Category: Statistics

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Department raises alarm over escalating intimate partner violence

    Source: Government of South Africa

    The Department of Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities has expressed concern over the pervasive “hidden crisis” of domestic and intimate partner violence, which is highlighted in a Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) report.

    Conducted in 2024, the report revealed that one in three women in South Africa have experienced physical intimate partner violence in their lifetime.

    “These are not just numbers; they represent the lived realities of millions of women, who endure suffering behind closed doors,” department spokesperson, Cassius Selala said on Monday.

    The study also highlighted higher victimisation among black African women and women with disabilities.

    While national statistics indicate a drop in overall violent crime during the second quarter of 2024, gender-based violence (GBV) crimes continue to rise.

    According to the report, between July and September 2024, 957 women were murdered, 1 567 survived attempted murders, and 14 366 were assaulted, resulting in grievous bodily harm. In addition, 10 191 cases of rape were reported during this period.

    Selala said intimate domestic violence manifests in various forms, often intertwined and escalating over time – ranging from physical and sexual abuse to emotional, psychological, and economic or financial.

    He said recognising these different types of abuse is a critical step in addressing the problem.

    Selala also warned that the impact of intimate domestic violence extends far beyond physical injuries, and victims often experience a range of severe and long-lasting consequences.

    “The greatest achievements in women’s economic progress in recent decades are potentially being eroded by domestic violence. Intimate domestic violence is a pattern of abusive behaviours used by one partner to maintain power and control over another in an intimate relationship.

    “This violence is not limited to physical harm; it encompasses a range of coercive and controlling actions that can leave deep and lasting scars,” Selala said.

    Globally, the World Health Organisation estimates that one in three women have experienced physical or sexual violence in their lifetime, most often at the hands of an intimate partner. In South Africa, the figures are particularly grim.

    At the end of 2024, the HSRC released the First South African National Gender-Based Violence Study, which detailed the prevalence of physical, sexual, emotional, psychological and economic violence experienced by women in all nine provinces.

    To discuss some of the survey’s findings, the HSRC recently hosted a webinar titled: ‘Addressing poverty and inequality as drivers of gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF) perpetrated against vulnerable populations in South Africa: The importance of economic empowerment interventions’.

    The webinar focused on poverty and inequality as drivers of gender-based violence and femicide perpetrated against women, including women with disabilities, women from the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex and Asexual (LGBTQIA+) community, black African women, and older women (over the age of 60). – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Color against inattention – how students and teachers of RUDN and Altai State University created an app for children with ADHD

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: Peoples’Friendship University of Russia –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    There are about 1,600,000 children with confirmed attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in Russia. The necessary therapy is not always available to their families: due to the cost or the lack of specialized centers nearby. Teachers and students of RUDN and Altai State University have developed a special application for such children that increases attentiveness and reduces anxiety using the color photostimulation (CPS) method.

    This year, the ActiMinds project team presented their application at the RUDN.VC 2.0 accelerator, becoming its finalist and receiving investor support. And then the development won the Startup Fest 2025 competition, which was organized by RSUH.

    Project team:

    Saniya Islamova is the project manager, analyst-programmer, first-year master’s student of the Applied Informatics program at the Faculty of Physical, Mathematical and Natural Sciences of RUDN University. Mikhail Yatsenko is the head of research work, candidate of biological sciences, psychophysiologist, associate professor of the Department of General and Applied Psychology of Altai State University. Tatyana Ustimenko is the director of the Scientific and Production Complex of the Cognitive Science Center. Ivan Brak is a specialist in scientific communication, candidate of biological sciences, neurobiologist, senior lecturer of the Department of the Faculty of Physical, Mathematical and Natural Sciences of RUDN University. Doruk Meric is a programmer, first-year master’s student of the Applied Informatics program at the Faculty of Physical, Mathematical and Natural Sciences of RUDN University.

    The essence of development

    The CFS method involves exposing the body to light signals of different colors – red, blue, green (at the user’s choice) – with an optimal blinking frequency.

    Photostimulation helps to rebuild the functional state of the cerebral cortex into an optimal operating mode and activates Brodmann’s area 10, which in turn activates the prefrontal cortex. After all, it is the prefrontal cortex that is involved in providing such cognitive functions as planning, decision-making, awareness and establishment of logical connections between phenomena, theoretical positions, as well as in recalling memories from episodic memory.

    The mobile app developed by the team works in conjunction with VR glasses. The user puts on the glasses, turns on the app, selects the color that will affect him for 2-10 minutes (red, blue or green). And then simply watches the flickering, which looks like a circle, of the selected color.

    What are the advantages of development:

    low cost of 2,500 rubles for a course of therapy consisting of 10 sessions (traditional methods of therapy cost from 20 to 50 thousand rubles); easy to use with a minimum of equipment (smartphone with an installed application plus VR glasses); the effect is already there from the first session; • high safety of use in the absence of epilepsy, heart disease and recent retinal detachment or recent eye surgery; there are statistics, session history, expansion of options is planned; there is communication with the project team via a chat bot and a VK channel.

    A bit of history

    The idea for the project originated at Altai State University back in 2001 during a study of the influence of the level of brain activation on the effectiveness of mental performance.

    “University scientists have found that at a certain level of brain activation, the experiment participants demonstrated high levels of mental performance. As a result, an idea came up to “impose” this activity on the brain in order to improve its performance using the color photostimulation method. During the research, ordinary glasses with black opaque lenses were used, on the inside of which three LEDs were glued in the center – red, green and blue. The glasses, in turn, were connected by wire to a special unit with a liquid crystal screen. It allowed changing the frequency of flickering, brightness and color,” – Saniya Islamova, head of the “ActiMinds” project and a RUDN Master’s student (Applied Informatics, 1st year).

    However, it took 20 years before the idea was developed and tested on a wider audience. Only since 2023 have studies been conducted again on different groups of people – children, students, athletes. At the same time, the development of technology has made it possible to use a smartphone and the first version of a mobile application created by a programmer from Barnaul instead of a block with a screen. And glasses with LEDs have been replaced by VR glasses, which allow you to influence a person’s visual field and prevent him from being distracted from the process of color photostimulation, which significantly increases the effectiveness of therapy sessions.

    Proven effectiveness

    “From February 1 to May 25, 2024, 37 children aged 6 to 7 years voluntarily took part in the study of the method. The experimental group included 24 children, 5 of whom had characteristic signs of attention deficit disorder (ADD) and 6 more – signs of ADHD. The control group consisted of 13 children. Sessions with the color photostimulation method were held four times a week for 10 minutes before correctional and developmental classes in the classrooms. In total, each child completed 10 sessions. In the group of children with ADHD, the speed of completing teacher’s tasks increased by 15%, the number of errors decreased by 2.5 times, and overall productivity increased by 22.5%,” said Elena Abuzova, Director of the MBU DO “DOOTS “Harmony”.

    Expanding the team

    Saniya Islamova joined the project in September 2024 as an administrator, and soon began to manage it. When the team was joined by programmer Meric Doruk in early 2025, it became possible to modernize the application. In two months, Meric created a new version of the service from scratch, it was deployed on PythonAnyWhere hosting. And now the team is switching to the Express.js (backend), Next.js (frontend) frameworks in JavaScript and the PostgreSQL database management system in order to be able to block content to protect against piracy and plagiarism. In addition, unnecessary settings were removed from the service, but an algorithm for creating a personal account and verifying a user using a unique token was added. Investor’s choice With the modernized application, the team took part in the RUDN.VC 2.0 accelerator. The program lasted 70 days, and during this time, Sania and her colleagues held more than 130 meetings with mentor-trackers, attended 8 open lectures from market experts and improved their project. On May 30, at the demo day, Sania defended the team’s work to investors. One of them, the founder of the company “ABV” and ambassador of the “Academy of Innovators” Ivan Shumilov, selected “ActiMinds” for further cooperation. Here is how he assessed the project.

    “The development has potential. It is possible to quickly enter monetization through the “technology plus service” combination. However, we need even more measurements on people to demonstrate the result – before/after. To increase trust on the part of parents, specialists and partners, it is necessary to strengthen the scientific and expert base. Involving people with specialized education, publications, clinical and research experience in the team or expert council will become a strong support. Their conclusions will be able to support the evidence-based nature of the method. The application can also be adapted for other problems, not only ADHD, but also stress, anxiety, and adaptation difficulties. In this way, it will be possible to expand the product line,” – Ivan Shumilov, founder of the company “ABV” and ambassador of the “Academy of Innovators”.

    Best Startup

    After completing the accelerator, the ActiMinds team formulated a commercial proposal for cooperation with private psychologists and neuropsychologists, psychological centers, and also agreed with the RUDN University Faculty of Psychology on joint work from autumn 2025. With such results, the participants of the ActiMinds project applied for the Startup Fest 2025 competition, which was organized by RSUH.

    “In the beginning, there were no particular hopes for winning, since we had to create a website for the project and conduct a marketing campaign. Probably, setting up online advertising was the most difficult, since we were doing it for the first time. After that, we recorded a video with a story about “ActiMinds”, the conducted marketing campaign and its results, and sent an application to the competition. The jury watched the video, and eventually, the student organizers from RSUH wrote to us and invited us to the award ceremony in one of the nominations. And it turned out to be a victory in the main nomination. The victory gave a positive assessment to our project and our teamwork, which does not go in vain!” – Saniya Islamova, head of the “ActiMinds” project and a RUDN University Master’s student (Applied Informatics, 1st year).

    According to Saniya, the recommendations for further development of the project from the organizers and jury of the competition were very valuable. Mikhail Boldyrev, Director of the Center for Project Activities and Communication Technologies at the Russian State University for the Humanities, advised the team to create a website and social networks for the project. Post articles on the topic of ADHD on the portal, collect traffic, and initiate communication with potential users of the application and partners in social networks. Then gradually integrate your own product into the community through expert content. In addition, Mikhail Boldyrev recommended involving doctors in testing the application in order to promote the product through their reviews.

    New goals

    The team has taken the expert’s advice on board, so its immediate plans include creating social networks and a project website to educate and inform parents about the ADHD problem and their method. And also to organize joint work with the psychology departments of RUDN and Moscow State University on research and scientific articles in the new academic year, and to establish commercial cooperation with private neuropsychologists and psychological centers.

    “We also plan to launch our own mobile application for the Android platform, which will work together with VR glasses. In addition to the main function based on the photostimulation method, the service will offer psychological tests, analysis of the user’s speech segment before and after using the DFS method, support and online consultation with a psychologist. The application is planned to be placed on all available marketplaces,” says Saniya Islamova, head of the ActiMinds project and a RUDN University Master’s student (Applied Informatics, 1st year).

    In addition, the ActiMinds team wants to apply for the Student Startup competition from the Social Initiatives Fund and compete for a grant. And hopes for another victory.

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: National Savings Month: Beat unhealthy gambling habits 

    Source: Government of South Africa

    National Savings Month: Beat unhealthy gambling habits 

    In the quest to keep head above water, South Africans have been forced to review and cut down their expenses in order to meet their financial obligations.

    Given the ongoing economic challenges, some have turned to gambling as a means of making ends meet.

    The month of July in South Africa is not only dedicated to the birthday of former President Nelson Mandela but also marks National Savings Month, which raises awareness about the importance of saving as well as fostering responsible financial behaviour.

    Mindful of the hardships facing communities, government said it recognises that the current economic challenges, including the high cost of living and unemployment make it difficult for many South Africans to save their hard-earned money. 

    It has, however, called on citizens to save even the smallest amounts of money, as government continues to implement policies that are aimed at growing an economy that creates jobs and supports families that are better positioned to save and invest in their futures.

    Recently, Parliament’s National Assembly deliberated the National Gambling Amendment Bill. The bill aims to amend the 2004 National Gambling Act (NGA) so as to amend and delete certain definitions; to transfer the regulation of bets on the national lottery, foreign lottery, lottery results and sports pools to the National Lotteries Commission.

    It also aims to strengthen the regulation of casinos, limited pay-out machines (LPMS) and bingo, as well as to provide for the repositioning of the National Gambling Board (NGB) as a National Gambling Regulator, and to provide for certain new offences, among others.

    With competing priorities vying for attention, gambling is seen by some as a way to close the shortfall in one’s budget.  
    In an interview with SAnews, the South African Responsible Gambling Foundation said it has seen a rise in the number of individuals who are struggling with gambling.

    “From our referral statistics of the previous financial year, there has been a rise in the number of individuals who are struggling with gambling as compared to other financial years,” the foundation’s Executive Director, Sibongile Simelane-Quntana, said.

    In the 2022/23 financial year, the foundation referred 2 253 patients for gambling related counselling, while 2 648 patients were referred in the 2023/24 financial year.

    “It should be noted that these stats exclude family referral patients. In the 2024/25 financial year, the foundation referred a total of 4 126 patients for gambling related counselling, excluding family referrals,” said Simelane-Quntana.

    The foundation provides free and confidential treatment and counselling to those affected by problem gambling and their immediate family members. The foundation also educates South Africans about the potential harmful effect of problem gambling and responsible gambling.

    The data showed that more males were referred for help as compared to females.

    “There were more adults referred than any other age group and most of the patients referred were full-time employed. Moreover, most of these patients held a matric as their highest level of education,” Simelane-Quntana explained.

    This as the NGB, which is responsible for the oversight of the regulation of the gambling industry throughout the country, warned against gambling being “defined as a source of income or to make ends meet”.

    Through the NGA, the NGB is empowered to provide oversight over licensing and monitoring of licensees by provincial licensing authorities.

    South Africa has four legal modes of gambling, namely casinos, LPMS, bingo and betting. 

    The board, which is an entity of the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition, said the unrealistic appeal of quick money through gambling for those experiencing financial problems can be dire.

    It added that “often consumers will go into further debt by borrowing money to feed a gambling habit, with the aim of making their money grow”.

    Simelane-Quntana said that issues like the unemployment rate rising by 1% to reach 32.9% in the first quarter of 2025, inflation and inequality, are making it difficult for many.

    “These statistics indicate the hardships that most South African citizens go through and the desperation to make a living out of various methods, and gambling seems to be one of those measures. Many individuals who are referred to the Foundation gamble to make an extra income; for some who are unemployed, gambling is a way of making money,” she explained.

    Problematic gambling 

    The foundation (which is a non-profit organisation dedicated to the prevention and treatment of disordered gambling) said based on its referral statistics for the previous financial year, individuals who are unemployed were the second highest group to be referred.

    “This is concerning, as we see a surge of problematic gambling in South Africa, which results in an increase in social and psychological health issues in our country,” said the Executive Director.

    Signs of problematic gambling include preoccupation with gambling thoughts, chasing after your losses on gambling and being unable to stop gambling even after many attempts to do so.

    Other signs are borrowing money to cover up for debts caused by gambling, gambling when feeling distressed and lying about gambling or one’s whereabouts regarding gambling, among others.

    Help 

    Simelane-Quntana urged the public to seek assistance if they experience symptoms of problem gambling.  

    “The foundation offers free and comprehensive counselling and treatment for those affected by problematic gambling,” she said.

    The foundation, which is funded by licensed gambling operators (excluding the National Lottery), also undertakes special projects at the request of provincial gambling boards.

    Licensed gambling operators also support the foundation’s National Responsible Gambling Programme (NRGP), including awareness interventions through their own communication campaigns.

    The programme provides three services namely: prevention through education and public awareness campaign, treatment and counselling as well as research, monitoring and evaluation.

    The dtic, NGB and the Gauteng Gambling Board are among the partners of the foundation which assists those who need help on their confidential helpline, number 0800 006 008. The service is free of charge and available 24/7.

    Asked on whether there has been increased marketing of gambling, the Executive Director said this was the case.

    “There has been a rise in marketing and promotion of gambling activities in South Africa. This is also reflected by the R2.6 billion spent on gambling advertising, as reported for up to March 2025 in the news recently. Furthermore, the R1.1 trillion wagered into gambling as stipulated by the National Gambling Board for [the] financial year 2023/2024 implies the reality of South African’s being more attracted to gambling activities. 

    “Through our Taking Risks Wisely schools awareness programme, which is aimed at educating learners about the dangers of underage illegal gambling, we have noted field observation insights regarding children normalising gambling activities and actually partaking in them. 

    “This is not in isolation from the exposure at home and the media; however, it is also due to the illegal forms readily available at our spaza shops in communities known as Chinese Roulette Machines/Mochina, where they slot in R2 to play,” she said.

    Live within your means

    The foundation further called on the public to live within their means.

    “It is important to live within your means, draw a budget and understand that if life changes happen, such as losing a job, getting retrenched or getting a salary cut, it is important to adjust to the changes and ensure that your expenses are not more than your income.

    “Gambling cannot be a solution to one’s financial crisis and borrowing more money to cover other debts keeps you in the debt trap or circle, “said Simelane-Quntana.

    With Savings Month coming to an end this week, it is never too late to take back one’s power and get help. – SAnews.gov.za 
     

    Neo

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Parliament calls for accelerated action on gender equality

    Source: Government of South Africa

    Parliament has called for an acceleration in gender equality and women’s empowerment across the African continent.

    Addressing Parliament’s G20 special engagement between Parliament and the Pan-African Parliament’s (PAP) women and young parliamentarians, held in Johannesburg on Friday, Chairperson of the National Council of Provinces, Refilwe Mtshweni-Tsipane, challenged parliamentarians to lead an “epistemic shift” by unlearning the colonial ideologies that continue to shape public policy, and to build a new legislative framework grounded in equity, reparations and dignity for all.

    “Parliamentary diplomacy must be used not to mimic old power, but to dismantle the logics of exclusion, logics that sort bodies by race, gender and class, and determine who matters and who doesn’t,” Mtshweni-Tsipane said.

    With South Africa preparing to host the G20 Parliamentary Speakers’ Summit (P20) in October 2025, the Chairperson urged women and young African parliamentarians to seize this historic moment to speak with a united, unapologetically African voice that brings gender justice, feminist solidarity and people-first reforms to the centre stage.

    “The rights of women and girls cannot live on paper alone, they must be seen in courtrooms, in clinics, in classrooms and in every village across Africa. We must move from ratification to realisation and from symbolic gestures to systemic change,” she said.

    Echoing Mtshweni-Tsipane’s sentiments, Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly, Dr Annelie Lotriet said the policy frameworks are already in place.

    “The frameworks are in place, the statistics are known, and what remains is deliberate and determined action that is driven by political will,” Lotriet said.

    As South Africa is presiding over the Group Twenty (G20) Presidency, Parliament will hold the P20 Summit, a high-level gathering of Speakers and Presiding Officers from G20 member countries. 

    The summit serves as the parliamentary dimension of the G20, aiming to strengthen global legislative collaboration on key development issues. –SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI China: Wind power lights up roof of the world

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

    Every time Hu Jiansheng watched people stop beneath the towering wind turbines, marveling at their massive size, pride surged through him. He was one of the builders of the Oumatingga wind power farm, one of the highest in the world with an average altitude of 4,600 meters, in southwest China’s Xizang Autonomous Region, the roof of the world.

    As deputy general manager of the Xizang branch of CHN Energy Investment Group, Hu dedicated three years to this project in the city of Nagqu.

    The Oumatingga wind power project, comprising 25 turbines with a total installed capacity of 100 megawatts, stands as a landmark achievement that demonstrates the region’s strong commitment to renewable energy development, particularly in photovoltaic and wind power.

    “The project generates 227 million kWh of electricity annually, saving around 70,000 tonnes of standard coal and reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 120,000 tonnes, making a significant contribution to local energy supply,” the 47-year-old said.

    “During the bitter winter months, we constantly struggled with electricity shortages that frequently led to power outages,” recalled Ngawang Jampa, 31, a resident from Nagqu’s Seni District. His family often resorted to burning cow dung for heating in the middle of the night.

    However, since the wind power station commenced operations in January 2024, such hardships have become a thing of the past.

    Today, every household in Seni District enjoys reliable electric heating, and power interruptions — even in winter — are now exceptionally rare.

    The construction of this wind power project, however, was fraught with challenges.

    “It was an extraordinarily difficult mission,” he said, explaining that altitude sickness and severe weather made the project seem nearly impossible at times.

    Locals often joke that Nagqu has only two seasons: winter and “almost winter.”

    “We’ve seen snowfall as late as May. This limited our construction window to just five months,” Hu explained.

    One particularly harrowing incident occurred during turbine installation. “The hailstones striking my face felt like rocks, and it hurt so much,” Hu recalled.

    “Then the snow began falling, and I became completely numb from the cold.” Amid these brutal conditions, the wind turbine nacelle hung precariously in the air, with only several workers struggling to secure the swaying machinery by tightening ropes against the howling gale.

    “After a while, company workers, local villagers, and township government staff all came together to help fasten the ropes,” said Hu, with tears in his eyes, adding that when the hailstorm finally passed, he saw everyone was covered in snow, resembling a team of snowmen standing together on the vast grassland.

    During the grid connection ceremony, while everyone gathered in the control center, Hu chose to stand alone at the wind farm. “Watching the turbines turn and hearing the blades spin felt amazing. I could finally allow myself to relax at that moment,” he said.

    Wind power has injected vitality into Xizang’s clean energy development, serving as a vital complement during low-output periods of photovoltaic and hydropower generation, according to Shi Lei, a professor at the School of Ecology and Environment, Renmin University of China.

    Official statistics showed that, by the end of 2024, more than 99 percent of Xizang’s power generation came from clean energy sources, the highest rate among all Chinese regions. Xizang now has a comprehensive energy system with hydropower as the main source, complemented by geothermal, wind and solar energy, among others. 

    MIL OSI China News

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: As Trump Administration Continues To Gut Education Department, Warren Exposes Harmful Impact to Students with Disabilities

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
    July 25, 2025
    According to the National Center for Education Statistics, 60,000 public schools and about 30 million K-12 students were left without a dedicated civil rights investigator due to Trump’s cuts at ED.
    Warren: “It’s disgraceful that Secretary McMahon is firing the people responsible for protecting our students with disabilities.”
    Video of Exchange (YouTube)
    Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), in a forum held by Senator Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), “Robbing Our Students’ Futures: The Indefensible Attacks on Public Education,” highlighted the consequences of President Donald Trump and Secretary Linda McMahon’s cuts to the Department of Education (ED) for students with disabilities and their families.
    “It’s disgraceful that Secretary McMahon is firing the people responsible for protecting our students with disabilities,” said Senator Warren. “This forum is a valuable opportunity to speak out and stand up against these horrible cuts so we can start building a better future for our nation’s children.”
    In the hearing, Senator Warren slammed Secretary McMahon for her broken promise to “make sure that our students with special needs are taken care of.” In March, Secretary McMahon fired half of the staff at ED’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR), which is responsible for protecting students facing discrimination in school, and closed down 7 out of OCR’s 12 regional offices, including the one in Boston. Nearly half of all OCR complaints involve discrimination against students with disabilities, and following these cuts, OCR has begun dismissing complaints at an unusually high rate.
    Dr. Jacqueline Rodriguez, CEO of the National Center for Learning Disabilities, testified that due to the cuts at OCR, 60,000 public schools and 30 million K-12 students were left without a dedicated civil rights investigator, with OCR dismissing 30% more cases last year than in the previous year. She warned it would be “improbable, if not impossible” for OCR to sufficiently resolve incoming disability discrimination cases with staff cut in half.
    Senator Warren also highlighted the story of G, a student with an intellectual disability whose mom filed a complaint with OCR after G was allegedly locked in a padded room at her school repeatedly, despite not posing a danger to herself or others. The Trump administration fired the lawyer assigned to investigate G’s case, leaving G without any support. Ms. Randi Weingarten, President of the American Federation of Teachers, stressed the importance of making the public aware of the impact of cuts to public education by sharing stories like G’s. She described ED as an “opportunity engine” for providing educational oversight and funding for various education programs, which are crucial for students with disabilities.
    “We are in this fight because we believe that the future of this nation lies with our children. We speak out, we fight back, and we do not pass budgets that leave the door open for more cuts for the education of our children,” concluded Senator Warren.
    Senator Warren launched the Save Our Schools campaign in a coordinated effort to fight back against President Trump’s attempts to abolish the Department of Education:
    On July 17, 2025, Senator Warren released a new 23-page report, “Education At Risk: Frontline Impacts of Trump’s War on Students,” highlighting warnings from 11 major national education and civil rights organizations on the impact of the Trump Administration’s dismantling of the Department of Education (ED), slashing support to millions of American students, primary and secondary school teachers, administrators, parents, and student loan borrowers.
    On July 15, 2025, Senators Warren and Sanders, along with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, sent a letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon, urging her to reverse the interest hike on student loan borrowers in the SAVE forbearance.
    On July 14, 2025, Senator Warren joined a letter to the director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russ Vought, and Secretary of Education, Linda McMahon, demanding that the Department of Education stop blocking nearly $7 billion in funds for K-12 schools, including for afterschool programs.
    On July 3, 2025, Senator Warren led her colleagues in submitting an amicus brief for NAACP v. US, arguing to the United States District Court District of Maryland that President Trump’s attempts to dismantle the Department of Education violate separation of powers and lack constitutional authority.
    On June 10, 2025, Senator Warren met with Secretary of Education Linda McMahon and delivered over 1,000 letters to McMahon that the senator had received from people in all 50 states who were worried about the Secretary’s efforts to dismantle the Department of Education.
    On June 9, 2025, Senator Warren led her colleagues in pushing the Acting Inspector General of the Department of Education to open an investigation into new information obtained by her office, revealing that DOGE may have gained access to two FSA internal systems, in addition to sensitive borrower data.
    On May 20, 2025, Senator Warren and 27 other senators pushed for full funding for the Office of Federal Student Aid.
    On May 14, 2025, Senator Warren led a Senate forum entitled “Stealing the American Dream: How Trump and Republicans Are Raising Education Costs for Families,” highlighting the consequences of Secretary Linda McMahon’s reckless dismantling of the Department of Education and President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” for working- and middle-class students and borrowers.
    On May 13, 2025, Senator Warren agreed to meet with Education Secretary Linda McMahon and promised to bring questions and stories from Americans across the country to highlight how the Trump administration’s attacks on education are hurting American families.
    On May 6, 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren highlighted the consequences of President Trump and Secretary Linda McMahon’s reckless dismantling of the Department of Education for American families in a Senate forum.
    On April 24, 2025, Senator Warren launched a new investigation into the harms of President Trump’s attacks on the Department of Education, seeking information on the impact of the Trump administration’s actions from the members of twelve leading organizations representing schools, parents, teachers, students, borrowers, and researchers.
    On April 10, 2025, following a request led by Senator Warren, the Department of Education’s Acting Inspector General agreed to open an investigation into the Trump administration’s attempts to dismantle the Department of Education.
    On April 2, 2025, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Mazie Hirono, along with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, sent a letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon regarding the Department of Government Efficiency’s proposed plan to replace the Department of Education’s federal student aid call centers with generative artificial intelligence chatbots.
    On April 2, 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren launched the Save Our Schools campaign to fight back against the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle the Department of Education and highlight the consequences for every student and public school in America.
    On March 27, 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) led a letter to Acting Department of Education Inspector General René Rocque requesting they conduct an investigation of the Trump Administration’s attempts to dismantle the Department of Education.
    On March 20, 2025, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders led a letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon regarding the Trump Administration’s decision to slash the capacity of Federal Student Aid to handle student aid complaints.
    On February 24, 2025, in a response to Senator Warren, Secretary McMahon gave her first public admission that she “wholeheartedly” agreed with Trump’s plans to abolish the Department of Education.
    On February 11, 2025, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Andy Kim sent Linda McMahon, Secretary-Designate for the U.S. Department of Education, a 12-page letter with 65 questions on McMahon’s policy views in advance of her nomination hearing.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: In the first six months of 2025, Uzbekistan imported over 24 thousand passenger cars

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

    Tashkent, July 25 (Xinhua) — Uzbekistan imported over 24,000 passenger cars in the first six months of 2025, local media reported on Friday, citing the National Statistics Committee of Uzbekistan.

    In January-June 2025, 24,355 passenger cars worth 422.1 million US dollars were imported to Uzbekistan, the report says.

    Of the imported passenger cars, 14,356 were electric vehicles.

    Among the countries that supplied the most passenger cars to Uzbekistan in the first 6 months of 2025, China took first place – 21,399 units. The Republic of Korea is in second place – 2,032 units, followed by India – 168 units. –0–

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Security: Two teenagers jailed for the murder of 14-year-old Kelyan Bokassa following a dedicated Met investigation

    Source: United Kingdom London Metropolitan Police

    Two teenagers, who brutally stabbed a 14-year-old boy, have been jailed after detectives from the Metropolitan Police Service conducted a thorough investigation. Following the sentencing hearing, the victim’s mother made a heart-rendering plea for young teenagers to stop carrying knives as she spoke of her immense grief.

    Kelyan Bokassa was stabbed by the pair as he was sat on a bus in Woolwich in January of this year. Despite the best efforts from officers and paramedics at the scene, Kelyan tragically lost his young life.

    Two 16-year-old boys, who cannot be named for legal reasons, were both sentenced at the Old Bailey to a minimum of 15 years, 10 months for murder. They received an additional 12-month sentence for possession of a knife which will run concurrent.

    The teenagers previously pleaded guilty to Keyan’s murder at the same court on Friday, 23 May.

    Detective Chief Inspector Sarah Lee, whose team led the Met investigation, said: “This case has been deeply troubling for all involved and our thoughts remain with Kelyan’s family and loved ones.

    “The harsh reality in London is that violence disproportionately affects young black men and boys. The fact we’re seeing so many teenagers like Kelyan die should be at the forefront of the minds of every politician, every policy maker and everyone who wants better for children growing up in London. Without this collective effort, we won’t be able to tackle knife crime in its entirety.

    “And while I am pleased that Keylan’s mother, Marie, has been spared the emotional turmoil of a trial, I know that she still desperately seeks to understand why three young lives could be considered so disposable.

    “Finally, I would like to recognise the members of the public that comforted Kelyan in his final moments and the witnesses who entrusted my investigation team with their testimonies. It was your bravery that helped us secure justice. Thank you.”

    Marie Bokassa, Kelyan’s mother, said: “My child had a name, it was Kelyan, a future, a heartbeat full of hope. That life was not theirs to take. That moment of violence may have lasted seconds, but the consequences are eternal. They didn’t just take a life; they shattered an entire world. They broke a family, they buried a future, and they left me, a mother dead inside with wounds no justice can ever heal.

    “To the young people who carry knives, I beg you to stop, before you raise that blade, think of your own mother, think of the mothers who will cry every night like I do, who will scream into her pillow, who will walk past her child’s empty room and collapse with grief. Don’t let a moment of anger steal your future. Don’t let the streets raise you in a way your mother never would.

    “Knife crime is not just statistics to us, its caskets, flowers, funerals. Our children being buried before their parents.”

    On the afternoon of Tuesday, 7 January, passengers flagged down passing police officers after Kelyan was stabbed on bus travelling on Woolwich Church Street. These officers began performing emergency first-aid on Kelyan, before the arrival of paramedics. He sadly died a short while later.

    An investigation commenced and detectives quickly recovered bus CCTV and witnessed the two teenagers board the bus, making their way to the top deck.

    One of the 16-year-old boys could be seen smiling as he recognised Kelyan. Only seconds later both boys produced machetes and launched into a violent ambush.

    Kelyan has been stabbed more than eight times, although CCTV showed that they had made more than 27 attempts to wound him.

    Audio from the bus highlighted the terror of the incident as screams from members of the public could be heard, as many attempted to flea the frenzied attack.

    The pair then fled the scene. Officers traced their movements, with CCTV showing them discard the murder weapon into the river.

    Following a manhunt, both were arrested an address in Eltham during the early hours of Wednesday, 15 January.

    MIL Security OSI

  • MIL-OSI: No Credit Check Bad Credit Guaranteed Approval Loan Scams Exposed and Debunked While GreendayOnline Proves There’s a Better Way

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Dallas, TX , July 25, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — As millions of Americans continue seeking loans for bad credit, a comprehensive analysis reveals concerning trends in the no credit check loans space while highlighting how responsible lenders like GreendayOnline are providing genuine alternatives. This educational initiative aims to help consumers understand personal loans for bad credit while making informed borrowing decisions about bad credit loans guaranteed approval options.

    Chapter 1: The “No Credit Check” Deception – What Bad Credit Borrowers Really Face in 2025

    The promise of “guaranteed approval” has become increasingly common in online advertising for example phrases such as “personal loans for bad credit guaranteed approval”. However, consumers researching urgent loans for bad credit often discover that these marketing claims can be misleading, according to industry experts and consumer advocates studying the loans with bad credit marketplace.

    GreendayOnline, a transparent lending platform specializing in online loans for bad credit, reports that many borrowers seeking “no credit check loans guaranteed approval direct lender”options encounter unexpected terms once they begin the application process.

     “We’ve seen too many consumers disappointed by the gap between advertising promises and actual loan terms,” explains Tarquin Nemec, GreendayOnline’s representative. “That’s precisely why we focus on clear, upfront communication for example in California about all aspects of our online $255 payday loans on the same day. We go into explaining the same day is only possible if you apply early enough.

    Common Pricing Structure Challenges in No Credit Check Loans:

    Misleading flat-fee advertising – While some lenders advertise loans for people with bad credit using attractive structures like “$15 per $100 borrowed,” the actual APR can reach 300-400%

    Hidden calculations for payday loans online same day – True costs often remain unclear until after application submission

    Delayed disclosure in bad credit loans- Many lenders reveal actual terms only during final approval stages

    Complex fee structures that make installment loans for bad credit difficult to compare accurately because of obfustication.

    GreendayOnline addresses these challenges in the loans with no credit check market by providing clear APR disclosures from the initial application stage, ensuring borrowers understand exactly what they’re agreeing to before signing any documentation. This transparency stands in contrast to some industry practices where the true cost of emergency loans becomes apparent only after approval.

    The term “direct lender” has also evolved in meaning across the bad credit personal loans space. While consumers searching for quick loans for bad credit often prefer working directly with the actual lender, some companies marketing themselves as loans “no credit check direct lenders” actually operate through complex networks. GreendayOnline maintains a straightforward model for no credit check loans with not always granting “guaranteed approval” , eliminating confusion about who provides the funds and services.

    Chapter 2: Bad Credit Borrowers – The Perfect Target for Financial Predators

    The small loan and  bad credit market serves consumers who often cannot access traditional banking products due to credit challenges. Research indicates that borrowers seeking best loans for bad credit typically include individuals recovering from financial setbacks, those with limited credit history, and consumers facing temporary cash flow issues in the bad credit loan marketplace.

    Marketing strategies in this space often focus on speed and accessibility, emphasizing terms like “hardship loans for bad credit” and “payday loans no credit check.”

    While speed can be valuable during financial emergencies, GreendayOnline emphasizes that borrowers benefit most when they can quickly access both funding and comprehensive information about their bad credit loan approval terms.

    Diverse Customer Demographics Seeking Payday Loans for Bad Credit:

    Industry data shows that consumers searching for “no denial installment loans direct lenders” or loans for people with poor credit often come from diverse backgrounds:

    • Working professionals experiencing temporary cash flow gaps
    • Students managing educational expenses through best online loans instant approval
    • Retirees on fixed incomes facing unexpected costs via instant payday loans online guaranteed approval
    • Small business owners handling seasonal revenue fluctuations
    • Military families dealing with deployment-related financial challenges
    • Single parents managing childcare emergencies
    • Healthcare workers covering certification or continuing education costs

    GreendayOnline has observed that effective lending with customers looking for “no denial payday loans” involves understanding each customer’s unique situation rather than assuming that the borrower is broke.

     Their approach focuses on providing same day emergency loans for borrowers across different income levels and credit situations, recognizing that one-size-fits-all solutions rarely meet individual needs

    The concentration of best online payday loans in certain communities has drawn regulatory attention in some states. However, many industry participants, including GreendayOnline, view this as an opportunity to demonstrate responsible lending practices.

    Chapter 3: Guaranteed to Fail – Why Bad Credit Loan Defaults Are Built Into the Predatory System

    Industry statistics reveal that default rates for loans for bad credit vary significantly based on loan structure, borrower screening, and customer support practices. While some segments of the bad credit market experience default rates exceeding 40%, responsible lenders like GreendayOnline report significantly lower default rates through careful underwriting and customer support for personal loans.

    Some urgent bad credit loans are structured with balloon payments or compressed repayment schedules that can challenge borrowers’ ability to repay “guaranteed approval loans” successfully. GreendayOnline addresses this by offering flexible repayment structures designed to work with borrowers’ actual financial situations.

    Critical Factors Contributing to Loan Success in Online Loans for Bad Credit:

    • Appropriate loan sizing – Matching for example $255 payday loans online same day amounts to realistic repayment capacity
    • Income-aligned payment schedules for no credit check loan lender products
    • Transparent communication about all payday loans online and

    Consumer advocates note that sustainable lending practices benefit both borrowers and lenders over time in the bad credit loans online marketplace. When borrowers successfully repay installment loans without experiencing financial strain, they’re more likely to become repeat customers and recommend services to others. GreendayOnline has built its business model around this principle with focusing on long-term customer relationships rather than short-term transaction volume.

    The industry continues evolving toward more sophisticated underwriting models that consider factors beyond traditional credit scores for emergency loans for bad credit. This evolution benefits consumers seeking bad credit personal loans up to $5,000 by enabling lenders to make more accurate assessments of repayment ability while expanding access to credit.

    Chapter 4: Hidden Costs and Buried Terms That Destroy Bad Credit Borrowers

    Transparency in pricing represents one of the most significant differentiators among lenders offering quick loans for bad credit. Industry practices vary widely, with some lenders disclosing all costs upfront while others reveal additional fees only during the final stages of the loans no credit check application process.

    Common Fee Categories in No Credit Check Loans Guaranteed Approval:

    • Origination fees – Processing charges for small loans
    • Administrative costs – Account setup fees
    • Processing charges – Application review costs
    • Late payment penalties – Additional costs for missed hardship loans for bad credit payments
    • Prepayment charges – Early repayment fees for payday loans(where applicable)
    • Document fees – Charges for loan agreement preparation
    • Funding fees – Costs associated with bad credit loan disbursement

    GreendayOnline maintains a policy of full fee disclosure before borrowers commit to any payday loan agreement, ensuring no surprises during the funding process. The company’s transparent approach helps borrowers accurately compare options when researching from multiple sources.

    The complexity of loan documents can sometimes obscure true borrowing costs. While regulatory requirements mandate certain disclosures, the presentation and timing of this information can vary significantly between lenders offering best instant approval.

    For consumers comparing multiple direct payday lenders, creating a standardized comparison becomes essential. Industry experts recommend focusing on the APR as the most comprehensive measure of same day emergency loans cost, as it incorporates both interest rates and fees into a single, annualized figure for instant loans online guaranteed approval products.

    Chapter 5: The Bad Credit Debt Trap – Rollover Loans and Endless Fee Cycles

    The topic of loan renewals and extensions generates significant discussion with the best online payday loans. Some states have implemented regulations limiting the number of times borrowers can renew or extend certain types of online loans with no credit check, while others allow more flexibility.

    GreendayOnline approaches loan extensions in the bad credit loan space with a focus on borrower benefit rather than fee generation. When customers face temporary difficulties meeting their original loan repayment schedule, the company works to find solutions that avoid additional financial strain while fulfilling obligations.

    Strategic Approach to Loan Extensions for No Credit Check Loans:

    • Root cause analysis – Understanding why payment difficulties arose with the urgent loan with bad credit
    • Alternative solution exploration beyond simple term extension for bad credit loans guaranteed approval
    • Complete fee transparency for any personal loan modifications
    • Realistic payment plan development based on actual borrower circumstances

    Industry best practices suggest that loan renewals should address underlying financial challenges rather than simply postponing payment obligation.

    This approach requires lenders to invest in customer service and financial counseling capabilities beyond basic transaction processing

    For borrowers understanding renewal policies becomes particularly important. Some lenders structure their no credit check loans products specifically to generate renewal fees, while others, like GreendayOnline, design their loans for people with bad credit to minimize the need for extensions through appropriate initial term selection.

    Chapter 6: When Bad Credit Loans Turn Criminal – Illegal Collection Tactics

    Debt collection practices in the bad credit installment loan  industry operate under strict federal and state regulations designed to protect consumer rights. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and state-specific regulations establish clear boundaries for legitimate collection activities in the loans with no credit check space.

    GreendayOnline emphasizes respectful, helpful communication throughout the entire customer relationship for emergency loans, including any necessary collection conversations. Their approach focuses on problem-solving and payment plan development rather than aggressive collection tactics for poor credit loans of up to $5000

    Essential Consumer Rights in Debt Collection for Quick loans for Bad Credit:

    • Debt verification rights – Requesting written confirmation of details
    • Communication restrictions – Limits on when collectors can contact borrowers
    • Dispute procedures for challenging incorrect small loan claims
    • Privacy protections regarding credit information sharing

    Consumers should understand that legitimate lenders cannot threaten criminal prosecution for unpaid loans, as these represent civil debts rather than criminal matters. While some states maintain criminal penalties for writing bad checks, these laws typically require proof of intent to defraud, which doesn’t apply to good-faith hardship loans for bad credit arrangements.

    The distinction between criminal and civil debt matters becomes particularly important for borrowers seeking payday loans or similar short-term products. Legitimate lenders like GreendayOnline ensure their collection practices comply with all applicable regulations while maintaining respectful customer relationships

    Chapter 7: Guaranteed Approval Scams That Specifically Target Bad Credit Customers

    The growth of online lending has created opportunities for both legitimate businesses and fraudulent operators. Consumers researching no denial installment loans direct lenders only benefit from understanding key indicators that distinguish reputable lenders from potential scams.

    Legitimacy Indicators for Loans for People with Poor Credit:

    • Valid state licensing for best online loans instant approval operations
    • Transparent physical addresses and accessible customer service for instant payday loans online guaranteed approval
    • Upfront cost disclosure for all no denial payday loans direct lenders only no credit check products
    • Standard application procedures rather than unusual upfront payments

    Critical Warning Signs in Same Day Emergency Loans Marketing:

    • Upfront fee demands before instant loans online guaranteed approval or funding
    • Artificial urgency creation to prevent careful consideration of best online payday loans terms
    • Vague cost information about online loans no credit check products
    • Universal approval promises regardless of financial circumstances for easy loans for bad credit

    GreendayOnline addresses these concerns by maintaining transparent communication throughout the loans for bad credit application process and providing comprehensive information about personal loans for bad credit terms before requiring any commitment from borrowers seeking no credit check loans.

    Verification of lender credentials provides another layer of consumer protection. State banking departments and attorney general offices often maintain databases of licensed lenders and known fraudulent operators in the bad credit loans guaranteed approval space.

    Chapter 8: Red Flags Every Bad Credit Borrower Must Recognize Before Applying

    Educated consumers make better borrowing decisions across all credit categories, including personal loans for bad credit guaranteed approval products. Understanding common warning signs and protection strategies helps borrowers avoid problematic lending relationships before they begin in the loans with bad credit marketplace.

    Critical Warning Signs for Online Loans for Bad Credit:

    • No creditworthiness evaluation – Lenders who don’t assess ability to repay $255 payday loans online same day
    • Asset requirement demands – Requiring access to bank accounts for no credit check loans guaranteed approval direct lender products
    • Documentation refusal – Unwillingness to provide written agreements for loans for people with bad credit
    • Unrealistic marketing claims – Guarantees that seem too good to be true for payday loans online same day

    Consumer Protection Strategies for Bad Credit Loans Online:

    • Thorough lender research with state regulators for installment loans for bad credit
    • Comprehensive cost comparison across multiple loans with no credit check options
    • Complete document retention for all emergency loans for bad credit communications
    • Alternative exploration of all available bad credit personal loans guaranteed approval $5,000 options

    GreendayOnline addresses these concerns through comprehensive application processes and clear documentation practices for quick loans, ensuring borrowers have adequate information and time to make informed decisions about their no credit check loan needs.

    Consumers should also be cautious of marketing that seems too good to be true, such as universal approval claims for “no credit check loans guaranteed approval” regardless of financial circumstances. Responsible lenders like GreendayOnline evaluate each application individually while maintaining realistic approval standards for small loans for bad credit.

    Chapter 9: GreendayOnline’s Promise to Bad Credit Customers – Real Help, Not Exploitation

    GreendayOnline has built its reputation on providing genuine transparency in the best loans for bad credit space. Unlike some competitors who reveal important terms only after application submission, GreendayOnline provides comprehensive cost information and loan terms upfront for loans for bad credit online, allowing consumers to make informed decisions before committing to the application process.

    GreendayOnline’s Transparency Commitments for Hardship Loans for Bad Credit:

    • Complete upfront cost disclosure for all payday loans no credit check products
    • Plain-language term explanations for loans bad credit guaranteed approval
    • Realistic approval standards rather than false payday loans for bad credit guarantees
    • Comprehensive lifecycle support for no denial installment loans direct lenders only

    The company’s approach to loans for people with poor credit reflects their commitment to realistic underwriting standards. Rather than promising universal approval for best online loans instant approval, GreendayOnline evaluates each application based on the borrower’s actual ability to repay, resulting in higher success rates for approved instant payday loans online guaranteed approval borrowers.

    Customer service represents a core differentiator for GreendayOnline in the competitive landscape of no denial payday loans direct lenders only no credit check. The company maintains accessible customer support throughout the entire loan lifecycle, from initial inquiry through final payment, ensuring borrowers have access to assistance when needed for same day emergency loans.

    GreendayOnline’s technology platform streamlines the application and approval process while maintaining security and privacy standards that protect customer information for instant loans online guaranteed approval. This approach enables quick processing of best online payday loans requests while safeguarding sensitive financial data.

    Chapter 10: The GreendayOnline Difference – The Right Way to Serve Bad Credit Borrowers

    Modern lending technology enables better customer experiences while improving risk assessment and customer service capabilities for online loans no credit check. GreendayOnline leverages advanced systems to provide fast processing of easy loans for bad credit applications while maintaining thorough evaluation of each borrower’s situation.

    Technology Benefits in Modern Loans for Bad Credit:

    Rapid automated processing for personal loans for bad credit applications
    Bank-level security protection for sensitive no credit check loans information
    Mobile-optimized accessibility for urgent loans for bad credit applications
    Real-time status updates throughout the bad credit loans guaranteed approval process
    Integrated customer support for personal loans for bad credit guaranteed approval management
    Secure document storage for all loans with bad credit agreements
    24/7 account access for online loans for bad credit customers

    Automated underwriting systems can process applications for $255 payday loans online on the same day within minutes, but GreendayOnline combines automation with human oversight to ensure appropriate lending decisions. This hybrid approach provides speed while maintaining the flexibility to consider unique customer circumstances for no credit check loans guaranteed approval direct lender products.

    Mobile accessibility has become essential for consumers seeking loans for people with bad credit options. GreendayOnline’s mobile-optimized platform enables customers to apply, monitor applications, manage accounts, and access customer support from any device with internet connectivity for payday loans online same day needs.

    Innovation in the bad credit loans online industry continues focusing on improving customer outcomes rather than simply increasing transaction volume. GreendayOnline participates in industry developments that enhance borrower success rates and overall customer satisfaction with the installment loans for bad credit experience.

    Chapter 11: Breaking the Cycle – GreendayOnline’s Hope for Bad Credit Borrowers in 2025

    The ultimate goal of responsible alternative lending extends beyond individual transactions to supporting borrowers’ long-term financial stability in the loans with no credit check space. GreendayOnline recognizes that successful lending relationships contribute to customer financial resilience rather than creating additional challenges for emergency loans for bad credit borrowers.

    Components of Financial Resilience Support for Bad Credit Personal Loans Guaranteed Approval $5,000:

    • Educational resources about money management and credit building for quick loans for bad credit borrowers
    • Flexible loan structures designed to work with loans no credit check borrower circumstances
    • Ongoing customer support beyond initial no credit check loans guaranteed approval transactions

    Education and financial literacy support represent key components of effective lending relationships in the small loans for bad credit market. While immediate funding addresses urgent financial needs, helping borrowers understand money management and credit building creates lasting value. GreendayOnline provides educational resources alongside best loans for bad credit services to support customer financial development.

    Community impact considerations influence responsible lending practices across the loans for bad credit online industry. When lenders like GreendayOnline operate transparently and ethically, they contribute to positive economic outcomes in the communities they serve, creating sustainable business models that benefit all stakeholders in the hardship loans for bad credit space.

    The future of alternative lending depends on demonstrating genuine value to consumers and communities seeking payday loans no credit check options. GreendayOnline’s approach focuses on building long-term customer relationships based on trust, transparency, and mutual benefit rather than short-term profit maximization in the loans bad credit guaranteed approval marketplace.

    Chapter 12: Final Thoughts & Contact Information – GreendayOnline’s Long-Term Commitment

    GreendayOnline maintains its commitment to serving consumers seeking reliable access to credit, regardless of their credit history or current financial circumstances in the payday loans for bad credit space. The company’s customer-first approach continues evolving to meet changing consumer needs while maintaining the highest standards of ethical lending practices for no denial installment loans direct lenders only.

    Available Resources and Support for Loans for People with Poor Credit:

    • Website information with detailed explanations on the company’s official website.
    • 24/7 customer service for best online loans instant approval support
    • Educational materials covering financial literacy for instant payday loans online guaranteed approval borrowers
    • Transparent application process for no denial payday loans direct lenders only no credit check products
    • Secure account management for same day emergency loans customers

    Consumers interested in learning more about GreendayOnline’s instant loans online guaranteed approval services can visit https://greendayonline.com/ for comprehensive information about available loan products, application processes, and customer support resources. The company’s website provides detailed explanations of all best online payday loans terms and costs before requiring any personal information or commitment from potential borrowers.

    Customer support remains available throughout the borrowing relationship and beyond for online loans no credit check customers, reflecting GreendayOnline’s belief that lending relationships should support customer success rather than creating additional financial stress. The company’s support team helps customers solve challenges that arise during the application or repayment process for easy loans for bad credit.

    GreendayOnline encourages consumers to compare lending options carefully and choose providers that demonstrate genuine commitment to customer success and transparent business practices in the loans for bad credit marketplace. The alternative lending industry serves an important role in providing financial access, and responsible lenders help ensure this access benefits consumers and communities seeking personal loans for bad credit solutions.

    About GreendayOnline

    GreendayOnline provides transparent, customer-focused lending services for consumers across the credit spectrum, specializing in no credit check loans and urgent loans for bad credit. The company’s commitment to ethical lending practices and customer education has established it as a trusted resource in the bad credit loans guaranteed approval industry. For more information about personal loans for bad credit guaranteed approval options, visit greendayonline.com.

    Compliance Statement:
    All GreendayOnline loan products are subject to credit approval and state regulations. Loan terms, rates, and availability vary by state and individual creditworthiness. Borrowers should carefully review all loan terms before accepting any loan offer and should borrow responsibly based on their ability to repay.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Fear of crime is a useful political tool, even if the data doesn’t back it up

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Emily Gray, Assistant Professor of Criminology, University of Warwick

    “We’re actually facing, in many parts of our country, nothing short of societal collapse.” This was the dire warning from Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, in setting out his party’s goal of halving crime.

    In an op-ed in the Daily Mail and a press conference, Farage framed Britain as a nation in crisis from rising crime and lawlessness. But, he said, Reform had the solution: mass deportation of foreign offenders, the construction of prefabricated “Nightingale” prisons, and a wholesale crackdown on offending.

    He insisted that British streets were out of control (although recent rises in crime come mainly from online fraud and shoplifting, according to the latest data), pledged to simultaneously increase prison sentences and reduce overcrowding, and vowed to restore order with a “higher and physically tougher standard of police officer”.

    Speaking after a weekend of violent anti-immigration protests in Epping, Farage also tied Britain’s supposed lawlessness to migration: “Many break the law just by entering the UK, then commit further crimes once here – disrespecting our laws, culture and civility. The only acceptable response is deportation.”

    Invoking crime as a threat, and the politician as its solution, is a tried-and-tested political manoeuvre. We’ve seen it deployed from both left and right, in many parts of the world, for decades. Stuart Hall and colleagues famously examined this phenomenon in the 1970s in their seminal book Policing the Crisis.

    Our own analysis suggests that the accuracy of crime statistics often matters less than how politicians frame public anxieties – through media, public rhetoric and policy initiatives. In short: the public often responds to emotion as much as evidence.

    One tension in England and Wales is that there are two major sources of crime data. The first – on which Farage leans heavily – is police-recorded crime. But, as is widely understood, that data provides only a partial picture of the true extent of crime. Many people, especially those from marginalised or vulnerable groups, choose not to report their experiences of crime.




    Read more:
    Most crime has fallen by 90% in 30 years – so why does the public think it’s increased?


    Moreover, the consistency and accuracy with which police forces record these offences has been questioned over time. Indeed, police-recorded crime statistics are not designated as official national statistics.

    The other (and more robust) source is the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), which asks a representative sample of the public about their experiences of crime over the past 12 months. Notably, it includes those incidents that were not reported to the police.

    Running since the early 1980s, the CSEW has demonstrated long-term declines in incidents of theft, criminal damage and violence (with or without injury) since the mid-to-late 1990s. Curiously, Farage told reporters that the CSEW was “based on completely false data”, without providing any evidence.

    The Office for National Statistics (ONS), and most criminologists, regard the CSEW as the more accurate metric of long-term crime trends. (The Conversation asked the CSEW to comment but hadn’t received a response when this article was published.)

    The political weight of crime

    Crime has electoral value. It allows parties and political campaigners to project strength, decisiveness and control. Farage’s rhetoric is designed to provoke urgency and anxiety. It’s a well-worn script. Margaret Thatcher’s government leveraged fears of law and order. New Labour made “anti-social behaviour” a central point of focus at a time when crime was, in fact, falling.

    In research conducted with colleagues, we examined how people’s fears about specific crimes are shaped not just by actual crime rates, or by the person’s age, gender or ethnicity, but also by the political context in which they grew up.

    Using data from the CSEW and a method called age-period-cohort analysis, we explored how different “political generations” developed and retained distinct concerns about crime.

    We found clear patterns. Those who grew up during the James Callaghan era in the mid-to-late 1970s – when politicians repeatedly warned of “muggings” – were more likely to report anxieties about street robbery over time.

    Thatcher’s generation, who came of age during a sharp rise in property crime, were more likely than other groups to express long-term fears about burglary. And those who grew up under New Labour – during the height of the “anti-social behaviour” agenda – reported persistent concerns about neighbourhood disorder, even as recorded incidents declined.

    Is crime on the rise? Depends who you ask.
    Loch Earn/Shutterstock

    In other words, the political rhetoric people are exposed to during their formative years leaves a lasting impression on their relationship to crime. Debates about crime become embedded in personal and generational memory.

    Crime is real and victims suffer. But distorting its nature and prevalence can erode public trust in the institutions tasked with protecting us. It can foster punitive and ineffective policy responses. And it can leave whole communities feeling targeted, criminalised or unsafe, based on selective and often sensational narratives.

    We absolutely need to talk about crime. But we also need to talk about how we talk about crime. Who frames the debate, which statistics are used, who and how many are left out of the official records, whose fears are being amplified, and who is looking to exploit crime?

    Emily Gray has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

    Stephen Farrall has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

    ref. Fear of crime is a useful political tool, even if the data doesn’t back it up – https://theconversation.com/fear-of-crime-is-a-useful-political-tool-even-if-the-data-doesnt-back-it-up-261777

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Fear of crime is a useful political tool, even if the data doesn’t back it up

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Emily Gray, Assistant Professor of Criminology, University of Warwick

    “We’re actually facing, in many parts of our country, nothing short of societal collapse.” This was the dire warning from Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, in setting out his party’s goal of halving crime.

    In an op-ed in the Daily Mail and a press conference, Farage framed Britain as a nation in crisis from rising crime and lawlessness. But, he said, Reform had the solution: mass deportation of foreign offenders, the construction of prefabricated “Nightingale” prisons, and a wholesale crackdown on offending.

    He insisted that British streets were out of control (although recent rises in crime come mainly from online fraud and shoplifting, according to the latest data), pledged to simultaneously increase prison sentences and reduce overcrowding, and vowed to restore order with a “higher and physically tougher standard of police officer”.

    Speaking after a weekend of violent anti-immigration protests in Epping, Farage also tied Britain’s supposed lawlessness to migration: “Many break the law just by entering the UK, then commit further crimes once here – disrespecting our laws, culture and civility. The only acceptable response is deportation.”

    Invoking crime as a threat, and the politician as its solution, is a tried-and-tested political manoeuvre. We’ve seen it deployed from both left and right, in many parts of the world, for decades. Stuart Hall and colleagues famously examined this phenomenon in the 1970s in their seminal book Policing the Crisis.

    Our own analysis suggests that the accuracy of crime statistics often matters less than how politicians frame public anxieties – through media, public rhetoric and policy initiatives. In short: the public often responds to emotion as much as evidence.

    One tension in England and Wales is that there are two major sources of crime data. The first – on which Farage leans heavily – is police-recorded crime. But, as is widely understood, that data provides only a partial picture of the true extent of crime. Many people, especially those from marginalised or vulnerable groups, choose not to report their experiences of crime.




    Read more:
    Most crime has fallen by 90% in 30 years – so why does the public think it’s increased?


    Moreover, the consistency and accuracy with which police forces record these offences has been questioned over time. Indeed, police-recorded crime statistics are not designated as official national statistics.

    The other (and more robust) source is the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW), which asks a representative sample of the public about their experiences of crime over the past 12 months. Notably, it includes those incidents that were not reported to the police.

    Running since the early 1980s, the CSEW has demonstrated long-term declines in incidents of theft, criminal damage and violence (with or without injury) since the mid-to-late 1990s. Curiously, Farage told reporters that the CSEW was “based on completely false data”, without providing any evidence.

    The Office for National Statistics (ONS), and most criminologists, regard the CSEW as the more accurate metric of long-term crime trends. (The Conversation asked the CSEW to comment but hadn’t received a response when this article was published.)

    The political weight of crime

    Crime has electoral value. It allows parties and political campaigners to project strength, decisiveness and control. Farage’s rhetoric is designed to provoke urgency and anxiety. It’s a well-worn script. Margaret Thatcher’s government leveraged fears of law and order. New Labour made “anti-social behaviour” a central point of focus at a time when crime was, in fact, falling.

    In research conducted with colleagues, we examined how people’s fears about specific crimes are shaped not just by actual crime rates, or by the person’s age, gender or ethnicity, but also by the political context in which they grew up.

    Using data from the CSEW and a method called age-period-cohort analysis, we explored how different “political generations” developed and retained distinct concerns about crime.

    We found clear patterns. Those who grew up during the James Callaghan era in the mid-to-late 1970s – when politicians repeatedly warned of “muggings” – were more likely to report anxieties about street robbery over time.

    Thatcher’s generation, who came of age during a sharp rise in property crime, were more likely than other groups to express long-term fears about burglary. And those who grew up under New Labour – during the height of the “anti-social behaviour” agenda – reported persistent concerns about neighbourhood disorder, even as recorded incidents declined.

    Is crime on the rise? Depends who you ask.
    Loch Earn/Shutterstock

    In other words, the political rhetoric people are exposed to during their formative years leaves a lasting impression on their relationship to crime. Debates about crime become embedded in personal and generational memory.

    Crime is real and victims suffer. But distorting its nature and prevalence can erode public trust in the institutions tasked with protecting us. It can foster punitive and ineffective policy responses. And it can leave whole communities feeling targeted, criminalised or unsafe, based on selective and often sensational narratives.

    We absolutely need to talk about crime. But we also need to talk about how we talk about crime. Who frames the debate, which statistics are used, who and how many are left out of the official records, whose fears are being amplified, and who is looking to exploit crime?

    Emily Gray has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

    Stephen Farrall has received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.

    ref. Fear of crime is a useful political tool, even if the data doesn’t back it up – https://theconversation.com/fear-of-crime-is-a-useful-political-tool-even-if-the-data-doesnt-back-it-up-261777

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Analysis: Deportation tactics from 4 US presidents have done little to reduce the undocumented immigrant population

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Kevin Johnson, Dean and Professor of Public Interest Law and Chicana/o Studies, University of California, Davis

    Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents escort a detained immigrant into an elevator on June 17, 2025, in New York. AP Photo/Olga Fedorova

    All modern U.S. presidents, both Republican and Democratic, have attempted to reduce the population of millions of undocumented immigrants. But their various strategies have not had significant results, with the population hovering around 11 million from 2005 to 2022.

    President Donald Trump seeks to change that.

    With harsh rhetoric that has sowed fear in immigrant communities, and policies that ignore immigrants’ due process rights, Trump has pursued deportation tactics that differ dramatically from those of any other modern U.S. president.

    As a scholar who examines the history of U.S. immigration law and enforcement, I believe that it remains far from clear whether the Trump White House will significantly reduce the undocumented population. But even if the administration’s efforts fail, the fear and damage to the U.S. immigrant community will remain.

    Presidents Bush and Obama

    To increase deportations, in 2006 President George W. Bush began using workplace raids. Among these sweeps was the then-largest immigration workplace operation in U.S. history at a meat processing plant in Postville, Iowa in 2008.

    U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement deployed 900 agents in Postville and arrested 398 employees, 98% of whom were Latino. They were chained together and arraigned in groups of 10 for felony criminal charges of aggravated identity theft, document fraud and use of stolen Social Security numbers. Some 300 were convicted, and 297 of them served jail sentences before being deported.

    Men wait in a holding cell on June 21, 2006, in Nogales, Arizona.
    Spencer Platt/Getty Images

    In 2008, Bush also initiated Secure Communities, a policy that sought to deport noncitizens – both lawful permanent residents as well as undocumented immigrants – who had been arrested for crimes. Some 2 million immigrants were deported during Bush’s two terms in office.

    The Obama administration limited Secure Communities to focus on the removal of noncitizens convicted of felonies. It deported a record 400,000 noncitizens in fiscal year 2013, which led detractors to refer to President Barack Obama as the “Deporter in Chief.”

    Obama also targeted recent entrants and national security threats and pursued criminal prosecutions for illegal reentry to the U.S. Almost all of these policies built on Bush’s, although Obama virtually abandoned workplace raids.

    Despite these enforcement measures, Obama also initiated Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, in 2012. The policy provided relief from deportation and gave work authorization to more than 500,000 undocumented immigrants who came to the United States as children.

    Obama deported about 3 million noncitizens, but the size of the undocumented population did not decrease dramatically.

    The first Trump administration and Biden

    Trump’s first administration broke new immigration enforcement ground in several ways.

    He began his presidency by issuing what was called a “Muslim ban” to restrict the entry into the U.S. of noncitizens from predominantly Muslim nations.

    Early in Trump’s first administration, federal agents expanded immigration operations to include raids at courthouses, which previously had been off-limits.

    In 2017, Trump tried to rescind DACA, but the Supreme Court rejected Trump’s effort in 2020.

    In 2019, Trump implemented the Remain in Mexico policy that for the first time forced noncitizens who came to the U.S. border seeking asylum to wait in Mexico while their claims were being decided. He also invoked Title 42 in 2020 to close U.S. borders during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Trump succeeded in reducing legal immigration numbers during his first term. However, there is no evidence that his enforcement policies reduced the size of the overall undocumented population.

    President Joe Biden sought to relax – although not abandon – some immigration enforcement measures implemented during Trump’s first term.

    His administration slowed construction of the border wall championed by Trump. Biden also stopped workplace raids in 2021, and in 2023, he ended Title 42.

    In 2023, Biden sought to respond to migration surges in a measured fashion, by temporarily closing ports of entry and increasing arrests.

    In attempting to enforce the borders, his administration at times pursued tough measures. Biden continued deportation efforts directed at criminal noncitizens. Immigrant rights groups criticized his administration when armed Border Patrol officers on horseback were videotaped chasing Haitian migrants on the U.S.-Mexico border.

    As of 2022, the middle of the Biden’s term, an estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants lived in the U.S.

    Immigration-rights activists stage a rally outside President Barack Obama’s Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee fundraiser in Los Angeles, after the president signed a bill that tightened security at the Mexico border in August 2010.
    Mark Ralston/AFP via Getty Images

    A second chance

    Since his second inauguration, Trump has pursued a mass deportation campaign through executive orders that are unprecedented in their scope.

    In January 2025, he announced an expanded, expedited removal process for any noncitizen apprehended anywhere in the country – not just the border region, as had been U.S. practice since 1996.

    In March, Trump issued a presidential proclamation to deport Venezuelan nationals who were members of the Tren de Aragua gang, designated a foreign terrorist organization by the State Department. In doing so, he invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 – an act used three times in U.S. history during declared wars that empowers presidents to remove foreign nationals from countries at war with the U.S.

    Declaring an “invasion” of migrants into the U.S. in June, Trump deployed the military to assist in immigration enforcement in Los Angeles.

    Trump also sought to dramatically upend birthright citizenship, the Constitutional provision that guarantees citizenship to any person born in the U.S. He issued an executive order in January that would bar citizenship to people born in the U.S. to undocumented parents.

    California National Guard members stand in formation during a protest in Los Angeles on June 14, 2025.
    David Pashaee/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images

    The birthright executive order has been challenged in federal court and is mostly likely working its way up to the Supreme Court.

    Under the second Trump administration, immigration arrests are up, but actual deportation numbers are in flux.

    ICE in June arrested the most people in a month in at least five years, roughly 30,000 immigrants. But deportations of noncitizens – roughly 18,000 – lagged behind those during the Obama administration’s record-setting year of 2013 in which more than 400,000 noncitizens were deported.

    The gap between arrests and deportations shows the challenges the Trump administration faces in making good on his promised mass deportation campaign.

    Undocumented immigrants often come to the U.S. to work or seek safety from natural disasters and mass violence.

    These issues have not been seriously addressed by any modern U.S. president. Until it is, we can expect the undocumented population to remain in the millions.

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

    ref. Deportation tactics from 4 US presidents have done little to reduce the undocumented immigrant population – https://theconversation.com/deportation-tactics-from-4-us-presidents-have-done-little-to-reduce-the-undocumented-immigrant-population-261640

    MIL OSI Analysis

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: The 3 worst things you can say after a pet dies, and what to say instead

    Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Brian N. Chin, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Trinity College

    Loss of a pet falls into what researchers call disenfranchised grief in which the pain is often minimized or discounted. Claudia Luna/iStock via Getty Images Plus

    I saw it firsthand after my cat Murphy died earlier this year. She’d been diagnosed with cancer just weeks before.

    She was a small gray tabby with delicate paws who, even during chemotherapy, climbed her favorite dresser perch – Mount Murphy – with steady determination.

    The day after she died, a colleague said with a shrug: “It’s just part of life.”

    That phrase stayed with me – not because it was wrong, but because of how quickly it dismissed something real.

    Murphy wasn’t just a cat. She was my eldest daughter – by bond, if not by blood. My shadow.

    Why pet grief doesn’t count

    More than two-thirds of U.S. households include pets. Americans tend to treat them like family with birthday cakes, shared beds and names on holiday cards.

    But when someone grieves them like family, the cultural script flips. Grief gets minimized. Support gets awkward. And when no one acknowledges your loss, it starts to feel like you weren’t even supposed to love them that much in the first place.

    I’ve seen this kind of grief up close – in my research and in my own life.
    I am a psychologist who studies attachment, loss and the human-animal bond.

    And I’ve seen firsthand how often grief following pet loss gets brushed aside – treated as less valid, less serious or less worthy of support than human loss. After a pet dies, people often say the wrong thing – usually trying to help, but often doing the opposite.

    Many Americans consider pets family members.
    vesi_127/Moment via Getty Images

    When loss is minimized or discounted

    Psychologists describe this kind of unacknowledged loss as disenfranchised grief: a form of mourning that isn’t fully recognized by social norms or institutions. It happens after miscarriages, breakups, job loss – and especially after the death of a beloved animal companion.

    The pain is real for the person grieving, but what’s missing is the social support to mourn that loss.

    Even well-meaning people struggle to respond in ways that feel supportive.
    And when grief gets dismissed, it doesn’t just hurt – it makes us question whether we’re even allowed to feel it.

    Here are three of the most common responses – and what to do instead:

    ‘Just a pet’

    This is one of the most reflexive responses after a loss like this. It sounds harmless. But under the surface is a cultural belief that grieving an animal is excessive – even unprofessional.

    That belief shows up in everything from workplace leave policies to everyday conversations. Even from people trying to be kind.

    But pet grief isn’t about the species, it’s about the bond. And for many, that bond is irreplaceable.

    Pets often become attachment figures; they’re woven into our routines, our emotional lives and our identities. Recent research shows that the quality of the human-pet bond matters deeply – not just for well-being, but for how we grieve when that connection ends.

    What’s lost isn’t “just an animal.” It’s the steady presence who greeted you every morning. The one who sat beside you through deadlines, small triumphs and quiet nights. A companion who made the world feel a little less lonely.

    But when the world treats that love like it doesn’t count, the loss can cut even deeper.

    It may not come with formal recognition or time off, but it still matters. And love isn’t less real just because it came with fur.

    If someone you care about loses a pet, acknowledge the bond. Even a simple “I’m so sorry” can offer real comfort.

    ‘I know how you feel’

    “I know how you feel” sounds empathetic, but it quietly shifts the focus from the griever to the speaker. It rushes in with your story before theirs has even had a chance to land.

    That instinct comes from a good place. We want to relate, to reassure, to let someone know they’re not alone. But when it comes to grief, that impulse often backfires. Grief doesn’t need to be matched. It needs to be honored and given time, care and space to unfold, whether the loss is of a person or a pet.

    Instead of responding with your own story, try simpler, grounding words:

    You don’t need to understand someone’s grief to make space for it. What helps isn’t comparison – it’s presence.

    Let them name the loss. Let them remember. Let them say what hurts.

    Sometimes, simply staying present – without rushing, problem-solving or shifting the focus away – is the most meaningful thing you can do.

    Pets frequently make a showing in family photos and holiday cards.
    Klaus Vedfelt/DigitalVision via Getty Images

    ‘You can always get another one’

    “You can always get another one” is the kind of thing people offer reflexively when they don’t know what else to say – a clumsy attempt at reassurance.

    Underneath is a desire to soothe, to fix, to make the sadness go away. But that instinct can miss the point: The loss isn’t practical – it’s personal. And grief isn’t a problem to be solved.

    This type of comment often lands more like customer service than comfort. It treats the relationship as replaceable, as if love were something you can swap out like a broken phone.

    But every pet is one of a kind – not just in how they look or sound, but in how they move through your life. The way they wait for you at the door and watch you as you leave. The small rituals that you didn’t know were rituals until they stopped. You build a life around them without realizing it, until they’re no longer in it.

    You wouldn’t tell someone to “just have another child” or “just find a new partner.” And yet, people say the equivalent all the time after pet loss.

    Rushing to replace the relationship instead of honoring what was lost overlooks what made that bond irreplaceable. Love isn’t interchangeable – and neither are the ones we lose.

    So offer care that endures. Grief doesn’t follow a timeline. A check-in weeks or months later, whether it’s a heart emoji, a shared memory or a gentle reminder that they’re not alone, can remind someone that their grief is seen and their love still matters.

    When people say nothing

    People often don’t know what to say after a pet dies, so they say nothing. But silence doesn’t just bury grief, it isolates it. It tells the griever that their love was excessive, their sadness inconvenient, their loss unworthy of acknowledgment.

    And grief that feels invisible can be the hardest kind to carry.

    So if someone you love loses a pet, don’t change the subject. Don’t rush them out of their sadness. Don’t offer solutions.

    Instead, here are a few other ways to offer support gently and meaningfully:

    • Say their pet’s name.

    • Ask what they miss most.

    • Tell them you’re sorry.

    • Let them cry.

    • Let them not cry.

    • Let them remember.

    Because when someone loses a pet, they’re not “just” mourning an animal. They’re grieving for a relationship, a rhythm and a presence that made the world feel kinder. What they need most is someone willing to treat that loss like it matters.

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

    ref. The 3 worst things you can say after a pet dies, and what to say instead – https://theconversation.com/the-3-worst-things-you-can-say-after-a-pet-dies-and-what-to-say-instead-258531

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Submissions: Trump’s push for more deportations could boost demand for foreign farmworkers with ‘guest worker’ visas

    Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Scott Morgenstern, Professor of Political Science, University of Pittsburgh

    Mexican farmworkers with H-2A visas weed a North Carolina tobacco field in 2016. Andrew Lichtenstein/Corbis via Getty Images

    The U.S. has an important choice to make regarding agriculture.

    It can import more people to pick crops and do other kinds of agricultural labor, it can raise wages enough to lure more U.S. citizens and immigrants with legal status to take these jobs, or it can import more food. All three options contradict key Trump administration priorities: reducing immigration, keeping prices low and importing fewer goods and services.

    The big tax-and-spending bill President Donald Trump signed into law on July 4, 2025, included US$170 billion to fund the detention and deportation of those living in the U.S. without authorization. And about 1 million of them work in agriculture, accounting for more than 40% of all farmworkers.

    As the detention and deportation of undocumented immigrants ramps up, one emerging solution is to replace at least some deported farmworkers with foreigners who are given special visas that allow them to help with the harvest but require them to go home after their visas expire.

    Such “guest worker” programs have existed for decades, leading to today’s H-2A visa program. As of 2023, more than 310,000 foreigners, around 13% of the nation’s 2.4 million farmworkers, were employed through this program. About 90% of the foreign workers with these visas come from Mexico, and nearly all are men. The states where the largest numbers of them go are California, Florida, Georgia and Washington.

    As a professor of Latin American politics and U.S.-Latin American relations, I teach my students to consider the difficult trade-offs that governments face. If the Trump administration removes a significant share of the immigrants living in the U.S. without legal permission from the agricultural labor force to try to meet its deportation goals, farm owners will have few options.

    Few options available

    First, farm owners could raise wages and improve working conditions enough to attract U.S. citizens and immigrants who are legal permanent residents or otherwise in the U.S. with legal status.

    But many agricultural employers say they can’t find enough people to hire who can legally work – at least without higher wages and much-improved job requirements. Without any undocumented immigrant farmworkers, the prices of U.S.-sourced crops and other agricultural products would spike, creating an incentive for more food to be imported.

    Second, farm owners could employ fewer people. That would require either growing different crops that require less labor or becoming more reliant on machinery to plant and harvest. But that would mean the U.S. could have to import more food. And automation for some crops is very expensive. For others, such as for berries, it’s currently impossible.

    It’s also possible that some farm owners could put their land to other uses, ceasing production, but that would also necessitate more imported food.

    Trump administration’s suggested fixes

    U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has predicted that farm owners will soon find plenty of U.S. citizens to employ.

    She declared on July 8 that the new Medicaid work requirements included in the same legislative package as the immigration enforcement funds would encourage huge numbers of U.S. citizens to start working in the fields instead of losing their health insurance through that government program.

    Farm trade groups say this scenario is far-fetched.

    For one thing, most adults enrolled in the Medicaid program who can work already do. Many others are unable to do so due to disabilities or caregiving obligations.

    Few people enrolled in Medicaid live close enough to a farm to work at one, and even those who do aren’t capable of doing farmwork. When farm owners tried putting people enrolled in a welfare program to work in the fields in the 1990s, it failed. Another experiment in the 1960s, which deployed teenagers, didn’t pan out either because the teens found the work too hard.

    It seems more likely that farm owners will try to hire many more foreign farmworkers to do temporary but legal jobs through the H-2A program.

    Although he has not made it an official policy, Trump seems to be moving toward this same conclusion.

    In June, for example, Trump said his administration was working on “some kind of a temporary pass” for immigrants lacking authorization to be in the U.S. who are working on farms and in hotels.

    Farmworkers with H-2A visas spend time in their employer-provided dormitory on April 28, 2020, in King City, Calif.
    Brent Stirton/Getty Images

    Established in 1952, numbers now rising quickly

    The guest worker system, established in 1952 and revised significantly in 1986, has become a mainstay of U.S. agriculture because it offers important benefits to both the farm owners who need workers and the foreign workers they hire.

    There is no cap on the number of potential workers. The number of H-2A visas issued is based only on how many employers request them. Farm owners may apply for visas after verifying that they are unable to locate enough workers who are U.S. citizens or present in the U.S. with authorization.

    To protect U.S. workers, the government mandates that H-2A workers earn an “adverse effect wage rate.” The Labor Department sets that hourly wage, which ranges from $10.36 in Puerto Rico to about $15 in several southern states, to more than $20 in California, Alaska and Hawaii. These wages are set at relatively high levels to avoid putting downward pressure on what other U.S. workers are paid for the same jobs.

    After certification, farm owners recruit workers in a foreign country who are offered a contract that includes transportation from their home country and a trip back – assuming they complete the contract.

    The program provides farm owners with a short-term labor force. It guarantees the foreign workers who obtain H-2A visas relatively high wages, as well as housing in the U.S. That combination has proven increasingly popular in recent years: The annual number of H-2A visas rose to 310,700 in 2023, a more than fivefold increase since 2010.

    Possible downsides

    Boosting the number of agricultural guest workers would help fill some gaps in the agricultural labor force and reduce the risk of crops going unharvested. But it seems clear to me that a sudden change would pose risks for workers and farm owners alike.

    Workers would be at risk because oversight of the H-2A program has historically been weak. Despite that lax track record, some unscrupulous farmers have been fined or barred from participating in the H-2A program because of unpaid wages and other abuses.

    Relying even more on guest farmworkers than the U.S. does today would also swap workers who have built lives and families north of the border with people who are in the U.S. on a temporary basis. Immigration opponents are unlikely to object to this trade-off, but to immigrant rights groups, this arrangement would be cruel and unfair to workers with years of service behind them.

    What’s more, the workers with guest visas can be at risk of exploitation and abuse. In 2022, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Georgia described conditions for H-2A workers at an onion farm the government had investigated as “modern-day slavery.”

    The U.S. Government Accountability Office has researched the H-2A visa program and observed many problems it recommends be fixed.

    For farm owners, the downside of ramping up guest worker programs is that it could increase costs and make production less efficient and more costly. That’s because transporting Mexican farmworkers back and forth each year is complicated and expensive. Farm groups say that compliance with H-2A visa requirements is cumbersome. It can be particularly difficult for small farms to participate in this program.

    Some farm owners have objected to the costs of employing H-2A workers. Rollins has said that the Trump administration believes that the mandatory wages are too high.

    To be sure, these problems aren’t limited to agriculture. Hotels, restaurants and other hospitality businesses, which rely heavily on undocumented workers, can also temporarily employ some foreigners through the H-2B visa program – which is smaller than the H-2A program, limits the number of visas issued and is available only for jobs considered seasonal.

    Home health care providers and many other kinds of employers who rely on people who can’t legally work for them could also struggle. But so far, there is no temporary visa program available to help them fill those gaps.

    If the U.S. does deport millions of workers, the price of tomatoes, elder care, restaurant meals and roof repairs would probably rise substantially. A vast increase in the number of guest workers is a potential but partial solution, but it would multiply problems that are inherent in these temporary visa programs.

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

    ref. Trump’s push for more deportations could boost demand for foreign farmworkers with ‘guest worker’ visas – https://theconversation.com/trumps-push-for-more-deportations-could-boost-demand-for-foreign-farmworkers-with-guest-worker-visas-259868

    MIL OSI

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Kazakhstan has become the largest source of tourists in Central Asia for China’s Hainan Province

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

    BEIJING, July 25 (Xinhua) — Kazakhstan has become the largest source of tourists in Central Asia for China’s island province of Hainan, according to a Hainan tourism presentation held in Astana on Wednesday.

    According to the results of the first half of this year, the famous resort province of Hainan received a total of 40.2 thousand citizens of Kazakhstan, which was 41.4 percent more in annual terms. Thus, Kazakhstan entered the world’s top four sources of travelers for Hainan, according to statistics.

    According to information posted on the official website of the Hainan Provincial Government, the tourism presentation in Astana introduced those present to health and wellness tourism products and demonstrated the province’s new image as an international center for tourism consumption.

    The rapid development of tourism cooperation between Hainan Province and Kazakhstan is due to regular air traffic. Currently, a number of Kazakhstan airlines have launched direct flights connecting cities in Kazakhstan and Hainan Province.

    Air Astana is making great efforts to promote cooperation between Kazakhstan and China in air transport. In the future, the airline plans to intensify cooperation with Hainan travel agencies and launch more flights to provide passengers with better quality services, the airline said.

    The presentation is organized by the Hainan Province Department of Tourism, Culture, Radio, Television, Physical Culture and Sports. The event was held as part of the Year of China Tourism in Kazakhstan. -0-

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region’s Foreign Trade Volume Exceeds 280 Billion Yuan in H1

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

    URUMQI, July 25 (Xinhua) — Northwest China’s Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region’s foreign trade volume hit a record high of 280.82 billion yuan in the first half of this year, up 28 percent year on year, local customs officials said.

    In particular, the autonomous region’s foreign trade turnover in June amounted to 53.17 billion yuan.

    In the first half of this year, Xinjiang’s list of trading partners included 222 countries and regions of the world. At the same time, Xinjiang significantly increased its trade turnover with countries participating in the Belt and Road Initiative. The said figure increased by 17.9 percent year-on-year to 237.59 billion yuan. Its share in the region’s foreign trade turnover exceeded 80 percent.

    Statistics show that Xinjiang has supplied mainly agricultural products, electromechanical products, sports equipment and machinery to the international market since the beginning of this year. -0-

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: ASIA/VIETNAM – “Vietnamese Catholic medical staff admired by the people and praised by the Vietnamese State”

    Source: Agenzia Fides – MIL OSI

    Friday, 25 July 2025

    by Andrew Doan Thanh PhongHanoi (Agenzia Fides) – Right before the mass, the priest was asked to celebrate the mass as quickly as possible, due to the health of the patients from the Oncology Hospital who are attending the mass. The patients tried to walk step by step into the church with the help of volunteers and relatives to meet Christ. Despite the inconvenience, the mass still remained more fervent than ever, and with the singing of nuns combined with prayers made by the mass participants in their weak voices, the mass was celebrated in a sacred and beautiful atmosphere.It was the 9am Sunday mass held every week at Phan Thon parish in Vinh diocese in central Vietnam, dedicated to serious patients being treated at the hospital. After the mass, the patients, the priest, and the volunteers gathered together to share meals filled up with love and comfort.Also in Vinh diocese, on July 13, 2025, 83 medical staff across the country, most of them Catholics, in coordination with the Medical Team Organization which is founded by Vietnamese priests and religious living in the United States, examined and provided free medicine to many poor people regardless of religion in Ru Dat Parish and neighboring areas. With good expertise and a dedicated working spirit, along with many modern medical examination equipments, the medical volunteers of the Medical Team helped hundreds of elderly men, women and children of the community of Ru Dat in protecting their health and distributing them medicine.The beautiful images of the devotion in serving patients of Catholic medical staff have been trusted and admired by the Vietnamese people and government, not only in treating illnesses but also in healing spiritual wounds.As mentioned in a report of the National Committee for Religious Affairs (a governmental organization of the Socialist Republic of Vietnam in charge of the government’s religious affairs): “In fact, the contribution of religion in today’s society is not only in terms of morality but also in many other social fields, especially in the field of healthcare. Catholicism is a religion that actively participates in healthcare to share and help the poor, the sick, the disadvantaged, and to testify to the values of love and charity of Christianity.”According to statistics, there are currently 113 medical facilities owned be religious organizations across the Country that have been under operation, of which 56 are from the Catholic Church of Vietnam, specializing in medical examination and treatment and care for the elderly, the mentally ill, orphans, abandoned children, and people with HIV/AIDS. And also according to the report of the Government’s Committee for Religious Affairs, many charitable activities regarding to healthcare are regularly performed by Catholic religious orders and parishioners in many parishes, dioceses all over the Country to help poor patients including non-Catholics such as free distribution of medicine to patients, buying health insurance for them, examining health; cooperating with specialists in hospitals to perform eye surgery freely for poor patients; organizing charity kitchens for providing foods to patients in hospitals, and helping people in specially difficult circumstances in society, caring for and educating HIV-infected children, and helping disabled, poor, homeless children, and autistic children.According to the State newspaper of Dai Doan Ket: “For decades, Kim Long Charity Clinic has become a trusted address of examination and treatment for patients with difficult circumstances in Thua Thien Hue province”. Mr. Nguyen Van Long, a regular patient, frequently receive examination and treatment at Kim Long clinic run by the nuns from the Congregation of the Daughters of the Immaculate Conception of Hue in central Vietnam, shared: “Since I learned that the clinic provides free medical treatment to people, I have come here every month for examination and treatment. Thanks to that, my illness has improved a lot. The nuns here, in addition to their expertise, are also very dedicated, they always ask questions about health and take good care of patients, so all the patients who come here feel happy and love the nuns”.“Healthcare workers are not simply doctors, nurses or paramedics, but first of all, are children of God who are called to collaborate with God in the mission of protecting and caring for life. They are not only physical healers, but also witnesses of hope in the midst of suffering and illness. Following the example of Saint John of God, that is, is dedicated yourself to serving the sick with compassion, under the accompaniment of the Church and the grace of God.” said by Father Joseph Phan Anh Dung, from the Camilô Order specializing in care for patients in Vietnam, during the recent pilgrimage of the Holy Year 2025 in the Da Nang diocese with the presence of more than 60 Catholic doctors and medical staff.Besides those good images, challenges and temptations for Catholic medical staff still exist in Vietnamese society nowadays, and Father Dung reminded: “Temptations in the medical environment, from professional pressure, material benefits, compromises in medical intervention contrary to Christian ethics are still present here and there. When losing that ethical principle, the physician risks no longer being a collaborator with God in protecting life, but inadvertently becoming an agent for the decline of medical ethics”. (Agenzia Fides, 25/7/2025)
    Share:

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Euro area economic and financial developments by institutional sector: first quarter of 2025

    Source: European Central Bank

    25 July 2025

    • Euro area net saving decreased to €799 billion in four quarters to first quarter of 2025, compared with €813 billion one quarter earlier
    • Household debt-to-income ratio decreased to 81.7% in first quarter of 2025 from 83.8% one year earlier
    • Non-financial corporations’ debt-to-GDP ratio (consolidated measure) decreased to 67.2% in first quarter of 2025 from 68.4% one year earlier
    • Share of net wealth held by wealthiest 10% of households stood at 57.3% in 2024, largely unchanged from previous years.

    Total euro area economy

    Euro area net saving decreased to €799 billion (6.5% of euro area net disposable income) in the four quarters to the first quarter of 2025 compared with €813 billion in the four quarters to the previous quarter. Euro area net non-financial investment was broadly unchanged at €441 billion (3.6% of net disposable income), due to broadly unchanged net investment of all sectors (see Chart 1 and Table 1 in the Annex).

    Euro area net lending to the rest of the world decreased to €388 billion (from €401 billion previously) reflecting the decreased net saving and broadly unchanged net non-financial investment. Non-financial corporations’ net lending decreased to €130 billion (1.1% of net disposable income) from €156 billion, while that of households increased to €598 billion (4.9% of net disposable income) from €588 billion. Financial corporations’ net lending (€123 billion, 1.0% of net disposable income) and general government net borrowing were broadly unchanged, the latter contributing negatively to euro area net lending (-€463 billion, -3.8% of net disposable income).

    Chart 1

    Euro area saving, investment and net lending to the rest of the world

    (EUR billions, four-quarter sums)

    Sources: ECB and Eurostat.

    * Net saving minus net capital transfers to the rest of the world (equals change in net worth due to transactions).

    Data for euro area saving, investment and net lending to the rest of the world (Chart 1)

    Households

    Household financial investment increased at a broadly unchanged annual rate of 2.5% in the first quarter of 2025. Among its components, investment in currency and deposits grew at an unchanged rate of 3.0%. Investment in debt securities increased at a lower rate (3.0%, after 8.2%), while investment in shares and other equity grew at a higher rate (2.3%, after 1.8%) – the latter mainly due to investment fund shares.

    Households purchased, in net terms, mainly debt securities issued by the rest of the world, general government, and other financial institutions (see Table 1 below and Table 2.2. in the Annex). Households were overall net sellers of listed shares, selling predominantly listed shares of MFIs, while buying listed shares issued by the rest of the world (i.e. shares issued by non-euro area residents). Households increased their purchases of euro area non-money market investment fund shares, and continued to purchase money market fund shares, while purchases of investment fund shares issued by the rest of the world decelerated.

    The household debt-to-income ratio[1] decreased, to 81.7% in the first quarter of 2025 from 83.8% in the first quarter of 2024. The household debt-to-GDP ratio decreased, to 51.2% in the first quarter of 2025 from 52.3% in the first quarter of 2024 (see Chart 2).

    Table 1

    Financial investment and financing of households, main items

    (annual growth rates)

    Financial transactions

    2024 Q1

    2024 Q2

    2024 Q3

    2024 Q4

    2025 Q1

    Financial investment*

    2.0

    2.3

    2.4

    2.4

    2.5

    Currency and deposits

    1.5

    2.3

    2.5

    3.0

    3.0

    Debt securities

    41.4

    29.8

    17.1

    8.2

    3.0

    Shares and other equity**

    0.2

    0.4

    0.9

    1.8

    2.3

    Life insurance

    0.0

    0.4

    1.3

    1.6

    1.7

    Pension schemes

    2.0

    1.8

    1.9

    1.8

    2.1

    Financing***

    0.9

    1.2

    1.2

    1.6

    1.8

    Loans

    0.6

    0.6

    0.9

    1.3

    1.7

    Source: ECB.

    * Items not shown include: loans granted, prepayments of insurance premiums and reserves for outstanding claims and other accounts receivable.

    ** Includes investment fund shares.

    *** Items not shown include: financial derivatives’ net liabilities, pension schemes and other accounts payable.

    Data for financial investment and financing of households (Table 1)

    Chart 2

    Debt ratios of households and NFCs

    (percentages of GDP)

    Sources: ECB and Eurostat.

    * Outstanding amount of loans, debt securities, trade credits and pension scheme liabilities.
    ** Outstanding amount of loans and debt securities, excluding debt positions between NFCs
    *** Outstanding amount of loan liabilities.

    Data for debt ratios of households and non-financial corporations (Chart 2)

    Developments in household wealth distribution in 2024

    The Distributional Wealth Accounts show that household net wealth continued to increase in 2024, while wealth inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient of net wealth, has remained broadly unchanged in recent years (see Chart 3). The share of household net wealth held by the wealthiest 10% of households stood at 57.3% at the end of 2024, largely unchanged from previous years.

    Chart 3

    Household net wealth distribution and wealth inequality

    (left-hand scale: EUR trillions; right-hand scale: percentages)

    Sources: ECB.

    The growth in net wealth across the various household wealth groups was primarily driven by valuation effects of both financial and non-financial assets, while contribution of net saving was stable but lower. Since the fourth quarter of 2019, net wealth has risen substantially across all wealth groups, with increases of 32% for the bottom 50% of the wealth distribution, 24% for the next 40%, and 26% for the top 10%. The developments varied between different asset classes, resulting in distinct portfolio dynamics across household wealth groups (see Chart 4). A significant portion of overall net wealth growth – more than half in each wealth group – was driven by increases in housing wealth. For the bottom 50% of households, deposits were the second-largest contributor (+9 percentage points), with smaller contributions from other wealth components. Among the next 40% of households, deposits also made a positive contribution (+4 percentage points) to net wealth growth, though this was largely offset by the negative effect of increasing mortgages (-3 percentage points). For the wealthiest 10% of households, the growth in net wealth was also supported by significant increases in business wealth (+6 percentage points) and investment fund shares (+3 percentage points).

    Chart 4

    Contributions to growth of household net wealth between Q1 2019 and Q4 2024

    (percentage points, percentage change)

    Sources: ECB.

    Note: The left-hand scale measures the percentage growth of net wealth and the percentage point contributions to net wealth growth of all other legend items.

    Non-financial corporations

    Financing of NFCs increased at a higher annual rate of 1.3% in the first quarter of 2025 (after 0.9% in the previous quarter). This was the result of an acceleration in financing by loans (2.0% after 1.3%) and trade credits (4.1% after 3.6%), while the financing via the issuance of debt securities and of equity grew at broadly unchanged rates (see Table 2).The acceleration in loan financing is mainly due to loans granted by MFIs (2.6% after 1.6%, see Table 3.2 in the Annex), by the rest of the world (1.6% after -0.2%), and by other financial institutions (-0.5% after -2.5%).

    NFCs’ debt-to-GDP ratio (consolidated measure) decreased to 67.2% in the first quarter of 2025, from 68.4% first quarter of 2024; the non-consolidated, wider debt measure decreased to 138.9% from 140.6% (see Chart 2).

    Table 2

    Financing and financial investment of NFCs, main items

    (annual growth rates)

    Financial transactions

    2024 Q1

    2024 Q2

    2024 Q3

    2024 Q4

    2025 Q1

    Financing*

    0.8

    0.9

    1.0

    0.9

    1.3

    Debt securities

    2.0

    2.9

    2.5

    1.5

    1.6

    Loans

    1.6

    1.4

    1.4

    1.3

    2.0

    Shares and other equity

    0.3

    0.6

    0.6

    0.4

    0.5

    Trade credits and advances

    1.0

    2.0

    2.5

    3.6

    4.1

    Financial investment**

    1.7

    1.8

    2.0

    1.8

    2.0

    Currency and deposits

    0.2

    2.6

    1.7

    2.4

    2.1

    Debt securities

    10.9

    8.1

    3.9

    2.1

    4.1

    Loans

    3.9

    3.7

    3.2

    2.6

    2.8

    Shares and other equity

    1.1

    0.9

    1.2

    0.7

    0.4

    Source: ECB.

    * Items not shown include: pension schemes, other accounts payable, financial derivatives’ net liabilities and deposits.

    ** Items not shown include: other accounts receivable and prepayments of insurance premiums and reserves for outstanding claims.

    Data for financial investment and financing of non-financial corporations (Table 2)

    For queries, please use the statistical information request form.

    Notes

    • These data come from a second release of quarterly euro area sector accounts for the first quarter of 2025 by the ECB and Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. This release incorporates revisions and completed data for all sectors compared with the first release on “Euro area households and non-financial corporations” of 3 July 2025.
    • The euro area and national financial accounts data of NFCs and households are available in an interactive dashboard.
    • The debt-to-GDP (or debt-to-income) ratios are calculated as the outstanding amount of debt in the reference quarter divided by the sum of GDP (or income) in the four quarters up to the reference quarter. The ratio of non-financial transactions (e.g. savings) as a percentage of income or GDP is calculated as the sum of the four quarters up to the reference quarter for both numerator and denominator.
    • The annual growth rate of non-financial transactions and of outstanding assets and liabilities (stocks) is calculated as the percentage change between the value for a given quarter and that value recorded four quarters earlier. The annual growth rates used for financial transactions refer to the total value of transactions during the year in relation to the outstanding stock a year before.
    • Hyperlinks in the main body of the statistical release lead to data that may change with subsequent releases as a result of revisions. Figures shown in annex tables are a snapshot of the data as at the time of the current release.
    • The release of results of experimental Distributional Wealth Accounts (DWA) for the first quarter of 2025 is planned for 29 August 2025 (tentative date).

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Euro area economic and financial developments by institutional sector: first quarter of 2025

    Source: European Central Bank

    25 July 2025

    • Euro area net saving decreased to €799 billion in four quarters to first quarter of 2025, compared with €813 billion one quarter earlier
    • Household debt-to-income ratio decreased to 81.7% in first quarter of 2025 from 83.8% one year earlier
    • Non-financial corporations’ debt-to-GDP ratio (consolidated measure) decreased to 67.2% in first quarter of 2025 from 68.4% one year earlier
    • Share of net wealth held by wealthiest 10% of households stood at 57.3% in 2024, largely unchanged from previous years.

    Total euro area economy

    Euro area net saving decreased to €799 billion (6.5% of euro area net disposable income) in the four quarters to the first quarter of 2025 compared with €813 billion in the four quarters to the previous quarter. Euro area net non-financial investment was broadly unchanged at €441 billion (3.6% of net disposable income), due to broadly unchanged net investment of all sectors (see Chart 1 and Table 1 in the Annex).

    Euro area net lending to the rest of the world decreased to €388 billion (from €401 billion previously) reflecting the decreased net saving and broadly unchanged net non-financial investment. Non-financial corporations’ net lending decreased to €130 billion (1.1% of net disposable income) from €156 billion, while that of households increased to €598 billion (4.9% of net disposable income) from €588 billion. Financial corporations’ net lending (€123 billion, 1.0% of net disposable income) and general government net borrowing were broadly unchanged, the latter contributing negatively to euro area net lending (-€463 billion, -3.8% of net disposable income).

    Chart 1

    Euro area saving, investment and net lending to the rest of the world

    (EUR billions, four-quarter sums)

    Sources: ECB and Eurostat.

    * Net saving minus net capital transfers to the rest of the world (equals change in net worth due to transactions).

    Data for euro area saving, investment and net lending to the rest of the world (Chart 1)

    Households

    Household financial investment increased at a broadly unchanged annual rate of 2.5% in the first quarter of 2025. Among its components, investment in currency and deposits grew at an unchanged rate of 3.0%. Investment in debt securities increased at a lower rate (3.0%, after 8.2%), while investment in shares and other equity grew at a higher rate (2.3%, after 1.8%) – the latter mainly due to investment fund shares.

    Households purchased, in net terms, mainly debt securities issued by the rest of the world, general government, and other financial institutions (see Table 1 below and Table 2.2. in the Annex). Households were overall net sellers of listed shares, selling predominantly listed shares of MFIs, while buying listed shares issued by the rest of the world (i.e. shares issued by non-euro area residents). Households increased their purchases of euro area non-money market investment fund shares, and continued to purchase money market fund shares, while purchases of investment fund shares issued by the rest of the world decelerated.

    The household debt-to-income ratio[1] decreased, to 81.7% in the first quarter of 2025 from 83.8% in the first quarter of 2024. The household debt-to-GDP ratio decreased, to 51.2% in the first quarter of 2025 from 52.3% in the first quarter of 2024 (see Chart 2).

    Table 1

    Financial investment and financing of households, main items

    (annual growth rates)

    Financial transactions

    2024 Q1

    2024 Q2

    2024 Q3

    2024 Q4

    2025 Q1

    Financial investment*

    2.0

    2.3

    2.4

    2.4

    2.5

    Currency and deposits

    1.5

    2.3

    2.5

    3.0

    3.0

    Debt securities

    41.4

    29.8

    17.1

    8.2

    3.0

    Shares and other equity**

    0.2

    0.4

    0.9

    1.8

    2.3

    Life insurance

    0.0

    0.4

    1.3

    1.6

    1.7

    Pension schemes

    2.0

    1.8

    1.9

    1.8

    2.1

    Financing***

    0.9

    1.2

    1.2

    1.6

    1.8

    Loans

    0.6

    0.6

    0.9

    1.3

    1.7

    Source: ECB.

    * Items not shown include: loans granted, prepayments of insurance premiums and reserves for outstanding claims and other accounts receivable.

    ** Includes investment fund shares.

    *** Items not shown include: financial derivatives’ net liabilities, pension schemes and other accounts payable.

    Data for financial investment and financing of households (Table 1)

    Chart 2

    Debt ratios of households and NFCs

    (percentages of GDP)

    Sources: ECB and Eurostat.

    * Outstanding amount of loans, debt securities, trade credits and pension scheme liabilities.
    ** Outstanding amount of loans and debt securities, excluding debt positions between NFCs
    *** Outstanding amount of loan liabilities.

    Data for debt ratios of households and non-financial corporations (Chart 2)

    Developments in household wealth distribution in 2024

    The Distributional Wealth Accounts show that household net wealth continued to increase in 2024, while wealth inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient of net wealth, has remained broadly unchanged in recent years (see Chart 3). The share of household net wealth held by the wealthiest 10% of households stood at 57.3% at the end of 2024, largely unchanged from previous years.

    Chart 3

    Household net wealth distribution and wealth inequality

    (left-hand scale: EUR trillions; right-hand scale: percentages)

    Sources: ECB.

    The growth in net wealth across the various household wealth groups was primarily driven by valuation effects of both financial and non-financial assets, while contribution of net saving was stable but lower. Since the fourth quarter of 2019, net wealth has risen substantially across all wealth groups, with increases of 32% for the bottom 50% of the wealth distribution, 24% for the next 40%, and 26% for the top 10%. The developments varied between different asset classes, resulting in distinct portfolio dynamics across household wealth groups (see Chart 4). A significant portion of overall net wealth growth – more than half in each wealth group – was driven by increases in housing wealth. For the bottom 50% of households, deposits were the second-largest contributor (+9 percentage points), with smaller contributions from other wealth components. Among the next 40% of households, deposits also made a positive contribution (+4 percentage points) to net wealth growth, though this was largely offset by the negative effect of increasing mortgages (-3 percentage points). For the wealthiest 10% of households, the growth in net wealth was also supported by significant increases in business wealth (+6 percentage points) and investment fund shares (+3 percentage points).

    Chart 4

    Contributions to growth of household net wealth between Q1 2019 and Q4 2024

    (percentage points, percentage change)

    Sources: ECB.

    Note: The left-hand scale measures the percentage growth of net wealth and the percentage point contributions to net wealth growth of all other legend items.

    Non-financial corporations

    Financing of NFCs increased at a higher annual rate of 1.3% in the first quarter of 2025 (after 0.9% in the previous quarter). This was the result of an acceleration in financing by loans (2.0% after 1.3%) and trade credits (4.1% after 3.6%), while the financing via the issuance of debt securities and of equity grew at broadly unchanged rates (see Table 2).The acceleration in loan financing is mainly due to loans granted by MFIs (2.6% after 1.6%, see Table 3.2 in the Annex), by the rest of the world (1.6% after -0.2%), and by other financial institutions (-0.5% after -2.5%).

    NFCs’ debt-to-GDP ratio (consolidated measure) decreased to 67.2% in the first quarter of 2025, from 68.4% first quarter of 2024; the non-consolidated, wider debt measure decreased to 138.9% from 140.6% (see Chart 2).

    Table 2

    Financing and financial investment of NFCs, main items

    (annual growth rates)

    Financial transactions

    2024 Q1

    2024 Q2

    2024 Q3

    2024 Q4

    2025 Q1

    Financing*

    0.8

    0.9

    1.0

    0.9

    1.3

    Debt securities

    2.0

    2.9

    2.5

    1.5

    1.6

    Loans

    1.6

    1.4

    1.4

    1.3

    2.0

    Shares and other equity

    0.3

    0.6

    0.6

    0.4

    0.5

    Trade credits and advances

    1.0

    2.0

    2.5

    3.6

    4.1

    Financial investment**

    1.7

    1.8

    2.0

    1.8

    2.0

    Currency and deposits

    0.2

    2.6

    1.7

    2.4

    2.1

    Debt securities

    10.9

    8.1

    3.9

    2.1

    4.1

    Loans

    3.9

    3.7

    3.2

    2.6

    2.8

    Shares and other equity

    1.1

    0.9

    1.2

    0.7

    0.4

    Source: ECB.

    * Items not shown include: pension schemes, other accounts payable, financial derivatives’ net liabilities and deposits.

    ** Items not shown include: other accounts receivable and prepayments of insurance premiums and reserves for outstanding claims.

    Data for financial investment and financing of non-financial corporations (Table 2)

    For queries, please use the statistical information request form.

    Notes

    • These data come from a second release of quarterly euro area sector accounts for the first quarter of 2025 by the ECB and Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. This release incorporates revisions and completed data for all sectors compared with the first release on “Euro area households and non-financial corporations” of 3 July 2025.
    • The euro area and national financial accounts data of NFCs and households are available in an interactive dashboard.
    • The debt-to-GDP (or debt-to-income) ratios are calculated as the outstanding amount of debt in the reference quarter divided by the sum of GDP (or income) in the four quarters up to the reference quarter. The ratio of non-financial transactions (e.g. savings) as a percentage of income or GDP is calculated as the sum of the four quarters up to the reference quarter for both numerator and denominator.
    • The annual growth rate of non-financial transactions and of outstanding assets and liabilities (stocks) is calculated as the percentage change between the value for a given quarter and that value recorded four quarters earlier. The annual growth rates used for financial transactions refer to the total value of transactions during the year in relation to the outstanding stock a year before.
    • Hyperlinks in the main body of the statistical release lead to data that may change with subsequent releases as a result of revisions. Figures shown in annex tables are a snapshot of the data as at the time of the current release.
    • The release of results of experimental Distributional Wealth Accounts (DWA) for the first quarter of 2025 is planned for 29 August 2025 (tentative date).

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Western Cape works to enhance road safety

    Source: Government of South Africa

    The Western Cape is working to enhance efforts aimed at preventing road incidents, particularly those involving pedestrians.

    This as the Western Cape Mobility Department is working closely with law enforcement, municipalities, and Joint Traffic Control Centres (JTCCs) in this undertaking.

    According to the provincial department, pedestrians are the most vulnerable road users, accounting for the majority of lives lost on the province’s roads this month.

    Of the 72 road fatalities recorded across the province from 1 to 22 July 2025, pedestrians account for the most deaths, highlighting the need for focused interventions.

    READ | Western Cape concerned at 23 deaths on province’s roads in one week 

    The department said many of these incidents occurred in high-density municipal areas, with Khayelitsha, Milnerton, Paarl, and Kuilsriver repeatedly emerging as hotspots for multiple pedestrian deaths.

    In addition, the R300 corridor, a provincial route, also recorded several fatalities. 

    Meanwhile, outside the primary hotspots, there were over 20 individual pedestrian deaths spread across the province, from metro suburbs to smaller rural towns. 

    “This wide distribution highlights that no community is immune and underscores the need for a province-wide safety response. Recent statistics reveal that pedestrian fatalities occur mostly at night, along highways, and on poorly lit roads,” the statement read. 

    Contributing factors include jaywalking, alcohol use by both pedestrians and drivers, speeding, and non-utilisation of pedestrian infrastructure.

    The department stated that it was collaborating with relevant stakeholders to prevent road incidents involving road users. 
    In the meantime, the province has conducted 442 vehicle checkpoint operations in the first three weeks of July, including 219 drunk driving operations, 84 public transport checks, and targeted operations focusing on seatbelt use, vehicle fitness, learner and farm worker transport.

    The team is deploying road safety ambassadors in high-risk areas to educate communities on safe road use and is launching awareness campaigns supported by schools, neighbourhood watches, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and other community groups.

    They are also enhancing law enforcement visibility on highways and provincial routes, with improved monitoring.

    Western Cape Mobility MEC, Isaac Sileku, said the loss of pedestrian lives is not just a statistic; it represents families torn apart and communities left in mourning. 

    “We urge both motorists and pedestrians to take responsibility. Motorists must slow down and remain vigilant, while pedestrians should always use designated crossings, wear visible clothing at night, and avoid walking under the influence of alcohol,” Sileku said.

    Meanwhile, the department is also preparing to roll out new pedestrian safety infrastructure and interventions in identified high-risk zones in the coming months, as part of its ongoing strategy to reduce road deaths.

    “Road safety is a collective effort. By working together, as government, drivers, and pedestrians, we can turn the tide on these preventable deaths,” it said. – SAnews.gov.za
     

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Statistics on Code on Access to Information for fourth quarter of 2024

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    Statistics on Code on Access to Information for fourth quarter of 2024 
         The total number of requests received since the introduction of the Code in March 1995 and up to the end of December 2024 amounted to 134 124. Of these, 8 767 requests were subsequently withdrawn by the requestors, and 6 623 requests covered cases in which the bureaux/departments concerned did not hold the requested information or cannot confirm or deny the existence of information. As at December 31, 2024, 653 requests were still being processed by bureaux/departments.

         Among the 118 081 requests which covered information held by bureaux/departments and to which the bureaux/departments had responded, 114 706 requests (97.1 per cent) were met, either in full (111 597 requests) or in part (3 109 requests), and 3 375 requests (2.9 per cent) were refused.Issued at HKT 15:30

    NNNN

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: ToolShell: a story of five vulnerabilities in Microsoft SharePoint

    Source: Securelist – Kaspersky

    Headline: ToolShell: a story of five vulnerabilities in Microsoft SharePoint

    On July 19–20, 2025, various security companies and national CERTs published alerts about active exploitation of on-premise SharePoint servers. According to the reports, observed attacks did not require authentication, allowed attackers to gain full control over the infected servers, and were performed using an exploit chain of two vulnerabilities: CVE-2025-49704 and CVE-2025-49706, publicly named “ToolShell”. Additionally, on the same dates, Microsoft released out-of-band security patches for the vulnerabilities CVE-2025-53770 and CVE-2025-53771, aimed at addressing the security bypasses of previously issued fixes for CVE-2025-49704 and CVE-2025-49706. The release of the new, “proper” updates has caused confusion about exactly which vulnerabilities attackers are exploiting and whether they are using zero-day exploits.

    Kaspersky products proactively detected and blocked malicious activity linked to these attacks, which allowed us to gather statistics about the timeframe and spread of this campaign. Our statistics show that widespread exploitation started on July 18, 2025, and attackers targeted servers across the world in Egypt, Jordan, Russia, Vietnam, and Zambia. Entities across multiple sectors were affected: government, finance, manufacturing, forestry, and agriculture.

    While analyzing all artifacts related to these attacks, which were detected by our products and public information provided by external researchers, we found a dump of a POST request that was claimed to contain the malicious payload used in these attacks. After performing our own analysis, we were able to confirm that this dump indeed contained the malicious payload detected by our technologies, and that sending this single request to an affected SharePoint installation was enough to execute the malicious payload there.

    Our analysis of the exploit showed that it did rely on vulnerabilities fixed under CVE-2025-49704 and CVE-2025-49706, but by changing just one byte in the request, we were able to bypass those fixes.

    In this post, we provide detailed information about CVE-2025-49704, CVE-2025-49706, CVE-2025-53770, CVE-2025-53771, and one related vulnerability. Since the exploit code is already published online, is very easy to use, and poses a significant risk, we encourage all organizations to install the necessary updates.

    The exploit

    Our research started with an analysis of a POST request dump associated with this wave of attacks on SharePoint servers.

    Snippet of the exploit POST request

    We can see that this POST request targets the “/_layouts/15/ToolPane.aspx” endpoint and embeds two parameters: “MSOtlPn_Uri” and “MSOtlPn_DWP”. Looking at the code of ToolPane.aspx, we can see that this file itself does not contain much functionality and most of its code is located in the ToolPane class of the Microsoft.SharePoint.WebPartPages namespace in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll. Looking at this class reveals the code that works with the two parameters present in the exploit. However, accessing this endpoint under normal conditions is not possible without bypassing authentication on the attacked SharePoint server. This is where the first Microsoft SharePoint Server Spoofing Vulnerability CVE-2025-49706 comes into play.

    CVE-2025-49706

    This vulnerability is present in the method PostAuthenticateRequestHandler, in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll. SharePoint requires Internet Information Services (IIS) to be configured in integrated mode. In this mode, the IIS and ASP.NET authentication stages are unified. As a result, the outcome of IIS authentication is not determined until the PostAuthenticateRequest stage, at which point both the ASP.NET and IIS authentication methods have been completed. Therefore, the PostAuthenticateRequestHandler method utilizes a series of flags to track potential authentication violations. A logic bug in this method enables an authentication bypass if the “Referrer” header of the HTTP request is equal to “/_layouts/SignOut.aspx”, “/_layouts/14/SignOut.aspx”, or “/_layouts/15/SignOut.aspx” using case insensitive comparison.

    Vulnerable code in PostAuthenticateRequestHandler method (Microsoft.SharePoint.dll version 16.0.10417.20018)

    The code displayed in the image above handles the sign-out request and is also triggered when the sign-out page is specified as the referrer. When flag6 is set to false and flag7 is set to true, both conditional branches that could potentially throw an “Unauthorized Access” exception are bypassed.

    Unauthorized access checks bypassed by the exploit

    On July 8, 2025, Microsoft released an update that addressed this vulnerability by introducing additional checks to detect the usage of the “ToolPane.aspx” endpoint with the sign-out page specified as the referrer.

    CVE-2025-49706 fix (Microsoft.SharePoint.dll version 16.0.10417.20027)

    The added check uses case insensitive comparison to verify if the requested path ends with “ToolPane.aspx”. Is it possible to bypass this check, say, by using a different endpoint? Our testing has shown that this check can be easily bypassed.

    CVE-2025-53771

    We were able to successfully bypass the patch for vulnerability CVE-2025-49706 by adding just one byte to the exploit POST request. All that was required to bypass this patch was to add a “/” (slash) to the end of the requested “ToolPane.aspx” path.

    Bypass for CVE-2025-49706 fix

    On July 20, 2025, Microsoft released an update that fixed this bypass as CVE-2025-53771. This fix replaces the “ToolPane.aspx” check to instead check whether the requested path is in the list of paths allowed for use with the sign-out page specified as the referrer.

    CVE-2025-53771 fix (Microsoft.SharePoint.dll version 16.0.10417.20037)

    This allowlist includes the following paths: “/_layouts/15/SignOut.aspx”, “/_layouts/15/1033/initstrings.js”, “/_layouts/15/init.js”, “/_layouts/15/theming.js”, “/ScriptResource.axd”, “/_layouts/15/blank.js”, “/ScriptResource.axd”, “/WebResource.axd”, “/_layouts/15/1033/styles/corev15.css”, “/_layouts/15/1033/styles/error.css”, “/_layouts/15/images/favicon.ico”, “/_layouts/15/1033/strings.js”, “/_layouts/15/core.js”, and it can contain additional paths added by the administrator.

    While testing the CVE-2025-49706 bypass with the July 8, 2025 updates installed on our SharePoint debugging stand, we noticed some strange behavior. Not only did the bypass of CVE-2025-49706 work, but the entire exploit chain did! But wait! Didn’t the attackers use an additional Microsoft SharePoint Remote Code Execution Vulnerability CVE-2025-49704, which was supposed to be fixed in the same update? To understand why the entire exploit chain worked in our case, let’s take a look at the vulnerability CVE-2025-49704 and how it was fixed.

    CVE-2025-49704

    CVE-2025-49704 is an untrusted data deserialization vulnerability that exists due to improper validation of XML content. Looking at the exploit POST request, we can see that it contains two URL encoded parameters: “MSOtlPn_Uri” and “MSOtlPn_DWP”. We can see how they are handled by examining the code of the method GetPartPreviewAndPropertiesFromMarkup in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll. A quick analysis reveals that “MSOtlPn_Uri”  is a page URL that might be pointing to an any file in the CONTROLTEMPLATES folder and the parameter “MSOtlPn_DWP” contains something known as WebPart markup. This markup contains special directives that can be used to execute safe controls on a server and has a format very similar to XML.

    WebPart markup used by the attackers

    While this “XML” included in the “MSOtlPn_DWP” parameter does not itself contain a vulnerability, it allows attackers to instantiate the ExcelDataSet control from Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.Client.dll with CompressedDataTable property set to malicious payload and trigger its processing using DataTable property getter.

    Code of the method that handles the contents of ExcelDataSet’s CompressedDataTable property in the DataTable property getter

    Looking at the code of the ExcelDataSet’s DataTable property getter in Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.Client.dll, we find the method GetObjectFromCompressedBase64String, responsible for deserialization of CompressedDataTable property contents. The data provided as Base64 string is decoded, unzipped, and passed to the BinarySerialization.Deserialize method from Microsoft.SharePoint.dll.

    DataSet with XML content exploiting CVE-2025-49704 (deserialized)

    Attackers use this method to provide a malicious DataSet whose deserialized content is shown in the image above. It contains an XML with an element of dangerous type “System.Collections.Generic.List1[[System.Data.Services.Internal.ExpandedWrapper2[…], System.Data.Services, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089]]”, which allows attackers to execute arbitrary methods with the help of the well-known ExpandedWrapper technique aimed at exploitation of unsafe XML deserialization in applications based on the .NET framework. In fact, this shouldn’t be possible, since BinarySerialization.Deserialize in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll uses a special XmlValidator designed to protect against this technique by checking the types of all elements present in the provided XML and ensuring that they are on the list of allowed types. However, the exploit bypasses this check by placing the ExpandedWrapper object into the list.

    Now, to find out why the exploit worked on our SharePoint debugging stand with the July 8, 2025 updates installed, let’s take a look at how this vulnerability was fixed. In this patch, Microsoft did not really fix the vulnerability but only mitigated it by adding the new AddExcelDataSetToSafeControls class to the Microsoft.SharePoint.Upgrade namespace. This class contains new code that modifies the web.config file and marks the Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.ExcelDataSet control as unsafe. Because SharePoint does not execute this code on its own after installing updates, the only way to achieve the security effect was to manually run a configuration upgrade using the SharePoint Products Configuration Wizard tool. Notably, the security guidance for CVE-2025-49704 does not mention the need for this step, which means at least some SharePoint administrators may skip it. Meanwhile, anyone who installed this update but did not manually perform a configuration upgrade remained vulnerable.

    CVE-2025-53770

    On July 20, 2025, Microsoft released an update with a proper fix for the CVE-2025-49704 vulnerability. This patch introduces an updated XmlValidator that now properly validates element types in XML, preventing exploitation of this vulnerability without requiring a configuration upgrade and, more importantly, addressing the root cause and preventing exploitation of the same vulnerability through controls other than Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.ExcelDataSet.

    DataSet with XML content exploiting CVE-2025-49704 (deserialized)

    CVE-2020-1147

    Readers familiar with previous SharePoint exploits might feel that the vulnerability CVE-2025-49704/CVE-2025-53770 and the exploit used by the attackers looks very familiar and very similar to the older .NET Framework, SharePoint Server, and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability CVE-2020-1147. In fact, if we compare the exploit for CVE-2020-1147 and an exploit for CVE-2025-49704/CVE-2025-53770, we can see that they are almost identical. The only difference is that in the exploit for CVE-2025-49704/CVE-2025-53770, the dangerous ExpandedWrapper object is placed in the list. This makes CVE-2025-53770 an updated fix for CVE-2020-1147.

    DataSet with XML content exploiting CVE-2020-1147

    Conclusions

    Despite the fact that patches for the ToolShell vulnerabilities are now available for deployment, we assess that this chain of exploits will continue being used by attackers for a long time. We have been observing the same situation with other notorious vulnerabilities, such as ProxyLogon, PrintNightmare, or EternalBlue. While they have been known for years, many threat actors still continue leveraging them in their attacks to compromise unpatched systems. We expect the ToolShell vulnerabilities to follow the same fate, as they can be exploited with extremely low effort and allow full control over the vulnerable server.

    To stay better protected against threats like ToolShell, we as a community should learn lessons from previous events in the industry related to critical vulnerabilities. Specifically, the speed of applying security patches nowadays is the most important factor when it comes to fighting such vulnerabilities. Since public exploits for these dangerous vulnerabilities appear very soon after vulnerability announcements, it is paramount to install patches as soon as possible, as a gap of even a few hours can make a critical difference.

    At the same time, it is important to protect enterprise networks against zero-day exploits, which can be leveraged when there is no available public patch for vulnerabilities. In this regard, it is critical to equip machines with reliable cybersecurity solutions that have proven effective in combatting ToolShell attacks before they were publicly disclosed.

    Kaspersky Next with its Behaviour detection component proactively protects against  exploitation of these vulnerabilities. Additionally, it is able to detect exploitation and the subsequent malicious activity.

    Kaspersky products detect the exploits and malware used in these attacks with the following verdicts:

    • UDS:DangerousObject.Multi.Generic
    • PDM:Exploit.Win32.Generic
    • PDM:Trojan.Win32.Generic
    • HEUR:Trojan.MSIL.Agent.gen
    • ASP.Agent.*
    • PowerShell.Agent.*

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Economics: ToolShell: a story of five vulnerabilities in Microsoft SharePoint

    Source: Securelist – Kaspersky

    Headline: ToolShell: a story of five vulnerabilities in Microsoft SharePoint

    On July 19–20, 2025, various security companies and national CERTs published alerts about active exploitation of on-premise SharePoint servers. According to the reports, observed attacks did not require authentication, allowed attackers to gain full control over the infected servers, and were performed using an exploit chain of two vulnerabilities: CVE-2025-49704 and CVE-2025-49706, publicly named “ToolShell”. Additionally, on the same dates, Microsoft released out-of-band security patches for the vulnerabilities CVE-2025-53770 and CVE-2025-53771, aimed at addressing the security bypasses of previously issued fixes for CVE-2025-49704 and CVE-2025-49706. The release of the new, “proper” updates has caused confusion about exactly which vulnerabilities attackers are exploiting and whether they are using zero-day exploits.

    Kaspersky products proactively detected and blocked malicious activity linked to these attacks, which allowed us to gather statistics about the timeframe and spread of this campaign. Our statistics show that widespread exploitation started on July 18, 2025, and attackers targeted servers across the world in Egypt, Jordan, Russia, Vietnam, and Zambia. Entities across multiple sectors were affected: government, finance, manufacturing, forestry, and agriculture.

    While analyzing all artifacts related to these attacks, which were detected by our products and public information provided by external researchers, we found a dump of a POST request that was claimed to contain the malicious payload used in these attacks. After performing our own analysis, we were able to confirm that this dump indeed contained the malicious payload detected by our technologies, and that sending this single request to an affected SharePoint installation was enough to execute the malicious payload there.

    Our analysis of the exploit showed that it did rely on vulnerabilities fixed under CVE-2025-49704 and CVE-2025-49706, but by changing just one byte in the request, we were able to bypass those fixes.

    In this post, we provide detailed information about CVE-2025-49704, CVE-2025-49706, CVE-2025-53770, CVE-2025-53771, and one related vulnerability. Since the exploit code is already published online, is very easy to use, and poses a significant risk, we encourage all organizations to install the necessary updates.

    The exploit

    Our research started with an analysis of a POST request dump associated with this wave of attacks on SharePoint servers.

    Snippet of the exploit POST request

    We can see that this POST request targets the “/_layouts/15/ToolPane.aspx” endpoint and embeds two parameters: “MSOtlPn_Uri” and “MSOtlPn_DWP”. Looking at the code of ToolPane.aspx, we can see that this file itself does not contain much functionality and most of its code is located in the ToolPane class of the Microsoft.SharePoint.WebPartPages namespace in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll. Looking at this class reveals the code that works with the two parameters present in the exploit. However, accessing this endpoint under normal conditions is not possible without bypassing authentication on the attacked SharePoint server. This is where the first Microsoft SharePoint Server Spoofing Vulnerability CVE-2025-49706 comes into play.

    CVE-2025-49706

    This vulnerability is present in the method PostAuthenticateRequestHandler, in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll. SharePoint requires Internet Information Services (IIS) to be configured in integrated mode. In this mode, the IIS and ASP.NET authentication stages are unified. As a result, the outcome of IIS authentication is not determined until the PostAuthenticateRequest stage, at which point both the ASP.NET and IIS authentication methods have been completed. Therefore, the PostAuthenticateRequestHandler method utilizes a series of flags to track potential authentication violations. A logic bug in this method enables an authentication bypass if the “Referrer” header of the HTTP request is equal to “/_layouts/SignOut.aspx”, “/_layouts/14/SignOut.aspx”, or “/_layouts/15/SignOut.aspx” using case insensitive comparison.

    Vulnerable code in PostAuthenticateRequestHandler method (Microsoft.SharePoint.dll version 16.0.10417.20018)

    The code displayed in the image above handles the sign-out request and is also triggered when the sign-out page is specified as the referrer. When flag6 is set to false and flag7 is set to true, both conditional branches that could potentially throw an “Unauthorized Access” exception are bypassed.

    Unauthorized access checks bypassed by the exploit

    On July 8, 2025, Microsoft released an update that addressed this vulnerability by introducing additional checks to detect the usage of the “ToolPane.aspx” endpoint with the sign-out page specified as the referrer.

    CVE-2025-49706 fix (Microsoft.SharePoint.dll version 16.0.10417.20027)

    The added check uses case insensitive comparison to verify if the requested path ends with “ToolPane.aspx”. Is it possible to bypass this check, say, by using a different endpoint? Our testing has shown that this check can be easily bypassed.

    CVE-2025-53771

    We were able to successfully bypass the patch for vulnerability CVE-2025-49706 by adding just one byte to the exploit POST request. All that was required to bypass this patch was to add a “/” (slash) to the end of the requested “ToolPane.aspx” path.

    Bypass for CVE-2025-49706 fix

    On July 20, 2025, Microsoft released an update that fixed this bypass as CVE-2025-53771. This fix replaces the “ToolPane.aspx” check to instead check whether the requested path is in the list of paths allowed for use with the sign-out page specified as the referrer.

    CVE-2025-53771 fix (Microsoft.SharePoint.dll version 16.0.10417.20037)

    This allowlist includes the following paths: “/_layouts/15/SignOut.aspx”, “/_layouts/15/1033/initstrings.js”, “/_layouts/15/init.js”, “/_layouts/15/theming.js”, “/ScriptResource.axd”, “/_layouts/15/blank.js”, “/ScriptResource.axd”, “/WebResource.axd”, “/_layouts/15/1033/styles/corev15.css”, “/_layouts/15/1033/styles/error.css”, “/_layouts/15/images/favicon.ico”, “/_layouts/15/1033/strings.js”, “/_layouts/15/core.js”, and it can contain additional paths added by the administrator.

    While testing the CVE-2025-49706 bypass with the July 8, 2025 updates installed on our SharePoint debugging stand, we noticed some strange behavior. Not only did the bypass of CVE-2025-49706 work, but the entire exploit chain did! But wait! Didn’t the attackers use an additional Microsoft SharePoint Remote Code Execution Vulnerability CVE-2025-49704, which was supposed to be fixed in the same update? To understand why the entire exploit chain worked in our case, let’s take a look at the vulnerability CVE-2025-49704 and how it was fixed.

    CVE-2025-49704

    CVE-2025-49704 is an untrusted data deserialization vulnerability that exists due to improper validation of XML content. Looking at the exploit POST request, we can see that it contains two URL encoded parameters: “MSOtlPn_Uri” and “MSOtlPn_DWP”. We can see how they are handled by examining the code of the method GetPartPreviewAndPropertiesFromMarkup in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll. A quick analysis reveals that “MSOtlPn_Uri”  is a page URL that might be pointing to an any file in the CONTROLTEMPLATES folder and the parameter “MSOtlPn_DWP” contains something known as WebPart markup. This markup contains special directives that can be used to execute safe controls on a server and has a format very similar to XML.

    WebPart markup used by the attackers

    While this “XML” included in the “MSOtlPn_DWP” parameter does not itself contain a vulnerability, it allows attackers to instantiate the ExcelDataSet control from Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.Client.dll with CompressedDataTable property set to malicious payload and trigger its processing using DataTable property getter.

    Code of the method that handles the contents of ExcelDataSet’s CompressedDataTable property in the DataTable property getter

    Looking at the code of the ExcelDataSet’s DataTable property getter in Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.Client.dll, we find the method GetObjectFromCompressedBase64String, responsible for deserialization of CompressedDataTable property contents. The data provided as Base64 string is decoded, unzipped, and passed to the BinarySerialization.Deserialize method from Microsoft.SharePoint.dll.

    DataSet with XML content exploiting CVE-2025-49704 (deserialized)

    Attackers use this method to provide a malicious DataSet whose deserialized content is shown in the image above. It contains an XML with an element of dangerous type “System.Collections.Generic.List1[[System.Data.Services.Internal.ExpandedWrapper2[…], System.Data.Services, Version=4.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089]]”, which allows attackers to execute arbitrary methods with the help of the well-known ExpandedWrapper technique aimed at exploitation of unsafe XML deserialization in applications based on the .NET framework. In fact, this shouldn’t be possible, since BinarySerialization.Deserialize in Microsoft.SharePoint.dll uses a special XmlValidator designed to protect against this technique by checking the types of all elements present in the provided XML and ensuring that they are on the list of allowed types. However, the exploit bypasses this check by placing the ExpandedWrapper object into the list.

    Now, to find out why the exploit worked on our SharePoint debugging stand with the July 8, 2025 updates installed, let’s take a look at how this vulnerability was fixed. In this patch, Microsoft did not really fix the vulnerability but only mitigated it by adding the new AddExcelDataSetToSafeControls class to the Microsoft.SharePoint.Upgrade namespace. This class contains new code that modifies the web.config file and marks the Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.ExcelDataSet control as unsafe. Because SharePoint does not execute this code on its own after installing updates, the only way to achieve the security effect was to manually run a configuration upgrade using the SharePoint Products Configuration Wizard tool. Notably, the security guidance for CVE-2025-49704 does not mention the need for this step, which means at least some SharePoint administrators may skip it. Meanwhile, anyone who installed this update but did not manually perform a configuration upgrade remained vulnerable.

    CVE-2025-53770

    On July 20, 2025, Microsoft released an update with a proper fix for the CVE-2025-49704 vulnerability. This patch introduces an updated XmlValidator that now properly validates element types in XML, preventing exploitation of this vulnerability without requiring a configuration upgrade and, more importantly, addressing the root cause and preventing exploitation of the same vulnerability through controls other than Microsoft.PerformancePoint.Scorecards.ExcelDataSet.

    DataSet with XML content exploiting CVE-2025-49704 (deserialized)

    CVE-2020-1147

    Readers familiar with previous SharePoint exploits might feel that the vulnerability CVE-2025-49704/CVE-2025-53770 and the exploit used by the attackers looks very familiar and very similar to the older .NET Framework, SharePoint Server, and Visual Studio Remote Code Execution Vulnerability CVE-2020-1147. In fact, if we compare the exploit for CVE-2020-1147 and an exploit for CVE-2025-49704/CVE-2025-53770, we can see that they are almost identical. The only difference is that in the exploit for CVE-2025-49704/CVE-2025-53770, the dangerous ExpandedWrapper object is placed in the list. This makes CVE-2025-53770 an updated fix for CVE-2020-1147.

    DataSet with XML content exploiting CVE-2020-1147

    Conclusions

    Despite the fact that patches for the ToolShell vulnerabilities are now available for deployment, we assess that this chain of exploits will continue being used by attackers for a long time. We have been observing the same situation with other notorious vulnerabilities, such as ProxyLogon, PrintNightmare, or EternalBlue. While they have been known for years, many threat actors still continue leveraging them in their attacks to compromise unpatched systems. We expect the ToolShell vulnerabilities to follow the same fate, as they can be exploited with extremely low effort and allow full control over the vulnerable server.

    To stay better protected against threats like ToolShell, we as a community should learn lessons from previous events in the industry related to critical vulnerabilities. Specifically, the speed of applying security patches nowadays is the most important factor when it comes to fighting such vulnerabilities. Since public exploits for these dangerous vulnerabilities appear very soon after vulnerability announcements, it is paramount to install patches as soon as possible, as a gap of even a few hours can make a critical difference.

    At the same time, it is important to protect enterprise networks against zero-day exploits, which can be leveraged when there is no available public patch for vulnerabilities. In this regard, it is critical to equip machines with reliable cybersecurity solutions that have proven effective in combatting ToolShell attacks before they were publicly disclosed.

    Kaspersky Next with its Behaviour detection component proactively protects against  exploitation of these vulnerabilities. Additionally, it is able to detect exploitation and the subsequent malicious activity.

    Kaspersky products detect the exploits and malware used in these attacks with the following verdicts:

    • UDS:DangerousObject.Multi.Generic
    • PDM:Exploit.Win32.Generic
    • PDM:Trojan.Win32.Generic
    • HEUR:Trojan.MSIL.Agent.gen
    • ASP.Agent.*
    • PowerShell.Agent.*

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Key Indicators of China’s Economic Development in the First Half of 2025

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

    Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –

    An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

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

    Russians. Ori.org.KN | 25. 07. 2025

    Key words: China’s economy

    Source: russian.china.org.cn

    Key Indicators of China’s Economic Development in the First Half of 2025 On July 15, the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) of China released data showing that China’s gross domestic product (GDP) for the first half of 2025 was 66.0536 trillion yuan.

    Please note: This information is raw content obtained directly from the source of the information. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    .

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Press Briefing Transcript: Julie Kozack, Director, Communications Department, July 24, 2025

    Source: International Monetary Fund

    July 24, 2025

    SPEAKER:  Ms. Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department, IMF

    MS. KOZACK: Good morning, and welcome to the IMF Press Briefing. It is wonderful to see all of you, both those of you here in person and colleagues online as well. I’m Julie Kozack, Director of the Communications Department at the IMF. As usual, this briefing is embargoed until 11 A.M. Eastern Time in the United States. I’ll start with a few announcements and then I’ll take your questions in person on Webex and via the Press Center.
    First, we will be releasing our flagship publication, the World Economic Outlook Update, next Tuesday, July 29th. The report will offer fresh insights into the current global economic trends and external imbalances.
    For your planning purposes, our Executive Board will be in recess from August 4th through the 15th, and we will notify you in due course on the date of our next press briefing.
    And with that, I will now open the floor for your questions. For those connecting virtually, please turn on both your camera and microphone when speaking, and the floor is opened.

    QUESTIONER: Just wanted to ask you about the tariff situation that’s unfolding at the moment, given the recent trade deals that the U.S. has struck with its key trading partners, including Japan, Indonesia, Philippines, just recently. The European Union is under negotiations that’s coming to fruition soon. It looks like the consensus is kind of around a 15 to 20% tariff rate in that range, that the US is, sort of agreeing with its partners for. And I just wanted to know if the IMF views that as an acceptable rate? Whether this would be detrimental to the global economy. I know we have the WEO coming out in a few days. Just wanted to get your take on what’s unfolding right now.

    MS. KOZACK: Let us see if there’s any other questions on this topic before I answer. If anyone online wants to come in on this topic, please let us know.
    So let me start with where we are. Since April, when we think about the global economy, we see activity indicators that reflect a complex backdrop shaped by trade tensions. We also saw that in the first quarter of the year, the data showed some front-loading of exports and imports ahead of, at that time, what was expected tariff increases. The more recent data points to trade diversion and to some unwinding of the front-loading. And at the same time, we are seeing some trade deals. Some have lowered tariffs. And at the same time, there’s also been some deals or some, not deals, but we have seen increases in tariffs, for example, on steel, aluminum, and copper. So, our team is assessing all of this information as it is coming in. And they will put together a comprehensive picture, which we will talk about in the WEO next week.

    I would also just remind that when we released our WEO in April, we talked about a period of very high uncertainty. And at that time, we had in our WEO a reference forecast, right? And that reflected the fact that we were in an uncertain environment where there were many different paths forward. For example, we had an effective tariff rate of the U.S. of about 25 percent based on April 2nd announcements. That effective tariff rate for the U.S. declined to 14 percent based on the pause of April 9th. And of course, one of the important factors for assessing the impact of the deals on the U.S. economy and the global economy will be what is the new effective tariff rate that will prevail.
    So, all of that work is ongoing, and we will have a full assessment next week in the WEO.

    QUESTIONER: So, would the 15 to 20 percent rate be higher than what we saw in the April WEO?

    MS. KOZACK: I think the way I would answer that is to simply say that we are looking at all the deals in April, and we had an effective rate around 14 percent. There, of course, has been movement since April. There have been deals. There have been some reductions in some tariff rates. There have been increases in other tariff rates. So, the team is going to have to put together that comprehensive assessment to determine what would be the new effective tariff rate that would prevail. And then, we would be in a position to compare it to what we had based on the April 2 announcement, what we had based on the April 9 pause, and then where we are today.
    And another very important factor will be what is the overall impact on uncertainty, right? We have talked about being in a very highly uncertain environment. So, of course, we will be looking at that closely as well.

    QUESTIONER: The president of Ukraine recently signed a law that regulates the anti-corruption bodies in the country. How does the IMF view this law, and how can this impact IMF Ukraine cooperation moving forward? And secondly, Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said Ukraine is facing a significant budget shortfall and is likely seeking a new IMF loan. What is the IMF’s assessment of the possibility of launching a new program?

    MS. KOZACK: Any other questions on Ukraine?

    QUESTIONER: I just wanted to follow up on whether, despite the moves by the Ukrainian government, can the IMF land to Ukraine?

    MS. KOZACK: Are there questions online on Ukraine? On Ukraine, let me just step back and remind kind of where we are with Ukraine.
    On June 30th, the IMF Board completed the Eighth Review of the EFF program and that enabled a disbursement of half a billion U.S. dollars. And that brought total disbursements under the program to U.S. $10.6 billion. Ukraine’s economy remains resilient. The authorities met, and this was reported as part of the Eighth Review, all of the end-March and continuous quantitative performance criteria; they met the prior action that was required for that review, and they also met two structural benchmarks.
    With respect to the specific questions, on the first question that you had, the enacted law, as we see it, neutralizes the effectiveness of Ukraine’s anti-corruption institutions. And from our perspective, that would be very problematic for macroeconomic stability and growth in Ukraine. Stepping back a bit, you know, the establishment and the development of independent institutions to detect and prosecute corruption cases has been central to the IMF’s engagement with Ukraine over the past 10 years. And these institutions have contributed to an improvement in governance in Ukraine over that period.
    Why is this important for Ukraine? From our perspective, Ukraine needs a robust anti-corruption architecture. And that will help level the playing field, improve the business climate, and attract private investment into Ukraine. And it’s a central piece of Ukraine’s reform agenda. So, from our perspective, safeguarding the independence of anti-corruption institutions remains a critical policy priority.
    We do take note of the government’s intention to introduce a new bill to restore the independence of the anti-corruption institutions.
    So, what I can say now is that in the coming weeks, the IMF Staff and the authorities are expected to intensify discussions about the 2026 budget and s to do an assessment of Ukraine’s financing needs, both for 2026 and over the medium term. They will be intensifying discussions to put together that comprehensive picture. That work is essential for the current program and any future potential engagement that we would have with Ukraine.

    QUESTIONER: If it finishes, what was the Staff assessment of the First Review of the agreement with Argentina and when would the Board’s definition be? And following the report on external reserves published this week, I think it was on Monday, does the IMF’s concerns continue?

    QUESTIONER: Has the Board already met to evaluate the First Review? And do you know if Argentina has requested a waiver? And how does the IMF assess the recent rate in this area, action rate and interest rates? And what are the causes of this change in monetary and exchange rate policy? Thank you.

    QUESTIONER: Yes, to add up to what was asked if there are any concerns regarding the impact of the exchange rates on inflation as well? And also, if the concerns remain regarding the weak external position for Argentina.

    QUESTIONER: President Milei has already confirmed that, for fiscal reasons, he will veto the laws recently passed by the Congress to increase pensions, extend the pension moratorium and declare an emergency disability. So, then has this intention being talked with the IMF previously or what is the IMF position on this matter?

    MS. KOZACK: On Argentina, here is what I can share today. So first, I want to mention that discussions on the First Review, which many of you have mentioned, are very advanced at this stage. And the next step in these discussions will be to reach a Staff-Level Agreement between the authorities and Staff. And we believe that that can happen very shortly. After the Staff-Level Agreement is reached, then Staff will present the documents to the Executive Board for their approval and consideration.
    What I can also add, and we have talked about that before here, is that the program has been off to a strong start. It has been underpinned by the continued implementation of tight macroeconomic policies, including a strong fiscal anchor and a tight monetary policy stance. The transition to a more flexible exchange rate regime has been smooth. Disinflation has resumed. And Argentina has reassessed international capital markets earlier than had been initially anticipated under the program.
    Given that our Staff and the authorities are very engaged in these discussions, which again are at an advanced stage, I’m not going to provide any further details now. We will give space for them to bring those discussions to a conclusion, and then we will, of course, communicate once those discussions have come to a conclusion. And again, we do think that a Staff-Level agreement could happen very, very shortly.

    QUESTIONER: Will the Board meeting be before, and start the holiday recess, or after? Because we are talking about 15 days, if not.

    MS. KOZACK: So right now, I don’t have any further details to share with you, but certainly once a Staff-Level Agreement is reached, we will be communicating, including the potential timing for formal Board discussion.

    QUESTIONER: Can you please kindly update us on the current status of the discussion between the IMF and the Republic of Senegal regarding the temporarily suspended disbursements? Especially with the Annual Meetings approaching in October in Washington, is there a realistic prospect of finalizing the matter before then? This is the first question.
    The second one, following the recent meeting between His Excellency, the President of the Republic of Senegal, Bassirou Diomaye Faye, and Mrs. Gita Gopinath, First Deputy Managing Director of the IMF, could you kindly also share some insight into the key topics discussed? What were the main points of their exchange, particularly in regard to economic and financial cooperation?

    MS. KOZACK: Any other questions on Senegal Online? Does anyone want to come in on Senegal?

    QUESTIONER: I have a follow-up because investors have been expecting the Board to consider the waiver by September. Is that timeline realistic? And the government also said it shared everything in its findings for reconciliation with the IMF. Does the Fund feel it has everything it needs in order to make the decision on the waiver?

    QUESTIONER: Have you received the report done by Mazars? And, is it enough to conclude the misreporting, and can we have maybe a time for the Board? And then, when can we expect also a new program?

    MS. KOZACK: So, let me turn to these questions.
    I’ll start by saying that the IMF remains closely engaged with Senegal. And as part of this process, as was noted, First Deputy Managing Director Gita Gopinath met with President Bassirou Faye during his visit to Washington, D.C. on July 9th. Our First Deputy Managing Director (FDMD), Gopinath, emphasized the IMF’s continued support, as Senegal works to resolve the misreporting matter. And the President reaffirmed his government’s strong commitment to transparency and reform.

    What I can also share is that an IMF Staff team will visit Dakar. The mission is tentatively planned for later in August. The purpose of the mission is going to be to discuss the steps needed to bring the misreporting case to our Executive Board. And the team will also use the opportunity to initiate discussions on the contours of a new IMF-supported program for Senegal. We are also working closely with the authorities to design the corrective actions aimed at addressing the root causes of the misreporting and, of course, to strengthen capacity development in Senegal.

    With respect to the questions on the report by Mazars, what I can share there is that we have received a preliminary debt inventory that has been prepared by Forvis Mazars. Our IMF Staff are currently reviewing that report and all the information in detail. The preliminary assessment in the report is broadly aligned with expectations, and the final validation is ongoing. And I will leave it at that on Senegal. That is what I can share for now.

    QUESTIONER: My question is on Japan. Last week, the upper house election in Japan was over, but still unclear on the composition of a new government. And what is it you are recommending? But almost all parties pledged fiscal — expansionary fiscal policies, from providing cash to reduction of consumption tax. And what is your recommendation to the new government, especially on fiscal policy, given the power of debt in Japan? And my second question is on monetary policy of Federal Reserve next week. And should the Federal Reserve cut interest rates preemptively under the circumstance of huge pressure from President Donald Trump.

    MS. KOZACK: Let us start with Japan. So maybe let me just step back a little bit to give an overview of how we assessed the Japanese economy in our April WEO.
    So, at that time, we expected growth to strengthen in Japan, and we expected inflation to converge to the Bank of Japan’s 2 percent target by 2027. Growth was projected to accelerate from 0.2 percent in 2024 to 0.6 percent this year. At the same time, and as has been the case for quite some time, Japan continues to have high levels of public debt. And because of that, our advice for Japan is for a clear fiscal consolidation plan to offset pressures from rising interest payments and also from aging-related spending. And because of this advice, we assess that Japan has limited fiscal space, again because of high public debt and these future spending needs.

    In the near term, our advice to Japan is that given this limited fiscal space, it is essential that any response to shocks, any fiscal response to shocks, is both temporary and also targeted. And by targeted, I mean targeted toward vulnerable households and firms that may be most affected by shocks. Generalized subsidies and tax cuts, in our view, should be avoided. And that is because they are not targeted to the most vulnerable, and they are not an efficient use of Japan’s limited fiscal space.

    And then, on your second question, what I can say about the U.S. economy is that the U.S. economy has proven to be resilient in the past few years. It is something that we have been talking about for quite some time. But we do see high-frequency data that indicate moderating domestic demand and low consumer and business sentiment in the U.S. In addition, and as we mentioned before, there was a strong front-loading of imports into the U.S. in the first quarter. And that, in anticipation of tariffs, and that led to an important drag on growth in the first quarter. At the same time, in the U.S., labor markets remain resilient, and the unemployment rate remains relatively low.

    With respect to inflation, we do see inflation on a path towards the Fed’s 2 percent target, but it is subject to upside risks. And that means that the Fed’s task is complex given the very highly uncertain economic environment. So the Fed will need to take into account both policies undertaken by the U.S. administration, as well as incoming data in, and of course, data on potential wage pressures as it comes to thinking about, you know, the extent of rate decisions and the timing of any rate decisions going forward.

    QUESTIONER: On Argentina, can the IMF confirm that there was a meeting on Tuesday between the Board and Staff regarding the first program review? And I know you said you wouldn’t be able to divulge much details, but I’m going to ask it anyway. When should you expect Argentina’s $2 billion disbursement?

    MS. KOZACK: So, on the first question, all I can say on this is that it’s not unusual for IMF Staff to informally brief the Executive Board on a broad range of issues. And on the timing of the disbursement, as I already indicated, we will provide more information on the timing for a formal Board meeting only once a Staff-Level Agreement has been reached. And that formal Board meeting would indicate the time when any disbursement would be made available to the Argentine authorities.

    QUESTIONER: First, let me say on behalf of my colleague from the U.S., around the world, as well as in Africa, to say thank you to Gita for everything that she has done. Our engagements with African journalists, especially. So that’s part of what I wanted to say, thank you to her. I know she’s leaving.
    And my question now goes to if you can provide updates on African nations. And I have two specific questions, one on Malawi and one on South Africa. The recent reports on Malawi said the country is facing macroeconomic challenges. I know in 2020 they received the completed HIPC program. Could you provide any updates on whether the country has reached out for any assistance regarding HIPC? Whether they qualify for another Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPC) program to help them? We know in the past year, they’ve experienced floods, droughts, and natural issues that have affected the economy. I was wondering if the IMF is providing any assistance to them.
    The other question is on South Africa. We see growing tension between South Africa and the U.S. So, can you talk about if there’s any economic implication? South Africa is the largest economic in. Africa is also seen as a gateway to the continent. What are the macroeconomic issues, implications for the South African Development Community region (SADC), and also for the continent as a whole?

    MS. KOZACK: With respect to Malawi, what I can say is we completed the Article IV Consultation with Malawi just yesterday, July 22nd, 2025, or two days ago. So that was the 2025 Article IV Consultation that has been completed. And of course, there will be a lot of rich discussion of the state of the Malawian economy in that report. With respect to your more specific question on HIPC, what I can say is that Malawi completed the HIPC process in 2006. And at that time, Malawi secured U.S. $3.1 billion of debt relief through the HIPC Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative or otherwise known as MDRI. Since 2006, our assessment is that public debt in Malawi has returned to unsustainable levels. Total public debt is reached 88 percent of GDP at the end of 2024. And the interest bill on public debt is estimated to approach about 7 percent of GDP, which is quite high.

    We continue to urge the authorities to take decisive steps to restore public debt sustainability. Completing an external debt Restructuring and addressing the high cost of domestic borrowing are both essential to do this. And of course, strengthening public debt management and securing concessional financing will also be critical. So again, Malawi already completed the HIPC process in 2006.

    And then, on South Africa. What I can say about South Africa, I can talk a bit about how we see the outlook for South Africa, the economic outlook. So right now, based on the April WEO, we see the current economic outlook for South Africa as subdued. We projected growth in April at 1 percent for this year and 1.3 percent for next year. Uncertainty, including related to global trade policies, is weighing on activity in South Africa. And that it’s causing firms and households to delay their investment decisions and also consumption decisions.

    And I would also refer you to the April REO, Regional Economic Outlook, for Africa, and that includes some estimates on the impact of uncertainty and financial conditions on the Sub-Saharan Africa region.
    And finally, we of course continue to assess developments in South Africa, and we’ll be providing an update in the July WEO.

    QUESTIONER: I just had two follow-up questions. One was on your comments about the Fed. As you know, the tension between the Trump administration and the Fed, particularly Chair Powell, has been increasing lately. The President is going to go tour the Fed building that’s being renovated. It is a subject of controversy. Given that the IMF has been a stalwart defender of Central Bank independence, should any of this lead to Chair Powell’s replacement or his resignation? Just wondering, what kind of signal that would send to financial markets, to other countries, what kind of precedent would that set? And secondly, regarding First Deputy Managing Director Gopinath’s departure, can you walk us through the process for choosing a replacement for her?
    Traditionally, this has been a position that the U.S. has had a very strong hand in choosing. It has typically been an American. Do you expect the U.S. Treasury Department, for example, to basically recommend a candidate to the Managing Director?

    MS. KOZACK: On your first question for quite some time, the IMF has consistently advocated for Central Bank independence. And we’ve said it’s critical to ensuring that Central Banks are able to achieve their mandated objectives, such as low and stable inflation. And as we have seen through the disinflation process that has been taking place over the last few years, the credibility of Central Banks around the world has been instrumental in anchoring inflation expectations and in bringing down inflation across, you know, across the world. And across many countries in the world. And it is also important that independence, of course, it must coexist with clear accountability to the public.
    And on the question about the process, on Gita Gopinath’s decision to return to Harvard, maybe just to step back to say that on July 21st, you know, the Managing Director announced that Gita Gopinath, our First Deputy Managing Director, would be leaving the Fund at the end of August to return to Harvard University. She will be the inaugural Gregory and Ania Coffey Professor of Economics in the Department of Economics.

    And for your background, Ms. Gopinath joined the Fund in January 2019 as the first female Chief Economist of the Fund. And she was promoted to First Deputy Managing Director in January of 2022. I can add that this was a personal decision for Ms. Gopinath. She will return to her roots in academia, where she will continue to push the research frontier in international finance and macroeconomics. And she will also be training the next generation of economists.
    With respect to the selection of process and how the process works, the Managing Director selects and appoints the First Managing Director and the three Deputy Managing Directors of the Fund. The appointment is subject to approval by the Fund’s Executive Board. And in making the selection, the Managing Director consults with the Executive Board regarding the type of qualifications that, in the view of the Executive Board, a First Deputy Managing Director or a Deputy Managing Director should possess.

    QUESTIONER: My first question is regarding Sri Lanka. When can we expect the next review for the IMF-supported program? And secondly, given the uncertainties and risks that are currently opposing the economy for Sri Lanka, is there any decision or any exploration by the IMF to revisit some of the targets that have been implemented in the program that was given to Sri Lanka?

    QUESTIONER: I would like to know that now Sri Lanka has already finished four reviews, and now we are heading for the fifth one. What is the overall view of the IMF? That Sri Lanka’s performance, how we perform during these four reviews? And what are the expectations for the next review in brief? Thank you very much.

    MS. KOZACK: I have a question here that came in through the Press center on Sri Lanka. The question is what is the status of the IMF review of Sri Lanka’s program, an assessment of the macroeconomic outlook as well as the status of the review of the current mission that is visiting Sri Lanka. So, let me go ahead and take these. So, stepping back, on July 1st, the IMF’s Executive Board completed the Fourth Review under the EFF arrangement with Sri Lanka. This provided the country with U.S. $350 million to support its economic policies and reforms, and it brought total IMF financial support to U.S. $1.74 billion.

    What I can add is that Sri Lanka’s ambitious reform agenda continues to deliver commendable outcomes. Inflation remains low, revenue collection is improving and reserves, international reserves, continue to accumulate for the country. The post-crisis growth rebound to 5 percent in 2024 is quite remarkable. The revenue-to-GDP ratio improved from 8.2 percent in 2022 to 13.5 percent in 2024. The debt restructuring is nearly complete. And program performance has been generally strong overall, and the government remains committed to program objectives.

    What I can also add is that although the economic outlook remains positive for Sri Lanka, global trade policy and uncertainties do pose risks. And so, as the team moves forward to the Fifth Review, which we expect will be held in the fall, they will, of course, be looking at the overall and making an overall assessment of Sri Lanka’s economy. You know, including any implications from trade tensions or uncertainty. And of course, that will be — they will take that into account in discussions with the authorities on policies, and all of the program matters as part of the Fifth Review.

    QUESTIONER: Hi Julie. Thank you for taking my question. I have two questions, one on Syria and one on Egypt. So today there was the Saudi Syrian Investment Forum in Damascus, and it was said that in addition to the Saudi investments in support that there will be some global support on this. And the IFC was mentioned as well. So, what’s the IMF’s call on this, given that we have one of the G20 countries pledging this huge amount of investments in support? And how will the IMF contribute in this? That’s on Syria.

    And on Egypt, a few weeks ago in our press briefing here, it was mentioned that the two reviews, the Fifth and the Sixth, will be done together in the fall. Can we say that this is going to be in fall after the Annual Meeting, after the WEO report is published for the — for the region and for the global? And what, what is the main factor that we’re looking at here that would ultimately change the way it’s viewed, how Egypt’s economy is viewed in light of all the recent developments?

    MS. KOZACK: On Syria, what I can say is, and as we discussed here before, an IMF staff team did visit Syria from June 1st through 5th, and that was the first visit since 2009. The team was there to assess economic and financial conditions in Syria and to discuss with the authorities their economic policy and capacity building priorities, ultimately to support the recovery of the Syrian economy. With your specific question, what I can say there is that we have mentioned that Syria will need substantial international assistance to support the authorities’ efforts to rehabilitate the economy, meet urgent humanitarian needs, and rebuild essential institutions and infrastructure. And this not only includes concessional financial support, but it also extends to capacity development. And here, the IMF is committed to supporting Syria in its recovery efforts. The IMF Staff is working in coordination with other partners to develop a detailed roadmap for policy and capacity building priorities for some of the key economic institutions. So that’s kind of within our mandate, and that includes the Finance Ministry, the Central Bank, and the Statistics Agency.

    With respect to Egypt, what I can say on Egypt is that the IMF Staff conducted a mission to Cairo in May 2025. The mission noted continued progress under Egypt’s macroeconomic reform program, including improvements in inflation and foreign exchange reserves. However, additional time was needed to finalize key policy measures, particularly those related to reducing the state’s footprint in the economy by advancing the implementation of the state ownership policy and leveling the playing field for businesses. To allow for this continued work, the Fifth and Sixth Reviews under the EFF will be combined, and they are expected to be completed in the fall. Our team remains committed to supporting Egypt in advancing reforms to strengthen resilience and foster inclusive and private sector led growth.

    MS. KOZACK: Coming back to the Press Center, I have a question that has come in on Ghana. It says Ghana’s Finance Minister is presenting the mid-year budget today, following a first half marked by notable improvements in key economic indicators. However, concerns are rising about potential new fiscal slippages, and that could undermine gains in inflation control, currency stability, and overall recovery. Does the IMF share these concerns? And second question, what is your view on the role of monetary policy at this point, especially as the Bank of Ghana prepares to review its policy stance?

    Again, stepping back, on July 7th, the IMF’s Executive Board completed the Fourth Review of Ghana’s ECF arrangement. And after Board approval, Ghana received about U.S. $367 million, bringing total support to around U.S. $2.3 billion since May 2023.
    With respect to the budget here, I can say that the IMF has welcomed the government’s corrective actions, including a strong 2025 budget and an audit of payables to quantify and address the pre-election fiscal slippages. The authorities have recently implemented changes to their public financial management and public procurement acts, and this helps improve the overall fiscal responsibility framework in Ghana. And the authorities have also adopted a strategy to address issues in the energy sector. I can add that the mid-year budget review is fully in line with the parameters and objectives of the IMF-supported program.

    And with respect to the question on monetary policy, what I can say is that Ghana has made good progress since the beginning of the program in reducing inflation. Inflation was extremely high at the end of 2022 at 54 percent. It has now come down substantially to 14 percent at end June 2025. Going forward, it will be important for monetary policy to remain sufficiently tight, consistent with bringing inflation down to the Bank of Ghana’s target range, which is 8 percent plus or minus 2 percentage points.

    QUESTIONER: I’m going to ask about digital assets. One very specifically. There’s this controversy with El Salvador that is going around and around, but the government says they’re still buying Bitcoin, and it seems that the IMF is saying they are just moving things around between wallets. And I wanted you to address that. Also, with the passage here in the U.S. of the GENIUS Act, I guess, what does the IMF, what do they think the impacts of this sort of increasing legitimization of digital assets in the U.S. is going to be in terms of other economies, in terms of the ability to implement monetary policy? I just wonder if you have any comment on that. Thank you very much for taking the question.

    QUESTIONER: I have a question, specifically on El Salvador. How does the IMF assess the country’s continued Bitcoin accumulation in the context of the fiscal and transparency standards embedded in the Extended Fund Facility, the $1.4 billion program that was agreed last December? To what extent could this strategy complicate monitoring or risk management of this program?

    MS. KOZACK: So, on El Salvador, I’ll start with El Salvador and then Matthew, I’ll get to your question on the GENIUS Act. So again, stepping back. So, on June 27th, the IMF Executive Board completed El Salvador’s annual Article IV Consultation and concluded the First Review of the EFF that enabled El Salvador to have access to U.S. $118 million. And so far, $231 million has been disbursed under the EFF program that was approved in February.
    Program performance has been solid in El Salvador. The economy has continued to expand as macroeconomic imbalances are being addressed. The key fiscal and reserve targets were met at the time of the review with margins. And substantial progress continues with the ambitious reform agenda in the areas of governance, transparency, and financial resilience.
    And risks from Bitcoin continue to be mitigated. Regarding the questions on Bitcoin, I don’t have much new to say other than as we have stated in the past, the total amount of Bitcoin held across government-owned wallets remains unchanged, and that is consistent with El Salvador’s program commitments. The accumulation of Bitcoin by the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund is consistent with program conditionality. And the increases in the Bitcoin Reserve Fund relate to movements across various government-owned wallets.
    And on your second question on the GENIUS Act, let me get to this one. Let me just step back for a moment, and then I’ll kind of come directly to the GENIUS Act.

    So, first, the GENIUS Act covers stablecoins, and stablecoins are a key type of privately issued crypto asset that aims to maintain a stable value. They do bring potential benefits, including cheaper and faster cross-border payments, increased financial inclusion, and greater portfolio diversification. So those are some of the potential benefits. There are operational risks, of course, associated with stablecoins if they are not properly regulated under an appropriate policy framework.

    Now, turning to the GENIUS Act. The GENIUS Act provides a comprehensive foundation for financial innovation and deepening. And that is balanced with consideration of consumer protection and market integrity goals and a clear identification of the institutional framework for oversight.
    Now, with respect to the kind of implications of the GENIUS Act, we, of course, are continuing to very actively monitor developments of stablecoins. We are assessing the potential implications of the GENIUS Act. And for us at the IMF, what is going to be especially important are going to be the implications for the international monetary system and the potential for spillovers to other jurisdictions. So that’s work that is ongoing, and our teams are making those assessments at this time.

    QUESTIONER: Any update on UAE economy outlook for GCC region and oil economy in general?

    MS. KOZACK: What I can share on UAE and the GCC in general, and I’ll be — and, of course, next week as part of the WEO update, we will, of course, be providing an update for the GCC region.
    So, starting with the UAE. Near-term growth in the UAE has been strong, and it is expected to remain healthy at over 4 percent in 2025. That was the assessment at the time of the April WEO. What we are seeing is robust growth in the non-hydrocarbon activity, and it is boosted by tourism, construction, public expenditure, and financial services. So those are the drivers of growth. Oil production is also increasing faster than expected, given the reversal of oil production cuts. And the UAE economy has demonstrated resilience to lower oil prices and increased oil price volatility this year.

    Now, turning to the GCC, what I can say for the GCC is that despite oil production cuts, GCC growth is estimated to have rebounded to 1.4 percent in 2024. And our projection at the time of the April WEO was that it will increase further to 3.3 percent in 2025. Non-hydrocarbon output growth is expected to remain strong, supported by rapid investment, construction, and accelerated reforms to diversify the GCC economies.
    Inflation remains low in the GCC, and our policy advice is for fiscal policy to remain prudent while strengthening fiscal reform implementation. And of course, we encourage policymakers in the region to continue reforms to support economic diversification. And as I noted, we will be providing an update of this assessment as part of the WEO update.
    And with that, I’m going to bring this Press Briefing to a close. Thank you all for your participation today.

    As a reminder, this briefing is embargoed until 11:00 A.M. Eastern Time in the United States. A transcript will be made available later on our website, IMF.org. Should you have any clarifications or additional queries, please do reach out to my colleagues via media@imf.org.

    This concludes our Press Briefing. I wish everyone a wonderful day, and I look forward to seeing you all next time.

    IMF Communications Department
    MEDIA RELATIONS

    PRESS OFFICER: Meera Louis

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

    MIL OSI Economics

  • MIL-OSI: Heritage Commerce Corp Reports Second Quarter and First Six Months of 2025 Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    SAN JOSE, Calif., July 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Heritage Commerce Corp (Nasdaq: HTBK), (the “Company”), the holding company for Heritage Bank of Commerce (the “Bank”) today announced its financial results for the second quarter and six months ended June 30, 2025. All data are unaudited.

    REPORTED SECOND QUARTER 2025 HIGHLIGHTS:
               
    Net Income Earnings Per Share Pre-Provision Net Revenue
    (“PPNR”)
    (1)
    Fully Tax Equivalent
    (“FTE”) Net Interest
    Margin
    (1)
    Efficiency Ratio(1) Tangible Book Value Per
    Share
    (1)
               
    $6.4 million $0.10 $9.4 million 3.54 % 80.23 % $8.49
               
    ADJUSTED SECOND QUARTER 2025 HIGHLIGHTS:(1)
          
               
    Net Income Earnings Per Share PPNR(1) FTE Net Interest Margin(1) Efficiency Ratio(1) Tangible Book Value Per
    Share
    (1)
               
               
    $13.0 million $0.21 $18.6 million 3.54 % 61.01 % $8.59
               

    CEO COMMENTARY:
    “We executed well in the second quarter, generating a higher level of net income and earnings per share, excluding significant charges primarily related to a legal settlement,” said Clay Jones, President and Chief Executive Officer. “We had positive trends in loan growth, an expansion in our net interest margin, and stable asset quality, while deposits declined due to seasonal outflows that we typically see in the second quarter. Our loan growth was well diversified across our portfolios. We continue to successfully add new clients by offering a superior banking experience and generate loan growth while maintaining our disciplined underwriting and pricing criteria.”

    “We have a strong balance sheet with a high level of capital and liquidity and healthy asset quality, which provides a strong foundation to weather periods of economic volatility. We are well positioned to navigate the current environment and expect to see positive trends in loan growth, the net interest margin, and expense management,” said Mr. Jones.

       
    LINKED-QUARTER BASIS YEAR-OVER-YEAR

    FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS:

      • Total revenue of $47.8 million, an increase of 4%, or $1.7 million
    • Noninterest expense of $38.3 million includes an accrual of $9.2 million for pre-tax charges primarily related to a legal settlement
    • Reported net income of $6.4 million and earnings per share of $0.10, down 45% and 47%, from $11.6 million and $0.19, respectively
    • Adjusted net income(1) of $13.0 million and adjusted earnings per share(1) of $0.21, both metrics up 11% from $11.6 million and $0.19, respectively
      • Total revenue of $47.8 million, an increase of 15%, or $6.1 million
    • Noninterest expense of $38.3 million includes an accrual of $9.2 million for pre-tax charges primarily related to a legal settlement
    • Reported net income of $6.4 million and earnings per share of $0.10, down 31% and 33%, from $9.2 million and $0.15, respectively
    • Adjusted net income(1) of $13.0 million and adjusted earnings per share(1) of $0.21, both metrics up 40% from $9.2 million and $0.15, respectively

    FINANCIAL CONDITION:

      • Loans held-for-investment (“HFI”) of $3.5 billion, up $47.4 million or 1%
    • Total deposits of $4.6 billion, down $55.9 million, or 1%
    • Loan to deposit ratio of 76.38%, up from 74.45%
    • Total shareholders’ equity of $694.7 million, down $1.5 million
      • Increase in loans HFI of $154.5 million, or 5%

    • Increase in total deposits of $182.7 million, or 4%       
    • Loan to deposit ratio of 76.38%, up from 76.04%
    • Increase in total shareholders’ equity of $15.5 million

    CREDIT QUALITY:

      • Nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) to total assets of 0.11% for both quarters
    • NPAs to total assets of 0.11% for both quarters
      • Classified assets to total assets of 0.69%, compared to 0.73%
    • Classified assets to total assets of 0.69%, compared to 0.64%

    KEY PERFORMANCE METRICS:

      • FTE net interest margin(1) of 3.54%, an increase from 3.39%
    • Common equity tier 1 capital ratio of 13.3%, compared to 13.6%
    • Total capital ratio of 15.5%, compared to 15.9%
    • Tangible common equity ratio(1) of 9.85%, an increase of 1% from 9.78%
      • FTE net interest margin(1) of 3.54%, an increase from 3.26%
    • Common equity tier 1 capital ratio of 13.3%, compared to 13.4%
    • Total capital ratio of 15.5%, compared to 15.6%
    • Tangible common equity ratio(1) of 9.85%, a decrease of 1% from 9.91%

    (1)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release. All references to “adjusted” operating metrics exclude the $9.2 million of charges primarily related to a legal settlement in the second quarter and first six months of 2025 as presented in the reconciliation of non-GAAP financial measures at the end of this press release.

    Results of Operations:

    Reported net income was $6.4 million, or $0.10 per average diluted common share, for the second quarter of 2025. Adjusted net income(2) was $13.0 million, or $0.21 per average diluted common share, for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $11.6 million, or $0.19 per average diluted common share, for the first quarter of 2025, and $9.2 million, or $0.15 per average diluted common share, for the second quarter of 2024. The annualized return on average assets was 0.47% and annualized return on average equity was 3.68% for the second quarter of 2025, compared to 0.85% and 6.81%, respectively, for the first quarter of 2025, and 0.71% and 5.50%, respectively, for the second quarter of 2024. The adjusted annualized return on average assets(2) was 0.95% and adjusted annualized return on average tangible common equity(2) was 9.92% for the second quarter of 2025, compared to 0.85% and 9.09%, respectively, for the first quarter ended of 2025, and 0.71% and 7.43%, respectively, for the second quarter of 2024.

    Reported net income was $18.0 million, or $0.29 per average diluted common share, for the first six months of 2025. Adjusted net income(2) was $24.6 million, or $0.40 per average diluted common share, for the first six months of 2025, compared to $19.4 million, or $0.32 per average diluted common share, for the first six months of 2024. The annualized return on average assets was 0.66% and annualized return on average equity was 5.23% for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 0.75% and 5.79%, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The adjusted annualized return on average assets(2) was 0.90% and annualized return on average tangible common equity(2) was 9.51% for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to 0.75% and 7.84%, respectively, for the six months ended June 30, 2024.

    Total revenue, which is defined as net interest income before provision for credit losses on loans plus noninterest income, increased $1.7 million, or 4%, to $47.8 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $46.1 million for the first quarter of 2025, and increased $6.1 million, or 15%, from $41.7 million for the second quarter of 2024. Total revenue increased $9.9 million, or 12%, to $93.8 million for the first six months of 2025, compared to $83.9 million for the first six months of 2024.

    For the second quarter and first six months of 2025, the Company’s reported PPNR(2), which is defined as total revenue less adjusted noninterest expense(2) was $9.4 million and $26.0 million, respectively. The adjusted PPNR(2) was $18.6 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $16.6 million for the first quarter of 2025, and $13.5 million for the second quarter of 2024. For the six months of 2025, the Company’s adjusted PPNR(2) was $35.2 million, compared to $28.1 million for the six months of 2024.

    Net interest income totaled $44.8 million for the second quarter of 2025, an increase of $1.4 million, or 3%, compared to $43.4 million for the first quarter of 2025. The FTE net interest margin(2) was 3.54% for the second quarter of 2025, an increase over 3.39% for the first quarter of 2025 primarily due to an increase in the average yields and average balances of loans and securities, partially offset by a decrease in the average balances of deposits resulting in a lower average balance of overnight funds.

    Net interest income increased $5.9 million, or 15%, to $44.8 million, compared to $38.9 million for the second quarter of 2024. The FTE net interest margin(2) increased from 3.23% for the second quarter of 2024 primarily due to lower rates paid on customer deposits, an increase in the average yields and average balances of loans and securities, and an increase in the average balance of deposits resulting in a higher average balance of overnight funds, partially offset by a lower average yield on overnight funds.

    For the first six months of 2025, net interest income increased $9.8 million, or 12% to $88.2 million, compared to $78.4 million for the first six months of 2024. The FTE net interest margin(2) increased 20 basis points to 3.47% for the first six months of 2025, from 3.27% for the first six months of 2024, primarily due to an increase in the average balances of average interest earning assets, and an increase in the average yields on loans and securities, partially offset by higher rates paid on client deposits and a lower yield on overnight funds.

    We recorded a provision for credit losses on loans of $516,000 for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $274,000 for the first quarter of 2025, and $471,000 for the second quarter of 2024. There was a provision for credit losses on loans of $790,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2025, compared to $655,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The increase in the provision for credit losses on loans for the second quarter and first six months of 2025 was primarily due to loan growth.

    Total noninterest income increased to $3.0 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $2.7 million for the first quarter of 2025, and $2.9 million for the second quarter of 2024, primarily due to higher termination and facility fees. The increase in noninterest income in the second quarter of 2025 was partially offset by a $219,000 gain on proceeds from company-owned life insurance in the second quarter of 2024.

    Total noninterest income increased 3% to $5.7 million for the first six months of 2025, compared to $5.5 million for the first six months of 2024, primarily due to higher termination and facility fees, partially offset by a $219,000 gain on proceeds from company-owned life insurance in the first six months of 2024.

    (2)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.

    Reported noninterest expense for the second quarter of 2025 and first six months of 2025 totaled $38.3 million and $67.8 million, respectively. During the second quarter of 2025, the Company recorded expenses of $9.2 million, primarily due to pre-tax charges related to the settlement of certain litigation matters, including the anticipated settlement of a previously disclosed class action and California Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) lawsuit that alleged the violation of certain California wage-and-hour and related laws and regulations, and charges related to the planned closure of a Bank branch. Adjusted noninterest expense(3) was $29.1 million, compared to $29.5 million for the first quarter of 2025, and $28.2 million for the second quarter of 2024. Adjusted noninterest expense(3) for the first six months of 2025 was $58.6 million, compared to $55.7 million for the first six months of 2024.

    Income tax expense decreased to $2.5 million for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $4.7 million for the first quarter of 2025, and $3.8 million for the second quarter of 2024, primarily due to lower pre-tax income. The effective tax rate for the second quarter of 2025 was 28.5%, compared to 28.8% for the first quarter of 2025, and 29.4% for the second quarter of 2024.

    Income tax expense for the six months ended June 30, 2025 was $7.2 million, compared to $8.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2024. The effective tax rate for six months ended June 30, 2025 was 28.7%, compared to 29.4% for the six months ended June 30, 2024.

    The reported efficiency ratio(3) for the second quarter and first six month of 2025 was 80.23% and 72.24%, respectively. The adjusted efficiency ratio(3) improved to 61.01% for the second quarter of 2025, compared to 63.96% for the first quarter of 2025, as a result of higher total revenue. The adjusted efficiency ratio(3) improved from 67.55% for the second quarter of 2024, primarily due to higher total revenue, partially offset by higher noninterest expense. The adjusted efficiency ratio(3) improved to 62.45% for the first six months of 2025 from 66.44% for the first six months of 2024, primarily due to higher total revenue, partially offset by higher noninterest expense.

    Full time equivalent employees were 350 at both June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, and 353 at June 30, 2024.

    Financial Condition and Capital Management:

    Total assets remained relatively flat at $5.5 billion at both June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025. Total assets increased 4% from $5.3 billion at June 30, 2024, primarily due to an increase in deposits resulting in an increase in overnight funds, and an increase in loans.  

    Investment securities available-for-sale (at fair value) decreased to $307.0 million at June 30, 2025, compared to $371.0 million at March 31, 2025, primarily due to maturities and paydowns, partially offset by purchases. Investment securities available-for-sale totaled $273.0 million at June 30, 2024. The pre-tax unrealized loss on the securities available-for-sale portfolio was $448,000, or $396,000 net of taxes, which equaled less than 1% of total shareholders’ equity at June 30, 2025.

    During the first six months of 2025, the Company purchased $87.2 million of agency mortgage-backed securities, $79.8 million of collateralized mortgage obligations, and $44.8 million of U.S. Treasury securities, for total purchases of $211.8 million in the available-for-sale portfolio. Securities purchased had a book yield of 4.82% and an average life of 4.55 years.

    Investment securities held-to-maturity (at amortized cost, net of allowance for credit losses of ($16,000), totaled $561.2 million at June 30, 2025, compared to $576.7 million at March 31, 2025, and $621.2 million at June 30, 2024. The fair value of the securities held-to-maturity portfolio was $486.5 million at June 30, 2025. The pre-tax unrecognized loss on the securities held-to-maturity portfolio was $74.7 million, or $52.7 million net of taxes, which equaled 7.6% of total shareholders’ equity at June 30, 2025.

    The unrealized and unrecognized losses in both the available-for-sale and held-to-maturity portfolios were due to higher interest rates at June 30, 2025 compared to when the securities were purchased. The issuers are of high credit quality and all principal amounts are expected to be repaid when the securities mature. The fair value is expected to recover as the securities approach their maturity date and/or market rates decline.

    Loans HFI, net of deferred costs and fees, increased $47.4 million, or 1% to $3.5 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $3.5 billion at March 31, 2025, and increased $154.5 million, or 5%, from $3.4 billion at June 30, 2024. Loans HFI, excluding residential mortgages, increased $58.3 million, or 2% to $3.1 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $3.0 billion at March 31, 2025, and increased $184.9 million, or 6%, from $2.9 billion at June 30, 2024.

    Commercial and industrial line utilization was 32% at June 30, 2025, compared to 31% at both March 31, 2025, and June 30, 2024. Commercial real estate (“CRE”) loans totaled $2.0 billion at June 30, 2025, of which 31% were owner occupied and 31% were investor CRE loans. Owner occupied CRE loans totaled 31% at March 31, 2025 and 32% at June 30, 2024. Approximately 24% of the Company’s loan portfolio consisted of floating interest rate loans at both June 30, 2025 and March 31, 2025, compared to 27% at June 30, 2024.

    At June 30, 2025, paydowns and maturities of investment securities and fixed interest rate loans maturing within one year totaled $311.0 million.

    (3)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.

    Total deposits decreased $55.9 million, or 1%, to $4.6 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $4.7 billion at March 31, 2025, primarily due to season outflows. Total deposits increased $182.7 million, or 4% from $4.4 billion at June 30, 2024.

    The following table shows the Company’s deposit types as a percentage of total deposits at the dates indicated:

                       
        June 30,      March 31,     June 30,   
    DEPOSITS TYPE % TO TOTAL DEPOSITS      2025         2025         2024  
    Demand, noninterest-bearing   25 %     24 %     27 %  
    Demand, interest-bearing   21 %     20 %     21 %  
    Savings and money market   28 %     29 %     25 %  
    Time deposits — under $250   1 %     1 %     1 %  
    Time deposits — $250 and over   4 %     5 %     4 %  
    Insured Cash Sweep (“ICS”)/Certificate of Deposit Registry                  
    Service (“CDARS”) – interest-bearing demand, money                  
    market and time deposits   21 %     21 %     22 %  
    Total deposits   100 %     100 %     100 %  

    The loan to deposit ratio was 76.38% at June 30, 2025, compared to 74.45% at March 31, 2025, and 76.04% at June 30, 2024.

    The Company’s total available liquidity and borrowing capacity was $3.1 billion at June 30, 2025, compared to $3.2 billion at March 31, 2025, and $3.0 billion at June 30, 2024.

    Total shareholders’ equity was $694.7 million at June 30, 2025, compared to $696.2 million at March 31, 2025, and $679.2 million at June 30, 2024. The change in shareholders’ equity at June 30, 2025 is primarily a function of net income and the decrease in the total accumulated other comprehensive loss, partially offset by dividends to stockholders.

    Total accumulated other comprehensive loss of $5.0 million at June 30, 2025 was comprised of $2.5 million in actuarial losses associated with split dollar insurance contracts, $2.2 million in actuarial losses associated with the supplemental executive retirement plan, unrealized losses on securities available-for-sale of $396,000, and a $42,000 unrealized gain on interest-only strip from SBA loans.

    The Company’s consolidated capital ratios exceeded regulatory guidelines and the Bank’s capital ratios exceeded regulatory guidelines under the prompt corrective action (“PCA”) regulatory guidelines for a well-capitalized financial institution, and the Basel III minimum regulatory requirements at June 30, 2025.

    Reported tangible book value per share(4) was $8.49 at June 30, 2025. Adjusted tangible book value per share(4) was $8.59 at June 30, 2025, compared to $8.48 at March 31, 2025, and $8.22 at June 30, 2024.

    The Company is authorized to repurchase up to $15.0 million of the Company’s shares of its issued and outstanding common stock under its share repurchase program authorized by the Board of Directors in July 2024. During the second quarter of 2025, the Company repurchased 207,989 shares of its common stock with a weighted average price of $9.19 for a total of $1.9 million. The remaining capacity under this share repurchase program was $13.1 million at June 30, 2025. In July 2025, the Company’s Board of Directors extended the program for one year, expiring on July 31, 2026.

    Credit Quality:
    The provision for credit losses on loans totaled $516,000 for the second quarter of 2025, compared to a $274,000 provision for credit losses on loans for the first quarter of 2025 and a provision for credit losses on loans of $471,000 for the second quarter of 2024. Net charge-offs totaled $145,000 for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $965,000 for the first quarter of 2025, and $405,000 for the second quarter of 2024. 

    The provision for credit losses on loans totaled $790,000 for the first six months of 2025, compared to a $655,000 provision for credit losses on loans for the first six months of 2024. Net charge-offs totaled $1.1 million for the first six months of 2025, compared to $659,000 for the first six months of 2024. 

    The allowance for credit losses on loans (“ACLL”) at June 30, 2025 was $48.6 million, or 1.38% of total loans, representing 787% of total nonperforming loans. The ACLL at March 31, 2025 was $48.3 million, or 1.38% of total loans, representing 765% of total nonperforming loans. The ACLL at June 30, 2024 was $48.0 million, or 1.42% of total loans, representing 795% of total nonperforming loans. The reduction to the allowance for credit on losses on loans reflects our credit assessment and economic factors.

    NPAs were $6.2 million at June 30, 2025, compared to $6.3 million at March 31, 2025, and $6.0 million at June 30, 2024. There were no foreclosed assets on the balance sheet at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, or June 30, 2024. There were no Shared National Credits (“SNCs”) or material purchased participations included in NPAs or total loans at June 30, 2025, March 31, 2025, or June 30, 2024.

    Classified assets totaled $37.5 million, or 0.69% of total assets, at June 30, 2025, compared to $40.0 million, or 0.73% of total assets, at March 31, 2025, and $33.6 million, or 0.64% of total assets, at June 30, 2024.

    (4)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.

    Heritage Commerce Corp, a bank holding company established in October 1997, is the parent company of Heritage Bank of Commerce, established in 1994 and headquartered in San Jose, CA with full-service branches in Danville, Fremont, Gilroy, Hollister, Livermore, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Morgan Hill, Oakland, Palo Alto, Pleasanton, Redwood City, San Francisco, San Jose, San Mateo, San Rafael, and Walnut Creek. Heritage Bank of Commerce is an SBA Preferred Lender. Bay View Funding, a subsidiary of Heritage Bank of Commerce, is based in San Jose, CA and provides business-essential working capital factoring financing to various industries throughout the United States. For more information, please visit www.heritagecommercecorp.com. The contents of our website are not incorporated into, and do not form a part of, this release or of our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

    Reclassifications

    During the first quarter of 2025, we reclassified Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and Federal Reserve Bank (“FRB”) stock dividends from interest income to noninterest income and the related average asset balances were reclassified from interest earning assets to other assets on the “Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin” tables. The amounts for the prior periods were reclassified to conform to the current presentation. These reclassifications did not affect previously reported net income or shareholders’ equity.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Financial results are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and prevailing practices in the banking industry. However, certain non-GAAP performance measures and ratios are used by management to evaluate and measure the Company’s performance. These measures include “adjusted” operating metrics that have been adjusted to exclude notable expenses incurred in the second quarter as well as other performance measures and ratios adjusted for notable items. Management believes these non-GAAP financial measures enhance comparability between periods and in some instances are common in the banking industry. These non-GAAP financial measures should be supplemental to primary GAAP financial measures and should not be read in isolation or relied upon as a substitute for primary GAAP financial measures. A reconciliation of GAAP to non-GAAP financial measures is presented in the tables at the end of this press release under “Reconciliation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”

    Forward-Looking Statement Disclaimer

    Certain matters discussed in this press release constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Such forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain in that they reflect plans and expectations for future events. These statements may include, among other things, those relating to the Company’s future financial performance, plans and objectives regarding future events, expectations regarding changes in interest rates and market conditions, projected cash flows of our investment securities portfolio, the performance of our loan portfolio, loan growth, expenses, net interest margin, estimated net interest income resulting from a shift in interest rates, expectation of high credit quality issuers ability to repay, as well as statements relating to the anticipated effects on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations from expected developments or events. Any statements that reflect our belief about, confidence in, or expectations for future events, performance or condition should be considered forward-looking statements. Readers should not construe these statements as assurances of a given level of performance, nor as promises that we will take actions that we currently expect to take. All statements are subject to various risks and uncertainties, many of which are outside our control and some of which may fall outside our ability to predict or anticipate. Accordingly, our actual results may differ materially from our projected results, and we may take actions or experience events that we do not currently expect. Risks and uncertainties that could cause our financial performance to differ materially from our goals, plans, expectations and projections expressed in forward-looking statements include those set forth in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Item 1A of the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, and include: (i) cybersecurity risks that may affect us directly or may impact us indirectly by virtue of their effects on our clients, markets or vendors, including our ability to identify and address cybersecurity risks, including those posed by the increasing use of artificial intelligence (such as, but not limited to, ransomware, data security breaches, “denial of service” attacks, “hacking” and identity theft) affecting us, our clients, and our third-party vendors and service providers; (ii) events that affect our ability to attract, recruit, and retain qualified officers and other personnel to implement our strategic plan, and that enable current and future personnel to protect and develop our relationships with clients, and to promote our business, results of operations and growth prospects; (iii) media items and consumer confidence as those factors affect our clients’ confidence in the banking system generally and in our bank specifically; (iv) adequacy of our risk management framework, disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting; (v) the effects of recent wildfires affecting Southern California, which have affected certain clients and certain loans secured by mortgages in Los Angeles County, and which are affecting or may, in the future, affect other clients in those and other markets throughout California; (vi) market, geographic and sociopolitical factors that arise by virtue of the fact that we operate primarily in the general San Francisco Bay Area of Northern California; (vii) risks of geographic concentration of our client base, our loans, and the collateral securing our loans, as those clients and assets may be particularly subject to natural disasters and to events and conditions that directly or indirectly affect those regions, including the particular risks of natural disasters (including earthquakes, fires, and flooding) and other events that disproportionately affect that region; (viii) political events that have accompanied or that may in the future accompany or result from recent political changes, particularly including sociopolitical events and conditions that result from political conflicts and law enforcement activities that may adversely affect our markets or our clients; (ix) our ability to estimate accurately, and to establish adequate reserves against, the risk of loss associated with our loan and lease portfolios and our factoring business; (x) inflationary pressures and changes in the interest rate environment that reduce our margins and yields, the fair value of financial instruments or our level of loan originations, or increase the level of defaults, losses and prepayments on loans to clients, whether held in the portfolio or in the secondary market; (xi) factors that affect the value and liquidity of our investment portfolios, particularly the values of securities available-for-sale; (xii) factors that affect our liquidity and our ability to meet client demands for withdrawals from deposit accounts and undrawn lines of credit, including our cash on hand and the availability of funds from our own lines of credit; (xiii) increased capital requirements for our continual growth or as imposed by banking regulators, which may require us to raise capital at a time when capital is not available on favorable terms or at all; (xiv) the expense and uncertain resolution of litigation matters whether occurring in the ordinary course of business or otherwise, particularly including but not limited to the effects of recent and ongoing developments in California labor and employment laws, regulations and court decisions; (xv) operational issues stemming from, and/or capital spending necessitated by, the potential need to adapt to industry changes in information technology systems, on which we are highly dependent; and (xvi) our success in managing the risks involved in the foregoing factors.

    Member FDIC

    For additional information, email:
    InvestorRelations@herbank.com

                                                   
        For the Quarter Ended:   Percent Change From:     For the Six Months Ended:
    CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS      June 30,       March 31,       June 30,       March 31,       June 30,         June 30,       June 30,       Percent  
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   2025   2025   2024   2025     2024       2025   2024   Change  
    Interest income   $ 63,025   $ 61,832   $ 58,489   2   %   8   %   $ 124,857   $ 115,450   8   %
    Interest expense     18,220     18,472     19,622   (1 ) %   (7 ) %     36,692     37,080   (1 ) %
    Net interest income before provision                                              
    for credit losses on loans     44,805     43,360     38,867   3   %   15   %     88,165     78,370   12   %
    Provision for credit losses on loans     516     274     471   88   %   10   %     790     655   21   %
    Net interest income after provision                                              
    for credit losses on loans     44,289     43,086     38,396   3   %   15   %     87,375     77,715   12   %
    Noninterest income:                                                   
    Service charges and fees on deposit                                              
    accounts     929     892     891   4   %   4   %     1,821     1,768   3   %
    FHLB and FRB stock dividends     584     590     588   (1 ) %   (1 ) %     1,174     1,178      
    Increase in cash surrender value of                                              
    life insurance     548     538     521   2   %   5   %     1,086     1,039   5   %
    Termination fees     227     87     100   161   %   127   %     314     113   178   %
    Gain on sales of SBA loans     87     98     76   (11 ) %   14   %     185     254   (27 ) %
    Servicing income     61     82     90   (26 ) %   (32 ) %     143     180   (21 ) %
    Gain on proceeds from company-owned                                              
    life insurance             219   N/A   (100 ) %         219   (100 ) %
    Other     541     409     379   32   %   43   %     950     750   27   %
    Total noninterest income     2,977     2,696     2,864   10   %   4   %     5,673     5,501   3   %
    Noninterest expense:                                                   
    Salaries and employee benefits     16,227     16,575     15,794   (2 ) %   3   %     32,802     31,303   5   %
    Occupancy and equipment     2,525     2,534     2,689   0   %   (6 ) %     5,059     5,132   (1 ) %
    Professional fees     1,819     1,580     1,072   15   %   70   %     3,399     2,399   42   %
    Other     17,764     8,767     8,633   103   %   106   %     26,531     16,890   57   %
    Total noninterest expense     38,335     29,456     28,188   30   %   36   %     67,791     55,724   22   %
    Income before income taxes     8,931     16,326     13,072   (45 ) %   (32 ) %     25,257     27,492   (8 ) %
    Income tax expense     2,542     4,700     3,838   (46 ) %   (34 ) %     7,242     8,092   (11 ) %
    Net income   $ 6,389   $ 11,626   $ 9,234   (45 ) %   (31 ) %   $ 18,015   $ 19,400   (7 ) %
                                                   
    PER COMMON SHARE DATA                                              
    (unaudited)                                                 
    Basic earnings per share   $ 0.10   $ 0.19   $ 0.15   (47 ) %   (33 ) %   $ 0.29   $ 0.32   (9 ) %
    Diluted earnings per share   $ 0.10   $ 0.19   $ 0.15   (47 ) %   (33 ) %   $ 0.29   $ 0.32   (9 ) %
    Weighted average shares outstanding – basic     61,508,180     61,479,579     61,279,914   0   %   0   %     61,493,880     61,233,269   0   %
    Weighted average shares outstanding – diluted     61,624,600     61,708,361     61,438,088   0   %   0   %     61,664,942     61,446,484   0   %
    Common shares outstanding at period-end     61,446,763     61,611,121     61,292,094   0   %   0   %     61,446,763     61,292,094   0   %
    Dividend per share   $ 0.13   $ 0.13   $ 0.13   0   %   0   %   $ 0.26   $ 0.26   0   %
    Book value per share   $ 11.31   $ 11.30   $ 11.08   0   %   2   %   $ 11.31   $ 11.08   2   %
    Tangible book value per share(1)   $ 8.49   $ 8.48   $ 8.22   0   %   3   %   $ 8.49   $ 8.22   3   %
                                                   
    KEY PERFORMANCE METRICS                                                      
    (in $000’s, unaudited)                                                      
    Annualized return on average equity     3.68 %     6.81 %     5.50 %   (46 ) %   (33 ) %     5.23 %     5.79 %   (10 ) %
    Annualized return on average tangible                                              
    common equity(1)     4.89 %     9.09 %     7.43 %   (46 ) %   (34 ) %     6.97 %     7.84 %   (11 ) %
    Annualized return on average assets     0.47 %     0.85 %     0.71 %   (45 ) %   (34 ) %     0.66 %     0.75 %   (12 ) %
    Annualized return on average tangible assets(1)     0.48 %     0.88 %     0.74 %   (45 ) %   (35 ) %     0.68 %     0.78 %   (13 ) %
    Net interest margin (FTE)(1)     3.54 %     3.39 %     3.23 %   4   %   10   %     3.47 %     3.27 %   6   %
    Total revenue   $ 47,782   $ 46,056   $ 41,731   4   %   15   %     93,838     83,871   12   %
    Pre-provision net revenue(1)   $ 9,447   $ 16,600   $ 13,543   (43 ) %   (30 ) %     26,047     28,147   (7 ) %
    Efficiency ratio(1)     80.23 %     63.96 %     67.55 %   25   %   19   %     72.24 %     66.44 %   9   %
                                                   
    AVERAGE BALANCES                                                     
    (in $000’s, unaudited)                                                      
    Average assets   $ 5,458,420   $ 5,559,896   $ 5,213,171   (2 ) %   5   %   $ 5,508,878   $ 5,195,903   6   %
    Average tangible assets(1)   $ 5,284,972   $ 5,386,001   $ 5,037,673   (2 ) %   5   %   $ 5,335,207   $ 5,020,134   6   %
    Average earning assets   $ 5,087,089   $ 5,188,317   $ 4,840,670   (2 ) %   5   %   $ 5,137,424   $ 4,825,587   6   %
    Average loans held-for-sale   $ 2,250   $ 2,290   $ 1,503   (2 ) %   50   %   $ 2,270   $ 2,126   7   %
    Average loans held-for-investment   $ 3,504,518   $ 3,429,014   $ 3,328,358   2   %   5   %   $ 3,466,975   $ 3,312,799   5   %
    Average deposits   $ 4,618,007   $ 4,717,517   $ 4,394,545   (2 ) %   5   %   $ 4,667,487   $ 4,377,347   7   %
    Average demand deposits – noninterest-bearing   $ 1,146,494   $ 1,167,330   $ 1,127,145   (2 ) %   2   %   $ 1,156,854   $ 1,152,111   0   %
    Average interest-bearing deposits   $ 3,471,513   $ 3,550,187   $ 3,267,400   (2 ) %   6   %   $ 3,510,633   $ 3,225,236   9   %
    Average interest-bearing liabilities   $ 3,511,237   $ 3,589,872   $ 3,306,972   (2 ) %   6   %   $ 3,550,338   $ 3,264,788   9   %
    Average equity   $ 697,016   $ 692,733   $ 675,108   1   %   3   %   $ 694,886   $ 673,700   3   %
    Average tangible common equity(1)   $ 523,568   $ 518,838   $ 499,610   1   %   5   %   $ 521,215   $ 497,931   5   %
                                                   
                                                   

    (1)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.

                                     
        For the Quarter Ended:  
    CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS      June 30,       March 31,       December 31,       September 30,      June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   2025   2025   2024   2024   2024  
    Interest income   $ 63,025   $ 61,832   $ 64,043   $ 60,852   $ 58,489  
    Interest expense     18,220     18,472     20,448     21,523     19,622  
    Net interest income before provision                                
    for credit losses on loans     44,805     43,360     43,595     39,329     38,867  
    Provision for credit losses on loans     516     274     1,331     153     471  
    Net interest income after provision                                
    for credit losses on loans     44,289     43,086     42,264     39,176     38,396  
    Noninterest income:                                 
    Service charges and fees on deposit                                
    accounts     929     892     885     908     891  
    FHLB and FRB stock dividends     584     590     590     586     588  
    Increase in cash surrender value of                                
    life insurance     548     538     528     530     521  
    Termination fees     227     87     18     46     100  
    Gain on sales of SBA loans     87     98     125     94     76  
    Servicing income     61     82     77     108     90  
    Gain on proceeds from company-owned                                
    life insurance                     219  
    Other     541     409     552     554     379  
    Total noninterest income     2,977     2,696     2,775     2,826     2,864  
    Noninterest expense:                                     
    Salaries and employee benefits     16,227     16,575     16,976     15,673     15,794  
    Occupancy and equipment     2,525     2,534     2,495     2,599     2,689  
    Professional fees     1,819     1,580     1,711     1,306     1,072  
    Other     17,764     8,767     9,122     7,977     8,633  
    Total noninterest expense     38,335     29,456     30,304     27,555     28,188  
    Income before income taxes     8,931     16,326     14,735     14,447     13,072  
    Income tax expense     2,542     4,700     4,114     3,940     3,838  
    Net income   $ 6,389   $ 11,626   $ 10,621   $ 10,507   $ 9,234  
                                     
    PER COMMON SHARE DATA                                
    (unaudited)                                    
    Basic earnings per share   $ 0.10   $ 0.19   $ 0.17   $ 0.17   $ 0.15  
    Diluted earnings per share   $ 0.10   $ 0.19   $ 0.17   $ 0.17   $ 0.15  
    Weighted average shares outstanding – basic     61,508,180     61,479,579     61,320,505     61,295,877     61,279,914  
    Weighted average shares outstanding – diluted     61,624,600     61,708,361     61,679,735     61,546,157     61,438,088  
    Common shares outstanding at period-end     61,446,763     61,611,121     61,348,095     61,297,344     61,292,094  
    Dividend per share   $ 0.13   $ 0.13   $ 0.13   $ 0.13   $ 0.13  
    Book value per share   $ 11.31   $ 11.30   $ 11.24   $ 11.18   $ 11.08  
    Tangible book value per share(1)   $ 8.49   $ 8.48   $ 8.41   $ 8.33   $ 8.22  
                                     
    KEY PERFORMANCE METRICS                                     
    (in $000’s, unaudited)                                     
    Annualized return on average equity     3.68 %     6.81 %     6.16 %     6.14 %     5.50 %  
    Annualized return on average tangible                                
    common equity(1)     4.89 %     9.09 %     8.25 %     8.27 %     7.43 %  
    Annualized return on average assets     0.47 %     0.85 %     0.75 %     0.78 %     0.71 %  
    Annualized return on average tangible assets(1)     0.48 %     0.88 %     0.78 %     0.81 %     0.74 %  
    Net interest margin (FTE)(1)     3.54 %     3.39 %     3.32 %     3.15 %     3.23 %  
    Total revenue   $ 47,782   $ 46,056   $ 46,370   $ 42,155   $ 41,731  
    Pre-provision net revenue(1)   $ 9,447   $ 16,600   $ 16,066   $ 14,600   $ 13,543  
    Efficiency ratio(1)     80.23 %     63.96 %     65.35 %     65.37 %     67.55 %  
                                     
    AVERAGE BALANCES                                     
    (in $000’s, unaudited)                                     
    Average assets   $ 5,458,420   $ 5,559,896   $ 5,607,840   $ 5,352,067   $ 5,213,171  
    Average tangible assets(1)   $ 5,284,972   $ 5,386,001   $ 5,433,439   $ 5,177,114   $ 5,037,673  
    Average earning assets   $ 5,087,089   $ 5,188,317   $ 5,235,986   $ 4,980,082   $ 4,840,670  
    Average loans held-for-sale   $ 2,250   $ 2,290   $ 2,260   $ 1,493   $ 1,503  
    Average loans held-for-investment   $ 3,504,518   $ 3,429,014   $ 3,388,729   $ 3,359,647   $ 3,328,358  
    Average deposits   $ 4,618,007   $ 4,717,517   $ 4,771,491   $ 4,525,946   $ 4,394,545  
    Average demand deposits – noninterest-bearing   $ 1,146,494   $ 1,167,330   $ 1,222,393   $ 1,172,304   $ 1,127,145  
    Average interest-bearing deposits   $ 3,471,513   $ 3,550,187   $ 3,549,098   $ 3,353,642   $ 3,267,400  
    Average interest-bearing liabilities   $ 3,511,237   $ 3,589,872   $ 3,588,755   $ 3,393,264   $ 3,306,972  
    Average equity   $ 697,016   $ 692,733   $ 686,263   $ 680,404   $ 675,108  
    Average tangible common equity(1)   $ 523,568   $ 518,838   $ 511,862   $ 505,451   $ 499,610  
                                     
                                     
                                     

    (1)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.

                                 
        End of Period:   Percent Change From:  
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS      June 30,       March 31,       June 30,       March 31,       June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   2025     2025     2024     2025     2024    
    ASSETS                                 
    Cash and due from banks   $ 55,360     $ 44,281     $ 37,497     25   %   48   %
    Other investments and interest-bearing deposits                            
    in other financial institutions     666,432       700,769       610,763     (5 ) %   9   %
    Securities available-for-sale, at fair value     307,035       370,976       273,043     (17 ) %   12   %
    Securities held-to-maturity, at amortized cost     561,205       576,718       621,178     (3 ) %   (10 ) %
    Loans – held-for-sale – SBA, including deferred costs     1,156       1,884       1,899     (39 ) %   (39 ) %
    Loans – held-for-investment:                             
    Commercial     492,231       489,241       477,929     1   %   3   %
    Real estate:                             
    CRE – owner occupied     627,810       616,825       594,504     2   %   6   %
    CRE – non-owner occupied     1,390,419       1,363,275       1,283,323     2   %   8   %
    Land and construction     149,460       136,106       125,374     10   %   19   %
    Home equity     120,763       119,138       126,562     1   %   (5 ) %
    Multifamily     285,016       284,510       268,968     0   %   6   %
    Residential mortgages     454,419       465,330       484,809     (2 ) %   (6 ) %
    Consumer and other     14,661       12,741       18,758     15   %   (22 ) %
    Loans     3,534,779       3,487,166       3,380,227     1   %   5   %
    Deferred loan fees, net     (446 )     (268 )     (434 )   66   %   3   %
    Total loans – held-for-investment, net of deferred fees     3,534,333       3,486,898       3,379,793     1   %   5   %
    Allowance for credit losses on loans     (48,633 )     (48,262 )     (47,954 )   1   %   1   %
    Loans, net     3,485,700       3,438,636       3,331,839     1   %   5   %
    Company-owned life insurance     82,296       81,749       80,153     1   %   3   %
    Premises and equipment, net     9,765       9,772       10,310     0   %   (5 ) %
    Goodwill     167,631       167,631       167,631     0   %   0   %
    Other intangible assets     5,532       5,986       7,521     (8 ) %   (26 ) %
    Accrued interest receivable and other assets     125,125       115,853       121,190     8   %   3   %
    Total assets   $ 5,467,237     $ 5,514,255     $ 5,263,024     (1 ) %   4   %
                                 
    LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY                              
    Liabilities:                              
    Deposits:                             
    Demand, noninterest-bearing   $ 1,151,242     $ 1,128,593     $ 1,187,320     2   %   (3 ) %
    Demand, interest-bearing     955,504       949,068       928,246     1   %   3   %
    Savings and money market     1,320,142       1,353,293       1,126,520     (2 ) %   17   %
    Time deposits – under $250     35,356       37,592       39,046     (6 ) %   (9 ) %
    Time deposits – $250 and over     210,818       213,357       203,886     (1 ) %   3   %
    ICS/CDARS – interest-bearing demand, money market                            
    and time deposits     954,272       1,001,365       959,592     (5 ) %   (1 ) %
    Total deposits     4,627,334       4,683,268       4,444,610     (1 ) %   4   %
    Subordinated debt, net of issuance costs     39,728       39,691       39,577     0   %   0   %
    Accrued interest payable and other liabilities     105,471       95,106       99,638     11   %   6   %
    Total liabilities     4,772,533       4,818,065       4,583,825     (1 ) %   4   %
                                 
    Shareholders’ Equity:                                 
    Common stock     509,888       511,596       508,343     0   %   0   %
    Retained earnings     189,794       191,401       182,571     (1 ) %   4   %
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (4,978 )     (6,807 )     (11,715 )   (27 ) %   (58 ) %
    Total shareholders’ equity     694,704       696,190       679,199     0   %   2   %
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 5,467,237     $ 5,514,255     $ 5,263,024     (1 ) %   4   %
                                 
                                   
        End of Period:
    CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS      June 30,       March 31,       December 31,       September 30,      June 30, 
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   2025     2025     2024     2024     2024  
    ASSETS                                   
    Cash and due from banks   $ 55,360     $ 44,281     $ 29,864     $ 49,722     $ 37,497  
    Other investments and interest-bearing deposits                              
    in other financial institutions     666,432       700,769       938,259       906,588       610,763  
    Securities available-for-sale, at fair value     307,035       370,976       256,274       237,612       273,043  
    Securities held-to-maturity, at amortized cost     561,205       576,718       590,016       604,193       621,178  
    Loans – held-for-sale – SBA, including deferred costs     1,156       1,884       2,375       1,649       1,899  
    Loans – held-for-investment:                              
    Commercial     492,231       489,241       531,350       481,266       477,929  
    Real estate:                              
    CRE – owner occupied     627,810       616,825       601,636       602,062       594,504  
    CRE – non-owner occupied     1,390,419       1,363,275       1,341,266       1,310,578       1,283,323  
    Land and construction     149,460       136,106       127,848       125,761       125,374  
    Home equity     120,763       119,138       127,963       124,090       126,562  
    Multifamily     285,016       284,510       275,490       273,103       268,968  
    Residential mortgages     454,419       465,330       471,730       479,524       484,809  
    Consumer and other     14,661       12,741       14,837       14,179       18,758  
    Loans     3,534,779       3,487,166       3,492,120       3,410,563       3,380,227  
    Deferred loan fees, net     (446 )     (268 )     (183 )     (327 )     (434 )
    Total loans – held-for-investment, net of deferred fees     3,534,333       3,486,898       3,491,937       3,410,236       3,379,793  
    Allowance for credit losses on loans     (48,633 )     (48,262 )     (48,953 )     (47,819 )     (47,954 )
    Loans, net     3,485,700       3,438,636       3,442,984       3,362,417       3,331,839  
    Company-owned life insurance     82,296       81,749       81,211       80,682       80,153  
    Premises and equipment, net     9,765       9,772       10,140       10,398       10,310  
    Goodwill     167,631       167,631       167,631       167,631       167,631  
    Other intangible assets     5,532       5,986       6,439       6,966       7,521  
    Accrued interest receivable and other assets     125,125       115,853       119,813       123,738       121,190  
    Total assets   $ 5,467,237     $ 5,514,255     $ 5,645,006     $ 5,551,596     $ 5,263,024  
                                   
    LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY                              
    Liabilities:                                 
    Deposits:                                 
    Demand, noninterest-bearing   $ 1,151,242     $ 1,128,593     $ 1,214,192     $ 1,272,139     $ 1,187,320  
    Demand, interest-bearing     955,504       949,068       936,587       913,910       928,246  
    Savings and money market     1,320,142       1,353,293       1,325,923       1,309,676       1,126,520  
    Time deposits – under $250     35,356       37,592       38,988       39,060       39,046  
    Time deposits – $250 and over     210,818       213,357       206,755       196,945       203,886  
    ICS/CDARS – interest-bearing demand, money market                              
    and time deposits     954,272       1,001,365       1,097,586       997,803       959,592  
    Total deposits     4,627,334       4,683,268       4,820,031       4,729,533       4,444,610  
    Subordinated debt, net of issuance costs     39,728       39,691       39,653       39,615       39,577  
    Accrued interest payable and other liabilities     105,471       95,106       95,595       97,096       99,638  
    Total liabilities     4,772,533       4,818,065       4,955,279       4,866,244       4,583,825  
                                   
    Shareholders’ Equity:                                   
    Common stock     509,888       511,596       510,070       509,134       508,343  
    Retained earnings     189,794       191,401       187,762       185,110       182,571  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss     (4,978 )     (6,807 )     (8,105 )     (8,892 )     (11,715 )
    Total shareholders’ equity     694,704       696,190       689,727       685,352       679,199  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 5,467,237     $ 5,514,255     $ 5,645,006     $ 5,551,596     $ 5,263,024  
                                   
                                 
        At or For the Quarter Ended:   Percent Change From:  
    CREDIT QUALITY DATA      June 30,       March 31,       June 30,       March 31,       June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   2025   2025   2024   2025     2024    
    Nonaccrual loans – held-for-investment:                            
    Land and construction loans   $ 4,198   $ 4,793   $ 4,774   (12 ) %   (12 ) %
    Home equity and other loans     728     927     108   (21 ) %   574   %
    Residential mortgages     607           N/A   N/A  
    Commercial loans     491     324     900   52   %   (45 ) %
    CRE loans     31           N/A   N/A  
    Total nonaccrual loans – held-for-investment:     6,055     6,044     5,782   0   %   5   %
    Loans over 90 days past due                            
    and still accruing     123     268     248   (54 ) %   (50 ) %
    Total nonperforming loans     6,178     6,312     6,030   (2 ) %   2   %
    Foreclosed assets               N/A   N/A  
    Total nonperforming assets   $ 6,178   $ 6,312   $ 6,030   (2 ) %   2   %
    Net charge-offs during the quarter   $ 145   $ 965   $ 405   (85 ) %   (64 ) %
    Provision for credit losses on loans during the quarter   $ 516   $ 274   $ 471   88   %   10   %
    Allowance for credit losses on loans   $ 48,633   $ 48,262   $ 47,954   1   %   1   %
    Classified assets   $ 37,525   $ 40,034   $ 33,605   (6 ) %   12   %
    Allowance for credit losses on loans to total loans     1.38 %     1.38 %     1.42 %   0   %   (3 ) %
    Allowance for credit losses on loans to total nonperforming loans     787.20 %     764.61 %     795.26 %   3   %   (1 ) %
    Nonperforming assets to total assets     0.11 %     0.11 %     0.11 %   0   %   0   %
    Nonperforming loans to total loans     0.17 %     0.18 %     0.18 %   (6 ) %   (6 ) %
    Classified assets to Heritage Commerce Corp                            
    Tier 1 capital plus allowance for credit losses on loans     7 %     7 %     6 %   0   %   17   %
    Classified assets to Heritage Bank of Commerce                            
    Tier 1 capital plus allowance for credit losses on loans     6 %     7 %     6 %   (14 ) %   0   %
                                 
    OTHER PERIOD-END STATISTICS                                 
    (in $000’s, unaudited)                                 
    Heritage Commerce Corp:                                 
    Tangible common equity (1)   $ 521,541   $ 522,573   $ 504,047   0   %   3   %
    Shareholders’ equity / total assets     12.71 %     12.63 %     12.91 %   1   %   (2 ) %
    Tangible common equity / tangible assets (1)     9.85 %     9.78 %     9.91 %   1   %   (1 ) %
    Loan to deposit ratio     76.38 %     74.45 %     76.04 %   3   %   0   %
    Noninterest-bearing deposits / total deposits     24.88 %     24.10 %     26.71 %   3   %   (7 ) %
    Total capital ratio     15.5 %     15.9 %     15.6 %   (3 ) %   (1 ) %
    Tier 1 capital ratio     13.3 %     13.6 %     13.4 %   (2 ) %   (1 ) %
    Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio     13.3 %     13.6 %     13.4 %   (2 ) %   (1 ) %
    Tier 1 leverage ratio     9.9 %     9.8 %     10.2 %   1   %   (3 ) %
    Heritage Bank of Commerce:                            
    Tangible common equity / tangible assets (1)     10.28 %     10.15 %     10.28 %   1   %   0   %
    Total capital ratio     15.1 %     15.4 %     15.1 %   (2 ) %   0   %
    Tier 1 capital ratio     13.8 %     14.1 %     13.9 %   (2 ) %   (1 ) %
    Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio     13.8 %     14.1 %     13.9 %   (2 ) %   (1 ) %
    Tier 1 leverage ratio     10.4 %     10.2 %     10.6 %   2   %   (2 ) %
                                 

    (1)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.

                                     
        At or For the Quarter Ended:  
    CREDIT QUALITY DATA      June 30,       March 31,       December 31,       September 30,      June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   2025   2025   2024   2024   2024  
    Nonaccrual loans – held-for-investment:                                
    Land and construction loans   $ 4,198   $ 4,793   $ 5,874   $ 5,862   $ 4,774  
    Home equity and other loans     728     927     290     84     108  
    Residential mortgages     607                  
    Commercial loans     491     324     1,014     752     900  
    CRE loans     31                  
    Total nonaccrual loans – held-for-investment:     6,055     6,044     7,178     6,698     5,782  
    Loans over 90 days past due                                
    and still accruing     123     268     489     460     248  
    Total nonperforming loans     6,178     6,312     7,667     7,158     6,030  
    Foreclosed assets                      
    Total nonperforming assets   $ 6,178   $ 6,312   $ 7,667   $ 7,158   $ 6,030  
    Net charge-offs during the quarter   $ 145   $ 965   $ 197   $ 288   $ 405  
    Provision for credit losses on loans during the quarter   $ 516   $ 274   $ 1,331   $ 153   $ 471  
    Allowance for credit losses on loans   $ 48,633   $ 48,262   $ 48,953   $ 47,819   $ 47,954  
    Classified assets   $ 37,525   $ 40,034   $ 41,661   $ 32,609   $ 33,605  
    Allowance for credit losses on loans to total loans     1.38 %     1.38 %     1.40 %     1.40 %     1.42 %  
    Allowance for credit losses on loans to total nonperforming loans     787.20 %     764.61 %     638.49 %     668.05 %     795.26 %  
    Nonperforming assets to total assets     0.11 %     0.11 %     0.14 %     0.13 %     0.11 %  
    Nonperforming loans to total loans     0.17 %     0.18 %     0.22 %     0.21 %     0.18 %  
    Classified assets to Heritage Commerce Corp                                
    Tier 1 capital plus allowance for credit losses on loans     7 %     7 %     7 %     6 %     6 %  
    Classified assets to Heritage Bank of Commerce                                
    Tier 1 capital plus allowance for credit losses on loans     6 %     7 %     7 %     6 %     6 %  
                                     
    OTHER PERIOD-END STATISTICS                                     
    (in $000’s, unaudited)                                     
    Heritage Commerce Corp:                                     
    Tangible common equity (1)   $ 521,541   $ 522,573   $ 515,657   $ 510,755   $ 504,047  
    Shareholders’ equity / total assets     12.71 %     12.63 %     12.22 %     12.35 %     12.91 %  
    Tangible common equity / tangible assets (1)     9.85 %     9.78 %     9.43 %     9.50 %     9.91 %  
    Loan to deposit ratio     76.38 %     74.45 %     72.45 %     72.11 %     76.04 %  
    Noninterest-bearing deposits / total deposits     24.88 %     24.10 %     25.19 %     26.90 %     26.71 %  
    Total capital ratio     15.5 %     15.9 %     15.6 %     15.6 %     15.6 %  
    Tier 1 capital ratio     13.3 %     13.6 %     13.4 %     13.4 %     13.4 %  
    Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio     13.3 %     13.6 %     13.4 %     13.4 %     13.4 %  
    Tier 1 leverage ratio     9.9 %     9.8 %     9.6 %     10.0 %     10.2 %  
    Heritage Bank of Commerce:                                
    Tangible common equity / tangible assets (1)     10.28 %     10.15 %     9.79 %     9.86 %     10.28 %  
    Total capital ratio     15.1 %     15.4 %     15.1 %     15.1 %     15.1 %  
    Tier 1 capital ratio     13.8 %     14.1 %     13.9 %     13.9 %     13.9 %  
    Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio     13.8 %     14.1 %     13.9 %     13.9 %     13.9 %  
    Tier 1 leverage ratio     10.4 %     10.2 %     10.0 %     10.4 %     10.6 %  

    (1)This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.

                                       
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Quarter Ended  
        June 30, 2025   March 31, 2025  
                    Interest      Average               Interest      Average  
    NET INTEREST INCOME AND NET INTEREST MARGIN   Average   Income/   Yield/   Average   Income/   Yield/  
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   Balance   Expense   Rate   Balance   Expense   Rate  
    Assets:                                        
    Loans, core bank   $ 3,020,534       41,738     5.54 %   $ 2,945,072     $ 39,758     5.47 %  
    Prepayment fees           473     0.06 %           224     0.03 %  
    Bay View Funding factored receivables     67,756       3,347     19.81 %     60,250       2,942     19.80 %  
    Purchased residential mortgages     420,280       3,548     3.39 %     427,963       3,597     3.41 %  
    Loan fair value mark / accretion     (1,802 )     172     0.02 %     (1,981 )     181     0.02 %  
    Loans, gross (1)(2)     3,506,768       49,278     5.64 %     3,431,304       46,702     5.52 %  
    Securities – taxable     902,642       6,346     2.82 %     876,092       5,559     2.57 %  
    Securities – exempt from Federal tax (3)     30,259       272     3.61 %     30,480       275     3.66 %  
    Other investments and interest-bearing deposits                                  
    in other financial institutions     647,420       7,186     4.45 %     850,441       9,354     4.46 %  
    Total interest earning assets (3)     5,087,089       63,082     4.97 %     5,188,317       61,890     4.84 %  
    Cash and due from banks     31,044                  31,869               
    Premises and equipment, net     9,958                  10,007               
    Goodwill and other intangible assets     173,448                  173,895               
    Other assets     156,881                  155,808               
    Total assets   $ 5,458,420                $ 5,559,896               
                                       
    Liabilities and shareholders’ equity:                                    
    Deposits:                                    
    Demand, noninterest-bearing   $ 1,146,494                $ 1,167,330               
                                       
    Demand, interest-bearing     949,867       1,484     0.63 %     944,375       1,438     0.62 %  
    Savings and money market     1,313,054       8,205     2.51 %     1,323,038       8,073     2.47 %  
    Time deposits – under $100     11,456       49     1.72 %     11,383       47     1.67 %  
    Time deposits – $100 and over     231,644       1,995     3.45 %     234,421       2,129     3.68 %  
    ICS/CDARS – interest-bearing demand, money market                                  
    and time deposits     965,492       5,949     2.47 %     1,036,970       6,248     2.44 %  
    Total interest-bearing deposits     3,471,513       17,682     2.04 %     3,550,187       17,935     2.05 %  
    Total deposits     4,618,007       17,682     1.54 %     4,717,517       17,935     1.54 %  
                                       
    Short-term borrowings     19           0.00 %     18           0.00 %  
    Subordinated debt, net of issuance costs     39,705       538     5.43 %     39,667       537     5.49 %  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     3,511,237       18,220     2.08 %     3,589,872       18,472     2.09 %  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities and demand,                                  
    noninterest-bearing / cost of funds     4,657,731       18,220     1.57 %     4,757,202       18,472     1.57 %  
    Other liabilities     103,673                  109,961               
    Total liabilities     4,761,404                  4,867,163               
    Shareholders’ equity     697,016                  692,733               
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 5,458,420                $ 5,559,896               
                                       
    Net interest income / margin (3)            44,862     3.54 %            43,418     3.39 %  
    Less tax equivalent adjustment (3)            (57 )                 (58 )       
    Net interest income          $ 44,805     3.53 %          $ 43,360     3.39 %  
                                       

    (1)Includes loans held-for-sale. Nonaccrual loans are included in average balances.
    (2)Yield amounts earned on loans include fees and costs. The accretion of net deferred loan fees into loan interest income was $253,000 for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $214,000 for the first quarter of 2025.  Prepayment fees totaled $473,000 for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $224,000 for the first quarter of 2025.
    (3)Reflects the FTE adjustment for Federal tax-exempt income based on a 21% tax rate. This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial
    Measures” in this press release.

                                       
        For the Quarter Ended   For the Quarter Ended  
        June 30, 2025   June 30, 2024  
                    Interest      Average               Interest      Average  
    NET INTEREST INCOME AND NET INTEREST MARGIN   Average   Income/   Yield/   Average   Income/   Yield/  
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   Balance   Expense   Rate   Balance   Expense   Rate  
    Assets:                                        
    Loans, core bank   $ 3,020,534     $ 41,738     5.54 %   $ 2,830,260     $ 38,496     5.47 %  
    Prepayment fees           473     0.06 %           54     0.01 %  
    Bay View Funding factored receivables     67,756       3,347     19.81 %     54,777       2,914     21.40 %  
    Purchased residential mortgages     420,280       3,548     3.39 %     447,687       3,739     3.36 %  
    Loan fair value mark / accretion     (1,802 )     172     0.02 %     (2,863 )     267     0.04 %  
    Loans, gross (1)(2)     3,506,768       49,278     5.64 %     3,329,861       45,470     5.49 %  
    Securities – taxable     902,642       6,346     2.82 %     942,532       5,483     2.34 %  
    Securities – exempt from Federal tax (3)     30,259       272     3.61 %     31,803       285     3.60 %  
    Other investments and interest-bearing deposits                                   
    in other financial institutions     647,420       7,186     4.45 %     536,474       7,311     5.48 %  
    Total interest earning assets (3)     5,087,089       63,082     4.97 %     4,840,670       58,549     4.86 %  
    Cash and due from banks     31,044                  33,419               
    Premises and equipment, net     9,958                  10,216               
    Goodwill and other intangible assets     173,448                  175,498               
    Other assets     156,881                  153,368               
    Total assets   $ 5,458,420                $ 5,213,171               
                                       
    Liabilities and shareholders’ equity:                                    
    Deposits:                                    
    Demand, noninterest-bearing   $ 1,146,494                $ 1,127,145               
                                       
    Demand, interest-bearing     949,867       1,484     0.63 %     932,100       1,719     0.74 %  
    Savings and money market     1,313,054       8,205     2.51 %     1,104,589       7,867     2.86 %  
    Time deposits – under $100     11,456       49     1.72 %     10,980       46     1.68 %  
    Time deposits – $100 and over     231,644       1,995     3.45 %     228,248       2,245     3.96 %  
    ICS/CDARS – interest-bearing demand, money market                                  
    and time deposits     965,492       5,949     2.47 %     991,483       7,207     2.92 %  
    Total interest-bearing deposits     3,471,513       17,682     2.04 %     3,267,400       19,084     2.35 %  
    Total deposits     4,618,007       17,682     1.54 %     4,394,545       19,084     1.75 %  
                                       
    Short-term borrowings     19           0.00 %     19           0.00 %  
    Subordinated debt, net of issuance costs     39,705       538     5.43 %     39,553       538     5.47 %  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     3,511,237       18,220     2.08 %     3,306,972       19,622     2.39 %  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities and demand,                                  
    noninterest-bearing / cost of funds     4,657,731       18,220     1.57 %     4,434,117       19,622     1.78 %  
    Other liabilities     103,673                  103,946               
    Total liabilities     4,761,404                  4,538,063               
    Shareholders’ equity     697,016                  675,108               
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 5,458,420                $ 5,213,171               
                                       
    Net interest income / margin (3)            44,862     3.54 %            38,927     3.23 %  
    Less tax equivalent adjustment (3)            (57 )                 (60 )       
    Net interest income          $ 44,805     3.53 %          $ 38,867     3.23 %  

    (1)Includes loans held-for-sale. Nonaccrual loans are included in average balances.
    (2)Yield amounts earned on loans include fees and costs. The accretion of net deferred loan fees into loan interest income was $253,000 for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $117,000 for the second quarter of 2024. Prepayment fees totaled $473,000 for the second quarter of 2025, compared to $54,000 for the second quarter of 2024.
    (3)Reflects the FTE adjustment for Federal tax-exempt income based on a 21% tax rate. This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in this press release.  

                                       
        For the Six Months Ended   For the Six Months Ended  
        June 30, 2025   June 30, 2024  
                    Interest      Average               Interest      Average  
    NET INTEREST INCOME AND NET INTEREST MARGIN   Average   Income/   Yield/   Average   Income/   Yield/  
    (in $000’s, unaudited)   Balance   Expense   Rate   Balance   Expense   Rate  
    Assets:                                        
    Loans, core bank   $ 2,983,011     $ 81,496     5.51 %   $ 2,812,805     $ 76,217     5.45 %  
    Prepayment fees           697     0.05 %           78     0.01 %  
    Bay View Funding factored receivables     64,024       6,289     19.81 %     54,144       5,752     21.36 %  
    Purchased residential mortgages     424,101       7,145     3.40 %     450,964       7,527     3.36 %  
    Loan fair value mark / accretion     (1,891 )     353     0.02 %     (2,988 )     496     0.04 %  
    Loans, gross (1)(2)     3,469,245       95,980     5.58 %     3,314,925       90,070     5.46 %  
    Securities – taxable     889,440       11,905     2.70 %     992,508       11,666     2.36 %  
    Securities – exempt from Federal tax (3)     30,369       547     3.63 %     31,871       571     3.60 %  
    Other investments, interest-bearing deposits in other                                  
    financial institutions and Federal funds sold     748,370       16,540     4.46 %     486,283       13,263     5.48 %  
    Total interest earning assets (3)     5,137,424       124,972     4.91 %     4,825,587       115,570     4.82 %  
    Cash and due from banks     31,454                  33,316               
    Premises and equipment, net     9,982                  10,115               
    Goodwill and other intangible assets     173,671                  175,769               
    Other assets     156,347                  151,116               
    Total assets   $ 5,508,878                $ 5,195,903               
                                       
    Liabilities and shareholders’ equity:                                      
    Deposits:                                      
    Demand, noninterest-bearing   $ 1,156,854                $ 1,152,111               
                                       
    Demand, interest-bearing     947,137       2,922     0.62 %     926,074       3,273     0.71 %  
    Savings and money market     1,318,018       16,278     2.49 %     1,086,085       14,516     2.69 %  
    Time deposits – under $100     11,420       96     1.70 %     10,962       88     1.61 %  
    Time deposits – $100 and over     233,025       4,124     3.57 %     224,730       4,309     3.86 %  
    ICS/CDARS – interest-bearing demand, money market                                  
    and time deposits     1,001,033       12,197     2.46 %     977,385       13,818     2.84 %  
    Total interest-bearing deposits     3,510,633       35,617     2.05 %     3,225,236       36,004     2.24 %  
    Total deposits     4,667,487       35,617     1.54 %     4,377,347       36,004     1.65 %  
                                       
    Short-term borrowings     19           0.00 %     17           0.00 %  
    Subordinated debt, net of issuance costs     39,686       1,075     5.46 %     39,535       1,076     5.47 %  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities     3,550,338       36,692     2.08 %     3,264,788       37,080     2.28 %  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities and demand,                                  
    noninterest-bearing / cost of funds     4,707,192       36,692     1.57 %     4,416,899       37,080     1.69 %  
    Other liabilities     106,800                 105,304              
    Total liabilities     4,813,992                  4,522,203               
    Shareholders’ equity     694,886                  673,700               
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity   $ 5,508,878                $ 5,195,903               
                                         
    Net interest income / margin (3)            88,280     3.47 %            78,490     3.27 %  
    Less tax equivalent adjustment (3)            (115 )                (120 )      
    Net interest income          $ 88,165     3.46 %          $ 78,370     3.27 %  

    (1)Includes loans held-for-sale. Nonaccrual loans are included in average balances.
    (2)Yield amounts earned on loans include fees and costs. The accretion of net deferred loan fees into loan interest income was $467,000 for the first six months of 2025, compared to $277,000 for the six months of 2024. Prepayment fees totaled $697,000 for the first six months of 2025, compared to $78,000 for the first six months of 2024.
    (3)Reflects the FTE adjustment for Federal tax-exempt income based on a 21% tax rate. This is a non-GAAP financial measure as defined and discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial
       Measures” in this press release.

    RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES

    Management considers net income and earnings per share adjusted to exclude the $9.2 million of charges primarily related to a legal settlement in the second quarter and first six months of 2025 as a useful measurement of the Company’s profitability compared to prior periods.

    The following table summarizes components of net income and diluted earnings per share for the periods indicated:

                                   
    NET INCOME AND   For the Quarter Ended:
    DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE   June 30,    March 31,    December 31,   September 30,   June 30, 
    (in $000’s, except per share amounts, unaudited)      2025     2025        2024   2024   2024
    Reported net income (GAAP)   $ 6,389     $ 11,626   $ 10,621   $ 10,507   $ 9,234
    Add: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     9,184                  
    Less: related income taxes     (2,618 )                
    Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)   $ 12,955     $ 11,626   $ 10,621   $ 10,507   $ 9,234
                                   
    Weighted average shares outstanding – diluted     61,624,600       61,708,361     61,679,735     61,546,157     61,438,088
                                   
    Reported diluted earnings per share   $ 0.10     $ 0.19   $ 0.17   $ 0.17   $ 0.15
                                   
    Adjusted diluted earnings per share   $ 0.21     $ 0.19   $ 0.17   $ 0.17   $ 0.15
                 
    NET INCOME AND   For the Six Months Ended:
    DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE   June 30,    June 30, 
    (in $000’s, except per share amounts, unaudited)      2025     2024
    Reported net income (GAAP)   $ 18,015     $ 19,400
    Add: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     9,184      
    Less: related income taxes     (2,618 )    
    Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)   $ 24,581     $ 19,400
                 
    Weighted average shares outstanding – diluted     61,664,942       61,446,484
                 
    Reported diluted earnings per share   $ 0.29     $ 0.32
                 
    Adjusted diluted earnings per share   $ 0.40     $ 0.32

    Management considers tangible book value per share as a useful measurement of the Company’s equity. The Company references the return on average tangible common equity and the return on average tangible assets as measurements of profitability.

    The following table summarizes components of the tangible book value per share at the dates indicated:

                                     
    TANGIBLE BOOK VALUE PER SHARE   June 30,    March  31,    December 31,   September 30,   June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2025     2025     2024        2024    
    Capital components:                                
    Total equity (GAAP)   $ 694,704     $ 696,190     $ 689,727     $ 685,352     $ 679,199    
    Less: preferred stock                                
    Total common equity     694,704       696,190       689,727       685,352       679,199    
    Less: goodwill     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )  
    Less: other intangible assets     (5,532 )     (5,986 )     (6,439 )     (6,966 )     (7,521 )  
    Reported tangible common equity (non-GAAP)     521,541       522,573       515,657       510,755       504,047    
    Add: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     9,184                            
    Less: related income taxes     (2,618 )                          
    Adjusted tangible common equity (non-GAAP)   $ 528,107     $ 522,573     $ 515,657     $ 510,755     $ 504,047    
                                     
    Common shares outstanding at period-end     61,446,763       61,611,121       61,348,095       61,297,344       61,292,094    
                                     
    Reported tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)   $ 8.49     $ 8.48     $ 8.41     $ 8.33     $ 8.22    
                                     
    Adjusted tangible book value per share (non-GAAP)   $ 8.59     $ 8.48     $ 8.41     $ 8.33     $ 8.22    

    The following tables summarize components of the annualized return on average equity, annualized return on average tangible common equity and the annualized return on average assets for the periods indicated:

                                     
    RETURN ON AVERAGE TANGIBLE COMMON   For the Quarter Ended:  
    EQUITY AND AVERAGE ASSETS   June 30,    March 31,    December 31,   September 30,   June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2025          2024     2024     2024       
    Reported net income (GAAP)   $ 6,389     $ 11,626     $ 10,621     $ 10,507     $ 9,234    
    Add: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     9,184                            
    Less: related income taxes     (2,618 )                          
    Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)   $ 12,955     $ 11,626     $ 10,621     $ 10,507     $ 9,234    
                                     
    Average tangible common equity components:                                
    Average equity (GAAP)   $ 697,016     $ 692,733     $ 686,263     $ 680,404     $ 675,108    
    Less: goodwill     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )  
    Less: other intangible assets     (5,817 )     (6,264 )     (6,770 )     (7,322 )     (7,867 )  
    Total average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)   $ 523,568     $ 518,838     $ 511,862     $ 505,451     $ 499,610    
                                     
    Annualized return on average equity (GAAP)      3.68      6.81   %    6.16   %    6.14   %    5.50   %
                                     
    Reported annualized return on average                                
    tangible common equity (non-GAAP)     4.89   %     9.09   %     8.25   %     8.27   %     7.43   %  
                                               
    Adjusted annualized return on average                                
    tangible common equity (non-GAAP)     9.92   %     9.09   %     8.25   %     8.27   %     7.43   %  
                                     
    Average assets (GAAP)   $ 5,458,420     $ 5,559,896     $ 5,607,840     $ 5,352,067     $ 5,213,171    
                                     
    Reported annualized return on average assets (GAAP)     0.47   %     0.85   %     0.75   %     0.78   %     0.71   %  
                                     
    Adjusted annualized return on average assets (non-GAAP)     0.95   %     0.85   %     0.75   %     0.78   %     0.71   %  
                   
    RETURN ON AVERAGE TANGIBLE COMMON   For the Six Months Ended:  
    EQUITY AND AVERAGE ASSETS   June 30,    June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2024       
    Reported net income (GAAP)   $ 18,015     $ 19,400    
    Add: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     9,184          
    Less: related income taxes     (2,618 )        
    Adjusted net income (non-GAAP)   $ 24,581     $ 19,400    
                   
    Average tangible common equity components:              
    Average equity (GAAP)   $ 694,886     $ 673,700    
    Less: goodwill     (167,631 )     (167,631 )  
    Less: other intangible assets     (6,040 )     (8,138 )  
    Total average tangible common equity (non-GAAP)   $ 521,215     $ 497,931    
                   
    Annualized return on average equity (GAAP)      5.23      5.79   %
                   
    Reported annualized return on average              
    tangible common equity (non-GAAP)     6.97   %     7.84   %  
                       
    Adjusted annualized return on average              
    tangible common equity (non-GAAP)     9.51   %     7.84   %  
                   
    Average assets (GAAP)   $ 5,508,878     $ 5,195,903    
                   
    Reported annualized return on average assets (GAAP)     0.66   %     0.75   %  
                   
    Adjusted annualized return on average assets (non-GAAP)     0.90   %     0.75   %  

    Management reviews yields on certain asset categories and the net interest margin of the Company on an FTE basis. In this non-GAAP presentation, net interest income is adjusted to reflect tax-exempt interest income on an equivalent before-tax basis using tax rates effective as of the end of the period. This measure ensures comparability of net interest income arising from both taxable and tax-exempt sources. The following tables summarize components of FTE net interest income of the Company for the periods indicated:

                                     
        For the Quarter Ended:  
    NET INTEREST INCOME AND NET INTEREST MARGIN   June 30,    March 31,    December 31,    September 30,    June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025   2025   2024   2024   2024  
    Net interest income before                                
    credit losses on loans (GAAP)   $ 44,805   $ 43,360   $ 43,595   $ 39,329   $ 38,867  
    Tax-equivalent adjustment on securities –                                
    exempt from Federal tax     57     58     58     59     60  
    Net interest income, FTE (non-GAAP)   $ 44,862   $ 43,418   $ 43,653   $ 39,388   $ 38,927  
                                     
    Average balance of total interest earning assets   $ 5,087,089   $ 5,188,317   $ 5,235,986   $ 4,980,082   $ 4,840,670  
                                     
    Net interest margin (annualized net interest income divided by the                                
    average balance of total interest earnings assets) (GAAP)     3.53 %     3.39 %     3.31 %     3.14 %     3.23 %  
                                     
    Net interest margin, FTE (annualized net interest income, FTE,                                
    divided by the average balance of total                                
    earnings assets) (non-GAAP)     3.54 %     3.39 %     3.32 %     3.15 %     3.23 %  
                   
        For the Six Months Ended:  
    NET INTEREST INCOME AND NET INTEREST MARGIN   June 30,    June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025   2024  
    Net interest income before              
    credit losses on loans (GAAP)   $ 88,165   $ 78,370  
    Tax-equivalent adjustment on securities – exempt from Federal tax     115     120  
    Net interest income, FTE (non-GAAP)   $ 88,280   $ 78,490  
                   
    Average balance of total interest earning assets   $ 5,137,424   $ 4,825,587  
                   
    Net interest margin (annualized net interest income divided by the              
    average balance of total interest earnings assets) (GAAP)     3.46 %     3.27 %  
                   
    Net interest margin, FTE (annualized net interest income, FTE, divided by the              
    average balance of total interest earnings assets) (non-GAAP)     3.47 %     3.27 %  

    Management views its non-GAAP PPNR as a key metric for assessing the Company’s earnings power. The following table summarizes the components of PPNR for the periods indicated:

                                   
        For the Quarter Ended:
    PRE-PROVISION NET REVENUE   June 30,    March 31,    December 31,   September 30,   June 30, 
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2025     2024     2025     2024  
    Net interest income before credit losses on loans   $ 44,805     $ 43,360     $ 43,595     $ 39,329     $ 38,867  
    Noninterest income     2,977       2,696       2,775       2,826       2,864  
    Total revenue     47,782       46,056       46,370     $ 42,155     $ 41,731  
    Less: Noninterest expense     (38,335 )     (29,456 )     (30,304 )     (27,555 )     (28,188 )
    Reported PPNR (non-GAAP)     9,447       16,600       16,066     $ 14,600     $ 13,543  
    Add: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     9,184                          
    Adjusted PPNR (non-GAAP)   $ 18,631     $ 16,600     $ 16,066     $ 14,600     $ 13,543  
                 
        For the Six Months Ended:
    PRE-PROVISION NET REVENUE   June 30,    June 30, 
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2024  
    Net interest income before credit losses on loans   $ 88,165     $ 78,370  
    Noninterest income     5,673       5,501  
    Total revenue     93,838       83,871  
    Less: Noninterest expense     (67,791 )     (55,724 )
    Reported PPNR (non-GAAP)     26,047       28,147  
    Add: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     9,184        
    Adjusted PPNR (non-GAAP)   $ 35,231     $ 28,147  

    The efficiency ratio is a non-GAAP financial measure, which is calculated by dividing noninterest expense by total revenue (net interest income plus noninterest income), and measures how much it costs to produce one dollar of revenue. The following tables summarize components of noninterest expense and the efficiency ratio of the Company for the periods indicated:

                                     
        For the Quarter Ended:  
    NONINTEREST EXPENSE AND EFFICIENCY RATIO   June 30,    March 31,    December 31,   September 30,   June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2025   2024   2024   2024  
    Reported noninterest expense (GAAP)   $ 38,335     $ 29,456   $ 30,304   $ 27,555   $ 28,188  
    Less: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     (9,184 )                  
    Adjusted noninterest expense (non-GAAP)   $ 29,151     $ 29,456   $ 30,304   $ 27,555   $ 28,188  
                                     
    Net interest income before credit losses on loans   $ 44,805     $ 43,360   $ 43,595   $ 39,329   $ 38,867  
    Noninterest income     2,977       2,696     2,775     2,826     2,864  
    Total revenue   $ 47,782     $ 46,056   $ 46,370   $ 42,155   $ 41,731  
                                     
    Reported efficiency ratio (noninterest expense divided                                
    by total revenue) (non-GAAP)     80.23   %     63.96 %     65.35 %     65.37 %     67.55 %  
                                     
    Adjusted efficiency ratio (adjusted noninterest expense                                
    divided by total revenue) (non-GAAP)     61.01   %     63.96 %     65.35 %     65.37 %     67.55 %  
                   
        For the Six Months Ended:  
    NONINTEREST EXPENSE AND EFFICIENCY RATIO   June 30,    June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2024  
    Reported noninterest expense (GAAP)   $ 67,791     $ 55,724  
    Less: pre-tax legal settlement and other charges     (9,184 )      
    Adjusted noninterest expense (non-GAAP)   $ 58,607     $ 55,724  
                   
    Net interest income before credit losses on loans   $ 88,165     $ 79,548  
    Noninterest income     5,673       4,323  
    Total revenue   $ 93,838     $ 83,871  
                   
    Reported efficiency ratio (noninterest expense divided              
    by total revenue) (non-GAAP)     72.24   %     66.44 %  
                   
    Adjusted efficiency ratio (adjusted noninterest expense              
    divided by total revenue) (non-GAAP)     62.46   %     66.44 %  

    Management considers the tangible common equity ratio as a useful measurement of the Company’s and the Bank’s equity. The following table summarizes components of the tangible common equity to tangible assets ratio of the Company at the dates indicated:

                                     
    TANGIBLE COMMON EQUITY TO TANGIBLE ASSETS   June 30,    March 31,    December 31,       September 30,      June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2025        2024        2024        2024    
    Capital components:                                
    Total equity (GAAP)   $ 694,704     $ 696,190     $ 689,727     $ 685,352     $ 679,199    
    Less: preferred stock                                
    Total common equity     694,704       696,190       689,727       685,352       679,199    
    Less: goodwill     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )  
    Less: other intangible assets     (5,532 )     (5,986 )     (6,439 )     (6,966 )     (7,521 )  
    Total tangible common equity (non-GAAP)   $ 521,541     $ 522,573     $ 515,657     $ 510,755     $ 504,047    
                                     
    Asset components:                                
    Total assets (GAAP)   $ 5,467,237     $ 5,514,255     $ 5,645,006     $ 5,551,596     $ 5,263,024    
    Less: goodwill     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )  
    Less: other intangible assets     (5,532 )     (5,986 )     (6,439 )     (6,966 )     (7,521 )  
    Total tangible assets (non-GAAP)   $ 5,294,074     $ 5,340,638     $ 5,470,936     $ 5,376,999     $ 5,087,872    
                                     
    Tangible common equity / tangible assets (non-GAAP)     9.85   %     9.78   %     9.43   %     9.50   %     9.91   %  

    The following table summarizes components of the tangible common equity to tangible assets ratio of the Bank at the dates indicated:

                                     
    TANGIBLE COMMON EQUITY TO TANGIBLE ASSETS   June 30,    March 31,    December 31,       September 30,   June 30,   
    (in $000’s, unaudited)      2025     2025        2024        2024        2024    
    Capital components:                                
    Total equity (GAAP)   $ 717,103     $ 715,605     $ 709,379     $ 704,585     $ 697,964    
    Less: preferred stock                                
    Total common equity     717,103       715,605       709,379       704,585       697,964    
    Less: goodwill     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )  
    Less: other intangible assets     (5,532 )     (5,986 )     (6,439 )     (6,966 )     (7,521 )  
    Total tangible common equity (non-GAAP)   $ 543,940     $ 541,988     $ 535,309     $ 529,988     $ 522,812    
                                     
    Asset components:                                
    Total assets (GAAP)   $ 5,464,618     $ 5,512,160     $ 5,641,646     $ 5,548,576     $ 5,260,500    
    Less: goodwill     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )     (167,631 )  
    Less: other intangible assets     (5,532 )     (5,986 )     (6,439 )     (6,966 )     (7,521 )  
    Total tangible assets (non-GAAP)   $ 5,291,455     $ 5,338,543     $ 5,467,576     $ 5,373,979     $ 5,085,348    
                                     
    Tangible common equity / tangible assets (non-GAAP)     10.28   %     10.15   %     9.79   %     9.86   %     10.28   %  

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-Evening Report: Ultrafast fashion brand Princess Polly has been certified as ‘sustainable’. Is that an oxymoron?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Harriette Richards, Senior Lecturer, School of Fashion and Textiles, RMIT University

    Carol Yepes/Getty Images

    Last week, the ultrafast fashion brand Princess Polly received B Corp certification. This certification is designed to accredit for-profit businesses that provide social impact and environmental benefit.

    Established on the Gold Coast in 2010, a 50% stake in Princess Polly was acquired by United States-based A.K.A. Brands in 2018.

    Since then, it has grown its global reach as a low-cost, high-turnover online retailer.

    So can ultrafast fashion ever be sustainable?

    Who is Princess Polly?

    Princess Polly distinguishes itself from other fast fashion retailers through a mission to “make on-trend, sustainable fashion accessible to everyone”.

    As part of this mission, Princess Polly is a participant of the United Nations Global Compact, which commits them to sustainable procurement. The 2024 Baptist World Aid Ethical Fashion Report placed them in the top 20% of 460 global brands assessed.

    Yet, on the sustainability rating website Good On You, Princess Polly receives a “Not Good Enough” grade, due to their lack of action on reducing plastic and textile waste or protecting biodiversity in their supply chains, and the absence of evidence that they pay their workers a living wage.

    Regardless of how they make their clothes, Princess Polly produces a lot. At the time of writing, the brand has 3,920 different styles available on their website (excluding shoes and accessories).

    Of those, 34% (1,355 styles) are listed as “lower impact,” which means items are made using materials such as organic cotton and linen, recycled polyester and cellulose fabrics. There are also 720 items on the website currently listed as “new”: their daily new arrivals means they are constantly adding fresh items for sale.

    Overproduction, no matter what the garments are made from, is inherently wasteful. Even when clothes are purchased (and 10–40% of the clothing produced each year is not sold), the poor quality of fast fashion items means that they end up in landfill faster and stay there for longer, contributing to the ongoing environmental disaster.

    Sustainability communication

    In Australia, 1,096 companies are accredited with B Corp status, including 152 fashion businesses.

    B Corp assesses the practices of a company as a whole, rather than focusing on one single social or environmental issue. Businesses must score at least 80 out of a possible 250+ points in the B Impact Assessment to achieve accreditation.

    Organisations are assessed in five key areas – community, customers, environment, governance and workers – and must meet high standards of social and environmental performance, transparency and accountability.

    Third-party accreditations such as B Corp, Fairtrade and Global Organic Textile Standard are often used by brands as a marketing tool.

    These certifications can enhance consumer trust without the need for detailed explanations. For fashion brands, accreditation can help them stand out in a crowded market. They can provide legitimacy, attract ethical fashion consumers and reduce consumer scepticism.

    While B Corp aims to provide assurance to consumers, activists have accused it of greenwashing. In 2022, the organisation came under fire for accrediting Nespresso, a brand owned by Nestlé, which has a reputation for poor worker rights and sourcing policies.

    B Corp is now facing renewed condemnation for issuing certification to Princess Polly.

    Who needs certification?

    Other B Corp certified Australian fashion brands such as Clothing the Gaps and Outland Denim have built their reputations on their ethical credentials. For values-driven fashion-based social enterprises such as these, accreditations can provide valuable guarantees regarding ethical processes.

    According to our research, however, there are several barriers fashion-based social enterprises face when pursuing ethical accreditation.

    The cost of accreditation, both financial and in terms of time, skills and resourcing, is a significant challenge. And there is no certification that covers all aspects of environmental sustainability and ethical production. As a result, fashion-based social enterprises often require multiple accreditations to fully communicate the breadth of their ethical commitments.

    Despite the costs involved, if fashion-based social enterprises don’t acquire certain certifications they risk being ineligible for government grants and tenders, such as social procurement contracts.

    Differences between fashion-based social enterprises and fast fashion brands are stark. While Clothing the Gaps, Outland Denim and Princess Polly now all hold B Corp certification, the former score much more highly on the B Impact Assessment.
    The value and credibility of the certification is diminished when it extends to unsustainable ultrafast fashion.

    Is it possible for fast fashion to ever be sustainable?

    The question of whether fast fashion can ever be sustainable has become increasingly heated since the advent of ultrafast fashion, where brands produce on demand and sell directly online.

    Fast fashion took seasonal trends from high fashion runways and made them available to consumers at low costs within weeks. Ultrafast fashion takes trends from social media and reproduces them extremely cheaply for mass consumption within days.

    Both fast and ultrafast fashion’s low-cost, high-volume models encourage consumers to value quantity over quality. Using permanent sales and discounts, these brands incentivise multiple purchases of items that may never actually be worn. Online “micro trends” and “haul” videos further spur this overconsumption.

    The overconsumption of fast fashion means lots of it ends up in landfill.
    Dipanjan Pal/Unsplash

    Princess Polly may be using more sustainable textiles and engaging in more ethical forms of production than some of its ultrafast fashion counterparts. But this is not enough when the business model itself is unsustainable. Accreditations such as B Corp are unable to account for this nuance.

    Princess Polly claims to make sustainable fashion, yet it is also proudly trend driven. As an ultrafast fashion brand, it relies on overproduction and overconsumption. The idea that this can ever be “sustainable” is simply an oxymoron.

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

    ref. Ultrafast fashion brand Princess Polly has been certified as ‘sustainable’. Is that an oxymoron? – https://theconversation.com/ultrafast-fashion-brand-princess-polly-has-been-certified-as-sustainable-is-that-an-oxymoron-261561

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Butter wars: ‘nothing cures high prices like high prices’ – but will market forces be enough?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alan Renwick, Professor of Agricultural Economics, Lincoln University, New Zealand

    RobynRoper/Getty Images

    The alarming rise of butter prices has become a real source of frustration for New Zealand consumers, as well as a topic of political recrimination. The issue has become so serious that Miles Hurrell, chief executive of dairy co-operative Fonterra, was summoned to meetings with the government and opposition parties this week.

    After meeting Hurrell, Finance Minister Nicola Willis appeared to place some of the blame for the high price of butter on supermarkets rather than on the dairy giant.

    According to Stats NZ, butter prices rose by 46.5% in the year to June and are now 120% higher than a decade ago. The average price for a 500g block is NZ$8.60, with some local brands costing over $10.

    But solving the problem is not a matter of waving a magic economic wand. Several factors influence butter prices, few of which can be altered directly by government policy.

    And the question remains – would we want to? Proposals such as reducing exports to boost domestic supply, or cutting goods and services tax (GST) on dairy products, all carry consequences.

    A key factor driving butter prices in New Zealand is that 95% of the country’s dairy production is exported.

    Limited domestic supply and strong global demand have pushed up prices for a range of commodities – not just milk, but beef as well. These increases are reflected in local retail prices.

    Another contributing factor is rising costs along the supply chain. At the farm level, producers are receiving record prices for dairy. But this comes at a time when input costs have also increased significantly. It is not all profit.

    Weighing the options

    Before changing rules around dairy exports, the government must weigh the broader consequences.

    On the one hand, high milk prices benefit “NZ Inc”. The dairy sector accounts for 25% of exports and employs 55,000 New Zealanders. When farmers do well, the wider rural economy benefits – with flow-on effects for the country as a whole.

    On the other hand, there is the ongoing challenge of domestic food security. Many people cannot afford basic groceries and foodbank use is rising.

    So how can New Zealand maintain a food system that benefits from exports while also supporting struggling domestic consumers?

    One option is to remove GST from food. Other countries exempt dairy products from such taxes in an effort to make staples more affordable.

    This idea has been repeatedly reviewed and rejected – including by the 2018 Tax Working Group. In 2024, it was estimated that removing GST could cost the government between $3.3bn and $3.9bn, with only modest benefits for the average household.

    Fonterra or supermarkets?

    Another route would be to examine Fonterra’s dominance in the supply chain. There are advantages to having a strong global player. And it is not in the national interest for the company to incur losses on domestic sales.

    Still, the structure of the market may warrant scrutiny. For a long time there were just two main suppliers of processed dairy products – Fonterra and Goodman Fielder – and two main retailers – Foodstuffs and Woolworths. This set up reduced the need to compete on prices.

    While there is arguably more competition in manufacturing sector now, supermarkets are still under scrutiny and have long faced criticism for a lack of competition.

    The opaque nature of the profit margins across the supply chain also fuels suspicion. Consumers know what they pay at the checkout and what farmers receive. But the rest is less clear. This lack of transparency invites speculation about who benefits from soaring prices.

    In the end, though, the government may not need to act at all.

    As economists like to say: “Nothing cures high prices like high prices.” While demand for butter is relatively inelastic, there comes a point at which consumers reduce their purchases or seek alternatives. International buyers will also push back – and falling global demand may redirect more supply to domestic markets.

    High prices also act as a signal to producers across the globe to increase production, which could happen relatively quickly if there are favourable climatic and other conditions.

    We only need to look back to 2014, when the price of dairy dropped by 48% over the course of 12 months due to reduced demand and increased supply, to see how quickly the situation can change.

    Alan Renwick 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. Butter wars: ‘nothing cures high prices like high prices’ – but will market forces be enough? – https://theconversation.com/butter-wars-nothing-cures-high-prices-like-high-prices-but-will-market-forces-be-enough-261750

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: Waiting too long for public dental care? Here’s why the system is struggling – and how to fix it

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Santosh Tadakamadla, Professor and Head of Dentistry and Oral Health, La Trobe University

    Just over one-third of Australians are eligible for public dental services, which provide free or low cost dental treatment.

    Yet demand for these services continues to exceed supply. As a result, many Australian adults face long waits for access, which can be up to three years in some states.

    So what’s going wrong with public dental care in Australia? And how can it be fixed?

    Who funds public dental care?

    Both the federal government and state and territory governments fund public dental services. These are primarily targeted at low-income Australians, including children, and hard-to-reach populations, known as priority groups.

    Individuals and families bear a majority of the costs for dental services. They paid around 81% (A$10.1 billion) of the cost for dental services in 2022–23, either directly through out-of-pocket expenses, or through private health insurance premiums.

    The Commonwealth contributed 11% to the cost of dental care, while the states and territories paid the remaining 8% in 2022–23.

    Who is eligible for public dental care?

    Just under half of Australian children are eligible for the means-tested Child Dental Benefits Schedule. This gives them access to $1,132 of dental benefits over two years.

    While children from low-income families tend to benefit from this scheme, critics have raised concerns about the low uptake. Only one-third use the dental program in any given year.

    Some children access free or low-cost dental care from state and territory based services, such as the Victorian Smile Squad school dental program or the NSW Health Primary School Mobile Dental Program.

    Others use their private health insurance to pay for some of the costs of private dental care.

    What if you’re low-income but aren’t eligible?

    Some Australians aren’t eligible for public dental services but can’t afford private dental care. In 2022–23, around one in six people (18%) delayed or didn’t see a dental professional when they needed to because of the cost.

    Some Australians are accessing their superannuation funds under compassionate grounds for dental treatment. The amount people have accessed has grown eight-fold from 2018–19 to 2023–24, from $66.4 million to $526.4 million.

    However, concerns have been raised about the exploitation of this provision. Some people have accessed their super for dental treatment costing more than $20,000. This more than what would typically be required for urgent dental care, impacting their future financial security.

    Why are the waits so long in the public dental care system?

    The long waits are due to a combination of factors, alongside high levels need:

    • systemic under-funding by Australian governments. This is exacerbated by federal government funding for public dental services remaining fixed rather than being indexed annually

    • workforce shortages in rural and remote areas, with dental practitioners concentrated in wealthy, metro areas

    • poor incentives for the oral health workforce in public dental services

    • too few public clinics, in part because the initial outlay and ongoing equipment costs are so great.

    What is the government planning in the long term?

    The federal government is taking action to improve the affordability of dental services through long-term funding reforms only targeting priority populations to bring some dental services into Medicare.

    An initial focus is for older Australians and First Nations people.

    Cost estimates for a universal dental scheme vary significantly, depending on the population coverage and the number of dental benefits individuals are eligible for, and whether services are capped (as in the case of the Child Dental Benefits Schedule) or uncapped.

    The Grattan Institute estimates a capped scheme would cost $5.6 billion annually.

    The Australian Parliamentary Budget Office estimates it would cost $45 billion over three years.

    When increasing government funding for public dental service, it’s important policymakers ensure the services included are evidence-based and represent value for money.

    What needs to be done in the meantime

    Meaningful long-term funding reform towards a universal dental scheme requires some foundational policy work.

    First, there should be an agreed understanding of what dental services should be government subsidised and provide annual limits for reimbursement to prevent overtreatment. This would avoid some people getting a lot of dental treatment they don’t need, while others could miss out.

    Many dental services are routinely offered without any clinical benefit. This includes six-monthly oral health check-ups and cleans for low-risk patients.

    Second, resource allocation is best done when we focus on prevention and governments fund cost-effective dental services. Priority-setting is best done using economic evaluation tools.

    Third, the federal government should extend its existing decision-making frameworks to include dental services. This would bring dental care in line with medicine and service listings on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) and the Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS), ensuring that safety, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness inform public funding decisions.

    Fourth, the government needs to reform the workforce. This should include funding to support recruitment and training of students from regional, rural and remote areas. These students are more likely to return to their communities to work, balancing the unequal distribution of the workforce.

    We also urgently need to attract and retain more people to work in public dental services.

    Finally, we need a coordinated national approach to oral health policy and funding. The federal government has an opportunity to do this now as consultations continue through 2025 to develop and implement the National Oral Health Plan 2025–2034.

    Santosh Tadakamadla received National Health and Medical Research Council Early Career Fellowship (APP1161659) from 2019-2023. He is Head of Dentistry and Oral Health at La Trobe Rural Health School in Bendigo.

    Tan Nguyen receives funding from National Health and Medical Research Council (Postgraduate Scholarship Scheme APP1189802). He is affiliated with Deakin University, Monash University, Oral Health Victoria, Public Association of Australia, National Oral Health Alliance and Dental Board of Australia.

    ref. Waiting too long for public dental care? Here’s why the system is struggling – and how to fix it – https://theconversation.com/waiting-too-long-for-public-dental-care-heres-why-the-system-is-struggling-and-how-to-fix-it-261661

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz