County wildfires later that month.

    • California’s 58 counties range in size from Alpine County, with just over 1,170 residents, to Los Angeles County with 9.9 million residents. The population increased in 35 counties, with most growth in the Central Valley, the Inland Empire, and coastal counties. Population gains reflect natural increase exceeding losses in net total migration.

    • The state’s ten largest counties remain Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, Santa Clara, Alameda, Sacramento, Contra Costa, and Fresno, with each having more than one million residents. These ten counties represent 72 percent of California’s population. 

    • Nine of the ten counties with one million or more people have positive population growth, leaving Contra Costa as the only county with a very small population loss of 24 people. Los Angeles led with an increase of 28,000 persons. 

    • Population growth rates ranged from a high of 2.88 percent in Lassen County to a low of -1.58 percent in Mono County. The next five largest in percentage growth were Glenn (1.35 percent), Fresno (0.87 percent), Sutter (0.83 percent), Imperial (0.81 percent), and Tulare (0.73 percent).

    Recent Census Bureau revisions

    In addition to the report released by the Department of Finance, the U.S. Census Bureau (which measures on a fiscal calendar year versus DOF’s calendar year) released updated information showing California’s population increasing as well  — with several key revisions upwards:

    • July 1, 2023 to June 30, 2024, California’s population increased by more than 225,000 people.

    • July 1, 2022 to June 30, 2023: California’s population increased by more than 50,000 people. NOTE: This was revised up from the originally reported 75,000+ decrease.

    • July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022: California’s population decreased by just 151 people. NOTE: This was revised up from the originally reported 100,000+ decrease.

    Busting myths

    Despite the common myth of a continually declining population, California has only saw a short period of population loss in its 174 year history — during the peak of the COVID pandemic, when it decreased by 379,544 people (which represents about 1% decrease over those two years), according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

    During the same period, from July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022, 10 states saw larger population decreases, with Louisiana — led by a Republican Governor and legislature — seeing the largest percent decrease. And 13 states also saw population decreases from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021.

    California leads the way

    Building on the second year of population growth, California leads the way in tourism spending, and was just announced as the fourth largest economy, moving up from fifth, in the world by the International Monetary Fund. California is also home to the most Fortune 500 companies and most Inc. 5000 companies. And, California leads the way nationally as the #1 state for new business starts, access to venture capital funding, manufacturing, high-tech, and agriculture.

    Recent news

    News What you need to know: House Republicans used an illegal tactic to attempt to overrule California’s clean cars and trucks program that has decreased smog and protected Californians’ health. SACRAMENTO — Governor Gavin Newsom issued the following statement today…

    News Sacramento, California – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued a proclamation declaring April 30, 2025, as “Apprenticeship Day.”The text of the proclamation and a copy can be found below. PROCLAMATIONNational Apprenticeship Day is a nationwide celebration…

    News What you need to know: The state of California is providing LA City and County a new AI-powered e-check software free of charge to speed the pace at which local governments are approving building permits. LOS ANGELES – Leveraging the power of private sector…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Governor Newsom on illegal House effort to curb California’s tools for cleaning the air: ‘Making California smoggy again’

    Source: US State of California 2

    May 1, 2025

    What you need to know: House Republicans used an illegal tactic to attempt to overrule California’s clean cars and trucks program that has decreased smog and protected Californians’ health.

    SACRAMENTO — Governor Gavin Newsom issued the following statement today in response to the House vote targeting California’s clean vehicles program.

    The Republican-controlled House illegally used the Congressional Review Act (CRA) today to attempt to repeal California’s Clean Air Act waivers, which authorize California’s clean cars and trucks program. This defies decades of precedent of these waivers not being subject to the CRA, and contradicts the non-partisan Government Accountability Office and Senate Parliamentarian, who both ruled that the CRA’s short-circuited process does not apply to the waivers.

    Trump Republicans are hellbent on making California smoggy again. Clean air didn’t used to be political. In fact, we can thank Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon for our decades-old authority to clean our air.

    The only thing that’s changed is that big polluters and the right-wing propaganda machine have succeeded in buying off the Republican Party – and now the House is using a tactic that the Senate’s own parliamentarian has said is lawless. Our vehicles program helps clean the air for all Californians, and we’ll continue defending it. Washington may want to cede our economy to China but California is standing by American innovation.

    Governor Gavin Newsom

    The state’s efforts to clean its air ramped up under then-Governor Ronald Reagan when he established the California Air Resources Board. California’s Clean Air Act waivers date back to the Nixon Administration – allowing the state to set standards necessary for cleaning up some of the worst air pollution in the country. 

    California’s climate leadership

    Pollution is down and the economy is up. Greenhouse gas emissions in California are down 20% since 2000 – even as the state’s GDP increased 78% in that same time period.

    The state continues to set clean energy records. Last year, California ran on 100% clean electricity for the equivalent of 51 days – with the grid running on 100% clean energy for some period two out of every three days. Since the beginning of the Newsom Administration, battery storage is up to over 13,000 megawatts – a 1,600%+ increase.

    California’s clean air authority

    Since the Clean Air Act was adopted in 1970, the U.S. EPA has granted California more than 100 waivers for its clean air and climate efforts. California has always demonstrated that its standards are feasible, and that manufacturers have enough lead time to develop the technology to meet them. It has done so for every waiver it has submitted. 

    Waivers do not expire and there is no process for revoking a waiver – which makes sense because governments and industry rely on market certainty waivers provide for years after they are granted to deliver clean vehicles and develop clean air plans. 

    Although California standards have dramatically improved air quality, the state’s unique geography means air quality goals still require continued progress on vehicle emissions. Five of the ten cities with the worst air pollution nationwide are in California. Ten million Californians in the San Joaquin Valley and Los Angeles air basins currently live under what is known as “severe nonattainment” conditions for ozone. People in these areas suffer unusually high rates of asthma and cardiopulmonary disease. Zero-emission vehicles are a critical part of the plan to protect Californians.

    Press Releases, Recent News

    Recent news

    News Sacramento, California – Governor Gavin Newsom today issued a proclamation declaring April 30, 2025, as “Apprenticeship Day.”The text of the proclamation and a copy can be found below. PROCLAMATIONNational Apprenticeship Day is a nationwide celebration…

    News What you need to know: The state of California is providing LA City and County a new AI-powered e-check software free of charge to speed the pace at which local governments are approving building permits. LOS ANGELES – Leveraging the power of private sector…

    News What you need to know: Governor Gavin Newsom and the Department of Housing and Community Development today announced the awards of $118.9 million in federal funding for 29 California rural and tribal communities to create more affordable housing and supportive…

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Jordanian National Sentenced to Six Years for Threatening to Use Explosives and Attacking an Energy Facility

    Source: US State of California

    Hashem Younis Hashem Hnaihen, 44, a Jordanian national residing illegally in Orlando, was sentenced today to six years in federal prison for threatening to use explosives and destruction of an energy facility. A restitution hearing will be held at a future date to address the more than $450,000 in damages Hnaihen caused.

    “Threatening to commit mass violence against American citizens and targeting businesses or institutions for destruction will not be tolerated,” said U.S. Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe for the Middle District of Florida. “Today’s sentence demonstrates the collective fortitude of our law enforcement partners to vigorously investigate and prosecute those who engage in acts of intimidation or violence against our communities.”

    “This case highlights the strength of our partnerships and the tenacity of our investigators who are determined to protect the American people from those threatening the safety and security of our communities,” said Special Agent in Charge Matthew Fodor the FBI Tampa Field Office. 

    Restaurant damaged in attack with notes taped to the window.

    According to court documents, beginning around June 2024, Hnaihen targeted and attacked businesses in the Orlando area for their perceived support for Israel. Wearing a mask, under the cover of night, Hnaihen smashed the glass front doors of businesses and left behind “Warning Letters.” In his letters, which were addressed to the President of the United States and the United States government, Hnaihen laid out a series of political demands, culminating in a threat to “destroy or explode everything here in whole America. Especially the companies and factories that support the racist state of Israel.” 

    Solar panels with cracked glass.

    Hnaihen’s attacks escalated. At the end of June, as law enforcement worked to identify the masked attacker, Hnaihen broke into a solar power generation facility in Wedgefield, Florida, and spent hours systematically destroying solar panel arrays. He smashed panels, cut wires, and targeted critical electronic equipment. Hnaihen left behind two more copies of his threatening demand letter. Hnaihen’s attacks caused more than $450,000 in damage.

    Following a multiagency effort, law enforcement identified Hnaihen and arrested him on July 11, 2024, shortly after another “Warning Letter” threatening to “destroy or explode everything” was discovered at an industrial propane gas distribution depot in Orlando.

    The FBI and the Orange County Sheriff’s Office investigated the case, with valuable assistance from the Maitland Police Department, the Winter Park Police Department, the Orlando Police Department, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Varadan for the Middle District of Florida and Trial Attorneys Ryan White and George Kraehe of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section prosecuted the case.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI USA: Justice Department Files Complaints Against Hawaii, Michigan, New York and Vermont Over Unconstitutional State Climate Actions

    Source: US State of Vermont

    WASHINGTON — The Justice Department today filed complaints against the states of New York and Vermont over their “climate superfund laws.” In separate actions, the Justice Department yesterday filed lawsuits against the states of Hawaii and Michigan to prevent each state from suing fossil fuel companies in state court to seek damages for alleged climate change harms.

    President Trump recently directed Attorney General Pamela Bondi to take action to stop the enforcement of state laws that unreasonably burden domestic energy development so that energy will once again be reliable and affordable for all Americans. These lawsuits advance President Trump’s directive in Executive Order 14260, Protecting American Energy from State Overreach.

    “These burdensome and ideologically motivated laws and lawsuits threaten American energy independence and our country’s economic and national security,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The Department of Justice is working to ‘Unleash American Energy’ by stopping these illegitimate impediments to the production of affordable, reliable energy that Americans deserve.”

    “When states seek to regulate energy beyond their constitutional or statutory authority, they harm the country’s ability to produce energy and they aid our adversaries,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “The Department’s filings seek to protect Americans from unlawful state overreach that would threaten energy independence critical to the wellbeing and security of all Americans.”

    According to the complaints filed yesterday in the U.S. District Courts for the District of Hawaii and the Western District of Michigan, Hawaii and Michigan intend to sue fossil fuel companies to seek damages for alleged climate change harms.  The government alleges that these anticipated actions are preempted by the Clean Air Act and violate the Constitution. Such lawsuits burden energy production, force the American people to pay more for energy, and make the United States less able to defend itself from hostile foreign actors.

    Complaints filed today in U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of New York and for the District of Vermont challenge expropriative laws passed by New York and Vermont. These “climate superfund” laws would impose strict liability on energy companies for their worldwide activities extracting or refining fossil fuels. The laws assess penalties for those businesses’ purported contributions to harms that those states allegedly are experiencing from climate change. The New York law seeks $75 billion from energy companies, while the Vermont law seeks an unspecified amount.

    Today’s complaints allege that the New York Climate Change Superfund Act and the Vermont Climate Superfund Act are preempted by the federal Clean Air Act and by the federal foreign affairs power, and that they violate the U.S. Constitution. The Justice Department seeks a declaration that these state laws are unconstitutional and an injunction against their enforcement.

    Complaints:

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Justice Department Files Complaints Against Hawaii, Michigan, New York and Vermont Over Unconstitutional State Climate Actions

    Source: United States Attorneys General 1

    WASHINGTON — The Justice Department today filed complaints against the states of New York and Vermont over their “climate superfund laws.” In separate actions, the Justice Department yesterday filed lawsuits against the states of Hawaii and Michigan to prevent each state from suing fossil fuel companies in state court to seek damages for alleged climate change harms.

    President Trump recently directed Attorney General Pamela Bondi to take action to stop the enforcement of state laws that unreasonably burden domestic energy development so that energy will once again be reliable and affordable for all Americans. These lawsuits advance President Trump’s directive in Executive Order 14260, Protecting American Energy from State Overreach.

    “These burdensome and ideologically motivated laws and lawsuits threaten American energy independence and our country’s economic and national security,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The Department of Justice is working to ‘Unleash American Energy’ by stopping these illegitimate impediments to the production of affordable, reliable energy that Americans deserve.”

    “When states seek to regulate energy beyond their constitutional or statutory authority, they harm the country’s ability to produce energy and they aid our adversaries,” said Acting Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson of the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “The Department’s filings seek to protect Americans from unlawful state overreach that would threaten energy independence critical to the wellbeing and security of all Americans.”

    According to the complaints filed yesterday in the U.S. District Courts for the District of Hawaii and the Western District of Michigan, Hawaii and Michigan intend to sue fossil fuel companies to seek damages for alleged climate change harms.  The government alleges that these anticipated actions are preempted by the Clean Air Act and violate the Constitution. Such lawsuits burden energy production, force the American people to pay more for energy, and make the United States less able to defend itself from hostile foreign actors.

    Complaints filed today in U.S. District Courts for the Southern District of New York and for the District of Vermont challenge expropriative laws passed by New York and Vermont. These “climate superfund” laws would impose strict liability on energy companies for their worldwide activities extracting or refining fossil fuels. The laws assess penalties for those businesses’ purported contributions to harms that those states allegedly are experiencing from climate change. The New York law seeks $75 billion from energy companies, while the Vermont law seeks an unspecified amount.

    Today’s complaints allege that the New York Climate Change Superfund Act and the Vermont Climate Superfund Act are preempted by the federal Clean Air Act and by the federal foreign affairs power, and that they violate the U.S. Constitution. The Justice Department seeks a declaration that these state laws are unconstitutional and an injunction against their enforcement.

    Complaints:

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Agriculture Chair urges innovative approaches to move talks forward

    Source: World Trade Organization

    The Chair reported on the consultations he held with various groups and individual members since he assumed the role as Chair on 1 April. He said that divergences in views continue to persist on how the shared goal of making progress on agriculture talks can be translated into a meaningful MC14 outcome. However, while MC14 might not be the conclusion of members’ efforts, it should result in a meaningful step forward. The credibility of the WTO depends on its ability to respond to real-world challenges, particularly in the current turbulent international context, he said.

    Moving forward, Ambassador Hussain encouraged members to engage constructively in an attempt to narrow differences and explore solutions. He committed to facilitating this effort through dialogue across all groups upon request. He noted that meetings of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session (CoASS) will be held as needed to promote transparency and inclusivity. These meetings will serve to update members, allow feedback and share progress.

    Ambassador Hussain said he intends to pursue in the coming weeks his consultations in various configurations, starting with proponents on the various topics, to explore how concrete progress can be made on their topics of interest in a pragmatic and effective manner.

    The Chair also indicated that there will not be a facilitator-led process for now, but more technical discussions may be launched if needed. This phase will culminate in a stocktaking session after the summer, likely in late September or early October, to evaluate progress and collectively decide on the way forward and the expected outcome, setting the stage for final negotiations ahead of MC14.

    Members overall expressed support for the process outlined by Ambassador Hussain, urging a focus on achievable MC14 outcomes and aiming at a clear roadmap post-MC14 for more detailed negotiations. Innovative approaches in Geneva were advocated, avoiding ineffective past methods. Members also underlined the importance of the upcoming retreat on sustainable agriculture on 5-6 May, and of future meetings of the Committee on Agriculture, which should contribute to maximizing the effectiveness of discussions ahead of concrete ministerial action in 2026.

    Several members highlighted the on-going joint work between the Cairns Group of agricultural exporting economies and the African Group as a promising example of substantive discussions aimed at narrowing gaps. The two groups reported that since their last update to members in February, they have continued discussions, together with others, on a draft package that could form the basis of CoASS negotiations. These discussions aim to identify and work through areas of difference, identify and build on commonalities and make progress on a draft modalities package across all topics.

    The two groups noted that the goal is to continue this technical work and submit a document to CoASS for the membership’s consideration and further work. The process has been designed so that ideas can be put on the table and assessed without prejudice to final positions, in an effort to facilitate a constructive dialogue. Members participating in the process are doing so on the basis that there is no commitment to any elements where convergence may develop until an overall package that is satisfactory to all is reached, they said.

    Public stockholding and the Special Safeguard Mechanism

    Members held dedicated sessions on public stockholding (PSH) for food security purposes and on the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) to have more focussed discussions on these topics.

    The Chair reported on his recent consultations, noting that he sensed a political will from many delegations to engage constructively on finding a way forward on PSH. However, significant disagreements remain, particularly regarding the sequencing of negotiations and concerns about expanding domestic support, he said. The concern about the impact of the current trade context on efforts to make meaningful progress was expressed by several members.

    The proponents stressed that securing a permanent solution on PSH was increasingly urgent, as it remained critical to global food security amid growing economic uncertainties and potential disruptions to food supply chains.

    Ambassador Hussain stressed that “there is no alternative to frank exchanges to achieve meaningful progress” on the key issue of PSH. He expressed his confidence that progress can be made “if we shift from fixed positions to shared solutions.”

    On SSM, discussions also reflected that members continue to hold different views regarding the linkage between SSM and market access. Given how important this file is for many developing economies, and the need to achieve a balanced outcome at MC14, the Chair urged members to think creatively to help break the impasse. He suggested identifying a pragmatic approach to foster a substantive technical dialogue on the various components of a potential SSM outcome.

    Share

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Canada: Bringing communities and stories to life

    Source: Government of Canada regional news (2)

    MIL OSI Canada News

  • MIL-OSI USA: NASA Invests in Future STEM Workforce Through Space Grant Awards 

    Source: NASA

    NASA is awarding up to $870,000 annually to 52 institutions across the United States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico over the next four years. The investments aim to create opportunities for the next generation of innovators by supporting workforce development, science, technology, engineering and math education, and aerospace collaboration nationwide. 
    The Space Grant College and Fellowship Program (Space Grant), established by Congress in 1989, is a workforce development initiative administered through NASA’s Office of STEM Engagement (OSTEM). The program’s mission is to produce a highly skilled workforce prepared to advance NASA’s mission and bolster the nation’s aerospace sector. 
    “The Space Grant program exemplifies NASA’s commitment to cultivating a new generation of STEM leaders,” said Torry Johnson, deputy associate administrator of the STEM Engagement Program at NASA Headquarters in Washington. “By partnering with institutions across the country, we ensure that students have the resources, mentorship, and experiences needed to thrive in the aerospace workforce.” 
    The following is a complete list of awardees: 

    University of Alaska, Fairbanks 

    University of Alabama, Huntsville 

    University of Arkansas, Little Rock 

    University of Arizona 

    University of California, San Diego 

    University of Colorado, Boulder 

    University of Hartford, Connecticut 

    American University, Washington, DC 

    University of Delaware 

    University of Central Florida 

    Georgia Institute of Technology 

    University of Hawaii, Honolulu 

    Iowa State University, Ames 

    University of Idaho, Moscow 

    University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign 

    Purdue University, Indiana 

    Wichita State University, Kansas 

    University of Kentucky, Lexington 

    Louisiana State University and A&M College 

    Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

    Johns Hopkins University, Maryland 

    Maine Space Grant Consortium 

    University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 

    University of Minnesota 

    Missouri University of Science and Technology 

    University of Mississippi 

    Montana State University, Bozeman 

    North Carolina State University 

    University of North Dakota, Grand Forks 

    University of Nebraska, Omaha 

    University of New Hampshire, Durham 

    Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey 

    New Mexico State University 

    Nevada System of Higher Education 

    Cornell University, New York 

    Ohio Aerospace Institute 

    University of Oklahoma 

    Oregon State University 

    Pennsylvania State University 

    University of Puerto Rico 

    Brown University, Rhode Island 

    College of Charleston, South Carolina 

    South Dakota School of Mines & Technology 

    Vanderbilt University, Tennessee 

    University of Texas, Austin 

    University of Utah, Salt Lake City 

    Old Dominion University Research Foundation, Virginia 

    University of Vermont, Burlington 

    University of Washington, Seattle 

    Carthage College, Wisconsin 

    West Virginia University 

    University of Wyoming 

    Space Grant operates through state-based consortia, which include universities, university systems, associations, government agencies, industries, and informal education organizations engaged in aerospace activities. Each consortium’s lead institution coordinates efforts within its state, expanding opportunities for students and researchers while promoting collaboration with NASA and aerospace-related industries nationwide. 
    To learn more about NASA’s missions, visit: https://www.nasa.gov/ 

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Jordanian National Sentenced to Six Years for Threatening to Use Explosives and Attacking an Energy Facility

    Source: United States Attorneys General 7

    Hashem Younis Hashem Hnaihen, 44, a Jordanian national residing illegally in Orlando, was sentenced today to six years in federal prison for threatening to use explosives and destruction of an energy facility. A restitution hearing will be held at a future date to address the more than $450,000 in damages Hnaihen caused.

    “Threatening to commit mass violence against American citizens and targeting businesses or institutions for destruction will not be tolerated,” said U.S. Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe for the Middle District of Florida. “Today’s sentence demonstrates the collective fortitude of our law enforcement partners to vigorously investigate and prosecute those who engage in acts of intimidation or violence against our communities.”

    “This case highlights the strength of our partnerships and the tenacity of our investigators who are determined to protect the American people from those threatening the safety and security of our communities,” said Special Agent in Charge Matthew Fodor the FBI Tampa Field Office. 

    Restaurant damaged in attack with notes taped to the window.

    According to court documents, beginning around June 2024, Hnaihen targeted and attacked businesses in the Orlando area for their perceived support for Israel. Wearing a mask, under the cover of night, Hnaihen smashed the glass front doors of businesses and left behind “Warning Letters.” In his letters, which were addressed to the President of the United States and the United States government, Hnaihen laid out a series of political demands, culminating in a threat to “destroy or explode everything here in whole America. Especially the companies and factories that support the racist state of Israel.” 

    Solar panels with cracked glass.

    Hnaihen’s attacks escalated. At the end of June, as law enforcement worked to identify the masked attacker, Hnaihen broke into a solar power generation facility in Wedgefield, Florida, and spent hours systematically destroying solar panel arrays. He smashed panels, cut wires, and targeted critical electronic equipment. Hnaihen left behind two more copies of his threatening demand letter. Hnaihen’s attacks caused more than $450,000 in damage.

    Following a multiagency effort, law enforcement identified Hnaihen and arrested him on July 11, 2024, shortly after another “Warning Letter” threatening to “destroy or explode everything” was discovered at an industrial propane gas distribution depot in Orlando.

    The FBI and the Orange County Sheriff’s Office investigated the case, with valuable assistance from the Maitland Police Department, the Winter Park Police Department, the Orlando Police Department, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Varadan for the Middle District of Florida and Trial Attorneys Ryan White and George Kraehe of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section prosecuted the case.

    MIL Security OSI