Category: Russian Federation

MIL-OSI Russia: The IMF to Hold the Inaugural Annual Economic Research Conference on Middle East and North Africa (MENA)

Source: IMF – News in Russian

April 28, 2025

Washington, DC: Jihad Azour, Director of the Middle East and Central Asia Department and Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, Economic Counsellor and Director of the Research Department of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) issued a statement today:

“Global shocks are adding to regional factors resulting in exceptionally uncertain economic environment for Middle East and North Africa (MENA) economies. Conflicts, trade tensions, volatile commodity prices, changing climate conditions, energy transitions, rapid technological advances are altering the economic landscape of the region, posing severe challenges but also presenting opportunities for bold reforms that safeguard macroeconomic stability, build resilience, and raise living standards for all. Economic research is essential to provide reliable analysis and develop workable and innovative policy responses.

“In this context, we are pleased to announce that the IMF will organize an annual Economic Research Conference on MENA, partnering with leading universities in the region. The aim is to establish a forum for dialogue on pressing economic issues, promote policy-oriented academic research tailored to the needs and unique challenges of the region. It will also provide a platform for the exchange of ideas and insights for academics, researchers, and policymakers in the MENA region and worldwide.

“The inaugural conference, Steering Macroeconomic and Structural Policies in A Shifting Global Economic Landscape, will be co-organized with Onsi Sawiris School of Business at The American University in Cairo and take place in Cairo on May 18-19, 2025. It will feature presentations and panel discussions by leading economists and policymakers. The conference details and agenda are available here.

“The IMF is a long-standing partner to countries in the MENA region in the quest for more inclusive and resilient growth. The IMF-MENA Annual Research Conference is another step forward to further strengthen that partnership and engagement with the region and its people.”

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

PRESS OFFICER: Angham Al Shami

Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org

@IMFSpokesperson

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/04/28/pr-25125-imf-to-hold-inaugural-ann-economic-research-conf-on-middle-east-and-north-africa

MIL OSI

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Russia must provide its response on Ukraine ceasefire

Source: France-Diplomatie – Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Development

Excerpts from statements to the press by M. Emmanuel Macron, President of the Republic, from Madagascar (Antananarivo, April 24, 2025)

(Check against delivery)

(…)

A few moments ago, in your speech here, you denounced “the mad armies that want to seize little bits of land”. However, a few minutes ago President Zelenskyy said the pressure on Russia isn’t strong enough, at a time when the United States is obviously preparing to recognize Crimea as Russian. Is peace getting further away today?

THE PRESIDENT – First of all, I don’t want to speak for anyone. As you know, France’s position is steadfast. It won’t change. We’re in favour of the sovereignty of peoples and territorial integrity, respecting international law. Moreover, there are no double standards for France. That applies to Ukraine, it applies to the Middle East and it applies to the African continent. And I pride myself on that position.

So we’ll continue to uphold the Ukrainian people’s right to live in peace on their territory and within their internationally-recognized borders. That’s why we’ve always condemned the Russian war of aggression.

We’re at a moment when I hope peace can be built, and I want to pay tribute to the efforts made by US diplomacy. But I also want to remind you of the facts. There’s an aggressor, Russia, and an aggressee, Ukraine. A few weeks ago, under American impetus, President Zelenskyy made an incredible gesture. He said: “I agree to an unconditional ceasefire”.

The only thing we have to ensure, the only thing – I repeated this to President Trump, to whom I spoke two days ago during the night – is for President Putin to finally stop lying. When President Putin talks to the US negotiators, he tells them: “I want peace.” When he talks to the whole planet, he says: “I personally want peace.” He continues to bomb Ukraine. He continues to kill people in Ukraine. There’s only one reply we’re waiting for. Does President Putin agree to an unconditional ceasefire? The Americans have proposed it, the Europeans support it, and President Zelenskyy has said yes. If President Putin says yes, the weapons fall silent tomorrow and lives are saved. The international community has just one thing to do, and America’s irritation should focus on only one person: President Putin. He must answer the question he’s asking him. Then we’ll be able to build a just, solid, lasting, robust peace – in other words, a peace that makes it possible to find territorial concessions and solid security guarantees.

But as I speak, it’s not as if nothing had happened in the past few weeks. The Americans have proposed something, the Ukrainians have said yes, and we support it. Now Russia must provide its response. If Russia says, I’m not ready for a ceasefire, it will have lied to the US President, it will have lied to all those it told it wanted peace, and we’ll have to act accordingly. If it says yes, we’ll have a ceasefire tomorrow. (…)

Are you going to speak to President Trump?

THE PRESIDENT – I spoke to him 24 hours ago, the night before yesterday.

Do you think he can modify his position? Or is he sticking with positions that are difficult to reconcile with those of the Europeans?

THE PRESIDENT – He wants to find agreements, and I completely respect him. He wants a comprehensive peace agreement – he’s the negotiator too. But let me put things back in the right order. There can be no peace agreement if there isn’t already an agreement on what he’s got from President Zelenskyy, which was a huge step forward by President Zelenskyy.

I say this very emphatically here: the first step, the one that – if I can put it like this – marks the beginning of everything, is the unconditional ceasefire that the Russians must accept.

So, no freezing of the ceasefire line, of the current front line?

THE PRESIDENT – But all the other issues are issues that come under a peace negotiation, which must subsequently be carried out, and they’ll take into account the military positions, the territorial issues and the security issues. But you can’t ask for this or that to be accepted while Russia continues bombing Kyiv. Put yourself in President Zelenskyy’s shoes: do you think he can make gestures of openness when his capital is currently being bombed? Let’s be reasonable. (…)

When Donald Trump says that Ukraine lost Crimea years ago, is he wrong? Is he playing into Russia’s hands?

THE PRESIDENT – No, he’s describing a factual situation. But is it our job to describe a factual situation? Since 2014, an army has conquered a territory, totally illegally, through violence and by killing people. That’s describing a factual situation, what he’s saying. Does that mean we should approve of it? No, in any case, not now. And it isn’t for us to do so, as I’ve always said, it’s up to Ukraine and its representatives to say that. So our collective job – which is what President Trump has committed to do – is to say “ceasefire”. (…)./.

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 29, 2025

MIL-OSI: NXP Semiconductors Reports First Quarter 2025 Results, Announces Management Transition

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

EINDHOVEN, The Netherlands, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NXP Semiconductors N.V. (NASDAQ: NXPI) today reported financial results for the first quarter, which ended March 30, 2025. “NXP delivered quarterly revenue of $2.84 billion, in-line with the midpoint of guidance. NXP’s first-quarter results and guidance for the second quarter underpin a cautious optimism that NXP continues to effectively navigate through a challenging set of market conditions. We are operating in a very uncertain environment influenced by tariffs with volatile direct and indirect effects. Considering these external factors, we are redoubling our efforts to manage what is in our direct control, enabling NXP to drive solid profitability and earnings,” said Kurt Sievers, NXP President and Chief Executive Officer.

The company announced that Mr. Sievers has informed the Board of Directors of his intention to retire from NXP at the end of 2025. “Kurt has been a dynamic, visionary, and highly effective CEO of NXP since May 2020,” said Julie Southern, NXP’s Chair of the Board of Directors. “He has been instrumental in leading the definition and implementation of NXP’s strategy to be the leader in intelligent systems at the edge within the Automotive and Industrial & IoT end markets. After a successful 30-year career with NXP, we are saddened to see Kurt retire. We and the entire NXP community thank him for his leadership and wish him the absolute best in his retirement.”

Following a comprehensive and thorough succession planning process, NXP’s Board of Directors announced that it has unanimously approved Mr. Rafael Sotomayor to succeed Mr. Sievers as President, effective April 28, 2025. Messrs. Sievers and Sotomayor will work closely to orchestrate a smooth leadership transition until October 28, 2025, when Mr. Sotomayor will assume the role of President and Chief Executive Officer. “Rafael has been an integral part of creating and shaping NXP’s strategy and enabling the company’s success. We are confident he is ideally suited to assume the role of President and CEO at NXP, and to execute the company’s vision for leadership in the intelligent systems at the edge within the Automotive and Industrial & IoT end markets,” said Ms. Southern.

Mr. Sievers’ departure is a purely personal decision and is not related to any disagreement with the Board of Directors, or any issues relating to the strategic or financial performance of the company.

Key Highlights for the First Quarter 2025:

Revenue was $2.84 billion, down 9 percent year-on-year;
GAAP gross margin was 55.0 percent, GAAP operating margin was 25.5 percent and GAAP diluted Net Income per Share was $1.92;
Non-GAAP gross margin was 56.1 percent, non-GAAP operating margin was 31.9 percent, and non-GAAP diluted Net Income per Share was $2.64;
Cash flow from operations was $565 million, with net capex investments of $138 million, resulting in non-GAAP free cash flow of $427 million;
Capital return during the quarter was $561 million, representing 131 percent of first quarter non-GAAP free cash flow. Share buybacks were $303 million and dividends paid during the quarter were $258 million. After the end of the first quarter, between March 31, 2025, and April 25, 2025, NXP executed via a 10b5-1 program additional share repurchases totaling $90 million;
On January 7, 2025, NXP announced the MCX L14x and MCX L25x, the first families in the ultra-low-power L Series of the MCX microcontroller portfolio. The MCX L series features a dual-core architecture with an independent ultra-low-power sense domain to enable challenging battery-limited applications, such as sensors for industrial monitoring, building management, and flow metering;
On January 8, 2025, Honeywell and NXP announced an expansion of its partnership that will accelerate aviation product development and chart the path for autonomous flight. The Honeywell Anthem cockpit is powered by NXP’s i.MX 8 applications processors to help improve operational efficiency, safety and unlock value for pilots and operators. This builds on the companies’ existing relationship, which is focused on helping optimize how building management systems sense and securely control energy consumption;
On January 15, 2025, NXP announced it has secured a €1 billion loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB) to advance the company’s RDI investments across its broad portfolio of semiconductor solutions. The €1 billion loan facility carries a weighted average interest rate of 4.54 percent when drawn in dollar denominated tranches, under the current market conditions and has a duration of six years;
On February 10, 2025, NXP announced the agreement to acquire Kinara Inc., an industry leader in high performance, energy-efficient and programmable discrete neural processing units (NPUs) to enable intelligence at the edge solutions. The all-cash transaction was valued at $307 million and is expected to close in the first half of 2025, subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory clearances;
On March 11, 2025, NXP announced the new S32K5 family of automotive microcontrollers (MCU), the automotive industry’s first 16nm FinFET MCU with embedded magnetic RAM (MRAM). The S32K5 MCU family will extend the NXP CoreRide platform with pre-integrated zonal and electrification system solutions for scalable software-defined vehicle (SDV) architectures.

Summary of Reported First Quarter 2025 ($ millions, unaudited) ⁽¹⁾

	Q1 2025			Q4 2024			Q1 2024			Q – Q		Y – Y
Total Revenue	$	2,835		$	3,111		$	3,126		-9	%	-9	%
GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,560		$	1,678		$	1,783		-7	%	-13	%
Gross Profit Adjustments ⁽ⁱ⁾	$	(31	)	$	(111	)	$	(35	)
Non-GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,591		$	1,789		$	1,818		-11	%	-12	%
GAAP Gross Margin		55.0	%		53.9	%		57.0	%
Non-GAAP Gross Margin		56.1	%		57.5	%		58.2	%
GAAP Operating Income (Loss)	$	723		$	675		$	856		7	%	-16	%
Operating Income Adjustments ⁽ⁱ⁾	$	(181	)	$	(390	)	$	(224	)
Non-GAAP Operating Income	$	904		$	1,065		$	1,080		-15	%	-16	%
GAAP Operating Margin		25.5	%		21.7	%		27.4	%
Non-GAAP Operating Margin		31.9	%		34.2	%		34.5	%
GAAP Net Income (Loss) attributable to Stockholders	$	490		$	495		$	639		-1	%	-23	%
Net Income Adjustments ⁽ⁱ⁾	$	(183	)	$	(322	)	$	(201	)
Non-GAAP Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Stockholders	$	673		$	817		$	840		-18	%	-20	%
GAAP diluted Net Income (Loss) per Share ⁽ⁱⁱ⁾	$	1.92		$	1.93		$	2.47		—	%	-22	%
Non-GAAP diluted Net Income (Loss) per Share ⁽ⁱⁱ⁾	$	2.64		$	3.18		$	3.24		-17	%	-19	%

Additional information
	Q1 2025		Q4 2024		Q1 2024		Q – Q		Y – Y
Automotive	$	1,674	$	1,790	$	1,804	-6	%	-7	%
Industrial & IoT	$	508	$	516	$	574	-2	%	-11	%
Mobile	$	338	$	396	$	349	-15	%	-3	%
Comm. Infra. & Other	$	315	$	409	$	399	-23	%	-21	%
DIO		169		151		144
DPO		62		65		65
DSO		34		30		26
Cash Conversion Cycle		141		116		105
Channel Inventory (weeks)		9		8		7
Gross Financial Leverage ⁽ⁱⁱⁱ⁾	2.4x		2.1x		1.9x
Net Financial Leverage ^(iv)	1.6x		1.5x		1.3x

Additional Information for the First Quarter 2025:

For an explanation of GAAP to non-GAAP adjustments, please see “Non-GAAP Financial Measures”.
Refer to Table 1 below for the weighted average number of diluted shares for the presented periods.
Gross financial leverage is defined as gross debt divided by trailing twelve months adjusted EBITDA.
Net financial leverage is defined as net debt divided by trailing twelve months adjusted EBITDA.

Guidance for the Second Quarter 2025: ($ millions, except Per Share data) ⁽¹⁾


	GAAP			Reconciliation	non-GAAP
	Low	Mid	High		Low	Mid	High
Total Revenue	$2,800	$2,900	$3,000		$2,800	$2,900	$3,000
Q-Q	-1%	2%	6%		-1%	2%	6%
Y-Y	-10%	-7%	-4%		-10%	-7%	-4%
Gross Profit	$1,533	$1,604	$1,675	$(29)	$1,562	$1,633	$1,704
Gross Margin	54.8%	55.3%	55.8%		55.8%	56.3%	56.8%
Operating Income (loss)	$680	$741	$802	$(182)	$862	$923	$984
Operating Margin	24.3%	25.6%	26.7%		30.8%	31.8%	32.8%
Financial Income (expense)	$(100)	$(100)	$(100)	$(12)	$(88)	$(88)	$(88)
Tax rate	18.5%-19.5%				17.0%-18.0%
Equity-accounted investees	$(8)	$(8)	$(8)	$(6)	$(2)	$(2)	$(2)
Non-controlling interests	$(9)	$(9)	$(9)		$(9)	$(9)	$(9)
Shares – diluted	255.0	255.0	255.0		255.0	255.0	255.0
Earnings Per Share – diluted	$1.78	$1.97	$2.16		$2.46	$2.66	$2.86

Note (1) Additional Information:

GAAP Gross Profit is expected to include Purchase Price Accounting (“PPA”) effects, $(7) million; Share-based Compensation, $(15) million; Other Incidentals, $(7) million;
GAAP Operating Income (loss) is expected to include PPA effects, $(33) million; Share-based Compensation, $(115) million; Restructuring and Other Incidentals, $(34) million;
GAAP Financial Income (expense) is expected to include Other financial expense $(12) million;
GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees is expected to include results relating to non-foundry equity-accounted investees $(6) million;
GAAP diluted EPS is expected to include the adjustments noted above for PPA effects, Share-based Compensation, Restructuring and Other Incidentals in GAAP Operating Income (loss), the adjustment for Other financial expense, the adjustment for results relating to non-foundry equity-accounted investees and the adjustment on Tax due to the earlier mentioned adjustments.

NXP has based the guidance included in this release on judgments and estimates that management believes are reasonable given its assessment of historical trends and other information reasonably available as of the date of this release. Please note, the guidance included in this release consists of predictions only, and is subject to a wide range of known and unknown risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond NXP’s control. The guidance included in this release should not be regarded as representations by NXP that the estimated results will be achieved. Actual results may vary materially from the guidance we provide today. In relation to the use of non-GAAP financial information see the note regarding “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below. For the factors, risks, and uncertainties to which judgments, estimates and forward-looking statements generally are subject see the note regarding “Forward-looking Statements.” We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, including the guidance set forth herein, to reflect future events or circumstances.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

In managing NXP’s business on a consolidated basis, management develops an annual operating plan, which is approved by our Board of Directors, using non-GAAP financial measures, that are not in accordance with, nor an alternative to, U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). In measuring performance against this plan, management considers the actual or potential impacts on these non-GAAP financial measures from actions taken to reduce costs with the goal of increasing our gross margin and operating margin and when assessing appropriate levels of research and development efforts. In addition, management relies upon these non-GAAP financial measures when making decisions about product spending, administrative budgets, and other operating expenses. We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures, when coupled with the GAAP results and the reconciliations to corresponding GAAP financial measures, provide a more complete understanding of the Company’s results of operations and the factors and trends affecting NXP’s business. We believe that they enable investors to perform additional comparisons of our operating results, to assess our liquidity and capital position and to analyze financial performance excluding the effect of expenses unrelated to core operating performance, certain non-cash expenses and share-based compensation expense, which may obscure trends in NXP’s underlying performance. This information also enables investors to compare financial results between periods where certain items may vary independent of business performance, and allow for greater transparency with respect to key metrics used by management.

These non-GAAP financial measures are provided in addition to, and not as a substitute for, or superior to, measures of financial performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. The presentation of these and other similar items in NXP’s non-GAAP financial results should not be interpreted as implying that these items are non-recurring, infrequent, or unusual. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to the most comparable measures calculated in accordance with GAAP are provided in the financial statements portion of this release in a schedule entitled “Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Results (unaudited).” Please refer to the NXP Historic Financial Model file found on the Financial Information page of the Investor Relations section of our website at https://investors.nxp.com for additional information related to our rationale for using these non-GAAP financial measures, as well as the impact of these measures on the presentation of NXP’s operations.

In addition to providing financial information on a basis consistent with GAAP, NXP also provides the following selected financial measures on a non-GAAP basis: (i) Gross profit, (ii) Gross margin, (iii) Research and development, (iv) Selling, general and administrative, (v) Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, (vi) Other income, (vii) Operating income (loss), (viii) Operating margin, (ix) Financial Income (expense), (x) Income tax benefit (provision), (xi) Results relating to non-foundry equity-accounted investees, (xii) Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders, (xiii) Earnings per Share – Diluted, (xiv) EBITDA, adjusted EBITDA and trailing 12 month adjusted EBITDA, and (xv) free cash flow, trailing 12 month free cash flow and trailing 12 month free cash flow as a percent of Revenue. The non-GAAP information excludes, where applicable, the amortization of acquisition related intangible assets, the purchase accounting effect on inventory and property, plant and equipment, merger related costs (including integration costs), certain items related to divestitures, share-based compensation expense, restructuring and asset impairment charges, extinguishment of debt, foreign exchange gains and losses, income tax effect on adjustments described above and results from non-foundry equity-accounted investments.

The difference in the benefit (provision) for income taxes between our GAAP and non-GAAP results relates to the income tax effects of the GAAP to non-GAAP adjustments that we make and the income tax effect of any discrete items that occur in the interim period. Discrete items primarily relate to unexpected tax events that may occur as these amounts cannot be forecasted (e.g., the impact of changes in tax law and/or rates, changes in estimates or resolved tax audits relating to prior year tax provisions, the excess or deficit tax effects on share-based compensation, etc.).

Conference Call and Webcast Information

The company will host a conference call with the financial community on Tuesday, April 29, 2025 at 8:00 a.m. U.S. Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) to review the first quarter 2025 results in detail.

Interested parties may preregister to obtain a user-specific access code for the call here.

The call will be webcast and can be accessed from the NXP Investor Relations website at www.nxp.com. A replay of the call will be available on the NXP Investor Relations website within 24 hours of the actual call.

About NXP Semiconductors

NXP Semiconductors N.V. (NASDAQ: NXPI) is the trusted partner for innovative solutions in the automotive, industrial & IoT, mobile, and communications infrastructure markets. NXP’s “Brighter Together” approach combines leading-edge technology with pioneering people to develop system solutions that make the connected world better, safer, and more secure. The company has operations in more than 30 countries and posted revenue of $2.84 billion in 2024. Find out more at www.nxp.com.

Forward-looking Statements

This document includes forward-looking statements which include statements regarding NXP’s business strategy, financial condition, results of operations, market data, as well as any other statements which are not historical facts. By their nature, forward-looking statements are subject to numerous factors, risks and uncertainties that could cause actual outcomes and results to be materially different from those projected. These factors, risks and uncertainties include the following: market demand and semiconductor industry conditions; our ability to successfully introduce new technologies and products; the demand for the goods into which NXP’s products are incorporated; trade disputes between the U.S. and China, potential increase of barriers to international trade and resulting disruptions to NXP’s established supply chains; the impact of government actions and regulations, including restrictions on the export of US-regulated products and technology; increasing and evolving cybersecurity threats and privacy risks, including theft of sensitive or confidential data; the ability to generate sufficient cash, raise sufficient capital or refinance corporate debt at or before maturity to meet both NXP’s debt service and research and development and capital investment requirements; our ability to accurately estimate demand and match our production capacity accordingly or obtain supplies from third-party producers to meet demand; our access to production capacity from third-party outsourcing partners, and any events that might affect their business or NXP’s relationship with them; our ability to secure adequate and timely supply of equipment and materials from suppliers; our ability to avoid operational problems and product defects and, if such issues were to arise, to correct them quickly; our ability to form strategic partnerships and joint ventures and to successfully cooperate with our alliance partners; our ability to win competitive bid selection processes; our ability to develop products for use in customers’ equipment and products; the ability to successfully hire and retain key management and senior product engineers; global hostilities, including the invasion of Ukraine by Russia and resulting regional instability, sanctions and any other retaliatory measures taken against Russia and the continued hostilities and the armed conflict in the Middle East, which could adversely impact the global supply chain, disrupt our operations or negatively impact the demand for our products in our primary end markets; the ability to maintain good relationships with NXP’s suppliers; and a change in tax laws could have an effect on our estimated effective tax rate. In addition, this document contains information concerning the semiconductor industry, our end markets and business generally, which is forward-looking in nature and is based on a variety of assumptions regarding the ways in which the semiconductor industry, our end markets and business will develop. NXP has based these assumptions on information currently available, if any one or more of these assumptions turn out to be incorrect, actual results may differ from those predicted. While NXP does not know what impact any such differences may have on its business, if there are such differences, its future results of operations and its financial condition could be materially adversely affected. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak to results only as of the date the statements were made. Except for any ongoing obligation to disclose material information as required by the United States federal securities laws, NXP does not have any intention or obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements after we distribute this document, whether to reflect any future events or circumstances or otherwise. For a discussion of potential risks and uncertainties, please refer to the risk factors listed in our SEC filings. Copies of our SEC filings are available on our Investor Relations website, www.nxp.com/investor or from the SEC website, www.sec.gov.

For further information, please contact:

Investors: Jeff Palmer jeff.palmer@nxp.com +1 408 205 0687	Media: Paige Iven paige.iven@nxp.com +1 817 975 0602

NXP-CORP

NXP Semiconductors
Table 1: Condensed consolidated statement of operations (unaudited)

($ in millions except share data)	Three months ended
	March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024

Revenue	$	2,835		$	3,111		$	3,126
Cost of revenue		(1,275	)		(1,433	)		(1,343	)
Gross profit		1,560			1,678			1,783
Research and development		(547	)		(612	)		(564	)
Selling, general and administrative		(281	)		(323	)		(306	)
Amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets		(27	)		(28	)		(51	)
Total operating expenses		(855	)		(963	)		(921	)
Other income (expense)		18			(40	)		(6	)
Operating income (loss)		723			675			856
Financial income (expense):
Other financial income (expense)		(92	)		(91	)		(70	)
Income (loss) before income taxes		631			584			786
Benefit (provision) for income taxes		(130	)		(77	)		(141	)
Results relating to equity-accounted investees		(4	)		(2	)		(1	)
Net income (loss)		497			505			644
Less: Net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests		7			10			5
Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders		490			495			639

Earnings per share data:
Net income (loss) per common share attributable to stockholders in $
Basic	$	1.93		$	1.95		$	2.49
Diluted	$	1.92		$	1.93		$	2.47

Weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period (in thousands):
Basic		253,709			254,349			256,567
Diluted		255,018			256,628			258,954

NXP Semiconductors
Table 2: Condensed consolidated balance sheet (unaudited)

	($ in millions)	As of
		March 30, 2025		December 31, 2024		March 31, 2024
ASSETS
Current assets:
	Cash and cash equivalents	$	3,988	$	3,292	$	2,908
	Short-term deposits		—		—		400
	Accounts receivable, net		1,060		1,032		881
	Inventories, net		2,350		2,356		2,102
	Other current assets		627		625		603
Total current assets			8,025		7,305		6,894

Non-current assets:
	Deferred tax assets		1,284		1,251		1,048
	Other non-current assets		1,942		1,796		1,290
	Property, plant and equipment, net		3,210		3,267		3,304
	Identified intangible assets, net		777		836		839
	Goodwill		9,942		9,930		9,945
Total non-current assets			17,155		17,080		16,426

Total assets			25,180		24,385		23,320

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current liabilities:
	Accounts payable		863		1,017		954
	Restructuring liabilities-current		75		147		68
	Other current liabilities		1,412		1,434		1,906
	Short-term debt		1,499		500		—
Total current liabilities			3,849		3,098		2,928

Non-current liabilities:
	Long-term debt		10,226		10,354		10,178
	Restructuring liabilities		4		10		9
	Other non-current liabilities		1,424		1,392		1,055
Total non-current liabilities			11,654		11,756		11,242

	Non-controlling interests		355		348		321
	Stockholders’ equity		9,322		9,183		8,829
Total equity			9,677		9,531		9,150

Total liabilities and equity			25,180		24,385		23,320

NXP Semiconductors
Table 3: Condensed consolidated statement of cash flows (unaudited)

($ in millions)	Three months ended
	March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income (loss)	$	497		$	505		$	644
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used for) operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		209			259			235
Share-based compensation		127			117			115
Amortization of discount (premium) on debt, net		1			1			1
Amortization of debt issuance costs		1			2			2
Net (gain) loss on sale of assets		(22	)		(1	)		(2	)
Results relating to equity-accounted investees		4			2			1
(Gain) loss on equity securities, net		6			6			2
Deferred tax expense (benefit)		(27	)		(145	)		(64	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
(Increase) decrease in receivables and other current assets		(29	)		(25	)		(25	)
(Increase) decrease in inventories		6			(122	)		32
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable and other liabilities		(110	)		16			(102	)
(Increase) decrease in other non-current assets		(106	)		(218	)		6
Exchange differences		4			(1	)		3
Other items		4			(5	)		3
Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities		565			391			851

Cash flows from investing activities:
Purchase of identified intangible assets		(25	)		(36	)		(32	)
Capital expenditures on property, plant and equipment		(139	)		(130	)		(226	)
Insurance recoveries received for equipment damage		—			—			2
Proceeds from the disposals of property, plant and equipment		1			1			2
Advance payment from sale of property, plant and equipment		—			30			—
Proceeds of short-term deposits		—			400			9
Purchase of investments		(53	)		(67	)		(34	)
Proceeds from the sale of investments		—			—			5
Net cash provided by (used for) investing activities		(216	)		198			(274	)

Cash flows from financing activities:
Repurchase of long-term debt		—			—			(1,000	)
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt		370			670			—
Cash paid for debt issuance costs		—			(1	)		—
Proceeds from the issuance of commercial paper notes		646			—			—
Repayment of commercial paper notes		(146	)		—			—
Dividends paid to common stockholders		(258	)		(258	)		(261	)
Proceeds from issuance of common stock through stock plans		37			3			37
Purchase of treasury shares and restricted stock unit withholdings		(303	)		(455	)		(303	)
Other, net		(1	)		—			(1	)
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities		345			(41	)		(1,528	)

Effect of changes in exchange rates on cash positions		2			(4	)		(3	)
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		696			544			(954	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		3,292			2,748			3,862
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period		3,988			3,292			2,908

Net cash paid during the period for:
Interest		41			92			38
Income taxes, net of refunds		96			280			198
Net gain (loss) on sale of assets:
Cash proceeds from the sale of assets		31			1			2
Book value of these assets		(9	)		—			—
Non-cash investing activities:
Non-cash capital expenditures		108			161			223

NXP Semiconductors
Table 4: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Results (unaudited)

($ in millions except share data)	Three months ended
	March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,560		$	1,678		$	1,783
PPA Effects		(8	)		(11	)		(12	)
Restructuring		(4	)		(21	)		(3	)
Share-based compensation		(16	)		(15	)		(15	)
Other incidentals		(3	)		(64	)		(5	)
Non-GAAP Gross Profit	$	1,591		$	1,789		$	1,818
GAAP Gross margin		55.0	%		53.9	%		57.0	%
Non-GAAP Gross margin		56.1	%		57.5	%		58.2	%
GAAP Research and development	$	(547	)	$	(612	)	$	(564	)
Restructuring		(7	)		(50	)		(3	)
Share-based compensation		(64	)		(60	)		(58	)
Other incidentals		(1	)		(5	)		(1	)
Non-GAAP Research and development	$	(475	)	$	(497	)	$	(502	)
GAAP Selling, general and administrative	$	(281	)	$	(323	)	$	(306	)
Restructuring		(3	)		(41	)		(1	)
Share-based compensation		(47	)		(42	)		(42	)
Other incidentals		(20	)		(12	)		(29	)
Non-GAAP Selling, general and administrative	$	(211	)	$	(228	)	$	(234	)
GAAP Operating income (loss)	$	723		$	675		$	856
PPA effects		(40	)		(39	)		(63	)
Restructuring		(14	)		(112	)		(7	)
Share-based compensation		(127	)		(117	)		(115	)
Other incidentals		—			(122	)		(39	)
Non-GAAP Operating income (loss)	$	904		$	1,065		$	1,080
GAAP Operating margin		25.5	%		21.7	%		27.4	%
Non-GAAP Operating margin		31.9	%		34.2	%		34.5	%
GAAP Income tax benefit (provision)	$	(130	)	$	(77	)	$	(141	)
Income tax effect		13			87			30
Non-GAAP Income tax benefit (provision)	$	(143	)	$	(164	)	$	(171	)
GAAP Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders	$	490		$	495		$	639
PPA Effects		(40	)		(39	)		(63	)
Restructuring		(14	)		(112	)		(7	)
Share-based compensation		(127	)		(117	)		(115	)
Other incidentals		—			(122	)		(39	)
Other adjustments:
Adjustments to financial income (expense)		(12	)		(17	)		(6	)
Income tax effect		13			87			30
Results relating to equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		(3	)		(2	)		(1	)
Non-GAAP Net income (loss) attributable to stockholders	$	673		$	817		$	840


Additional Information:
1. Refer to Table 7 below for further information regarding the results relating to equity-accounted investees.

GAAP net income (loss) per common share attributable to stockholders – diluted	$	1.92		$	1.93		$	2.47
PPA Effects		(0.16	)		(0.15	)		(0.24	)
Restructuring		(0.05	)		(0.44	)		(0.03	)
Share-based compensation		(0.50	)		(0.46	)		(0.44	)
Other incidentals		—			(0.47	)		(0.15	)
Other adjustments:
Adjustments to financial income (expense)		(0.05	)		(0.07	)		(0.02	)
Income tax effect		0.05			0.34			0.11
Results relating to equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		(0.01	)		—			—
Non-GAAP net income (loss) per common share attributable to stockholders – diluted	$	2.64		$	3.18		$	3.24


Additional Information:
1. Refer to Table 7 below for further information regarding the results relating to equity-accounted investees.

NXP Semiconductors
Table 5: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Financial income (expense) (unaudited)

	($ in millions)	Three months ended
		March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
GAAP Financial income (expense)		$	(92	)	$	(91	)	$	(70	)
	Foreign exchange loss		(3	)		3			(1	)
	Other financial expense		(9	)		(20	)		(5	)
Non-GAAP Financial income (expense)		$	(80	)	$	(74	)	$	(64	)

NXP Semiconductors
Table 6: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Other income (expense) (unaudited)

	($ in millions)	Three months ended
		March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
GAAP Other income (expense)		$	18		$	(40	)	$	(6	)
	PPA effects		(5	)		—			—
	Other incidentals		24			(41	)		(4	)
Non-GAAP Other income (expense)		$	(1	)	$	1		$	(2	)

NXP Semiconductors
Table 7: Financial Reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees (unaudited)

	($ in millions)	Three months ended
		March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees		$	(4	)	$	(2	)	$	(1	)
	Results of equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		(3	)		(2	)		(1	)
Non-GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees		$	(1	)	$	—		$	—

Additional Information:
We adjust our results relating to equity-accounted investees for those results from investments over which NXP has significant influence, but not control, and whose business activities are not related to the core operating performance of NXP. Our equity-investments in foundry partners are part of our long-term core operating performance and accordingly those results comprise the Non-GAAP Results relating to equity-accounted investees.

NXP Semiconductors
Table 8: Adjusted EBITDA and Free Cash Flow (unaudited)

($ in millions)	Three months ended
	March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
GAAP Net income (loss)	$	497		$	505		$	644
Reconciling items to EBITDA (Non-GAAP)
Financial (income) expense		92			91			70
(Benefit) provision for income taxes		130			77			141
Depreciation and impairment		143			190			145
Amortization		66			69			90
EBITDA (Non-GAAP)	$	928		$	932		$	1,090
Reconciling items to adjusted EBITDA (Non-GAAP)
Results of equity-accounted investees, excluding Foundry investees¹		3			2			1
Purchase accounting effect on asset sale		5			—			—
Restructuring		14			112			7
Share-based compensation		127			117			115
Other incidental items²		(4	)		77			39
Adjusted EBITDA (Non-GAAP)	$	1,073		$	1,240		$	1,252
Trailing twelve month adjusted EBITDA (Non-GAAP)	$	4,885		$	5,064		$	5,395

Additional Information:
1. Refer to Table 7 above for further information regarding the results relating to equity-accounted investees.
2. Excluding from total other incidental items, charges included in depreciation, amortization or impairment reconciling items:
– other incidental items		4			45			—



($ in millions)	Three months ended
	March 30, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
Net cash provided by (used for) operating activities	$	565		$	391		$	851
Net capital expenditures on property, plant and equipment		(138	)		(99	)		(224	)
Non-GAAP free cash flow	$	427		$	292		$	627
Trailing twelve month non-GAAP free cash flow	$	1,889		$	2,089		$	2,933
Trailing twelve month non-GAAP free cash flow as percent of Revenue		15	%		17	%		22	%

The MIL Network –

April 29, 2025

MIL-OSI: RBB Bancorp Reports First Quarter 2025 Earnings

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

LOS ANGELES, April 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — RBB Bancorp (NASDAQ:RBB) and its subsidiaries, Royal Business Bank (the “Bank”) and RBB Asset Management Company (“RAM”), collectively referred to herein as the “Company,” announced financial results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.

First Quarter 2025 Highlights

Net income totaled $2.3 million, or $0.13 diluted earnings per share
Return on average assets of 0.24%, compared to 0.44% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024
Net interest margin expanded to 2.88%, up from 2.76% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024
Net loans held for investment growth of $89.8 million, or 12% annualized
Nonperforming assets decreased $16.5 million, or 20.3%, to $64.6 million at March 31, 2025, down from $81.0 million at December 31, 2024
Book value and tangible book value per share⁽¹⁾ increased to $28.77 and $24.63 at March 31, 2025, up from $28.66 and $24.51 at December 31, 2024

The Company reported net income of $2.3 million, or $0.13 diluted earnings per share, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to net income of $4.4 million, or $0.25 diluted earnings per share, for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. First quarter of 2025 net income included $6.7 million in pre-tax provision for credit losses mostly related to reducing exposure to nonperforming loans, including higher specific reserves.

“First quarter net income declined to $2.3 million, or 13 cents per share, as we took decisive action to address our nonperforming loans,” said David Morris, Chief Executive Officer of RBB Bancorp. “We reduced our net exposure to nonperforming loans to $51 million, including specific reserves, or 32% since year end. We remain focused on resolving our nonperforming loans as quickly as possible while minimizing the impact to earnings and capital and we think our actions in the first quarter reflect this.”

“Our loan production was relatively strong during the first quarter driven by continued execution of our initiatives, which resulted in 12% annualized net loan growth. Our loan prospect pipeline continues to be healthy, and we anticipate loan growth to continue in the second quarter, albeit likely at a more moderate pace,” said Johnny Lee, President of RBB Bancorp and President and Chief Executive Officer of the Bank. “While the market environment is volatile, we have not observed significant signs of financial impact to our clients at this time.”

)

Reconciliations of the non–U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) measures included at the end of this press release.

Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

Net interest income was $26.2 million for the first quarter of 2025, compared to $26.0 million for the fourth quarter of 2024. The $186,000 increase was due to a $2.4 million decrease in interest expense, offset by a $2.2 million decrease in interest income. The decrease in interest income was mostly due to the impact of fewer days in the quarter of $1.2 million and lower average excess liquidity (cash and cash equivalents and investment securities) of $1.5 million. The decrease in interest expense was mostly due to the impact of lower average funding rates of $1.5 million, fewer days in the quarter of $621,000 and lower average interest-bearing liabilities of $336,000. The $1.5 million attributed to lower average funding rates included $1.8 million due to a 29 basis point decrease in the average cost of interest-bearing deposits.

The net interest margin (“NIM”) was 2.88% for the first quarter of 2025, an increase of 12 basis points from 2.76% for the fourth quarter of 2024. The NIM expansion was due to a 17 basis point decrease in the overall cost of funds, partially offset by a 3 basis point decrease in the yield on average interest-earning assets. The yield on average interest-earning assets decreased to 5.76% for the first quarter of 2025 from 5.79% for the fourth quarter of 2024 due mainly to a decrease in the yield on average cash and cash equivalents of 32 basis points and average loans of 2 basis points, partially offset by the benefit of a change in the mix in average-earning assets. Average loans represented 84% of average interest-earning assets in the first quarter of 2025, as compared to 82% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

The average cost of funds decreased to 3.15% for the first quarter of 2025 from 3.32% for the fourth quarter of 2024, driven by a 29 basis point decrease in the average cost of interest-bearing deposits, partially offset by a 38 basis point increase in the average cost of borrowings. The average cost of interest-bearing deposits decreased to 3.77% for the first quarter of 2025 from 4.06% for the fourth quarter of 2024. During the first quarter of 2025, $150.0 million in Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances with an average cost of 1.18% matured and were largely replaced with $110.0 million in FHLB advances with various terms at an average rate of 3.88%. The overall funding mix for the first quarter of 2025 remained relatively unchanged from the fourth quarter of 2024 with total deposits representing 90% of the funding mix and average noninterest-bearing deposits representing 17% of average total deposits. The all-in average spot rate for total deposits was 3.06% at March 31, 2025.

Provision for Credit Losses

The provision for credit losses was $6.7 million for the first quarter of 2025 compared to $6.0 million for the fourth quarter of 2024. The first quarter of 2025 provision for credit losses was due to an increase in specific reserves of $2.8 million, net charge-offs of $2.6 million and an increase in general reserves of $1.3 million due mainly to net loan growth. The first quarter increase in specific reserves related mostly to two lending relationships. Net charge-offs included $1.4 million related to a bulk sale of $10.8 million in underperforming single-family residential (“SFR”) mortgage loans, of which $6.5 million were on nonaccrual at the end of the year, and $1.2 million related to an $8.8 million loan transferred to other real estate owned (“OREO”) and subsequently sold. Net charge-offs on an annualized basis represented 0.35% of average loans for the first quarter of 2025 compared to 0.26% for the fourth quarter of 2024. The first quarter provision also took into consideration factors such as changes in loan balances, the loan portfolio mix, the outlook for economic conditions and market interest rates, and changes in credit quality metrics, including changes in nonperforming loans, special mention and substandard loans during the period.

Noninterest Income

Noninterest income for the first quarter of 2025 was $2.3 million, a decrease of $434,000 from $2.7 million for the fourth quarter of 2024. This decrease was mostly due to the fourth quarter of 2024 including $258,000 of income from a Bank Enterprise Award grant (included in other income) and lower net gain on sale of loans as compared to the fourth quarter of 2024.

Noninterest Expense

Noninterest expense for the first quarter of 2025 was $18.5 million, an increase of $873,000 from $17.6 million for the fourth quarter of 2024. This increase was mostly due to higher salaries and employee benefits expense of $716,000 attributed to higher payroll taxes and annual pay increases, which are typically reflected in the first quarter of the year. The annualized noninterest expenses to average assets ratio was 1.90% for the first quarter of 2025, up from 1.76% for the fourth quarter of 2024. The efficiency ratio was 65.1% for the first quarter of 2025, up from 61.5% for the fourth quarter of 2024 due mostly to higher noninterest expense.

Income Taxes

The effective tax rate was 28.2% for the first quarter of 2025 and 13.3% for the fourth quarter of 2024. The increase in the effective tax rate for the first quarter was due in part to lower tax credits combined with higher estimated pre-tax net income for the full year of 2025 as compared to the prior quarter.2

Balance Sheet

At March 31, 2025, total assets were $4.0 billion, a $16.9 million increase compared to December 31, 2024, and a $131.4 million increase compared to March 31, 2024.

Loan and Securities Portfolio

Loans held for investment (“HFI”) totaled $3.1 billion as of March 31, 2025, an increase of $89.8 million, or 12% annualized, compared to December 31, 2024 and an increase of $115.7 million, or 3.8%, compared to March 31, 2024. The first quarter of 2025 net loan growth included $201 million in new production with an average yield of 6.77%. When loan sales, charge-offs, and foreclosures totaling $28.6 million are considered, the annualized first quarter net loan growth rate was 16%. The increase from December 31, 2024 was primarily due to a $51.8 million increase in SFR mortgage loans, a $44.0 million increase in commercial real estate (“CRE”) loans, a $6.0 million increase in commercial and industrial (“C&I”) loans and a $3.4 million increase in Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loans, partially offset by a $14.4 million decrease in construction and land development (“C&D”) loans. The loan to deposit ratio was 98.4% at March 31, 2025, compared to 97.5% at December 31, 2024 and 98.6% at March 31, 2024.

As of March 31, 2025, available for sale securities totaled $378.2 million, a decrease of $42.0 million from December 31, 2024, primarily related to the net decrease in short-term commercial paper of $41.4 million due to maturity and purchase activity during the first quarter of 2025. As of March 31, 2025, net unrealized losses totaled $25.0 million, a $4.2 million decrease, when compared to net unrealized losses of $29.2 million as of December 31, 2024.

Deposits

Total deposits were $3.1 billion as of March 31, 2025, an increase of $58.8 million, or 7.7% annualized, compared to December 31, 2024 and an increase of $114.3 million, or 3.8%, compared to March 31, 2024. The increase during the first quarter of 2025 was due to a $93.6 million increase in interest-bearing deposits, while noninterest-bearing deposits decreased $34.8 million. The increase in interest-bearing deposits included increases in non-maturity deposits of $58.2 million and time deposits of $35.5 million. Wholesale deposits totaled $158.5 million at March 31, 2025, and $147.5 million at December 31, 2024. Noninterest-bearing deposits totaled $528.2 million and represented 16.8% of total deposits at March 31, 2025 compared to $563.0 million and 18.3% at December 31, 2024.

Credit Quality

Nonperforming assets totaled $64.6 million, or 1.61% of total assets, at March 31, 2025, down from $81.0 million, or 2.03% of total assets, at December 31, 2024. The $16.5 million decrease in nonperforming assets was due to sales totaling $20.0 million and payoffs or paydowns of $1.8 million, partially offset by the addition of one $5.3 million CRE loan placed on nonaccrual status in the first quarter of 2025. Nonperforming assets included one $4.2 million OREO (included in “Accrued interest and other assets”) at March 31, 2025, which was a nonaccrual loan at December 31, 2024.

Special mention loans totaled $64.3 million, or 2.05% of total loans, at March 31, 2025, down from $65.3 million, or 2.14% of total loans, at December 31, 2024. The $1.1 million decrease was primarily due to the upgrade of one $1.7 million CRE loan to a pass-rated loan, offset by the addition of one $578,000 C&I loan. All special mention loans are paying current.

Substandard loans totaled $76.4 million at March 31, 2025, down from $100.3 million at December 31, 2024. This $24.0 million decrease was primarily due to loan sales totaling $11.7 million, transfers to OREO totaling $12.8 million, of which $8.8 million was subsequently sold during the first quarter of 2025, and payoffs and paydowns totaling $5.4 million, partially offset by the downgrade of two loans totaling $6.2 million. Of the total substandard loans at March 31, 2025, there were $16.0 million on accrual status.

30-89 day delinquent loans, excluding nonperforming loans, totaled $5.9 million, or 0.19% of total loans, at March 31, 2025, down from $22.1 million, or 0.72% of total loans, at December 31, 2024. The $16.2 million decrease was mostly due to $16.3 million in loans returning to current status, $2.9 million in SFR mortgage loans included in the bulk sale of several underperforming SFR mortgage loans and $398,000 in paydowns and payoffs, offset by $3.5 million in new delinquent loans.3

As of March 31, 2025, the allowance for credit losses totaled $52.6 million and was comprised of an allowance for loan losses of $51.9 million and a reserve for unfunded commitments of $629,000 (included in “Accrued interest and other liabilities”). This compares to the allowance for credit losses of $48.5 million, comprised of an allowance for loan losses of $47.7 million and a reserve for unfunded commitments of $729,000 at December 31, 2024. The $4.1 million increase in the allowance for credit losses for the first quarter of 2025 was due to a $6.7 million provision for credit losses offset by net charge-offs of $2.6 million. Net charge-offs included $1.4 million related to a bulk sale of $10.8 million in underperforming SFR mortgage loans, of which $6.5 million were on nonaccrual at the end of the year, and $1.2 million related to an $8.8 million loan transferred to OREO and subsequently sold. The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of loans HFI increased to 1.65% at March 31, 2025, compared to 1.56% at December 31, 2024, due to an increase in specific reserves. The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of nonperforming loans HFI was 86% at March 31, 2025, an increase from 68% at December 31, 2024.

	For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025
*(dollars in thousands)*	Allowance for loan losses			Reserve for unfunded loan commitments			Allowance for credit losses
Beginning balance	$	47,729		$	729		$	48,458
Provision for (reversal of) credit losses		6,846			(100	)		6,746
Less loans charged-off		(2,727	)		—			(2,727	)
Recoveries on loans charged-off		84			—			84
Ending balance	$	51,932		$	629		$	52,561

Shareholders’ Equity

At March 31, 2025, total shareholders’ equity was $510.3 million, a $2.4 million increase compared to December 31, 2024, and a $3.7 million decrease compared to March 31, 2024. The increase in shareholders’ equity for the first quarter of 2025 was due to lower net unrealized losses on available for sale securities of $3.0 million, net income of $2.3 million and equity compensation activity of $43,000, offset by common stock cash dividends paid of $2.9 million. The decrease in shareholders’ equity for the last twelve months was due to common stock repurchases of $19.2 million and dividends paid of $11.6 million on common stock, offset by net income of $20.9 million, lower net unrealized losses on available for sale securities of $3.7 million, and equity compensation activity of $2.5 million. Book value per share and tangible book value per share⁽¹⁾ increased to $28.77 and $24.63 at March 31, 2025, up from $28.66 and $24.51 at December 31, 2024 and up from $27.67 and $23.68 at March 31, 2024.

)

Reconciliations of the non–U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) measures included at the end of this press release.

Corporate Overview

RBB Bancorp is a community-based financial holding company headquartered in Los Angeles, California. As of March 31, 2025, the Company had total assets of $4.0 billion. Its wholly-owned subsidiary, Royal Business Bank, is a full service commercial bank, which provides consumer and business banking services predominately to the Asian-centric communities in Los Angeles County, Orange County, and Ventura County in California, in Las Vegas, Nevada, in Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan in New York, in Edison, New Jersey, in the Chicago neighborhoods of Chinatown and Bridgeport, Illinois, and on Oahu, Hawaii. Bank services include remote deposit, E-banking, mobile banking, commercial and investor real estate loans, business loans and lines of credit, commercial and industrial loans, SBA 7A and 504 loans, 1-4 single family residential loans, trade finance, a full range of depository account products and wealth management services. The Bank has nine branches in Los Angeles County, two branches in Ventura County, one branch in Orange County, California, one branch in Las Vegas, Nevada, three branches and one loan operation center in Brooklyn, three branches in Queens, one branch in Manhattan in New York, one branch in Edison, New Jersey, two branches in Chicago, Illinois, and one branch in Honolulu, Hawaii. The Company’s administrative and lending center is located at 1055 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90017, and its operations center is located at 7025 Orangethorpe Ave., Buena Park, California 90621. The Company’s website address is www.royalbusinessbankusa.com.

Conference Call

Management will hold a conference call at 11:00 a.m. Pacific time/2:00 p.m. Eastern time on Tuesday, April 29, 2025, to discuss the Company’s first quarter 2025 financial results.

To listen to the conference call, please dial 1-888-506-0062 or 1-973-528-0011, the Participant ID code is 534591, conference ID RBBQ125. A replay of the call will be made available at 1-877-481-4010 or 1-919-882-2331, the passcode is 52277, approximately one hour after the conclusion of the call and will remain available through May 13, 2025.

The conference call will also be simultaneously webcast over the Internet; please visit our Royal Business Bank website at www.royalbusinessbankusa.com and click on the “Investors” tab to access the call from the site. This webcast will be recorded and available for replay on our website approximately two hours after the conclusion of the conference call.

Disclosure

This press release contains certain non-GAAP financial disclosures for tangible common equity and tangible assets and adjusted earnings. The Company uses certain non-GAAP financial measures to provide meaningful supplemental information regarding the Company’s operational performance and to enhance investors’ overall understanding of such financial performance. Please refer to the tables at the end of this release for a presentation of performance ratios in accordance with GAAP and a reconciliation of the non-GAAP financial measures to the GAAP financial measures.

Safe Harbor

Certain matters set forth herein (including the exhibits hereto) constitute forward-looking statements relating to the Company’s current business plans and expectations and our future financial position and operating results. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance and/or achievements to differ materially from those projected. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures; the potential for additional material weaknesses in the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting or other potential control deficiencies of which the Company is not currently aware or which have not been detected; business and economic conditions generally and in the financial services industry, nationally and within our current and future geographic markets, including the tight labor market, ineffective management of the United States (“U.S.”) federal budget or debt or turbulence or uncertainly in domestic or foreign financial markets; the strength of the U.S. economy in general and the strength of the local economies in which we conduct operations; adverse developments in the banking industry highlighted by high-profile bank failures and the potential impact of such developments on customer confidence, liquidity and regulatory responses to these developments; possible additional provisions for credit losses and charge-offs; credit risks of lending activities and deterioration in asset or credit quality; extensive laws and regulations and supervision that we are subject to, including potential supervisory action by bank supervisory authorities; compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and other money laundering statutes and regulations; potential goodwill impairment; liquidity risk; failure to comply with debt covenants; fluctuations in interest rates; risks associated with acquisitions and the expansion of our business into new markets; inflation and deflation; real estate market conditions and the value of real estate collateral; the effects of having concentrations in our loan portfolio, including commercial real estate and the risks of geographic and industry concentrations; environmental liabilities; our ability to compete with larger competitors; our ability to retain key personnel; successful management of reputational risk; severe weather, natural disasters, earthquakes, fires, including direct and indirect costs and impacts on clients, the Company and its employees from the January 2025 Los Angeles County wildfires; or other adverse external events could harm our business; geopolitical conditions, including acts or threats of terrorism, actions taken by the U.S. or other governments in response to acts or threats of terrorism and/or military conflicts, including the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, in the Middle East, and increasing tensions between China and Taiwan, which could impact business and economic conditions in the U.S. and abroad; tariffs, trade policies, and related tensions, which could impact our clients, specific industry sectors, and/or broader economic conditions and financial market; public health crises and pandemics, and their effects on the economic and business environments in which we operate, including our credit quality and business operations, as well as the impact on general economic and financial market conditions; general economic or business conditions in Asia, and other regions where the Bank has operations; failures, interruptions, or security breaches of our information systems; climate change, including any enhanced regulatory, compliance, credit and reputational risks and costs; cybersecurity threats and the cost of defending against them; our ability to adapt our systems to the expanding use of technology in banking; risk management processes and strategies; adverse results in legal proceedings; the impact of regulatory enforcement actions, if any; certain provisions in our charter and bylaws that may affect acquisition of the Company; changes in tax laws and regulations; the impact of governmental efforts to restructure the U.S. financial regulatory system and increased costs of compliance and other risks associated with changes in regulation, including any amendments to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act; the impact of changes in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance assessment rate and the rules and regulations related to the calculation of the FDIC insurance assessments; the effect of changes in accounting policies and practices or accounting standards, as may be adopted from time-to-time by bank regulatory agencies, the SEC, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the Financial Accounting Standards Board or other accounting standards setters; fluctuations in the Company’s stock price; restrictions on dividends and other distributions by laws and regulations and by our regulators and our capital structure; our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, and the potential resulting dilution of interests of holders of our common stock; the soundness of other financial institutions; our ongoing relations with our various federal and state regulators, including the SEC, FDIC, FRB and California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation; our success at managing the risks involved in the foregoing items and all other factors set forth in the Company’s public reports, including its Annual Report as filed under Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, and particularly the discussion of risk factors within that document. The Company does not undertake, and specifically disclaims any obligation, to update any forward-looking statements to reflect occurrences or unanticipated events or circumstances after the date of such statements except as required by law. Any statements about future operating results, such as those concerning accretion and dilution to the Company’s earnings or shareholders, are for illustrative purposes only, are not forecasts, and actual results may differ.

RBB BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
(Dollars in thousands)

	March 31,			December 31,			September 30,			June 30,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024			2024			2024
Assets
Cash and due from banks	$	25,315		$	27,747		$	26,388		$	23,313		$	21,887
Interest-earning deposits with financial institutions		213,508			229,998			323,002			229,456			247,356
Cash and cash equivalents		238,823			257,745			349,390			252,769			269,243
Interest-earning time deposits with financial institutions		600			600			600			600			600
Investment securities available for sale		378,188			420,190			305,666			325,582			335,194
Investment securities held to maturity		5,188			5,191			5,195			5,200			5,204
Loans held for sale		655			11,250			812			3,146			3,903
Loans held for investment		3,143,063			3,053,230			3,091,896			3,047,712			3,027,361
Allowance for loan losses		(51,932	)		(47,729	)		(43,685	)		(41,741	)		(41,688	)
Net loans held for investment		3,091,131			3,005,501			3,048,211			3,005,971			2,985,673
Premises and equipment, net		24,308			24,601			24,839			25,049			25,363
Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) stock		15,000			15,000			15,000			15,000			15,000
Cash surrender value of bank owned life insurance		60,699			60,296			59,889			59,486			59,101
Goodwill		71,498			71,498			71,498			71,498			71,498
Servicing assets		6,766			6,985			7,256			7,545			7,794
Core deposit intangibles		1,839			2,011			2,194			2,394			2,594
Right-of-use assets		26,779			28,048			29,283			30,530			31,231
Accrued interest and other assets		87,926			83,561			70,644			63,416			65,608
Total assets	$	4,009,400		$	3,992,477		$	3,990,477		$	3,868,186		$	3,878,006
Liabilities and shareholders’ equity
Deposits:
Noninterest-bearing demand	$	528,205		$	563,012		$	543,623		$	542,971		$	539,517
Savings, NOW and money market accounts		721,216			663,034			666,089			647,770			642,840
Time deposits, $250,000 and under		1,000,106			1,007,452			1,052,462			1,014,189			1,083,898
Time deposits, greater than $250,000		893,101			850,291			830,010			818,675			762,074
Total deposits		3,142,628			3,083,789			3,092,184			3,023,605			3,028,329
FHLB advances		160,000			200,000			200,000			150,000			150,000
Long-term debt, net of issuance costs		119,624			119,529			119,433			119,338			119,243
Subordinated debentures		15,211			15,156			15,102			15,047			14,993
Lease liabilities – operating leases		28,483			29,705			30,880			32,087			32,690
Accrued interest and other liabilities		33,148			36,421			23,150			16,818			18,765
Total liabilities		3,499,094			3,484,600			3,480,749			3,356,895			3,364,020
Shareholders’ equity:
Common stock		260,284			259,957			259,280			266,160			271,645
Additional paid-in capital		3,360			3,645			3,520			3,456			3,348
Retained earnings		263,885			264,460			262,946			262,518			259,903
Non-controlling interest		72			72			72			72			72
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net		(17,295	)		(20,257	)		(16,090	)		(20,915	)		(20,982	)
Total shareholders’ equity		510,306			507,877			509,728			511,291			513,986
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	4,009,400		$	3,992,477		$	3,990,477		$	3,868,186		$	3,878,006

RBB BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(Unaudited)
*(In thousands, except share and per share data)*

	For the Three Months Ended
	March 31, 2025		December 31, 2024		March 31, 2024
Interest and dividend income:
Interest and fees on loans	$	45,621	$	46,374	$	45,547
Interest on interest-earning deposits		2,014		3,641		5,040
Interest on investment securities		4,136		3,962		3,611
Dividend income on FHLB stock		330		330		331
Interest on federal funds sold and other		235		248		266
Total interest and dividend income		52,336		54,555		54,795
Interest expense:
Interest on savings deposits, NOW and money market accounts		4,468		4,671		4,478
Interest on time deposits		19,084		21,361		23,322
Interest on long-term debt and subordinated debentures		1,632		1,660		1,679
Interest on FHLB advances		989		886		439
Total interest expense		26,173		28,578		29,918
Net interest income before provision for credit losses		26,163		25,977		24,877
Provision for credit losses		6,746		6,000		—
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		19,417		19,977		24,877
Noninterest income:
Service charges and fees		1,017		988		992
Gain on sale of loans		81		376		312
Loan servicing fees, net of amortization		588		492		589
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance		403		407		382
Gain on OREO		—		—		724
Other income		206		466		373
Total noninterest income		2,295		2,729		3,372
Noninterest expense:
Salaries and employee benefits		10,643		9,927		9,927
Occupancy and equipment expenses		2,407		2,403		2,443
Data processing		1,602		1,499		1,420
Legal and professional		1,515		1,355		880
Office expenses		408		399		356
Marketing and business promotion		197		251		172
Insurance and regulatory assessments		730		677		982
Core deposit premium		172		182		201
Other expenses		848		956		588
Total noninterest expense		18,522		17,649		16,969
Income before income taxes		3,190		5,057		11,280
Income tax expense		900		672		3,244
Net income	$	2,290	$	4,385	$	8,036

Net income per share
Basic	$	0.13	$	0.25	$	0.43
Diluted	$	0.13	$	0.25	$	0.43
Cash dividends declared per common share	$	0.16	$	0.16	$	0.16
Weighted-average common shares outstanding
Basic		17,727,712		17,704,992		18,601,277
Diluted		17,770,588		17,796,840		18,666,683

RBB BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
AVERAGE BALANCE SHEET AND NET INTEREST INCOME
(Unaudited)

	For the Three Months Ended
	March 31, 2025							December 31, 2024							March 31, 2024
(tax-equivalent basis,	Average		Interest		Yield /			Average		Interest		Yield /			Average		Interest		Yield /
*dollars in thousands)*	Balance		& Fees		Rate			Balance		& Fees		Rate			Balance		& Fees		Rate
Interest-earning assets
Cash and cash equivalents ⁽¹⁾	$	194,236	$	2,249		4.70	%	$	308,455	$	3,890		5.02	%	$	364,979	$	5,306		5.85	%
FHLB Stock		15,000		330		8.92	%		15,000		330		8.75	%		15,000		331		8.88	%
Securities
Available for sale ⁽²⁾		390,178		4,113		4.28	%		361,253		3,939		4.34	%		320,015		3,589		4.51	%
Held to maturity ⁽²⁾		5,189		49		3.83	%		5,194		48		3.68	%		5,207		46		3.55	%
Total loans ⁽³⁾		3,079,224		45,621		6.01	%		3,059,786		46,374		6.03	%		3,018,423		45,547		6.07	%
Total interest-earning assets		3,683,827	$	52,362		5.76	%		3,749,688	$	54,581		5.79	%		3,723,624	$	54,819		5.92	%
Total noninterest-earning assets		260,508							244,609							246,341
Total average assets	$	3,944,335						$	3,994,297						$	3,969,965

Interest-bearing liabilities
NOW		61,222		321		2.13	%	$	53,879	$	254		1.88	%	$	58,946	$	298		2.03	%
Money market		463,443		3,625		3.17	%		463,850		3,735		3.20	%		411,751		3,526		3.44	%
Saving deposits		155,116		522		1.36	%		162,351		682		1.67	%		157,227		654		1.67	%
Time deposits, $250,000 and under		989,622		10,046		4.12	%		1,034,946		11,583		4.45	%		1,175,804		13,805		4.72	%
Time deposits, greater than $250,000		864,804		9,038		4.24	%		835,583		9,778		4.66	%		785,172		9,517		4.88	%
Total interest-bearing deposits		2,534,207		23,552		3.77	%		2,550,609		26,032		4.06	%		2,588,900		27,800		4.32	%
FHLB advances		176,833		989		2.27	%		200,000		886		1.76	%		150,000		439		1.18	%
Long-term debt		119,562		1,295		4.39	%		119,466		1,295		4.31	%		119,180		1,295		4.37	%
Subordinated debentures		15,175		337		9.01	%		15,121		365		9.60	%		14,957		384		10.33	%
Total interest-bearing liabilities		2,845,777		26,173		3.73	%		2,885,196		28,578		3.94	%		2,873,037		29,918		4.19	%
Noninterest-bearing liabilities
Noninterest-bearing deposits		520,145							539,900							528,346
Other noninterest-bearing liabilities		66,151							56,993							55,795
Total noninterest-bearing liabilities		586,296							596,893							584,141
Shareholders’ equity		512,262							512,208							512,787
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	3,944,335						$	3,994,297						$	3,969,965
Net interest income / interest rate spreads			$	26,189		2.03	%			$	26,003		1.85	%			$	24,901		1.73	%
Net interest margin						2.88	%						2.76	%						2.69	%

Total cost of deposits	$	3,054,352	$	23,552		3.13	%	$	3,090,509	$	26,032		3.35	%	$	3,117,246	$	27,800		3.59	%
Total cost of funds	$	3,365,922	$	26,173		3.15	%	$	3,425,096	$	28,578		3.32	%	$	3,401,383	$	29,918		3.54	%

(1	)	Includes income and average balances for interest-earning time deposits and other miscellaneous interest-earning assets.
(2	)	Interest income and average rates for tax-exempt securities are presented on a tax-equivalent basis.
(3	)	Average loan balances relate to loans held for investment and loans held for sale and include nonaccrual loans. Interest income on loans includes the effects of discount accretion and net deferred loan origination fees and costs accounted for as yield adjustments.

RBB BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
(Unaudited)

	At or for the Three Months Ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024
Per share data (common stock)
Book value	$	28.77		$	28.66		$	27.67
Tangible book value ⁽¹⁾	$	24.63		$	24.51		$	23.68
Performance ratios
Return on average assets, annualized		0.24	%		0.44	%		0.81	%
Return on average shareholders’ equity, annualized		1.81	%		3.41	%		6.30	%
Return on average tangible common equity, annualized ⁽¹⁾		2.12	%		3.98	%		7.37	%
Noninterest income to average assets, annualized		0.24	%		0.27	%		0.34	%
Noninterest expense to average assets, annualized		1.90	%		1.76	%		1.72	%
Yield on average earning assets		5.76	%		5.79	%		5.92	%
Yield on average loans		6.01	%		6.03	%		6.07	%
Cost of average total deposits ⁽²⁾		3.13	%		3.35	%		3.59	%
Cost of average interest-bearing deposits		3.77	%		4.06	%		4.32	%
Cost of average interest-bearing liabilities		3.73	%		3.94	%		4.19	%
Net interest spread		2.03	%		1.85	%		1.73	%
Net interest margin		2.88	%		2.76	%		2.69	%
Efficiency ratio ⁽³⁾		65.09	%		61.48	%		60.07	%
Common stock dividend payout ratio		123.08	%		64.00	%		37.21	%

(1	)	Non-GAAP measure. See Non–GAAP reconciliations set forth at the end of this press release.
(2	)	Total deposits include non-interest bearing deposits and interest-bearing deposits.
(3	)	Ratio calculated by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest income before provision for credit losses and noninterest income.

RBB BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
(Unaudited)
*(Dollars in thousands)*

	At or for the quarter ended
	March 31,			December 31,			March 31,
	2025			2024			2024
Credit Quality Data:
Special mention loans	$	64,279		$	65,329		$	20,580
Special mention loans to total loans		2.05	%		2.14	%		0.68	%
Substandard loans HFI	$	76,372		$	89,141		$	57,170
Substandard loans HFS	$	—		$	11,195		$	—
Substandard loans HFI to total loans HFI		2.43	%		2.92	%		1.89	%
Loans 30-89 days past due, excluding nonperforming loans	$	5,927		$	22,086		$	20,950
Loans 30-89 days past due, excluding nonperforming loans, to total loans		0.19	%		0.72	%		0.69	%
Nonperforming loans HFI	$	60,380		$	69,843		$	35,935
Nonperforming loans HFS	$	—		$	11,195		$	—
OREO	$	4,170		$	—		$	1,071
Nonperforming assets	$	64,550		$	81,038		$	37,006
Nonperforming loans HFI to total loans HFI		1.92	%		2.29	%		1.19	%
Nonperforming assets to total assets		1.61	%		2.03	%		0.95	%

Allowance for loan losses	$	51,932		$	47,729		$	41,688
Allowance for loan losses to total loans HFI		1.65	%		1.56	%		1.38	%
Allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans HFI		86.01	%		68.34	%		116.01	%
Net charge-offs	$	2,643		$	2,006		$	184
Net charge-offs to average loans		0.35	%		0.26	%		0.02	%

Capital ratios ⁽¹⁾
Tangible common equity to tangible assets ⁽²⁾		11.10	%		11.08	%		11.56	%
Tier 1 leverage ratio		12.07	%		11.92	%		12.16	%
Tier 1 common capital to risk-weighted assets		17.87	%		17.94	%		19.10	%
Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets		18.45	%		18.52	%		19.72	%
Total capital to risk-weighted assets		24.41	%		24.49	%		25.91	%

(1	)	March 31, 2025 capital ratios are preliminary.
(2	)	Non-GAAP measure. See Non-GAAP reconciliations set forth at the end of this press release.

RBB BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
SELECTED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
(Unaudited)

Loan Portfolio Detail	As of March 31, 2025					As of December 31, 2024						As of March 31, 2024
*(dollars in thousands)*	$			%		$			%			$			%
Loans:
Commercial and industrial	$	135,538		4.3	%	$	129,585			4.2	%	$	121,441			4.0	%
SBA		50,651		1.6	%		47,263			1.5	%		54,677			1.8	%
Construction and land development		158,883		5.1	%		173,290			5.7	%		198,070			6.5	%
Commercial real estate ⁽¹⁾		1,245,402		39.6	%		1,201,420			39.3	%		1,178,498			38.9	%
Single-family residential mortgages		1,545,822		49.2	%		1,494,022			48.9	%		1,463,497			48.4	%
Other loans		6,767		0.2	%		7,650			0.4	%		11,178			0.4	%
Total loans ⁽²⁾	$	3,143,063		100.0	%	$	3,053,230			100.0	%	$	3,027,361			100.0	%
Allowance for loan losses		(51,932	)				(47,729	)					(41,688	)
Total loans, net	$	3,091,131				$	3,005,501					$	2,985,673

(1	)	Includes non-farm and non-residential loans, multi-family residential loans and non-owner occupied single family residential loans.
(2	)	Net of discounts and deferred fees and costs of $808, $488, and $474 as of March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively.

Deposits	As of March 31, 2025				As of December 31, 2024					As of March 31, 2024
*(dollars in thousands)*	$		%		$		%			$		%
Deposits:
Noninterest-bearing demand	$	528,205	16.8	%	$	563,012		18.3	%	$	539,517		17.8	%
Savings, NOW and money market accounts		721,216	22.9	%		663,034		21.5	%		642,840		21.2	%
Time deposits, $250,000 and under		863,962	27.5	%		882,438		28.6	%		901,738		29.8	%
Time deposits, greater than $250,000		870,708	27.8	%		827,854		26.8	%		746,611		24.7	%
Wholesale deposits ⁽¹⁾		158,537	5.0	%		147,451		4.8	%		197,623		6.5	%
Total deposits	$	3,142,628	100.0	%	$	3,083,789		100.0	%	$	3,028,329		100.0	%

)

Includes brokered deposits, collateralized deposits from the State of California, and deposits acquired through internet listing services.

Non-GAAP Reconciliations

Tangible Book Value Reconciliations

Tangible book value per share is a non-GAAP disclosure. Management measures tangible book value per share to assess the Company’s capital strength and business performance and believes this is helpful to investors as additional tools for further understanding our performance. The following is a reconciliation of tangible book value to the Company shareholders’ equity computed in accordance with GAAP, as well as a calculation of tangible book value per share as of March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024.


*(dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)*	March 31, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
Tangible common equity:
Total shareholders’ equity	$	510,306		$	507,877		$	513,986
Adjustments
Goodwill		(71,498	)		(71,498	)		(71,498	)
Core deposit intangible		(1,839	)		(2,011	)		(2,594	)
Tangible common equity	$	436,969		$	434,368		$	439,894
Tangible assets:
Total assets-GAAP	$	4,009,400		$	3,992,477		$	3,878,006
Adjustments
Goodwill		(71,498	)		(71,498	)		(71,498	)
Core deposit intangible		(1,839	)		(2,011	)		(2,594	)
Tangible assets	$	3,936,063		$	3,918,968		$	3,803,914
Common shares outstanding		17,738,628			17,720,416			18,578,132
Common equity to assets ratio		12.73	%		12.72	%		13.25	%
Tangible common equity to tangible assets ratio		11.10	%		11.08	%		11.56	%
Book value per share	$	28.77		$	28.66		$	27.67
Tangible book value per share	$	24.63		$	24.51		$	23.68

Return on Average Tangible Common Equity

Management measures return on average tangible common equity (“ROATCE”) to assess the Company’s capital strength and business performance and believes this is helpful to investors as an additional tool for further understanding our performance. Tangible equity excludes goodwill and other intangible assets (excluding mortgage servicing rights) and is reviewed by banking and financial institution regulators when assessing a financial institution’s capital adequacy. This non-GAAP financial measure should not be considered a substitute for operating results determined in accordance with GAAP and may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures used by other companies. The following table reconciles ROATCE to its most comparable GAAP measure:

	Three Months Ended
*(dollars in thousands)*	March 31, 2025			December 31, 2024			March 31, 2024
Net income available to common shareholders	$	2,290		$	4,385		$	8,036
Average shareholders’ equity		512,262			512,208			512,787
Adjustments:
Average goodwill		(71,498	)		(71,498	)		(71,498	)
Average core deposit intangible		(1,951	)		(2,129	)		(2,726	)
Adjusted average tangible common equity	$	438,813		$	438,581		$	438,563
Return on average common equity, annualized		1.81	%		3.41	%		6.30	%
Return on average tangible common equity, annualized		2.12	%		3.98	%		7.37	%

The MIL Network –

April 29, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Juggling dynamite? At 100 days in office, Donald Trump is no Franklin D. Roosevelt
Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Ronald W. Pruessen, Emeritus Professor of History, University of Toronto

Watching United States President Donald Trump weave and chainsaw his way through the first 100 days of his second term in office, I’ve been reminded of what Anthony Eden, the United Kingdom’s foreign secretary in the 1930s and later its prime minister, once said about Franklin D. Roosevelt.

FDR, Eden recalled in his memoirs, was “too like a conjurer, skilfully juggling balls of dynamite, whose nature he failed to understand.”

The image fits the 47th president much better than the 32nd.

The dynamite-wielding Trump

Dynamite has certainly been exploding regularly since Trump took office in January. His actions include:
- The firings (and sometimes re-hirings) of thousands of government employees.
- The attack on government agencies doing work delegated by Congress.
- Pardons for Jan. 6 rioters but deportations of asylum seekers and green card holders with no semblance of due process.
- Campaigns against universities for their supposed dereliction in terms of antisemitism or extravagance in adhering to diversity, equity and inclusion principles, and towards law firms linked to earlier prosecutions of the now-resurrected president.
- Cannonades of tariffs, tariff pauses and threats of re-imposition.
Read more:
How Project 2025 became the blueprint for Donald Trump’s second term

For non-MAGA enthusiasts, it is easy to surmise — similar to Eden’s remarks on FDR — that Trump does not understand the potential damage of the dynamite he is not just juggling, but hurling.

A case might be made that some lobs align with Trump’s personal penchant for retribution, or that the chainsaw is being wielded to make room in the federal budget for new tax cuts for the one per cent.

But such calculations disregard deeply rooted American values like respect for the rule of law and the separation of powers.

Trump’s actions could suggest a lust for mayhem apparently aimed at dismantling a century of efforts to shape a government that serves global security while also meeting the economic, social and health care needs of American citizens, including safety net provisions for senior citizens, children, farmers, veterans and others.

Threats today, damage tomorrow

His apparent fondness for dynamite is already having negative consequences, with seemingly little grasp of the likelihood of worse to come: today, he’s upending the lives of civil servants; tomorrow’s disruptions will likely include an attack on the services provided by agencies like the Social Security Administration and disruption of the flow of funds to many poor school districts.

Today, the U.S. is struggling with a measles outbreak. But the personal beliefs of Health and Human Services Director Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., a notorious vaccination and public health skeptic, doesn’t bode well for a fight against a rapidly evolving avian flu threat on the near horizon.

Today’s stock and bond market volatility creates the possibility of a trade war catastrophe and damage to economic stability as the U.S. appears poised to disregard its longtime status as the world economy’s “safe haven.”

The current tensions in what were once ironclad partnerships with allies that include Canada, the European Union and Ukraine — along with the whiplash reversal of American-Russian dynamics — are reminiscent of the global disruption in the 1930s that featured the Great Depression and the eruption of the Second World War.

How FDR coped with explosions around him

If Eden’s image of FDR as a dangerous juggler of dynamite might also apply to Trump, it fails to capture the essential attributes of the 32nd president’s White House career. Eden’s ego seems to have undercut his appraisal of FDR — compounded by his own failure to understand the historical developments that profoundly weakened the British Empire and brought his own career to an end.

There’s no question dynamite was exploding in 1933, the start of FDR’s 12 years in the White House. But the Depression and its evolving consequences, not FDR’s personal impulses and misconceptions, created a tinderbox decade.

One of Roosevelt’s great strengths, in fact, was his ability to recognize the acute dangers emanating from a fearful cortege of flaming fuses. Another was his success in turning insights into meaningful actions.

Roosevelt knew — far better than his predecessor, Herbert Hoover — that the onset of the Depression would require dramatic actions and fundamental reforms.

His New Deal expanded the government’s role in stimulating the economy (for example, the Public Works Administration), regulation (the Securities Exchange Commission), social welfare initiatives (the Social Security program) and infrastructure development (for example, the Tennessee Valley Authority).

The Depression wasn’t fully eradicated — that didn’t happen until after war broke out — but the lives of millions of Americans still improved significantly.

Of equal importance, FDR’s creative thinking and government transformations created building blocks for further post-war reforms, including Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society efforts three decades later.

Read more:
The Great Society: the forgotten reform movement

Roosevelt also knew that the devastation of the Depression and the unparalleled destruction of the Second World War required a transformation of the global arena. He believed technology — air power especially — had created an integrated world. In his January 1943 State of the Union address, he said:

“Wars grow in size, in death and destruction, and in the inevitability of engulfing all nations, in inverse ratio to the shrinking size of the world as a result of the conquest of the air.”

Sharing responsibilities

FDR believed the world he worked to create would be safer and more prosperous because multilateral organizations would encourage greater emphasis on shared resources and responsibilities. The United Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank took shape during FDR’s presidency — as did long-term plans for decolonization and human rights initiatives.

Roosevelt knew too — better than many of his White House successors — that the U.S. needed to share leadership responsibilities. He believed emphatically in multilateralism, recognizing the limits of American resources and power, and the pragmatism of compromising with the priorities of others, whether they were powerful states or colonial peoples.

His “Four Policemen” approach to maintaining peace — comprising the U.S., the U.K., the Soviet Union and China — would sometimes create unpalatable situations. He was criticized harshly, for example, for naively opening the door to Soviet domination of eastern Europe via the Yalta agreement. Nonetheless, FDR focused on efforts he believed would avert another destructive cataclysm.

FDR was an imperfect leader in various ways — in not appreciating, for example, how global leadership could result in arrogance. He did, however, understand the explosive domestic and international developments of the 20th century and sought constructive solutions to grave challenges.

Trump, on the contrary, is seemingly prioritizing destruction over construction. Propelled by a “move fast and break things” mantra, there’s little evidence that he understands its pain nor the damaging consequences of his impulses.

Ronald W. Pruessen has received funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. Juggling dynamite? At 100 days in office, Donald Trump is no Franklin D. Roosevelt – https://theconversation.com/juggling-dynamite-at-100-days-in-office-donald-trump-is-no-franklin-d-roosevelt-254773
MIL OSI – Global Reports –
April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial News: Discrete auction held for VTBR securities

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

Vtbr

VTB JSC

As of 14:05:00 the current price was 106.98 rubles. (Deviation – 22.97%).

There was an increase of 20.00% or more within 10 consecutive minutes of the current share price from the closing price of the previous trading day (87 rubles).

In the Main Trading Mode T, a discrete auction (DA) will be held from 14:09:00.

In other non-addressed trading modes during the DA period, trading is conducted in accordance with the established regulations.

End of DA and resumption of trading at 14:39:00.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.M.M.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 15:54 (Moscow time) the values of the upper limit of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the security RU000A105NK5 (MOEK BO1P5) were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

15:54

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC) on 28.04.2025, 15-54 (Moscow time), the values of the upper limit of the price corridor (up to 97.34) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 1036.11 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 7.5%) of the security RU000A105NK5 (MOEK BO1P5) were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.MO/N89864

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 16-13 (Moscow time) the values of the upper limit of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the security RU000A106TR5 (VimpelK3R3) were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

16:13

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC) on 28.04.2025, 16-13 (Moscow time), the values of the upper limit of the price corridor (up to 86.72) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 947.25 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 18.75%) of the RU000A106TR5 (VimpelK3R3) security were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.MO/N89866

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 18-11 (Moscow time) the values of the lower boundary of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the RU000A100VG7 (SUEK-F1P3R) security were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

18:11

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC) on 28.04.2025, 18-11 (Moscow time), the values of the lower limit of the price corridor (up to 87.58) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 850.58 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 7.5%) of the RU000A100VG7 (SUEK-F1P3R) security were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.MO/N89880

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: On 29.04.2025, two deposit auctions of the PPC “TERRITORIAL DEVELOPMENT FUND” will take place

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

Parameters: Date of the deposit auction 04/29/2025. Placement currency RUB. Maximum amount of funds placed (in the placement currency) 8,003,000,000.00 Placement term, days 42. Date of depositing funds 04/29/2025. Date of return of funds 06/10/2025. Minimum placement interest rate, % per annum 21.00 Terms of the conclusion, urgent or special (Urgent). Minimum amount of funds placed for one application (in the placement currency) 8,003,000,000.00 Maximum number of applications from one Participant, pcs. 1. Auction form, open or closed (Open).

The basis of the Agreement is the General Agreement. Schedule (Moscow time). Applications in preliminary mode from 11:00 to 11:10. Applications in competition mode from 11:10 to 11:15. Setting the cutoff percentage rate or declaring the auction invalid before 11:25.

Additional terms

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MEEX.K.MO/N89888

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Denis Manturov took part in the main plenary session of Innoprom

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

First Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian Federation Denis Manturov took part in the international exhibition “Innoprom. Central Asia” and spoke at the main plenary session “Strategic Industrial Partnership in Central Asia: Integration Based on Advanced Technologies”. Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Uzbekistan Jamshid Khodjaev also took part in the main session.

Opening the main session, Denis Manturov noted that today the development of industrial partnership with the Central Asian countries is one of the absolute priorities: “Today, Russian enterprises are widely represented in the region. Their share in the total number of foreign companies in Uzbekistan is about 20%, in Kyrgyzstan more than 30%, and in Kazakhstan already over 40%. The total volume of Russian investments in the economy of the Central Asian states last year alone exceeded 760 billion rubles. This allows us to increase the portfolio of joint projects in agricultural machinery, pharmaceuticals, the automotive industry, the chemical industry, metallurgy and many other industries.”

The First Deputy Prime Minister noted that, despite the high level of cooperation, the growth potential has not been exhausted, and stressed the need to expand cooperation in response to global challenges, including in the areas of green economy, infrastructure projects, retail, etc.

“If we talk about promising areas of our cooperation, they are consolidated in national projects of technological leadership. We started their implementation in Russia this year. We place special emphasis on achieving sovereignty over the means of production, including additive solutions and industrial robots. The same applies to the development of all types of transport, including on alternative fuel and with elements of autonomy. Our special focus is the development of new materials and chemicals. As well as improving technologies for medicine, energy, agriculture and expanding the range of space services,” Denis Manturov emphasized.

“It is gratifying to note that the scale of the exhibition is growing every year, attracting participants not only from Russia and Central Asian countries, but also from a number of other countries, such as Saudi Arabia, Belarus, and Afghanistan. Today we are seeing new promising and large-scale horizons for cooperation. By the end of 2024, Uzbekistan’s trade with Russia and Central Asian countries approached $20 billion. There are about 5,000 enterprises in Uzbekistan with capital from these countries. More than 650 joint projects worth $67 billion are being implemented in various sectors of our country’s economy. Despite such a rich level of relations, we all understand that this is far from the limit,” said Jamshid Khodjaev.

Denis Manturov and Zhamshid Khodjaev also took part in the ceremony of exchanging folders of signed agreements at Innoprom, aimed at developing cooperation in the trade and economic, scientific and technical, social and cultural and humanitarian spheres.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Plan to gradually reduce the EU’s dependence on Russian energy imports – P-000981/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
Following the Russian military aggression against Ukraine as of 2022, the EU has acted firmly to cut its reliance on Russian energy.

REPowerEU[1], adopted in May 2022, aiming to fast forward the clean transition, diversify supplies, and enhance EU energy resilience. The EU adopted sanctions to phase out Russian coal imports.

Sanctions on Russian oil have also reduced imports from almost a third to 3% of total EU imports. In terms of gas, the EU reduced its Russian gas imports from over 45% in 2021, to 19% in 2024, replacing it with alternatives like liquefied natural gas from a number of international partners.

With the end of Russian gas transit via Ukraine, beginning of 2025, the share could fall to 13% this year. However, Russian energy, particularly gas, remains in the EU energy mix.

To address this, the Commission is working apace on a Roadmap to end Russian energy imports by fully implementing REPowerEU, which is in the Commission Work Programme for 2025.

[1] https://commission.europa.eu/publications/key-documents-repowereu_en
Last updated: 28 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Missions – SANT mission to Kyiv, Ukraine – 14-04-2025 – Committee on Public Health

Source: European Parliament

EU Ukraine © Adobe Stock

Committee on Public Health travelled to Ukraine on 14 and 15 April for talks with parliament representatives and healthcare leaders. The delegation was composed of five Members: Adam Jarubas (EPP, PL), SANT Chair, Tilly Metz (Greens/EFA, LU), SANT Vice-Chair, Vytenis Andriukaitis (S&D, LT), Nikos Papandreou (S&D, EL) and Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová (Renew, SK).

The European Parliament delegation met Chairman Ruslan Stefanchuk, Mykhailo Radutskyi, Chair of the Committee on Public Health, and other members of the Verkhovna Rada, as well as healthcare leaders, including Maryna Slobodnichenko, Deputy Minister of Health. MEPs also witnessed first-hand the impressive care of soldiers injured in the Russian war of aggression.

MIL OSI Europe News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Pressure to release a Russian spy and the Commission’s rule of law report – E-001534/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001534/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Mariusz Kamiński (ECR)

The Commission’s rule of law report criticised the conservative Polish government for arresting dangerous Russian spy Pavel Rubtsov[1], which raises serious questions. Poland was clearly being pressured to release a Russian spy. In addition, this was an attack on the EU’s most anti-Putin government, which has been exceptionally active in supporting Ukraine in the war with Russia. Despite spending millions of euros on fact-checking and fighting disinformation, the Commission made no effort to verify the circumstances around Rubtsov’s arrest but simply, and disgracefully, played into Russia’s hands.

The Commission handled the situation disgracefully, avoiding any responsibility and pinning the blame entirely on the Council of Europe’s platform[2]. However, following the spy exchange and the public welcome from Putin that backed up the Polish government’s position, the Council of Europe updated the information on the platform on 16 October. Other organisations also withdrew their false accusations[3]. By not withdrawing its disgraceful claims, the Commission is alone in stubbornly sticking to and promoting the lie. Commissioner McGrath’s stance was also significant – during an EUDS committee meeting he did not respond to questions on the matter.

1.The Commission’s false accusations serve the interests of the Russian special services. It is the Commission’s responsibility to determine whether the accusations originated from them. Does the Commission intend to conduct an investigation and disclose who backed up these disgraceful claims?

2.Does the Commission recognise that defending Rubtsov and attacking the Law and Justice government served the interests of the Russian special forces?

3.Will the Commission continue to be the only institution compromising itself in this fashion, or will it apologise and update its 2023 report?

Submitted: 15.4.2025

[1] The 2023 rule of law report criticised the Polish government for arresting Spanish left-wing journalist Pablo González. The case was supposed to be evidence of rule of law violations in Poland and restrictions on freedom of speech. However, Pablo González was actually Pavel Rubtsov, a dangerous Russian spy. In August 2024, Rubtsov was handed over to the Russians as part of a high-profile spy swap and was greeted by Putin at the airport.

[2] In response to a question I submitted, the Commission stated that it had supported Rubtsov based on information from the Council of Europe platform.

[3] Alert 87/2022 was deactivated and its content was updated. In addition, the Council of Europe stated that ‘the partner organisations decided to deactivate this alert on the Platform, concluding that the charges against Pablo González (Pavel Rubtsov), which led to his arrest in Poland, were not related to his journalistic activities.’ httpsfom.coe.int/en/alerte/detail/107637244.
Last updated: 28 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI China: Regular Press Conference of the Ministry of National Defense on April 24, 2025 2025-04-29 Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China, answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025.

Source: People’s Republic of China – Ministry of National Defense 2

By Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, Spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND)

Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Zhang Zhicheng)

(The following English text is for reference. In case of any divergence of interpretation, the Chinese text shall prevail.)

Zhang Xiaogang: Friends from the media, welcome to this month’s regular press conference of the Ministry of National Defense (MND).

Today, I have one piece of information to announce on the top.

The inaugural Navigator Meeting of the Beijing Xiangshan Forum will be held in Beijing from April 28 to 30. The theme of the meeting will be “Opportunities and Challenges Facing Global Security”. Over 200 defense officials, experts, scholars and media representatives from more than 30 countries and international organizations will attend the event. Through multilateral seminars and dialogues, the meeting aims to enhance the effectiveness of international participation and contribute insights to global security governance. Bilateral and multilateral meetings as well as cultural and technological visits will also be arranged on the margins of the event.

Journalist: It’s reported that President Xi Jinping paid a visit to Malaysia. With a focus on building a high-level strategic China-Malaysia community with a shared future, he underlined the importance of deepening exchanges and cooperation on national security, defense and law enforcement. Please share with us what measures will the Chinese side take to bolster China-Malaysia military-to-military relationship.

Zhang Xiaogang: President Xi Jinping paid a state visit to Malaysia upon invitation from April 15 to 17, which ushered in the next “golden 50 years” for bilateral relations. China and Malaysia are neighbors across the sea with a millennium-old friendship. Under the strategic guidance of leaders of our two countries, the Chinese and Malaysian militaries have had productive cooperation in different areas. A 2+2 diplomatic and defense dialogue mechanism will be established to deepen exchanges and cooperation on national security, defense and law enforcement. Exercise Aman Youyi, initiated by China and Malaysia, has become a brand of military cooperation with significant influence in the region.

Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Li Xiaowei)

The Chinese and Malaysian people both believe that solidarity brings strength. We are ready to work with the Malaysian side to deliver on the important consensus between leaders of our two countries, strengthen high-level engagements, and deepen strategic trust. Our two sides will have more cooperation in areas such as joint exercises, maritime security, and multilateral coordination, and promote greater quality-oriented growth of our military-to-military relationship.

Journalist: It’s reported that the US, the Philippines and other countries are conducting Exercise Balikatan. As part of drills, the US military has, for the first time, deployed anti-ship missile system to the Luzon Strait north of the Philippines. Some analysts believe that this is to simulate the blockade of the Bashi Channel during a crisis in the Taiwan Strait. The Philippines and the US also organized Exercise Cope Thunder previously. What’s your comment on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: We always hold that military cooperation between countries should not target or hurt the interests of any third party, nor should it jeopardize regional peace and stability. The South China Sea should be a sea of peace, cooperation and friendship. However, the Philippines holds a candle to the devil by currying favor and colluding with the US and other outside countries to make provocations. It frequently conducts the so-called joint patrols and exercises, and invites and deploys strategic and tactical weapons, which seriously undermines the common interests of regional countries. We firmly oppose any country strengthening military deployment in the region and provoking tensions and confrontation under the excuse of the Taiwan question. Regardless of external challenges and turbulence, the Chinese side will resolutely safeguard our territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests, and firmly maintain peace and stability in the region.

Journalist: The Chinese and Egyptian air forces are conducting their first joint training. Could you please brief us what are the strategic and tactical achievements of this training?

Zhang Xiaogang: Thanks for your attention. Eagles of Civilization 2025 joint air force training is the first joint training between the Chinese and Egyptian armed forces. The two sides deployed fighter jets, AEW&Cs, tankers and helicopters to the activity. Drills on air combat and air refueling began on April 19, and subjects of air support and battlefield search and rescue will also be covered. The training will run until early May. The participating PLAAF aircraft will train in collaboration with assets of the Egyptian Air Force. This will help enhance capabilities of the two air forces and deepen substantive cooperation between the Chinese and Egyptian militaries.

Journalist: I have two questions. Firstly, the US Secretary of Defense reportedly claimed that China is building an army specifically designed to destroy the US. He said that China’s hypersonic missiles can destroy all US aircraft carriers in 20 minutes. In every war game played by the Pentagon, the US loses to China. In addition, the Commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command stated that China is producing warplanes and warships much faster than the US, and is capable of denying US air superiority along the first island chain. Do you have any comment on that? My second question is about the on-going vessel open-day events held by the PLA Navy in 10 cities. Some netizens asked when will the Chinese aircraft carrier also open to the public? What’s your comment on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, some individuals in the US see the Chinese military through colored lens and keep hyping up the so-called “China military threat”. I think this is an obstacle hindering engagements between the Chinese and US militaries. Non-conflict, non-confrontation and peaceful coexistence is in the most fundamental interests of both China and the US, and meets the common expectation of people across the world. We have a sober understanding of the state of our development. We hope the US side will break away from “persecution mania” and stop using others as excuses.

On your second question, I fully understand the public’s interest in China’s aircraft carriers, and I believe their wish will come true sometime in the future.

Journalist: It’s reported that President Xi Jinping paid a visit to Cambodia. At his talks with Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet, President Xi pointed out the importance of ensuring greater security. Please share with us the Chinese side’s consideration in advancing China-Cambodia military-to-military relationship.

Zhang Xiaogang: President Xi Jinping paid a state visit to Cambodia upon invitation from April 17 to 18. During his visit, he met with leaders of Cambodia to chart the way forward for jointly building an all-weather China-Cambodia community with a shared future in the new era. China and Cambodia are friends with ironclad bonds. No matter how the international landscape evolves, China and Cambodia always stand by each other in good faith, support each other, and pursue shared success. Under the strategic guidance of leaders of our two countries, the Chinese and Cambodian armed forces have had close high-level engagements and productive cooperation in different areas. The China-Cambodia Joint Support and Training Center at Port Ream has been put into operation. The two sides have held Exercise Golden Dragon and Exercise Peace Angel. Exchanges in areas including demining, medical care and publicity continue to deepen. Our military relationship is rock-solid and unbreakable.

Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Sun Yue)

Standing at a new starting point, we are ready to work with the Cambodian side to implement the important consensus between leaders of our two countries and make good use of the newly-established 2+2 strategic dialogue mechanism. The two sides will further enrich and expand substantive cooperation in areas such as education and training, joint exercises, medical service, and equipment and technology, and will elevate our military-to-military relationship to a new level.

Journalist: I have two questions. Firstly, as revealed by Taiwan media outlets, there is a wave of resignation inside the troops of Taiwan. Many military officers on the ground chose early decommissioning or resignation to avoid fighting in war. Some analysts think that it’s because they don’t want to be cannon fodder for “Taiwan independence” separatists. What’s your comment on this? Secondly, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued Diplomatic Bluebook 2025. In the document, the Japanese side labeled China as an “unprecedented strategic security challenge” and hyped up situations in the East China Sea and the South China Sea as well as military cooperation between China and Russia. In addition, the Japanese Defense Minister said that Japan will invest nearly 2 trillion yen in 2 Aegis system equipped vessels. Each of them will have a displacement of over 10,000 tons and firepower far beyond the need required for defense. The Japanese side keeps violating its “exclusively defense-oriented policy” and accelerates the building of offensive capabilities. What’s your comment on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, this is another evidence that “Taiwan independence” separatists have no support from the people of Taiwan and will collapse like a house of cards.

On your second question, we firmly oppose the Japanese side playing up the so-called “China military threat”, hyping up tensions in the region, and deliberately provoking confrontation. China follows a path of peaceful development and pursues a national defense policy that is defensive in nature. Our military development is aimed at safeguarding our national sovereignty, security and development interests. We have no intention to challenge or threaten any country. Engagements and cooperation between the Chinese and Russian militaries feature non-alignment, non-confrontation and non-targeting any third party.

In recent years, the Japanese side has drastically increased defense budget, and sought breakthroughs in military build-up. Its behaviors have led to serious concerns among its Asian neighbors and the international community. We urge the Japanese side to recalibrate its strategic perception of China, stop provoking bloc confrontation, be prudent with its words and actions in the military and security domain, and contribute more to regional peace and stability.

Journalist: The Japanese Defense Minister reportedly claimed that Chinese military drones operate frequently near Japan’s airspace and are expanding their flying zone, which concerns the Japanese side and the international community. He also said that the Japanese side will take comprehensive measures for vigilance and reconnaissance. The Japanese Defense Ministry said that the number of emergency scrambles conducted in response to Chinese military drones in 2024 more than doubled year-on-year. May I have your comments on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: The Chinese military’s operations in relevant waters and airspace are in line with international law and practices, and do not target any specific entity. They are aimed at enhancing our capability to safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests. There is absolutely no need for the Japanese side to be paranoid. We require the Japanese side to stop its hype and stop monitoring and disrupting operations of the Chinese side. This will help avoid misunderstanding and miscalculation, prevent accidents at sea and in the air, and avert negative impacts on the relationship between the two countries.

Journalist: This year marks the 35th year of the Chinese military’s participation in United Nations peacekeeping operations (UNPKOs). Since the Chinese military dispatched military observers for the first time to UNPKOs in April 1990, it has now become a major troop contributor. Could you provide an overview of the Chinese military’s participation in UNPKOs?

Zhang Xiaogang: Since our first deployment 35 years ago, the Chinese military has participated in 25 peacekeeping missions, and dispatched over 50,000 personnel to more than 20 countries and regions, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Lebanon and South Sudan. Chinese peacekeepers completed tasks such as mine clearance and explosive ordinance disposal, medical treatment, security escorts, and protection of civilians. China’s Blue Helmets have stepped forward for world peace with courage and persistence in despite of difficulties and dangers. 17 Chinese service members, including Liu Mingfang, Du Zhaoyu and Shen Liangliang, have made the ultimate sacrifice for the UN peacekeeping cause.

It’s our objective to preserve peace and protect the people. China is the largest troop contributor to UNPKOs among the permanent members of the UN Security Council, and the second largest contributor to UN peacekeeping assessments. We maintain an 8,000-strong peacekeeping standby force, which consists of 28 units in 10 categories, such as infantry, medical and rapid response units. The Chinese military has conducted exchanges and cooperation on peacekeeping with over 90 countries and 10 international and regional organizations. We have built “Shared”series, an international brand of peacekeeping operations. As we speak, approximately 1800 Chinese peacekeepers are executing tasks in the UN headquarters and seven mission areas. The Chinese military will continue to deepen and expand our participation in UNPKOs, and contribute more to the implementation of the Global Security Initiative and the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

Journalist: According to reports, the US Chief of Naval Operations announced that a large-scale inter-service joint-operation exercise will be conducted in the Pacific Ocean as a “stress test” to evaluate the combat capabilities of the US military. The US side claimed that the exercise aims to prepare the military for potential conflicts with China in the Pacific. In addition, a US B-1B bomber task force has arrived at the Misawa Air Base in Japan, and US MQ-4C long-endurance drones will be deployed to Okinawa. Do you have any comment on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: The Asia-Pacific is a promising land for peace and development, not a “hunting ground” for geopolitical games. Show of force and provocation are “stress tests” that no regional country wants to see or take. We hope the US side will do more to promote peace and stability in the region, rather than the opposite. China remains a force for peace, stability and progress in the Asia-Pacific, and will never be swayed by fallacies, deterred by intimidation, or cowed by pressure. We will resolutely safeguard our national sovereignty, security and development interests.

Journalist: It’s reported that the commander of the US Indo-Pacific Command said in a recent Senate hearing that “China’s increasingly aggressive actions near Taiwan are not just exercises, but rehearsals for attacking Taiwan”. He suggested that the US should significantly advance autonomous systems and deploy them in the Taiwan Strait, so as to build a “hellscape” to deter China. What’s your comment on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: The Taiwan question is purely an internal affair of China. How to resolve it is a matter for the Chinese, which brooks no foreign interference. Some individuals of the US side point fingers at and make groundless speculations on the legitimate and necessary measures taken by the Chinese side to safeguard our national sovereignty and territorial integrity. They also attempt to bluff us with a fancy slogan. This exposes their true motive of clinging to US hegemony and selfish interests at the cost of destroying others’ homeland. Threats and intimidation will never work on China or the Chinese military.

Journalist: I have two questions. The first one is that the Philippine corvette BRP Apolinario Mabini (PS-36) invaded into China’s territorial waters of Huangyan Dao on April 20. The naval force of the Southern Theater Command carried out tracking, monitoring, warning and repelling in accordance with law. Analysts believe that by changing the subject of its harassing activities from fishing boats, PCG vessels to warships, the Philippine side is attempting to escalate the South China Sea issue from law enforcement by coast guard to military conflict, leaving space for following diplomatic and public opinion manipulations. What’s your comment on this? Secondly, according to Japanese media outlets, the Japanese and Philippine governments will make legal arrangements to facilitate military intelligence exchanges. The Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba will visit the Philippines at the end of April to reach an agreement on starting discussions as soon as possible for signing the General Security of Military Information Agreement. The Philippines signed with the US a military intelligence-sharing agreement last year. If it signs another with Japan, the three countries will be able to share intelligence regarding the East China Sea and the South China Sea. Analysts believe that this is aimed at monitoring and deterring military presence of the PLA in this region. Do you have any comment?

Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, the PLA Southern Theater Command has issued a statement in response. We urge the Philippine side to stop right-infringing provocations. If it keeps barreling down the wrong path and acting recklessly, it will do itself more harm than good and taste the bitter fruit of its own doing.

On your second question, the Philippine side soliciting foreign support to stir up troubles in the South China Sea will not work. External countries meddling in the South China Sea issue will bring about chaos and is not welcomed.

Journalist: I have two questions. Firstly, it’s reported that the troops in Taiwan started the computer-assisted command post drill (computer-simulated war games) under Exercise Han Kuang 41 on April 5. The drill will last for 14 days and 13 nights. The scenarios include the so-called potential operations by the Chinese mainland, such as “gray-zone harassment” and “transition from exercise to war”. Koo Li-hsiung, Head of Taiwan’s military authorities, said that as it takes the PLA shorter time to shift from training to war, the troops in Taiwan needs to test and enhance its ability to respond to potential situations at any time. What’s your comment on this?

The second one is that it is reported that the DPP authorities is considering using over 13,000 convenience stores as “wartime hubs” in the event of “a cross-Strait war”. This is one of the plans under discussion for the ”Whole of Society Defence Resilience Committee”, a unit set up by the Lai Ching-te authorities. May I have your comments on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: On your first question, the military elements of “Taiwan independence” separatist forces put on a flashy show by conducting exercises. This does nothing more than embolden and comfort themselves. No matter how many drills they carry out, they will not be able to escape from their destined failure.

Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang, spokesperson for the Ministry of National Defense (MND) of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), answers questions at a regular press conference on the afternoon of April 24, 2025. (mod.gov.cn/Photo by Sun Yue)

On your second question, for its selfish gains, the DPP authorities hysterically hype up the so-called “mainland’s threat”, stir up social panic, and double down on their “combat readiness for Taiwan independence”. If left unchecked, their behaviors will surely plunge Taiwan into war. The DPP authorities’ so-called “whole-of-society defence” actually harms the whole society, as they take the Taiwan island as a battlefield and coerce the local people into cannon fodders for “Taiwan independence”. Their actions are shameful. The PLA is committed to fighting against “Taiwan independence” separatists, promoting national reunification, and safeguarding China’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity. We hope our Taiwan compatriots recognize the true nature of the DPP authorities as a source of chaos and disasters, take active actions to oppose “Taiwan independence”, and protect their own well-being and livelihood. We hope the two sides of the Taiwan Strait will join hands to promote national reunification and rejuvenation.

Journalist: According to reports from Taiwan media, the US side sent a retired four-star army general, who was also a former commander of US Forces Korea, to serve as the senior observer for the war games of this year’s Han Kuang Exercise. In addition, the war games revealed five potential patterns of joint operations between Taiwan and the US in wartime. May I have your comment on this?

Zhang Xiaogang: We firmly oppose any form of military collusion between the US and Taiwan. To embolden and support “Taiwan independence” separatists is to ruin peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. Those who do that will get burned for playing with fire, and taste the bitter fruit of their own doing. We urge the US side to stop stirring up troubles on the Taiwan question, earnestly abide by the one-China principle and the stipulations of the three China-US joint communiqués, and deliver on its promise of not supporting “Taiwan independence”. We solemnly warn the DPP authorities that those who solicit US support for “Taiwan independence” will be stabbed in the back, and be abandoned as a useless pawn.

Zhang Xiaogang: If no other questions, this concludes today’s press conference. Thank you.

MIL OSI China News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Colon cancer rates are rising among young people – could changes to children’s gut bacteria explain why?

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Justin Stebbing, Professor of Biomedical Sciences, Anglia Ruskin University

Irina WS/Shutterstock

Alarming trends show that colon – or bowel – cancer is increasing in younger people. If the rise continues, colorectal cancer is projected to become the leading cause of cancer-related deaths among young adults globally by 2030.

Until recently, the reasons for this surge were largely unclear or unknown. Now research points to a surprising suspect: gut bacteria.

A recent study reveals that exposure during childhood or adolescence to a toxin produced by certain strains of E coli, whose growth is encouraged by highly processed diets, may lay the groundwork for aggressive bowel cancers decades later. This discovery could help explain why people under 50 are at the heart of one of the fastest-growing cancer epidemics of our time.

Colon cancer is currently the second biggest cause of cancer death, yet only one in three cases are diagnosed in the earliest stages. Often symptomless in its early forms, colon cancer typically begins as polyps and can take ten to 15 years to develop. This slow progression makes regular screening crucial, especially because many patients experience no early warning signs.

For the new research, an international team analysed the complete DNA sequences of 981 colorectal cancer tumours from patients across 11 countries. They discovered striking geographic patterns in the mutations that lead to cancer.

Two specific mutational signatures – SBS88 and ID18 – stood out for their association with colibactin, a DNA-damaging toxin produced by some E coli strains. These bacterial “fingerprints” were 3.3 times more common in patients diagnosed before age 40 than in those over 70. Significantly, these mutations appear early in tumour development, suggesting the damage may occur years – even decades – before cancer is diagnosed.

Read more:
Why eating yoghurt regularly could lower your risk of bowel cancer

Gut microbiome

Colibactin doesn’t cause random DNA damage. The study found it tends to target the APC gene, a vital tumour suppressor that normally controls cell growth.

In colibactin-positive cancers, about 25% of APC mutations bore the toxin’s unique signature. This direct hit to the body’s internal “brake system” could explain why these cancers appear earlier in life.

Molecular analysis indicated that colibactin-associated mutations often emerge within the first ten years of life. While this suggests the toxin may silently colonise children’s guts and initiate cancerous changes early, it’s important to note that this remains a theory; the study didn’t directly examine children or young adults.

Still, the research maps out a microbial pattern of cancer risk. These gut bacteria are not the same as those that cause food poisoning – they often live within us and perform beneficial roles.

But their composition can vary widely by region. Countries including Argentina, Brazil, and Russia – where colorectal cancer rates are climbing – showed higher levels of colibactin-related mutations.

This may reflect regional differences in gut microbiomes influenced by diet (particularly ultraprocessed foods), antibiotic use and environmental factors. In contrast, Japan and South Korea, where rates are historically high but stable, showed different mutational patterns, suggesting other causes may dominate there.

Perhaps the most provocative finding relates to when this bacterial damage occurs. Unlike lifestyle risks that build up over decades, colibactin seems to strike during a narrow window – when the microbiome is still forming in childhood or early adulthood.

Potential triggers could include repeated antibiotic use that disrupts healthy gut bacteria, highly processed diets that favour E. coli growth and urban living that reduces exposure to diverse microbial environments.

Not just genes and lifestyle

These findings may also point to new prevention strategies. Screening programs could focus on younger adults carrying these high-risk bacterial strains, using stool tests to detect colibactin genes.

Diets high in fibre and low in processed foods might promote a healthier gut microbiome, potentially suppressing harmful bacteria. The research also adds weight to calls for lowering colorectal cancer screening ages worldwide, since many early-onset cases go undetected under current guidelines.

While this study is a major step forward, many questions remain. Why do some people carry colibactin-producing bacteria but never develop cancer? How do modern lifestyle factors amplify – or mitigate – these microbial risks? What we do know is that cancer results from the complex interplay between our genes and our environment – including the microscopic world within us.

As researchers continue to connect the dots, one thing is clear: the colorectal cancer epidemic of the 21st century may have begun with silent microbial battles in our guts, decades before diagnosis. This emerging view of cancer not just as a genetic or lifestyle disease, but also as a microbial one – could fundamentally reshape how we think about prevention for future generations.

Justin Stebbing 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. Colon cancer rates are rising among young people – could changes to children’s gut bacteria explain why? – https://theconversation.com/colon-cancer-rates-are-rising-among-young-people-could-changes-to-childrens-gut-bacteria-explain-why-255176

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s first 100 days: economic uncertainty spikes while the president’s approval ratings tank

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Steve Schifferes, Honorary Research Fellow, City Political Economy Research Centre, City St George’s, University of London

When US president Donald Trump took office in January he inherited a strong economy, which was growing faster than those of many of its rivals. Nevertheless, he won the election in November on the back of strong voter dissatisfaction with the economy, especially the cost of living. This is the legacy of high inflation sparked first by COVID and then Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

But Trump also won with his appeal to “left-behind” voters, especially working-class people in the US rust belt. This demographic has suffered a long-term decline in living standards as manufacturing jobs in traditional industries like car-making and steel have disappeared.

Trump claimed during his campaign that high tariffs were the answer to most of America’s economic problems. He promised a revival in domestic manufacturing by blocking imports, while forcing foreign firms to shift production to the US. And there was also the promise of tax cuts paid for with the revenues raised from tariffs.

But the erratic roll-out of his tariff policies have shattered business and consumer confidence. They have also tanked his poll ratings with respect to his management of the economy. And it is causing chaos to world trade and economic cooperation.

How is Donald Trump’s presidency shaping up after 100 days? Here’s what the experts think. If you like what you see, sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter.

The threat of higher prices for imported goods has made US consumers cautious. Businesses are facing the awesome task of rejigging global supply chains established over many decades, with no certainty over where they should invest.

China was always the main target of Trump’s tariffs, but it is not clear who will win the battle. China has been preparing for this confrontation for years, shifting its exports to other countries and boosting domestic consumption.

And blocking Chinese exports does not automatically mean that US industry will become more efficient and productive. This is especially true in the absence of any industrial policy and with massive cutbacks in federal support for business, including for research.

Trouble ahead for Trump

The dramatic swings in tariff policy are probably less a product of Trump’s deep strategic planning – “the art of the deal” – than a response to conflicting pressures from different factions of Trump’s supporters.

What Trump probably did not anticipate was the negative reaction of financial markets to his April 2 announcement of massive global tariffs. The precipitous fall in the stock market (which arguably was overvalued already) has wiped US$4 trillion (£3 trillion) off the value of shares. This threatens the pensions of millions of US voters.

Even more serious has been the reaction of the bond market. Trump’s plan for massive tax cuts for the rich, now being negotiated in Congress, could add nearly US$6 trillion to the already huge and growing stock of US government debt over the next decade. This strategy will only work if international bond holders are prepared to buy a lot more US Treasury bonds.

But they are now fleeing that market, which is normally the bedrock of the international financial system. This has the effect of forcing up interest rates, both in the US and globally.

The US president’s attack on the independence of the US central bank, the Federal Reserve, is further unsettling the markets. The Fed now has the unenviable task of trying both to stop a recession and prevent inflation getting out of hand.

And the economic damage of Trump’s tariffs is having political consequences. The Democrats are now favoured to retake control of the House of Representatives in the 2026 mid-term elections.

Targeting welfare may be a cut too far for many US voters.
Christopher Penler/Shutterstock

Trump’s popularity will suffer a further blow if Congress is forced to cut government spending even further to finance its tax cuts. One casualty could be Medicaid spending, which faces cuts of US$880 billion. Medicaid provides health insurance for 70 million people on low incomes or with disabilities. The cut has already been included in one version of the budget resolution.

Read more:
Trump thinks tariffs can bring back the glory days of US manufacturing. Here’s why he’s wrong

Trump is now caught between his big business backers, who want to drastically reduce the role of the federal government but keep free trade, and his working-class supporters, who are hoping that his tariffs will restore manufacturing jobs.

But this group would be deeply upset by cuts to major government programmes such as Medicare and social security, which many depend on for much of their income. These programmes make up a large portion of all government non-defence spending, and without major cuts it will be hard to find enough savings to fund tax reductions.

With the International Monetary Fund now forecasting a 40% chance of recession in the US, the president’s economic ratings look unlikely to improve any time soon.

Steve Schifferes 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. Trump’s first 100 days: economic uncertainty spikes while the president’s approval ratings tank – https://theconversation.com/trumps-first-100-days-economic-uncertainty-spikes-while-the-presidents-approval-ratings-tank-255449

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Rector of the State University of Management joined the Public Council under the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: State University of Management – Official website of the State –

On April 28, an order was published “On Amendments to the Composition of the Public Council under the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation” signed by the Minister of Economic Development Maxim Reshetnikov.

In accordance with the document, the rector of the State University of Management, Vladimir Stroyev, joined the Public Council as a representative of the Interregional Public Movement for Interethnic Harmony “Beacons of Friendship”.

“The historical and cultural project “Beacons of Friendship. Towers of the Caucasus” was born at the State University of Management in 2016. Since then, dozens of trips and events have been held aimed at strengthening interethnic relations between the peoples of our country and drawing attention to the problems of preserving the cultural and historical heritage of the peoples of Russia,” Vladimir Vitalyevich recalled.

Let us recall that in 2024, Vladimir Stroyev was awarded the jubilee medal “100 years of statehood of the Republic of Ingushetia” for the long-term cooperation of the State University of Management with the Republic of Ingushetia, which began with the implementation of the project “Beacons of Friendship. Towers of the Caucasus”.

We congratulate our rector on his new achievement and wish him successful work for the benefit of our country and his native State University of Management!

Subscribe to the TG channel “Our GUU” Date of publication: 04/28/2025

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Round table within BIMAC-2025: how to provide the industry with personnel

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering – Saint Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering –

On April 24, a round table was held at SPbGASU as part of the VIII International Scientific and Practical Conference “Information Modeling in Construction and Architecture Problems” (BIMAC-2025) dedicated to the issues of developing digital competencies of students of secondary vocational education institutions (SVE) in the construction sector.

The event brought together representatives of public organizations, educational institutions, customer companies and students to discuss current trends in personnel training and the implementation of information modeling technologies.

SPbGASU trains personnel together with industry partners

Polina Fedyuchek, Victoria Vinogradova

Vice-Rector for Continuing Education at SPbGASU Victoria Vinogradova said that the university continues to actively work on the application of TIM technologies in the educational process, closely cooperating with leading enterprises in the construction industry, and emphasized that all initiatives at the university – from school projects to scientific developments – are implemented jointly with industrial partners, which ensures the practical orientation of personnel training. She also noted that the university positions itself not just as an educational institution, but as an integration center that unites educational, scientific and project activities. SPbGASU is becoming a platform for professional dialogue between all participants in the construction process – from students to the heads of large companies.

“We are creating an environment where future specialists can gain not only theoretical knowledge, but also practical experience working with real projects,” noted Victoria Vinogradova. “Our partners are actively involved in developing educational programs, organizing internships and internships, and supervising diploma projects.” Particular attention is paid to creating conditions for professional growth. The university offers various formats of interaction: from corporate training for company employees to joint scientific research.

“Openness to cooperation is one of our key principles,” emphasized Victoria Vinogradova. “We are ready to discuss new initiatives and joint projects that will contribute to the development of the construction industry and the training of highly qualified personnel who meet the requirements of the digital age.”

In conclusion of her report, Victoria Vinogradova invited interested organizations to work together in several areas: the implementation of scientific and design developments, the creation of an open environment for digital projects, and the development of students’ project activities. According to her, such a comprehensive approach allows training specialists who can work effectively in the modern conditions of the digitalized construction industry immediately after graduation.

The role of professional associations

Elena Parikova, Development Director – Head of the NOSTROY Project Office, gave a presentation on the experience of the NOSTROY SPO Consortium in the field of digital competencies formation. She emphasized the importance of information modeling technologies and presented the consortium’s initiatives in this area.

Particular attention was paid to personnel training. Elena Parikova noted that the industry is facing a shortage of specialists – from 300 to 700 thousand digital personnel. In higher education institutions, TIM programs are implemented in bachelor’s, master’s and postgraduate programs, including such areas as “Construction” and “Information systems and technologies”. In secondary vocational education, the federal state educational standard for the specialty 08.02.15 “Information modeling in construction” has been implemented, which provides training in technical support of TIM, design of structures and management of digital models.

Elena Parikova noted that NOSTROY is also developing additional educational programs, including professional retraining, advanced training, and corporate training. Of particular interest were the projects “Digital Construction Classes” developed by SPbGASU for schoolchildren, and the online course “From Idea to Practice of Digitalization of the Construction Industry”, developed jointly with the RF Competence Center.

Elena Parikova also spoke in detail about the implementation of the educational initiative “TIM-elective of SPbGASU. SPO League 2025” and the All-Russian TIM-championship of SPbGASU. SPO League 2025. She noted that NOSTROY President Anton Glushkov notes the importance of digitalization of the industry and training of qualified personnel and emphasizes that the championship has become the first all-Russian competition for students of the vocational education system after the approval of the new Federal State Educational Standard (FSES) for the specialty 08.02.15, expressing confidence that the participants will make a significant contribution to the development of the construction industry.

In conclusion, Elena Parikova noted that the development of digital competencies requires joint efforts of educational institutions, businesses and regulators, and invited all interested parties to cooperate.

Deputy Head of the Office of the National Association of Designers and Surveyors (NOPRIZ) Nadezhda Prokopyeva gave a report on the development of a system for independent assessment of the qualifications of specialists in the field of information modeling. In her speech, she emphasized the importance of fulfilling the order of the President of the Russian Federation from 2018 on the modernization of the construction industry through the introduction of TIM technologies.

Nadezhda Prokopyeva noted that NOPRIZ and the Association of Software Developers “Domestic Software” are joining forces to develop TIM technologies. As part of the development of digital competencies in the construction industry, NOPRIZ has entered into an agreement with the Association “Domestic Software”, which unites Russian software developers. This partnership is aimed at harmonizing professional standards and qualification requirements with the capabilities of domestic TIM solutions. Joint work will allow adapting independent qualification assessment programs to Russian software products, as well as facilitating the training of specialists who are proficient in national digital tools.

Particular attention was paid to the updated professional standard “Specialist in the field of information modeling in construction”, which came into force on March 1, 2025. The standard establishes five levels of qualification – from technical support of TIM to management of information modeling processes at the organizational level. On its basis, the Federal State Educational Standard of Secondary Vocational Education 08.02.15 “Information Modeling in Construction” has already been developed, which is implemented by 34 educational institutions of secondary vocational education.

Nadezhda Prokopyeva spoke in detail about the independent qualification assessment system, which has been conducted since 2017 on the basis of Federal Law No. 238-FZ. Currently, examination centers operate in Moscow, Krasnoyarsk, Yekaterinburg, Novosibirsk, Irkutsk and Veliky Novgorod. The exam includes both a theoretical part with questions on the regulatory framework and practical tasks on working with TIM software products.

An important area of work for NOPRIZ is cooperation with the country’s leading construction universities to update educational programs in accordance with professional standards. In conclusion, Nadezhda Prokopyeva noted that the introduction of an independent qualification assessment system ensures a high professional level of specialists and increases confidence in TIM technologies in the construction industry.

Polina Fedyuchek, Deputy Director for Development of the Association of SRO “OsnovaProekt”, gave a report on the role of self-regulatory organizations in training specialists for the construction industry. In her speech, she emphasized the importance of the active participation of self-regulatory organizations in issues of personnel shortage and digitalization of the construction industry.

Polina Fedyuchek emphasized the importance of implementing state strategic documents – the Strategy for the Development of the Construction Industry and Housing and Public Utilities of the Russian Federation for the Period up to 2030 with a Forecast up to 2035 and the Concept for Training Personnel for the Construction Industry and Housing and Public Utilities up to 2035. These documents define the need for digitalization of the industry and the creation of a system of continuous professional education, where SROs act as a link between educational institutions, businesses and regulators.

Particular attention was paid to the implementation of the educational initiative “TIM-elective. SPO League”, launched by the Association of SRO “OsnovaProekt” together with SPbGASU in 2024. The pilot project covered six colleges from different regions of Russia, training 150 students and 29 teachers. In 2025, the program expanded significantly: now 32 educational institutions are participating in it, including colleges from Moscow, St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Khabarovsk and other cities. The total number of students reached 787 people, of which 631 are students and 146 are teachers. The program includes 308 hours of training in key areas of TIM technologies: architecture, structures, engineering systems and others. She also noted that these educational initiatives are being implemented with the involvement of exclusively domestic software developers.

“Support for young specialists and development of regional human resources potential remain our priorities,” noted Polina Fedyuchek. “Programs like the TIM-optional course not only help prepare qualified specialists, but also help reduce the personnel shortage in the regions.”

In conclusion, the speaker expressed confidence that further development of the self-regulation system and strengthening of interaction with educational institutions and government agencies will allow for successful resolution of the challenges facing the industry, including digitalization and training of qualified personnel.

As noted by Leonid Shelkovnikov, Head of the TIM Department of Kairos-Engineering LLC, a teacher at the Perm Construction College, the discrepancy between the qualifications of personnel and the needs of the labor market is a consequence of a major problem – the lack of a unified state approach to the use of information modeling technology, namely the choice of software. Educational institutions at the state level are prohibited from teaching imported software products, but construction organizations are allowed to use foreign software, including with violation of the copyrights of the departed vendors.

“The rapid obsolescence of knowledge due to the rapid transformation of the construction industry, the effective implementation of new technologies in the conditions of “turbulence” of the economy, the lack of dialogue between enterprises of the real sector of the economy and educational institutions – this is what is worth paying attention to in the near future. Growth points lie in the close interaction of educational institutions with the construction industry, the information technology industry. Therefore, it is necessary to move towards the set goals: try to select the required software for the educational process, look for technology partners in the conditions of uncertainty of state policy in the field of application of TIM. At the same time, we are all waiting for the formation of a unified methodology for training TIM personnel in the country, we are trying to convince both students and ourselves of the need to achieve technological sovereignty of the Russian construction industry through import substitution of software products and the applied standards for information transfer,” Leonid Shelkovnikov emphasized.

What do experts expect from the educational process?

Leonid Shelkovnikov, Maria Lemekhova and Alexey Zubkov

The head of the educational project of the company “ASCON”, the manager of the competence “Technologies of information modeling BIM” of the Agency for the development of skills and professions Olga Chernyadyeva clarified who a TIM teacher is. This is a certified specialist in the main BIM tools, who has experience in solving real problems of the industry and strives to constantly develop along with the update of the functionality of BIM tools and the construction industry.

“The professional skills competitions were created at the request of the industry. The tasks include the basic principles of BIM technologies (multi-vendor, teamwork, work with exchange formats), current tasks and skills in demand by the industry, taking into account current BIM standards and professional standards. As part of the TIM Championship of SPbGASU, training intensives are held on working with BIM tools, as well as on teaching methods,” said Olga Chernyadyeva.

She added that BIM management, the StroimProsto hackathon, the Professionals Championship movement, the TIM-Leaders All-Russian competition, and the Summer BIM School help develop the competencies of all members of the professional community.

Maria Lemekhova, Head of the Department for Work with the Federal Targeted Program at JSC Baltic Shipyard, noted that shipbuilding is also currently implementing TIM technologies and is facing similar personnel problems.

“Shipbuilding, like the construction industry, is unthinkable today without information modeling. At shipyards, we use TIM approaches to create ships, vessels and infrastructure. Our experience can be useful for solving problems in architecture and construction – from design optimization to life cycle management of objects. Digital twins of ships and TIM technologies in shipbuilding are the “marine version” of construction solutions. Integration of approaches will help overcome common challenges,” explained Maria Lemekhova.

She emphasized that digitalization of shipbuilding is a key element of the strategy of technological sovereignty. It covers not only the introduction of robotics and automation, but also the transformation of human resources. The transition to the concept of “Shipbuilding 4.0” requires training specialists capable of working with digital twins, ship lifecycle management systems (PLM) and artificial intelligence. The United Construction Corporation (JSC “USC”), which includes the Baltic Shipyard, is taking steps to restructure the educational system through projects such as “Plant-VTUZ”, combining training with practical training at enterprises. For example, students of the St. Petersburg Marine Technical University (SPbGMTU) are involved in the creation of digital twins of ships, which reduces the adaptation period for graduates in production.

“Only through the integration of digital platforms, updating retraining programs and creating attractive conditions for young people will we be able to overcome the personnel crisis,” noted Maria Lemekhova.

Construction allows you to leave a mark on history and realize your creative potential, because each project is unique and requires an individual approach, agreed Alexey Zubkov, project manager of the service of the director for construction of social facilities of the LSR Group and a graduate of St. Petersburg State University of Architecture and Civil Engineering.

“LSR traces its history back to 1993 and in 30 years has become one of the leading construction holdings in the country. Now the LSR Group continues to increase construction and production volumes, following a proven strategy and maintaining established traditions. We follow new standards and requirements for the design of buildings and structures, including the use of modern technologies (for example, TIM). And we understand that the most important thing in any company, regardless of its size and profile of activity, is people. Therefore, we pay great attention to our many thousands of personnel, creating conditions for effective work and providing the broadest opportunities for professional and career growth. We will be glad to see young specialists in our teams,” said Alexey Zubkov.

In addition, teachers from colleges from Perm, Belgorod, Rostov-on-Don, Veliky Novgorod and St. Petersburg spoke at the round table and shared their opinions on the educational initiative “TIM-elective SPbGASU. SPO League 2025”. The speakers outlined the issues that, in their opinion, need to be improved by next year, and thanked SPbGASU and the Association of SRO “OsnovaProekt” for organizing such an interesting and significant event.

The participants of the round table agreed that the development of TIM technologies requires close interaction between educational institutions, businesses and regulators. Particular attention was paid to the need to adapt educational programs to rapidly changing industry requirements.

The event became a platform for exchanging best practices and defining the vector of further cooperation in the field of digitalization of the construction industry.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Open Day at the Polytechnic University brought together thousands of future students

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University – Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University –

Before the start of the admissions campaign, the Polytechnic University held an Open Day. On April 27, more than 4,000 applicants and their parents visited the Main Academic Building of the university. For those who could not come in person, a live broadcast was organized in the Polytechnic group for applicants on VKontakte.

The event was opened by the Vice-Rector for Continuing and Pre-University Education of SPbPU Dmitry Tikhonov, who spoke about the advantages of studying at the Polytechnic University and the prospects for students. Then the responsible secretary of the Admissions Committee Vitaly Drobchik acquainted the participants with the key changes in the admission rules for the 2025 academic year.

After the official part, the guests were able to visit the institutes’ stands, where they learned about the training areas and asked questions to the teachers and students. Various activities and presentations were prepared for the university’s guests. The Civil Engineering Institute held master classes on digital construction, life safety, and product design. Those interested in the humanities were able to learn about the professions of a digital linguist, psychologist, and specialist in foreign regional studies. The Institute of Biomedical Systems and Biotechnology held a master class on experiments with food pigments. The Institute of Industrial Management, Economics, and Trade organized a master class on commodity science, where schoolchildren learned to quickly determine the quality of products and identify signs of non-compliance with standards and possible counterfeiting.

The SPbPU Career Development Department presented job opportunities to applicants in an interactive format. Specialists talked about practices, internships and options for cooperation with the university’s partners. Organizations that offer targeted training at the university were also presented.

In addition, participants could visit a photo booth and take a sightseeing tour of the campus. At special consultation stands, guests of the university talked with employees of the Admissions Committee, activists of the United Student Council of Dormitories, representatives of the Black Bears-Polytech sports club and specialists of the Center for Work with Applicants.

At the end of the event, participants were treated to an impressive scientific show from the Institute of Physics and Mathematics, as well as an awards ceremony for the winners of the university competition.

The live broadcast was hosted by the Director of the Contingent Formation Center Varvara Sotova and a student of the Institute of Energy Victoria Chernova. They explained in detail the nuances of admission this year and talked about participation in the projects of the State Corporation Rosatom. The broadcast can be viewed inrecords in a group.

The Open Day once again confirmed the leading position of the Polytechnic University, the relevance of our scientific developments and educational programs. There was a lot of excitement near the career guidance zones of each institute. And the university strategy adapted for presentation to schoolchildren aroused keen interest among applicants and parents, because we are talking about success and prospects. We see how the interest of young people in engineering areas and the use of modern technologies related to artificial intelligence, digital engineering, new materials is growing. It is especially valuable that applicants come to us not just for a diploma, but for the competencies of the future, which will allow them to become sought-after specialists in high-tech industries, – noted Dmitry Tikhonov.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: Italy’s Meloni is positioning herself as bridge between EU and Trump – but will it work?

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Julia Khrebtan-Hörhager, Associate Professor of Critical Cultural & International Studies, Colorado State University

Italy Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni looks to thread a divide. Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni recently became the first European leader to visit the United States after President Donald Trump announced a new tariff regime on trading partners, including a 20% levy on imports from the European Union.

While those tariffs are currently on hold, the ongoing threat of them being enacted provided a telling backdrop for Meloni’s mid-April 2025 visit.

Controversial and often perceived by critics as calculating, Meloni has walked a tightrope between European Union solidarity and embracing far-right causes since becoming Italy’s prime minister in 2022. She was the only European leader to attend Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 and counts tech titan Elon Musk among her allies.

In many ways, Meloni reflects Europe’s own identity crisis: a regional power with global ambition. Italy, after all, was a founding pillar of the European Union, hosting the signing of the Treaties of Rome in 1957 establishing the European common market. Yet, for decades, Italy has often stood just outside the core of EU influence, overshadowed by the Franco-German partnership.

Still, when the moment is right, Italy knows how to wield its leverage, especially as a bridge between clashing camps in Brussels.

In Washington, Meloni made her pitch to Trump: a tighter ideological alliance over shared disdain for “woke” politics, diversity, equity and inclusion agendas, and lax immigration. She offered a sweetener – more Italian investment in the U.S. as a sop to the transatlantic trade dispute. But she also reiterated her and the EU’s support for Ukraine, a direct contrast to Trump’s skepticism to continued U.S. support in Ukraine’s conflict with Russia.

In so doing, Meloni has cast herself as someone who can serve both Brussels and Washington without burning bridges on either side. The gamble? That balancing act could backfire. Trump’s demands over trade and increased defense spending by NATO countries force Meloni to choose between appeasing Washington or staying in line with EU norms. Her overtures to Trump risk alienating key European allies who are wary of his disruptive politics.

In trying to play both sides, she could end up isolated from both – undermining Italy’s credibility and influence on the world stage.

Italy was a founder member of the European Union, but it is often a third wheel behind Germany and France.
Simona Granati/Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images

Meloni as a bridge

The story of modern Italy has been one of playing off sides.

During the Cold War, Italy walked a fine line between NATO commitments and accommodating a powerful domestic Communist Party.

Italy was regularly governed by a series of often fraught center-right coalitions that were forced to navigate fractious politics and quid pro quo political violence between the far right and far left. The center-right Christian Democrats that dominated this period married conservatism at home with a strong pro-European outlook.

In the first decades after the Cold War ended, Italy continued to carve out its own lane – pushing for leniency on issues like immigration and fiscal rules. The period saw Italy oscillate between pro-European integration and bouts of euroscepticism, with successive governments frequently challenging Brussels over budgetary constraints or border management.

Meloni’s own rise is deeply rooted in the post-2015 tensions, when Italy – overwhelmed by the Mediterranean migrant crisis – felt abandoned by its European partners. Her party’s hard-line stance on immigration capitalized on public frustration. While she now presents herself as firmly pro-EU, it’s a version of Europe that aligns with her own vision: more secure borders, stronger national sovereignty and less technocratic interference.

Ironically, as the bloc itself drifts rightward on migration, Meloni’s positions no longer seem so fringe – perhaps allowing her to embrace the EU pragmatically, even as she critiques it ideologically. Meloni’s own background and rise reflect this ambiguity and duality. Emerging from a political movement with fascist roots, she now presents herself as a passionate Europeanist and pacifist while maintaining right-wing positions on immigration and cultural issues.

Meloni has governed in that fashion: cultivating ties with conservative heavyweights like Trump and right-wing European leaders, pushing back against Brussels on contentious policy issues, but also remaining firmly committed to the European project when it suits her. Especially when the economy is at stake.

Meloni as pragmatic European

Meloni’s strongly nationalist rhetoric and right-wing cultural views might appear at odds with the EU’s purpose, but her approach to the continent is highly pragmatic.

While she regularly critiques EU bureaucracy at home, her government remains the largest recipient of EU recovery funds, securing €191.5 billion (US$218 billion) from the EU’s post-COVID recovery plan program. That critical cash infusion for an aging country with persistently sluggish growth comes with a commitment to enact a series of stringent fiscal reforms and austerity measures by 2026. In addition, Italy continues to benefit from long-standing cohesion and structural funds, particularly the economically struggling south,.

Meanwhile, Meloni’s support for Ukraine helps her stand apart from pro-Russia voices in her coalition and strengthens Italy’s standing with NATO and the EU. It’s another strategic move that boosts her credibility both at home and abroad. Far from being a fringe player, Italy under Meloni is central to the EU’s narrative of unity, solidarity and survival.

A spaghetti Western alliance?

While Meloni reconciles her nationalist views vis-a-vis the supranationalist EU, she has also prioritized selling her idea of Italy on a bilateral basis.

That has largely focused on a shrewd charm offensive in the U.S., particularly since the return of Trump, whose right-wing administration provides any easy fit for Meloni. She has attempted to play both Trump and Musk to Italy’s advantage, leveraging Rome’s geopolitical position to secure economic agreements and ease tensions wrought by Trump tariffs, which Meloni called “wrong.”

Trump has been quick to praise her stance against “anti-woke” politics, while Meloni promises to help resolve trade issues and boost U.S. gas imports, all while keeping Italy at the forefront of negotiations. With Musk, she has attempted to position Italy as a key partner in tech and energy, navigating the global game with both finesse and ambition.

Italy runs a substantial trade surplus with the U.S. and underspends on NATO defense – two things that typically trigger Trump’s criticism. Yet with Meloni, Trump has been full of admiration: “She’s taken Europe by storm,” he said in April, agreeing during their last meeting to meet again in Rome in the near future.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, left, has expressed solidarity with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Thierry Monasse/Getty Images

Meloni’s diplomatic ambitions extend beyond the U.S., including making moves in the Middle East, particularly with Saudi Arabia. By promoting Italy as a gateway to Europe, she is securing key investments in energy and infrastructure, while boosting Italian exports and increasing her diplomatic leverage. The fact that many in Europe, and indeed Italy, eye such overtures toward Saudi money with distaste, appears neither here nor there. After all, in Italy there has long been an attitude among leaders that “money does not smell” – or “pecunia non olet” as the locals say – a phrase that by legend was uttered by Emperor Vespasian while slapping a tax on public urinals.

Will all roads lead to Rome?

While Meloni’s approach of casting Italy as a bridge between the U.S. and Europe may yield some short-term diplomatic gains, it’s nonetheless a delicate path fraught with risk. Cozying up to Washington under Trump, whose policies – especially on trade – have engendered widespread outrage in Europe, risks ruffling feathers in Brussels. Indeed, while Trump praised Meloni’s leadership, and both sides talked trade with no urgency on tariffs, Europe watched warily.

Trying to navigate between Trump’s protectionist leanings and the EU’s collective trade stance could leave Meloni unable to satisfy either side. Should Trump push for concessions – like shrinking Italy’s trade surplus with the U.S. or increasing defense spending – Meloni may find herself at odds with EU standards and alienating European partners. But leaning too far into EU alignment – and the bloc’s commitment to Ukraine – risks souring her ties with Trump’s camp, potentially weakening her influence across the Atlantic.

In trying to please both Washington and Brussels, Meloni could end up with enemies on both fronts – and very few wins to show for it.

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

– ref. Italy’s Meloni is positioning herself as bridge between EU and Trump – but will it work? – https://theconversation.com/italys-meloni-is-positioning-herself-as-bridge-between-eu-and-trump-but-will-it-work-254955

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Global: 50 years later, Vietnam’s environment still bears the scars of war – and signals a dark future for Gaza and Ukraine

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Pamela McElwee, Professor of Human Ecology, Rutgers University

During the Vietnam War, the U.S. bombed and defoliated vast areas of forest and protective mangroves. AP Photo

When the Vietnam War finally ended on April 30, 1975, it left behind a landscape scarred with environmental damage. Vast stretches of coastal mangroves, once housing rich stocks of fish and birds, lay in ruins. Forests that had boasted hundreds of species were reduced to dried-out fragments, overgrown with invasive grasses.

The term “ecocide” had been coined in the late 1960s to describe the U.S. military’s use of herbicides like Agent Orange and incendiary weapons like napalm to battle guerrilla forces that used jungles and marshes for cover.

Fifty years later, Vietnam’s degraded ecosystems and dioxin-contaminated soils and waters still reflect the long-term ecological consequences of the war. Efforts to restore these damaged landscapes and even to assess the long-term harm have been limited.

As an environmental scientist and anthropologist who has worked in Vietnam since the 1990s, I find the neglect and slow recovery efforts deeply troubling. Although the war spurred new international treaties aimed at protecting the environment during wartime, these efforts failed to compel post-war restoration for Vietnam. Current conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East show these laws and treaties still aren’t effective.

Agent Orange and daisy cutters

The U.S. first sent ground troops to Vietnam in March 1965 to support South Vietnam against revolutionary forces and North Vietnamese troops, but the war had been going on for years before then. To fight an elusive enemy operating clandestinely at night and from hideouts deep in swamps and jungles, the U.S. military turned to environmental modification technologies.

The most well-known of these was Operation Ranch Hand, which sprayed at least 19 million gallons (75 million liters) of herbicides over approximately 6.4 million acres (2.6 million hectares), of South Vietnam. The chemicals fell on forests, and also on rivers, rice paddies and villages, exposing civilians and troops. More than half of that spraying involved the dioxin-contaminated defoliant Agent Orange.

A U.S. Air Force C-123 flies low along a South Vietnamese highway spraying defoliants on dense jungle growth beside the road to eliminate ambush sites during the Vietnam War.
AP Photo/Department of Defense

Herbicides were used to strip the leaf cover from forests, increase visibility along transportation routes and destroy crops suspected of supplying guerrilla forces.

As news of the damage from these tactics made it back to the U.S., scientists raised concerns about the campaign’s environmental impacts to President Lyndon Johnson, calling for a review of whether the U.S. was intentionally using chemical weapons. American military leaders’ position was that herbicides did not constitute chemical weapons under the Geneva Protocol, which the U.S. had yet to ratify.

Scientific organizations also initiated studies within Vietnam during the war, finding widespread destruction of mangroves, economic losses of rubber and timber plantations, and harm to lakes and waterways.

A photo at the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City, historically known as Saigon, shows the damage at Cần Giờ mangrove forest. The mangrove forest was destroyed by herbicides, bombs and plows.
Gary Todd/Flickr

In 1969, evidence linked a chemical in Agent Orange, 2,4,5-T, to birth defects and stillbirths in mice because it contained TCDD, a particularly harmful dioxin. That led to a ban on domestic use and suspension of Agent Orange use by the military in April 1970, with the last mission flown in early 1971.

Incendiary weapons and the clearing of forests also ravaged rich ecosystems in Vietnam.

The U.S. Forest Service tested large-scale incineration of jungles by igniting barrels of fuel oil dropped from planes. Particularly feared by civilians was the use of napalm bombs, with more than 400,000 tons of the thickened petroleum used during the war. After these infernos, invasive grasses often took over in hardened, infertile soils.

Fires from napalm and other incendiary weapons cleared stretches of forest, in some cases scorching the soil so badly that nothing would regrow.
AP Photo

“Rome Plows,” massive bulldozers with an armor-fortified cutting blade, could clear 1,000 acres a day. Enormous concussive bombs, known as “daisy cutters”, flattened forests and set off shock waves killing everything within a 3,000-foot (900-meter) radius, down to earthworms in the soil.

The U.S. also engaged in weather modification through Project Popeye, a secret program from 1967 to 1972 that seeded clouds with silver iodide to prolong the monsoon season in an attempt to cut the flow of fighters and supplies coming down the Ho Chi Minh Trail from North Vietnam. Congress eventually passed a bipartisan resolution in 1973 urging an international treaty to prohibit the use of weather modification as a weapon of war. That treaty came into effect in 1978.

The U.S. military contended that all these tactics were operationally successful as a trade of trees for American lives.

Despite Congress’ concerns, there was little scrutiny of the environmental impacts of U.S. military operations and technologies. Research sites were hard to access, and there was no regular environmental monitoring.

Recovery efforts have been slow

After the fall of Saigon to North Vietnamese troops on April 30, 1975, the U.S. imposed a trade and economic embargo on all of Vietnam, leaving the country both war-damaged and cash-strapped.

Vietnamese scientists told me they cobbled together small-scale studies. One found a dramatic drop in bird and mammal diversity in forests. In the A Lưới valley of central Vietnam, 80% of forests subjected to herbicides had not recovered by the early 1980s. Biologists found only 24 bird and five mammal species in those areas, far below normal in unsprayed forests.

Only a handful of ecosystem restoration projects were attempted, hampered by shoestring budgets. The most notable began in 1978, when foresters began hand-replanting mangroves at the mouth of the Saigon River in Cần Giờ forest, an area that had been completely denuded.

Mangroves have been replanted in the Cần Giờ Biosphere Reserve near Ho Chi Minh City, but their restoration took decades.
Tho Nau/Flickr, CC BY

In inland areas, widespread tree-planting programs in the late 1980s and 1990s finally took root, but they focused on planting exotic trees like acacia, which did not restore the original diversity of the natural forests.

Chemical cleanup is still underway

For years, the U.S. also denied responsibility for Agent Orange cleanup, despite the recognition of dioxin-associated illnesses among U.S. veterans and testing that revealed continuing dioxin exposure among potentially tens of thousands of Vietnamese.

The first remediation agreement between the two countries only occurred in 2006, after persistent advocacy by veterans, scientists and nongovernmental organizations led Congress to appropriate US$3 million for the remediation of the Da Nang airport.

That project, completed in 2018, treated 150,000 cubic meters of dioxin-laden soil at an eventual cost of over $115 million, paid mostly by the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID. The cleanup required lakes to be drained and contaminated soil, which had seeped more than 9 feet (3 meters) deeper than expected, to be piled and heated to break down the dioxin molecules.

Large amounts of Agent Orange had been stored at the Da Nang airport during the war and contaminated the soil with dioxin. The cleanup project, including heating contaminated soil to high temperatures, was completed in 2018.
Richard Nyberg/USAID

Another major hot spot is the heavily contaminated Biên Hoà airbase, where local residents continue to ingest high levels of dioxin through fish, chicken and ducks.

Agent Orange barrels were stored at the base, which leaked large amounts of the toxin into soil and water, where it continues to accumulate in animal tissue as it moves up the food chain. Remediation began in 2019; however, further work is at risk with the Trump administration’s near elimination of USAID, leaving it unclear if there will be any American experts in Vietnam in charge of administering this complex project.

Laws to prevent future ‘ecocide’ are complicated

While Agent Orange’s health effects have understandably drawn scrutiny, its long-term ecological consequences have not been well studied.

Current-day scientists have far more options than those 50 years ago, including satellite imagery, which is being used in Ukraine to identify fires, flooding and pollution. However, these tools cannot replace on-the-ground monitoring, which often is restricted or dangerous during wartime.

The legal situation is similarly complex.

In 1977, the Geneva Conventions governing conduct during wartime were revised to prohibit “widespread, long term, and severe damage to the natural environment.” A 1980 protocol restricted incendiary weapons. Yet oil fires set by Iraq during the Gulf War in 1991, and recent environmental damage in the Gaza Strip, Ukraine and Syria indicate the limits of relying on treaties when there are no strong mechanisms to ensure compliance.

Remediation work to remove dioxin contamination was just getting started at the former Biên Hoà Air Base in Vietnam when USAID’s staff was dismantled in 2025.
USAID Vietnam, CC BY-NC

An international campaign currently underway calls for an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court to add ecocide as a fifth prosecutable crime alongside genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression.

Some countries have adopted their own ecocide laws. Vietnam was the first to legally state in its penal code that “Ecocide, destroying the natural environment, whether committed in time of peace or war, constitutes a crime against humanity.” Yet the law has resulted in no prosecutions, despite several large pollution cases.

Both Russia and Ukraine also have ecocide laws, but these have not prevented harm or held anyone accountable for damage during the ongoing conflict.

Lessons for the future

The Vietnam War is a reminder that failure to address ecological consequences, both during war and after, will have long-term effects. What remains in short supply is the political will to ensure that these impacts are neither ignored nor repeated.

Pamela McElwee receives funding from the Carnegie Corporation, National Science Foundation, and National Endowment for the Humanities.

– ref. 50 years later, Vietnam’s environment still bears the scars of war – and signals a dark future for Gaza and Ukraine – https://theconversation.com/50-years-later-vietnams-environment-still-bears-the-scars-of-war-and-signals-a-dark-future-for-gaza-and-ukraine-254971

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: From Innovations to Personnel: The Polytechnic University Hosted the Arctic Summit

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University – Peter the Great St Petersburg Polytechnic University –

The 9th International Arctic Summit “Arctic: Prospects, Innovations and Regional Development”, dedicated to the 180th anniversary of the founding of the Russian Geographical Society, was held in two cities – Moscow and St. Petersburg. In the Northern capital, the participants of the large-scale event were hosted by the Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University.

At the opening of the summit in the Technopolis Polytech research building, guests were greeted on behalf of the Governor of St. Petersburg, Alexander Beglov, by the Head of the Department for Development of Interaction with the Arctic Region of the St. Petersburg Committee for Arctic Affairs, Sergei Nikolaev.

The regional head’s address states that St. Petersburg is the center of Russia’s Arctic competencies, and the exchange of regions’ accumulated experience and the discussion of pressing issues of the development of the Far North are the key to strengthening our country’s position in the Arctic.

As Yuri Fomin, Vice-Rector for Research at SPbPU, noted in his greeting, Peter the Great St. Petersburg Polytechnic University not only trains personnel for enterprises in the northern region, but also conducts research in areas that are relevant for the Arctic: development of autonomous energy, construction in the Far North, infrastructure, logistics, security, etc.

The developments of our scientists are aimed at solving the problems outlined by the President of Russia at the VI International Arctic Forum. This is strengthening the transport and logistics contour of the Arctic, ensuring the energy independence of the region, mining, construction in difficult weather conditions, – said Yuri Vladimirovich and wished the forum participants successful and fruitful work.

Participants of the plenary session and thematic sections discussed many problematic issues related to the geopolitical, environmental and economic situation, harsh climate conditions and the shortage of highly professional personnel for the Arctic zone. At the Polytechnic site, they sought and proposed solutions, shared experiences and found partners.

Experts, including representatives of SPbPU, outlined the goals, main directions and mechanisms for implementing the tasks set, and also noted the importance of the activities of the Russian Geographical Society in the development of the Arctic.

Nikolay Vatin, Director of the Scientific and Technological Complex “Digital Engineering in Civil Construction”, spoke at the plenary session. He also held a thematic session “Development of Science and Technology in the Interests of Arctic Development. Information Partnership of Arctic Regions”.

At the special session “Scientific and technical projects and modern technologies for the development of the Arctic zone: Russian industry, world practice” Liliya Talipova, senior lecturer of the Higher School of Industrial, Civil and Road Construction of SPbPU, gave a report. She spoke about the development of a GIS platform for the design of linear objects in the Arctic.

The round table, dedicated to improving the quality of life of the population of the Arctic, was attended by IPMEiT teachers Maxim Polyukhovich, Alexey Ulyanov and Yulia Logvinova. The topic of their presentations was a model for designing workplaces for the region. In the round table session dedicated to Arctic energy, SPbPU professor Viktor Elistratov made a report on the use of renewable energy sources in the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation.

Students of the Polytechnic University also took part in the summit. Thus, at the thematic session “International Relations in the Arctic”, Zoya Merkulova, a master of the Higher School of Technosphere Safety of SPbPU, presented a report “Comparison of Russian and Foreign Experience in Industrial Safety Applied to Enterprises in Arctic Regions”.

Summing up the forum, the director of the Arctic 2025 summit Gennady Cherepov thanked the participants and noted the productivity of all sections. In conclusion, the winners of the competition of scientific research works aimed at sustainable development and exploration of the Arctic within the framework of the Decade of Science and Technology were awarded. Based on the materials of the summit, a scientific collection of the Russian Science Citation Index will be prepared and published.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Rosneft held corporate competitions to pass GTO standards

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

Rosneft held a large-scale competition for its employees in the Moscow region city of Shchyolkovo to pass the standards of the All-Russian physical culture and sports complex “Ready for Labor and Defense” (GTO). The company dedicated the competition to the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War.

The event was attended by about 700 amateur athletes from 66 of the Company’s enterprises from all over the country, as well as from the central management office.

Over the course of two days, participants had to demonstrate their strength, endurance, and flexibility. Athletes could pass GTO standards in 13 disciplines, including short and long-distance running, long jumps, bends, pull-ups, push-ups, kettlebell snatches, and shooting.

Participants in the GTO standards were divided into age groups and difficulty levels. Many employees did not limit themselves to the minimum requirements for passing the standards when performing exercises – they set personal records and also tried to show the best result among all athletes. Thus, the record for the number of push-ups among women this year was 140 times, among men – 166 times.

The event also included functional all-round competitions, which have become especially popular among employees this year. The number of teams has almost doubled compared to last year’s competitions – up to 73 teams versus 40 in 2024. The total number of participants was 213 people.

On the first day of the competition, teams of three completed six events: rowing, kettlebell push, medicine ball throw, team pull-up, rope jumping, and farmer’s walk. On the second day, athletes competed for victory in the game “Sniper” and a mixed running relay of different distances.

The teams were divided into four age categories: 18-29, 30-39, 40-49 and 50-59. Seven teams applied for the last one. The best in the all-around were the teams RN-BashNIPIneft (18-29), Udmurtneft (categories 30-39 and 40-49) and RN-Uvatneftegaz (50-59).

The winners of the competition were awarded diplomas, cups and certificates. Sergei Fedorov, a three-time world hockey champion, silver and bronze medalist of the Olympic Games, three-time USSR champion, three-time Stanley Cup winner and two-time Gagarin Cup winner as the head coach of CSKA, took part in the award ceremony.

Support for mass sports is one of Rosneft’s key priorities. The Company’s athletes take part in all major mass sports competitions, winning prizes. Rosneft supports amateur sports and carries out large-scale work to popularize a healthy lifestyle both among its employees and among the population in the regions where it operates.

As part of the corporate sports and health movement “Energy of Life”, employees regularly engage in sports and compete in various sports disciplines. In 2024, almost 128 thousand employees of the Company engaged in sports as part of the “Energy of Life” movement. At the same time, more than 92 thousand employees took part in competitions in various sports.

Reference:

The All-Russian physical culture and sports complex “Ready for Labor and Defense” (GTO) is a full-fledged program and regulatory framework for physical education of the country’s population, aimed at developing mass sports and improving the health of the nation. The GTO complex provides for preparation for the implementation and direct implementation by the population of various age groups (from 6 to 70 years and older) of established regulatory requirements for three difficulty levels corresponding to the gold, silver and bronze badges of distinction “Ready for Labor and Defense” (GTO).

The development of the sports movement is one of Rosneft’s key priorities. For active support and systematic work to popularize the GTO complex, in 2023 Rosneft became the winner of the Champion award, established by the Roscongress Foundation’s sports platform RK-Sport and the Reputation educational forum.

Department of Information and Advertising of PJSC NK Rosneft April 28, 2025

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Economics: Phillips 66 Files Investor Presentation Highlighting Proven Strategy, Board Strength and Path for Shareholder Value Creation

Source: Phillips

Outlines strong operational and financial performance driven by the Company’s transformative strategy
Warns that Elliott’s high-risk proposals are misleading, based on flawed analysis and threaten long-term shareholder value
Underscores the valuable skills and experiences Phillips 66’s Board and nominees have to drive shareholder value creation, superior to those of Elliott’s nominees

HOUSTON–(BUSINESS WIRE)– Phillips 66 (NYSE:PSX) (the “Company”) today filed an investor presentation with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with its upcoming Annual Meeting of Shareholders on May 21, 2025.
In conjunction with the presentation, Phillips 66 published two new videos that showcase the skills and experiences the Company’s two new Board nominees, A. Nigel Hearne and Howard Ungerleider, would bring to the Board and how they would approach driving shareholder value as a potential Board member of Phillips 66.
The presentation and the videos are available at www.phillips66delivers.com.
Highlights of the investor presentation include:
Phillips 66’s proven strategy has driven, and will drive, outperformance for shareholders
Since Mark Lashier became President and CEO in 2022, Phillips 66 has delivered total shareholder returns of 67%1, significantly outperforming the S&P 500 Energy Index by 45%1 and the Company’s synthetic proxy peer median2 by 42%1
In under three years, Phillips 66 has taken significant action, including returning over $14 billion to shareholders through share repurchases and dividends, rationalization of Refining assets, $3.5 billion in non-core asset divestitures, and opportunistic Midstream expansion through the Pinnacle and EPIC NGL acquisitions3
Reduced Refining Adjusted Controllable Costs from $6.98/bbl in 2022 to $5.90/bbl4 in 2024 with a clear plan in place to further reduce costs and achieve $5.50/bbl by 20275
Phillips 66’s transformative strategy is in its early innings and has significant room to deliver further value. This proven strategy will continue to drive long-term competitiveness in Refining, grow the NGL value chain, maintain the Company’s advantaged position in Chemicals, optimize profitability across all assets, and deliver consistent, compelling returns
Phillips 66 has delivered Refining profitability on par with peers on a like-for-like basis, while outperforming them in overall Refining cost improvements since 2022 6. The Company remains focused on cost improvements with a focus on further enhancing market capture.
Compared to 2021, our projected Midstream Adjusted EBITDA (post EPIC NGL) has grown by $1.9 billion, driven by an incremental 18% Cash Return on Capital Invested7, with additional organic growth opportunities in the future
CPChem’s global scale and feedstock advantages result in a self-funding joint venture with stable, growing distributions that is constructing two world-scale projects coming online in late 2026

The Company’s integrated model creates consistent and compelling long-term value for shareholders
Compared to the weighted proxy peer average, the Company’s integrated model delivers higher returns for shareholders and lower volatility across cycles
Phillips 66’s integrated structure creates $500 million in annual operating synergies8, as the Midstream business ensures reliable supply and integrated logistics for refineries and CPChem, ultimately improving flow assurance, feedstock quality, blending efficiency, and market flexibility
Since the spinoff in 2012, we have grown our dividend at a 15% CAGR.9 Our annual dividend paid has increased every year – a rare achievement in the energy sector, especially through economic and commodity cycles
Elliott, which has notable conflicts of interest, is attempting to mislead shareholders while pushing a short-sighted agenda that introduces undue risk and threatens to disrupt long-term shareholder returns
Elliott has demonstrated a pattern of inconsistent engagement with the Company, including prolonged periods of no engagement followed by public presentations with new demands, not allowing the Board to interview its nominees and seeking to replace Bob Pease – a director who was appointed in mutual agreement with Elliott10
Misleading shareholders has been a core focus of Elliott’s campaign – twisting quotes from management, describing their annual resignation proposal as voluntary despite the plain language of the proposalrequiringresignation, mischaracterizing Phillips 66’s business and comparing our performance to peers who report their metrics differently
Elliott’s proposals ignore action already taken by Phillips 66 to reduce Refining Adjusted Controllable Costs
Elliott’s calls to separate the Midstream business and CPChem are not only misguided and risky, but are underpinned by speculative valuations, ignore potentially large tax leakages and are driven by comparisons to other situations that are not applicable to Phillips 66
Elliott’s subsidiary, Amber Energy, is in pursuit of CITGO – a direct competitor of Phillips 66 in a core operational corridor – and is being led by the same portfolio managers who are driving its proxy campaign against Phillips 66 and actively trying to undermine our strategy.Elliott’s public solicitation materials do not clearly mention its pursuit of CITGO, or that multiple members of the Amber Energy leadership team have been directly involved in soliciting Phillips 66 shareholders
Phillips 66’s highly skilled and refreshed Board is a group of change agents with a track record of value creation, while Elliott’s nominees pose a risk to shareholder value
Phillips 66’s Board composition is closely aligned with the Company’s strategy. Of our continuing Directors and our nominees, six have refining experience, five have chemicals experience and five have midstream experience. Nearly everyone has experience in business transformations, several have expertise in finance and a number are experts in supply chains11
The Board consistently and rigorously evaluates the portfolio and other alternatives with a clear focus on maximizing long-term shareholder value – and remains prepared to take decisive action to achieve that goal
Our Directors and nominees have overseen more than $300 billion in “breakup” or major divestiture transactions12 and consistently evaluate the portfolio for value-creating opportunities
With five new directors appointed within the past four years, the Board has a strong track record of regular refreshment
Compared to Phillips 66’s nominees, Elliott’s nominees bring less relevant expertise and have redundant backgrounds. They also have conflicts of interests and close ties to Elliott and Amber Energy, who are actively pursuing one of our direct competitors, CITGO
Phillips 66’s nominees are significantly superior to Elliott’s in every category. Our nominees have experiences that are directly relevant to the Company’s strategy and have notably stronger track records of creating value at publicly traded companies when compared to Elliott’s nominees
Elliott has put forth illegal corporate governance demands, masked by misleading communications
As you know, the Board is fully committed to declassifying in accordance with our governing documents such that each of our directors is up for election each year. Our last attempt to do so received approval from 73% of outstanding shares. We encourage shareholders to vote FOR management’s declassification proposal
In contrast, Elliott is asking us to devise a “workaround” to declassify the Board in a de facto manner, without obtaining the required stockholder vote to do so. Our charter and by-laws do not give us that power. Put simply, if implemented, Elliott’s annual resignation proposal would contravene Delaware law, our company’s charter and by-laws and our Board’s fiduciary duties to shareholders. These facts are totally irreconcilable with Elliott’s purported interest in good corporate governance. The SEC has a process for companies to be able to exclude 14a-8 shareholder proposals that are illegal to implement, but the manner Elliott chose to proceed with avoided that review as Elliott submitted a proposal and solicited on its own proxy card
Elliott itself clearly realizes that an annual resignation requirement is not legal to implement, so Elliott keeps misleadingly suggesting that what it is asking for is simply voluntary. However, the plain text of Elliott’s proposal specifically asks the Board to adopt a policyrequiringour directors to resign each year
Implementing Elliott’s proposal would expose the Company to costly litigation and reputational risks and set a dangerous precedent for conveniently disregarding governing documents
Your Vote Matters
Phillips 66’s Board of Directors urges shareholders to use only the WHITE proxy card to vote:
“FOR” all four of the candidates proposed by the Company and not Elliott’s four nominees;
“FOR” management’s proposal to approve the declassification of the Board of Directors; and
“AGAINST” Elliott’s proposal requiring annual director resignations, which implementing would violate Delaware law and put your Board at significant legal and reputational risk
The Board strongly recommends that shareholders safeguard their investment in Phillips 66 by casting their vote as soon as possible, regardless of plans to attend the Annual Meeting virtually on May 21, 2025.
Shareholders may receive materials from Elliott Management that say “gold proxy card” or “gold voting instructions” or similar. Phillips 66 recommends that shareholders DISCARD any Gold voting materials they may receive from Elliott. Shareholders may cancel out any vote made using a Gold proxy card by voting again TODAY using the Company’s WHITE proxy card. Only the latest-dated vote will count.
About Phillips 66
Phillips 66 (NYSE: PSX) is a leading integrated downstream energy provider that manufactures, transports and markets products that drive the global economy. The company’s portfolio includes Midstream, Chemicals, Refining, Marketing and Specialties, and Renewable Fuels businesses. Headquartered in Houston, Phillips 66 has employees around the globe who are committed to safely and reliably providing energy and improving lives while pursuing a lower-carbon future. For more information, visit phillips66.com or follow @Phillips66Co on LinkedIn.
Forward-Looking Statements
This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws relating to Phillips 66’s operations, strategy and performance. Words such as “anticipated,” “committed,” “estimated,” “expected,” “planned,” “scheduled,” “targeted,” “believe,” “continue,” “intend,” “will,” “would,” “objective,” “goal,” “project,” “efforts,” “strategies,” and similar expressions that convey the prospective nature of events or outcomes generally indicate forward-looking statements. However, the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements included in this news release are based on management’s expectations, estimates and projections as of the date they are made. These statements are not guarantees of future events or performance, and you should not unduly rely on them as they involve certain risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecast in such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results or events to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements include: changes in governmental policies or laws that relate to our operations, including regulations that seek to limit or restrict refining, marketing and midstream operations or regulate profits, pricing, or taxation of our products or feedstocks, or other regulations that restrict feedstock imports or product exports; our ability to timely obtain or maintain permits necessary for projects; fluctuations in NGL, crude oil, refined petroleum, renewable fuels and natural gas prices, and refining, marketing and petrochemical margins; the effects of any widespread public health crisis and its negative impact on commercial activity and demand for refined petroleum or renewable fuels products; changes to worldwide government policies relating to renewable fuels and greenhouse gas emissions that adversely affect programs including the renewable fuel standards program, low carbon fuel standards and tax credits for renewable fuels; potential liability from pending or future litigation; liability for remedial actions, including removal and reclamation obligations under existing or future environmental regulations; unexpected changes in costs for constructing, modifying or operating our facilities; our ability to successfully complete, or any material delay in the completion of, any asset disposition, acquisition, shutdown or conversion that we have announced or may pursue, including receipt of any necessary regulatory approvals or permits related thereto; unexpected difficulties in manufacturing, refining or transporting our products; the level and success of drilling and production volumes around our midstream assets; risks and uncertainties with respect to the actions of actual or potential competitive suppliers and transporters of refined petroleum products, renewable fuels or specialty products; lack of, or disruptions in, adequate and reliable transportation for our products; failure to complete construction of capital projects on time or within budget; our ability to comply with governmental regulations or make capital expenditures to maintain compliance with laws; limited access to capital or significantly higher cost of capital related to illiquidity or uncertainty in the domestic or international financial markets, which may also impact our ability to repurchase shares and declare and pay dividends; potential disruption of our operations due to accidents, weather events, including as a result of climate change, acts of terrorism or cyberattacks; general domestic and international economic and political developments, including armed hostilities (such as the Russia-Ukraine war), expropriation of assets, and other diplomatic developments; international monetary conditions and exchange controls; changes in estimates or projections used to assess fair value of intangible assets, goodwill and property and equipment and/or strategic decisions with respect to our asset portfolio that cause impairment charges; investments required, or reduced demand for products, as a result of environmental rules and regulations; changes in tax, environmental and other laws and regulations (including alternative energy mandates); political and societal concerns about climate change that could result in changes to our business or increase expenditures, including litigation-related expenses; the operation, financing and distribution decisions of equity affiliates we do not control; and other economic, business, competitive and/or regulatory factors affecting Phillips 66’s businesses generally as set forth in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Phillips 66 is under no obligation (and expressly disclaims any such obligation) to update or alter its forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
Additional Information
On April 8, 2025, Phillips 66 filed a definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A (the “Proxy Statement”) and accompanying WHITE proxy card with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) in connection with its 2025 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “2025 Annual Meeting”) and its solicitation of proxies for Phillips 66’s director nominees and for other matters to be voted on. This communication is not a substitute for the Proxy Statement or any other document that Phillips 66 has filed or may file with the SEC in connection with any solicitation by Phillips 66. PHILLIPS 66 SHAREHOLDERS ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO READ THE PROXY STATEMENT (AND ANY AMENDMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTS THERETO) AND ACCOMPANYING WHITE PROXY CARD AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT SOLICITATION MATERIALS FILED WITH THE SEC AS THEY CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. Shareholders may obtain copies of the Proxy Statement, any amendments or supplements to the Proxy Statement and other documents (including the WHITE proxy card) filed by Phillips 66 with the SEC without charge from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Copies of the documents filed by Phillips 66 with the SEC also may be obtained free of charge at Phillips 66’s investor relations website at https://investor.phillips66.com or upon written request sent to Phillips 66, 2331 CityWest Boulevard, Houston, TX 77042, Attention: Investor Relations.
Certain Information Regarding Participants
Phillips 66, its directors, its director nominees and certain of its executive officers and employees may be deemed to be participants in connection with the solicitation of proxies from Phillips 66 shareholders in connection with the matters to be considered at the 2025 Annual Meeting. Information regarding the names of such persons and their respective interests in Phillips 66, by securities holdings or otherwise, is available in the Proxy Statement, which was filed with the SEC on April 8, 2025, including in the sections captioned “Beneficial Ownership of Phillips 66 Securities” and “Appendix C: Supplemental Information Regarding Participants in the Solicitation.” To the extent that Phillips 66’s directors and executive officers who may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation have acquired or disposed of securities holdings since the applicable “as of” date disclosed in the Proxy Statement, such transactions have been or will be reflected on Statements of Changes in Ownership of Securities on Form 4 or Initial Statements of Beneficial Ownership of Securities on Form 3 filed with the SEC. These documents are or will be available free of charge at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.
Use of Non-GAAP Financial Information
Non-GAAP Measures—This news release includes non-GAAP financial measures, including, “adjusted EBITDA” and “refining adjusted controllable costs.” These are non-GAAP financial measures that are included to help facilitate comparisons of operating performance across periods and to help facilitate comparisons with other companies in our industry. Where applicable, these measures exclude items that do not reflect the core operating results of our businesses in the current period or other adjustments to reflect how management analyzes results. Reconciliations to, or further discussion of, the most comparable GAAP financial measures can be found within or at the end of the news release materials.
This news release also includes forward-looking non-GAAP financial measure estimates such as, but not limited to “adjusted EBITDA” and “refining adjusted controllable costs” which, as used in certain places herein, are forward looking non-GAAP financial measures. These forward-looking estimates or targets depend on future levels of revenues and/or expenses, including amounts that could be attributable to non-controlling interests or related joint ventures, which are not reasonably estimable at this time. Accordingly, reconciliations of these forward-looking non-GAAP financial measures to the nearest GAAP financial measure cannot be provided without unreasonable effort. Below are definitions of these non-GAAP measures and identification of the most directly comparable GAAP measure.
EBITDA is defined as estimated net income plus estimated net interest expense, income taxes, and depreciation and amortization. Adjusted EBITDA is defined as estimated EBITDA plus the proportional share of selected equity affiliates’ estimated net interest expense, income taxes, and depreciation and amortization less the portion of estimated adjusted EBITDA attributable to noncontrolling interests. Net income is the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure for the consolidated company and income before income taxes is the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure for operating segments. Refining adjusted controllable cost is the sum of operating and SG&A expenses forour Refining segment, plus our proportional share of operating and SG&A expenses of two refining equity affiliates that are reflected in equity earnings of affiliates. The per barrel amounts are based on total processed inputs, including our proportional share of processed inputs of an equity affiliate, for the respective period.
References in this news release to shareholder distributions and returns to shareholders refer to the sum of dividends paid to Phillips 66 stockholders and proceeds used by Phillips 66 to repurchase shares of its common stock. References in this news release to “synergies” or “dis-synergies” are supported by management’s estimates and assumptions. These estimates are derived from the Company’s internal projections and other relevant data. However, because these synergies or dis-synergies are not calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), they cannot be directly reconciled to GAAP measures. The Company believes that these non-GAAP measures provide valuable insight into optimization benefits but cautions that such synergies or dis-synergies may not be realized in full or at all.
Basis of News release—Effective April 1, 2024, we changed the internal financial information reviewed by our chief executive officer to evaluate performance and allocate resources to our operating segments. This included changes in the composition of our operating segments, as well as measurement changes for certain activities between our operating segments. The primary effects of this realignment included establishment of a Renewable Fuels operating segment, which includes renewable fuels activities and assets historically reported in our Refining, Marketing and Specialties (M&S), and Midstream segments; change in method of allocating results for certain Gulf Coast distillate export activities from our M&S segment to our Refining segment; reclassification of certain crude oil and international clean products trading activities between our M&S segment and our Refining segment; and change in reporting of our investment in NOVONIX from our Midstream segment to Corporate and Other. Accordingly, prior period results have been recast for comparability.
1. Source: FactSet; market data as of March 31, 2025. Shown since June 30, 2022, one day prior to Mark Lashier’s appointment as CEO.
2. Calculated as the weighted average of Refining (CVI, DINO, DK, MPC, PBF, VLO), Midstream (OKE, TRGP, WMB), and Chemicals (DOW, LYB, WLK) Performance by Proxy Peers’ TSR based on the weighting of consensus NTM EBIDTA estimates for PSX’s segments.
3. Source: Company filings.
4. Excludes adjusted turnaround costs. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measure can be found here.
5. Excluding adjusted turnaround expense, post-ceasing of operations at Los Angeles refinery.
6. For additional details, see Slide 16 of Investor Presentation.
7. Incremental Adjusted Cash Return on Capital Invested since 2021 calculated as $1.9 B of incremental Adjusted EBITDA from 2021 to Projected Post-EPIC NGL in 2024 divided by $10.6 B of capital invested ($0.4 B of cash used in the DCP restructuring with Enbridge, $3.8 B of cash used in the DCP acquisition, proportionate share of DCP’s debt and preferred equity outstanding as of June 30, 2023 of $2.9 B, $0.6 B of cash used in Pinnacle acquisition, $2.2 B, net of cash acquired, $2.7 B of Midstream growth + sustaining capital excluding acquisitions from 2021-2024, less $2.2 B of cash received from asset sales). For additional details, see Slide 19 of Investor Presentation. Reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to the most comparable GAAP financial measure can be found here.
8. $50 MM attributable to CPChem and $450 MM attributable to Midstream operations.
9. Dividend CAGR calculated from initial dividend of $0.20 per share in 3Q 2012 to $1.15 per share in 4Q 2024.
10. See section titled “Background of the Solicitation” in the definitive proxy statement filed by Phillips 66 with the SEC for a detailed summary of our engagement with Elliott.
11. Source: Company filings, public filings.
12. Source: Deal Point Data, Reuters, FactSet, Financial Times, RBC Capital Markets.

Source: Phillips 66

MIL OSI Economics –

April 29, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 13:40 (Moscow time) the values of the upper limit of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the security RU000A0JWLU4 (RZhD-42 region) were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

13:40

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC) on 28.04.2025, 13-40 (Moscow time), the values of the upper limit of the price corridor (up to 95.79) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 1031.78 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 10.0%) of the security RU000A0JWLU4 (RZhD-42 region) were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.M.M.

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 28, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 13:43 (Moscow time) the values of the upper limit of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the VTBR (VTB JSC) security were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

13:43

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC), on 28.04.2025, 13-43 (Moscow time), the values of the upper limit of the price corridor (up to 97.97) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 105.262555 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 21.25%) of the VTBR security (VTB JSC) were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MEEX.K.MO/N89849

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 28, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 13:47 (Moscow time) the values of the upper limit of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the VTBR (VTB JSC) security were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

13:47

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC), on 28.04.2025, 13-47 (Moscow time), the values of the upper limit of the price corridor (up to 101.66) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 108.95217 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 25.5%) of the VTBR security (VTB JSC) were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.MO/N89852

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 28, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 13:50 (Moscow time) the values of the upper limit of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the VTBR (VTB JSC) security were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

13:50

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC), on 28.04.2025, 13-50 (Moscow time), the values of the upper limit of the price corridor (up to 105.35) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 112.641785 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 29.75%) of the VTBR security (VTB JSC) were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.MO/N89854

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 28, 2025
MIL-OSI Russia: Financial news: 04/28/2025, 13:53 (Moscow time) the values of the upper limit of the price corridor and the range of market risk assessment for the VTBR (VTB JSC) security were changed.

Translation. Region: Russian Federal

Source: Moscow Exchange – Moscow Exchange –

04/28/2025

13:53

In accordance with the Methodology for determining the risk parameters of the stock market and deposit market of Moscow Exchange PJSC by NCO NCC (JSC) on 28.04.2025, 13-53 (Moscow time), the values of the upper limit of the price corridor (up to 109.04) and the range of market risk assessment (up to 116.3314 rubles, equivalent to a rate of 34.0%) of the VTBR security (VTB JSC) were changed.

Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect

HTTPS: //VVV. MOEX.K.MO/N89855

MIL OSI Russia News –

April 28, 2025

Category: Russian Federation

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

The dynamite-wielding Trump

Threats today, damage tomorrow

How FDR coped with explosions around him

Sharing responsibilities

Gut microbiome

Not just genes and lifestyle

Trouble ahead for Trump

Meloni as a bridge

Meloni as pragmatic European

A spaghetti Western alliance?

Will all roads lead to Rome?

Agent Orange and daisy cutters

Recovery efforts have been slow

Chemical cleanup is still underway

Laws to prevent future ‘ecocide’ are complicated

Lessons for the future