Category: Statistics

  • MIL-OSI USA News: Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Modernizes American Workforce Programs for the High-Paying Skilled Trade Jobs of the Future

    Source: The White House

    OVERHAULING FEDERAL WORKFORCE TRAINING: Today, President Donald J. Trump signed an Executive Order to modernize American workforce programs to prepare citizens for the high-paying skilled trade jobs of the future.

    • The order directs the Secretaries of Labor, Education, and Commerce to review all federal workforce programs to modernize, integrate, and re-align programs to address critical workforce needs in emerging industries.
    • These Secretaries shall provide President Trump with a streamlined and integrated plan to re-orient federal workforce programs to prepare the American economy for the opportunities presented by reshoring and re-industrialization.
    • This Comprehensive Workforce Strategy will further America’s global economic leadership and domination of key sectors by, among other things, capitalizing on the AI revolution.

    PROVIDING RETURN ON WORKFORCE INVESTMENT: After years of shuffling Americans through an economically unproductive postsecondary system, President Trump will refocus young Americans on career preparation.

    • Decades of failed political leadership have left America with a one-size-fits-all approach to workforce preparedness, which previous Administrations promoted as “college for all.”
    • The Federal Government invests over $700 billion a year in American higher education, but only about half of new college graduates find jobs that require college degrees.
    • Meanwhile, the Federal Government spends $4.1 billion on the Workforce Investment and Opportunity Act and $1.4 billion on Career and Technical Education through the Perkins Act. Neither of these programs are structured to promote apprenticeships or have incentives to meet workforce training needs.
    • The Trump Administration is putting American workers first, unleashing domestic advanced manufacturing to produce the best American-made products and implement world-leading, American-developed technologies.

    BACK TO THE FUTURE OF JOBS: After decades of leadership by so-called “Experts” making wrong predictions on what the future will hold, President Trump will restore focus on sectors and programs that Made the American Economy Great in the first place.

    • In 2024, there was a shortage of 447,00 construction workers and 94,000 durable goods workers. The Bureau of Labor Statistics projects that the annual shortage of skilled tradesman over the next decade will be close to half a million—and grow as the years go by.
    • This understates the problem—and the opportunity. Even the best federal government statisticians cannot predict the future. As the potential of American AI increases, and as America reshores manufacturing and makes Made in America a mark of international envy, America will need more skilled tradesman than we’re prepared to train.
    • President Trump’s Executive Order will meet the needs of the future with a focus on registered apprenticeships. The Administration will submit a plan to support more than 1 million apprenticeships per year.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI: Precision Drilling Announces 2025 First Quarter Unaudited Financial Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CALGARY, Alberta, April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — This news release contains “forward-looking information and statements” within the meaning of applicable securities laws. For a full disclosure of the forward-looking information and statements and the risks to which they are subject, see the “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information and Statements” later in this news release. This news release contains references to certain Financial Measures and Ratios, including Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before income taxes, gain on investments and other assets, finance charges, foreign exchange, gain on asset disposals and depreciation and amortization), Funds Provided by (Used in) Operations, Net Capital Spending, Working Capital and Total Long-term Financial Liabilities. These terms do not have standardized meanings prescribed under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Accounting Standards and may not be comparable to similar measures used by other companies. See “Financial Measures and Ratios” later in this news release.

    Precision Drilling Corporation (“Precision” or the “Company”) (TSX:PD; NYSE:PDS) announces 2025 first quarter results, confirms shareholder return targets, and lowers 2025 capital budget.

    Financial Highlights

    • Revenue in the first quarter was $496 million compared to $528 million realized in the same period last year as strong drilling activity in Canada was offset by lower U.S. drilling activity.
    • Adjusted EBITDA(1) was $137 million and included $3 million of restructuring costs and $3 million of share-based compensation expense. In 2024, first quarter Adjusted EBITDA(1) was $143 million and included share-based compensation expense of $23 million.
    • First quarter net earnings attributable to shareholders was $35 million or $2.52 per share and comparable to $37 million or $2.53 per share in 2024. Precision has consistently delivered positive net earnings since mid-2022.
    • Cash provided by operations during the quarter was $63 million, allowing the Company to repurchase $31 million of common shares and repay $17 million of debt.
    • Capital expenditures were $60 million and the Company has lowered its 2025 capital budget to $200 million versus the $225 million previously announced.
    • Precision remains committed to repaying at least $100 million of debt in 2025 and allocating 35% to 45% of free cash flow, before debt repayments, to share buybacks.

    Operational Highlights

    • Canada’s activity averaged 74 drilling rigs in the first quarter and surpassed the 73 active rigs in the same period last year.
    • Canadian revenue per utilization day was $35,601 and comparable to the $35,596 in the first quarter of 2024.
    • U.S. activity averaged 30 drilling rigs compared to 38 in the same period last year.
    • U.S. revenue per utilization day was US$33,157, which included US$1,263 per utilization day for idle but contracted rig revenue, versus US$32,867 in the first quarter of last year.
    • Internationally, we had eight rigs active in the first quarter, consistent with the first quarter of 2024, and realized revenue of US$36 million compared to US$38 million in 2024.
    • Service rig operating hours decreased 10% compared to the same quarter last year due to customer project deferrals and impacts of an earlier spring break up in Canada, plus lower U.S. activity.
            (1) See “FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RATIOS.”

    MANAGEMENT COMMENTARY

    “I am pleased with Precision’s first quarter financial and operational results, and particularly with the efforts of the Precision team as we manage our way through a period of unusual volatility and market uncertainty. In the first quarter, our net earnings attributable to shareholders was $35 million, marking 11 consecutive quarters of positive earnings, and we are well on our way to meeting our capital allocation targets. During the quarter, we generated $63 million of cash provided by operations, allowing us to repay $17 million of debt and purchase $31 million of shares. Over the last four quarters, Precision has reduced its outstanding shares by nearly one million shares, representing 7% of our outstanding balance.

    “During the first quarter our Canadian drilling activity remained slightly higher than last year, averaging 74 active rigs compared to 73 in 2024 and we expect this trend to continue through the first half of this year. In the U.S., we have modestly increased our activity levels from the fourth quarter, currently operating 34 rigs, primarily by capitalizing on the emerging opportunities in natural gas plays. With initial Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports beginning shortly in Canada and significant LNG export capacity expansion underway in the U.S., we believe our market positioning for these increasing LNG opportunities is constructive.

    “Second-half industry activity in North America will depend largely on customer realized cash flows and their capital allocation priorities. We believe industry capital discipline will remain a stabilizing market feature muting our customers’ short-term response to volatile commodity prices. However, global events and conflicts, including unexpected OPEC+ production increases, trade and tariff uncertainty, and geopolitical conflicts have the potential to impact global economic growth and access to commodity supplies, creating a range of commodity price scenarios which are difficult to predict.

    “Tightly controlling all aspects of our business, adjusting spending and specifically managing Precision’s cash inflows and outflows at a pace that matches the cyclicality of our industry is a cornerstone of Precision’s business model. We are reducing our 2025 capital spending by $25 million to $200 million to mitigate increased market uncertainty and a potential reduction in customer demand. This includes trimming our expected upgrade spending by approximately $8 million and maintenance capital by $17 million. We remain poised to further adjust capital spending in response to actual customer demand. 

    “We have also reduced our fixed costs by approximately $10 million annually by streamlining our internal structure and focusing more directly on customer needs and aligning with current activity levels. These changes included flattening our operations leadership structure, exiting our North Dakota well-servicing business and reducing the related staffing levels.

    “Our International drilling operations and Completion and Production business both contributed meaningful free cash flow for the quarter, and this is expected to continue for the rest of the year.

    “With a predominantly variable cost business and low debt levels, a highly experienced team committed to serving our customers, and a high-performance rig fleet, Precision is better positioned than any time in the past decade to navigate uncertainty while simultaneously creating shareholder value,” concluded Mr. Neveu.

    SELECT FINANCIAL AND OPERATING INFORMATION

    Financial Highlights

      For the three months ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars, except per share amounts)   2025       2024     % Change  
    Revenue   496,331       527,788       (6.0 )
    Adjusted EBITDA(1)   137,497       143,149       (3.9 )
    Net earnings   34,947       36,516       (4.3 )
    Net earnings attributable to shareholders   34,511       36,516       (5.5 )
    Cash provided by operations   63,419       65,543       (3.2 )
    Funds provided by operations(1)   109,842       117,765       (6.7 )
                     
    Cash used in investing activities   57,202       75,237       (24.0 )
    Capital spending by spend category(1)                
    Expansion and upgrade   19,546       14,370       36.0  
    Maintenance and infrastructure   40,419       41,157       (1.8 )
    Proceeds on sale   (3,765 )     (5,186 )     (27.4 )
    Net capital spending(1)   56,200       50,341       11.6  
                     
    Net earnings attributable to shareholders per share :                
    Basic   2.52       2.53       (0.4 )
    Diluted   2.20       2.53       (13.0 )
    Weighted average shares outstanding:                
    Basic   13,683       14,407       (5.0 )
    Diluted   14,287       14,410       (0.9 )

    (1) See “FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RATIOS.”

    Operating Highlights

      For the three months ended March 31,  
      2025     2024     % Change  
    Contract drilling rig fleet   215       214       0.5  
    Drilling rig utilization days:                
    Canada   6,680       6,617       1.0  
    U.S.   2,691       3,453       (22.1 )
    International   720       728       (1.1 )
    Revenue per utilization day:                
    Canada (Cdn$)   35,601       35,596       0.0  
    U.S. (US$)   33,157       32,867       0.9  
    International (US$)   49,419       52,808       (6.4 )
    Operating costs per utilization day:                
    Canada (Cdn$)   20,822       19,959       4.3  
    U.S. (US$)   23,568       21,719       8.5  
                     
    Service rig fleet   153       183       (16.4 )
    Service rig operating hours   66,986       74,505       (10.1 )


    Drilling Activity

      Average for the quarter ended 2024   Average for the quarter ended 2025  
      Mar. 31     June 30     Sept. 30     Dec. 31     Mar. 31  
    Average Precision active rig count(1):                            
    Canada   73       49       72       65       74  
    U.S.   38       36       35       34       30  
    International   8       8       8       8       8  
    Total   119       93       115       107       112  

    (1) Average number of drilling rigs working or moving.


    Financial Position

    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars, except ratios) March 31, 2025     December 31, 2024  
    Working capital(1)   (45,033 )     162,592  
    Cash   28,245       73,771  
    Long-term debt   567,824       812,469  
    Total long-term financial liabilities(1)   632,369       888,173  
    Total assets   2,915,984       2,956,315  
    Long-term debt to long-term debt plus equity ratio(1)   0.25       0.33  

    (1) See “FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RATIOS.”

    Summary for the three months ended March 31, 2025:

    • Revenue was $496 million compared to $528 million in the first quarter of 2024 as strong drilling activity in Canada was offset by lower U.S. drilling activity.
    • Adjusted EBITDA decreased to $137 million from $143 million, primarily due to lower drilling activity in the U.S. and restructuring costs of $3 million that were partially offset by lower share-based compensation expense. Please refer to “Other Items” later in this news release for additional information on share-based compensation.
    • Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenue was relatively stable at 28% compared to 27% in 2024.
    • Net earnings attributable to shareholders was $35 million or $2.52 per share and comparable with $37 million or $2.53 per share for the same period last year. On a diluted basis, net earnings attributable to shareholders was $2.20 versus $2.53 in 2024.
    • Cash provided by operations was $63 million, allowing the Company to repurchase 408,973 shares for $31 million, reduce debt by $17 million by repaying the outstanding balance on the Senior Credit Facility, and end the quarter with $28 million of cash and almost $550 million of available liquidity.
    • In Canada, revenue per utilization day was $35,601, consistent with the first quarter of 2024. Canadian operating costs per utilization day increased 4% to $20,822, mainly due to wage increases and Super Single rig reactivations. First quarter revenue and operating costs per utilization day were consistent with the fourth quarter of 2024.
    • In the U.S. revenue per utilization day, excluding idle but contracted rig revenue of US$1,263, was US$31,894 compared with US$32,867 in the first quarter of last year. First quarter revenue per utilization day, excluding idle but contracted rig revenue, increased by 4% from the fourth quarter of 2024.
    • U.S. operating costs per utilization day increased 9% to US$23,568 compared to the same quarter last year due to higher mobilization costs, additional rig reactivations, and fixed costs being spread over fewer activity days. These same factors caused operating costs per utilization per day in the first quarter to rise 9% compared to the fourth quarter of 2024.
    • Internationally, we realized revenue of US$36 million from eight active drilling rigs, which is similar to the US$38 million generated in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Completion and Production Services revenue was $79 million, a decrease of $8 million from 2024, as service rig operating hours decreased 10% due to a number of customer project deferrals and an earlier spring break up in Canada, plus less activity in the U.S. Adjusted EBITDA was $18 million, representing 22% of revenue compared to 21% in the first quarter of 2024.
    • General and administrative expenses were $30 million compared with $45 million in the first quarter of 2024 primarily due to lower share-based compensation expense.
    • Capital expenditures increased slightly to $60 million versus $56 million in 2024 and by spend category included $40 million for the maintenance of existing assets, infrastructure, and intangible assets and $20 million for expansion and upgrades. Precision has lowered its 2025 capital budget to $200 million.

    STRATEGY

    Precision’s vision is to be globally recognized as the High Performance, High Value provider of land drilling services. We work toward this vision by defining and measuring our results against strategic priorities that we establish at the beginning of every year.

    Precision’s 2025 strategic priorities and the progress made during the first quarter are as follows:

    1. Maximize free cash flow through disciplined capital deployment and strict cost management.
      • Generated cash from operations of $63 million, allowing the Company to reduce debt and buy back shares.
      • Proactively reduced fixed cost structure to address market uncertainty and expect to realize approximately $10 million in annual savings.
      • Reduced our 2025 capital budget to $200 million versus the $225 million previously announced.
    2. Enhance shareholder returns through debt reduction and share repurchases. Plan to reduce debt by at least $100 million and allocate 35% to 45% of free cash flow before debt repayments for share repurchases.
      • Returned $31 million of capital to shareholders by repurchasing 408,973 shares during the quarter.
      • Reduced debt by $17 million and ended the quarter with almost $550 million of available liquidity.
      • Remain committed to reducing debt by at least $100 million in 2025 and allocating 35% to 45% of free cash flow, before debt repayments, directly to shareholders.
    3. Grow revenue in existing service lines through contracted upgrades, optimized pricing and utilization, and opportunistic consolidating tuck-in acquisitions.
      • Increased Canadian rig utilization, averaging 74 active rigs for the first quarter versus 73 in 2024.
      • Maintained strong pricing in Canada with revenue per utilization per day of $35,601, aligning with an average day rate of $35,596 in the first quarter of 2024.
      • Invested $20 million in expansion and upgrade capital to enhance our drilling rigs.
      • Current market conditions and commodity price volatility make acquisitions less likely in the near term.

    OUTLOOK

    Near-term expectations for global energy demand growth have been tempered by several geopolitical events including OPEC+ easing of curtailments, trade policy uncertainty, and international conflicts. However, we believe the long-term fundamentals for energy demand are positive, driven by economic growth, increasing demand from emerging economies, and new energy sources of power demand. 

    In Canada, the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, which became operational in May of 2024, combined with the imminent startup of LNG Canada will provide significant tidewater access for Canadian crude oil and natural gas, supporting Canadian drilling activity. In the U.S., the next wave of LNG export terminals is expected to add approximately 13 bcf/d of export capacity over the next five years, supporting U.S. natural gas drilling activity beyond domestic demand growth and further supporting natural gas drilling.

    Our Canadian drilling activity peaked at 82 rigs in the first quarter with our Super Triple and Super Single rigs near full utilization. We expect the traditional spring breakup period this year to have a historically small impact on our activity, as strong demand for our growing fleet of pad-capable rigs should allow 45 to 48 rigs to continue operating during this period versus 43 last year. Despite trade and tariff uncertainty and oil prices falling to approximately US$60 per barrel, we have not experienced any meaningful change in customer demand or their longer-term plans. Overall, we expect our Canadian drilling activity to be up for the first half of the year compared to the first six months of 2024.

    In the U.S., we have modestly increased our activity levels from the fourth quarter, currently operating 34 rigs, primarily by capitalizing on the emerging opportunities in natural gas plays. With significant LNG export capacity expansion underway in the U.S., we believe our market positioning for these increasing LNG opportunities is constructive.

    North American industry activity in the second half of this year will depend largely on customer realized cash flows and their capital allocation priorities. We believe industry capital discipline will remain a stabilizing market feature muting our customers’ short-term response to volatile commodity prices. However, global events and conflicts, including unexpected OPEC+ production increases, trade and tariff uncertainty, and geopolitical conflicts have the potential to impact global economic growth and access to commodity supplies, creating a range of commodity price scenarios which are difficult to predict.

    Internationally, we have eight rigs on term contracts, five in Kuwait and three in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The majority of these rigs are under five-year term contracts that extend into 2027 and 2028, providing predictable cash flow for the next few years. In May and for the remainder of the year, we expect seven active rigs compared to eight for the first four months of the year but with no material impact on our 2025 cash flow. We continue to look for opportunities to leverage our international expertise.

    As the premier well service provider in Canada, the outlook for this business remains strong, driven by increased takeaway capacity from Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and LNG Canada, and increased regulatory spending requirements for abandonment work. With continued labour constraints, we expect firm pricing into the foreseeable future.

    Contracts

    The following chart outlines the average number of drilling rigs under term contract by quarter as at April 23, 2025. For those quarters ending after March 31, 2025, this chart represents the minimum number of term contracts from which we will earn revenue. We expect the actual number of contracted rigs to vary in future periods as we sign additional term contracts.

    As at April 23, 2025 Average for the quarter ended 2024     Average     Average for the quarter ended 2025     Average  
      Mar. 31     June 30     Sept. 30     Dec. 31     2024     Mar. 31     June 30     Sept. 30     Dec. 31     2025  
    Average rigs under term contract:                                                          
    Canada   24       22       23       23       23       20       19       18       14       18  
    U.S.   20       17       17       16       18       16       15       11       8       13  
    International   8       8       8       8       8       8       7       7       7       7  
    Total   52       47       48       47       49       44       41       36       29       38  

    SEGMENTED FINANCIAL RESULTS

    Precision’s operations are reported in two segments: Contract Drilling Services, which includes our drilling rig, oilfield supply and manufacturing divisions; and Completion and Production Services, which includes our service rig, rental and camp and catering divisions.

    SEGMENT REVIEW OF CONTRACT DRILLING SERVICES

      For the three months ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars, except where noted)   2025       2024     % Change  
    Revenue   419,457       443,367       (5.4 )
    Expenses:                
    Operating   272,412       276,692       (1.5 )
    General and administrative   11,029       13,002       (15.2 )
    Adjusted EBITDA(1)   136,016       153,673       (11.5 )
    Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenue(1)   32.4 %     34.7 %      

    (1) See “FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RATIOS.”

    Canadian onshore drilling statistics:(1) 2025     2024  
      Precision     Industry(2)     Precision     Industry(2)  
    Average number of active land rigs for quarters ended:                      
    March 31   74       214       73       208  

    (1) Canadian operations only.
    (2) Baker Hughes rig counts.

    United States onshore drilling statistics:(1) 2025     2024  
      Precision     Industry(2)     Precision     Industry(2)  
    Average number of active land rigs for quarters ended:                      
    March 31   30       572       38       602  

    (1) United States lower 48 operations only.
    (2) Baker Hughes rig counts.

    SEGMENT REVIEW OF COMPLETION AND PRODUCTION SERVICES

      For the three months ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars, except where noted)   2025       2024     % Change  
    Revenue   79,330       87,087       (8.9 )
    Expenses:                
    Operating   59,112       65,480       (9.7 )
    General and administrative   2,672       3,002       (11.0 )
    Adjusted EBITDA(1)   17,546       18,605       (5.7 )
    Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of revenue(1)   22.1 %     21.4 %      
    Well servicing statistics:                
    Number of service rigs (end of period)   153       183       (16.4 )
    Service rig operating hours   66,986       74,505       (10.1 )

    (1) See “FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RATIOS.”

    OTHER ITEMS

    Share-based Incentive Compensation Plans

    We have several cash and equity-settled share-based incentive plans for non-management directors, officers, and other eligible employees. Our accounting policies for each share-based incentive plan can be found in our 2024 Annual Report.

    A summary of expense amounts under these plans during the reporting periods are as follows:

      For the three months ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars) 2025     2024  
    Cash settled share-based incentive plans   403       21,759  
    Equity settled share-based incentive plans   2,427       875  
    Total share-based incentive compensation plan expense   2,830       22,634  
               
    Allocated:          
    Operating   1,128       5,252  
    General and Administrative   1,702       17,382  
        2,830       22,634  

    FINANCIAL MEASURES AND RATIOS

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    We reference certain additional Non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (Non-GAAP) measures that are not defined terms under IFRS Accounting Standards to assess performance because we believe they provide useful supplemental information to investors.
    Adjusted EBITDA We believe Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before income taxes, gain on investments and other assets, finance charges, foreign exchange, gain on asset disposals and depreciation and amortization), as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Net Earnings and our reportable operating segment disclosures, is a useful measure because it gives an indication of the results from our principal business activities prior to consideration of how our activities are financed and the impact of foreign exchange, taxation and depreciation and amortization charges.

    The most directly comparable financial measure is net earnings.

      For the three months ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars)   2025       2024  
    Adjusted EBITDA by segment:          
    Contract Drilling Services   136,016       153,673  
    Completion and Production Services   17,546       18,605  
    Corporate and Other   (16,065 )     (29,129 )
    Adjusted EBITDA   137,497       143,149  
    Depreciation and amortization   75,036       78,213  
    Gain on asset disposals   (2,872 )     (3,237 )
    Foreign exchange   367       394  
    Finance charges   15,760       18,369  
    Gain on investments and other assets   (49 )     (228 )
    Income taxes   14,308       13,122  
    Net earnings   34,947       36,516  
    Non-controlling interests   436        
    Net earnings attributable to shareholders   34,511       36,516  
    Funds Provided by (Used in) Operations We believe funds provided by (used in) operations, as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, is a useful measure because it provides an indication of the funds our principal business activities generate prior to consideration of working capital changes, which is primarily made up of highly liquid balances.

    The most directly comparable financial measure is cash provided by (used in) operations.

    Net Capital Spending We believe net capital spending is a useful measure as it provides an indication of our primary investment activities.

    The most directly comparable financial measure is cash provided by (used in) investing activities.

    Net capital spending is calculated as follows:

      For the three months ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars)   2025       2024  
    Capital spending by spend category          
    Expansion and upgrade   19,546       14,370  
    Maintenance, infrastructure and intangibles   40,419       41,157  
        59,965       55,527  
    Proceeds on sale of property, plant and equipment   (3,765 )     (5,186 )
    Net capital spending   56,200       50,341  
    Purchase of investments and other assets   11        
    Receipt of finance lease payments   (208 )     (191 )
    Changes in non-cash working capital balances   1,199       25,087  
    Cash used in investing activities   57,202       75,237  
    Working Capital We define working capital as current assets less current liabilities, as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Financial Position.

    Working capital is calculated as follows:

      March 31,     December 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars)   2025       2024  
    Current assets   481,111       501,284  
    Current liabilities   (526,144 )     (338,692 )
    Working capital   (45,033 )     162,592  
    Total Long-term Financial Liabilities We define total long-term financial liabilities as total non-current liabilities less deferred tax liabilities, as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Financial Position.

    Total long-term financial liabilities is calculated as follows:

      March 31,     December 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars)   2025       2024  
    Total non-current liabilities   688,940       935,624  
    Deferred tax liabilities   (56,571 )     (47,451 )
    Total long-term financial liabilities   632,369       888,173  
    Non-GAAP Ratios
    We reference certain additional Non-GAAP ratios that are not defined terms under IFRS to assess performance because we believe they provide useful supplemental information to investors.
    Adjusted EBITDA % of Revenue We believe Adjusted EBITDA as a percentage of consolidated revenue, as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Net Earnings, provides an indication of our profitability from our principal business activities prior to consideration of how our activities are financed and the impact of foreign exchange, taxation and depreciation and amortization charges.
    Long-term debt to long-term debt plus equity We believe that long-term debt (as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Financial Position) to long-term debt plus equity (total equity as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Financial Position) provides an indication of our debt leverage. For the period ended March 31, 2025 long-term debt includes long-term debt plus current portion of long-term debt as reported in our Consolidated Interim Consolidated Statements of Financial Position.
    Net Debt to Adjusted EBITDA We believe that the Net Debt (long-term debt plus current portion of long-term debt less cash, as reported in our Condensed Interim Consolidated Statements of Financial Position) to Adjusted EBITDA ratio provides an indication of the number of years it would take for us to repay our debt obligations. For the period ended March 31, 2025 long-term debt includes long-term debt plus current portion of long-term debt as reported in our Consolidated Interim Consolidated Statements of Financial Position.
    Supplementary Financial Measures
    We reference certain supplementary financial measures that are not defined terms under IFRS to assess performance because we believe they provide useful supplemental information to investors.
    Capital Spending by Spend Category We provide additional disclosure to better depict the nature of our capital spending. Our capital spending is categorized as expansion and upgrade, maintenance and infrastructure, or intangibles.

    CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION AND STATEMENTS

    Certain statements contained in this release, including statements that contain words such as “could”, “should”, “can”, “anticipate”, “estimate”, “intend”, “plan”, “expect”, “believe”, “will”, “may”, “continue”, “project”, “potential” and similar expressions and statements relating to matters that are not historical facts constitute “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation and “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the “safe harbor” provisions of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (collectively, “forward-looking information and statements”).

    In particular, forward-looking information and statements include, but are not limited to, the following:

    • our strategic priorities for 2025;
    • our capital expenditures, free cash flow allocation and debt reduction plans for 2025 and beyond;
    • anticipated activity levels, demand for our drilling rigs, day rates and daily operating margins in 2025;
    • the average number of term contracts in place for 2025;
    • customer adoption of Alpha™ technologies and EverGreen™ suite of environmental solutions;
    • potential commercial opportunities and rig contract renewals; and
    • our future debt reduction plans.

    These forward-looking information and statements are based on certain assumptions and analysis made by Precision in light of our experience and our perception of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors we believe are appropriate under the circumstances. These include, among other things:

    • our ability to react to customer spending plans as a result of changes in oil and natural gas prices;
    • the status of current negotiations with our customers and vendors;
    • customer focus on safety performance;
    • existing term contracts are neither renewed nor terminated prematurely;
    • our ability to deliver rigs to customers on a timely basis;
    • the impact of an increase/decrease in capital spending; and
    • the general stability of the economic and political environments in the jurisdictions where we operate.

    Undue reliance should not be placed on forward-looking information and statements. Whether actual results, performance or achievements will conform to our expectations and predictions is subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties which could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to:

    • volatility in the price and demand for oil and natural gas;
    • fluctuations in the level of oil and natural gas exploration and development activities;
    • fluctuations in the demand for contract drilling, well servicing and ancillary oilfield services;
    • our customers’ inability to obtain adequate credit or financing to support their drilling and production activity;
    • changes in drilling and well servicing technology, which could reduce demand for certain rigs or put us at a competitive advantage;
    • shortages, delays and interruptions in the delivery of equipment supplies and other key inputs;
    • liquidity of the capital markets to fund customer drilling programs;
    • availability of cash flow, debt and equity sources to fund our capital and operating requirements, as needed;
    • the impact of weather and seasonal conditions on operations and facilities;
    • the impact of tariffs and trade disputes;
    • competitive operating risks inherent in contract drilling, well servicing and ancillary oilfield services;
    • ability to improve our rig technology to improve drilling efficiency;
    • general economic, market or business conditions;
    • the availability of qualified personnel and management;
    • a decline in our safety performance which could result in lower demand for our services;
    • changes in laws or regulations, including changes in environmental laws and regulations such as increased regulation of hydraulic fracturing or restrictions on the burning of fossil fuels and greenhouse gas emissions, which could have an adverse impact on the demand for oil and natural gas;
    • terrorism, social, civil and political unrest in the foreign jurisdictions where we operate;
    • fluctuations in foreign exchange, interest rates and tax rates; and
    • other unforeseen conditions which could impact the use of services supplied by Precision and Precision’s ability to respond to such conditions.

    Readers are cautioned that the forgoing list of risk factors is not exhaustive. Additional information on these and other factors that could affect our business, operations or financial results are included in reports on file with applicable securities regulatory authorities, including but not limited to Precision’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2024, which may be accessed on Precision’s SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca or under Precision’s EDGAR profile at www.sec.gov. The forward-looking information and statements contained in this release are made as of the date hereof and Precision undertakes no obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

    CONDENSED INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL POSITION (UNAUDITED)

    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars) March 31, 2025     December 31, 2024  
    ASSETS          
    Current assets:          
    Cash $ 28,245     $ 73,771  
    Accounts receivable   397,684       378,712  
    Inventory   49,176       43,300  
    Assets held for sale   6,006       5,501  
    Total current assets   481,111       501,284  
    Non-current assets:          
    Deferred tax assets   2,437       6,559  
    Property, plant and equipment   2,342,482       2,356,173  
    Intangibles   13,537       12,997  
    Right-of-use assets   63,223       66,032  
    Finance lease receivables   4,670       4,806  
    Investments and other assets   8,524       8,464  
    Total non-current assets   2,434,873       2,455,031  
    Total assets $ 2,915,984     $ 2,956,315  
               
    LIABILITIES AND EQUITY          
    Current liabilities:          
    Accounts payable and accrued liabilities $ 271,696     $ 314,355  
    Income taxes payable   4,526       3,778  
    Current portion of lease obligations   19,703       20,559  
    Current portion of long-term debt   230,219        
    Total current liabilities   526,144       338,692  
               
    Non-current liabilities:          
    Share-based compensation   5,391       13,666  
    Provisions and other   7,478       7,472  
    Lease obligations   51,676       54,566  
    Long-term debt   567,824       812,469  
    Deferred tax liabilities   56,571       47,451  
    Total non-current liabilities   688,940       935,624  
    Equity:          
    Shareholders’ capital   2,287,422       2,301,729  
    Contributed surplus   77,011       77,557  
    Accumulated other comprehensive income   197,827       199,020  
    Deficit   (866,323 )     (900,834 )
    Total equity attributable to shareholders   1,695,937       1,677,472  
    Non-controlling interest   4,963       4,527  
    Total equity   1,700,900       1,681,999  
    Total liabilities and equity $ 2,915,984     $ 2,956,315  

    CONDENSED INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF NET EARNINGS (LOSS) (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars, except per share amounts) 2025     2024  
               
               
    Revenue $ 496,331     $ 527,788  
    Expenses:          
    Operating   329,068       339,506  
    General and administrative   29,766       45,133  
    Earnings before income taxes, gain on
    investments and other assets, finance
    charges, foreign exchange, gain on asset
    disposals, and depreciation and amortization
      137,497       143,149  
    Depreciation and amortization   75,036       78,213  
    Gain on asset disposals   (2,872 )     (3,237 )
    Foreign exchange   367       394  
    Finance charges   15,760       18,369  
    Gain on investments and other assets   (49 )     (228 )
    Earnings before income taxes   49,255       49,638  
    Income taxes:          
    Current   1,106       1,017  
    Deferred   13,202       12,105  
        14,308       13,122  
    Net earnings $ 34,947     $ 36,516  
    Attributable to:          
    Shareholders of Precision Drilling Corporation $ 34,511     $ 36,516  
    Non-controlling interests $ 436     $  
    Net earnings per share attributable to shareholders
    of Precision Drilling Corporation:
             
    Basic $ 2.52     $ 2.53  
    Diluted $ 2.20     $ 2.53  

    CONDENSED INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars) 2025     2024  
    Net earnings $ 34,947     $ 36,516  
    Unrealized gain (loss) on translation of assets
    and liabilities of operations denominated in
    foreign currency
      (658 )     32,253  
    Foreign exchange loss on net investment hedge
    with U.S. denominated debt
      (535 )     (20,159 )
    Comprehensive income $ 33,754     $ 48,610  
    Attributable to:          
    Shareholders of Precision Drilling Corporation $ 33,318     $ 48,610  
    Non-controlling interests $ 436     $  

    CONDENSED INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (UNAUDITED)

      Three Months Ended March 31,  
    (Stated in thousands of Canadian dollars) 2025     2024  
    Cash provided by (used in):          
    Operations:          
    Net earnings $ 34,947     $ 36,516  
    Adjustments for:          
    Long-term compensation plans   3,016       7,451  
    Depreciation and amortization   75,036       78,213  
    Gain on asset disposals   (2,872 )     (3,237 )
    Foreign exchange   (783 )     728  
    Finance charges   15,760       18,369  
    Income taxes   14,308       13,122  
    Gain on investments and other assets   (49 )     (228 )
    Income taxes paid   (321 )     (234 )
    Interest paid   (29,637 )     (33,430 )
    Interest received   437       495  
    Funds provided by operations   109,842       117,765  
    Changes in non-cash working capital balances   (46,423 )     (52,222 )
    Cash provided by operations   63,419       65,543  
               
    Investments:          
    Purchase of property, plant and equipment   (59,965 )     (55,527 )
    Proceeds on sale of property, plant and equipment   3,765       5,186  
    Purchase of investments and other assets   (11 )      
    Receipt of finance lease payments   208       191  
    Changes in non-cash working capital balances   (1,199 )     (25,087 )
    Cash used in investing activities   (57,202 )     (75,237 )
               
    Financing:          
    Repayment of long-term debt   (17,110 )     (716 )
    Repurchase of share capital   (30,766 )     (10,081 )
    Lease payments   (3,587 )     (3,200 )
    Cash used in financing activities   (51,463 )     (13,997 )
    Effect of exchange rate changes on cash   (280 )     457  
    Increase (decrease) in cash   (45,526 )     (23,234 )
    Cash, beginning of period   73,771       54,182  
    Cash, end of period $ 28,245     $ 30,948  

    CONDENSED INTERIM CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN EQUITY (UNAUDITED)

      Attributable to shareholders of the Corporation              
    (Stated in thousands of
    Canadian dollars)
    Shareholders’
    Capital
        Contributed
    Surplus
        Accumulated
    Other
    Comprehensive
    Income
        Deficit     Total     Non-
    controlling
    interest
        Total
    Equity
     
    Balance at January 1, 2025 $ 2,301,729     $ 77,557     $ 199,020     $ (900,834 )   $ 1,677,472     $ 4,527     $ 1,681,999  
    Net earnings for the period                     34,511       34,511       436       34,947  
    Other comprehensive income
    for the period
                  (1,193 )           (1,193 )           (1,193 )
    Settlement of Executive
    Performance and Restricted
    Share Units
      11,651       (2,790 )                 8,861             8,861  
    Share repurchases   (26,141 )                       (26,141 )           (26,141 )
    Redemption of non-management
    directors share units
      183       (183 )                              
    Share-based compensation
    expense
            2,427                   2,427             2,427  
    Balance at March 31, 2025 $ 2,287,422     $ 77,011     $ 197,827     $ (866,323 )   $ 1,695,937     $ 4,963     $ 1,700,900  
      Attributable to shareholders of the Corporation              
    (Stated in thousands of
    Canadian dollars)
    Shareholders’
    Capital
        Contributed
    Surplus
        Accumulated
    Other
    Comprehensive
    Income
        Deficit     Total     Non-
    controlling interest
        Total
    Equity
     
    Balance at January 1, 2024 $ 2,365,129     $ 75,086     $ 147,476     $ (1,012,029 )   $ 1,575,662     $     $ 1,575,662  
    Net earnings for the period                     36,516       36,516             36,516  
    Other comprehensive income
    for the period
                  12,094             12,094             12,094  
    Settlement of Executive
    Performance and Restricted
    Share Units
      21,846       (1,479 )                 20,367             20,367  
    Share repurchases   (10,081 )                       (10,081 )           (10,081 )
    Share-based compensation
    expense
            875                   875             875  
    Balance at March 31, 2024 $ 2,376,894     $ 74,482     $ 159,570     $ (975,513 )   $ 1,635,433     $     $ 1,635,433  

    2025 FIRST QUARTER RESULTS CONFERENCE CALL AND WEBCAST

    Precision Drilling Corporation has scheduled a conference call and webcast to begin promptly at 11:00 a.m. MT (1:00 p.m. ET) on Thursday, April 24, 2025.

    To participate in the conference call please register at the URL link below. Once registered, you will receive a dial-in number and a unique PIN, which will allow you to ask questions.

    https://register-conf.media-server.com/register/BIfac587dca2994a30be564b41d99b43ac

    The call will also be webcast and can be accessed through the link below. A replay of the webcast call will be available on Precision’s website for 12 months.

    https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/gifawh57

    About Precision

    Precision is a leading provider of safe and environmentally responsible High Performance, High Value services to the energy industry, offering customers access to an extensive fleet of Super Series drilling rigs. Precision has commercialized an industry-leading digital technology portfolio known as Alpha™ that utilizes advanced automation software and analytics to generate efficient, predictable, and repeatable results for energy customers. Our drilling services are enhanced by our EverGreen™ suite of environmental solutions, which bolsters our commitment to reducing the environmental impact of our operations. Additionally, Precision offers well service rigs, camps and rental equipment all backed by a comprehensive mix of technical support services and skilled, experienced personnel.

    Precision is headquartered in Calgary, Alberta, Canada and is listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange under the trading symbol “PD” and on the New York Stock Exchange under the trading symbol “PDS”.

    Additional Information

    For further information, please contact:

    Lavonne Zdunich, CPA, CA
    Vice President, Investor Relations
    403.716.4500

    800, 525 – 8th Avenue S.W.
    Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2P 1G1
    Website: www.precisiondrilling.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-Evening Report: The gambling industry has women in its sights. Why aren’t policymakers paying attention?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simone McCarthy, Postdoctoral Research Fellow – Commercial Determinants of Health, Deakin University

    Wpadington/Shutterstock

    Whatever the code, whatever the season, Australian sports fans are bombarded with gambling ads.

    Drawing on Australians’ passion, loyalty and pride for sport, the devastating health and social consequences of gambling – including financial stress, homelessness, family violence, and mental health issues – are largely sidelined.

    Instead, ads continue to normalise gambling, encouraging punters to embrace mateship and “have a crack” on gambling apps.

    A missed opportunity

    This prolific advertising has continued despite the findings of a landmark Australian parliamentary inquiry in 2022, which made 31 recommendations to curb the tactics of the gambling industry.

    Chair of the inquiry, the late Peta Murphy MP, concluded:

    If the status quo of online gambling regulation, including but not limited to advertising, was to continue, Australians would continue to lose more – more money, more relationships, more love of sport for the game rather than the odds.

    However, instead of acting on the major findings of the report, the Australian government indefinitely shelved any meaningful advertising reforms after meeting with major sporting codes, broadcasters and the gambling industry.

    Instead, we have been left to settle for a range of soft options, including taglines at the end of ads that encourage us to: “imagine what you could be buying instead”.

    It’s hard to be convinced these calls to action are having much impact compared to the seductive tactics of the gambling industry, with gambling losses continuing to spiral during a cost-of-living crisis.




    Read more:
    The gambling industry is pulling out all the stops to prevent an ad ban, but the evidence is against it


    A new market

    While the government hesitates to act on gambling ads, the gambling industry has a new set of customers in its promotional sights: women.

    Public perception is that most forms of gambling are largely male-dominated.

    However, in Victoria, 51% of women gamble each year (compared to 56% of men), and in NSW, 48.5% of women gamble (compared to 58.7% of men).

    Women are also gambling regularly. The 2023 Victorian Population Gambling and Health study found that of those women who gamble, 22.8% do so at least once a week (compared to 29.3% of men).

    Our research shows a combination of new marketing strategies, easy-to-use technology and social activities aligned with gambling venues and products may be changing the way women (and girls) think about and participate in gambling.

    How it begins

    For some young women it is a tradition to “go down to the pokies” or the casino when they turn 18.

    Some visit these venues for other entertainment options and end up gambling. For others, gambling ads encourage them to open online accounts. As one 25-year-old woman told us:

    That’s how I started sports betting, because it was on TV. Bonus bet, sign up today. Okay, that sounds good. So that’s what got me in.

    Young women are also diversifying their gambling across multiple products, with technology making it more accessible, easier and more socially acceptable.

    This includes women betting with groups of friends, but also on their own:

    You’ll sit around and all watch the footy, but you’ll all be gambling because it’s just more accessible. It’s easy. Also, I think it’s easier for females to go and seek it out on their own too, you know, if they have the app available. It’s not like they’re going up to someone at the pub and betting.

    Parents have even told us their daughters and their friends now talk about the outcomes of sporting matches based on the odds of the game.

    A different landscape

    Gambling companies and events, including racing, are also reshaping the image of gambling, making it seem fun and glamorous.

    This includes embedding gambling into spaces and experiences that align with women’s social and lifestyle interests, such as fashion and beauty, and peer group belonging.

    In racing, gambling is embedded as part of an overall experience for women. As one 23-year-old told us:

    I went to the races with my friends. We dressed up pretty and went, and that was like a girl’s day out thing […] I bet on horses just like once, just like for fun, as part of the experience.

    New gambling products are branded to appeal to women, and betting markets are now offered on popular reality shows such as Married at First Sight, the box office numbers for the opening weekend of the new Snow White movie, who will win Eurovision, and Time’s Person of the Year.

    But it is perhaps the use of celebrities and social media influencers that may have the most appeal to women and more concerningly, girls.

    Women influencers on TikTok and Instagram promote betting as an extension of social activities.

    In our recent study one 13-year-old girl told us:

    When you recognise someone from an ad, it makes it more interesting and it makes you want to watch it more.

    Gambling companies are also sponsoring women’s sports, supporting women’s health initiatives, and even aligning with International Women’s Day.

    We’ve seen this approach before

    The gambling industry is following a well-worn playbook, one mastered by the tobacco industry: when their core market of men became saturated, Big Tobacco turned its attention to women, crafting targeted marketing strategies and novel products to engage new, long-term consumers.

    However, rather than learning the lessons from tobacco, policymakers have been slow to recognise and respond to the playbook of the gambling industry.

    If we want to disrupt the status quo and prevent harm for all Australians, we must take action against the gambling industry and its tactics, rather than the individual, as the key vector of harm.

    Dr Simone McCarthy has received funding for gambling and related research from ACT Office of Gaming and Racing Commision, the Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, VicHealth, Department of Social Services, and Deakin University. She is currently a member of the Editorial Board of Health Promotion International.

    Dr Hannah Pitt has received funding from the Australian Research Council. Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, VicHealth, NSW Office of Responsible Gambling, Department of Social Services, ACT Office of Gambling and Racing Commission, and Deakin University. She is currently a member of the Editorial Board of Health Promotion International.

    Professor Samantha Thomas has received funding for gambling and related research from the Australian Research Council, ACT Office of Gaming and Racing, Department of Social Services, VicHealth, Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation, Healthway, NSW Office of Responsible Gambling, Deakin University. She is currently Editor in Chief for Health Promotion International an Oxford University Press journal. She receives an honorarium for this role.

    ref. The gambling industry has women in its sights. Why aren’t policymakers paying attention? – https://theconversation.com/the-gambling-industry-has-women-in-its-sights-why-arent-policymakers-paying-attention-251914

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI: Origin Bancorp, Inc. Reports Earnings For First Quarter 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    RUSTON, La., April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Origin Bancorp, Inc. (NYSE: OBK) (“Origin,” “we,” “our” or the “Company”), the holding company for Origin Bank (the “Bank”), today announced net income of $22.4 million, or $0.71 diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to net income of $14.3 million, or $0.46 diluted earnings per share, for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. Pre-tax, pre-provision (“PTPP”)(1) earnings were $32.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $12.6 million for the linked quarter.

    “Origin reported solid results for the quarter, and I am proud of how our bankers remain responsive to our customers and communities,” said Drake Mills, chairman, president and CEO of Origin Bancorp, Inc. “During last quarter’s earnings call, we introduced Optimize Origin, which is our plan to deliver sustainable elite-level financial performance. I am pleased with the overwhelming focus and commitment our employees have on accomplishing this goal and the progress we have made since launch.”

    (1) PTPP earnings is a non-GAAP financial measure, please see the last few pages of this document for a reconciliation of this alternative financial measure to its most directly comparable GAAP measure.

             

    Optimize Origin

    • In January 2025, we announced our initiative to drive elite financial performance and enhance our award-winning culture.
    • Built on three primary pillars:
      • Productivity, Delivery & Efficiency
      • Balance Sheet Optimization
      • Culture & Employee Engagement
    • Established near term target of greater than a 1% ROAA run rate by 4Q25 and an ultimate target of top quartile ROAA.
    • Near term target is being achieved in part by branch consolidation, headcount reduction, securities optimization, capital optimization, cash/liquidity management, mortgage restructuring, as well as other opportunistic efficiency optimizations throughout the organization.
    • We believe the actions we have taken will drive earnings improvement of approximately $23.4 million annually on a pre-tax pre-provision basis.
             

    Financial Highlights

    • Net interest income was $78.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, reflecting an increase of $110,000, or 0.1%, compared to the linked quarter and is at its highest level in eight quarters.
    • Net income was $22.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, reflecting an increase of $8.1 million, or 57.0% compared to the linked quarter.
    • Our fully tax equivalent net interest margin (“NIM-FTE”) expanded 11 basis points for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2024. This expansion was driven primarily by a 34 basis point reduction in rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities, offset by a 12 basis point decline in our yield earned on interest-earning assets.
    • Return on average assets (“ROAA”), annualized, was 0.93% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, a 63.2% increase when compared to 0.57% in the linked quarter. PTPP ROAA(1), annualized, was 1.32% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, reflecting an increase of 164.0% compared to 0.50% in the linked quarter.
    • Total loans held for investment (“LHFI”) were $7.59 billion at March 31, 2025, reflecting an increase of $11.8 million, or 0.2%, compared to December 31, 2024. Average LHFI were $7.50 billion for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, reflecting a decrease of $298.2 million, or 3.83%, compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2024.
    • Total deposits were $8.34 billion at March 31, 2025, reflecting an increase of $115.3 million, or 1.4%, compared to December 31, 2024. Deposits, excluding brokered deposits, were $8.29 billion at March 31, 2025, reflecting an increase of $145.5 million, or 1.8%, compared to December 31, 2024.

    (1) PTPP ROAA is a non-GAAP financial measure, please see the last few pages of this document for a reconciliation of this alternative financial measure to its most directly comparable GAAP measure.

    Results of Operations for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2025

    Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

    Net interest income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, was $78.5 million, an increase of $110,000, or 0.1%, compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily driven by a $7.7 million decrease in interest expense paid on interest-bearing deposits and increases of $1.4 million and $1.3 million in interest income earned on investment securities and average interest-earning balances due from banks, partially offset by a decrease of $9.9 million in interest income earned on LHFI.

    The decrease in average rates of interest-bearing deposits during the quarter ended March 31, 2025, and two fewer days in the current quarter, reduced interest expense by $5.8 million and $1.2 million, respectively, when compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The average rate on interest-bearing deposits was 3.23% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, a decrease of 38 basis points, from 3.61% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.

    The $1.4 million increase in interest income earned on investment securities was primarily driven by the bond portfolio optimization strategy we executed during the quarter ended December 31, 2024, in which we replaced securities with a total book value of $188.2 million and a weighted average yield of 1.51% with new securities totaling $173.7 million with a weighted average yield of 5.22%.

    The $1.3 million increase in interest income earned on average interest-earning balances due from banks was primarily driven by a $149.0 million increase in average interest-earning balances due from banks which led to a $1.8 million increase in interest income, partially offset by a reduction in average yield.

    The decrease in average LHFI principal balance, the impact of two fewer calendar days and a decline in average rates during the quarter ended March 31, 2025, resulted in decreases to interest income of $5.5 million, $2.6 million and $1.8 million, respectively, when compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The decrease in average LHFI principal balance was primarily driven by decreases of $170.2 million and $114.4 million in mortgage warehouse lines of credit (“MW LOC”) and average construction/land/land development loan balances. The average rate on LHFI was 6.33% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, a decrease of 14 basis points, compared to 6.47% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.

    The Federal Reserve Board sets various benchmark rates, including the federal funds rate, and thereby influences the general market rates of interest, including the loan and deposit rates offered by financial institutions. On September 18, 2024, the Federal Reserve reduced the federal funds target rate range by 50 basis points, to a range of 4.75% to 5.00%, marking the first rate reduction since early 2020. Subsequently, it implemented two additional reductions, with the current federal funds target range set to 4.25% to 4.50% on December 18, 2024. The Federal Reserve maintained this target range throughout the first quarter of 2025. In total, the federal funds target range has decreased 100 basis points from its recent cycle high.

    Our NIM-FTE was 3.44% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, representing 11- and 25-basis-point increases compared to the linked quarter and the prior year same quarter, respectively. The yield earned on interest-earning assets for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, was 5.79%, a decrease of 12 and 20 basis points compared to the linked quarter and the quarter ended March 31, 2024. The average rate paid on total interest-bearing liabilities for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, was 3.30%, representing 34- and 58-basis point decreases compared to the linked quarter and the quarter ended March 31, 2024, respectively.

    Credit Quality

    The table below includes key credit quality information:

      At and For the Three Months Ended   Change   % Change
    (Dollars in thousands, unaudited) March 31,
    2025
      December 31,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
      Linked
    Quarter
      Linked
    Quarter
    Past due LHFI $ 72,774     $ 42,437     $ 32,835     $ 30,337     71.5 %
    Allowance for loan credit losses (“ALCL”)   92,011       91,060       98,375       951     1.0  
    Classified loans   127,676       118,782       84,217       8,894     7.5  
    Total nonperforming LHFI   81,368       75,002       40,439       6,366     8.5  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses   3,444       (5,398 )     3,012       8,842     N/M  
    Net charge-offs (recoveries)   2,728       (560 )     2,582       3,288     N/M  
    Credit quality ratios(1):                    
    ALCL to nonperforming LHFI   113.08 %     121.41 %     243.27 %     (8.33 )%   N/A  
    ALCL to total LHFI   1.21       1.20       1.25       0.01     N/A  
    ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted(2)   1.28       1.25       1.30       0.03     N/A  
    Classified loans to total LHFI   1.68       1.57       1.07       0.11     N/A  
    Nonperforming LHFI to LHFI   1.07       0.99       0.51       0.08     N/A  
    Net charge-offs to total average LHFI (annualized)   0.15       (0.03 )     0.13       0.18     N/A  
                                       

    ___________________________

      N/M = Not meaningful.
      N/A = Not applicable.
    (1) Please see the Loan Data schedule at the back of this document for additional information.
    (2) The ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted, is calculated by excluding the ALCL for MW LOC loans from the total LHFI ALCL in the numerator and excluding the MW LOC loans from the LHFI in the denominator. Due to their low-risk profile, MW LOC loans require a disproportionately low allocation of the ALCL.
       

    Past due loans increased $30.3 million for the current quarter compared to the linked quarter. The increase was primarily due to 11 relationships totaling $39.8 million. The increase in past due loan relationships primarily consisted of residential real estate totaling $18.0 million, commercial real estate totaling $8.3 million, commercial and industrial totaling $9.7 million and construction/land/land development totaling $3.9 million. These increases were partially offset by a $4.5 million decrease in three previously past due residential real estate relationships, one of which paid off during the current quarter.

    Nonperforming LHFI increased $6.4 million for the current quarter compared to the linked quarter, evidenced by an increase in the percentage of nonperforming LHFI to LHFI to 1.07% compared to 0.99% for the linked quarter. The increase in nonperforming loans was primarily driven by two loan relationships totaling $8.2 million at March 31, 2025, with residential real estate loans totaling $5.1 million of the increase. The increase in nonperforming loans was partially offset by one residential real estate loan relationship totaling $2.1 million that paid off during the current quarter, but was considered nonperforming at December 31, 2024.

    Classified loans increased $8.9 million to $127.7 million at March 31, 2025, compared to $118.8 million at December 31, 2024. As discussed in previous filings, our classified and nonperforming LHFI were negatively impacted beginning in the second quarter of 2024 as a result of litigation against the bank brought in response to certain questioned activity involving a former banker in our East Texas market. We continue to work toward a resolution in this matter.

    Our results included a credit loss provision expense of $3.4 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2025, which includes a $3.7 million provision for loan credit losses, compared to provision release of $5.5 million for the linked quarter. Our allowance for credit losses increased $1.0 million during the current quarter, primarily driven by the $1.4 million increase in the individually evaluated portion of the reserve as a result of the increase in nonperforming loans.

    Net charge-offs increased $3.3 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, when compared to the quarter ended December 31, 2024, primarily due to total charge-offs of $4.8 million in the current quarter, consisting primarily of two commercial and industrial loan relationships with charge-offs totaling $2.6 million.

    Noninterest Income

    Noninterest income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, was $15.6 million, an increase of $15.9 million from the linked quarter, primarily driven by the $14.6 million loss on sales of securities, net, in the linked quarter and the $2.5 million increase in insurance commission and fee income in the current quarter. These increases were offset by a decrease of $1.6 million in limited partnership investment (loss) income.

    The loss on sales of securities, net, during the linked quarter was due to the execution of the bond portfolio optimization strategy security sale, with no such sale in the current quarter.

    The increase in insurance commission and fee income was primarily driven by a seasonal increase in annual contingency fee income recognized in the first quarter.

    The decrease in limited partnership investment income (loss) was due to $1.6 million in fair value adjustments on multiple limited partnership investments.

    Noninterest Expense

    Noninterest expense for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, was $62.1 million, a decrease of $3.4 million, or 5.1% from the linked quarter. The decrease was primarily driven by decreases of $3.1 million, $814,000 and $796,000 in other noninterest expense, professional services and advertising and marketing expense, respectively, that was partially offset by an increase of $1.3 million in salaries and employee benefit expense.

    The decrease in other noninterest expense was primarily due to $3.1 million in contingency expense recorded during the linked quarter. There was no such contingency reserve recorded in the current quarter.

    The $814,000 decrease in professional services was primarily due to a decrease of $668,000 in forensic accounting fees compared to the linked quarter.

    The $796,000 decrease in advertising and marketing was primarily due to a decrease in targeted marketing efforts in the current quarter compared to the prior quarter.

    The $1.3 million increase in salaries and employee benefit expense was primarily due to an Employee Retention Credit (“ERC”) of $1.7 million that was recorded in the linked quarter and related to the operations of BTH Bank, N.A., which we acquired in 2022. The ERC is a refundable tax credit for certain eligible businesses that had employees affected during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was partially offset by a decrease in incentive compensation due to the adjustment of the incentive compensation accrual during the current quarter.

    Financial Condition

    Loans

    • Total LHFI at March 31, 2025, were $7.59 billion, an increase of $11.8 million, or 0.2%, from $7.57 billion at December 31, 2024, and a decrease of $314.5 million, or 4.0%, compared to March 31, 2024.
    • The primary driver of the increase during the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to the linked quarter, were increases in multi-family real estate, MW LOC, residential real estate – single family and commercial and industrial loans of $64.3 million, $55.1 million, $33.1 million and $19.5 million, respectively. These increases were partially offset by decreases of $93.6 million and $65.4 million in total commercial real estate and construction/land/land development loans, respectively.

    Securities

    • Total securities at March 31, 2025 were $1.18 billion, an increase of $58.8 million, or 5.3%, from $1.12 billion at December 31, 2024, and a decrease of $30.4 million, or 2.5%, compared to March 31, 2024.
    • The increase in securities was due to purchases of $73.1 million in the current quarter. This was partially offset by maturities, scheduled principal payments and calls.
    • Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of taxes, primarily associated with unrealized losses within the available for sale portfolio, was $90.4 million at March 31, 2025, a decrease of $15.6 million, or 14.7% , from the linked quarter.
    • The weighted average effective duration for the total securities portfolio was 4.10 years as of March 31, 2025, compared to 4.46 years as of December 31, 2024.

    Deposits

    • Total deposits at March 31, 2025, were $8.34 billion, an increase of $115.3 million, or 1.4%, compared to the linked quarter, and a decrease of $167.1 million, or 2.0%, from March 31, 2024. The increase in the current quarter compared to the linked quarter was primarily due to an increase of $278.9 million in money market deposits. The increase was partially offset by decreases of $78.0 million and $67.1 million in time deposits (excluding brokered time deposits) and interest-bearing demand deposits, respectively.
    • At March 31, 2025, noninterest-bearing deposits as a percentage of total deposits were 22.7%, compared to 23.1% and 22.2% at December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively. Excluding brokered deposits, noninterest-bearing deposits as a percentage of total deposits were 22.8%, compared to 23.3% and 23.9% at December 31, 2024, and March 31, 2024, respectively.

    Subordinate debentures

    • Total subordinated debentures at March 31, 2025, were $89.6 million, a decrease of $70.3 million, or 44.0%, from $159.9 million at December 31, 2024, and a decrease of $71.1 million, or 44.2%, compared to March 31, 2024.
    • The decrease was due to the redemption of $70.0 million in subordinated debentures in conjunction with our Optimize Origin initiative, as forecasted in our fourth quarter 2024 investor presentation. We recognized $681,000 in original issue discount amortization related to the redemption during the current quarter. Based upon our forecast, the redemption is expected to result in approximately $2.1 million in annualized future interest expense savings.

    Conference Call

    Origin will hold a conference call to discuss its first quarter 2025 results on Thursday, April 24, 2025, at 8:00 a.m. Central Time (9:00 a.m. Eastern Time). To participate in the live conference call, please dial +1 (929) 272-1574 (U.S. Local / International 1); +1 (857) 999-3259 (U.S. Local / International 2); +1 (888) 700-7550 (U.S. Toll Free), enter Conference ID: 66134 and request to be joined into the Origin Bancorp, Inc. (OBK) call. A simultaneous audio-only webcast may be accessed via Origin’s website at www.origin.bank under the investor relations, News & Events, Events & Presentations link or directly by visiting https://dealroadshow.com/e/ORIGINQ125.

    If you are unable to participate during the live webcast, the webcast will be archived on the Investor Relations section of Origin’s website at www.origin.bank, under Investor Relations, News & Events, Events & Presentations.

    About Origin

    Origin Bancorp, Inc. is a financial holding company headquartered in Ruston, Louisiana. Origin’s wholly owned bank subsidiary, Origin Bank, was founded in 1912 in Choudrant, Louisiana. Deeply rooted in Origin’s history is a culture committed to providing personalized relationship banking to businesses, municipalities, and personal clients to enrich the lives of the people in the communities it serves. Origin provides a broad range of financial services and currently operates more than 55 locations in Dallas/Fort Worth, East Texas, Houston, North Louisiana, Mississippi, South Alabama and the Florida Panhandle. For more information, visit www.origin.bank.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    Origin reports its results in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”). However, management believes that certain supplemental non-GAAP financial measures may provide meaningful information to investors that is useful in understanding Origin’s results of operations and underlying trends in its business. However, non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and should be viewed in addition to, and not as an alternative for, Origin’s reported results prepared in accordance with GAAP. The following are the non-GAAP measures used in this release: PTPP earnings, PTPP ROAA, tangible book value per common share, adjusted tangible book value per common share, ROATCE, and core efficiency ratio.

    Please see the last few pages of this release for reconciliations of non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include information regarding Origin Bancorp, Inc’s (“Origin”, “we”, “our” or the “Company”) future financial performance, business and growth strategies, projected plans and objectives, and any expected purchases of its outstanding common stock, and related transactions and other projections based on macroeconomic and industry trends, including changes to interest rates by the Federal Reserve and the resulting impact on Origin’s results of operations, estimated forbearance amounts and expectations regarding the Company’s liquidity, including in connection with advances obtained from the FHLB, which are all subject to change and may be inherently unreliable due to the multiple factors that impact broader economic and industry trends, and any such changes may be material. Such forward-looking statements are based on various facts and derived utilizing important assumptions and current expectations, estimates and projections about Origin and its subsidiaries, any of which may change over time and some of which may be beyond Origin’s control. Statements or statistics preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “assumes,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “foresees,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “could,” “may,” “might,” “should,” “will,” and “would” and variations of such terms are generally forward-looking in nature and not historical facts, although not all forward-looking statements include the foregoing words. Further, certain factors that could affect Origin’s future results and cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: (1) the impact of current and future economic conditions generally and in the financial services industry, nationally and within Origin’s primary market areas, including the impact of tariffs, as well as the financial stress on borrowers and changes to customer and client behavior as a result of the foregoing; (2) changes in benchmark interest rates and the resulting impacts on net interest income; (3) deterioration of Origin’s asset quality; (4) factors that can impact the performance of Origin’s loan portfolio, including real estate values and liquidity in Origin’s primary market areas; (5) the financial health of Origin’s commercial borrowers and the success of construction projects that Origin finances; (6) changes in the value of collateral securing Origin’s loans; (7) the impact of generative artificial intelligence; (8) Origin’s ability to anticipate interest rate changes and manage interest rate risk; (9) the impact of heightened regulatory requirements, reduced debit interchange and overdraft income and the possibility of facing related adverse business consequences if our total assets grow in excess of $10 billion as of December 31 of any calendar year; (10) the effectiveness of Origin’s risk management framework and quantitative models; (11) Origin’s inability to receive dividends from Origin Bank and to service debt, pay dividends to Origin’s common stockholders, repurchase Origin’s shares of common stock and satisfy obligations as they become due; (12) the impact of labor pressures; (13) changes in Origin’s operation or expansion strategy or Origin’s ability to prudently manage its growth and execute its strategy; (14) changes in management personnel; (15) Origin’s ability to maintain important customer relationships, reputation or otherwise avoid liquidity risks; (16) increasing costs as Origin grows deposits; (17) operational risks associated with Origin’s business; (18) significant turbulence or a disruption in the capital or financial markets and the effect of market disruption and interest rate volatility on our investment securities; (19) increased competition in the financial services industry, particularly from regional and national institutions, as well as from fintech companies; (20) compliance with governmental and regulatory requirements and changes in laws, rules, regulations, interpretations or policies relating to financial institutions; (21) periodic changes to the extensive body of accounting rules and best practices; (22) further government intervention in the U.S. financial system; (23) a deterioration of the credit rating for U.S. long-term sovereign debt; (24) Origin’s ability to comply with applicable capital and liquidity requirements, including its ability to generate liquidity internally or raise capital on favorable terms, including continued access to the debt and equity capital markets; (25) natural disasters and other adverse weather events, pandemics, acts of terrorism, war, and other matters beyond Origin’s control; (26) developments in our mortgage banking business, including loan modifications, general demand, and the effects of judicial or regulatory requirements or guidance; (27) fraud or misconduct by internal or external actors (including Origin employees); (28) cybersecurity threats or security breaches and the cost of defending against them; (29) Origin’s ability to maintain adequate internal controls over financial and non-financial reporting; and (30) potential claims, damages, penalties, fines, costs and reputational damage resulting from pending or future litigation, regulatory proceedings and enforcement actions. For a discussion of these and other risks that may cause actual results to differ from expectations, please refer to the sections titled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in Origin’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and any updates to those sections set forth in Origin’s subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K. If one or more events related to these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if Origin’s underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may differ materially from what Origin anticipates. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made, and Origin does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.

    New risks and uncertainties arise from time to time, and it is not possible for Origin to predict those events or how they may affect Origin. In addition, Origin cannot assess the impact of each factor on Origin’s business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. All forward-looking statements, expressed or implied, included in this communication are expressly qualified in their entirety by this cautionary statement. This cautionary statement should also be considered in connection with any subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements that Origin or persons acting on Origin’s behalf may issue. Annualized, pro forma, adjusted, projected, and estimated numbers are used for illustrative purposes only, are not forecasts, and may not reflect actual results.

    This press release contains projected financial information with respect to Origin, including with respect to certain goals and strategic initiatives of Origin and the anticipated benefits thereof. This projected financial information constitutes forward-looking information and is for illustrative purposes only and should not be relied upon as necessarily being indicative of future results. The assumptions and estimates underlying such projected financial information are inherently uncertain and are subject to significant business, economic (including interest rate), competitive, and other risks and uncertainties. Actual results may differ materially from the results contemplated by the projected financial information contained herein and the inclusion of such projected financial information in this release should not be regarded as a representation by any person that such actions will be taken or accomplished or that the results reflected in such projected financial information with respect thereto will be achieved.

    Contact:

    Investor Relations
    Chris Reigelman
    318-497-3177
    chris@origin.bank

    Media Contact
    Ryan Kilpatrick
    318-232-7472
    rkilpatrick@origin.bank

    Origin Bancorp, Inc.
    Selected Quarterly Financial Data
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
      March 31,
    2025
      December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
                       
    Income statement and share amounts (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
    Net interest income $ 78,459     $ 78,349     $ 74,804     $ 73,890     $ 73,323  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses   3,444       (5,398 )     4,603       5,231       3,012  
    Noninterest income   15,602       (330 )     15,989       22,465       17,255  
    Noninterest expense   62,068       65,422       62,521       64,388       58,707  
    Income before income tax expense   28,549       17,995       23,669       26,736       28,859  
    Income tax expense   6,138       3,725       5,068       5,747       6,227  
    Net income $ 22,411     $ 14,270     $ 18,601     $ 20,989     $ 22,632  
    PTPP earnings(1) $ 31,993     $ 12,597     $ 28,272     $ 31,967     $ 31,871  
    Basic earnings per common share   0.72       0.46       0.60       0.68       0.73  
    Diluted earnings per common share   0.71       0.46       0.60       0.67       0.73  
    Dividends declared per common share   0.15       0.15       0.15       0.15       0.15  
    Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic   31,205,752       31,155,486       31,130,293       31,042,527       30,981,333  
    Weighted average common shares outstanding – diluted   31,412,010       31,308,805       31,239,877       31,131,829       31,078,910  
                       
    Balance sheet data                  
    Total LHFI $ 7,585,526     $ 7,573,713     $ 7,956,790     $ 7,959,171     $ 7,900,027  
    Total LHFI excluding MW LOC   7,181,395       7,224,632       7,461,602       7,452,666       7,499,032  
    Total assets   9,750,372       9,678,702       9,965,986       9,947,182       9,892,379  
    Total deposits   8,338,412       8,223,120       8,486,568       8,510,842       8,505,464  
    Total stockholders’ equity   1,180,177       1,145,245       1,145,673       1,095,894       1,078,853  
                       
    Performance metrics and capital ratios                  
    Yield on LHFI   6.33 %     6.47 %     6.67 %     6.58 %     6.58 %
    Yield on interest-earnings assets   5.79       5.91       6.09       6.04       5.99  
    Cost of interest-bearing deposits   3.23       3.61       4.01       3.95       3.85  
    Cost of total deposits   2.52       2.79       3.14       3.08       2.99  
    NIM – fully tax equivalent (“FTE”)   3.44       3.33       3.18       3.17       3.19  
    Return on average assets (annualized) (“ROAA”)   0.93       0.57       0.74       0.84       0.92  
    PTPP ROAA (annualized)(1)   1.32       0.50       1.13       1.28       1.30  
    Return on average stockholders’ equity (annualized) (“ROAE”)   7.79       4.94       6.57       7.79       8.57  
    Book value per common share $ 37.77     $ 36.71     $ 36.76     $ 35.23     $ 34.79  
    Tangible book value per common share(1)   32.43       31.38       31.37       29.77       29.24  
    Adjusted tangible book value per common share(1)   35.33       34.78       34.39       33.86       33.27  
    Return on average tangible common equity (annualized) (“ROATCE”)(1)   9.09 %     5.78 %     7.74 %     9.25 %     10.24 %
    Efficiency ratio(2)   65.99       83.85       68.86       66.82       64.81  
    Core efficiency ratio(1)   65.33       82.79       67.48       65.55       65.24  
    Common equity tier 1 to risk-weighted assets(3)   13.57       13.32       12.46       12.15       11.97  
    Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets(3)   13.76       13.52       12.64       12.33       12.15  
    Total capital to risk-weighted assets(3)   15.81       16.44       15.45       15.16       14.98  
    Tier 1 leverage ratio(3)   11.47       11.08       10.93       10.70       10.66  
                                           

    ___________________________

    (1) PTPP earnings, PTPP ROAA, tangible book value per common share, adjusted tangible book value per common share, ROATCE, and core efficiency ratio are either non-GAAP financial measures or use a non-GAAP contributor in the formula. For a reconciliation of these alternative financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures, please see the last few pages of this release.
    (2) Calculated by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest income plus noninterest income.
    (3) March 31, 2025, ratios are estimated and calculated at the Company level, which is subject to the capital adequacy requirements of the Federal Reserve Board.
       
    Origin Bancorp, Inc.
    Consolidated Quarterly Statements of Income
    (Unaudited)
     
      Three Months Ended
      March 31,
    2025
      December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
                       
    Interest and dividend income (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
    Interest and fees on loans $ 117,075     $ 127,021     $ 133,195   $ 129,879   $ 127,186  
    Investment securities-taxable   8,076       6,651       6,536     6,606     6,849  
    Investment securities-nontaxable   968       964       905     893     910  
    Interest and dividend income on assets held in other financial institutions   6,424       5,197       3,621     4,416     3,756  
    Total interest and dividend income   132,543       139,833       144,257     141,794     138,701  
    Interest expense                  
    Interest-bearing deposits   51,779       59,511       67,051     65,469     62,842  
    FHLB advances and other borrowings   96       88       482     514     518  
    Subordinated indebtedness   2,209       1,885       1,920     1,921     2,018  
    Total interest expense   54,084       61,484       69,453     67,904     65,378  
    Net interest income   78,459       78,349       74,804     73,890     73,323  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses   3,444       (5,398 )     4,603     5,231     3,012  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   75,015       83,747       70,201     68,659     70,311  
    Noninterest income                  
    Insurance commission and fee income   7,927       5,441       6,928     6,665     7,725  
    Service charges and fees   4,716       4,801       4,664     4,862     4,688  
    Other fee income   2,301       2,152       2,114     2,404     2,247  
    Mortgage banking revenue   915       1,151       1,153     1,878     2,398  
    Swap fee income   533       116       106     44     57  
    (Loss) gain on sales of securities, net         (14,617 )     221         (403 )
    Limited partnership investment (loss) income   (1,692 )     (62 )     375     68     138  
    Change in fair value of equity investments                   5,188      
    Other income   902       688       428     1,356     405  
    Total noninterest income (loss)   15,602       (330 )     15,989     22,465     17,255  
    Noninterest expense                  
    Salaries and employee benefits   37,731       36,405       38,491     38,109     35,818  
    Occupancy and equipment, net   8,544       7,913       6,298     7,009     6,645  
    Data processing   2,957       3,414       3,470     3,468     3,145  
    Office and operations   2,972       2,883       2,984     3,072     2,502  
    Intangible asset amortization   1,761       1,800       1,905     2,137     2,137  
    Regulatory assessments   1,392       1,535       1,791     1,842     1,734  
    Advertising and marketing   1,133       1,929       1,449     1,328     1,444  
    Professional services   1,250       2,064       2,012     1,303     1,231  
    Electronic banking   1,354       1,377       1,308     1,238     1,239  
    Loan-related expenses   599       431       751     1,077     905  
    Franchise tax expense   675       884       721     815     477  
    Other expenses   1,700       4,787       1,341     2,990     1,430  
    Total noninterest expense   62,068       65,422       62,521     64,388     58,707  
    Income before income tax expense   28,549       17,995       23,669     26,736     28,859  
    Income tax expense   6,138       3,725       5,068     5,747     6,227  
    Net income $ 22,411     $ 14,270     $ 18,601   $ 20,989   $ 22,632  
                                       
    Origin Bancorp, Inc.
    Consolidated Balance Sheets
    (Unaudited)
                       
    (Dollars in thousands) March 31,
    2025
      December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
    Assets                  
    Cash and due from banks $ 112,888     $ 132,991     $ 159,337     $ 137,615     $ 98,147  
    Interest-bearing deposits in banks   373,314       337,258       161,854       150,435       193,365  
    Total cash and cash equivalents   486,202       470,249       321,191       288,050       291,512  
    Securities:                  
    AFS   1,161,368       1,102,528       1,160,965       1,160,048       1,190,922  
    Held to maturity, net of allowance for credit losses   11,094       11,095       11,096       11,616       11,651  
    Securities carried at fair value through income   6,512       6,512       6,533       6,499       6,755  
    Total securities   1,178,974       1,120,135       1,178,594       1,178,163       1,209,328  
    Non-marketable equity securities held in other financial institutions   71,754       71,643       67,068       64,010       53,870  
    Loans held for sale   10,191       10,494       7,631       18,291       14,975  
    LHFI   7,585,526       7,573,713       7,956,790       7,959,171       7,900,027  
    Less: ALCL   92,011       91,060       95,989       100,865       98,375  
    LHFI, net of ALCL   7,493,515       7,482,653       7,860,801       7,858,306       7,801,652  
    Premises and equipment, net   123,847       126,620       126,751       121,562       120,931  
    Cash surrender value of bank-owned life insurance   41,021       40,840       40,602       40,365       40,134  
    Goodwill   128,679       128,679       128,679       128,679       128,679  
    Other intangible assets, net   38,212       37,473       39,272       41,177       43,314  
    Accrued interest receivable and other assets   177,977       189,916       195,397       208,579       187,984  
    Total assets $ 9,750,372     $ 9,678,702     $ 9,965,986     $ 9,947,182     $ 9,892,379  
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                  
    Noninterest-bearing deposits $ 1,888,808     $ 1,900,651     $ 1,893,767     $ 1,866,622     $ 1,887,066  
    Interest-bearing deposits excluding brokered interest-bearing deposits, if any   5,536,636       5,301,243       5,137,940       4,984,817       4,990,632  
    Time deposits   862,968       941,000       1,023,252       1,022,589       1,030,656  
    Brokered deposits   50,000       80,226       431,609       636,814       597,110  
    Total deposits   8,338,412       8,223,120       8,486,568       8,510,842       8,505,464  
    FHLB advances and other borrowings   12,488       12,460       30,446       40,737       13,158  
    Subordinated indebtedness   89,599       159,943       159,861       159,779       160,684  
    Accrued expenses and other liabilities   129,696       137,934       143,438       139,930       134,220  
    Total liabilities   8,570,195       8,533,457       8,820,313       8,851,288       8,813,526  
    Stockholders’ equity:                  
    Common stock   156,220       155,988       155,837       155,543       155,057  
    Additional paid-in capital   538,790       537,366       535,662       532,950       530,380  
    Retained earnings   575,578       557,920       548,419       534,585       518,325  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   (90,411 )     (106,029 )     (94,245 )     (127,184 )     (124,909 )
    Total stockholders’ equity   1,180,177       1,145,245       1,145,673       1,095,894       1,078,853  
      Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 9,750,372     $ 9,678,702     $ 9,965,986     $ 9,947,182     $ 9,892,379  
                                           
    Origin Bancorp, Inc.
    Loan Data
    (Unaudited)
       
      At and For the Three Months Ended
      March 31,
    2025
      December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
                       
    LHFI (Dollars in thousands)
    Owner occupied commercial real estate $ 937,985     $ 975,947     $ 991,671     $ 959,850     $ 948,624  
    Non-owner occupied commercial real estate   1,445,864       1,501,484       1,533,093       1,563,152       1,472,164  
    Construction/land/land development   798,609       864,011       991,545       1,017,389       1,168,597  
    Residential real estate – single family   1,465,192       1,432,129       1,414,013       1,421,027       1,373,532  
    Multi-family real estate   489,765       425,460       434,317       398,202       359,765  
    Total real estate loans   5,137,415       5,199,031       5,364,639       5,359,620       5,322,682  
    Commercial and industrial   2,022,085       2,002,634       2,074,037       2,070,947       2,154,151  
    MW LOC   404,131       349,081       495,188       506,505       400,995  
    Consumer   21,895       22,967       22,926       22,099       22,199  
    Total LHFI   7,585,526       7,573,713       7,956,790       7,959,171       7,900,027  
    Less: ALCL   92,011       91,060       95,989       100,865       98,375  
    LHFI, net $ 7,493,515     $ 7,482,653     $ 7,860,801     $ 7,858,306     $ 7,801,652  
                       
    Nonperforming assets(1)                  
    Nonperforming LHFI                  
    Commercial real estate $ 5,465     $ 4,974     $ 2,776     $ 2,196     $ 4,474  
    Construction/land/land development   17,694       18,505       26,291       26,336       383  
    Residential real estate(2)   40,749       36,221       14,313       13,493       14,918  
    Commercial and industrial   17,325       15,120       20,486       33,608       20,560  
    Consumer   135       182       407       179       104  
    Total nonperforming LHFI   81,368       75,002       64,273       75,812       40,439  
    Other real estate owned/repossessed assets   1,990       3,635       6,043       6,827       3,935  
    Total nonperforming assets $ 83,358     $ 78,637     $ 70,316     $ 82,639     $ 44,374  
    Classified assets $ 129,666     $ 122,417     $ 113,529     $ 125,081     $ 88,152  
    Past due LHFI(3)   72,774       42,437       38,838       66,276       32,835  
                       
    Allowance for loan credit losses                  
    Balance at beginning of period $ 91,060     $ 95,989     $ 100,865     $ 98,375     $ 96,868  
    Provision (benefit) for loan credit losses   3,679       (5,489 )     4,644       5,436       4,089  
    Loans charged off   4,848       2,025       11,226       3,706       6,683  
    Loan recoveries   2,120       2,585       1,706       760       4,101  
    Net charge-offs (recoveries)   2,728       (560 )     9,520       2,946       2,582  
    Balance at end of period $ 92,011     $ 91,060     $ 95,989     $ 100,865     $ 98,375  
                       
    Credit quality ratios                  
    Total nonperforming assets to total assets   0.85 %     0.81 %     0.71 %     0.83 %     0.45 %
    Nonperforming LHFI to LHFI   1.07       0.99       0.81       0.95       0.51  
    Past due LHFI to LHFI   0.96       0.56       0.49       0.83       0.42  
    ALCL to nonperforming LHFI   113.08       121.41       149.35       133.05       243.27  
    ALCL to total LHFI   1.21       1.20       1.21       1.27       1.25  
    ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted(4)   1.28       1.25       1.28       1.34       1.30  
    Net charge-offs (recoveries) to total average LHFI (annualized)   0.15       (0.03 )     0.48       0.15       0.13  
                                           

    ___________________________

    (1) Nonperforming assets consist of nonperforming/nonaccrual loans and property acquired through foreclosures or repossession, as well as bank-owned property not in use and listed for sale, if any.
    (2) Includes multi-family real estate.
    (3) Past due LHFI are defined as loans 30 days or more past due.
    (4) The ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted is calculated by excluding the ALCL for MW LOC loans from the total LHFI ALCL in the numerator and excluding the MW LOC loans from the LHFI in the denominator. Due to their low-risk profile, MW LOC loans require a disproportionately low allocation of the ALCL.
       
    Origin Bancorp, Inc.
    Average Balances and Yields/Rates
    (Unaudited)
       
      Three Months Ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
      Average Balance   Yield/Rate   Average Balance   Yield/Rate   Average Balance   Yield/Rate
                           
    Assets (Dollars in thousands)
    Commercial real estate $ 2,448,099   5.82 %   $ 2,499,279   5.89 %   $ 2,438,476   5.84 %
    Construction/land/land development   821,754   6.87       936,134   6.92       1,130,355   7.25  
    Residential real estate(1)   1,909,922   5.53       1,847,399   5.50       1,739,105   5.40  
    Commercial and industrial (“C&I”)   2,004,034   7.37       2,028,290   7.68       2,121,502   7.89  
    MW LOC   289,521   7.07       459,716   7.26       306,248   7.59  
    Consumer   22,709   7.45       23,393   7.64       23,319   8.07  
    LHFI   7,496,039   6.33       7,794,211   6.47       7,759,005   6.58  
    Loans held for sale   8,590   6.18       10,981   6.81       12,906   5.86  
    Loans receivable   7,504,629   6.33       7,805,192   6.47       7,771,911   6.58  
    Investment securities-taxable   1,021,904   3.21       1,002,216   2.64       1,095,480   2.51  
    Investment securities-nontaxable   140,875   2.79       149,307   2.57       148,077   2.47  
    Non-marketable equity securities held in other financial institutions   71,669   2.35       69,070   2.78       58,455   3.77  
    Interest-earning balances due from banks   543,821   4.48       394,790   4.75       240,432   5.37  
    Total interest-earning assets   9,282,898   5.79       9,420,575   5.91       9,314,355   5.99  
    Noninterest-earning assets   525,317         557,968         546,881    
    Total assets $ 9,808,215       $ 9,978,543       $ 9,861,236    
                           
    Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                    
    Liabilities                      
    Interest-bearing liabilities                      
    Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts $ 5,538,710   3.14 %   $ 5,341,028   3.48 %   $ 5,009,117   3.69 %
    Time deposits   972,176   3.69       1,213,565   4.20       1,563,992   4.35  
    Total interest-bearing deposits   6,510,886   3.23       6,554,593   3.61       6,573,109   3.85  
    FHLB advances and other borrowings   14,148   2.75       12,698   2.76       42,284   4.92  
    Subordinated indebtedness   124,133   7.22       159,910   4.69       165,252   4.91  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   6,649,167   3.30       6,727,201   3.64       6,780,645   3.88  
    Noninterest-bearing liabilities                      
    Noninterest-bearing deposits   1,837,365         1,940,689         1,866,496    
    Other liabilities   154,934         161,425         151,390    
    Total liabilities   8,641,466         8,829,315         8,798,531    
    Stockholders’ Equity   1,166,749         1,149,228         1,062,705    
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 9,808,215       $ 9,978,543       $ 9,861,236    
    Net interest spread     2.49 %       2.27 %       2.11 %
    NIM     3.43         3.31         3.17  
    NIM-FTE(2)     3.44         3.33         3.19  
                                 

    ___________________________

    (1) Includes multi-family real estate.
    (2) In order to present pre-tax income and resulting yields on tax-exempt investments comparable to those on taxable investments, a tax-equivalent adjustment has been computed. This adjustment also includes income tax credits received on Qualified School Construction Bonds.
       
    Origin Bancorp, Inc.
    Notable Items
    (Unaudited)
       
      At and For the Three Months Ended
      March 31,
    2025
      December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
      $ Impact   EPS
    Impact(1)
      $ Impact   EPS
    Impact(1)
      $ Impact   EPS
    Impact(1)
      $ Impact   EPS
    Impact(1)
      $ Impact   EPS
    Impact(1)
                                           
      (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
    Notable interest income items:                                    
    Interest income reversal on relationships impacted by questioned banker activity $     $     $     $     $     $     $ (1,206 )   $ (0.03 )   $     $  
    Notable interest expense items:                                    
    OID amortization – subordinated debenture redemption   (681 )     (0.02 )                                                
    Notable provision expense items:                                    
    Provision release (expense) related to questioned banker activity               3,212       0.08                   (3,212 )     (0.08 )            
    Provision release (expense) on relationships impacted by questioned banker activity   375       0.01                               (4,131 )     (0.11 )            
    Notable noninterest income items(2):                                
    MSR gain (impairment)                                                   410       0.01  
    (Loss) gain on sales of securities, net               (14,617 )     (0.37 )     221       0.01                   (403 )     (0.01 )
    Gain on sub-debt repurchase                                       81                    
    Positive valuation adjustment on non-marketable equity securities                                       5,188       0.13              
    Net (loss) gain on OREO properties(2)   (212 )     (0.01 )     198                         800       0.02              
    BOLI payout   208       0.01                                                  
    Notable noninterest expense items:                                
    Operating expense related to questioned banker activity   (543 )     (0.01 )     (4,069 )     (0.10 )     (848 )     (0.02 )     (1,452 )     (0.04 )            
    Operating expense related to strategic Optimize Origin initiatives   (1,615 )     (0.04 )     (1,121 )     (0.03 )                                    
    Employee Retention Credit   213       0.01       1,651       0.04                                      
    Total notable items $ (2,255 )     (0.06 )   $ (14,746 )     (0.37 )   $ (627 )     (0.02 )   $ (3,932 )     (0.10 )   $ 7        
                                                                                   

    ___________________________

    (1) The diluted EPS impact is calculated using a 21% effective tax rate. The total of the diluted EPS impact of each individual line item may not equal the calculated diluted EPS impact on the total notable items due to rounding.
    (2) The $212,000 net (loss) gain on OREO properties for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, includes a $444,000 expected insurance settlement recovery that was included in noninterest income on the face of the income statement and a $148,000 repair cost that was included in noninterest expense.
       
    Origin Bancorp, Inc.
    Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Unaudited)
     
      At and For the Three Months Ended
      March 31,
    2025
      December 31,
    2024
      September 30,
    2024
      June 30,
    2024
      March 31,
    2024
                       
      (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
    Calculation of PTPP earnings:                  
    Net income $ 22,411     $ 14,270     $ 18,601     $ 20,989     $ 22,632  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses   3,444       (5,398 )     4,603       5,231       3,012  
    Income tax expense   6,138       3,725       5,068       5,747       6,227  
    PTPP earnings (non-GAAP) $ 31,993     $ 12,597     $ 28,272     $ 31,967     $ 31,871  
                       
    Calculation of PTPP ROAA:                  
    PTPP earnings $ 31,993     $ 12,597     $ 28,272     $ 31,967     $ 31,871  
    Divided by number of days in the quarter   90       92       92       91       91  
    Multiplied by the number of days in the year   365       366       366       366       366  
    PTPP earnings, annualized $ 129,749     $ 50,114     $ 112,473     $ 128,571     $ 128,184  
                       
    Divided by total average assets $ 9,808,215     $ 9,978,543     $ 9,985,836     $ 10,008,225     $ 9,861,236  
    ROAA (annualized) (GAAP)   0.93 %     0.57 %     0.74 %     0.84 %     0.92 %
    PTPP ROAA (annualized) (non-GAAP)   1.32       0.50       1.13       1.28       1.30  
                       
    Calculation of tangible book value per common share and adjusted tangible book value per common share:
    Total common stockholders’ equity $ 1,180,177     $ 1,145,245     $ 1,145,673     $ 1,095,894     $ 1,078,853  
    Goodwill   (128,679 )     (128,679 )     (128,679 )     (128,679 )     (128,679 )
    Other intangible assets, net   (38,212 )     (37,473 )     (39,272 )     (41,177 )     (43,314 )
    Tangible common equity   1,013,286       979,093       977,722       926,038       906,860  
    Accumulated other comprehensive loss   90,411       106,029       94,245       127,184       124,909  
    Adjusted tangible common equity   1,103,697       1,085,122       1,071,967       1,053,222       1,031,769  
    Divided by common shares outstanding at the end of the period   31,244,006       31,197,574       31,167,410       31,108,667       31,011,304  
    Book value per common share (GAAP) $ 37.77     $ 36.71     $ 36.76     $ 35.23     $ 34.79  
    Tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP)   32.43       31.38       31.37       29.77       29.24  
    Adjusted tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP)   35.33       34.78       34.39       33.86       33.27  
                       
    Calculation of ROATCE:                
    Net income $ 22,411     $ 14,270     $ 18,601     $ 20,989     $ 22,632  
    Divided by number of days in the quarter   90       92       92       91       91  
    Multiplied by number of days in the year   365       366       366       366       366  
    Annualized net income $ 90,889     $ 56,770     $ 74,000     $ 84,417     $ 91,025  
                       
    Total average common stockholders’ equity $ 1,166,749     $ 1,149,228     $ 1,125,697     $ 1,084,269     $ 1,062,705  
    Average goodwill   (128,679 )     (128,679 )     (128,679 )     (128,679 )     (128,679 )
    Average other intangible assets, net   (38,254 )     (38,646 )     (40,487 )     (42,563 )     (44,700 )
    Average tangible common equity   999,816       981,903       956,531       913,027       889,326  
                       
    ROATCE (non-GAAP)   9.09 %     5.78 %     7.74 %     9.25 %     10.24 %
    Calculation of core efficiency ratio:                  
    Total noninterest expense $ 62,068     $ 65,422     $ 62,521     $ 64,388     $ 58,707  
    Insurance and mortgage noninterest expense   (8,230 )     (8,497 )     (8,448 )     (8,402 )     (8,045 )
    Adjusted total noninterest expense   53,838       56,925       54,073       55,986       50,662  
                       
    Net interest income $ 78,459     $ 78,349     $ 74,804     $ 73,890     $ 73,323  
    Insurance and mortgage net interest income   (2,815 )     (2,666 )     (2,578 )     (2,407 )     (2,795 )
    Total noninterest income   15,602       (330 )     15,989       22,465       17,255  
    Insurance and mortgage noninterest income   (8,842 )     (6,592 )     (8,081 )     (8,543 )     (10,123 )
    Adjusted total revenue   82,404       68,761       80,134       85,405       77,660  
                       
    Efficiency ratio (GAAP)   65.99 %     83.85 %     68.86 %     66.82 %     64.81 %
    Core efficiency ratio (non-GAAP)   65.33       82.79       67.48       65.55       65.24  

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Northrim BanCorp Earns $13.3 Million, or $2.38 Per Diluted Share, in First Quarter 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska, April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Northrim BanCorp, Inc. (NASDAQ:NRIM) (“Northrim” or the “Company”) today reported net income of $13.3 million, or $2.38 per diluted share, in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $10.9 million, or $1.95 per diluted share, in the fourth quarter of 2024, and $8.2 million, or $1.48 per diluted share, in the first quarter a year ago. The increase in first quarter 2025 profitability as compared to the first quarter a year ago was primarily the result of an increase in purchased receivable income, higher net interest income, increased mortgage banking income, and a benefit for the provision for credit losses, which were only partially offset by higher other operating expenses. Purchased receivable income increased primarily due to the Company’s acquisition of Sallyport Commercial Finance, LLC (“Sallyport or SCF”), which was completed on October 31, 2024. Sallyport and its direct and indirect subsidiaries provide services and products related to purchased receivable factoring and asset-based lending in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom.

    Dividends per share in the first quarter of 2025 increased to $0.64 per share as compared to $0.62 per share in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $0.61 per share in the first quarter of 2024.

    “Our record first quarter earnings are the result of Northrim’s focus on profitable, market share driven growth,” said Mike Huston, Northrim’s President and Chief Executive Officer. “Our strong financial performance is due to our history of investing in our people and banking infrastructure to consistently deliver ‘Superior Customer First Service’. We remain confident that our dedication to serving our customers and communities will support future growth.”

    First Quarter 2025 Highlights:

    • Net interest income in the first quarter of 2025 increased 1% to $31.3 million compared to $30.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and increased 18% compared to $26.4 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    • Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”)* was 4.61% for the first quarter of 2025, up 14-basis points from the fourth quarter of 2024 and up 39-basis points from the first quarter a year ago.
    • Return on average assets (“ROAA”) was 1.76% and return on average equity (“ROAE”) was 19.70% for the first quarter of 2025. ROAA was 1.19% and ROAE was 13.84% for the first quarter of 2024.
    • Portfolio loans were $2.12 billion at March 31, 2025, down slightly from the preceding quarter and up 17% from a year ago. Portfolio loans in the first quarter of 2025 decreased from the preceding quarter primarily due to the reclassification of $100 million of consumer mortgages previously held as residential real estate loans to loans held for sale. The consumer mortgages are expected to be sold in the second quarter of 2025 to reduce the concentration of residential real estate loans and provide additional liquidity for future commercial and construction loan growth.
    • Total deposits were $2.78 billion at March 31, 2025, up 4% from the preceding quarter, and up 14% from $2.43 billion a year ago. Non-interest bearing demand deposits increased 5% from the preceding quarter and increased 4% year-over-year to $742.6 million at March 31, 2025 and represent 27% of total deposits.
    • The average cost of interest-bearing deposits was 2.01% at March 31, 2025, down from 2.15% at December 31, 2024 and 2.13% at March 31, 2024.
    • Mortgage loan originations were $121.6 million in the first quarter of 2025, down from $185.9 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and up from $101.7 million in the first quarter a year ago. Mortgage loans funded for sale were $108.5 million in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $162.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $84.3 million in the first quarter of 2024.
    Financial Highlights Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 September 30, 2024 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024
    Total assets $ 3,140,960   $ 3,041,869   $ 2,963,392   $ 2,821,668   $ 2,759,560  
    Total portfolio loans $ 2,124,330   $ 2,129,263   $ 2,007,565   $ 1,875,907   $ 1,811,135  
    Total deposits $ 2,777,977   $ 2,680,189   $ 2,625,567   $ 2,463,806   $ 2,434,083  
    Total shareholders’ equity $ 279,756   $ 267,116   $ 260,050   $ 247,200   $ 239,327  
    Net income $ 13,324   $ 10,927   $ 8,825   $ 9,020   $ 8,199  
    Diluted earnings per share $ 2.38   $ 1.95   $ 1.57   $ 1.62   $ 1.48  
    Return on average assets   1.76 %   1.43 %   1.22 %   1.31 %   1.19 %
    Return on average shareholders’ equity   19.70 %   16.32 %   13.69 %   14.84 %   13.84 %
    NIM   4.55 %   4.41 %   4.29 %   4.24 %   4.16 %
    NIMTE*   4.61 %   4.47 %   4.35 %   4.30 %   4.22 %
    Efficiency ratio   64.47 %   66.96 %   66.11 %   68.78 %   68.93 %
    Total shareholders’ equity/total assets   8.91 %   8.78 %   8.78 %   8.76 %   8.67 %
    Tangible common equity/tangible assets*   7.41 %   7.23 %   8.28 %   8.24 %   8.14 %
    Book value per share $ 50.67   $ 48.41   $ 47.27   $ 44.93   $ 43.52  
    Tangible book value per share* $ 41.47   $ 39.17   $ 44.36   $ 42.03   $ 40.61  
    Dividends per share $ 0.64   $ 0.62   $ 0.62   $ 0.61   $ 0.61  
    Common stock outstanding   5,520,892     5,518,210     5,501,943     5,501,562     5,499,578  
                                   

    * References to NIMTE, tangible book value per share, and tangible common equity to tangible common assets, (both of which exclude intangible assets) represent non-GAAP financial measures. Management has presented these non-GAAP measurements in this earnings release, because it believes these measures are useful to investors. See the end of this release for reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP financial measures.

    Alaska Economic Update
    (Note: sources for information included in this section are included on page 13.)

    The Alaska Department of Labor (“DOL”) has reported Alaska’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in February of 2025 was 4.7% compared to the U.S. rate of 4.1%. The total number of payroll jobs in Alaska, not including uniformed military, increased 1.6% or 5,200 jobs between February of 2024 and February of 2025.

    According to the DOL, the Oil and Gas sector had the largest growth rate in new jobs of 7.5% through February 2025 compared to the prior year, up 600 direct jobs. The Construction sector added 1,000 positions for a year-over-year growth rate of 6.1% in February of 2025. The larger Health Care sector grew by 1,400 jobs for an annual growth rate of 3.4%. Transportation, Warehousing and Utilities added 1,100 jobs for a 5% growth rate. Leisure and Hospitality increased 500 jobs year-over-year through February of 2025, up 1.6%.

    The Government sector grew by 600 jobs for 0.7% growth, adding 100 Federal jobs, and 500 State positions in Alaska over the same period. Declining sectors between February 2024 and February 2025 were Manufacturing (primarily seafood processing) shrinking 500 positions (-4.4%), Financial Activities, down 100 jobs (-0.9%), and Retail lost 100 jobs (-0.3%).

    Alaska’s seasonally adjusted personal income was $56.5 billion in the fourth quarter of 2024 according to the Federal Bureau of Economic Analysis (“BEA”). This was an annualized improvement in the fourth quarter of 4.7% for Alaska, compared to the national average of 4.6%. Alaska enjoyed an annual personal income improvement of 6% in 2024 compared to the U.S. increase of 5.4%, ranking Alaska 6th best in the nation. The $650 million increase in personal income in the fourth quarter in Alaska came from a $446 million increase in net earnings from wages, $154 million growth in government transfer receipts, and a $49 million increase in investment income.

    Alaska’s Gross State Product (“GSP”) in 2024, reached $70 billion for the first time according to the BEA. Alaska’s inflation adjusted “real” GSP increased 1.5% in 2024 and 4% annualized in the fourth quarter of 2024, placing Alaska third best of all 50 states for the quarter. The average U.S. GDP growth rate was 2.8% for the year and 2.4% in the fourth quarter of 2024. Alaska’s real GSP improvement in the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily caused by growth in the Mining, Oil & Gas; Transportation & Warehousing; and to a lesser extent the Health Care sector. Construction played a larger role in the annual state GSP performance.

    Based on data from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Alaska exported $5.2 billion in goods to foreign countries in 2023. China is the largest importer of Alaska’s products at $1.2 billion, followed by Japan at $710 million and Korea at $702 million in 2023. Fish and related maritime products accounted for the largest volume at $2.1 billion, followed by minerals and ores $1.5 billion, and primary metals at $780 million in 2023. Chief Credit Officer and Bank Economist Mark Edwards stated, “President Trump’s significant changes to international tariffs has created uncertainty in trade markets. At this time, it is unknown how each country will respond. Alaska’s natural resources are highly valued commodities throughout the world. If issues arise with one country, such as China, it is most likely that Alaska’s products will be redirected to other markets like Japan and South Korea or sold domestically in the United States. Canada is the largest long-term investor in Alaska’s mining industry. This involves significant fixed capital investments made over decades that are unlikely to shift dramatically in the short-run.”

    According to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Consumer Price Index, or CPI, for the U.S. increased 2.8% between February of 2024 and February of 2025. In Alaska, the rate of increase was 2.9% for the same time period. Food and beverage; housing rents and mortgage rates; transportation; and medical care costs are the largest causes for inflation. Declining motor fuel prices, new and used car prices, and household furnishing costs have helped moderate inflationary pressures in Alaska.

    The monthly average price of Alaska North Slope (“ANS”) crude oil was $76.39 in January, $74.03 in February and $73.39 in March of 2025. The Alaska Department of Revenue (“DOR”) calculated ANS crude oil production was 461 thousand barrels per day (“bpd”) in Alaska’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2024. Through nine months of the fiscal year 2025, production has averaged slightly above the State of Alaska forecast of 467 thousand bpd. In the Spring 2025 Revenue Forecast published March 12, 2025, the DOR expects production to continue to grow to 663 thousand bpd by fiscal year 2034. This is primarily a result of new production coming on-line in and around the NPR-A region west of Prudhoe Bay. A partnership between Santos and Repsol is constructing the new Pikka oil field and ConocoPhillips is developing the new Willow oil field. There are also a number of smaller new oil fields in Alaska’s North Slope that are contributing to the State of Alaska’s production growth estimates.

    The Alaska Permanent Fund is seeded annually by the oil wealth the State continues to save each year and has grown significantly over 40 years of successful investment. As of February 28, 2025 the funds value was $81.35 billion. According to the DOR it is scheduled to contribute $3.7 billion to the Alaska General Fund in fiscal year 2025 for general government spending and to pay the annual dividend to Alaskan residents.

    According to the Alaska Multiple Listing Services, the average sales price of a single family home in Anchorage rose 6.2% in 2024 to $510,109, following a 5.2% increase in 2023. This was the seventh consecutive year of price increases.

    The average sales price for single family homes in the Matanuska Susitna Borough rose 3.8% in 2024 to $412,859, after increasing 4% in 2023. This continues a trend of average price increases for more than a decade in the region. These two markets represent where the vast majority of the residential lending activity for Northrim Bank (the”Bank”) occurs.

    The Alaska Multiple Listing Services reported a 3.4% increase in the number of units sold in Anchorage when comparing 2024 to 2023. There was virtually no change in the number of homes sold in the Matanuska Susitna Borough, with only four fewer homes sold in 2024 than in 2023 or -0.2%.

    Northrim Bank sponsors the Alaskanomics blog to provide news, analysis, and commentary on Alaska’s economy. Join the conversation at Alaskanomics.com, or for more information on the Alaska economy, visit: www.northrim.com and click on the “Business Banking” link and then click “Learn.” Information from our website is not incorporated into, and does not form, a part of this earnings release.

    Review of Income Statement

    Consolidated Income Statement

    In the first quarter of 2025, Northrim generated a ROAA of 1.76% and a ROAE of 19.70%, compared to 1.43% and 16.32%, respectively, in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 1.19% and 13.84%, respectively, in the first quarter a year ago.

    Net Interest Income/Net Interest Margin

    Net interest income increased 1% to $31.3 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared to $30.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and increased 18% compared to $26.4 million in the first quarter of 2024. Interest expense on deposits decreased to $9.9 million in the first quarter of 2025 compared to $10.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and increased compared to $9.2 million in the first quarter of 2024.

    NIMTE* was 4.61% in the first quarter of 2025 up from 4.47% in the preceding quarter and 4.22% in the first quarter a year ago. NIMTE* increased 39 basis points in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024 primarily due to a favorable change in the mix of earning-assets towards higher loan balances as a percentage of total earning-assets, slightly higher yields on those assets, and a decrease in costs on interest-bearing liabilities. The weighted average interest rate for new loans booked in the first quarter of 2025 was 7.30% compared to 7.23% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 7.84% in the first quarter a year ago. The yield on the investment portfolio in the first quarter of 2025 increased to 2.97% from 2.84% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 2.82% in the first quarter of 2024. “We are starting to see some benefit from lower deposit costs that benefit our net interest margin and outweigh the impact of the recent Fed rate cuts on our loan portfolio, which we could continue to see for the next couple of quarters,” said Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer. Northrim’s NIMTE* continues to remain above the peer average of 3.23% posted by the S&P U.S. Small Cap Bank Index with total market capitalization between $250 million and $1 billion as of December 31, 2024.

    Provision for Credit Losses

    Northrim recorded a benefit to the provision for credit losses of $1.4 million in the first quarter of 2025, which was comprised of a benefit to the provision for credit losses on loans of $1.1 million, a $322,000 benefit to the provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments, and a provision for credit losses on purchased receivables of $46,000. This compares to a provision for credit losses of $1.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, and provision for credit losses of $149,000 in the first quarter a year ago.

    The benefit to the provision for unfunded commitments in the first quarter of 2025 was primarily due to a decrease in estimated loss rates due to changes in mix that was only partially offset by management’s assessment of economic conditions and estimated funding rates. The decrease to the provision for credit losses on loans in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the prior quarter and the same quarter a year ago was primarily a result of the reclassification of $100 million in mortgage loans to loans held for sale, which provided a benefit to the provision of $2.2 million in the Home Mortgage Lending segment for the first quarter of 2025. This benefit was only partially offset by a $1.5 million provision for credit losses in the Home Mortgage Lending segment due to changes in the Company’s loss rate regression models for home mortgage loans. Additionally, the Company recorded $1.7 million net benefit for credit losses in the Community Banking segment related to changes in the Company’s loss rate regression models for commercial, commercial real estate, and construction loans. These decreases in the provision were only partially offset by increases in estimated loss rates for management’s assessment of economic conditions, an increase for higher loan balances in other loan segments, and specific provisions for credit losses in the Specialty Finance segment. These items reduced the overall benefit by $1.3 million. The provision for credit losses related to the Specialty Finance segment of $666,000 in the first quarter of 2025 consisted of a $621,000 provision for credit losses on loans and a $46,000 provision for credit losses on purchased receivables and represents management’s estimate of collateral shortfalls for four loans.

    Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, increased during the quarter to $8.0 million at March 31, 2025, compared to $7.5 million at December 31, 2024, and $5.3 million at March 31, 2024.

    The allowance for credit losses on loans was 262% of nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, at the end of the first quarter of 2025, compared to 292% three months earlier and 333% a year ago.

    Other Operating Income

    In addition to home mortgage lending, Northrim has interests in other businesses that complement its core community banking activities, including purchased receivables financing and wealth management. Other operating income contributed $14.2 million, or 31% of total first quarter 2025 revenues, as compared to $13.0 million, or 30% of revenues in the fourth quarter of 2024, and $7.8 million, or 23% of revenues in the first quarter of 2024. The increase in other operating income in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the preceding quarter and the first quarter of 2024 was primarily the result of increased purchased receivable income due to the Company’s acquisition of Sallyport on October 31, 2024. The fair market value of marketable equity securities decreased $50,000 in the first quarter of 2025 compared to a decrease of $364,000 in the prior quarter and an increase of $314,000 in the first quarter of 2024. Additionally, the increase in other operating income in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 was partially offset by a decrease in mortgage banking income due to a lower volume of mortgage activity. See further discussion regarding mortgage activity contained under “Home Mortgage Lending” below.

    Other Operating Expenses

    Operating expenses were $29.3 million in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $29.4 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, and $23.6 million in the first quarter of 2024. The decrease in other operating expenses in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily due to a decrease in salaries and other personnel expense, including $623,000 in lower mortgage commissions expense due to lower mortgage volume and a decrease in profit share expense. Professional fees decreased in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 primarily due to one-time deal costs associated with the acquisition of Sallyport of $1.1 million recorded in the fourth quarter of 2024. These decreases were only partially offset by $600,000 in compensation expense for Sallyport acquisition payments and an increase in other operating expense for a decrease in fair value of loans held for sale of $1.2 million as a result of reclassifying the consumer mortgages discussed above. The increase in other operating expenses in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter a year ago was primarily due to an increase in salaries and other personnel expense, the increase in compensation expense for Sallyport acquisition payments, the increase in other operating expense for the decrease in fair value of loans held for sale, as well as an increase in other real estate owned, or OREO, expense due to a gain on sale recorded in the first quarter of 2024 for proceeds received related to a government guarantee on an OREO property in prior years. Total other operating expense increased $2.7 million in the Specialty Finance segment in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024 from the addition of Sallyport on October 31, 2024.

    Income Tax Provision

    In the first quarter of 2025, Northrim recorded $4.3 million in state and federal income tax expense for an effective tax rate of 24.2%, compared to $2.4 million, or 17.8% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $2.3 million, or 21.9% in the first quarter a year ago. The increase in the tax rate in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the fourth and first quarters of 2024 is primarily the result of a decrease in tax credits and tax exempt interest income as a percentage of pre-tax income in 2025 as compared to 2024.

    Community Banking

    Northrim is committed to meeting the needs of the diverse communities in which it operates. As a testament to that support, the Bank has branches in four regions of Alaska identified by the Federal Reserve as ‘distressed or underserved non-metropolitan middle-income geographies’.

    Net interest income in the Community Banking segment totaled $28.2 million in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $27.6 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $24.2 million in the first quarter of 2024. Net interest income increased slightly in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 mostly due to lower interest expense on deposits and borrowings and higher interest income on loans. These increases were only partially offset by lower interest income on investments.

    Other operating expenses in the Community Banking segment totaled $18.6 million in the first quarter of 2025, down $535,000 or 3% from $19.1 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, and up $1.4 million or 8% from $17.2 million in the first quarter a year ago. The decrease in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the prior quarter was mostly due to decreases in salaries and other personnel expense, marketing expense, and professional and outside services expense. The increase in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the first quarter a year ago was primarily due to an increase in OREO expense due to a gain on sale recorded in the first quarter of 2024 for proceeds received related to a government guarantee on an OREO property sold in prior years, as well as increases in data processing expense, insurance expense, salaries and other personnel expense, and marketing expense.

    The following table provides highlights of the Community Banking segment of Northrim:

      Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 September 30, 2024 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024
    Net interest income $ 28,151   $ 27,643   $ 25,928   $ 24,318   $ 24,215  
    (Benefit) provision for credit losses   (1,768 )   771     1,492     (184 )   197  
    Other operating income   2,703     2,535     3,507     2,450     2,468  
    Other operating expense   18,581     19,116     18,723     18,068     17,178  
    Income before provision for income taxes   14,041     10,291     9,220     8,884     9,308  
    Provision for income taxes   3,253     1,474     2,133     1,786     1,966  
    Net income $ 10,788   $ 8,817   $ 7,087   $ 7,098   $ 7,342  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,608,102     5,597,889     5,583,055     5,558,580     5,554,930  
    Diluted earnings per share attributable to Community Banking $ 1.93   $ 1.58   $ 1.26   $ 1.27   $ 1.32  
                                   

    Home Mortgage Lending

    During the first quarter of 2025, mortgage loans funded for sale were $108.5 million, compared to $162.5 million in the fourth quarter of 2024, and $84.3 million in the first quarter of 2024.

    During the first quarter of 2025, the Bank purchased loans of $13.1 million from its subsidiary, Residential Mortgage. of which approximately half were jumbos, one-quarter were mortgages for second homes, and one-quarter were adjustable rate mortgages, with a weighted average interest rate of 6.39%, as compared to $23.4 million and 6.30% in the fourth quarter of 2024, and $17.4 million and 6.65% in the first quarter of 2024. Net interest income contributed $3.0 million to total Home Mortgage Lending revenue in the first quarter of 2025, down from $3.3 million in the prior quarter, and up from $2.2 million in the first quarter a year ago.

    The income statement impact from the reclassification of the consumer mortgages was a decrease in provision for credit losses of $2.2 million and a $1.2 million decrease in the fair value of mortgages.

    The Arizona, Colorado, and Pacific Northwest mortgage expansion markets were responsible for 20% of Residential Mortgage’s $122 million total production in the first quarter of 2025, 19% of $186 million total production in the fourth quarter of 2024, and 19% of $102 million total production in the first quarter of 2024.

    The net change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights decreased mortgage banking income by $855,000 during the first quarter of 2025 compared to an increase of $873,000 for the fourth quarter of 2024 and a decrease of $25,000 for the first quarter of 2024. Mortgage servicing revenue decreased to $2.7 million in the first quarter of 2025 from $2.8 million in the prior quarter and increased from $1.6 million in the first quarter of 2024 due to an increase in production of Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) mortgages, which contribute to servicing revenues at origination. In the first quarter of 2025, the Company’s servicing portfolio increased $24.0 million compared to a $294.1 million increase in the fourth quarter of 2024, which included the purchase of the AHFC servicing portfolio of $235.6 million, and an increase of $15.5 million in the first quarter of 2024.

    As of March 31, 2025, Northrim serviced 6,391 loans in its $1.48 billion home-mortgage-servicing portfolio, a 2% increase compared to the $1.46 billion serviced as of the end of the fourth quarter of 2024, and a 40% increase from the $1.06 billion serviced a year ago.

    The following table provides highlights of the Home Mortgage Lending segment of Northrim:

      Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 September 30, 2024 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024
    Mortgage commitments $ 68,258   $ 32,299   $ 77,591   $ 88,006   $ 56,208  
               
    Mortgage loans funded for sale $ 108,499   $ 162,530   $ 209,960   $ 152,339   $ 84,324  
    Mortgage loans funded for investment   13,061     23,380     38,087     29,175     17,403  
    Total mortgage loans funded $ 121,560   $ 185,910   $ 248,047   $ 181,514   $ 101,727  
    Mortgage loan refinances to total fundings   11 %   11 %   6 %   6 %   4 %
    Mortgage loans serviced for others $ 1,484,714   $ 1,460,720   $ 1,166,585   $ 1,101,800   $ 1,060,007  
               
    Net realized gains on mortgage loans sold $ 2,740   $ 3,747   $ 5,079   $ 3,188   $ 1,980  
    Change in fair value of mortgage loan commitments, net   660     (665 )   60     391     386  
    Total production revenue   3,400     3,082     5,139     3,579     2,366  
    Mortgage servicing revenue   2,696     2,847     2,583     2,164     1,561  
    Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights:          
    Due to changes in model inputs of assumptions1   (322 )   1,372     (566 )   239     289  
    Other2   (533 )   (499 )   (402 )   (320 )   (314 )
    Total mortgage servicing revenue, net   1,841     3,720     1,615     2,083     1,536  
    Other mortgage banking revenue   170     238     293     222     129  
    Total mortgage banking income $ 5,411   $ 7,040   $ 7,047   $ 5,884   $ 4,031  
               
    Net interest income $ 3,046   $ 3,280   $ 2,941   $ 2,775   $ 2,232  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses   (307 )   305     571     64     (48 )
    Mortgage banking income   5,411     7,040     7,047     5,884     4,031  
    Other operating expense   7,650     7,198     7,643     6,697     6,086  
    Income (loss) before provision for income taxes   1,114     2,817     1,774     1,898     225  
    Provision (benefit) for income taxes   310     842     497     532     63  
    Net income (loss) $ 804   $ 1,975   $ 1,277   $ 1,366   $ 162  
               
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,608,102     5,597,889     5,583,055     5,558,580     5,554,930  
    Diluted earnings per share attributable to Home Mortgage Lending $ 0.14   $ 0.35   $ 0.23   $ 0.25   $ 0.03  

    1Principally reflects changes in discount rates and prepayment speed assumptions, which are primarily affected by changes in interest rates.
    2Represents changes due to collection/realization of expected cash flows over time.

    Specialty Finance

    The Company’s Specialty Finance segment includes Northrim Funding Services and Sallyport Commercial Finance. Northrim Funding Services is a division of the Bank and has offered factoring solutions to small businesses since 2004. Sallyport is a leading provider of factoring, asset-based lending and alternative working capital solutions to small and medium sized enterprises in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom that the Company acquired on October 31, 2024 in an all cash transaction valued at approximately $53.9 million. The composition of revenues for the Specialty Finance segment are primarily purchased receivable income, but also includes interest income and other fee income.

    The acquisition of Sallyport included $1.1 million in one-time deal related costs which are reflected in other operating expenses for the fourth quarter of 2024 in the tables below. Total pre-tax income for Sallyport for the first quarter of 2025 was $1.3 million compared to $945,000 for the two months of operations in the fourth quarter of 2024, excluding transaction costs.

    Average purchased receivables and loan balances at Sallyport were $59.9 million for the first quarter of 2025, and yielded 35.8%. This included the recognition of $899,000 in fee income collected during the quarter related to two nonperforming receivables that was previously deferred and the collection of a $350,000 line termination fee. The yield excluding these items for the first quarter of 2025 was 27.4%.

    The following table provides highlights of the Specialty Finance segment of Northrim:

      Three Months Ended
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) March 31, 2025 December 31, 2024 September 30, 2024 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024
    Purchased receivable income $ 6,150   $ 3,526   $ 1,033   $ 1,243   $ 1,345  
    Other operating income   (64 )   (68 )            
    Interest income   596     407     158     170     212  
    Total revenue   6,682     3,865     1,191     1,413     1,557  
    Provision for credit losses   666     125              
    Compensation expense – SCF acquisition payments   600                  
    Other operating expense   2,500     3,063     362     429     374  
    Interest expense   496     489     185     210     212  
    Total expense   4,262     3,677     547     639     586  
    Income before provision for income taxes   2,420     188     644     774     971  
    Provision for income taxes   688     53     183     218     276  
    Net income Specialty Finance segment $ 1,732   $ 135   $ 461   $ 556   $ 695  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,608,102     5,597,889     5,583,055     5,558,580     5,554,930  
    Diluted earnings per share attributable to Specialty Finance $ 0.31   $ 0.02   $ 0.08   $ 0.10   $ 0.13  
                                   

    Balance Sheet Review

    Northrim’s total assets were $3.14 billion at March 31, 2025, up 3% from the preceding quarter and up 14% from a year ago. Northrim’s loan-to-deposit ratio was 76% at March 31, 2025, down from 79% at December 31, 2024, and up from 74% at March 31, 2024.

    At March 31, 2025, our liquid assets, investments, and loans maturing within one year were $1.11 billion and our funds available for borrowing under our existing lines of credit were $571.7 million. Given these sources of liquidity and our expectations for customer demands for cash and for our operating cash needs, we believe our sources of liquidity to be sufficient for the foreseeable future.

    Average interest-earning assets were $2.78 billion in the first quarter of 2025, down slightly from $2.79 billion in the fourth quarter of 2024 and up 9% from $2.56 billion in the first quarter a year ago. The average yield on interest-earning assets was 6.10% in the first quarter of 2025, up slightly from 6.02% in the preceding quarter and up from 5.69% in the first quarter a year ago.

    Average investment securities decreased to $523.8 million in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $565.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and $670.9 million in the first quarter a year ago. The average net tax equivalent yield on the securities portfolio was 2.97% for the first quarter of 2025, up from 2.84% in the preceding quarter and up from 2.82% in the year ago quarter. The average estimated duration of the investment portfolio at March 31, 2025, was approximately 2.4 years compared to approximately 2.7 years at March 31, 2024. As of March 31, 2025, $70.0 million of available for sale securities with a weighted average yield of 2.25% are scheduled to mature in the next six months, $80.7 million with a weighted average yield of 1.16% are scheduled to mature in six months to one year, and $168.6 million with a weighted average yield of 1.67% are scheduled to mature in the following year, representing a total of $319.4 million or 11% of earning assets that are scheduled to mature in the next 24 months.

    Total unrealized losses, net of tax, on available for sale securities decreased by $2.8 million in the first quarter of 2025 resulting in total unrealized loss, net of tax, of $5.5 million compared to $8.3 million at December 31, 2024, and $17.2 million a year ago. The average maturity of the available for sale securities with the majority of the unrealized loss is 1.3 years. Total unrealized losses on held to maturity securities were $1.1 million at March 31, 2025, compared to $1.0 million at December 31, 2024, and $3.4 million a year ago.

    Average interest bearing deposits in other banks decreased to $38.0 million in the first quarter of 2025 from $72.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2024 and decreased from $61.6 million in the first quarter of 2024, as cash was used to fund the loan growth and provide liquidity.

    Loans held for sale increased to $159.6 million at March 31, 2025, compared to $60.0 million at December 31, 2024, and $43.8 million a year ago, largely due to the reclassification of $100 million consumer mortgage loans from portfolio loans in the first quarter of 2025. Management expects to sell these loans with servicing retained which will result in an increase to mortgage servicing rights when the sale closes in the second quarter of 2025.

    Portfolio loans were $2.12 billion at March 31, 2025, consistent with the preceding quarter and up 17% from a year ago. Portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, were $1.94 billion at March 31, 2025, up $77.4 million or 4% from the preceding quarter and up 22% from a year ago. This increase in the first quarter of 2025 was diversified throughout the loan portfolio including nonowner-occupied commercial real estate and multi-family loans increasing by $70.8 million, commercial loans increasing by $55.4 million, and commercial real estate owner-occupied loans increasing $10.4 million from the preceding quarter. These increases were partially offset by a $57.9 million decrease in construction loans. Average portfolio loans in the first quarter of 2025 were $2.17 billion, which was up 5% from the preceding quarter and up 21% from a year ago. Yields on average portfolio loans in the first quarter of 2025 decreased to 6.89% from 6.93% in the fourth quarter and increased from 6.75% in the first quarter of 2024. The decrease in the yield on portfolio loans in the first quarter of 2025 compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 is primarily due to a change in the mix of loans as construction loans decreased and commercial real estate loans increased as a percentage of the overall portfolio. The yield on new portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, was 7.43% in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to 7.40% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and 8.39% in the first quarter of 2024.

    Northrim’s loans and credit lines are subject to approval procedures and amount limitations. These limitations apply to the borrower’s total outstanding indebtedness and commitments to us, including the indebtedness of any guarantor. Generally, Northrim is permitted to make loans to one borrower of up to 15% of the unimpaired capital and surplus of the Bank. The legal lending limit was $37.6 million at March 31, 2025. At March 31, 2025, Northrim had 23 relationships totaling $520.2 million in portfolio loans whose total direct and indirect commitments were greater than 50% of the legal lending limit.

    Alaskans continue to account for substantially all of Northrim’s deposit base. Total deposits were $2.78 billion at March 31, 2025, up 4% from $2.68 billion at December 31, 2024, and up 14% from $2.43 billion a year ago. “The increase in deposits in the first quarter of 2025 was not consistent with our customers’ normal business cycles as we normally see decreases in balances during the first quarter, however deposits from new relationships in the quarter were more than able to offset our normal seasonal deposit movement,” said Ballard. At March 31, 2025, 74% of total deposits were held in business accounts and 26% of deposit balances were held in consumer accounts. Northrim had approximately 34,000 deposit customers with an average balance of $61,000 as of March 31, 2025. Northrim had 27 customers with balances over $10 million as of March 31, 2025, which accounted for $694.7 million, or 26%, of total deposits. Demand deposits increased by 5% from the prior quarter and increased 4% from the prior year to $742.6 million at March 31, 2025. Demand deposits remained consistent at 27% of total deposits at both March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 and were down from 29% of total deposits at March 31, 2024. Average interest-bearing deposits were up 2% to $2.00 billion with an average cost of 2.01% in the first quarter of 2025, compared to $1.95 billion and an average cost of 2.15% in the fourth quarter of 2024, and up 16% compared to $1.73 billion and an average cost of 2.13% in the first quarter of 2024. Uninsured deposits totaled $1.04 billion or 37% of total deposits as of March 31, 2025 compared to $1.08 billion or 40% of total deposits as of December 31, 2024.

    Shareholders’ equity was $279.8 million, or $50.67 book value per share, at March 31, 2025, compared to $267.1 million, or $48.41 book value per share, at December 31, 2024 and $239.3 million, or $43.52 book value per share, a year ago. Tangible book value per share* was $41.47 at March 31, 2025, compared to $39.17 at December 31, 2024, and $40.61 per share a year ago. The increase in shareholders’ equity in the first quarter of 2025 as compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 was largely the result of earnings of $13.3 million and an increase in the fair value of the available for sale securities portfolio, which increased $5.5 million, net of tax, which were only partially offset by dividends paid of $3.6 million. The Company did not repurchase any shares of common stock in the first quarter of 2025 and currently has no plans to continue to repurchase shares. Tangible common equity to tangible assets* was 7.41% as of March 31, 2025, compared to 7.23% as of December 31, 2024 and 8.14% as of March 31, 2024. Northrim continues to maintain capital levels in excess of the requirements to be categorized as “well-capitalized” with Tier 1 Capital to Risk Adjusted Assets of 9.76% at March 31, 2025, compared to 9.76% at December 31, 2024, and 11.55% at March 31, 2024.

    Asset Quality

    Northrim believes it has a consistent lending approach throughout economic cycles, which emphasizes appropriate loan-to-value ratios, adequate debt coverage ratios, and competent management.

    Nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) net of government guarantees were $12.3 million at March 31, 2025, up from $11.6 million at December 31, 2024 and $5.4 million a year ago. Of the NPAs at March 31, 2025, $4.5 million are attributable to the Community Banking segment and $7.6 million are attributable to the Specialty Finance segment.

    Net adversely classified loans were $20.4 million at March 31, 2025, as compared to $9.6 million at December 31, 2024, and $7.2 million a year ago. Adversely classified loans are loans that Northrim has classified as substandard, doubtful, and loss, net of government guarantees. The increase in adversely classified loans, net of government guarantees, at March 31, 2025 as compared to the prior quarter and prior year is mostly attributable to two commercial relationships totaling $9.4 million. Net loan recoveries were $34,000 in the first quarter of 2025, compared to net loan recoveries of $51,000 in the fourth quarter of 2024, and net loan recoveries of $42,000 in the first quarter of 2024. Additionally, Northrim had three new loan modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty totaling $813,000, for a total of 14 totaling $3.8 million, net of government guarantees in the first quarter of 2025.

    Northrim had $140.7 million, or 7% of portfolio loans, in the Healthcare sector, $122.5 million, or 6% of portfolio loans, in the Tourism sector, $110.9 million, or 5% of portfolio loans, in the Accommodations sector, $91.2 million, or 4% of portfolio loans, in the Retail sector, $85.7 million, or 4% of portfolio loans, in the Aviation (non-tourism) sector, $75.5 million, or 4% of portfolio loans, in the Fishing sector, and $60.2 million, or 3% in the Restaurants and Breweries sector as of March 31, 2025.

    Northrim estimates that $106.3 million, or approximately 5% of portfolio loans, had direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, as of March 31, 2025, and $1.5 million of these loans are adversely classified. As of March 31, 2025, Northrim has an additional $32.6 million in unfunded commitments to companies with direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, and no unfunded commitments on adversely classified loans. Northrim defines direct exposure to the oil and gas sector as loans to borrowers that provide oilfield services and other companies that have been identified as significantly reliant upon activity in Alaska related to the oil and gas industry, such as lodging, equipment rental, transportation and other logistics services specific to this industry.

    About Northrim BanCorp

    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. is the parent company of Northrim Bank, an Alaska-based community bank with 20 branches throughout the state and differentiates itself with its detailed knowledge of Alaska’s economy and its “Customer First Service” philosophy. The Bank has two wholly-owned subsidiaries, Sallyport Commercial Finance, LLC, a specialty finance company and Residential Mortgage Holding Company, LLC, a regional home mortgage company. Pacific Wealth Advisors, LLC is an affiliated company.

    www.northrim.com

    Forward-Looking Statement
    This release may contain “forward-looking statements” as that term is defined for purposes of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements are, in effect, management’s attempt to predict future events, and thus are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect management’s views only as of the date hereof. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, regarding our financial position, business strategy, management’s plans and objectives for future operations are forward-looking statements. When used in this report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” and “intend” and words or phrases of similar meaning, as they relate to Northrim and its management are intended to help identify forward-looking statements. Although we believe that management’s expectations as reflected in forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure readers that those expectations will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements, are subject to various risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially and adversely from our expectations as indicated in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include: descriptions of Northrim’s and Sallyport’s financial condition, results of operations, asset based lending volumes, asset and credit quality trends and profitability and statements about the expected financial benefits and other effects of the acquisition of Sallyport by Northrim Bank; expected cost savings, synergies and other financial benefits from the acquisition of Sallyport by Northrim Bank might not be realized within the expected time frames and costs or difficulties relating to integration matters might be greater than expected; the ability of Northrim and Sallyport to execute their respective business plans; potential further increases in interest rates; the value of securities held in our investment portfolio; the impact of the results of government initiatives, including tariffs, on the regulatory landscape, natural resource extraction industries, and capital markets; the impact of declines in the value of commercial and residential real estate markets, high unemployment rates, inflationary pressures and slowdowns in economic growth; changes in banking regulation or actions by bank regulators; potential further increases in inflation, supply-chain constraints, and potential geopolitical instability, including the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East; financial stress on borrowers (consumers and businesses) as a result of higher rates or an uncertain economic environment; the general condition of, and changes in, the Alaska economy; our ability to maintain or expand our market share or net interest margin; the sufficiency of our allowance for credit losses and the accuracy of the assumptions or estimates used in preparing our financial statements, including those related to current expected credit losses accounting guidance; our ability to maintain asset quality; our ability to implement our marketing and growth strategies; our ability to identify and address cyber-security risks, including security breaches, “denial of service attacks,” “hacking,” and identity theft; disease outbreaks; and our ability to execute our business plan. Further, actual results may be affected by competition on price and other factors with other financial institutions; customer acceptance of new products and services; the regulatory environment in which we operate; and general trends in the local, regional and national banking industry and economy. In addition, there are risks inherent in the banking industry relating to collectability of loans and changes in interest rates. Many of these risks, as well as other risks that may have a material adverse impact on our operations and business, are identified in the “Risk Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, and from time to time are disclosed in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. However, you should be aware that these factors are not an exhaustive list, and you should not assume these are the only factors that may cause our actual results to differ from our expectations. These forward-looking statements are made only as of the date of this release, and Northrim does not undertake any obligation to release revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or conditions after the date of this release.

    References:

    https://www.bea.gov/

    http://almis.labor.state.ak.us/

    http://www.tax.alaska.gov/programs/oil/prevailing/ans.aspx

    http://www.tax.state.ak.us/

    www.mba.org

    https://www.alaskarealestate.com/MLSMember/RealEstateStatistics.aspx

    https://www.akleg.gov/basis/Bill/Text/34?Hsid=HJR011C

    https://www.uschamber.com/assets/static/maps/international-trade/AK_Chamber_2024.pdf

    https://tax.alaska.gov/programs/programs/reports/RSB.aspx?Year=2025&Type=Spring

    https://www.capitaliq.spglobal.com/web/client?auth=inherit&overridecdc=1&#markets/indexFinancials

    Income Statement      
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) Three Months Ended
    (Unaudited) March 31, December 31, March 31,
        2025     2024     2024  
    Interest Income:      
    Interest and fees on loans $ 37,470   $ 37,059   $ 30,450  
    Interest on portfolio investments   3,675     3,844     4,520  
    Interest on deposits in banks   416     883     838  
    Total interest income   41,561     41,786     35,808  
    Interest Expense:      
    Interest expense on deposits   9,935     10,568     9,180  
    Interest expense on borrowings   329     377     181  
    Total interest expense   10,264     10,945     9,361  
    Net interest income   31,297     30,841     26,447  
           
    (Benefit) provision for credit losses   (1,409 )   1,201     149  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   32,706     29,640     26,298  
           
    Other Operating Income:      
    Purchased receivable income   6,150     3,526     1,345  
    Mortgage banking income   5,411     7,040     4,031  
    Bankcard fees   1,074     1,148     917  
    Service charges on deposit accounts   677     622     549  
    Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable equity securities   (50 )   (364 )   314  
    Other income   938     949     688  
    Total other operating income   14,200     13,033     7,844  
           
    Other Operating Expense:      
    Salaries and other personnel expense   17,223     18,254     15,417  
    Data processing expense   3,104     3,108     2,659  
    Occupancy expense   1,889     1,893     1,962  
    Professional and outside services   1,115     1,967     755  
    Insurance expense   1,017     894     779  
    Marketing expense   672     965     513  
    Compensation expense – SCF acquisition payments   600          
    OREO expense, net rental income and gains on sale   3     2     (391 )
    Other operating expense   3,708     2,294     1,944  
    Total other operating expense   29,331     29,377     23,638  
           
    Income before provision for income taxes   17,575     13,296     10,504  
    Provision for income taxes   4,251     2,369     2,305  
    Net income $ 13,324   $ 10,927   $ 8,199  
           
    Basic EPS $ 2.41   $ 1.99   $ 1.49  
    Diluted EPS $ 2.38   $ 1.95   $ 1.48  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, basic   5,519,998     5,509,078     5,499,578  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,608,102     5,597,889     5,554,930  
                       
    Balance Sheet      
    (Dollars in thousands)      
    (Unaudited) March 31, December 31, March 31,
        2025     2024     2024  
           
    Assets:      
    Cash and due from banks $ 29,671   $ 42,101   $ 30,159  
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks   35,852     20,635     50,205  
    Investment securities available for sale, at fair value   463,096     478,617     592,479  
    Investment securities held to maturity   36,750     36,750     36,750  
    Marketable equity securities, at fair value   8,669     8,719     13,467  
    Investment in Federal Home Loan Bank stock   5,342     5,331     3,236  
    Loans held for sale   159,603     59,957     43,818  
           
    Portfolio loans   2,124,330     2,129,263     1,811,135  
    Allowance for credit losses, loans   (20,922 )   (22,020 )   (17,533 )
    Net portfolio loans   2,103,408     2,107,243     1,793,602  
    Purchased receivables, net   95,489     74,078     37,698  
    Mortgage servicing rights, at fair value   26,814     26,439     20,055  
    Other real estate owned, net            
    Premises and equipment, net   37,070     37,757     40,836  
    Lease right of use asset   7,632     7,455     8,867  
    Goodwill and intangible assets   50,824     50,968     15,967  
    Other assets   80,740     85,819     72,421  
    Total assets $ 3,140,960   $ 3,041,869   $ 2,759,560  
           
    Liabilities:      
    Demand deposits $ 742,560   $ 706,225   $ 714,244  
    Interest-bearing demand   1,187,465     1,108,404     889,581  
    Savings deposits   256,650     250,900     246,902  
    Money market deposits   193,842     196,290     209,785  
    Time deposits   397,460     418,370     373,571  
    Total deposits   2,777,977     2,680,189     2,434,083  
    Other borrowings   13,136     23,045     13,569  
    Junior subordinated debentures   10,310     10,310     10,310  
    Lease liability   7,682     7,487     8,884  
    Other liabilities   52,099     53,722     53,387  
    Total liabilities   2,861,204     2,774,753     2,520,233  
           
    Shareholders’ Equity:      
    Total shareholders’ equity   279,756     267,116     239,327  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 3,140,960   $ 3,041,869   $ 2,759,560  
           

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Composition of Portfolio Loans                        
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
      Balance % of total   Balance % of total   Balance % of total   Balance % of total   Balance % of total
    Commercial loans $ 573,593   27 %   $ 518,148   24 %   $ 492,414   24 %   $ 495,781   26 %   $ 475,220   26 %
    Commercial real estate:                            
    Owner occupied properties   430,442   20 %     420,060   20 %     412,827   20 %     383,832   20 %     372,507   20 %
    Nonowner occupied and multifamily properties   690,277   32 %     619,431   29 %     584,302   31 %     551,130   30 %     529,904   30 %
    Residential real estate:                            
    1-4 family properties secured by first liens   188,219   9 %     270,535   13 %     248,514   12 %     222,026   12 %     218,552   12 %
    1-4 family properties secured by junior liens & revolving secured by first liens   53,836   3 %     48,857   2 %     45,262   2 %     41,258   2 %     35,460   2 %
    1-4 family construction   34,017   2 %     39,789   2 %     39,794   2 %     29,510   2 %     27,751   2 %
    Construction loans   156,211   7 %     214,068   10 %     185,362   9 %     154,009   8 %     153,537   8 %
    Consumer loans   7,424   %     7,562   %     7,836   %     6,679   %     6,444   %
    Subtotal   2,134,019         2,138,450         2,016,311         1,884,225         1,819,375    
    Unearned loan fees, net   (9,689 )       (9,187 )       (8,746 )       (8,318 )       (8,240 )  
    Total portfolio loans $ 2,124,330       $ 2,129,263       $ 2,007,565       $ 1,875,907       $ 1,811,135    
                                 
    Composition of Deposits                        
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
      Balance % of total   Balance % of total   Balance % of total   Balance % of total   Balance % of total
    Demand deposits $ 742,560   27 %   $ 706,225   27 %   $ 763,595   29 %   $ 704,471   29 %   $ 714,244   29 %
    Interest-bearing demand   1,187,465   43 %     1,108,404   41 %     979,238   37 %     906,010   36 %     889,581   37 %
    Savings deposits   256,650   9 %     250,900   9 %     245,043   9 %     238,156   10 %     246,902   10 %
    Money market deposits   193,842   7 %     196,290   7 %     204,821   8 %     195,159   8 %     209,785   9 %
    Time deposits   397,460   14 %     418,370   16 %     435,870   17 %     420,010   17 %     373,571   15 %
    Total deposits $ 2,777,977       $ 2,680,189       $ 2,628,567       $ 2,463,806       $ 2,434,083    
                                                     

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Asset Quality March 31,   December 31,   March 31,
        2025       2024       2024  
    Nonaccrual loans – Community Banking $ 4,274     $ 4,337     $ 4,472  
    Nonaccrual loans – Home Mortgage Lending   221       233       263  
    Nonaccrual loans – Specialty Finance   3,573       2,946       525  
    Nonaccrual loans – Total   8,068       7,516       5,260  
    Loans 90 days past due and accruing – Community Banking         17        
    Loans 90 days past due and accruing – Total         17        
    Total nonperforming loans – Community Banking   4,274       4,354       4,472  
    Total nonperforming loans – Home Mortgage Lending   221       233       263  
    Total nonperforming loans – Specialty Finance   3,573       2,946       525  
    Total nonperforming loans – Total   8,068       7,533       5,260  
    Nonperforming loans guaranteed by gov’t – Community Banking   80              
    Nonperforming loans guaranteed by gov’t – Total   80              
    Net nonperforming loans – Community Banking   4,194       4,354       4,472  
    Net nonperforming loans – Home Mortgage Lending   221       233       263  
    Net nonperforming loans – Specialty Finance   3,573       2,946       525  
    Net nonperforming loans – Total   7,988       7,533       5,260  
                 
    Repossessed assets – Community Banking   297       297        
    Repossessed assets – Total   297       297        
                 
    Nonperforming purchased receivables – Specialty Finance   4,007       3,768       183  
                 
    Net nonperforming assets – Community Banking   4,491       4,651       4,472  
    Net nonperforming assets – Home Mortgage Lending   221       233       263  
    Net nonperforming assets – Specialty Finance   7,580       6,714       708  
    Net nonperforming assets – Total $ 12,292     $ 11,598     $ 5,443  
                 
    Adversely classified loans, net of gov’t guarantees – Community Banking $ 16,592     $ 6,332     $ 6,374  
    Adversely classified loans, net of gov’t guarantees – Home Mortgage Lending   252       358       307  
    Adversely classified loans, net of gov’t guarantees – Specialty Finance   3,573       2,946       525  
    Adversely classified loans, net of gov’t guarantees – Total $ 20,417     $ 9,636     $ 7,206  
                 
    Special mention loans, net of gov’t guarantees – Community Banking $ 14,496     $ 19,769     $ 9,976  
    Special mention loans, net of gov’t guarantees – Home Mortgage Lending   637              
    Special mention loans, net of gov’t guarantees – Total $ 15,133     $ 19,769     $ 9,976  
                           
    Asset Quality, Continued March 31, December 31, March 31,
        2025     2024     2024  
    Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans   0.38 %   0.35 %   0.29 %
    Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees   0.40 %   0.38 %   0.31 %
    Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets   0.39 %   0.38 %   0.20 %
    Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets net of government guarantees   0.41 %   0.40 %   0.20 %
                 
    Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans   0.04 %   0.11 %   0.03 %
    Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees   0.04 %   0.11 %   0.04 %
                 
    Allowance for credit losses for loans / portfolio loans   0.98 %   1.03 %   0.97 %
    Allowance for credit losses for loans / portfolio loans, net of gov’t guarantees   1.06 %   1.10 %   1.03 %
    Allowance for credit losses for loans / nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees   262 %   292 %   333 %
                 
    Gross loan charge-offs for the quarter – Community Banking $ 50   $ 44   $ 25  
    Gross loan charge-offs for the quarter – Specialty Finance       105      
    Gross loan charge-offs for the quarter – Total   50     149     25  
                 
    Gross loan recoveries for the quarter – Community Banking   (84 )   (200 )   (67 )
    Gross loan recoveries for the quarter – Home Mortgage Lending            
    Gross loan recoveries for the quarter – Specialty Finance            
    Gross loan recoveries for the quarter – Total $ (84 ) $ (200 ) $ (67 )
                 
    Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs for the quarter – Community Banking $ (34 ) $ (156 ) $ (42 )
    Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs for the quarter – Specialty Finance       (105 )    
    Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs for the quarter – Total $ (34 ) $ (51 ) $ (42 )
                 
    Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) for the quarter / average loans, for the quarter   %   %   %
                 
    Allowance for credit losses for purchased receivables / purchased receivables   3.72 %   4.69 %   %
                 
    Net purchased receivable charge-offs (recoveries) for the quarter $   $   $  
                 

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Average Balances, Yields, and Rates                
      Three Months Ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
        Average     Average     Average
      Average Tax Equivalent   Average Tax Equivalent   Average Tax Equivalent
      Balance Yield/Rate   Balance Yield/Rate   Balance Yield/Rate
    Assets                
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks $ 37,969   4.44 %   $ 72,212   4.72 %   $ 61,561   5.38 %
    Portfolio investments   523,753   2.97 %     565,785   2.84 %     670,937   2.82 %
    Loans held for sale   46,223   5.86 %     83,304   5.97 %     32,635   6.13 %
    Portfolio loans   2,173,425   6.89 %     2,066,216   6.93 %     1,793,425   6.75 %
    Total interest-earning assets   2,781,370   6.10 %     2,787,517   6.02 %     2,558,558   5.69 %
    Nonearning assets   293,415         251,364         201,137    
    Total assets $ 3,074,785       $ 3,038,881       $ 2,759,695    
                     
    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity                
    Interest-bearing deposits $ 2,002,594   2.01 %   $ 1,954,495   2.15 %   $ 1,731,923   2.13 %
    Borrowings   37,081   3.55 %     29,251   3.95 %     23,944   2.95 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   2,039,675   2.04 %     1,983,746   2.18 %     1,755,867   2.14 %
                     
    Noninterest-bearing demand deposits   697,534         738,911         705,134    
    Other liabilities   63,348         49,815         60,407    
    Shareholders’ equity   274,228         266,409         238,287    
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 3,074,785       $ 3,038,881       $ 2,759,695    
    Net spread   4.06 %     3.84 %     3.55 %
    NIM   4.55 %     4.41 %     4.16 %
    NIMTE*   4.61 %     4.47 %     4.22 %
    Cost of funds   1.52 %     1.59 %     1.53 %
    Average portfolio loans to average interest-earning assets   78.14 %       74.12 %       70.10 %  
    Average portfolio loans to average total deposits   80.49 %       76.71 %       73.59 %  
    Average non-interest deposits to average total deposits   25.83 %       27.43 %       28.93 %  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities   136.36 %       140.52 %       145.71 %  
                                 

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Capital Data (At quarter end)          
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   March 31, 2024
    Book value per share $ 50.67     $ 48.41     $ 43.52  
    Tangible book value per share* $ 41.47     $ 39.17     $ 40.61  
    Total shareholders’ equity/total assets   8.91 %     8.78 %     8.67 %
    Tangible Common Equity/Tangible Assets*   7.41 %     7.23 %     8.14 %
    Tier 1 Capital / Risk Adjusted Assets   9.76 %     9.76 %     11.55 %
    Total Capital / Risk Adjusted Assets   10.62 %     10.94 %     12.47 %
    Tier 1 Capital / Average Assets   8.02 %     7.68 %     9.01 %
    Shares outstanding   5,520,892       5,518,210       5,499,578  
    Total unrealized loss on AFS debt securities, net of income taxes $ (5,452 )   $ (8,295 )   $ (17,205 )
    Total unrealized gain on derivatives and hedging activities, net of income taxes $ 1,097     $ 1,272     $ 1,172  
                           
    Profitability Ratios                            
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
    For the quarter:                            
    NIM 4.55 %   4.41 %   4.29 %   4.24 %   4.16 %
    NIMTE* 4.61 %   4.47 %   4.35 %   4.30 %   4.22 %
    Efficiency ratio 64.47 %   66.96 %   66.11 %   68.78 %   68.93 %
    Return on average assets 1.76 %   1.43 %   1.22 %   1.31 %   1.19 %
    Return on average equity 19.70 %   16.32 %   13.69 %   14.84 %   13.84 %

    *Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Non-GAAP financial measures have inherent limitations, are not required to be uniformly applied, and are not audited. Although we believe these non-GAAP financial measures are frequently used by stakeholders in the evaluation of the Company, they have limitations as analytical tools and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of results as reported under GAAP.

    Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis

    Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”) is a non-GAAP performance measurement in which interest income on non-taxable investments and loans is presented on a tax equivalent basis using a combined federal and state statutory rate of 28.43% in both 2025 and 2024. The most comparable GAAP measure is net interest margin and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of NIMTE to net interest margin for the periods indicated.

      Three Months Ended
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
    Net interest income $ 31,297     $ 30,841     $ 28,842     $ 27,053     $ 26,447  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets   2,781,370       2,787,517       2,674,291       2,568,266       2,558,558  
    Net interest margin (“NIM”)2   4.55 %     4.41 %     4.29 %     4.24 %     4.16 %
                       
    Net interest income $ 31,297     $ 30,841     $ 28,842     $ 27,053     $ 26,447  
    Plus: reduction in tax expense related to tax-exempt interest income   379       379       385       378       379  
      $ 31,676     $ 31,220     $ 29,227     $ 27,431     $ 26,826  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets   2,781,370       2,787,517       2,674,291       2,568,266       2,558,558  
    NIMTE2   4.61 %     4.47 %     4.35 %     4.30 %     4.22 %
                                           

    2Calculated using actual days in the quarter divided by 365 for the quarters ended in 2025 and 366 for the quarters ended in 2024, respectively.

    *Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Tangible Book Value Per Share

    Tangible book value per share is a non-GAAP measure defined as shareholders’ equity, less intangible assets, divided by shares outstanding. The most comparable GAAP measure is book value per share and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of tangible book value per share and book value per share for the periods indicated.

      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $ 279,756     $ 267,116     $ 260,050     $ 247,200     $ 239,327  
    Divided by shares outstanding   5,521       5,518       5,502       5,502       5,500  
    Book value per share $ 50.68     $ 48.41     $ 47.26     $ 44.93     $ 43.52  
                                           
      March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $ 279,756     $ 267,116     $ 260,050     $ 247,200     $ 239,327  
    Less: goodwill and intangible assets   50,824       50,968       15,967       15,967       15,967  
      $ 228,932     $ 216,148     $ 244,083     $ 231,233     $ 223,360  
    Divided by shares outstanding   5,521       5,518       5,502       5,502       5,500  
    Tangible book value per share $ 41.47     $ 39.17     $ 44.36     $ 42.03     $ 40.61  
                                           

    Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets

    Tangible common equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP ratio that represents total equity less goodwill and intangible assets divided by total assets less goodwill and intangible assets. The most comparable GAAP measure of shareholders’ equity to total assets is calculated by dividing total shareholders’ equity by total assets and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of tangible common equity to tangible assets and shareholders’ equity to total assets for the periods indicated.

    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
                       
    Total shareholders’ equity $ 279,756     $ 267,116     $ 260,050     $ 247,200     $ 239,327  
    Total assets   3,140,960       3,041,869       2,963,392       2,821,668       2,759,560  
    Total shareholders’ equity to total assets   8.91 %     8.78 %     8.78 %     8.76 %     8.67 %
    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. March 31, 2025   December 31, 2024   September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   March 31, 2024
    Total shareholders’ equity $ 279,756     $ 267,116     $ 260,050     $ 247,200     $ 239,327  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net   50,824       50,968       15,967       15,967       15,967  
    Tangible common shareholders’ equity $ 228,932     $ 216,148     $ 244,083     $ 231,233     $ 223,360  
                       
    Total assets $ 3,140,960     $ 3,041,869     $ 2,963,392     $ 2,821,668     $ 2,759,560  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net   50,824       50,968       15,967       15,967       15,967  
    Tangible assets $ 3,090,136     $ 2,990,901     $ 2,947,425     $ 2,805,701     $ 2,743,593  
    Tangible common equity ratio   7.41 %     7.23 %     8.28 %     8.24 %     8.14 %
                                           
    Contact:     Mike Huston, President, CEO, and COO
    (907) 261-8750
    Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer
    (907) 261-3539
         

    Note Transmitted on GlobeNewswire on April 23, 2025, at 12:15 pm Alaska Standard Time.

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Europe: RECOMMENDATION FOR SECOND READING on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Union labour market statistics on businesses, repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 530/1999 and Regulations (EC) No 450/2003 and (EC) No 453/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council – A10-0057/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

    on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoption of a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Union labour market statistics on businesses, repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 530/1999 and Regulations (EC) No 450/2003 and (EC) No 453/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council

    (17082/1/2024 – C10‑0054/2025 – 2023/0288(COD))

    (Ordinary legislative procedure: second reading)

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the Council position at first reading (17082/1/2024 – C10‑0054/2025),

     having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank of 24 November 2023[1],

     having regard to its position at first reading[2] on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2023)0459)),

     having regard to Article 294(7) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

     having regard to the provisional agreement approved by the committee responsible under Rule 75(4) of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to Rule 68 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A10-0057/2025),

     

    1. Approves the Council position at first reading;

    2. Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position;

    3. Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

    4. Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;

    5. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

     

    SHORT JUSTIFICATION

    The Council position at first reading reflects the agreement reached between Parliament and the Council in interinstitutional negotiations at early second reading stage, after legal-linguistic verification. Since the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON), in its vote on 16 January 2025, already confirmed the outcome of those interinstitutional negotiations, as your rapporteur, I propose that ECON recommends that the Plenary confirms the position of the Council at first reading without amending it.

     

    ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

    Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that she received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the report, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:

    Entity and/or person

    European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS), opinion

    European Central Bank (ECB), opinion

    The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

     

    Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

    PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

    Title

    European labour market statistics on businesses, repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 530/1999 and Regulations (EC) No 450/2003 and (EC) No 453/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council

    References

    17082/1/2024 – C10-0054/2025 – 2023/0288(COD)

    Date of Parliament’s first reading – P number

    24.4.2024 T9-0356/2024

    Draft act considered at first reading

    COM(2023)0459 – C9-0316/2023

    Receipt of Council position at first reading announced in plenary

    3.4.2025

    Committee(s) responsible

    ECON

     

     

     

    Rapporteurs

     Date appointed

    Irene Tinagli

    12.9.2024

     

     

     

    Date adopted

    8.4.2025

     

     

     

    Result of final vote

    +:

    –:

    0:

    40

    4

    6

    Members present for the final vote

    Georgios Aftias, Rasmus Andresen, Stephen Nikola Bartulica, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Stefan Berger, Damian Boeselager, Gilles Boyer, Giovanni Crosetto, Fabio De Masi, Siegbert Frank Droese, Engin Eroglu, Marco Falcone, Markus Ferber, Jonás Fernández, Enikő Győri, Eero Heinäluoma, Billy Kelleher, Kinga Kollár, Tomáš Kubín, Aurore Lalucq, Rada Laykova, Marlena Maląg, Jorge Martín Frías, Denis Nesci, Luděk Niedermayer, Ľudovít Ódor, Nikos Papandreou, Gaetano Pedulla’, Lídia Pereira, Kira Marie Peter-Hansen, Pierre Pimpie, Evelyn Regner, René Repasi, Jussi Saramo, Paulius Saudargas, Ralf Seekatz, Irene Tinagli, Francesco Ventola, Lara Wolters, Auke Zijlstra, Roberts Zīle

    Substitutes present for the final vote

    Fernand Kartheiser, Martine Kemp, Eva Maydell, Andreas Schwab, Virginijus Sinkevičius

    Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote

    Estelle Ceulemans, Dóra Dávid, Isilda Gomes, Carolina Morace

    Date tabled

    9.4.2025

     

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section VIII – European Ombudsman – A10-0055/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    2. MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    with observations forming an integral part of the decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section VIII – European Ombudsman

    (2024/2027(DEC))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to its decision on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2023, Section VIII – European Ombudsman,

     having regard to Rule 102 of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A10-0055/2025),

    A. whereas in the context of the discharge procedure, the discharge authority wishes to stress the particular importance of further strengthening the democratic legitimacy of the Union institutions by improving transparency and accountability, and by implementing the concept of performance-based budgeting and good governance of human resources;

    B. whereas Article 228 of the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union provides for the election of a European Ombudsman (the ‘Ombudsman’) by the European Parliament who shall be empowered to receive complaints from any citizen of the Union or any natural or legal person residing or having its registered office in a Member State concerning instances of maladministration in the activities of the Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, with the exception of the Court of Justice of the European Union acting in its judicial role, and to examine such complaints and report on them;

    C. whereas Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2021/1163 of the European Parliament of 24 June 2021[7] lays down the regulations and general conditions governing the performance of the Ombudsman’s duties (Statute of the European Ombudsman);

    D. whereas, following the adoption of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2021/1163, the Ombudsman adopted its revised implementing provisions[8] on 21 June 2023;

    1. Notes that the budget of the Ombudsman falls under MFF heading 7 ’European public administration’, which amounted to a total of EUR 12,3 billion, i.e. 6,4 % of Union budget spending, in 2023; notes that the budget of the Ombudsman represented 0,11 % of MFF heading 7 appropriations;

    2. Notes that the Court of Auditors (the ‘Court’), in its Annual Report for the financial year 2023 (the ‘Court’s report’), examined a sample of 70 transactions under the heading ‘European public administration’, of which 21 (30 %) contained errors; further notes that for five of those errors, which were quantified by the Court, the Court estimated a level of error below the materiality threshold; notes with satisfaction from the Court’s report that for 2023 the Court did not identify any significant issues concerning the Ombudsman;

    3. Notes from the Court’s report its observation that administrative expenditure comprises expenditure on human resources including pensions, which in 2023 accounted for about 70 % of the total administrative expenditure, and on buildings, equipment, energy, communications and information technology; welcomes the fact that the Court concluded, as it did in previous years, that, overall, administrative spending is low risk;

    Budgetary and financial management

    4. Notes that the budget of the Ombudsman amounted to EUR 13 212 447 in 2023, which represents an increase of EUR 990 339 (i.e. +8,1 %) compared to 2022; takes note, from the Ombudsman’s replies to the questionnaire submitted by the Committee on Budgetary Control for the 2023 budgetary discharge (the ‘Questionnaire’), that this increase is mainly due to salary adjustments and two additional posts that were needed to reinforce the Ombudsman’s core activities;

    5. Notes that the budget monitoring efforts during the financial year 2023 resulted in a budget implementation rate of 95,39 %, representing a decrease of 1,58 % compared to 2022; notes that the current year payment appropriations execution rate was 97,58 %, representing an increase of 1,31 % compared to 2022, which led to a decrease in automatic carry-overs from 3,73 % (or 442 209) in 2002 to 2,42 % (or 304 550 EUR) in 2023; regrets, nevertheless, the lower execution rate of the automatic carry-overs of appropriations from the previous year, which in 2023 was 73,27 % compared to 92,59 % in 2022; calls for an improvement in this regard;

    6. Notes that in the course of 2023, the Ombudsman made nine budgetary transfers pursuant to Article 29 of the Financial Regulation, representing a total of EUR 241 150 or 1,8 % of the appropriations for that financial year, compared to 2,8 % in 2022; notes that those transfers were needed for the reinforcement of various budget lines on, for example, furniture, security and surveillance buildings, digitalisation of archives or informatics; observes in this context that the IT expenditure has increased by 41 %, from EUR 159 714 in 2022 to EUR 224 698 in 2023;

    7. Notes a further increase, for the third consecutive year, of the average time for executing payments; acknowledges that, despite increasing the time for payments from 11,35 days in 2021 to 13,50 days in 2023, the average time for payments continues to be relatively short and below the regulatory maximum payment time (30 days); welcomes in this context the fact that the Ombudsman has meanwhile fully implemented an electronic invoicing system which should further improve the efficiency of the payment process as of 2024;

    8. Notes that, for 2023, the European Parliament had not passed onto the Ombudsman any significant increase with regard to the rent and the lump-sum building charges, which has allowed the Ombudsman to reduce its budget line for rent by 8,06 % in order to reinforce other budget lines in 2023; takes note, however, that for 2024 the Ombudsman expects an increase of building related expenses by 170 % (or EUR 122 260);

    9. Welcomes the fact that the budget for staff missions decreased from EUR 120 000 in 2022 to EUR 100 000 in 2023 thanks to an extensive use of videoconference facilities in both places of work; commends, in this context, the Ombudsman for the reduction in its staff missions’ budget for the fourth consecutive year; notes that the missions and travel budget for the Ombudsman remained the same in 2023 as in the previous years (2021 and 2022), i.e. EUR 35 000;

    Internal management, performance and internal control

    10. Notes that the Ombudsman has linked to the high level objectives of its strategy ‘Towards 2024’ nine Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) consisting of 19 components, as set out in the Ombudsman’s Annual Management Plan for 2023; observes that 14 of those KPI components have been reached or exceeded in 2023;

    11. Observes an overall increase in the Ombudsman’s workload compared to the previous year, whereas in 2023 the Ombudsman handled 2 392 new complaints (2 223 in 2022), opened 398 inquiries (348 in 2022), including 56 inquiries of public importance (60 in 2022), closed 372 inquiries (330 in 2022) and dealt with a record number of public access complaints which has increased from 117 in 2022 to a record number of 167 in 2023, 118 of which were followed up with inquiries; commends, in this context, the Ombudsman for the efficiency gains made in 2023 to lower the number of complaints by simplifying the handling of the ‘failure to reply’ inquiries, and streamlining the processing of the ‘out of mandate complaints’ and information requests; calls on the Ombudsman to work on more targeted communication to address this issue in the future; welcomes its efforts to continue  streamlining and process simplification for the following years;

    12. Commends the Ombudsman for having reduced the time needed to process files at different levels of the procedure, such as the time taken on admissibility (from 16 days in 2022 to 11 days in 2023) or the average time taken to close cases in the area of public access to documents (from 46 days in 2022 to 42 days in 2023); regrets however that the average time (165 days) for dealing with an inquiry remained high in 2023; understands, nevertheless, the Ombudsman’s explanation that this average was impacted by delayed closing of inquiries due to repeated exchanges with the institutions concerned;

    13. Notes further an improvement with regard to positive replies by the Union institutions to the Ombudsman’s proposals to improve their administration, with an overall acceptance rate of 81 % in 2023 (compared to 79 % in 2022); asks the Ombudsman to continue working towards generating greater compliance with its findings, recommendations and suggestions;

    14. Acknowledges the efforts made by the Ombudsman in 2023 to enhance awareness and understanding of the Ombudsman’s mandate; observes with satisfaction in this context an increase of 20 % in the number of complaints within the mandate from 740 in 2022 to 885 in 2023, as well as an increase in the share of that type of complaints, from 33 % in 2022 to 37 % in 2023;

    15. Recognises the efforts made by and the positive impact of the Ombudsman in the areas of ethics, transparency and accountability in 2023, especially as a result of inquiries on public access to documents and conflicts of interest concerning various Union institutions, agencies or the European Investment Bank; expresses its appreciation for the special report the Ombudsman issued in September 2023 on the Commission delays in dealing with access to documents requests;

    16. Takes note, from the Ombudsman’s report to the discharge authority entitled ‘Report on the follow-up to the discharge for the financial year 2022’, of the issues observed in the area of the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), namely significant delays encountered by the European Commission in replying to requests for access to information, especially the delayed publication of the largest RRF recipients by Member States, undermining transparency, as well as with regard to the reasoning on the basis of which the Commission established the level for granting public access to documents in some cases; expresses concern with regard to the Commission’s decision not to accept all the suggestions and solution proposals that the Ombudsman made in that regard, recalling the importance of the good practice principles for governmental transparency in the use of recovery funds produced in cooperation with the OECD; regrets that significant divergences persist at the national level regarding the timeliness and completeness of information on final recipients; calls on the Commission to intensify its efforts to address these shortcomings as part of its ongoing monitoring and control functions; stresses the importance of consistent and complete reporting across all Member States to ensure transparency and accountability; calls on the Ombudsman to maintain its monitoring of the Commission’s efforts to ensure transparency and effective supervision of the RRF; calls further on the Ombudsman to continue informing the budgetary authority periodically about the difficulties encountered in its work on the transparency and accountability of the RRF;

    17. Highlights the fact that, in 2023, following an own-initiative inquiry that revealed that, when individuals seek a review of an access decision, known as a confirmatory request, the Commission misses the deadlines set out in the law in 85 % of cases, the Ombudsman urged the European Commission to promptly address systemic delays in processing access to documents requests; calls for the swift implementation of the Ombudsman’s urgent recommendation for a thorough reassessment to ensure compliance with the deadlines set out in Union law, such as Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001; commends the Ombudsman for its special report to the European Parliament, asking the institution for its formal support in getting the Commission to act on her recommendation; recalls that the Ombudsman discussed the report with Members of the European Parliament in the Committee for Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs in November 2023[9];

    18. Notes with great concern that the Ombudsman receives many  complaints from citizens about extreme delays in gaining access to requested documents; supports the Ombudsman’s views that access delayed is effectively access denied and that administrative processes should be streamlined to ensure that citizens receive access to documents in a timely manner[10];

    19. Notes that the internal auditor carried out a review of the Ombudsman’s risk management framework; notes that the parties agreed on a nine-point action plan to be implemented by the end of 2024; calls on the Ombudsman to inform the discharge authority on progress made in implementing that plan;

    Human resources, equality and staff well-being

    20. Notes an increase of 11 % in the total number of the Ombudsman’s staff from 74 in 2022 to 82 in 2023, mainly due to an increase in the number of contract staff and temporary staff; notes further that, in 2023, 40 officials were employed by the Ombudsman, compared to 39 and 38 in 2022 and 2021 respectively, 33 temporary staff, compared to 28 and 30 in 2022 and 2021 respectively, and 9 contract agents, compared to 7 and 6 in 2022 and 2021 respectively; notes with satisfaction an increase in the share of staff working on the core-business of the Ombudsman (complaints and inquiries), from 40,54 % in 2022 to 42,68 % in 2023; notes with satisfaction that the staff occupation rate increased from 91,8 % in 2022 to 95 % in 2023 and the turnover rate decreased from 9,9 % in 2022 to 5,2 % in 2023;

    21. Regrets that the post of the Secretary-General of the Ombudsman has been vacant for more than two years, namely since 1 September 2022; notes from the Questionnaire that “as a courtesy to the new Ombudsman, who will be elected by the end of 2024, the current Ombudsman decided to leave the post vacant for her successor to decide on the appointment”; calls on the next Ombudsman to make sure that the periods of vacancy of management positions remain as short as possible and are not longer than the time necessary for recruitment of new staff in those positions;

    22. Commends the Ombudsman for its call for expressions of interest for jobs (inquiry officers) which was successfully concluded in 2023 with the establishment of a reserve list of 19 candidates, 6 of them having been recruited the same year; notes that this has allowed the Ombudsman to reduce the time needed for recruitment which has been an issue in the past; notes further that the Ombudsman organised, with the help of EPSO, three internal competitions in 2023, in order to retain in-house talent; acknowledges that such actions help to improve the institution’s efficiency;

    23. Notes that, despite being a small institution, the Ombudsman managed to have 19 nationalities represented in its staff in 2023, as a result of proactive communication and outreach activity, notably through social media and online platforms to advertise vacancies; notes with dissatisfaction, however, an overrepresentation of some nationalities (for example French and Irish) and an underrepresentation of other nationalities (for example Romanian and Spanish); urges the Ombudsman to continue its efforts to achieve a balanced geographical distribution of nationals from all Member States within its staff, in particular at management level, by improving communication, fostering visibility, and enhancing job conditions to attract underrepresented nationalities;

    24. Notes that, in terms of gender balance, the Ombudsman employs more women than men in all categories of staff, in particular at management level, with the women-to-men overall ratio in 2023 remaining the same as in 2022, i.e. 67 % women and 33 % men; encourages the Ombudsman to continue its efforts towards achieving a more balanced gender representation among its staff;

    25. Notes that the Ombudsman makes efforts to ensure the physical and mental well-being of its staff at work and focuses on reinforcing team-spirit; welcomes in this context the  result of the general staff survey conducted in 2023 showing an overall staff satisfaction rate of 87 %, with, in particular, 95 % of the survey participants having responded positively to the question regarding the Ombudsman caring for the wellbeing of its staff, 97 % were satisfied with the Ombudsman’s hybrid and flexible working arrangements and 90 % were satisfied with the equipment and material their employer supplied to them to work remotely; notes with satisfaction that in 2023 the Ombudsman decided to provide ergonomic chairs to all staff who request them;

    26. Acknowledges that the small size of the Ombudsman’s Office allows managers to closely monitor the staff workload and make necessary adjustments, enabling the early detection of potential burnouts; notes that the 2023 staff survey indicated no issues with workload distribution or work-related health problems, and that the European Parliament’s medical service reported no long-term illnesses related to burnout;

    27. Notes with satisfaction that no harassment cases were reported in 2023; acknowledges the efforts made by the Ombudsman to provide a working environment that is free from sexual and psychological harassment, in particular through awareness raising and training; notes with satisfaction that a survey carried out in 2023 in the context of an internal audit on the ethical framework showed that 90 % of staff were aware of the policy and guidelines regarding harassment of any type;

    28. Notes with satisfaction that the Ombudsman welcomed 18 paid trainees in 2023 (the same number as in 2022), one of which was selected following the Ombudsman’s first call aimed at candidates with disabilities; acknowledges that this initiative promotes inclusivity and equal opportunities by providing trainees with valuable experience in the EU institutions;

    Ethical framework and transparency

    29. Welcomes the Ombudsman’s continued efforts to strengthen and raise awareness about the ethical framework of the institution; notes with appreciation that in 2023 the Ombudsman revised the whistleblower policy to strengthen protections for potential whistleblowers, ensure better alignment with data protection standards, enhance confidentiality and support, and incorporate provisions on ethics correspondents; further welcomes the full deployment of the SYSPER ethics tool that allows staff to update declarations (on their conflicts of interest and on their spouses’/partners’ professional activities) and organised an interactive training course entitled ‘Respect and dignity at work and our roles as actors, recipients and bystanders’; welcomes the result of the general staff survey carried out in 2023 confirming high levels of staff awareness about ethical matters; calls for the publication of all high-level meetings of the Ombudsman’s office with external actors, including corporate entities, interest groups and EU agencies, to ensure transparency in decision-making and advocacy efforts;

    30. Notes that the internal audit (report 22/03) on the Ombudsman’s ethical framework was finalised in 2023 with six issued recommendations to be implemented by 31 December 2024; notes from the Questionnaire that four of those recommendations have been fully implemented; invites the Ombudsman to report to the discharge authority on the implementation status of the remaining two recommendations;

    31. Notes that the anti-fraud strategy of the Ombudsman is largely based on the ethical framework in place and the principle of the segregation of duties for financial functions; notes that in 2023 the Ombudsman reviewed and adopted the code of professional standards applicable to staff involved in the control of financial operations setting out the duties and responsibilities in the detection of fraudulent transactions, including the procedure to follow in cases of suspected fraud;

    32. Notes with satisfaction that no cases of conflicts of interest and no cases of whistleblowing were reported in 2023;

    33. Notes from the Questionnaire that the Ombudsman did not formally join the EU transparency register (set up by the Interinstitutional Agreement of 20 May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register) in order to ensure that she can also look into potential complaints concerning the secretariat of that transparency register; notes, however, that the Ombudsman has aligned its practices on the principles of the transparency register, checking that speakers or interlocutors in events or meetings organised by the Ombudsman are registered therein; welcomes the high degree of transparency achieved by the Ombudsman by the publication on its website of information on inquiries, missions, meetings and events in which the Ombudsman takes part;

    34. Calls on the Ombudsman to introduce a mandatory declaration of financial interests for senior staff, with real-time public access to information regarding potential conflicts of interest, external engagements, and financial assets;

    Buildings

    35. Welcomes the fact that the Ombudsman’s final (after transfers) budget for buildings and associated costs decreased by approx. 15 %, from EUR 1 622 200 in 2022 to EUR 1 373 000 in 2023; notes that the appropriations for rent decreased by 26 %, from EUR 1 177 700 in 2022 to EUR 866 100 in 2023, with a payment execution rate in both years of close to 100 %;

    36. Notes that, following the move of the Ombudsman Brussels’ Office to new facilities provided by the Parliament in 2021, the building was organised as a collaborative workspace with very few individual offices and flexible collaborative meeting facilities; notes with satisfaction that the Ombudsman does not practice hot-desking and that all members of staff have their own desk with ample storage; notes that no changes were made to the offices in 2023 and that a general staff survey conducted in 2023 showed that the majority of staff (56 %) replied positively regarding the physical arrangements in their offices in Brussels;

    37. Recalls that the Ombudsman does not own its own buildings but rents a building in Brussels and office space in Strasbourg; notes with satisfaction that the Havel building in Strasbourg is fully accessible to persons with reduced mobility or other disabilities and strongly regrets that accessibility to the building rented in Brussels needs improvement; calls on the Parliament to improve accessibility to the building rented to the Ombudsman in Brussels;

    Digitalisation, cybersecurity and data protection

    38. Acknowledges the  success of the Ombudsman’s long-standing approach of leveraging integrated systems and resources from other Union institutions, in particular the Parliament and the Commission, in order to optimise budget utilisation and enhance coordination, for example in the area of digitalisation; notes, in this context, the successful implementation of the Commission’s machine translation tools that have been integrated into the Ombudsman’s systems (e.g. the website) in 2023; notes with satisfaction from the Questionnaire that this project has led to a reduction in translation costs estimated at over 30 % per year, as well as to a reduced administrative burden;

    39. Welcomes the full implementation of the qualified electronic signature allowing staff to sign documents in a secure way, as well the use of the Commission’s QSign allowing staff to sign and manage documents, including procurement and contractual documents;

    40. Notes that, since 2023, the Ombudsman has been actively exploring the opportunities that the use of artificial intelligence (AI) could bring; welcomes in this context the Ombudsman’s partnership with the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre to experiment with large language models, and test and evaluate AI use cases; notes further that the Ombudsman purchased several AI tools which have successfully contributed to video content creation; welcomes the adoption by the Ombudsman of internal guidelines to ensure that external AI tools are used in a responsible and transparent manner; encourages the Ombudsman to ensure that staff receives compulsory training on the safe and ethical use of AI tools to enhance their understanding and mitigate potential risks; invites the Ombudsman to keep the discharge authority informed of the progress made in testing and using AI solutions;

    41. Notes that, in terms of IT, the Ombudsman relies on Parliament’s infrastructure and cybersecurity framework and cooperates closely with the Commission concerning the integration and maintenance of the Union’s corporate tools (SYSPER, ABAC, MiPS and ARES) and the use of IT framework contracts; notes that, given that its level of control over the data is limited, the Ombudsman concluded service-level agreements with the institutions concerned to ensure that the handling of personal data complies with the applicable legal framework; notes with satisfaction that the Ombudsman did not encounter any cyberattack in 2023;

    42. Encourages the Ombudsman to work in close cooperation with ENISA (the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity); suggests that regularly updated cybersecurity-related training programmes be offered to all staff within the Ombudsman;

    43. Notes, with regard to the Internal Audit Report 21/03 on the review of the Ombudsman’s Data Protection Framework, that one action remained open in the fourth quarter of 2023 and, with regard to the internal audit report 20/04 on the Ombudsman’s ICT security, that there were seven ongoing actions in 2023; invites the Ombudsman to keep the discharge authority updated as to the progress made in these matters;

    Environment and sustainability

    44. Welcomes the fact that, over the years, the Ombudsman has reduced its environmental footprint, in particular through the digitalisation of its processes, the removal of individual printers, the non-replacement of central processing units when they reach end of life, measures to make events more sustainable and the extensive use of videoconference systems to avoid missions; notes that, in terms of the environmental footprint of its buildings, the Ombudsman relies on the measures taken by the Parliament in its capacity as owner of the buildings; notes with satisfaction that both buildings where the Ombudsman has offices run on 100 % clean energy; welcomes the installation by the Parliament of solar panels, including on the Havel building in Strasbourg in 2024;

    45. Notes that the Ombudsman continued to encourage sustainable mobility in 2023; welcomes, in this sense, the fact that the Ombudsman adopted a new mobility policy that provides for the payment of a flat-rate contribution to staff up to grade AST8/AD8 who use sustainable modes of transport to get to work; notes further from the Questionnaire that the initiative whereby the Ombudsman provided bicycles for staff use during working hours was unsuccessful, as bicycles were hardly used during the trial period;

    Interinstitutional cooperation

    46. Welcomes the financial and administrative savings achieved through inter-institutional cooperation, in particular the wide-range of service-level agreements (SLAs) concluded with the Parliament and the Commission and the participation in interinstitutional procurement procedures; welcomes the formalisation of the collaboration between the Parliament and the Ombudsman in the field of cybersecurity through a revised inter-institutional agreement which provides a framework for the Parliament to continue providing solid cybersecurity support to the Ombudsman; notes further that in 2023 the Ombudsman signed a SLA with EPSO for the organisation of internal competitions;

    47. Commends the Ombudsman for its good collaboration with OLAF, ECA and EPPO which in 2023 took the form of meetings and exchanges of views on, for example, ways to improve the transparency and integrity of Union institutions or the Union’s oversight framework; recalls that the Ombudsman and OLAF have put in place a system to avoid duplication of investigations; notes from the Questionnaire that the Ombudsman and the EDPS cooperate mainly on an ad-hoc and informal basis aiming for a quick and efficient collaboration when needed; encourages the Ombudsman to work closely in cooperation with the other institutions and European Agencies;

    48. Calls on the Ombudsman to establish a formalized annual dialogue with the European Parliament’s CONT and LIBE Committees, ensuring systematic follow-up on institutional transparency, governance reforms and fundamental rights protection;

    49. Recognises the importance of maintaining a high level of exchanges and coordination with the European Network of Ombudsmen (ENO); welcomes the organisation of the ENO annual conference with sessions on topics such as migration, artificial intelligence and ethics in public administration in 2023; notes with satisfaction that, through the query procedure, the Ombudsman assists ENO members in resolving investigations at national and regional level, whereas, in 2023, the Ombudsman concluded five queries originating from five Union Member States; commends the organisation of the ENO annual conference in 2023 as a valuable platform for dialogue on key issues influencing the activities of Ombudsmen across Europe;

    50. Welcomes the fact that the Ombudsman in 2023 continued its close cooperation with relevant European Parliament Committees on important inquiries, either by presenting the work directly in Committee meetings or through information being sent to the Committee Chairs; underlines that the strategic initiatives and inquiries conducted by the Ombudsman are key to improving the transparency and accountability of the Union’s administration;

    Communication

    51. Notes that the overall budget for communication and promotional activities (publications, event organisation, digital communication etc.) increased by 17,20 % from EUR 132 400 in 2022 to EUR 155 200 in 2023;

    52. Welcomes the efforts of and actions taken by the Ombudsman in 2023 to raise citizens’ awareness about its role and the possibility of recourse to it in the event of maladministration by a Union institution; notes in this sense the communication campaigns carried out in 2023 around a series of videos presenting the Ombudsman’s work and explaining three of the key areas of its interventions, an explainer in the form of a scrollable story on the impact of the Ombudsman’s work over time and an access to documents guide; welcomes moreover the organisation of the ‘Award for Good Administration’ ceremony and the participation of the Ombudsman at the EU Open Day in Brussels and Strasbourg, where it hosted targeted stakeholder events with academics and think tanks, and at the European Youth Event in Strasbourg in 2023;

    53. Recognises the efforts undertaken by the Ombudsman to provide transparent information and publish data (including statistics on its caseload) in an informative and user friendly format on the Ombudsman website (although such data are not available in open format); welcomes the publication on the website of a timeline for all inquiries into complaints providing information about past and future milestones in each inquiry;

    °

    ° °

    54. Notes that the Ombudsman has social media accounts on Instagram, LinkedIn, X (ex-Twitter), where the number of followers and the engagement rates continued to grow in 2023; welcomes the participation of the Ombudsman in a pilot project led by the EDPS aimed at bringing Union institutions onto EU Voice and EU Video, which are two free, open-source social media networks, based on Mastodon software, allowing Union institutions to interact with the public by sharing texts, images, videos and podcasts.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Türkiye – A10-0067/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the 2023 and 2024 Commission reports on Türkiye

    (2025/2023(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to the European Council conclusions of 17 and 18 April 2024, 30 June 2023, 23 June 2022, 24 June 2021 and 12 December 2019, and to all relevant previous Council and European Council conclusions,

     having regard to Türkiye’s membership of the Council of Europe and NATO,

     having regard to the Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Turkey on the readmission of persons residing without authorisation[1] (EU-Turkey Readmission Agreement),

     having regard to the statement of the members of the European Council of 25 March 2021 on Türkiye,

     having regard to the ‘EU-Turkey statements’ of 18 March 2016 and 29 November 2015,

     having regard to the ‘Turkey Negotiating Framework’ of 3 October 2005,

     having regard to the declaration issued by the European Community and its Member States on 21 September 2005 following the declaration made by Turkey upon its signature of the Additional Protocol to the Ankara Agreement on 29 July 2005,

     having regard to the Council conclusions of December 2006 and March 2020, and to the Presidency Conclusions of the European Council in Copenhagen of 21-22 June 1993, also known as the Copenhagen Criteria,

     having regard to the Council conclusions on Enlargement of 17 December 2024 and of 12 December 2023,

     having regard to the International Law of the Sea and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 30 October 2024 on EU enlargement policy (COM(2024)0690) and to the accompanying Türkiye 2024 Report (SWD(2024)0696),

     having regard to the Commission communication of 8 November 2023 on EU enlargement policy (COM(2023)0690) and to the accompanying Türkiye 2023 Report (SWD(2023)0696),

     

     having regard to Special report 06/2024 of the European Court of Auditors of 24 April 2024 entitled ‘The Facility for Refugees in Turkey – Beneficial for refugees and host communities, but impact and sustainability not yet ensured’,

     having regard to the joint communications from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to the European Council of 29 November 2023 (JOIN(2023)0050) and of 22 March 2021 (JOIN(2021)0008) on the state of play of EU-Türkiye political, economic and trade relations,

     having regard to the Commission communication of 19 December 2024 entitled ‘Eighth Annual Report of the Facility for Refugees in Turkey’ (COM(2024)0593),

     having regard to the fundamental principles of international law and to the Charter of the United Nations, the 1977 and the 1979 High-Level Agreements between the leaders of the two communities, and the relevant resolutions of the UN Security Council on Cyprus, including Resolution 186 (1964) of 4 March 1964, which reaffirms the sovereignty of the Republic of Cyprus, Resolution 550 (1984) of 11 May 1984 on secessionist actions in Cyprus, Resolution 789 (1992) of 25 November 1992, and Resolution 2537 (2020) on the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP),

     having regard to Article 46 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which states that the contracting parties undertake to abide by the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in any case to which they are parties, and to the ensuing obligation of Türkiye to implement all judgments of the ECtHR,

     having regard to the relevant resolutions of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe,

     having regard to the 2025 Freedom in the World report published by Freedom House,

     having regard to the 2024 World Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders,

     having regard to the January 2025 prison statistics report published by the Civil Society in the Penal System Association (CISST) and to the 2024 country profile for Türkiye published by Prison Insider,

     having regard to the Global Gender Gap Report 2024 published by the World Economic Forum,

     having regard to recent reports of the We Will Stop Femicide Platform (Kadın Cinayetlerini Durduracağız Platformu),

     having regard to the UNESCO statement on Hagia Sophia of 10 July 2020, and to the relevant UNESCO World Heritage Committee decisions 44 COM 7B.58 (2021) and 45 COM 7B.58 (2023), adopted in its 44th and 45th sessions respectively,

     having regard to its previous resolutions on Türkiye, in particular those of 13 September 2023 on the 2022 Commission Report on Türkiye[2], of 7 June 2022 on the 2021 Commission Report on Turkey[3], and of 26 November 2020 on escalating tensions in Varosha following the illegal actions by Türkiye and the urgent need for the resumption of talks[4],

     having regard to its resolution of 29 February 2024 on deepening EU integration in view of future enlargement[5],

     having regard to its resolution of 15 April 2015 on the centenary of the Armenian Genocide[6],

     having regard to its resolutions of 5 May 2022 on the case of Osman Kavala in Turkey[7], of 10 October 2024 on the case of Bülent Mumay in Türkiye[8] and of 13 February 2025 on recent dismissals and arrests of mayors in Türkiye[9],

     having regard to European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen’s visit to Ankara in December 2024,

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs (A10-0067/2025),

    A. whereas Türkiye remains a candidate for EU accession, and EU membership remains the repeatedly declared political goal of the Turkish Government, although the gap with the values and interests of the EU is growing; whereas EU accession negotiations have effectively been at a standstill since 2018, owing to the deterioration of the rule of law and democracy in Türkiye;

    B. whereas any accession country is expected to respect democratic values, the rule of law and human rights, and to abide by EU law; whereas Türkiye needs to credibly demonstrate its commitment to closer relations and alignment with the European Union in order to reinvigorate its European perspective; whereas being a candidate country presumes a willingness to progressively approach and align with the EU in all aspects, including values, interests, standards and policies, inter alia with its common foreign and security policy, to respect and uphold the Copenhagen criteria, and to pursue and maintain good neighbourly relations with the EU and all of its Member States without discrimination; whereas the tensions between the EU and Türkiye in relation to the situation in the Eastern Mediterranean have de-escalated but not ceased; whereas Türkiye has repeatedly been asked to refrain from all actions which violate the sovereignty and sovereign rights of all EU Member States and are in breach of international and EU law;

    C. whereas the 2023 Commission progress report on Türkiye painted a picture of continued backsliding, while its latest progress report of 2024 appears to present a slightly more positive overall picture of progress on enlargement-related reforms in Türkiye, such as in the area of economic and monetary policies; whereas this cannot, however, be applied to the core matters related to democracy and fundamental rights, which have deteriorated even further since the release of the Commission’s latest report; whereas the gap between Türkiye and the EU’s values and normative framework has therefore remained unaddressed during the recent period with the persistent use of laws and measures aimed at curtailing the rule of law and human rights, fundamental freedoms and civil liberties;

    D. whereas the joint communication on the state of play of EU-Türkiye relations of 29 November 2023 struck a more positive note, putting forward a set of recommendations on cooperating in areas of joint interest in a phased, proportionate and reversible manner and based on the established conditionalities; whereas only a few concrete steps in line with the commitments therein have been taken so far; whereas the April 2024 European Council mandated Coreper to advance in the implementation of this joint communication; whereas nevertheless this joint communication has not yet received a clear political endorsement by the Council;

    E. whereas Türkiye is a member of the Council of Europe and is therefore bound by the judgments of the ECtHR; whereas owing to its failure to apply landmark ECtHR rulings, Türkiye is currently facing historical infringement proceedings; whereas Türkiye consistently ranks among the countries most frequently found in violation of the human rights and fundamental freedoms protected by the European Convention on Human Rights; whereas as of late November 2024, Türkiye had the highest number of pending cases before the ECtHR, with 22 450 applications, representing 36.7 % of the Court’s total caseload of 61 250 applications;

    F. whereas Türkiye is classified as ‘not free’ by Freedom House and has experienced one of the worst declines in the level of freedom in the world in the past 10 years; whereas Türkiye ranks 158th out of 180 countries in the 2024 World Press Freedom Index; whereas the Turkish Government has closed dozens of media outlets, routinely blocks online articles, is reported to control 85 % of national media and uses its state agency Anadolu as an organ of propaganda;

    G. whereas the Turkish constitution provides for sufficient protection of fundamental rights, but the practice of the institutions and the critical state of the judiciary, including the lack of respect for Constitutional Court rulings, are the main reasons for the dire situation of the rule of law and human rights in the country, issues repeatedly described in the reports of the EU, the Council of Europe and international organisations;

    H. whereas Türkiye has the highest incarceration rate and the largest prison population of all Council of Europe Member States, with an overcrowded prison population that has grown by 439 % between 2005 and 2023 and currently represents more than a third of all inmates of Council of Europe countries;

    I. whereas Türkiye is ranked 127th out of 146 countries in the 2024 Global Gender Gap Index, underscoring severe gender inequality and systemic failures in protecting women’s rights; whereas according to the 2024 report of the We Will Stop Femicide Platform (Kadın Cinayetlerini Durduracağız Platformu), 394 women were murdered by men and 259 women were found dead in suspicious circumstances in Türkiye in 2024, the highest number recorded since the civil society group started collecting data in 2010; whereas in its 2023 report, the platform noted that 315 women were killed by men, and 248 women were found dead in suspicious circumstances;

    J. whereas in recent months, Türkiye has taken steps towards the resumption of a process for a peaceful resolution of the Kurdish question; whereas on 27 February 2025 jailed militant leader Abdullah Öcalan called on his Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) to disarm and disband, providing a historic opportunity to end the Turkish-Kurdish conflict; whereas these efforts have been accompanied by increasing repression and the curtailment of the powers of democratic local governments, including the dismissal of elected Kurdish and other opposition mayors;

    K. whereas, alongside being a candidate for EU accession, Türkiye is a NATO ally and a key partner in the areas of trade, economic relations, security, the fight against terrorism, and migration; whereas Türkiye continues to play a key role in the region, acts as a bridge between Europe and Asia, and remains a key partner for the stability of the wider East Mediterranean region; whereas Türkiye continues to play a significant role in the Syrian conflict and maintains a military presence in northern Syria;

    L. whereas Türkiye has not aligned with EU sanctions against Russia; whereas trade between Türkiye and Russia has nearly doubled since the EU’s imposition of sanctions against Russia; whereas despite some steps taken, Türkiye has not prevented its territory from being used to circumvent EU sanctions against Russia;

    M. whereas the 2024 Commission progress report on Türkiye states that, as at 30 September 2024, the country maintained a very low alignment rate of 5 % with relevant statements of the High Representative on behalf of the EU and with relevant Council decisions, compared to 9 % in 2023;

    N. whereas Türkiye is the EU’s fifth largest trade partner, and the EU is Türkiye’s largest trading partner by far, as well as its primary source of foreign direct investment;

    O. whereas in the past year, the level of engagement between the EU and Türkiye has increased in terms of both technical and high-level meetings in sectoral areas;

    P. whereas Türkiye has applied for membership of BRICS+ and shown interest in joining the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO);

    Q. whereas following a period of unorthodox economic policy, Türkiye has implemented a tighter monetary policy over the past year leading to a reduction in external imbalances and a moderation of inflationary pressures;

    R. whereas Türkiye hosts the largest refugee population in the world, with around 3.1 million registered refugees, mainly from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan; whereas since 2011 the EU has directed more than EUR 10  billion to assisting refugees and host communities in Türkiye; whereas according to a credible investigative report by Lighthouse Reports and eight media partners, the EU is funding removal centres in Türkiye implicated in the detention, abuse and forced deportations of refugees under the guise of voluntary return;

    S. whereas in addition to the emergency assistance coordinated via the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, with an estimated financial value of EUR 38 million, the EU provided EUR 78.2 million in humanitarian aid for the earthquake response in 2023, and EUR 26 million in humanitarian aid in 2024; whereas the EU signed an additional EUR 400 million in assistance under the EU Solidarity Fund to finance recovery operations following the devastating earthquake;

    T. whereas Türkiye has systematically misused counterterrorism laws to target elected officials, opposition politicians and human rights defenders, among others;

    Commitment to EU accession

    1. Recognises the long-standing aspirations of Turkish civil society regarding accession to the European Union; welcomes the Turkish Government’s recent statements reiterating its commitment to EU membership as a strategic goal amid an effort to revitalise EU-Türkiye relations in line with relevant European Council conclusions in a phased, proportionate and reversible manner; recognises the EU’s commitment to fostering this engagement through enhanced dialogue and cooperation;

    2. Stresses that EU membership is contingent on fulfilling the accession (Copenhagen) criteria, which require stable institutions that guarantee democracy, the rule of law, human rights, respect for and the protection of minorities, good neighbourly relations, respect for international law and alignment with the EU CFSP; further notes that these are absolute criteria, not issues subject to transactional strategic considerations and negotiations; stresses that recognition of all Member States is a necessary component of the accession process;

    3. Regrets, in this regard, that the aforementioned positive statements have not been accompanied by any concrete actions by the Turkish authorities to close the persistent and vast gap between Türkiye and the EU on values and standards, particularly with regard to the fundamentals of the accession process; reiterates its previously adopted conclusion that the Turkish Government continues to show, as it has done for the past few years, a clear lack of political will to carry out the necessary reforms to reactivate the accession process and continues to pursue a deeply entrenched authoritarian understanding of the presidential system;

    4. Acknowledges the strategic and geopolitical importance of Türkiye, and its increasing presence and influence in areas critical to international security, such as the Black Sea region, including Ukraine, and the Middle East; reiterates that Türkiye is a strategic partner and NATO ally, and a country with which the EU has close relations in the areas of security, trade, economy and migration; welcomes closer cooperation between Türkiye and the EU, to which the Turkish Government has made frequent reference, but stresses that this cannot in any way be a substitute for the necessary real progress which Türkiye, as a candidate country, needs to make with regard to meeting the fundamental requirements for accession; highlights, in this regard, that there are no shortcuts in the accession process and that no argument can be put forward to avoid discussing the democratic principles which are at the core of the accession process;

    5. Notes that the Commission’s Türkiye report 2024 paints a more positive picture of reform implementation in the context of Türkiye’s accession process than the Türkiye report 2023, shifting from further deterioration to ‘no progress’ with regard to the rule of law and human rights issues; is of the opinion, however, that at least in key areas such as democracy, rule of law and fundamental rights, this is due to the fact that a very low point had already been reached and this situation has remained unchanged;

    6. Further takes note of a nuanced shift in focus of the Türkiye report 2024, by contrast with the 2023 report, away from the accession process towards a strategic partnership between the European Union und Türkiye; is of the opinion that the critical state of the accession process is driving the Commission and the Council to focus merely on the partnership dimension of the EU’s relations with Türkiye, as is also reflected in the joint communication on the state of play of EU-Türkiye relations of 29 November 2023, and of 22 March 2021; highlights the increasing shift towards a different framework for the relationship, which might come at the expense of the accession process;

    The core of the accession process: democracy, the rule of law and fundamental rights

    7. Considers that, in terms of human rights and the rule of law, Parliament’s recent resolutions on the matter remain valid in light of the continued dire human rights situation and democratic backsliding in Türkiye over the last year; fully endorses the latest resolutions of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the related report by its Monitoring Committee, as well as the resolutions adopted by the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, which depict in detail the wide range of serious shortfalls in human rights constantly reported by locally and internationally renowned human rights organisations;

    8. Notes the Turkish Government’s stated commitment to judicial reform and the introduction of measures of an organisational nature; highlights, however, the need to introduce structural measures ensuring judicial independence; deeply regrets that, despite a reform strategy with nine judicial reform packages, the state of independence of the judiciary in Türkiye remains desolate following systematic government interference in and political instrumentalisation of the judicial system; deplores, in this regard, the weakening of remaining constitutional review mechanisms, particularly individual applications, and the frequent violations of due process;

    9. Is dismayed by the persecution of legal professionals, including most recently the lawsuit filed by the Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office that resulted in the removal of the leadership of the Istanbul Bar Association on charges of ‘making propaganda for a terrorist organization’ and ‘publicly disseminating misleading information’ for having asked for an investigation into the murders of two Kurdish journalists in Syria, and in the imprisonment of one of the members of the Istanbul Bar Association’s executive board following his trip to Strasbourg to hold meetings with Council of Europe institutions;

    10. Is alarmed by the blatant lack of implementation of decisions by the Constitutional Court, including in the case of MP Can Atalay, which has turned into a serious judicial crisis, with the Court of Cassation filing a criminal complaint against nine judges of the Constitutional Court; is worried by the recent decision of the Court of Cassation to overturn the sentences of and release the terrorists involved in the ISIS attack at Istanbul’s Atatürk Airport, which claimed 45 lives in 2016;

    11. Calls on Türkiye to strengthen its commitment to democratic governance, especially through reforms that ensure an independent judiciary; takes notes of the recent announcement of the Fourth Judicial Reform Strategy, spanning 2025-2029; calls on the Turkish Government to move from the superficial changes made so far through the recurrent reform packages and action plans to a profound and long overdue reform that will address, through real political will, the serious and structural shortcomings of Türkiye’s judiciary; stresses that putting an end to political interference in the judiciary requires no strategy or reform package but merely the political will to do so;

    12. Remains deeply concerned by the continued deterioration of democratic standards and relentless crackdown by the Turkish authorities on any critical voices by means of a growing battery of repressive laws, the regular misuse of counterterrorism laws, including their application in relation to minors (as in the ‘Kız Çocukları Davası’ trial), the disproportionate use of the crime of insulting a public official, the extensive use of secret witnesses and dormant cases in flawed judicial proceedings, and the recurrent practice of exaggerated night arrests and home raids to portray targeted persons as extremely dangerous;

    13. Welcomes the withdrawal in November 2024 of the draft amendment to Türkiye’s espionage laws, known as the ‘agent of influence’ law; urges the Turkish authorities to refrain from reintroducing a similar overly broad and vague law in the future, given the serious risk that it would be used as a tool to further criminalise the legitimate activities of civil society organisations within the country; calls on the Turkish authorities to ensure that the recently approved cybersecurity bill will serve its legitimate purpose of protecting data privacy and national security without giving way to potential infringements of fundamental rights or becoming another tool for further repression; stresses that the judicial apparatus remains heavily restrictive, with a complex web of legislation serving as a tool to systematically control and silence any critical voice, such as the 2020 social media law, the 2021 anti-money laundering law and the 2022 disinformation law;

    14. Is concerned by the recent approval of legal provisions granting extraordinary powers to the State Supervisory Council (DDK) and the Savings Deposit Insurance Fund (TMSF), including the possibility for the former to dismiss public officials of all types and levels and appoint trustees, which could be used in an arbitrary manner;

    15. Urges the Turkish authorities to put an end to the current serious restrictions on fundamental freedoms, in particular of expression, of assembly and of association, and to the constant attacks on the fundamental rights of members of the opposition, human rights defenders, lawyers, trade unionists, members of minorities, journalists, academics, artists and civil society activists, among others; strongly condemns the recent waves of mass arrest and imprisonment on politically motivated charges, and on the grounds of suspected terror links, affecting political figures, academics and journalists, including the arrests of Elif Akgül, independent journalist, Yıldız Tar, editor in chief of LGBT+ news site Kaos GL, and Ender İmrek, columnist of Evrensel daily, all well known for their work on human rights issues;

    16. Deplores the continued prosecution, censorship and harassment of journalists and independent media, denying them the freedom to carry out their professional duties and inform the public, which is essential to a functioning democratic society; calls on the Turkish authorities to refrain from further attacks on independent media and to uphold fundamental rights and civil liberties such as freedom of speech and of the press; remains deeply concerned by the existing legislation that prevents an open and free internet, with lengthy prison sentences imposed for social media posts, scores of access blocks and content removal orders, and by the continued use of the Radio and Television Supreme Council (RTÜK) to crack down on media criticism and even on outlets deemed to spread ‘pessimism’ instead of positive news;

    17. Acknowledges the positive developments in relation to the partial lifting by the minister of the interior of restrictions on the weekly vigils of the Saturday Mothers, Cumartesi Anneleri, in Istanbul’s Galatasaray Square, and the recent acquittal of all 46 people prosecuted for more than 6 years in the case surrounding the organisation’s 700th gathering in August 2018; calls for the complete removal of all restrictions on their peaceful protest, in full compliance with the relevant Constitutional Court ruling, and for an end to the ongoing judicial case against several of its members and sympathisers; is concerned by the ongoing trial against prominent human rights defender Nimet Tanrıkulu, who was released on 4 March 2025 after spending 94 days in pre-trial detention; urges the Turkish authorities to ensure the immediate release of all individuals detained for exercising their fundamental freedoms;

    18. Continues to be appalled by the Turkish authorities’, in particular the Turkish judiciary’s, continuous disregard for and failure to apply landmark ECtHR rulings; reiterates its condemnation of Türkiye’s blatant misuse of the judicial system and the refusal to release from detention human rights defender Osman Kavala and opposition politicians Selahattin Demirtaş and Figen Yüksekdağ,for which Türkiye is facing historical infringement proceedings in the Council of Europe, with long-awaited consequences yet to be determined; calls on Türkiye to fully comply with the ECtHR judgements related to missing persons and properties (inter alia in the Fokas case) in Cyprus; deplores the politically motivated nature of these prosecutions, which form part of a broader pattern of judicial harassment; calls on Türkiye to fully implement all judgments of the ECtHR in line with Article 46 of the ECHR and in line with the unconditional obligations derived from Article 90 of the Turkish constitution; calls on the European Commission and Member States to use all diplomatic channels to urge Türkiye to implement relevant ECtHR rulings and consider implementing relevant funding conditionality in relation to compliance with ECtHR rulings;

    19. Expresses its deep concern about the dire situation in Turkish prisons owing to severe overcrowding and poor living conditions, with reports, including by the Council of Europe, of torture and ill-treatment being widespread, and access to basic needs such as hygiene and information being severely limited; is particularly worried by the conditions of imprisonment of elderly and seriously ill prisoners; is concerned by the continued use of humiliating strip searches in prisons and other places of detention and by the persisting harassment of MP Ömer Faruk Gergerlioğlu, who is currently facing six proceedings for the removal of his parliamentary seat and immunity, among other reasons for his having denounced this very practice;

    20. Strongly condemns the Turkish Government’s decision to dismiss, following the March 2024 local elections, the democratically elected mayors of at least 13 municipalities and districts (Hakkari, Mardin, Batman, Halfeti, Tunceli, Bahçesaray, Akdeniz, Siirt, Van and Kağızman, won by the DEM Party; and Esenyurt Ovacık and Şişli, won by CHP Party) and to replace them with government trustees appointed by the interior ministry; regards this long-standing practice of appointing trustees as a blatant attack on the most basic principles of local democracy; urges the Turkish authorities to immediately cease and reverse repression of political opposition and to respect the rights of voters to elect their chosen representatives in line with the recommendations of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission; reiterates its call on the VP/HR to consider restrictive measures under the EU Global Human Rights Sanctions Regime against Turkish officials assuming the role of trustee and those appointing them; denounces the severe repression of protests against the removal of elected mayors, including the arbitrary arrest of hundreds of protesters, some of whom were minors; regards the decision of the Turkish Government to return to this practice after the last local elections of March 2024 as a clear sign of its lack of commitment to addressing the democratic shortcomings within the country and in clear contradiction to the declared willingness to revitalise the accession process, as such actions undermine the prospects for a stronger, more comprehensive partnership with the EU and are detrimental to long-term progress towards closer cooperation;

    21. Deplores the permanent targeting of political parties and members of the opposition, who continue to suffer increasing pressure; is extremely concerned by the recent arrest and removal from office of the Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality CHP Mayor Ekrem İmamoğlu, along with the mayors of Şişli and Beylikdüzü, in the framework of two separate investigations on alleged corruption and terrorist-related charges involving a total of 106 suspects; highlights that theses last cases, which are part of a long list of 42 administrative and 51 judicial investigations since İmamoğlu’s election in 2019, were launched just a few days before the internal party election to nominate him presidential candidate and the day after the controverted decision by Istanbul University to revoke his diploma, a requisite for his eligibility to be President; is appalled by the decision to temporarily ban all demonstrations in Istanbul and other provinces across the country, the slowdown on social media, the detention of journalists and the crackdown on peaceful protesters; considers that this is a politically motivated move aimed at preventing a legitimate challenger from standing in the upcoming elections and that with these actions the current Turkish authorities are further pushing the country towards a fully authoritarian model;

    22. Further expresses its concern about the recent separate cases against Istanbul’s Beşiktaş district CHP Mayor Rıza Akpolat, Istanbul’s Beykoz district CHP Mayor Alaattin Köseler, CHP Youth Branch Chair Cem Aydın, and Zafer Party Chair Ümit Özdag; is appalled by the brutal and relentless crackdown on any kind of criticism to which all sectors of Turkish society have recently been subjected by the Turkish authorities, as illustrated, among others, by the case of Ayşe Barım, a well-known talent manager imprisoned since 27 January 2025 for alleged involvement in the Gezi Park protest 12 years ago, the investigation launched against Orhan Turan and Ömer Aras, the president and an executive of TÜSIAD, the country’s main business group, and the indictment, with the aim of imposing hefty prison sentences, of Halk TV Editor-in-Chief Suat Toktaş and journalists Seda Selek, Barış Pehlivan, Serhan Asker and Kürşad Oğuz, who have been provisionally acquitted; is concerned by the involvement in these and other cases of recently appointed Istanbul Chief Public Prosecutor Akın Gürlek, who has a long record of involvement, in different positions, in high-profile cases against political figures, and which may give grounds for considering the application of restrictive measures under the EU Human Rights sanction regime; is also concerned by the growing financial pressure on opposition municipalities and controversial announcements, such as that made in relation to day-care centres run by opposition municipalities;

    23. Expresses its deep concern at the deterioration in women’s rights, at gender-based violence and at the increase in the incidence of femicide in Türkiye in 2024, which has been the highest since 2010, the year before the signing of the Istanbul Convention; reiterates its strong condemnation of Türkiye’s withdrawal, by presidential decree, from this international agreement and reiterates its call to reverse this decision; urges the Turkish authorities to improve the legislative framework and its implementation, including by fully applying Protection Law no. 6284, in order to effectively tackle all forms of violence against women and the practice of so called ‘honour killings’, end the persistent policy of impunity by holding abusers to account, and advance towards gender equality, particularly with regard to the participation of women in decision-making and policymaking processes;

    24. Strongly condemns the ongoing violations and lack of protection of the fundamental rights of LGBTI+ persons in Türkiye, including the increased incidence of hate speech, hate crimes and discriminatory rhetoric, as well as continued media stereotyping based on sexual orientation and gender identity; deplores the fact that this continued discrimination is often sanctioned by the authorities, as evidenced by the mass arrests made during the Pride March in 2023 and the banning of the march in 2024, while anti-LGBTI+ marches were permitted; urges the Turkish authorities to stop banning activities against homophobia, including Pride marches, with immediate effect;

    25. Welcomes the increased dialogue with Christian minorities, but stresses that no significant progress has been registered with regard to the protection of the rights of ethnic and religious minorities, in particular as regards their legal personality, including those of the Greek Orthodox population of the islands of Gökçeada (Imvros) and Bozcaada (Tenedos); calls for Türkiye to implement the Venice Commission recommendations and all relevant ECtHR rulings in this regard; notes with concern that representatives of different confessions, including non-Muslim and Alevi communities, continue to face bureaucratic obstacles when attempting to register places of worship; highlights that this is a violation of the right to freedom of religion and belief; calls on Türkiye to adopt the long-awaited regulation on the election of board members in non-Muslim minority foundations controlling community hospitals; reiterates its call on Türkiye to respect the role of the Ecumenical Patriarchate for Orthodox Christians all over the world and to recognise its legal personality and the public use of the ecclesiastical title of Ecumenical Patriarch; calls on Türkiye to fully respect and protect the outstanding universal value of Hagia Sophia and the Chora museum, which are inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List; notes with concern that Türkiye has still not implemented two decisions of the UNESCO World Heritage Committee of 2021 and 2023 regarding its obligations to undertake special measures to protect these monuments; deplores the lack of protection of Panagia Soumela Monastery, which has been put forward for inclusion in the UNESCO World Heritage Monuments list; stresses the need to eliminate restrictions on the training, appointment and succession of clergy; welcomes the envisaged reopening of the Halki Seminary and calls for the lifting of all obstacles to its proper functioning; calls on the Turkish authorities to effectively investigate and prosecute people responsible for any hate crimes, including hate speech, committed against minorities; condemns the antisemitic statements made in the media and by high-level officials following the Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel on 7 October 2023; notes that all of these practices against any religious minority are incompatible with EU values;

    26. Welcomes Abdullah Öcalan’s recent call on the PKK to lay down arms and dissolve, and to engage in a peace process, as a historic and long-awaited step that could help end a period of 40 years of violence that has caused more than 40 000 deaths; praises the efforts made by all stakeholders involved to facilitate these developments, including the constructive approach of different political leaders that was started by MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli, the visits to Imrali prison granted to a delegation of the DEM Party, and the broad consultations that this party has led with other political parties; underlines that this represents a significant opportunity and must be followed by an inclusive political process, with a prominent role for the Turkish Parliament, aimed at the peaceful and sustainable resolution of the Kurdish issue in its political, social, democratic and security-related aspects; stresses the need to uphold human rights, political pluralism, and civil rights for all citizens, including Kurds; regrets the continued political repression, judicial harassment and restrictions on cultural and linguistic rights faced by Kurdish citizens, which undermine democratic principles and social cohesion;

    Regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations

    27. Continues to commend Türkiye for hosting around 3.1 million refugees, including 2.9 million Syrians under temporary protection in 2024, down from 3.2 million in 2023; reiterates the importance of Türkiye’s collaboration for the effective and orderly management of migration flows; further welcomes the fact that since 2011 the EU has contributed close to EUR 10 billion to assist Türkiye in hosting refugees; notes that some EU funding has been allocated to strengthening Turkish border control and containment capabilities; welcomes the EU’s decision to allocate an additional EUR 1 billion in December 2024 to further support the healthcare, education, and integration of refugees in Türkiye since the fall of the Assad regime; at the same time, notes that these funds had already been pledged in May 2024, and therefore do not constitute new funds; calls on the Commission to ensure utmost transparency and accuracy in the allocation of funds and that EU-funded projects, particularly those related to removal centres and border control, comply with all relevant human rights standards; is alarmed by credible reports uncovering grave human rights violations at EU-funded removal centres in Türkiye and calls on the Commission to launch a transparent and independent review into the matter; notes with concern that a continuing increase in asylum applications has been registered in the Republic of Cyprus over recent years; recalls Türkiye’s obligation to take all necessary measures to halt the existing illegal migration routes and prevent the creation of new sea or land routes for illegal migration from Türkiye to the EU, particularly to Greece and the Republic of Cyprus; points out the risks related to any possible instrumentalisation of migrants by the Turkish Government; underlines the need to ensure the protection of all refugees’ and migrants’ rights and freedoms; calls on Türkiye to ensure the full and non-discriminatory implementation of the EU-Turkey Statement of 2016 and the EU-Türkiye Readmission Agreement vis-à-vis all Member States, including the Republic of Cyprus; expresses cautious hope that developments in Syria will gradually allow an increasing number of refugees to return home; reiterates that returns should only be carried out on a voluntary basis and under conditions of safety and dignity; condemns repeated violent attacks against refugees and migrants fuelled by xenophobic rhetoric among politicians and host communities; calls on the European Commission and the EU Member States to increase their efforts to preserve humanitarian and protection space for Syrian refugees in Türkiye and to uphold the principle of non-refoulement as a cornerstone of EU policies;

    28. Reiterates its strong interest in stability and security in the Eastern Mediterranean; welcomes the continued de-escalation and positive momentum in the region and the recent climate of re-engagement between Türkiye and Greece, albeit that unresolved issues continue to affect bilateral relations; deplores the fact that Türkiye continues to violate the sovereignty and sovereign rights of EU Member States, such as Greece and the Republic of Cyprus, including through the promotion of the Blue Homeland doctrine; underlines that, although Turkish violations of Greek airspace have drastically decreased, violations of Greek territorial waters have risen compared to 2023, and systematic illegal fishing activities have been conducted by Turkish vessels within Greek territorial waters; deeply regrets that Türkiye also continues to uphold a formal threat of war against Greece (casus belli) at 12 nautical miles; calls on Türkiye to fully respect the sovereignty of all EU Member States over their territorial sea and airspace, and their other sovereign rights, including the right to explore and exploit natural resources in accordance with EU and international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which is part of the EU acquis; reiterates its view that the memorandum of understanding between Türkiye and Libya on delimitation of the maritime jurisdiction areas in the Mediterranen infringes upon the sovereign rights of third States, does not comply with the Law of the Sea and cannot produce any legal consequences for third States;

    29. Regrets the fact that the Cyprus problem remains unresolved, and calls for serious reengagement and the political will of all parties involved to bring about peaceful UN-led negotiations, with a view to achieving real progress in the Cyprus settlement talks; welcomes the resumption of informal talks under the auspices of the UN Secretary-General on 18 and 19 March 2025, which were held in a constructive atmosphere in which both sides showed a clear commitment to making progress and continuing dialogue; welcomes the agreement between both sides on opening four crossing points, demining, establishing a youth affairs committee and launching environmental and solar energy projects, as part of a new set of confidence-building measures; encourages all sides to use this momentum to move towards the resumption of negotiations;

    30. Strongly reaffirms its view that the only solution to the Cyprus problem is a fair, comprehensive, viable and democratic settlement, including of its external aspects, within the agreed UN framework, on the basis of a bi-communal, bi-zonal federation with a single international legal personality, single sovereignty, single citizenship and political equality, as set out in the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, the agreed areas of convergence and the Framework of the UN Secretary General, as well as in accordance with international law and the principles and values on which the Union is founded; calls, as a matter of urgency, for the resumption of negotiations on the reunification of Cyprus under the auspices of the UN Secretary-General as soon as possible, from the point at which they were interrupted in Crans-Montana in 2017; calls on Türkiye to abandon the unacceptable proposal for a two-state solution in Cyprus and to return to the agreed basis for a solution and the UN framework; further calls on Türkiye to withdraw its troops from Cyprus and refrain from any unilateral action which would entrench the permanent division of the island and from action altering the demographic balance;

    31. Calls on Türkiye to respect the status of the buffer zone and the mandate of the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP); reiterates its call for cooperation among the Republic of Cyprus, Türkiye, the United Kingdom and the UN to implement concrete measures for a demilitarisation of the buffer zone, and to improve security on the island; urges Türkiye and the Turkish Cypriot leadership to reverse all unilateral actions and violations within and in the vicinity of the buffer zone and refrain from any further such actions and provocations; condemns the ongoing ‘opening’ of Varosha by Türkiye, as this negatively alters the situation on the ground, undermines mutual trust and negatively impacts the prospects for the resumption of direct talks on the comprehensive solution of the Cyprus problem; calls on Türkiye to reverse its illegal actions in violation of UN Security Council resolutions 550(1984) and 789(1992) on Varosha, which call on Türkiye to transfer the area of Varosha to its lawful inhabitants under the temporary administration of the UN, and to withdraw from Strovilia and facilitate the full implementation of the Pyla Understanding;

    32. Reiterates its call on Türkiye to give the Turkish Cypriot community the necessary space to act in accordance with its role as a legitimate community of the island, which is a right guaranteed by the constitution of the Republic of Cyprus; reiterates its call on the Commission to step up its efforts to engage with the Turkish Cypriot community, with a view to facilitating the resolution of the Cyprus problem and recalling that its place is in the European Union; calls for all parties involved to demonstrate a more courageous approach to bringing the communities together; stresses the need for the EU body of law to be implemented across the entire island following a comprehensive resolution of the Cyprus problem;

    33. Takes note of the significant work of the Committee on Missing Persons in Cyprus (CMP) and calls for improved access to military zones by the Turkish army, access to its military archives and information as to the relocation of remains from former to subsequent burial sites; remains deeply concerned about the education and religious restrictions and impediments faced by the enclaved Greek Cypriots; calls on Türkiye to step up its cooperation with the Council of Europe and its relevant bodies and institutions, to address their key recommendations, to fully implement the European Convention of Human Rights with regard to respecting the freedom of religion and the freedom of opinion and expression, and the right to access and enjoy cultural heritage, and to stop the deliberate destruction of cultural and religious heritage; condemns the repeated attempts by Türkiye to intimidate and silence Turkish Cypriot journalists, trade unionists, human rights defenders and progressive citizens in the Turkish Cypriot community, thus violating their right to freedom of opinion and expression; calls on Türkiye to halt its proclaimed aggressive policy of the sale and exploitation of Greek Cypriot properties, a policy designed to create irreversible effects on the ground and which completely disregards the European Code of Human Rights ruling on this issue;

    34. Regrets Türkiye’s continuing refusal to comply with aviation law and establish a channel of communication between air traffic control centres in Türkiye and the Republic of Cyprus, the absence of which entails real safety risks and dangers as identified by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency and the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations; regrets, too, its denial of access to vessels under the flag of one Member State to the Straits of Bosporus and the Dardanelles; takes the view that these could be areas where Türkiye can prove its commitment to confidence building measures and calls on Türkiye to collaborate by fully implementing EU aviation law; regrets that Türkiye has continued its attempts to impede the implementation of the Great Sea Interconnector, an EU project of common interest, and has persisted in its plans for an illegal electricity interconnector with the occupied area of Cyprus;

    35. Regrets that for 20 years Türkiye has refused to implement the obligations assumed towards the EU, including those in relation to Cyprus, as per the Negotiating Framework of October 2005; stresses that recognition of all Member States is a necessary component of the accession process; reiterates its call on Türkiye to fulfil its obligation of full, non-discriminatory implementation of the Additional Protocol to the Ankara Agreement in relation to all Member States, including the Republic of Cyprus; further calls on Türkiye  to ensure that the human and political rights of all Cypriots are fully respected and that compliance with the fundamental principles of the European Union and the European acquis is guaranteed;

    36. Affirms its support for a free, secure and stable future for Syria and its citizens and highlights the need for an inclusive and peaceful political transition process that is Syrian-led and Syrian- owned, including the protection and inclusion of religious and ethnic communities; expresses its commitment to constructive cooperation between the EU and Türkiye to that end, on humanitarian aid, promoting a sustainable political solution in Syria, and the fight against DAESH, given that Türkiye has a key role in promoting stability in the region; recalls that Syria’s sovereignty must be restored; acknowledges the importance of rebuilding Syria’s economy as a pillar of long-term stability and prosperity for the region; calls on Türkiye to respect Syria’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and immediately cease all attacks and incursions on and occupation of Syrian territory in full compliance with international law; condemns the attacks carried out in recent weeks, taking advantage of the collapse of the Assad regime, by Turkish-backed militias against Syrian Kurdish forces in the north of Syria; expresses deep concern, as these attacks increase the number of internally displaced persons but also threaten the efficiency and continuity of the fight against Daesh; notes that its ongoing presence risks further destabilising and undermining efforts towards a sustainable political resolution in Syria; further notes that, citing security concerns, Türkiye also illegally occupies areas in Iraq; reiterates that civilian populations should never be the victim of military self-defence; calls for the necessary investigation into the cases in which there have been civilian casualties and to stop the crackdown on journalists working in the area; calls on Türkiye to support the process of implementing the agreement between the Syrian transitional government and the Kurdish-led SDF and refrain from any interference in Syria’s internal processes;

    37. Supports the normalisation of relations between Armenia and Türkiye in the interests of reconciliation, good neighbourly relations, regional stability and security and socio-economic development, and welcomes the progress achieved so far; welcomes the continued efforts to restore links between the two countries; urges Türkiye to ensure the speedy implementation of agreements reached by the Turkish and Armenian Governments’ special representatives, such as the opening of the airspace and the border between the two countries for the third country nationals, and, subsequently, for holders of diplomatic passports; welcomes the temporary opening of the Margara-Alican border crossing between Armenia and Türkiye to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to Syria; expresses the hope that these developments may give impetus to the normalisation of relations in the South Caucasus region, also in terms of security and socio-economic development, and stresses the EU’s interest in supporting this process; encourages Türkiye to play a constructive role in promoting regional stability by facilitating the swift conclusion of the peace process between Armenia and Azerbaijan, inter alia by exerting its influence on Azerbaijan and by deterring Azerbaijan from any further military action against Armenian sovereignty; encourages Türkiye once again to acknowledge the Armenian genocide in order to pave the way for genuine reconciliation between the Turkish and Armenian peoples and to fully respect its obligations to protect Armenian cultural heritage;

    38. Notes that Türkiye’s stance in relation to Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine continues to affect EU-Türkiye relations, as Türkiye attempts to maintain ties with both the West and Russia simultaneously; notes Türkiye’s diplomatic attempts to mediate between Russia and Ukraine, particularly regarding the Black Sea Grain Initiative, as well as its continued support for  the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, including its vote in favour of UN General Assembly resolutions condemning the Russian aggression against Ukraine; regrets that, on the other hand, trade between Türkiye and Russia has risen sharply since the start of the war in Ukraine, making Türkiye Russia’s second largest trading partner despite EU sanctions against Russia, and that Türkiye is the only NATO member state not having imposed any sanctions on Russia; further notes that the European Union’s anti-fraud office, OLAF, has initiated an investigation into a loophole that enables countries like Türkiye to rebrand sanctioned Russian oil and export it to the EU; welcomes, however, positive steps such as Türkiye’s blocking of exports to Russia for certain dual use goods, as well as products originating in the United States and the United Kingdom that are of benefit to Russian military action; reiterates its call on the Turkish Government to halt its plans for the Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant, which will be built, operated and owned by Russia’s state atomic energy corporation, Rosatom; expresses concern at Türkiye’s ongoing discussions with Russia to establish a gas-trading hub in Istanbul, scheduled to begin operations in 2025;

    39. Welcomes Türkiye’s participation in various crisis management missions and operations (within the framework of the common security and defence policy); regrets, however, the further deterioration in the level of alignment on common foreign and security policy positions, including on sanctions and countering the circumvention of sanctions, which has fallen to a historically low rate of 5 %, the lowest rate for any accession country; recalls that EU candidate countries are required to progressively align with the common foreign and security policy of the European Union and comply with international law; regrets that Türkiye has not undertaken any steps in this regard, notably by failing to align with EU sanctions against Russia, and that in many areas of mutual interest the foreign policies of the EU and Türkiye are worryingly divergent; urges Türkiye to align with and fully implement the EU sanctions against Russia, including on anti-circumvention measures and to cooperate closely with the EU’s Sanctions Envoy;

    40. Stresses the importance of reinforcing EU-Türkiye cooperation in global security matters, particularly in light of the changing geopolitical landscape and potential shifts in US foreign policy; expresses cautious hope that recent informal engagement, such as the participation of the Turkish Foreign Minister in the informal meeting of EU foreign affairs ministers in 2024, may provide an impetus towards better relations; acknowledges Türkiye’s key role as an ally in NATO and welcomes the Turkish Parliament’s decision to ratify Sweden’s NATO accession in January 2024; recalls, in this regard, that Türkiye has a key responsibility to foster stability at both regional and global levels and is expected to act in line with its NATO obligations, especially given the current geopolitical upheavals; encourages constructive engagement in a more structured and frequent political dialogue on foreign, security and defence policy to seek collaboration on convergent interests while working to reduce divergences, particularly with regard to removing persistent obstacles to the enhancement of a genuine relationship between the EU and NATO, including the acquisition from Russia of the S-400 air defence system; remains duly concerned that Türkiye continues to exclude a Member State from cooperation with NATO;

    41. Welcomes Türkiye’s long-standing position in favour of a two-state solution for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, its calls for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war, and its ongoing efforts to supply humanitarian aid to Gaza throughout the conflict; deeply regrets, at the same time, the Turkish authorities’, including the President’s, active support for the EU-listed terror group Hamas and their stance on the attack against Israel on 7 October 2023, which the Turkish Government failed to condemn; points out that Türkiye’s open support for Hamas and its refusal to designate it a terrorist organisation is not compatible with the EU’s foreign and security policy; calls, therefore, for a revision of this position;

    42. Notes with concern that Türkiye has asked to be a member of BRICS+ and been offered ‘partner country’ status, and is considering the same for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), where it holds the status of a dialogue partner; expresses serious concern over Türkiye’s increasing interest in an alternative partnership framework, which is fundamentally incompatible with the EU accession process; insists that Türkiye’s new status as a BRICS partner country must not affect Türkiye’s responsibilities within NATO; notes that Türkiye has been cultivating cooperation formats, partnerships and regional alliances beyond the EU; is concerned by Türkiye’s tendency to use this multi-vector approach to advance its interests without committing to a full-fledged cooperation with any of these alliances;

    43. Remains concerned by the Turkish Government’s use of the Turkish diaspora as an instrument for occasional meddling in EU Member States’ domestic policies;

    Socio-economic and sustainability reforms

    44. Welcomes Türkiye’s return to a more conventional economic and monetary policy, while maintaining robust growth and a moderate budget deficit; regrets, however, that the cost of this is yet again being borne by citizens in the form of higher interest rates; highlights that social vulnerabilities have increased, particularly among children and older people, primarily due to the absence of a comprehensive poverty reduction strategy and income inequalities; underlines the necessity for the Turkish authorities to implement comprehensive social protection measures, strengthen collective bargaining rights and ensure that economic reforms prioritise reducing inequality and creating decent work opportunities;

    45. Regrets the fact that despite the progress observed in economic and monetary policies, other actions by the Turkish Government affecting the rule of law continue to undermine basic principles such as legal certainty, which impacts negatively on Türkiye’s potential capacity to receive investments; welcomes the removal of Türkiye from the grey list of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) in June 2024, following significant progress in improving its anti-money laundering regime and combating the financing of terrorism;

    46. Welcomes Türkiye’s increased investment activity in the green energy sector and calls on Türkiye to continue improving the compatibility of its energy policy with the EU acquis, exploiting Türkiye’s enormous potential in renewable energy; expresses concern about the lack of any significant progress on climate action, in particular owing to the absence of a comprehensive climate law, a domestic emissions trading system, and a long-term low-emission development strategy, which undermines its 2053 climate neutrality target; highlights the need for a robust legal framework and stricter enforcement mechanisms to safeguard environmental and natural resources; urges Türkiye to align its environmental policies with the EU acquis, including respecting natural habitats when conducting mining projects, and underlines the importance of Türkiye’s adherence to the Aarhus Convention; commends the work of environmental rights defenders in Türkiye and warns against the dire environmental impact of extensive government projects, such as the expansion of its copper mining activities in Mount Ida (Kaz Daglari);

    47. Highlights the fact that Türkiye has taken steps to diversify energy supplies and increase its renewable energy share; notes that the country is the seventh largest LNG market and highlights its potential as a regional energy hub; takes note that Türkiye has subscribed to the global goals on energy efficiency and renewable energy capacity by 2030; calls on the Commission to take into account Türkiye’s potential as a regional energy hub in initiatives to increase the installed renewable capacity in the Mediterranean region and in the development of the New Pact for the Mediterranean, and calls for energy cooperation to be part of the common agenda;

    48. Observes some improvements in labour market conditions and points out a number of pending critical challenges, such as informal employment, the gender gap, and income inequality; is worried about the low coverage of collective bargaining and the lack of recognition of trade union rights for certain public sector employees; believes that more efforts are needed to enhance social dialogue mechanisms and address emerging occupational safety challenges; recalls that trade union freedom and social dialogue are crucial to the development and prosperity of a pluralistic society; deplores, in this regard, the recent detentions of trade unionists including Remzi Çalişkan, vice-president of the DISK confederation, and president of Genel-Iş, who was released after a month in prison, Kemal Göksoy, President of the Mersin Branch of Genel-İş, who remains in prison, and Mehmet Türkmen, chair of the textile sector union BİRTEK SEN, who was detained on 14 February 2025;

    Wider EU-Türkiye relations

    49. Reiterates its firm conviction that, beyond the currently frozen accession process, Türkiye is a country of strategic relevance, a key partner for the stability of the wider region and plays an important role in addressing security challenges, migration management, counterterrorism, and energy security; stresses the importance of maintaining constructive dialogue and deepening cooperation in areas of mutual strategic interest; points to a number of policy areas for future engagement, whether it be the green transition, trade, energy, a modernised customs union and visa liberalisation, among others; reaffirms that the EU is committed to pursuing the best possible relations with Türkiye, based on dialogue, respect and mutual trust, in line with international law and good neighbourly relations;

    50. Stresses the importance of encouraging deeper partnership in all economic sectors, to the benefit of the EU and all of its Member States and Türkiye; notes in particular the importance of cooperation in the fields of energy, innovation, artificial intelligence, health, security and migration management, among others; in this regard, welcomes various high-level dialogues (HLDs) held recently, including the HLD on trade, and the plans for an HLD on economy, as positive steps towards pragmatic forms of cooperation in areas of mutual importance; calls again for the resumption of all relevant HLDs and for the establishment of structured HLDs on sectoral cooperation, to address common challenges and explore opportunities for joint initiatives in fields such as security, climate change, research and innovation; stresses that trade between the EU and Türkiye hit a record high last year and that the EU remains Türkiye’s largest trade and investment partner; calls for the removal of all existing trade barriers and irritants;

    51. Stands ready to support an upgraded customs union with a broader, mutually beneficial scope, which could encompass a wide range of areas of common interest, including digitalisation, Green Deal alignment for green energy policies, public procurement, sustainable development commitments, and due diligence, contributing to the economic security of both sides; supports accompanying this upgraded customs union with an efficient and effective dispute settlement mechanism; underlines the fact that for Parliament to give its consent at the end of the process, such a modernisation would need to be based on strong conditionality related to human rights and fundamental freedoms, respect for international law and good neighbourly relations, including Türkiye’s full implementation of the Additional Protocol on extending the Ankara Agreement to all Member States without exception and in a non-discriminatory fashion;

    52. Notes with deep regret that no progress has been made by Türkiye towards meeting the required benchmarks for visa liberalisation; reiterates its willingness to start the visa liberalisation process as soon as the Turkish authorities fully fulfil the six clearly outstanding benchmarks in a non-discriminatory manner vis-à-vis all EU Member states while aligning with EU visa policy; regrets that Turkish citizens are facing problems with visa requests/applications to EU Member States owing to a marked increase in demand and fears of abuse of the system; recognises, however, the political commitment to improving access to visas and calls for intensified efforts on both sides to address the remaining technical and administrative barriers; calls on the EU Member states to increase the resources allocated to this matter; supports measures on visa facilitation, particularly with regard to business activities and Erasmus students; deeply regrets the constant attempts by the Turkish authorities to blame the EU for not making progress on this dossier, while not taking any necessary steps to comply with the remaining benchmarks; reminds Türkiye that the lack of tangible and cumulative progress on the pending conditions has a direct impact on business activities and Erasmus students; appreciates the invaluable contribution of Erasmus+ exchanges in providing rich cross-cultural educational opportunities;

    The way forward for EU-Türkiye relations

    53. Considers, in view of the above, that the Turkish Government has failed to take the necessary steps to address the existing fundamental democratic shortcomings within the country and therefore reiterates its view that Türkiye’s EU accession process cannot be resumed in the current circumstances, despite the democratic and pro-European aspirations of a large part of Turkish society; recalls that, as in the case of any other candidate, the accession process is contingent on full compliance with the Copenhagen criteria and on the normalisation of relations with all EU Member States;

    54. Urges the Turkish Government and the EU institutions and Member States to continue working, beyond the currently frozen accession process, on the basis of the relevant Council and European Council conclusions and the established conditionality, towards a closer, more dynamic and strategic partnership with particular emphasis on climate action, energy security, counter-terrorism cooperation and regional stability; insists on the need to begin a process of reflection on how this new constructive and progressive framework for EU-Türkiye relations can encompass the interests of all parties involved, for example by modernising and enhancing the current Association Agreement;

    55. Considers the joint communication of 29 November 2023 on the state of play of EU-Türkiye relations a good basis on which to move forward in the overall relations between the EU and Türkiye; regrets the lack of a clear political endorsement of this joint communication so far by the Council; reiterates that recognition of all EU Member States is a necessary component of any agreement between the EU and Türkiye; stresses that Türkiye’s constructive engagement, including in relation to the Cyprus problem, remains key to advancing closer cooperation between the EU and Türkiye;

    56. Warns, nevertheless, that a further drift towards authoritarianism by the Turkish authorities, such as we have been witnessing recently, will ultimately have a severe impact on all dimensions of EU-Türkiye relations, including trade and security cooperation, as it prevents the trust and reliability needed between partners and antagonises both sides in the current geopolitical scene;

    57. Continues to acknowledge and commend the democratic and pro-European aspirations of the majority of Turkish society (particularly among Turkish youth), whom the EU will not forsake; regards these aspirations as a major reason for keeping Türkiye’s accession process alive; calls therefore on the Commission to uphold and increase its political and financial support to the vibrant and pro-democratic civil society in Türkiye, whose efforts can contribute to generating the political will necessary for deepening EU-Türkiye relations; highlights, nevertheless, that the resumption of the accession process depends on the unwavering political will of Türkiye’s authorities and society to become a full-fledged democracy, which cannot be forced upon it by the EU;

    58. Reiterates its call to strengthen and deepen mutual knowledge and understanding between our societies, promoting cultural growth, socio-cultural exchanges and combating all manifestations of social, religious, ethnic or cultural prejudice; encourages Türkiye and the EU to promote shared values, particularly by supporting young people; reiterates its utmost commitment to sustaining and increasing support for Türkiye’s independent civil society;

    °

    ° °

    59. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the President of the European Council, the Council and the Commission; asks that this resolution be translated into Turkish and forwarded to the President, Government and Parliament of the Republic of Türkiye.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the ninth report on economic and social cohesion – A10-0066/2025

    Source: European Parliament

    MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

    on the ninth report on economic and social cohesion

    (2024/2107(INI))

    The European Parliament,

     having regard to Articles 2 and 3 of the Treaty on European Union,

     having regard to Articles 4, 162, 174 to 178, and 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1060 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, the Just Transition Fund and the European Maritime, Fisheries and Aquaculture Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Instrument for Financial Support for Border Management and Visa Policy[1] (Common Provisions Regulation),

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1058 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 on the European Regional Development Fund and on the Cohesion Fund[2],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1059 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 on specific provisions for the European territorial cooperation goal (Interreg) supported by the European Regional Development Fund and external financing instruments[3],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1057 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 establishing the European Social Fund Plus (ESF+) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1296/2013[4],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1056 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 June 2021 establishing the Just Transition Fund[5],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 establishing rules on support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the common agricultural policy (CAP Strategic Plans) and financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013[6],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2020/460 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 March 2020 amending Regulations (EU) No 1301/2013, (EU) No 1303/2013 and (EU) No 508/2014 as regards specific measures to mobilise investments in the healthcare systems of Member States and in other sectors of their economies in response to the COVID-19 outbreak (Coronavirus Response Investment Initiative)[7],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2020/558 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2020 amending Regulations (EU) No 1301/2013 and (EU) No 1303/2013 as regards specific measures to provide exceptional flexibility for the use of the European Structural and Investments Funds in response to the COVID-19 outbreak[8],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2020/461 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 March 2020 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 in order to provide financial assistance to Member States and to countries negotiating their accession to the Union that are seriously affected by a major public health emergency[9],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2020/2221 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 December 2020 amending Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 as regards additional resources and implementing arrangements to provide assistance for fostering crisis repair in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and its social consequences and for preparing a green, digital and resilient recovery of the economy (REACT-EU)[10],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2022/562 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 April 2022 amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013 and (EU) No 223/2014 as regards Cohesion’s Action for Refugees in Europe (CARE)[11],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2022/2039 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 amending Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013 and (EU) 2021/1060 as regards additional flexibility to address the consequences of the military aggression of the Russian Federation FAST (Flexible Assistance for Territories) – CARE[12],

     having regard to the URBACT programme for sustainable urban cooperation, established in 2002,

     having regard to the Urban Agenda for the EU of 30 May 2016,

     having regard to the Territorial Agenda 2030 of 1 December 2020,

     having regard to the 9th Cohesion Report, published by the Commission on 27 March 2024[13], and the Commission communication of 27 March 2024 on the 9th Cohesion Report (COM(2024)0149),

     having regard to the study entitled ‘The future of EU cohesion: Scenarios and their impacts on regional inequalities’, published by the European Parliamentary Research Service in December 2024,

     having regard to the Commission report of February 2024 entitled ‘Forging a sustainable future together – Cohesion for a competitive and inclusive Europe’[14],

     having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 31 May 2024 on the 9th Cohesion Report[15],

     having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 21 November 2024 entitled ‘A renewed Cohesion Policy post 2027 that leaves no one behind – CoR responses to the 9th Cohesion Report and the Report of the Group of High-Level Specialists on the Future of Cohesion Policy’,

     having regard to the report entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness – A competitiveness strategy for Europe’, published by the Commission on 9 September 2024,

     having regard to the agreement adopted at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP21) in Paris on 12 December 2015 (the Paris Agreement),

     having regard to the study entitled ‘Streamlining EU Cohesion Funds: addressing administrative burdens and redundancy’, published by its Directorate-General for Internal Policies of the Union in November 2024[16],

     having regard to Regulation (EU) 2025/XXXX of the European Parliament and of the Council of [INSERT DATE] on the Border Regions’ Instrument for Development and Growth in the EU (BRIDGEforEU) [INSERT FOOTNOTE ONCE PUBLISHED IN OJ],

     having regard to the Commission communication of 3 May 2022 entitled ‘Putting people first, securing sustainable and inclusive growth, unlocking the potential of the EU’s outermost regions’ (COM(2022)0198),

     having regard to the opinion in the form of a letter from the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (XXX),

     having regard to its resolution of 25 March 2021 on cohesion policy and regional environment strategies in the fight against climate change[17],

     having regard to its resolution of 20 May 2021 on reversing demographic trends in EU regions using cohesion policy instruments[18],

     having regard to its resolution of 14 September 2021 entitled ‘Towards a stronger partnership with the EU outermost regions[19],

     having regard to its resolution of 15 September 2022 on economic, social and territorial cohesion in the EU: the 8th Cohesion Report[20],

     having regard to its resolution of 20 October 2023 on possibilities to increase the reliability of audits and controls by national authorities in shared management[21],

     having regard to its resolution of 23 November 2023 on harnessing talent in Europe’s regions[22],

     having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2024 entitled ‘Cohesion policy 2014-2020 – implementation and outcomes in the Member States[23],

     having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

     having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Development (A10-0066/2025),

    A. whereas cohesion policy is at the heart of EU policies and is the EU’s main tool for investments in sustainable economic, social and territorial development, and contributing to the Green Deal objectives, across the EU under its multiannual financial frameworks for the periods of 2014-2020 and 2021-2027; whereas cohesion policy, as mandated by the Treaties, is fundamental for a well-functioning and thriving internal market by promoting the development of all regions in the EU, and especially the less developed ones;

    B. whereas cohesion policy has fostered economic, social and territorial convergence in the EU, notably by increasing the gross domestic products, for example, of central and eastern EU Member States, which went from 43 % of the EU average in 1995 to around 80 % in 2023; whereas the 9th Cohesion Report highlights that, by the end of 2022, cohesion policy supported over 4.4 million businesses, creating more than 370 000 jobs in these companies; whereas it also underlines that cohesion policy generates a significant return on investment, and that each euro invested in the 2014–2020 and 2021–2027 programmes will have generated 1.3 euros of additional GDP in the Union by 2030; whereas cohesion policy constituted, on average, around 13 % of total public investment in the EU[24];

    C. whereas the Commission report entitled ‘The long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas: key achievements and ways forward’, presented alongside the ninth Cohesion Report, underlines that EUR 24.6 billion, or 8 % of the rural development pillar of the common agricultural policy, is directed towards investments in rural areas beyond farming investments, setting the scene for a debate on the future of rural areas;

    D. whereas between 2021 and 2027, cohesion policy will have invested over EUR 140 billion in the green and digital transitions[25], to help improve networks and infrastructure, support nature conservation, improve green and digital skills and foster job creation and services for the public;

    E. whereas despite the widely acknowledged and proven positive impact of cohesion policy on social, economic and territorial convergence, significant challenges remain, marked notably by development disparities at sub-national level, within regions and in regions caught in a development trap, and by the impact of climate change, in terms of demography, the digital and green transitions, and connectivity, but also in terms of sustainable economic development, in particular in least developed regions and rural and remote areas;

    F. whereas cohesion policy and sectoral programmes of the EU have repeatedly and efficiently helped regions to respond effectively to emergencies and asymmetric shocks such as the COVID-19 crisis, Brexit, the energy crisis and the refugee crisis caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, as well as natural disasters, even though it is a long-term, structural policy and not a crisis management instrument or the ‘go-to’ emergency response funding mechanism; whereas such crises have delayed the implementation of the European Structural and Investment Funds and whereas a considerable number of projects financed with Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) funds have been taken for the most part from projects that had been slated for investment under cohesion policy;

    G. whereas despite measures already taken for the 2014-2020 and 2021-2027 periods, the regulatory framework governing the use and administration of cohesion policy instruments and funds should be further simplified and interoperable digital tools better used and developed, including the establishment of one-stop digitalised service centres, with the objective of streamlining procedures, enhancing stakeholder trust, reducing the administrative burden, increasing flexibility in fund management and speeding up payments, not only for the relevant authorities but also for the final beneficiaries; whereas it is necessary to increase the scope for using funds more flexibly, including the possibility of financing the development of dual-use products; whereas it is of utmost importance to formulate any future cohesion policy with a strategic impetus throughout the funding period, which could, however, be reassessed at midterm;

    H. whereas the low absorption rate of the 2021-2027 cohesion policy funds, currently at just 6 %, is not because of a lack of need from Member States or regions, but rather stems from delays in the approval of operational programmes, the transition period between financial frameworks, the prioritisation of NextGenerationEU by national managing authorities, limited administrative capacity and complex bureaucratic procedures; whereas Member States and regions may not rush to absorb all available funds as they anticipate a possible extension under the N+2 or N+3 rules;

    I. whereas radical modifications to the cohesion regulatory framework, from one programming period to the next, contribute to generating insecurity among the authorities responsible and beneficiaries, gold-plating legislation, increasing error rates (and the accompanying negative reputational and financial consequences), delays in implementation and, ultimately, disaffection among beneficiaries and the general population;

    J. whereas there is sometimes competition between cohesion funds, emergency funds and sectoral policies;

    K. whereas demographic changes vary significantly across EU regions, with the populations of some Member States facing a projected decline in the coming years and others projected to grow; whereas demographic changes also take place between regions, including movement away from outermost regions, but are generally observed as movement from rural to urban areas within Member States, wherein women are leaving rural areas in greater numbers than men, but also to metropolitan areas, where villages around big cities encounter difficulties in investing in basic infrastructure; whereas the provision of essential services such as healthcare, education and transportation must be reinforced in all regions, with a particular focus on rural and remote areas; whereas a stronger focus is needed on areas suffering from depopulation and inadequate services, requiring targeted measures to encourage young people to remain through entrepreneurship projects, high-quality agriculture and sustainable tourism;

    L. whereas taking account of the ageing population is crucial in order to ensure justice among the generations and thereby to strengthen participation, especially among young people;

    M. whereas urban areas are burdened by new challenges resulting from the population influx to cities, as well as rising housing and energy prices, requiring the necessary housing development, new environmental protection and energy-saving measures, such as accelerated deep renovation to combat energy poverty and promote energy efficiency; whereas the EU cohesion policy should help to contribute to an affordable and accessible housing market for all people in the EU, especially for low- and middle-income households, urban residents, families with children, women and young people;

    N. whereas effective implementation of the Urban Agenda for the EU can enhance the capacity of cities to contribute to cohesion objectives, thereby improving the quality of life of citizens and guaranteeing a more efficient use of the EU’s financial resources;

    O. whereas particular attention needs to be paid to rural areas, as well as areas affected by industrial transition and EU regions that suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, brain drain, climate-related risks and water scarcity, such as the outermost regions, and in particular islands located at their peripheries or at the periphery of the EU, sparsely populated regions, islands, mountainous areas and cross-border regions, as well as coastal and maritime regions;

    P. whereas Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has created a new geopolitical reality that has had a strong impact on the employment, economic development and opportunities, and general well-being of the population living in regions bordering Ukraine, Belarus and Russia, as well as candidate countries such as Ukraine and Moldova, which therefore require special attention and support, including by accordingly adapting cohesion policy; whereas this war has led to an unprecedented number of people seeking shelter in the EU, placing an additional burden on local communities and services; whereas the collective security of the EU is strongly dependent on the vitality and well-being of regions situated at the EU’s external borders;

    Q. whereas the unique situation of Northern Ireland requires a bespoke approach building on the benefits of PEACE programmes examining how wider cohesion policy can benefit the process of reconciliation;

    R. whereas 79 % of citizens who are aware of EU-funded projects under cohesion policy believe that EU-funded projects have a positive impact on the regions[26], which contributes to a pro-EU attitude;

    S. whereas overall awareness of EU-funded projects under cohesion policy has decreased by 2 percentage points since 2021[27], meaning that greater decentralisation should be pursued to bring cohesion policy even closer to the citizen;

    1. Insists that the regional and local focus, place-based approach and strategic planning of cohesion policy, as well as its decentralised programming and implementation model based on the partnership principle with strengthened implementation of the European code of conduct, the involvement of economic and civil society actors, and multi-level governance, are key and positive elements of the policy, and determine its effectiveness; is firmly convinced that this model of cohesion policy should be continued in all regions and deepened where possible as the EU’s main long-term investment instrument for reducing disparities, ensuring economic, social and territorial cohesion, and stimulating regional and local sustainable growth in line with EU strategies, protecting the environment, and as a key contributor to EU competitiveness and just transition, as well as helping to cope with new challenges ahead;

    2. Calls for a clear demarcation between cohesion policy and other instruments, in order to avoid overlaps and competition between EU instruments, ensure complementarity of the various interventions and increase visibility and readability of EU support; in this context, notes that the RRF funds are committed to economic development and growth, without specifically focusing on economic, social and territorial cohesion between regions; is concerned about the Commission’s plans to apply a performance-based approach to the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF); acknowledges that performance-based mechanisms can be instrumental in making the policy more efficient and results-orientated, but cautions against a one-size-fits-all imposition of the model and expresses serious doubt about ideas to link the disbursement of ESIF to the fulfilment of centrally defined reform goals, even more so if the reform goals do not fall within the scope of competence of the regional level;

    3. Is opposed to any form of top-down centralisation reform of EU funding programmes, including those under shared management, such as the cohesion policy and the common agricultural policy, and advocates for greater decentralisation of decision-making to the local and regional levels; calls for enhanced involvement of local and regional authorities and economic and civil society actors at every stage of EU shared management programmes, from preparation and programming to implementation, delivery and evaluation, keeping in mind that the economic and social development of, and territorial cohesion between, regions can only be accomplished on the basis of good cooperation between all actors;

    4. Emphasises that the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) plays a key role, alongside cohesion policy funds, in supporting rural areas; stresses that the EAFRD’s design must align with the rules of cohesion policy funds to boost synergies and facilitate multi-funded rural development projects;

    5. Is convinced that cohesion policy can only continue to play its role if it has solid funding; underlines that this implies that future cohesion policy must be provided with robust funding for the post-2027 financial period; stresses that it is necessary to provide funding that is ambitious enough and easily accessible to allow cohesion policy to continue to fulfil its role as the EU’s main investment policy, while retaining the flexibility to meet potential new challenges, including the possibility of financing the development of dual-use products, and to enable local authorities, stakeholders and beneficiaries to effectively foster local development; is of the firm opinion that the capacity to offer flexible responses to unpredictable challenges should not come at the expense of the clear long-term strategic focus and objectives of cohesion policy;

    6. Underlines the importance of the next EU multiannual financial framework (MFF) and the mid-term review of cohesion policy programmes 2021-2027 in shaping the future of cohesion policy; reiterates the need for a more ambitious post-2027 cohesion policy in the next MFF 2028-2034; calls, therefore, for the upcoming MFF to ensure that cohesion policy continues to receive at least the same level of funding as in the current period in real terms; furthermore calls for cohesion policy to remain a separate heading in the new MFF; stresses that cohesion policy should be protected from statistical effects that may alter the eligibility of regions by changing the average EU GDP; reiterates the need for new EU own resources;

    7. Proposes, therefore, that next MFF be more responsive to unforeseen needs, including with sufficient margins and flexibilities from the outset; emphasises in this regard, however, that cohesion policy is not a crisis instrument and that it should not deviate from its main objectives, namely from its long-term investment nature; calls for the European Union Solidarity Fund to be strengthened, including in its pre-financing, making it less bureaucratic and more easily accessible, in order to develop an appropriate instrument capable of responding adequately to the economic, social and territorial consequences of future natural disasters or health emergencies; emphasises the need for Parliament to have adequate control over any emergency funds and instruments;

    8. Recognises the need to also use nomenclature of territorial units for statistics (NUTS) 3 classification for specific cases, in a manner that recognises that inequalities in development exist within all NUTS 2 regions; is of the opinion that regional GDP per capita must remain the main criterion for determining Member States’ allocations under cohesion policy; welcomes the fact that, following Parliament’s persistent calls, the Commission has begun considering additional criteria[28] such as greenhouse gas emissions, population density, education levels and unemployment rates, in order to provide a better socio-economic overview of the regions;

    9. Stresses that the rule of law conditionality is an overarching conditionality, recognising and enforcing respect for the rule of law, also as an enabling condition for cohesion policy funding, to ensure that Union resources are used in a transparent, fair and responsible manner with sound financial management; considers it necessary to reinforce respect for the rule of law and fundamental rights, and to ensure that all actions are consistent with supporting democratic principles, gender equality and human rights, including workers’ rights, the rights of disabled people and children’s rights, in the implementation of cohesion policy; highlights the important role of the European Anti-Fraud Office and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in protecting the financial interests of the Union;

    10. Calls for further efforts to simplify, make more flexible, strengthen synergies and streamline the rules and administrative procedures governing cohesion policy funds at EU, national and regional level, taking full advantage of the technologies available to increase accessibility and efficiency, building on the existing and well-established shared management framework, in order to strengthen confidence among users, thus encouraging the participation of a broader range of economic and civil society actors in projects supported and maximising the funds’ impact; calls for further initiatives enabling better absorption of cohesion funds, including increased co-financing levels, higher pre-financing and faster investment reimbursements; calls for local administration, in particular representing smaller communities, to be technically trained for better administrative management of the funds; stresses, therefore, the importance of strengthening the single audit principle, further expanding simplified cost options and reducing duplicating controls and audits that overlap with national and regional oversight for the same project and beneficiary, with a view to eliminating the possibility of repeating errors in subsequent years of implementation;

    11. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to give regions greater flexibility already at the programming stage, in order to cater for their particular needs and specificities, emphasising the need to involve the economic and civil society actors; underlines that thematic concentration was a key element in aligning cohesion policy with Europe 2020 objectives; asks the Commission, therefore, to present all findings related to the implementation of thematic concentration and to draw lessons for future legislative proposals;

    12. Acknowledges that the green, digital and demographic transitions present significant challenges but, at the same time, opportunities to achieve the objective of economic, social and territorial cohesion; recognises that, statistically, high-income areas can hide the economic problems within a region; is aware of the risk of a widening of regional disparities, a deepening of social inequalities and a rising ‘geography of discontent’ related to the transition process; underlines the need to reach the EU’s sustainability and climate objectives, and to maintain shared economic growth by strengthening the Union’s competitiveness; calls, therefore, for a European strategy that guarantees harmonious growth within the Union, meeting the respective regions’ specific needs; reaffirms its commitment to pursuing the green and digital transitions, as this will create opportunities to improve the EU’s competitiveness; underlines the need to invest in infrastructure projects that enhance connectivity, particularly in sustainable, intelligent transport, and in energy and digital networks, ensuring that all regions, including remote and less-developed ones, are fully integrated into the single market and benefit equitably from the opportunities it provides; emphasises, in this context, the need to support the development of green industries, fostering local specificities and traditions to increase the resilience of the economic environment and civil society to future challenges;

    13. Urges that the cohesion policy remain consistent with a push towards increasing innovation and completing the EU single market, in line with the conclusions of the Draghi report on European competitiveness; underlines, in the context of regional disparities, the problem of the persisting innovation divide and advocates for a tailored, place-based approach to fostering innovation and economic convergence across regions and reducing the innovation gap; calls for a stronger role for local and regional innovation in building competitive research and innovation ecosystems and promoting territorial cohesion; points to new EU initiatives, such as regional innovation valleys and partnerships for regional innovation, that aim to connect territories with different levels of innovation performance and tackle the innovation gap; considers that this approach will reinforce regional autonomy, allowing local and regional authorities to shape EU policies and objectives in line with their specific needs, characteristics and capacities, while safeguarding the partnership principle;

    14. Is convinced that cohesion policy needs to continue to foster the principle of just transition, addressing the specific needs of regions, while leaving no territory and no one behind; calls for continued financing of the just transition process, with the Just Transition Fund being fully integrated into the Common Provisions Regulation and endowed with reinforced financial means for the post-2027 programming period; emphasises, nonetheless, the need to assess the impact of the Just Transition Fund on the transformation of eligible regions and, while ensuring it remains part of cohesion policy, refine its approach in the new MFF on the basis of the findings and concrete measures to ensure the economic and social well-being of affected communities;

    15. Underlines the need to improve the relationship between cohesion policy and EU economic governance, while avoiding a punitive approach; stresses that the European Semester should comply with cohesion policy objectives under Articles 174 and 175 TFEU; calls for the participation of the regions in the fulfilment of these objectives and for a stronger territorial approach; calls for a process of reflection on the concept of macroeconomic conditionality and for the possibility to be explored of replacing this concept with new forms of conditionality to better reflect the new challenges ahead;

    16. Is concerned about the growing number of regions in a development trap, which are stagnating economically and are suffering from sharp demographic decline and limited access to essential services; calls, therefore, for an upward adjustment in co-financing for projects aimed at strengthening essential services; stresses the role of cohesion policy instruments in supporting different regions and local areas that are coping with demographic evolution affecting people’s effective right to stay, including, among others, challenges related to depopulation, ageing, gender imbalances, brain drain, skills shortages and workforce imbalances across regions; recognises the need for targeted economic incentives and structural interventions to counteract these phenomena; in this context, calls for the implementation of targeted programmes to attract, develop and retain talent, particularly in regions experiencing significant outflows of skilled workers, by fostering education, culture, entrepreneurship and innovation ecosystems that align with local and regional economic needs and opportunities;

    17. Recognises the importance of supporting and financing specific solutions for regions with long-standing and serious economic difficulties or severe permanent natural and demographic handicaps; reiterates the need for maintaining and improving the provision of quality essential services (such as education and healthcare), transport and digital connectivity of these regions, fostering their economic diversification and job creation, and helping them respond to challenges such as rural desertification, population ageing, poverty, depopulation, loneliness and isolation, as well as the lack of opportunities for vulnerable people such as persons with disabilities; underlines the need to prioritise the development and adequate funding of strategic sectors, such as renewable energy, sustainable tourism, digital innovation and infrastructure, in a manner that is tailored to the economic potential and resources of each region, in order to create broader conditions for endogenous growth and balanced development across all regions, especially rural, remote and less-developed areas, border regions, islands and outermost regions; recalls the importance of strong rural-urban linkages and particular support for women in rural areas;

    18. Emphasises the need for a tailored approach for the outermost regions, as defined under Article 349 TFEU, which face unique and cumulative structural challenges due to their remoteness, small market size, vulnerability to climate change and economic dependencies; underlines that these permanent constraints, including the small size of the domestic economy, great distance from the European continent, location near third countries, double insularity for most of them, and limited diversification of the productive sector, result in additional costs and reduced competitiveness, making their adaptation to the green and digital transition particularly complex and costly; underlines their great potential to further develop, inter alia through improved regional connectivity, key sectors such as blue economy, sustainable agriculture, renewable energies, space activities, research or eco-tourism; reiterates its long-standing call on the Commission to duly consider the impact of all newly proposed legislation on the outermost regions, with a view to avoiding disproportionate regulatory burdens and adverse effects on these regions’ economies;

    19. Underlines the fact that towns, cities and metropolitan areas have challenges of their own, such as considerable pockets of poverty, housing problems, traffic congestion and poor air quality, generating challenges for social and economic cohesion created by inharmonious territorial development; emphasises the need for a specific agenda for cities and calls for deepening their links with functional urban areas, encompassing smaller cities and towns, to ensure that economic and social benefits are spread more evenly across the entire territory; highlights the need to strengthen coordination between the initiatives of the Urban Agenda for the EU and the instruments of cohesion policy, favouring an integrated approach that takes into account territorial specificities and emerging challenges; calls, furthermore, for more direct access to EU funding for regional and local authorities, as well as cities and urban authorities, by inter alia widening the use of integrated territorial investments (ITI);

    20. Stresses the need to continue and strengthen investments in affordable housing within the cohesion policy framework, recognising its significance for both regions and cities; highlights the need to foster its changes relevant to investing in housing beyond the two current possibilities (energy efficiency and social housing); emphasises the important role that cohesion policy plays in the roll-out and coordination of these initiatives; believes, furthermore, that it is important to include housing affordability in the URBACT initiative;

    21. Stresses the strategic importance of strong external border regions for the security and resilience of the EU; calls on the Commission to support the Member States and regions affected by Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, in particular the regions on the EU’s eastern border, by revising the Guidelines on regional State aid[29], through tailor-made tools and investments under the cohesion policy, as well as supporting them to make the most of the possibilities offered by the cohesion policy funds, including Interreg, in a flexible way, to help cope with the detrimental socio-economic impact of the war on their populations and territories; calls, furthermore, for support to be given to regions bordering candidate countries such as Ukraine and Moldova to strengthen connections and promote their EU integration;

    22. Highlights the added value of territorial cooperation in general and cross-border cooperation in particular; underlines the importance of Interreg for cross-border regions, including outermost regions; emphasises its important role in contributing to their development and overcoming cross-border obstacles, including building trust across borders, developing transport links, identifying and reducing legal and administrative obstacles and increasing the provision and use of cross-border public services, among others; considers Interreg as the main EU instrument for tackling the persistent cross-border obstacles faced by emergency services, and proposes that there be a more prominent focus on these services; underlines the fact that cross-border areas, including areas at the EU’s external borders, bordering aggressor countries often face specific challenges; believes that EU border regions, facing multiple challenges, must be supported and is of the opinion that they must be provided with increased means; welcomes the new regulation on BRIDGEforEU; emphasises the importance of small-scale and cross-border projects and stresses the need for effective implementation on the ground; calls on the Commission to encourage Member States to actively support awareness-raising campaigns in bordering regions to maximise the impact of cross-border cooperation;

    23. Recalls the need to ‘support cohesion’, rather than just rely on the ‘do no harm to cohesion’ principle, which means that no action should hamper the convergence process or contribute to regional disparities; calls for a stronger integration of these principles as cross-cutting in all EU policies, to ensure that they support the objectives of social, economic and territorial cohesion, as set out in Articles 3 and 174 TFEU; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to issue specific guidelines on how to implement and enforce these principles across EU policies, paying particular attention to the impact of EU laws on the competitiveness of less developed regions; reiterates that new legislative proposals need to take due account of local and regional realities; suggests that the Commission draw on innovative tools such as RegHUB (the network of regional hubs) to collect data on the impact of EU policies on the regions; to this end, underlines the need to strengthen the territorial impact assessment of EU legislation, with a simultaneous strengthening of the territorial aspects of other relevant policies; insists that promoting cohesion should also be seen as a way of fostering solidarity and mutual support among Member States and their regions; calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue their efforts regarding communication and visibility of the benefits of cohesion policy, demonstrating to citizens the EU’s tangible impact and serving as a key tool in addressing Euroscepticism; welcomes the launch of the multilingual version of the Kohesio platform;

    24. Notes with concern the severe decline in recent years of adequate levels of national funding by Member States towards their poorer regions; recalls the importance of respecting the EU rule on additionality; calls on the Commission to ensure that national authorities take due account of internal cohesion in drafting and implementing structural and investment fund projects;

    25. Insists that, in addition to adjusting to regional needs, cohesion policy must be adapted to the smallest scale, i.e. funds must be accessible to the smallest projects and project bearers; points out that their initiatives are often the most innovative and have a significant impact on rural development; reiterates that these funds should be accessible to all, regardless of their size or scope; approves of the Cohesion Alliance’s call for ‘a post-2027 Cohesion Policy that leaves no one behind’;

    26. Stresses that delays in the MFF negotiations, together with the fact that Member States have placed a greater focus on the programming of the RRF funds, led to considerable delays in the programming period 2021-2027; stresses the importance of a timely agreement in the next framework, and therefore calls for the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) and the budget negotiations to be finalised at least one year before the start of the new funding period so that Member States can develop their national and regional funding strategies in good time to ensure a successful transition to the next funding period and the continuation of existing ESIF projects;

    27. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the European Economic and Social Committee, the European Committee of the Regions and the national and regional parliaments of the Member States.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Forgotten futures? Canada urgently needs a national discussion about young people’s futures

    Source: The Conversation – Canada – By J-C Couture, Adjunct faculty and Associate Lecturer, Department of Secondary Education, University of Alberta

    This federal election cycle has seen laudable efforts to raise awareness around neglected issues.

    We’ve heard more about the need for greater co-operation between provincial and territorial governments to respond to chaos triggered by United States President Donald Trump’s policies. In the same time frame, municipal politicans have been calling for climate change action through co-ordinated sustainable infrastructure development.

    For policy experts and pundits alike, a growing consensus is emerging that Canada has for too long ignored deeper economic and political structural problems.

    Some political analysts, (like pundit Andrew Coyne), have framed these issues as being part of Canada’s growth crisis, underscoring problems like a lack of a coherent industrial policy, flat or declining productivity and weak competitiveness.

    Others, including provincial, municipal and First Nations leaders, note Canada also lacks a coherent approach to infrastructure that addresses decades of neglect in cities, towns and Indigenouscommunities alike.

    As researchers committed to advancing more intentional conversations concerning the future of public education, we also see a huge gap in terms of co-ordinated, pan-Canadian federal efforts to support young people’s futures through education.

    Need to knit vision together

    For example, we have a national early learning and child-care strategy, (which could be imperilled, depending on who wins the election). It’s often shorthanded as being about “child care,” which diminishes the long-term significance of paying attention to how we invest in young people and families, and the quality of early education.

    A recent open letter by the chair of the Toronto District School Board called on the leaders of Canada’s federal party leaders to address the growing diversity and complexity of the city’s student population.




    Read more:
    ‘Child care’ or education? Words matter in how we envision living well with children


    We don’t have a federal department for education. While the Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC) serves as a forum to discuss policy issues, as education scholar Jennifer Wallner notes, “effective creativity and co-ordination” is needed.

    In the early 2000s, the Canadian Council on Learning was making ground-breaking contributions towards helping Canada develop comprehensive and coherent approaches to lifelong learning. But the council’s work was hobbled in 2011 when it was defunded by Stephen Harper’s Conservative government.

    Sen. Rosemary Moodie’s introducton of Bill S-282, a “National Strategy for Children and Youth Act,” in November 2023 is one example of a positive effort to develop a pan-Canadian youth development framework.

    There are solid pieces of a puzzle that can contribute to nurturing hopeful young people and a socially healthy and empowered society. But these sorely need to be knit together, as they have in places like like Iceland and Finland
    to name a few.

    Refraining from taking democracy for granted

    The question of what public education actually means is much more than a semantic exercise; it’s a practical and foundational exercise in building a civil society and nation.

    Three decades ago, American cultural and media critic Neil Postman invoked the truism that “public education creates a public” — a reminder that the vibrancy of our communities and democracy can’t be taken for granted. As we look at the U.S. and the rise of neo-liberalism and authoritarian populism, Canadians need to remember Postman.

    Our colleague, David King, former minister of education in Alberta from 1979 to 1986, observes that of all institutions citizens have created, “public school education is the only such institution that remains where we can share common stories, and conventions and imagination.”

    What we should value about public education

    Yet the role of public education in contributing to Canada’s democratic traditions is often taken for granted. A shared sense of what we should value about public education remains elusive — and is played out amid debate about structural and political reforms, around matters like who controls schools.

    Meanwhile, researchers highlight how families continue moving to private schooling. Consider Australians, who see public education as a universal right, yet 35 per cent of students attend private schools..

    In Canada, a network of university researchers and advocacy groups — the Public Education Exchange (PEX) research network —has documented growing privatization and commercialization of public education. Sue Winton, PEX project director and education professor, describes how the privatization of public education in Canada continues to undermine equality and democracy.

    Sue Winton discusses her book ‘Unequal Benefits: Privatization and Public Education in Canada.’

    Across Canada, processes towards privatization involve policies and practices that shift responsibilities from governments to private bodies, with corresponding shifts in lower investment in per-student public school learning.

    Shifts towards privatization go beyond funding private and charter schools. They include underfunding school facilities and movements that promote sloganeering around “parent rights” and “parental choice.”




    Read more:
    ‘School choice’ policies are associated with increased separation of students by social class


    Post-secondary investment declines

    In higher education, privatization has also accelerated. Students, particularly international students, have provided an increasing portion of funding. In Ontario, according to Higher Education Strategy Associates, international students contributed approximately 76 per cent of all tuition fee revenue in the college sector in 2023-24. In the university sector, it’s more than 50 per cent. Other provinces saw similar shifts.

    A decline in per capita public investment has encouraged the growth of the private college and university sector and investments in AI-enabled learning through corporate learning systems. Technology-related fields have developed corporate partnerships that shape what is taught and how.

    The precarity of public higher education in Canada threatens our social and economic future.

    Making futures possible for young people

    Whether it’s through local community schools, a university or college campus or larger community initiatives, we can’t drop the promise of universal access to an inclusive and broad education.

    Keeping this promise is even more pressing given generational inequity. As discusssed by Paul Kershaw, policy professor and founder of “Gen Squeeze” think tank, and Kareem Kudus, research analyst, “generationally unfair policies … have contributed to today’s housing, affordability, medical care and climate crises.”




    Read more:
    Wildfires in Alberta spark urgent school discussions about terrors of global climate futures


    Initiatives established in the 1970s focused on building connections between different regions: Open House Canada was a high-school student exchange program, and Katimavik, a youth service program founded by the visionary author Jacques Hébert, who would later become a senator and champion for intercutural and global travel experiences for our young people.

    Programs like these have presented significant and rich opportunities for building relationships across difference, and an equitable and inclusive sense of social cohesion. But governments at all levels have failed to sustain and expand such programs, or connect them with school learning.

    Broader discussions on what we care about

    The current existential threat to Canada fuelled by Trump’s presidency should mobilize not just an “elbows up” approach, but also “heads up” when it comes to the need for a pan-Canadian a youth policy framework that bolsters public education. As many Americans are also realizing, we need public education to help address current challenges, but it’s under attack.

    As American organizational behaviour expert and writer Margaret J. Wheatley reminds us: “There is nothing more powerful than a community discovering what it cares about.”

    In the aftermath of the federal election, we’d love to see much more dialogue surrounding the “publicness” of public education — to go further in at least deciding on what we really care about as a country.

    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. Forgotten futures? Canada urgently needs a national discussion about young people’s futures – https://theconversation.com/forgotten-futures-canada-urgently-needs-a-national-discussion-about-young-peoples-futures-254883

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: Is China the new cool? How Beijing is using pop culture to win the soft power war

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Shaoyu Yuan, Research Scientist at the Division of Global Affairs, Rutgers University – Newark

    IShowSpeed, a 20-year-old American YouTuber and internet star, recently livestreamed hourslong tours of Chinese cities including Beijing and Shanghai, showcasing the locations to some of his nearly 40 million viewers.

    During the March events, IShowSpeed, whose real name is Darren Jason Watkins Jr., marveled at friendly locals, spotless streets and the high-speed Wi-Fi available on the subway; Chinese fans mobbed him for selfies on the Great Wall.

    Beijing’s state media lapped up the attention, with one Chinese blogger proclaiming that the American influencer had “eliminated all Western propaganda about China” in the eyes of a new generation.

    IShowSpeed’s YouTube page attests to this assessment.

    “China is so underrated wtf,” reads one top comment. “After watching this video, I realized how foolish my previous views on China were,” reads another.

    The providence of such comments isn’t clear. Nonetheless, to someone who researches the use of Chinese soft power, I find the spectacle of a young American burnishing China’s image to Western audiences hugely significant. It provides an example of how soft power norms have been upended in recent years – and how China appears to be having some success in winning over the global youth.

    Mixing pop and politics

    Soft power refers to a country’s ability to influence others, not through coercion but through attraction – by shaping preferences through culture, values and public diplomacy. Coined by political scientist Joseph Nye, the term captures how nations project power by making others want what they have, rather than forcing outcomes through military or economic pressure.

    Throughout the Cold War and into the 21st century, U.S. soft power didn’t have to try that hard. It came wrapped in denim, was broadcast on MTV and blasted from boom boxes. Rock music crossed the Iron Curtain when diplomacy couldn’t, with artists like Bruce Springsteen and Madonna reaching Soviet youth more effectively than any ambassador.

    And in China, Michael Jackson became a pop icon well before McDonald’s or Hollywood blockbusters arrived, symbolizing a glamorous, open America that millions dreamed of. To many growing up in China in the 1990s, American culture wasn’t just entertainment – it was persuasion, aspiration, even subversion.

    Beijing’s blockbusters

    The U.S. is, of course, still a cultural powerhouse; American stars of film and music continue to be recognizable around the world.

    But there are signs that China is chipping away at that dominance.

    Take cinema. Not so long ago, Chinese films were considered niche abroad. Yet in January 2025, an animated Chinese feature film, “Ne Zha 2,” smashed box-office records. The movie, a dazzling retelling of a mythic boy-god, has grossed an astonishing US$2 billion worldwide, outperforming many Hollywood releases.

    It’s now the highest-grossing animated movie of all time, and it wasn’t made by Disney or Pixar but by a Chinese studio employing hundreds of local animators.

    An artist paints an image of Ne Zha, a character from the animated blockbuster, on an electricity distribution box in a farm field in southwest China.
    Zhong Min/Feature China/Future Publishing via Getty Images

    Beijing lost no time in co-opting “Ne Zha 2” as a symbol of China’s creative rise and cultural “soft power moment.” State media touted the film’s success as proof that Chinese folklore and artistry can captivate the globe just as powerfully as Marvel superheroes.

    “Ne Zha 2” isn’t a one-off. “Detective Chinatown 1900,” released in January by the Beijing-based Wanda Films, is 2025’s third-biggest grossing movie to date.

    Hollywood, once confident in its cultural monopoly, suddenly faces a colossal new competitor on the global stage – one backed by 1.4 billion people and a government eager to topple Western pop-cultural dominance. And the audience isn’t all domestic. “Ne Zha 2” also proved successful when it opened in the U.S.

    Gamers journey to the East

    And it’s not just movies.

    For decades, video games were an American and Japanese stronghold. Yet it is a Chinese-developed game, Black Myth: Wukong – developed by a studio in Hangzhou – that has become the talk of gamers worldwide.

    When its gameplay trailers first appeared in 2020, they went viral, with Black Myth: Wukong promising AAA-level graphics and action rooted in China’s classic “Journey to the West” tale.

    Skeptics wondered whether the final product could really compete with the likes of established franchise God of War or the George R. R. Martin-inspired Elden Ring. But those doubts evaporated when the game finally launched in 2024. Black Myth: Wukong debuted to massive global fanfare in summer 2024, instantly claiming a spot alongside the biggest Western franchises.

    Reviewers around the globe have hailed it as China’s first true blockbuster video game and evidence that the country can produce world-class entertainment.

    Black Myth: Wukong won Best Action Game and Players’ Voice awards at The Game Awards 2024 on Dec. 13, 2024.
    VCG/VCG via Getty Images

    I’d argue that this isn’t just about bragging rights in China’s gaming community; it’s about narrative power for the Chinese state. When millions of young people around the world spend 30 or 40 hours a week immersed in the adventures of Sun Wukong, the Monkey King hero, rather than, say, a Marvel superhero or a Tolkien epic, that subtly shifts the cultural center of gravity eastward.

    It suggests that Chinese myths are becoming as cool as Western ones to a global audience. And that is soft power.

    Small screen, big impact

    Meanwhile, on the smaller screens we carry in our pockets, another Chinese export has embedded itself deeply into global culture: TikTok.

    As of 2025, TikTok boasts over 1.6 billion monthly users worldwide.

    More striking is TikTok’s cultural reach. The app’s algorithm has propelled songs from musicians in South Korea or Nigeria to the top of global charts; it has teenagers in Kansas learning Indonesian dance moves, and grandmothers in Italy trying Mexican recipes they saw on a viral Chinese app.

    In effect, TikTok has built a new transnational pop culture commons – one owned by a Beijing-based company. Yes, the content on TikTok is created by users everywhere, not dictated by the Chinese state, but the platform’s very existence is a triumph of Chinese tech entrepreneurship and global ambition.

    Every minute that Western youths spend scrolling TikTok is a minute they’re within a Chinese-designed cultural sphere. Little wonder the U.S. government has fretted about TikTok’s influence – it’s not just about data security, it’s about cultural security.

    Banning it outright has proven politically difficult, and so TikTok remains, steadily entrenching its position as a staple of global youth culture.

    All these strands – blockbuster films, hit video games, viral apps – tie into a larger truth: China is rapidly building its soft power as America risks letting its own erode. At a time when the U.S. slashes foreign aid, China expands its influence through the Belt and Road Initiative and development loans. And while the U.S. curtails visas for students and scientists, China’s universities – some of which now rank in the global top 20 – become more attractive destinations.

    Can the US maintain a cultural edge?

    Assessing the impact of soft power is notoriously hard – nations that employ it are typically playing a very long game. And Beijing’s soft power push is not guaranteed success everywhere. Many societies remain skeptical of Beijing’s intentions, and China’s authoritarian system limits the appeal of its political model in democratic nations.

    Yet there are clear signs that China’s cultural exports are gaining traction among the younger generation.

    The U.S. once set the global cultural tempo almost by default. But today, as China invests heavily in its creative industries and digital platforms, it is increasingly shaping the soundtrack and storylines for a rising global generation.

    The question is no longer whether China can compete for soft power influence but whether America has a plan to hold its ground.

    Shaoyu Yuan 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. Is China the new cool? How Beijing is using pop culture to win the soft power war – https://theconversation.com/is-china-the-new-cool-how-beijing-is-using-pop-culture-to-win-the-soft-power-war-254923

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI USA: Smart Electrical Panel Startup SPANs NREL’s Accelerator Programs

    Source: US National Renewable Energy Laboratory


    SPAN created a smart electrical panel that goes beyond traditional capabilities. Photo from SPAN

    Imagine a severe storm knocks out a neighborhood powerline; while most homes go dark, one homeowner seamlessly manages their backup energy, prioritizing critical appliances. This is not the future—it is happening now with SPAN’s smart electrical panel.

    SPAN is the only startup company to go through two of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL’s) startup assistance programs: the Shell GameChanger Accelerator Powered by NREL (GCxN) and the Wells Fargo Innovation Incubator (IN2). SPAN created a smart electrical panel that goes beyond traditional capabilities, allowing users to control individual circuits for individual devices. SPAN also has an app that provides users with a dashboard to keep track of the connected appliances and electric loads. The panel provides real-time visibility into a homeowner’s energy consumption, broken out by individual breakers, so homeowners can prioritize different loads during a power outage, while utilities can gain insight into grid flexibility strategies.

    When NREL Senior Engineer Bethany Sparn had SPAN’s smart panel installed in a lab, all the laboratory electricians were excited about it.

    “The electrician that installed the panel asked me how it worked, and I explained that every circuit had a dedicated power meter and relay, all hidden in the backplate of the panel,” Sparn said. “They thought it was really cool. The SPAN panel shook up the world of breaker panels in a way that feels like the early days of smart thermostats. They created a product that would be beneficial to utilities and consumers.”

    SPAN Vice President of Business Development Alex Pratt said the company reimagined a power panel from the ground up.

    “Each of the circuits in our panels are granularly metered and controllable through a relay,” Pratt said. “This combined with significant onboard processing and multichannel communications creates a powerful platform to provide novel home energy management capabilities.”

    The first project that brought SPAN’s technology to NREL was through the GCxN program in 2019. NREL scientists, including Senior Research Engineer Shibani Ghosh, focused on simulations to test the possible impacts of high adoption of SPAN panels at the neighborhood scale under a utility’s distribution feeder. The simulations demonstrated how grid operations could improve and help utility consumers when individual consumptions are managed by SPAN smart panels.

    “If a smart panel like SPAN’s can communicate and track when the electricity price goes down,” Ghosh said, “you can schedule the operation of your devices and save money within your time preferences.”

    SPAN is the only startup to participate in both the IN2 and GCxN programs. Photo from SPAN

    The results of the simulations supported that SPAN’s panel could deliver grid benefits as expected, so as the GCxN project wrapped up, SPAN joined IN2 in 2020, initiating Sparn’s work with the smart panel in the lab.

    “SPAN was unique in that they had already gone through GCxN, but that had been an entirely simulation-based project,” Sparn said. “For IN2, we wanted to get their hardware in the lab. We wanted to look at a number of features that could help people add electrical equipment or provide resilience. For instance, if you install their panel with a backup battery, you can change what circuits are powered during a grid outage and even prioritize them.”

    Pratt points to a concrete example of how the panel operates and provides value when a homeowner goes to install a new electrical load in the home, such as an electric vehicle (EV) charger or heat pump. These additions could exceed the amount of electricity the home was originally designed to draw.

    “The panel eliminates the need for the consumer to upgrade their service level with a utility and instead will intelligently balance the loads in their home automatically,” Pratt said.

    The laboratory testing of the panel confirmed that its advanced features, such as turning off circuits to avoid overloading the electrical service and configurable backup power, were working as expected. The IN2 laboratory experiments laid the groundwork for further collaboration between SPAN and NREL.

    In addition to the GCxN and IN2 programs, another collaboration opportunity was led by Xin Jin, NREL group manager for Grid Edge and Advanced Controls at the Building Technologies and Science Center. Jin and his team developed an artificial intelligence (AI)-driven home energy management system, called foresee™, which won an R&D 100 award in 2018. Through a cooperative research agreement after the IN2 project, Jin explored how integrating SPAN’s panel with foresee could generate additional benefits.

    “This maximized the work NREL did with SPAN through the GCxN and IN2 projects,” Jin said. “With their panel and our software, we can modulate the thermostat, manage EV charging, and control the water heater. We can talk to every major load in the home. By combining their panel and circuit-level power metering with foresee, there is more control, and that translates to utility bill savings.”

    NREL’s foresee software uses advanced algorithms that learn the dynamics of each home along with its occupants’ patterns to predict future energy consumption. Automated control of connected appliances and systems will save energy, reduce strain on the grid, and could save homeowners up to $9 billion on energy bills—without asking people to become energy experts. Introduced in 2018, it was a significant breakthrough in the home energy management market, attracting interest from startups and large HVAC manufacturers.

    SPAN continues to scale up in the way it works with NREL. The company started in California and Hawaii, and its panels are now widely deployed in all 50 states, supported by a network of hundreds of electrical installers. While homeowners and contractors have traditionally been SPAN’s target audience, it is also exploring applications for utility grid services.

    “As we’re trying to introduce a new category and new approach to home energy management technology, having the credibility from a partnership with an entity like NREL is invaluable,” Pratt said. “We’ve proven the viability and value of our product. We are now focused on accelerating adoption, and electric utilities represent a step-function change in the scale we can achieve and impact we can have.”

    The SPAN panel made a lasting impact on the NREL researchers, and they remain excited about its potential.

    “Their panel is really sleek,” Jin said. “It’s like an art piece—it’s very beautiful and well built. In terms of function, it’s very advanced.”

    Learn more about the GCxN program and IN2.

    MIL OSI USA News

  • MIL-OSI Russia: History in numbers: how statistics help us understand the stability of Soviet society

    Translartion. Region: Russians Fedetion –

    Source: State University Higher School of Economics – State University Higher School of Economics –

    On April 16, as part of XXV April International Scientific Conference of the National Research University Higher School of Economics a round table discussion entitled “Historical Statistics for Studying Mechanisms of Social Stability in the USSR” was held. The event was supported by Interdisciplinary group on historical statistics of the National Center for Humanities and Social Sciences “Center for Interdisciplinary Research of Human Potential”.

    The opening speech was given by the Vice-Rector of the National Research University Higher School of Economics Liliya Ovcharova. She emphasized the importance of studying the socio-economic legacy of the USSR not only for understanding the past, but also for analyzing modern trends: “The Soviet past contains the reasons for those long-term trends that are still in effect today. We see them in science and scientific schools, in education, in demography, as well as in the development features of Russian regions. Without attention from the Russian research community, important components may be missed in this history, which I include the connecting, civilizational role of the Soviet Union and Russia, as an institution for the development of union republics – future independent states in the post-Soviet space, as well as adjacent territories.”

    Round table chaired by the director Expert Institute And Center for Productivity Research The HSE Ilya Voskoboinikov conference brought together not only HSE experts, but also representatives of the Presidential Academy (RANEPA), Rosstat, Moscow State University, and the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The discussion focused on rethinking Soviet official statistics and the availability of archival data, as well as the need for an interdisciplinary approach to studying the socio-economic development of the USSR and Russia using modern quantitative methods. Participants discussed the complexity of interpreting Soviet data, the comparability of sources, and the institutional barriers facing researchers.

    Vladimir Sokolin, Chairman of the Federal State Statistics Service (1999-2008) and the Interstate Statistical Committee of the Commonwealth of Independent States (2009-2022), devoted his speech to the importance of revising and refining official Soviet statistics based on modern scientific principles. He emphasized the uneven quality of Soviet data — high in terms of physical indicators of industrial production and transport, but questionable in agriculture. He also pointed out the almost complete lack of data in terms of price statistics and mentioned the influence of ideology on decisions to publish data and even statistical developments in certain areas — for example, in cross-country comparisons of living standards. The expert paid special attention to the importance of restoring long dynamic series of statistical indicators and preserving expert knowledge in the field of Soviet statistics as long as its bearers are alive.

    A presentation of the results of a project to analyze wage inequality in the USSR was given by Professor Leonid Borodkin of Lomonosov Moscow State University and Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences. His research showed how the degree of differentiation of wages between workers and engineering and technical workers changed in different periods, from the NEP to the late Soviet era. The professor emphasized that data on actual accruals in the archives of enterprises often contradict official statistics. For example, under the conditions of equalization in the post-war period, responsible engineering and technical workers (ITW) were supposed to receive salaries comparable to or even lower than those of workers. This did not correspond to the role of IWW in production and could lead to a shortage of specialists. The solution was incentive funds, which made it possible to create material incentives for responsible and qualified engineers.

    Roman Konchakov, Dean of the Faculty of History and Philology at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, spoke about institutional and methodological obstacles to the use of Soviet statistics. He presented statistics not only as a source of data, but also as an element of state building. Konchakov emphasized the importance of the 1920s as a key period for the formation of the Soviet statistical school and pointed out the need to create an infrastructure for combining various historical datasets.

    Speech by Ekaterina Boltunova, Director Institute of Regional Historical Research HSE, was devoted to the study of financial and time budgets of households in the context of late Soviet domestic tourism (late 1950s – 1960s). She paid special attention to how the prism of tourism can be used to study the availability of infrastructure, the perception of territories and the everyday economy of Soviet citizens.

    Mikhail Denisenko, director Institute of Demography HSE named after A.G. Vishnevsky, in his report examined the dynamics of the age structure of the population of Russia in the 20th century. In his speech, the expert emphasized the importance of demographic data for the analysis of social sustainability, and also spoke about the challenges that researchers face when reconstructing this data, especially in the absence of continuous data for a number of years.

    The discussion was summed up by the moderator of the round table, Ilya Voskoboinikov: “When a modern statistician submits a report, the document goes into the archive – but this is not the end of the work. In ten, twenty, fifty years, a historian will come to this archive. Statistics are not only numbers, but also a long-term contribution to our understanding of the past and the present. Soviet historical statistics are very important for modern research, since the Soviet experience touches on a big issue of the modern economy – finding a balance between economic efficiency and social sustainability.”

    The second part of the round table included a discussion with representatives of the scientific community, including Maria Drobysheva, Deputy Head of the Department of Living Standards Statistics and Household Surveys of Rosstat, Vyacheslav Stepanov, Leading Researcher at the Center for Ethnopolitical Studies at the Institute of Economics and Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and Researcher Laboratories for institutional analysis of economic reforms HSE University Alexey Popov. The latter noted that many statistical funds still remain classified and this greatly complicates working with data.

    The discussion confirmed the high interest in the topic and emphasized the need for further development of the historical data infrastructure. Deputy Vice-Rector of the National Research University Higher School of Economics Maria Nagernyak noted the often fragmented and unsystematic nature of a large part of the statistical data collected over a long period of time: “These data on various areas of the socio-economic development of our country are of interest not only to the scientific community, but also to the general public. The activities of the Interdisciplinary Group on Historical Statistics are aimed at uniting the efforts of scientists from various fields of science for the joint study of historical statistical data on the development of human potential both in our country and in the post-Soviet space, as well as in friendly foreign countries.”

    The group plans to create working groups to discuss statistics in various areas and to formulate an official position of Rosstat on unofficial data, as well as to organize regular conferences to discuss issues of access to archival data and cooperation between historians, economists and statisticians with the involvement of specialists from the faculties of social and economic sciences, as well as schools of historical research National Research University Higher School of Economics.

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

    MIL OSI Russia News

  • MIL-OSI Global: Trump’s obsession with trade deficits has no basis in economics. And it’s a bad reason for tariffs

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Nigel Driffield, Professor of International Business, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick

    Those of us who study trade and investment for a living are, I suspect, becoming exasperated with both the White House stance on tariffs and the way that this is reported in much of the media. US president Donald Trump believes that if a country has a trade surplus with the US it is somehow playing unfairly and needs to be dealt with. But anyone who understands the basics of international economics will recognise the fallacy in both of these beliefs.

    Trade takes place based on what economists call “comparative advantage” – countries import those goods that are otherwise relatively expensive for them to produce. And they export what they produce cheaply relative to other countries.

    So the UK, for example, has a trade surplus in services but a deficit in goods that are made in low-cost locations. This is similar to the position of the US.

    To understand what the US is seeking to achieve, the first questions must be: what are tariffs designed to do? And when are they typically applied? These issues lead to another point. If Trump is so convinced that his tariffs will produce a win-win, why haven’t they succeeded before?

    Trade policy in the form of tariffs is designed to make imports more expensive and encourage buyers to switch to domestic producers. This may be an attempt to protect or support local industry, or as part of a bargaining strategy to access others’ markets.

    But this assumes two things. First, that the demand for such imports is relatively price sensitive (that is, buyers will be put off by price rises). And second, that there are domestic producers able to fill this gap at an appropriate price.

    But tariffs can also cause what is known as “trade substitution” – where the country imports the goods from alternative sources instead.

    To illustrate how this can work in practice, the US has long applied tariffs on European whisky, ranging from 10% to 25% in recent years.

    The US already produces various drinks that are considered to be similar to whisky. So the reason for importing is likely for variety, or possibly the allure of consuming a premium product like a Scottish single malt. As such, price increases may not encourage substitution away from imports – or it may trigger substitution to other imports with lower tariffs.

    An alternative example of the case for tariffs is the steel industry. Many countries believe that they should have a steel industry for strategic reasons, but also because steel is an input into so many aspects of the economy.

    There have also been concerns globally in the industry about the pricing of Chinese steel, and whether it should attract tariffs to balance what is seen as unfair competition. Chinese steel receives subsidies from the Chinese government, after all.

    While this may be a valid concern, it also forces governments to make choices about what they see as “strategic industries”. A good example of this is the desire to protect steel jobs in richer countries, in contrast to the willingness to import cheap clothes from Asia in order to keep inflation down.

    This is typically why, if tariffs are used at all, they tend to be targeted to certain industries.

    The wrinkle in Trump’s plan

    So will the US tariffs plan work? Unfortunately for Trump, the answer is probably not. This type of trade policy has been tried, but has seldom been shown to be effective.

    The second point is whether the president of a large global power should be concerned about its trade balance with another country. Unless he believes that the country is engaging in large-scale subsidy in order to dump goods on foreign markets, the answer is almost certainly no.

    Casual inspection of trade statistics for the US and Canada suggests that the most common exports from Canada to the US include crude petroleum, petroleum gas, refined petroleum and motor vehicle parts and accessories.

    Tariffs on the first three will simply push prices up for US consumers. The last one demonstrates, often to the frustration of policymakers who seek to intervene on trade, that there is little that governments can do to influence modern supply chains, unless they seek to break them all together.

    ‘We don’t need anything Canada has.’

    Firms will locate activities based on combinations of efficiency and where their customers are. So seeking to change these patterns through tariffs will simply increase the cost of imported inputs and make production in the US less competitive.

    In simple terms, complaining that you have a trade deficit with one country is like complaining that you have a trade deficit with your corner shop. They sell you things, you give them money, but they never buy from you. They provide goods that you want for money that you earn elsewhere.

    You could shop elsewhere (and have a deficit with the new shop), you can give up your job and even grow your own food. But were you to impose a “tariff” on your corner shop, it would simply put up the prices that you have to pay.

    That the US has a trade deficit is not a sign that the rest of the world is “ripping it off”. It is a reflection of an affluent society with relatively high wages buying products from countries that can produce them more cheaply. Trump’s tariffs will hurt Americans first – basic international economics is clear on that too.

    Nigel Driffield receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council. He is an inactive member of the Labour Party and an advisor to the mayor of the West Midlands

    ref. Trump’s obsession with trade deficits has no basis in economics. And it’s a bad reason for tariffs – https://theconversation.com/trumps-obsession-with-trade-deficits-has-no-basis-in-economics-and-its-a-bad-reason-for-tariffs-254512

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: US universities lose millions of dollars chasing patents, research shows

    Source: The Conversation – USA – By Joshua M. Pearce, John M. Thompson Chair in Information Technology and Innovation and Professor, Western University

    Every year, American universities spend millions of dollars patenting inventions developed on their campuses. Big names such as Stanford and the University of California system lead the pack in patent activity, but hundreds of other universities are also trying to strike gold by monetizing intellectual property. The idea is simple: By investing in patents and selling or licensing them to industry, the university will profit.

    But in practice, this strategy rarely pays off.

    Indeed, the results of a recent study I conducted using full-cost accounting shows the average American research university is losing millions of dollars on patents annually. One school I examined as a case study lost a staggering $9 million on intellectual property investments in one year.

    These findings come at a critical moment. Universities across the U.S. are under serious financial strain and at risk of losing federal funding under the current administration. Speaking as an engineer and innovation expert, I believe universities can no longer afford to be losing money on schemes meant to generate revenue.

    How universities got into the patent business

    The current system was born out of the 1980 Bayh-Dole Act, which standardized federal policy to encourage university grant recipients to patent their inventions. The goal was to commercialize taxpayer-funded research and to make universities money in the process.

    One result was the rapid expansion of technology transfer offices at universities across the country. These offices are designed to support the commercialization of academic research and development.

    On the surface, this strategy might seem promising. Years of data from the Association of University Technology Managers, which surveys tech transfer offices, suggested large, growing revenues from licensing intellectual property.

    But there’s a major caveat: It costs money for a university to do all this, and the association’s figures don’t take all of those costs into account. They exclude big expenses such as the costs of running technology transfer offices and litigation. When these are included, previous research has shown, just under half of the tech transfer offices pay for themselves.

    And even these analyses are incomplete, as they ignore the opportunity costs to faculty participating in the time-consuming patenting process. After all, every hour a professor spends on patenting is an hour not spent writing grant proposals.

    This raises a crucial question: Do university investments in patenting, taking into account all the costs, actually deliver a positive return on investment?

    To answer this, I developed a formula to determine exactly how much universities spend in patenting, including the costs of faculty time. I then applied that formula to an average R1 research university − about halfway down the list of annual National Science Foundation funding − using real numbers.

    The hidden cost of faculty time

    For the case study university, I found that every single cost category exceeded the intellectual property-related income. The opportunity cost for writing patents instead of grants was more than 33 times the income realized.

    This means that the average U.S. university is literally losing millions of dollars pursuing patents. Research universities could increase research income by simply ignoring intellectual property entirely.

    Using this full-cost accounting method is something university administrators would be wise to consider in their decision-making, given the real opportunity costs of faculty time.

    Administrators may argue that because faculty are salaried, there’s no additional cost to making them spend time writing patents. But this ignores reality: Faculty are among the university’s most productive assets. They generate income through tuition and research grants. Their time isn’t free − and using it inefficiently can come at a steep cost.

    My study looked only at one university that happens to have a very high invention disclosure rate and would, if viewed from afar, seem to be doing really well on intellectual property investment. When all costs are accounted for the university, it becomes apparent that its intellectual property policy is causing the school to hemorrhage money.

    The easy-to-follow methodology I set up can be used by any university to determine its intellectual property’s real return on income. Each university will be slightly different, but for the vast majority, the return on investment will be strongly negative.

    As the costs of university education become increasingly challenging for many Americans, I think it’s time to take a hard look at university “investments” in technology transfer with a negative return.

    Joshua M. Pearce has received funding for research from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Mitacs, the U.S. Department of Energy and the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, U.S. Department of Defense, The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the National Science Foundation. His past and present consulting work and research is funded by the United Nations, the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, and many companies in the energy and solar photovoltaic fields. He does not have any direct conflicts of interest.

    ref. US universities lose millions of dollars chasing patents, research shows – https://theconversation.com/us-universities-lose-millions-of-dollars-chasing-patents-research-shows-244270

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Global: What does the UK Supreme Court’s gender ruling mean for trans men?

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Daniel Alge, Senior Lecturer in Criminology & Criminal Justice, Brunel University of London

    Alex Segre/Shutterstock

    The UK Supreme Court ruling backing the “biological” definition of a woman has been hailed by many as providing clarity on the law. But far from the matter being settled, it has raised complex questions, particularly when we consider that half of all transgender people are trans men. It even raises the possibility of trans men being excluded from both men and women’s spaces.

    The court unanimously agreed that, regardless of any gender reassignment or possession of a gender recognition certificate (GRC) recognising them as female, transgender women should not be recognised as women for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010. This means that access to single-sex spaces should be determined by biological gender assigned at birth.

    Meanwhile, the Equality and Human Rights Commission has said it will “pursue” the NHS unless it changes its gender policies. The NHS policies currently state that transgender patients should be accommodated in accordance with their self-identified gender, based on appearance, name and pronouns.


    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.


    For many complex reasons, trans men generally feature far less in the public discourse around trans issues. Trans men are currently under-researched and rarely considered by the mainstream media or academic literature.

    The Supreme Court’s own summary of the case sets out the issue in terms of the definition of “woman”. But it is clear that the judgment applies equally to trans men as it finds that each of the terms “man”, “woman” and “sex” in the Equality Act refer to biological sex. The court concludes that any other definition would be “incoherent and unworkable”.

    The Office for National Statistics estimates there are roughly equal numbers (48,000) of trans men and trans women in England and Wales. This is supported by data from the US, which also shows roughly equal populations of trans men and trans women.

    Issues for trans men

    Those who support a biological definition of sex have framed their position as one which protects women’s rights and keeps women’s spaces safe by excluding men. By legal definition, that now includes trans women. However, it does not include trans men, who would have been born biologically female.

    This judgment means that trans men can be excluded from men’s single-sex spaces. But there may also be cases where they are excluded from women’s spaces too, despite being considered women under the ruling.

    The court found that it might be proportionate to exclude a trans man from a women’s single-sex service such as counselling for survivors of sexual abuse where “reasonable objection is taken to their presence … because the gender reassignment process has given them a masculine appearance…”.

    This statement highlights the flawed legal reasoning around trans men. In most circumstances they are to be treated as women, even if that creates absurdities in practical implementation. And yet, they can also be excluded from some women’s spaces if they appear too masculine. It could be argued that it is this decision which is “incoherent and unworkable”.

    The ruling could create more confusion over who can access single-sex spaces.
    Iryna_Kolesova/Shutterstock

    The Supreme Court decision repeatedly makes the point that “neither possession of a GRC [gender recognition certificate] nor the protected characteristic of gender reassignment require any physiological change or even any change in outward appearance”.

    However, in practice a GRC can’t be issued without a medical diagnosis of gender dysphoria. It is very difficult for an individual to meet the diagnostic criteria for gender dysphoria without making changes to their appearance or pursuing medical transition.

    Testosterone treatment means that trans men may find it easier to “pass” (be perceived as the gender they identify with) than trans women. Testosterone generally causes facial hair to grow, and creates a more masculine physique and a deeper voice without the need for any additional procedures.

    There are no official statistics, but a 2022 report by the advocacy group TransActual found that around 90% of trans respondents have accessed hormone therapy or surgery, or hope to do so in the future.

    This likely means that a majority of the 48,000 estimated trans men in England and Wales are likely to present as masculine, and be perceived as cisgender men. This is where any implementation of the Supreme Court’s ruling becomes complicated.

    Single-sex spaces

    The decision, subject to any future clarification, means that trans men are not permitted to enter men’s single-sex spaces such as men’s toilets, gym changing rooms or hospital wards. Instead, they should use the women’s single-sex spaces including communal changing areas, in accordance with their biological sex.

    The justices briefly considered this issue when they gave the example of an employer requiring that a warden in a women’s or girls’ hostel be female. Before this ruling, such a role would be open to a trans woman with a GRC, but not to a trans man with a GRC.

    The court stated that “a biological definition of sex would correct this perceived anomaly”. However, this means that the warden in the girls’ hostel can now be a trans man, who could well be indistinguishable from a cis man to the residents of the hostel.

    There is also the concern that both trans men and trans women will expose themselves to a greater risk of harassment, which has already increased considerably, if they are forced to out themselves by using facilities which don’t align with the gender they present as.

    Daniel Alge 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. What does the UK Supreme Court’s gender ruling mean for trans men? – https://theconversation.com/what-does-the-uk-supreme-courts-gender-ruling-mean-for-trans-men-254868

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Consumer inflation eases in March

    Source: South Africa News Agency

    Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) has announced that headline consumer inflation decreased for the first time in five months due to lower fuel prices and softer tuition inflation.

    According to Stats SA, inflation was edging lower to 2.7% in March from 3.2% in February. 

    “The fuel index softened by 0.4% from February, taking the annual rate from -3.6% to -8.8%. A litre of 95-octane petrol (inland) was R22.34 in March, down from R24.45 a year before. The average price for diesel declined to R22.80 from R24.85 over the same period.

    “Education fees are surveyed once a year in March. The price index for education increased by 4.5%, lower than the 6.4% rise in 2024. School fees increased by 5.0% (from 6.6% in 2024). Tertiary education institutions charged 3.7% more in 2025, compared with the 5.9% rise recorded the year before,” Stats SA said on Wednesday.

    Food inflation slightly softer in March

    The annual rate for food and non-alcoholic beverages (NAB) edged lower to 2.7% in March from 2.8% in February. 

    Vegetables, fruits and nuts, cereal products, meat and fish registered higher annual rates. 

    Lower rates were recorded for oils and fats; hot beverages; milk, other dairy products and eggs; cold beverages; and sugar, confectionery and desserts.

    “Inflation for cereal products accelerated to 4.3% in March from 3.9% in February. Maize meal remains a key driver in this category, with its annual rate accelerating to 13.1% from 10.6%. 

    “There is some good news, however. Monthly increases for maize meal have recently slowed, from 4.8% in January to 2.4% in February and 1.4% in March. Coffee and tea drinkers continue to feel pain. 

    “Although the annual rate for the hot beverages category declined slightly in March, it remains in double-digit territory at 14.4%. In fact, this category has witnessed double-digit inflation in all but 5 of the 32 months since August 2022,” Stats SA said.

    Instant coffee is 18.8% and black tea 12.8% more expensive than a year ago.

    Alcoholic beverages also added pressure, with prices rising on average by 2.1% between February and March. This took the annual rate to 4.7% from 4.1% in February. 

    Annual increases were recorded for wine (up 5.3%), beer (up 4.4%) and spirits and liqueurs (up 4.3%). – SAnews.gov.za

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI: Snail, Inc.’s Independent Label Wandering Wizards Acquires Publishing Rights to Whispers of West Grove

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CULVER CITY, Calif., April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Snail, Inc. (Nasdaq: SNAL) (“Snail Games” or the “Company”), a leading global independent developer and publisher of interactive digital entertainment, officially announced that its independent indie publishing arm, Wandering Wizard, has acquired the publishing rights to Whispers of West Grove, an upcoming psychological horror game developed by NVNT Studios. Set to release on Steam, the title expands Wandering Wizard’s growing portfolio of indie horror content while further diversifying the Company’s revenue streams.

    This strategic acquisition reflects the Company’s continued commitment to high-growth genres of the gaming market beyond its flagship ARK sandbox survival content. The Company believes the psychological horror genre in particular, has demonstrated remarkable resilience and consumer engagement. According to industry analysts1, the immersive horror games market is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of over 13% from 2024 to 2030, driven by the increasing popularity of narrative-driven and emotionally immersive gameplay experiences. The Company believes this acquisition adds momentum to Snail’s publishing strategy, which has seen significant growth over the past year through its indie division, Wandering Wizard’s expanding slate.

    Whispers of West Grove invites players into the decaying corridors of West Grove Asylum, where they must navigate fear, fight monstrosities, and piece together a shattered psyche. Blending environmental storytelling with survival horror, the game centers on a patient’s desperate attempt to escape the sinister grasp of Dr. Kade, encountering disturbing visions, mind-bending puzzles, and a revolutionary gameplay mechanic that allows players to reshape the world around them.

    Key gameplay features include:

    • Visceral combat that challenges players to hone survival instincts
    • Innovative puzzle design that integrates deeply with narrative pacing
    • Atmospheric environments packed with hidden items and lore
    • A reality-bending mechanic that transforms the game world at will
    • An original, dynamic score that shifts between haunting ambiance and intense dread

    More details on launch timing for Whispers of West Grove will be shared in the months ahead.

    Wishlist Whispers of West Grove on Steam https://store.steampowered.com/app/2228840/Whispers_of_West_Grove/

    Whispers of West Grove Press Kit

    For Creators interested in collaborative opportunities reach out to creatordirect@noiz.gg

    For media inquiries, interview requests, or additional details, please contact: press@snailgamesusa.com

    1Source: https://www.statsndata.org/report/infor-crm-consulting-service-market-352010

    About Snail, Inc.
    Snail, Inc. (Nasdaq: SNAL) is a leading, global independent developer and publisher of interactive digital entertainment for consumers around the world, with a premier portfolio of premium games designed for use on a variety of platforms, including consoles, PCs, and mobile devices. For more information, please visit: https://snail.com/.

    Forward-Looking Statements
    This press release contains statements that constitute forward-looking statements. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this press release can be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “expect,” “should,” “plan,” “intend,” “may,” “predict,” “continue,” “estimate” and “potential,” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. Forward-looking statements appear in a number of places in this press release and include, but are not limited to, statements regarding the strategic acquisition reflecting the Company’s  continued commitment to potential high-growth genres of the gaming market beyond its flagship ARK sandbox survival content, such as the psychological horror genre, and the notion that such acquisition adds momentum to Snail’s publishing strategy, which has seen significant growth over the past year through its indie division, Wandering Wizard’s expanding slate. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described in the “Risk Factors” section of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, which was filed by the Company with the SEC on March 26, 2025 and other documents filed by the Company from time to time with the SEC, including the Company’s Forms 10-Q filed with the SEC. The Company does not undertake or accept any obligation to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect any change in its expectations or any change in events, conditions, or circumstances on which any such statement is based.

    Investor Contact:
    John Yi and Steven Shinmachi
    Gateway Group, Inc.
    949-574-3860
    SNAL@gateway-grp.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI: Hanover Bancorp, Inc. Reports First Quarter 2025 Results Highlighted by Accelerated Margin Expansion, Improved Credit Quality Metrics & Successful Core Banking System Conversion

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    First Quarter Performance Highlights

    • Net Income: Net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 totaled $1.5 million or $0.20 per diluted share (including Series A preferred shares). Adjusted (non-GAAP) net income (excluding core system conversion expenses of $2.6 million, net of tax) increased to $4.1 million or $0.55 per diluted share for the quarter ended March 31, 2025.
    • Net Interest Income: Net interest income was $14.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, an increase of $0.8 million or 5.95% from the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and $1.7 million, or 13.10% from the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Net Interest Margin Expansion: The Company’s net interest margin during the quarter ended March 31, 2025 increased to 2.68% from 2.53% in the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and 2.41% in the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
    • Strong Liquidity Position: At March 31, 2025, undrawn liquidity sources, which include cash and unencumbered securities and secured and unsecured funding capacity, totaled $679.0 million, or approximately 322% of uninsured deposit balances. Insured and collateralized deposits, which include municipal deposits, accounted for approximately 89% of total deposits at March 31, 2025.
    • Demand Deposits: Demand deposits increased $12.6 million or 6.23% from March 31, 2024 and $3.9 million or 1.85% from December 31, 2024.
    • Loan Diversification Strategy: The Company continues to actively manage its Multi-Family and Commercial Real Estate portfolios which resulted in a reduction in the commercial real estate concentration ratio to 369% of capital at March 31, 2025 from 385% at December 31, 2024 and 416% at March 31, 2024. The Company continues to focus loan growth primarily in residential loan products originated for sale to specific buyers in the secondary market, C&I and SBA loans. The Company will selectively explore Commercial Real Estate opportunities with an emphasis on relationship based Commercial Real Estate lending.
    • Asset Quality: At March 31, 2025, the Bank’s asset quality improved with non-performing loans decreasing 28.5% to $11.7 million, representing 0.60% of the total loan portfolio, while the allowance for credit losses increased to 1.17% of total loans.
    • Tangible Book Value Per Share: Tangible book value per share (including Series A preferred shares) was $23.62 at March 31, 2025 (inclusive of one-time core system conversion expenses of $2.6 million, net of tax, or $0.34 per share) compared to $23.86 at December 31, 2024.
    • Technology & Rebranding: The Company completed its core processing system conversion to FIS Horizon in February 2025. This conversion, coupled with our recently revealed refreshed corporate logo, exemplifies our momentum towards a more technologically advanced, modern and digitally forward-thinking bank.
    • Quarterly Cash Dividend: The Company’s Board of Directors approved a $0.10 per share cash dividend on both common and Series A preferred shares payable on May 14, 2025 to stockholders of record on May 7, 2025.

    MINEOLA, N.Y., April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Hanover Bancorp, Inc. (“Hanover” or “the Company” – NASDAQ: HNVR), the holding company for Hanover Community Bank (“the Bank”), today reported results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 and the declaration of a $0.10 per share cash dividend on both common and Series A preferred shares payable on May 14, 2025 to stockholders of record on May 7, 2025.

    Earnings Summary for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2025

    The Company reported net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 of $1.5 million or $0.20 per diluted share (including Series A preferred shares), versus $4.1 million or $0.55 per diluted share (including Series A preferred shares) in the quarter ended March 31, 2024. The Company recorded adjusted (non-GAAP) net income (excluding core system conversion expenses of $2.6 million, net of tax) of $4.1 million or $0.55 per diluted share in the quarter ended March 31, 2025, versus net income of $4.1 million or $0.55 per diluted share in the comparable 2024 quarter (which included no adjustments). Returns on average assets, average stockholders’ equity and average tangible equity were 0.27%, 3.11% and 3.45%, respectively, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, versus 0.74%, 8.70% and 9.71%, respectively, for the comparable quarter of 2024. Adjusted (non-GAAP) returns, exclusive of core system conversion expenses on average assets, average stockholders’ equity and average tangible equity were 0.73%, 8.36% and 9.27%, respectively, in the quarter ended March 31, 2025, versus 0.74%, 8.70% and 9.71%, respectively, in the comparable quarter of 2024.

    While net interest income and non-interest income increased during the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the quarter ended March 31, 2024, these were partially offset by increases in provision for credit losses and non-interest expenses, particularly compensation and benefits and the one-time core system conversion expenses. The increase in compensation and benefits expense in the first quarter of 2025 versus the comparable 2024 quarter was primarily related to lower deferred loan origination costs partially offset by lower incentive compensation expense resulting from reduced lending activity. The Company’s effective tax rate decreased to 13.8% in the first quarter of 2025 from 24.9% both in the linked quarter and the comparable 2024 quarter due to the tax impact of the windfall benefit from expiring stock options that were exercised and vested restricted stock. We expect a normalized run rate of 25.0% for the remainder of the year.

    Net interest income was $14.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, an increase of $1.7 million, or 13.10% from the comparable 2024 quarter due to improvement of the Company’s net interest margin to 2.68% in the 2025 quarter from 2.41% in the comparable 2024 quarter. The yield on interest earning assets decreased to 6.01% in the 2025 quarter from 6.03% in the comparable 2024 quarter, a decrease of 2 basis points that was partially offset by a 32 basis point decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities to 4.01% in 2025 from 4.33% in the first quarter of 2024. Net interest income on a linked quarter basis increased $0.8 million or 5.95%, due to a 15 basis point increase in net interest margin resulting from a 23 basis point decrease in cost of interest-bearing liabilities, partially offset by a 5 basis point decrease on yield on interest earning assets. The increase in the net interest margin was a result of the late 2024 reductions in the Fed Funds effective rate and the liability sensitive nature of the Bank’s balance sheet.

    Michael P. Puorro, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, commented on the Company’s quarterly results: “We are pleased with our first quarter performance which reflected sizable improvements in Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin that drove stronger adjusted ROTE and ROA for the period. Specifically, NII increased from $13.8 million to $14.6 million and NIM from 2.53% to 2.68%, resulting in adjusted ROTE of 9.27% and ROA of 0.73%, confirming a trend away from the restrictive environment of the last couple of years. Building on this positive momentum were improved credit metrics and the completion of our core banking system conversion, a significant achievement that is expected to deliver tangible operational efficiencies and customer benefits while enhancing our commitment to digital banking. In addition to the core banking system conversion, we recently announced our new logo which is representative of our focus on innovation and a digital forward strategy. Moving forward, we remain committed to disciplined development of our core business verticals which include niche residential, SBA and C&I lending. Further, we look forward to a more favorable banking environment and the upcoming potential qualification for the Russell 2000, which should increase institutional ownership and enhance the liquidity of our stock.”

    Balance Sheet Highlights

    Total assets at March 31, 2025 were $2.29 billion versus $2.31 billion at December 31, 2024. Total securities available for sale at March 31, 2025 were $93.2 million, an increase of $9.4 million from December 31, 2024, primarily driven by growth in collateralized mortgage obligations, collateralized loan obligations and corporate bonds.

    Total deposits at March 31, 2025 were $1.94 billion, a decrease of $17.8 million or 0.91%, compared to $1.95 billion at December 31, 2024. Total deposits increased $19.2 million or 1.00% from March 31, 2024. Demand deposits increased $12.6 million or 6.23% from March 31, 2024. Our loan to deposit ratio improved to 101% at March 31, 2025 from 102% at December 31, 2024.

    The Company had $517.1 million in total municipal deposits at March 31, 2025, at a weighted average rate of 3.71% versus $509.3 million at a weighted average rate of 3.72% at December 31, 2024 and $576.3 million at a weighted average rate of 4.65% at March 31, 2024. The Company’s municipal deposit program is built on long-standing relationships developed in the local marketplace. This core deposit business will continue to provide a stable source of funding for the Company’s lending products at costs lower than those of consumer deposits and market-based borrowings. The Company continues to broaden its municipal deposit base and currently services 40 customer relationships.

    Total borrowings at March 31, 2025 were $107.8 million, with a weighted average rate and term of 4.11% and 20 months, respectively. At March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, the Company had $107.8 million of term FHLB advances outstanding. The Company had no FHLB overnight borrowings outstanding at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024. The Company had no borrowings outstanding under lines of credit with correspondent banks at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024.

    Stockholders’ equity was $196.6 million at both March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024. Retained earnings increased by $0.8 million due primarily to net income of $1.5 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, which was offset by $0.7 million of dividends declared. The accumulated other comprehensive loss at March 31, 2025 was 0.71% of total equity and was comprised of a $0.9 million after tax net unrealized loss on the investment portfolio and a $0.5 million after tax net unrealized loss on derivatives. Tangible book value per share (including Series A preferred shares) was $23.62 at March 31, 2025 (inclusive of one-time core system conversion expenses of $2.6 million, net of tax, or $0.34 per share) compared to $23.86 at December 31, 2024.

    Loan Portfolio

    For the three months ended March 31, 2025, the Bank’s loan portfolio decreased $24.9 million to $1.96 billion from December 31, 2024. The decrease resulted primarily from the ongoing management of our commercial real estate and multifamily loan concentrations. At March 31, 2025, the Company’s residential loan portfolio (including home equity) amounted to $733.6 million, with an average loan balance of $486 thousand and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 57%. Commercial real estate (including construction) and multifamily loans totaled $1.06 billion at March 31, 2025, with an average loan balance of $1.5 million and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 59%. As will be discussed below, approximately 37% of the multifamily portfolio is subject to rent regulation. The Company’s commercial real estate concentration ratio continues to improve, decreasing to 369% of capital at March 31, 2025 from 385% at December 31, 2024 and 416% at March 31, 2024, with loans secured by office space accounting for 2.23% of the total loan portfolio and totaling $43.8 million at March 31, 2025. The Company’s loan pipeline with executed term sheets at March 31, 2025 is approximately $255.0 million, with approximately 92% being niche-residential, conventional C&I and SBA lending opportunities.

    The Bank remains focused on expanding its core verticals and continues to originate loans for its portfolio and for sale in the secondary market under its residential flow origination program. Of the $48.8 million in closed residential loans originated in the quarter ended March 31, 2025, $27.6 million were originated for the Bank’s portfolio and reflected a weighted average yield of 6.64% before origination and other fees, which average 50-100 bps per loan, and a weighted average LTV of 58%. The remaining $21.2 million of closed loans were originated for sale in the secondary market. During the quarter ended March 31, 2025, the Company sold $18.3 million of residential loans under its flow origination program and recorded gains on sale of loans held-for-sale of $0.4 million with a premium of 2.38%.

    During the quarters ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, the Company sold approximately $23.4 million and $26.7 million, respectively, in government guaranteed SBA loans and recorded gains on sale of loans held-for-sale of $1.9 million and $2.5 million, respectively. SBA loan originations and gains on sale were lower due to a combination of factors, including: lower than expected loan sale premiums due, we believe, to first quarter market turmoil; delays in loan closings resulting from the impact of administrative changes to SBA Standard Operating Procedures; and the inability of certain loans to close because of delays by state regulatory agencies in issuing permit approvals to certain borrowers. As we enter the second quarter of 2025, we expect to navigate these factors and to increase the volume of origination and loan sale activity throughout the year. The Bank concluded the first quarter of 2025 with C&I loan originations of approximately $16.8 million. Based on its existing pipeline, the Bank expects C&I lending and deposit activity to grow as the year progresses.

    Commercial Real Estate Statistics

    A significant portion of the Bank’s commercial real estate portfolio consists of loans secured by Multi-Family and CRE-Investor owned real estate that are predominantly subject to fixed interest rates for an initial period of 5 years. The Bank’s exposure to Land/Construction loans is minor at $8.0 million, all at floating interest rates. As shown below, 31% of the loan balances in these combined portfolios will either have a rate reset or mature in 2025 and 2026, with another 56% with rate resets or maturing in 2027.

    Multi-Family Market Rent Portfolio Fixed Rate Reset/Maturity Schedule   Multi-Family Stabilized Rent Portfolio Fixed Rate Reset/Maturity Schedule
    Calendar Period   # Loans   Total O/S ($000’s omitted)   Avg O/S ($000’s omitted)   Avg Interest Rate   Calendar Period   # Loans   Total O/S ($000’s omitted)   Avg O/S ($000’s omitted)   Avg Interest Rate
                                                     
    2025   10   $ 16,321   $ 1,632   4.45 %   2025   10   $ 17,025   $ 1,703   5.03 %
    2026   36     117,886     3,275   3.66 %   2026   20     42,549     2,127   3.67 %
    2027   70     174,601     2,494   4.29 %   2027   53     123,668     2,333   4.22 %
    2028   16     21,382     1,336   6.20 %   2028   13     10,914     839   7.17 %
    2029   6     4,929     821   7.70 %   2029   4     4,328     1,082   6.38 %
    2030+   2     171     85   6.00 %   2030+   4     1,129     282   6.02 %
    Fixed Rate   140     335,290     2,395   4.61 %   Fixed Rate   104     199,613     1,919   4.39 %
    Floating Rate   2     749     375   9.50 %   Floating Rate             %
    Total   142   $ 336,039   $ 2,366   4.26 %   Total   104   $ 199,613   $ 1,919   4.39 %
    CRE Investor Portfolio Fixed Rate Reset/Maturity Schedule
    Calendar Period   # Loans   Total O/S ($000’s omitted)   Avg O/S ($000’s omitted)   Avg Interest Rate
                           
    2025   29   $ 23,092   $ 796   6.13 %
    2026   33     41,668     1,263   4.84 %
    2027   90     162,557     1,806   5.03 %
    2028   30     31,763     1,059   6.64 %
    2029   4     2,353     588   7.03 %
    2030+   13     7,967     613   6.49 %
    Fixed Rate   199     269,400     1,354   5.35 %
    Floating Rate   5     19,074     3,815   8.73 %
    Total CRE-Inv.   204   $ 288,474   $ 1,414   5.57 %

    Rental breakdown of Multi-Family portfolio

    The table below segments our portfolio of loans secured by Multi-Family properties based on rental terms and location. As shown below, 63% of the combined portfolio is secured by properties subject to free market rental terms, which is the dominant tenant type. Both the Market Rent and Stabilized Rent segments of our portfolio present very similar average borrower profiles. The portfolio is primarily located in the New York City boroughs of Brooklyn, the Bronx and Queens.

    Multi-Family Loan Portfolio – Loans by Rent Type
    Rent Type   # of Notes   Outstanding Loan Balance   % of Total Multi-Family   Avg Loan Size   LTV   Current DSCR   Avg # of Units  
            ($000’s omitted)         ($000’s omitted)                
                                           
    Market   142   $ 336,039   63 % $ 2,366   61.5 % 1.41   11  
    Location                                      
    Manhattan   7   $ 10,299   2 % $ 1,471   49.6 % 1.88   14  
    Other NYC   93   $ 244,552   46 % $ 2,630   61.2 % 1.40   9  
    Outside NYC   42   $ 81,188   15 % $ 1,933   64.2 % 1.36   13  
                                           
    Stabilized   104   $ 199,613   37 % $ 1,919   62.1 % 1.42   12  
    Location                                      
    Manhattan   6   $ 8,843   2 % $ 1,474   44.2 % 1.58   17  
    Other NYC   86   $ 171,852   32 % $ 1,998   62.8 % 1.41   11  
    Outside NYC   12   $ 18,918   3 % $ 1,576   64.1 % 1.49   16  


    Office Property Exposure

    The Bank’s exposure to the Office market is minor. Loans secured by office space accounted for 2.23% of the total loan portfolio with a total balance of $43.8 million, of which less than 1% is located in Manhattan. The pool has a 2.32x weighted average DSCR, a 53% weighted average LTV and less than $353,000 of exposure in Manhattan.

    Asset Quality and Allowance for Credit Losses

    At March 31, 2025, the Bank’s asset quality metrics improved with non-performing loans totaling $11.7 million compared to non-performing loans of $16.4 million at December 31, 2024, a decrease of $4.7 million. This decrease resulted primarily from the contracted sale of non-performing loans totaling $5.0 million, net of a $0.3 million charge-off, during the quarter. At March 31, 2025 non-performing loans were 0.60% of total loans outstanding versus 0.82% at December 31, 2024.

    During the first quarter of 2025, the Bank recorded a provision for credit losses expense of $0.6 million. The March 31, 2025 allowance for credit losses was $22.9 million versus $22.8 million at December 31, 2024. The allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans was 1.17% at March 31, 2025 and 1.15% at December 31, 2024.

    Net Interest Margin

    The Bank’s net interest margin increased to 2.68% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to 2.53% in the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and 2.41% in the quarter ended March 31, 2024 due to the recent reductions in the Fed Funds effective rate and the liability sensitive nature of the Bank’s balance sheet.

    About Hanover Community Bank and Hanover Bancorp, Inc.

    Hanover Bancorp, Inc. (NASDAQ: HNVR), is the bank holding company for Hanover Community Bank, a community commercial bank focusing on highly personalized and efficient services and products responsive to client needs. Management and the Board of Directors are comprised of a select group of successful local businesspeople who are committed to the success of the Bank by knowing and understanding the metro-New York area’s financial needs and opportunities. Backed by state-of-the-art technology, Hanover offers a full range of financial services. Hanover offers a complete suite of consumer, commercial, and municipal banking products and services, including multi-family and commercial mortgages, residential loans, business loans and lines of credit. Hanover also offers its customers access to 24-hour ATM service with no fees attached, free checking with interest, telephone banking, advanced technologies in mobile and internet banking for our consumer and business customers, safe deposit boxes and much more. The Company’s corporate administrative office is located in Mineola, New York where it also operates a full-service branch office along with additional branch locations in Garden City Park, Hauppauge, Forest Hills, Flushing, Sunset Park, Rockefeller Center and Chinatown, New York, and Freehold, New Jersey, with a new branch opening in Port Jefferson, New York in mid 2025.

    Hanover Community Bank is a member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and is an Equal Housing/Equal Opportunity Lender. For further information, call (516) 548-8500 or visit the Bank’s website at www.hanoverbank.com.

    Non-GAAP Disclosure

    This discussion, including the financial statements attached thereto, includes non-GAAP financial measures which include the Company’s adjusted net income, adjusted basic and diluted earnings per share, adjusted return on average assets, adjusted return on average equity, tangible common equity (“TCE”) ratio, TCE, tangible assets, tangible book value per share, return on average tangible equity and efficiency ratio. A non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of historical or future performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are required to be disclosed in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). The Company’s management believes that the presentation of non-GAAP financial measures provides both management and investors with a greater understanding of the Company’s operating results and trends in addition to the results measured in accordance with GAAP, and provides greater comparability across time periods. While management uses non-GAAP financial measures in its analysis of the Company’s performance, this information is not meant to be considered in isolation or as a substitute for the numbers prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP or considered to be more important than financial results determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The Company’s non-GAAP financial measures may not be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other financial institutions.

    With respect to the calculations of and reconciliations of adjusted net income, TCE, tangible assets, TCE ratio and tangible book value per share, reconciliations to the most comparable U.S. GAAP measures are provided in the tables that follow.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    This release may contain certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and may be identified by the use of such words as “may,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “plan,” “estimate,” “predict,” “continue,” and “potential” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Examples of forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, estimates with respect to the financial condition, results of operations and business of Hanover Bancorp, Inc. Any or all of the forward-looking statements in this release and in any other public statements made by Hanover Bancorp, Inc. may turn out to be incorrect. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions that Hanover Bancorp, Inc. might make or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties, including those discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K under Item 1A – Risk Factors, as updated by our subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Further, the adverse effect of health emergencies or natural disasters on the Company, its customers, and the communities where it operates may adversely affect the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition for an indefinite period of time. Consequently, no forward-looking statement can be guaranteed. Hanover Bancorp, Inc. does not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this release or to conform these statements to actual events.

    Investor and Press Contact:
    Lance P. Burke
    Chief Financial Officer
    (516) 548-8500

                 
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.            
    STATEMENTS OF CONDITION (unaudited)            
    (dollars in thousands)            
                   
                   
        March 31,   December 31,   March 31,  
          2025       2024       2024    
    Assets              
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 160,234     $ 162,857     $ 136,481    
    Securities-available for sale, at fair value   93,197       83,755       92,709    
    Investments-held to maturity   3,671       3,758       3,973    
    Loans held for sale   16,306       12,404       7,641    
                   
    Loans, net of deferred loan fees and costs   1,960,674       1,985,524       2,005,515    
    Less: allowance for credit losses   (22,925 )     (22,779 )     (19,873 )  
    Loans, net   1,937,749       1,962,745       1,985,642    
                   
    Goodwill     19,168       19,168       19,168    
    Premises & fixed assets   14,511       15,337       15,648    
    Operating lease assets   8,484       8,337       9,336    
    Other assets   38,207       43,749       36,910    
      Assets $ 2,291,527     $ 2,312,110     $ 2,307,508    
                   
    Liabilities and stockholders’ equity            
    Core deposits $ 1,418,209     $ 1,456,513     $ 1,453,035    
    Time deposits   518,229       497,770       464,227    
    Total deposits   1,936,438       1,954,283       1,917,262    
                   
    Borrowings   107,805       107,805       148,953    
    Subordinated debentures   24,702       24,689       24,648    
    Operating lease liabilities   9,144       9,025       10,039    
    Other liabilities   16,795       19,670       17,063    
      Liabilities   2,094,884       2,115,472       2,117,965    
                   
    Stockholders’ equity   196,643       196,638       189,543    
      Liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 2,291,527     $ 2,312,110     $ 2,307,508    
                   
             
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.        
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (unaudited)      
    (dollars in thousands, except per share data)        
             
      Three Months Ended  
      3/31/2025   3/31/2024  
             
    Interest income $ 32,837   $ 32,432  
    Interest expense   18,208     19,497  
    Net interest income   14,629     12,935  
    Provision for credit losses   600     300  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   14,029     12,635  
             
    Loan servicing and fee income   1,081     913  
    Service charges on deposit accounts   117     96  
    Gain on sale of loans held-for-sale   2,352     2,506  
    Other operating income   182     61  
    Non-interest income   3,732     3,576  
             
    Compensation and benefits   7,232     5,562  
    Conversion expenses   3,180      
    Occupancy and equipment   1,836     1,770  
    Data processing   593     518  
    Professional fees   787     818  
    Federal deposit insurance premiums   337     318  
    Other operating expenses   2,031     1,818  
    Non-interest expense   15,996     10,804  
             
    Income before income taxes   1,765     5,407  
    Income tax expense   244     1,346  
             
    Net income $ 1,521   $ 4,061  
             
    Earnings per share (“EPS”):(1)        
    Basic $ 0.20   $ 0.55  
    Diluted $ 0.20   $ 0.55  
             
    Average shares outstanding for basic EPS (1)(2)   7,463,537     7,376,227  
    Average shares outstanding for diluted EPS (1)(2)   7,469,489     7,420,926  
             
    (1) Calculation includes common stock and Series A preferred stock.      
    (2) Average shares outstanding before subtracting participating securities.      
             
                         
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.                    
    CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME (unaudited)                  
    QUARTERLY TREND                    
    (dollars in thousands, except per share data)                    
                         
      Three Months Ended  
      3/31/2025   12/31/2024   9/30/2024   6/30/2024   3/31/2024  
                         
    Interest income $ 32,837   $ 33,057   $ 34,113   $ 33,420   $ 32,432  
    Interest expense   18,208     19,249     21,011     20,173     19,497  
    Net interest income   14,629     13,808     13,102     13,247     12,935  
    Provision for credit losses   600     400     200     4,040     300  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   14,029     13,408     12,902     9,207     12,635  
                         
    Loan servicing and fee income   1,081     981     960     836     913  
    Service charges on deposit accounts   117     136     123     114     96  
    Gain on sale of loans held-for-sale   2,352     3,014     2,834     2,586     2,506  
    Gain on sale of investments       27         4      
    Other operating income   182     29     37     82     61  
    Non-interest income   3,732     4,187     3,954     3,622     3,576  
                         
    Compensation and benefits   7,232     6,699     6,840     6,499     5,562  
    Conversion expenses   3,180                  
    Occupancy and equipment   1,836     1,810     1,799     1,843     1,770  
    Data processing   593     536     547     495     518  
    Professional fees   787     782     762     717     818  
    Federal deposit insurance premiums   337     375     360     365     318  
    Other operating expenses   2,031     2,198     1,930     1,751     1,818  
    Non-interest expense   15,996     12,400     12,238     11,670     10,804  
                         
    Income before income taxes   1,765     5,195     4,618     1,159     5,407  
    Income tax expense   244     1,293     1,079     315     1,346  
                         
    Net income $ 1,521   $ 3,902   $ 3,539   $ 844   $ 4,061  
                         
    Earnings per share (“EPS”):(1)                    
    Basic $ 0.20   $ 0.53   $ 0.48   $ 0.11   $ 0.55  
    Diluted $ 0.20   $ 0.52   $ 0.48   $ 0.11   $ 0.55  
                         
    Average shares outstanding for basic EPS (1)(2)   7,463,537     7,427,583     7,411,064     7,399,816     7,376,227  
    Average shares outstanding for diluted EPS (1)(2)   7,469,489     7,456,471     7,436,068     7,449,110     7,420,926  
                         
    (1) Calculation includes common stock and Series A preferred stock.
    (2) Average shares outstanding before subtracting participating securities.
                         
             
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.        
    CONSOLIDATED NON-GAAP FINANCIAL INFORMATION (1)(unaudited)  
    (dollars in thousands, except per share data)        
             
      Three Months Ended  
      3/31/2025   3/31/2024  
             
    ADJUSTED NET INCOME:        
    Net income, as reported $ 1,521     $ 4,061    
    Adjustments:        
    Conversion expenses   3,180          
    Total adjustments, before income taxes   3,180          
    Adjustment for reported effective income tax rate   608          
    Total adjustments, after income taxes   2,572          
    Adjusted net income $ 4,093     $ 4,061    
    Basic earnings per share – adjusted $ 0.55     $ 0.55    
    Diluted earnings per share – adjusted $ 0.55     $ 0.55    
             
    ADJUSTED OPERATING EFFICIENCY RATIO:        
    Operating efficiency ratio, as reported   87.12 %     65.44 %  
    Adjustments:        
    Conversion expenses   -17.32 %     0.00 %  
    Adjusted operating efficiency ratio   69.80 %     65.44 %  
             
    ADJUSTED RETURN ON AVERAGE ASSETS   0.73 %     0.74 %  
    ADJUSTED RETURN ON AVERAGE EQUITY   8.36 %     8.70 %  
    ADJUSTED RETURN ON AVERAGE TANGIBLE EQUITY   9.27 %     9.71 %  
             
    (1) A non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are required to be disclosed in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). The Company’s management believes the presentation of non-GAAP financial measures provide investors with a greater understanding of the Company’s operating results in addition to the results measured in accordance with U.S. GAAP. While management uses non-GAAP measures in its analysis of the Company’s performance, this information should not be viewed as a substitute for financial results determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP or considered to be more important than financial results determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP.
             
             
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.        
    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA (unaudited)      
    (dollars in thousands)        
             
             
      Three Months Ended  
      3/31/2025   3/31/2024  
    Profitability:        
    Return on average assets   0.27 %     0.74 %  
    Return on average equity (1)   3.11 %     8.70 %  
    Return on average tangible equity (1)   3.45 %     9.71 %  
    Pre-provision net revenue to average assets   0.42 %     1.03 %  
    Yield on average interest-earning assets   6.01 %     6.03 %  
    Cost of average interest-bearing liabilities   4.01 %     4.33 %  
    Net interest rate spread (2)   2.00 %     1.70 %  
    Net interest margin (3)   2.68 %     2.41 %  
    Non-interest expense to average assets   2.85 %     1.96 %  
    Operating efficiency ratio (4)   87.12 %     65.44 %  
             
    Average balances:        
    Interest-earning assets $ 2,217,107     $ 2,162,835    
    Interest-bearing liabilities   1,842,073       1,810,397    
    Loans   1,989,796       1,984,075    
    Deposits   1,919,436       1,842,642    
    Borrowings   133,665       162,427    
             
             
    (1) Includes common stock and Series A preferred stock.      
    (2) Represents the difference between the yield on average interest-earning assets and the cost of average interest-bearing liabilities.
    (3) Represents net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.  
    (4) Represents non-interest expense divided by the sum of net interest income and non-interest income.
             
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.                  
    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA (unaudited)                  
    (dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)                
                       
      At or For the Three Months Ended    
      3/31/2025   12/31/2024   9/30/2024   6/30/2024    
    Asset quality:                  
    Provision for credit losses – loans (1) $ 600   $ 400   $ 200   $ 3,850    
    Net (charge-offs)/recoveries   (454   (1,027   (438   (79  
    Allowance for credit losses   22,925     22,779     23,406     23,644    
    Allowance for credit losses to total loans (2)   1.17 %     1.15 %     1.17 %     1.17 %    
    Non-performing loans $ 11,697   $ 16,368   $ 15,365   $ 15,828    
    Non-performing loans/total loans   0.60 %     0.82 %     0.77 %     0.79 %    
    Non-performing loans/total assets   0.51 %     0.71 %     0.66 %     0.68 %    
    Allowance for credit losses/non-performing loans   195.99 %     139.17 %     152.33 %     149.38 %    
                       
    Capital (Bank only):                  
    Tier 1 Capital $ 201,925   $ 201,744   $ 198,196   $ 195,703    
    Tier 1 leverage ratio   8.95 %     9.13 %     8.85 %     8.89 %    
    Common equity tier 1 capital ratio   13.37 %     13.32 %     12.99 %     12.78 %    
    Tier 1 risk based capital ratio   13.37 %     13.32 %     12.99 %     12.78 %    
    Total risk based capital ratio   14.62 %     14.58 %     14.24 %     14.21 %    
                       
    Equity data:                  
    Shares outstanding (3)   7,503,731     7,427,127     7,428,366     7,402,163    
    Stockholders’ equity $ 196,643   $ 196,638   $ 192,339   $ 190,072    
    Book value per share (3)   26.21     26.48     25.89     25.68    
    Tangible common equity (3)   177,239     177,220     172,906     170,625    
    Tangible book value per share (3)   23.62     23.86     23.28     23.05    
    Tangible common equity (“TCE”) ratio (3)   7.80 %     7.73 %     7.49 %     7.38 %    
                       
    (1) Excludes $0, $0, $0 and $190 thousand provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments for the quarters ended 3/31/25, 12/31/24, 9/30/24 and 6/30/24, respectively.  
    (2) Calculation excludes loans held for sale.    
    (3) Includes common stock and Series A preferred stock.    
                       
                     
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.                
    STATISTICAL SUMMARY                
    QUARTERLY TREND                
    (unaudited, dollars in thousands, except share data)              
                       
        3/31/2025   12/31/2024   9/30/2024   6/30/2024  
                       
    Loan distribution (1):                
    Residential mortgages $ 708,649     $ 702,832     $ 719,037     $ 733,040    
    Multifamily     535,429       550,570       557,634       562,503    
    Commercial real estate   520,808       536,288       529,948       549,725    
    Commercial & industrial   170,442       168,909       171,899       139,209    
    Home equity   24,914       26,422       26,825       27,992    
    Consumer     432       503       470       485    
                       
    Total loans $ 1,960,674     $ 1,985,524     $ 2,005,813     $ 2,012,954    
                       
    Sequential quarter growth rate   -1.25 %     -1.01 %     -0.35 %     0.37 %  
                       
    CRE concentration ratio   369 %     385 %     397 %     403 %  
                       
    Loans sold during the quarter $ 46,649     $ 53,499     $ 43,537     $ 35,302    
                       
    Funding distribution:                
    Demand   $ 215,569     $ 211,656     $ 206,327     $ 199,835    
    N.O.W.     698,297       692,890       621,880       661,998    
    Savings     46,275       48,885       53,024       44,821    
    Money market   458,068       503,082       572,213       571,170    
    Total core deposits   1,418,209       1,456,513       1,453,444       1,477,824    
    Time     518,229       497,770       504,100       464,105    
    Total deposits   1,936,438       1,954,283       1,957,544       1,941,929    
    Borrowings   107,805       107,805       125,805       148,953    
    Subordinated debentures   24,702       24,689       24,675       24,662    
                       
    Total funding sources $ 2,068,945     $ 2,086,777     $ 2,108,024     $ 2,115,544    
                       
    Sequential quarter growth rate – total deposits   -0.91 %     -0.17 %     0.80 %     1.29 %  
                       
    Period-end core deposits/total deposits ratio   73.24 %     74.53 %     74.25 %     76.10 %  
                       
    Period-end demand deposits/total deposits ratio   11.13 %     10.83 %     10.54 %     10.29 %  
                       
    (1) Excluding loans held for sale                
                       
                         
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.                    
    RECONCILIATION OF NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES (1)(unaudited)          
    (dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts)              
                         
                         
      3/31/2025   12/31/2024   9/30/2024   6/30/2024   3/31/2024  
    Tangible common equity                    
    Total equity (2) $ 196,643     $ 196,638     $ 192,339     $ 190,072     $ 189,543    
    Less: goodwill   (19,168 )     (19,168 )     (19,168 )     (19,168 )     (19,168 )  
    Less: core deposit intangible   (236 )     (250 )     (265 )     (279 )     (295 )  
    Tangible common equity (2) $ 177,239     $ 177,220     $ 172,906     $ 170,625     $ 170,080    
                         
    Tangible common equity (“TCE”) ratio                  
    Tangible common equity (2) $ 177,239     $ 177,220     $ 172,906     $ 170,625     $ 170,080    
    Total assets   2,291,527       2,312,110       2,327,814       2,331,098       2,307,508    
    Less: goodwill   (19,168 )     (19,168 )     (19,168 )     (19,168 )     (19,168 )  
    Less: core deposit intangible   (236 )     (250 )     (265 )     (279 )     (295 )  
    Tangible assets $ 2,272,123     $ 2,292,692     $ 2,308,381     $ 2,311,651     $ 2,288,045    
    TCE ratio (2)   7.80 %     7.73 %     7.49 %     7.38 %     7.43 %  
                         
    Tangible book value per share                    
    Tangible equity (2) $ 177,239     $ 177,220     $ 172,906     $ 170,625     $ 170,080    
    Shares outstanding (2)   7,503,731       7,427,127       7,428,366       7,402,163       7,392,412    
    Tangible book value per share (2) $ 23.62     $ 23.86     $ 23.28     $ 23.05     $ 23.01    
                         
    (1) A non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of historical or future financial performance, financial position or cash flows that excludes or includes amounts that are required to be disclosed in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”). The Company’s management believes the presentation of non-GAAP financial measures provide investors with a greater understanding of the Company’s operating results in addition to the results measured in accordance with U.S. GAAP. While management uses non-GAAP measures in its analysis of the Company’s performance, this information should not be viewed as a substitute for financial results determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP or considered to be more important than financial results determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP.  
                         
    (2) Includes common stock and Series A preferred stock.  
       
                             
    HANOVER BANCORP, INC.      
    NET INTEREST INCOME ANALYSIS      
    For the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 and 2024      
    (unaudited, dollars in thousands)      
                             
                             
        2025       2024    
      Average       Average   Average       Average  
      Balance   Interest   Yield/Cost Balance   Interest   Yield/Cost  
                             
    Assets:                        
    Interest-earning assets:                        
    Loans $ 1,989,796   $ 29,984   6.11 %   $ 1,984,075   $ 29,737   6.03 %  
    Investment securities   85,839     1,186   5.60 %     94,845     1,457   6.18 %  
    Interest-earning cash   133,458     1,482   4.50 %     74,672     1,014   5.46 %  
    FHLB stock and other investments   8,014     185   9.36 %     9,243     224   9.75 %  
    Total interest-earning assets   2,217,107     32,837   6.01 %     2,162,835     32,432   6.03 %  
    Non interest-earning assets:                        
    Cash and due from banks   9,504             7,945          
    Other assets   49,695             49,941          
    Total assets $ 2,276,306           $ 2,220,721          
                             
    Liabilities and stockholders’ equity:                        
    Interest-bearing liabilities:                        
    Savings, N.O.W. and money market deposits $ 1,217,429   $ 11,455   3.82 %   $ 1,161,191   $ 12,933   4.48 %  
    Time deposits   490,979     5,320   4.39 %     486,779     4,962   4.10 %  
    Total savings and time deposits   1,708,408     16,775   3.98 %     1,647,970     17,895   4.37 %  
    Borrowings   108,972     1,107   4.12 %     137,788     1,276   3.72 %  
    Subordinated debentures   24,693     326   5.35 %     24,639     326   5.32 %  
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   1,842,073     18,208   4.01 %     1,810,397     19,497   4.33 %  
    Demand deposits   211,028             194,672          
    Other liabilities   24,726             27,959          
    Total liabilities   2,077,827             2,033,028          
    Stockholders’ equity   198,479             187,693          
    Total liabilities & stockholders’ equity $ 2,276,306           $ 2,220,721          
    Net interest rate spread         2.00 %           1.70 %  
    Net interest income/margin     $ 14,629   2.68 %       $ 12,935   2.41 %  
                             

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Consumer Price Indices for March 2025

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

         The Census and Statistics Department (C&SD) released today (April 23) the Consumer Price Index (CPI) figures for March 2025. According to the Composite CPI, overall consumer prices rose by 1.4% in March 2025 over the same month a year earlier, smaller than the average rate of increase in January and February 2025 (1.7%). Netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures, the year-on-year rate of increase in the Composite CPI (i.e. the underlying inflation rate) in March 2025 was 1.0%, also smaller than the average rate of increase in January and February 2025 (1.3%). The comparison to the average rate of increase in January and February is to neutralise the effect caused by the different timing of the Chinese New Year between two years, which occurred in January this year but in February last year. The smaller increase in March 2025 was mainly due to the decreases in inbound and outbound transport fares and the charges for package tours. 

         Comparing March 2025 with February 2025, the year-on-year rate of increase in the Composite CPI in March 2025 was 1.4%, the same as that in February 2025. Netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures, the year-on-year rate of increase in the Composite CPI in March 2025 was 1.0%, slightly smaller than the corresponding increase in February 2025 (1.1%).  

         On a seasonally adjusted basis, the average monthly rate of change in the Composite CPI for the 3-month period ending March 2025 was 0.0%, the same as that for the 3-month period ending February 2025. Netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures, the corresponding rates of change were both 0.0%.   

         Analysed by sub-index, the year-on-year rates of increase in the CPI(A), CPI(B) and CPI(C) were 2.0%, 1.2% and 1.0% respectively in March 2025, as compared to the average rates of increase of 2.2%, 1.5% and 1.3% respectively in January and February 2025, and 2.0%, 1.2% and 1.0% respectively in February 2025. Netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures, the year-on-year rates of increase in the CPI(A), CPI(B) and CPI(C) were 1.4%, 0.9% and 0.8% respectively in March 2025, as compared to the average rates of increase of 1.7%, 1.2% and 1.2% respectively in January and February 2025, and 1.4%, 1.0% and 0.9% respectively in February 2025.   

         On a seasonally adjusted basis, for the 3-month period ending March 2025, the average monthly rates of change in the CPI(A), CPI(B) and CPI(C) were 0.1%, 0.0% and 0.0% respectively. The corresponding rates of change for the 3-month period ending February 2025 were 0.1%, 0.0% and 0.1% respectively. Netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures, the average monthly rates of change in the seasonally adjusted CPI(A), CPI(B) and CPI(C) for the 3-month period ending March 2025 were -0.1%, 0.0% and 0.0% respectively, the same as those for the 3-month period ending February 2025.   

         Amongst the various components of the Composite CPI, year-on-year increases in prices were recorded in March 2025 for electricity, gas and water (14.0%), alcoholic drinks and tobacco (4.4%), transport (1.7%), housing (1.7%), meals out and takeaway food (1.3%), miscellaneous goods (1.0%), and miscellaneous services (1.0%).   

         On the other hand, year-on-year decreases in the components of the Composite CPI were recorded in March 2025 for clothing and footwear (-2.8%), basic food (-1.5%), and durable goods (-0.5%).   

         In the first quarter of 2025, the Composite CPI rose by 1.6% over a year earlier, while the CPI(A), CPI(B) and CPI(C) rose by 2.2%, 1.4% and 1.2% respectively. The corresponding increases after netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures were 1.2%, 1.6%, 1.1% and 1.0% respectively.   

         For the 12 months ending March 2025, the Composite CPI was on average 1.6% higher than that in the preceding 12-month period. The respective increases in the CPI(A), CPI(B) and CPI(C) were 2.1%, 1.5% and 1.4% respectively. The corresponding increases after netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures were 1.1%, 1.2%, 1.1% and 1.1% respectively.   

    Commentary

         A Government spokesman said that the underlying consumer price inflation stayed modest in March. The underlying Composite CPI increased by 1.0% over a year earlier in March, smaller than the increase of 1.3% in January and February combined. Price pressures on various major components stayed contained in general.

         Looking ahead, overall inflation should remain modest in the near term. External price pressures should be broadly in check, though escalating trade conflicts continue to warrant attention. The Government will monitor the situation closely.

    Further information

         The CPIs and year-on-year rates of change at section level for March 2025 are shown in Table 1. The time series on the year-on-year rates of change in the CPIs before and after netting out the effects of all Government’s one-off relief measures are shown in Table 2. For discerning the latest trend in consumer prices, it is also useful to look at the changes in the seasonally adjusted CPIs. The time series on the average monthly rates of change during the latest 3 months for the seasonally adjusted CPIs are shown in Table 3. The rates of change in the original and the seasonally adjusted Composite CPI and the underlying inflation rate are presented graphically in Chart 1.

         More detailed statistics are given in the “Monthly Report on the Consumer Price Index”. Users can browse and download this publication at the website of the C&SD (www.censtatd.gov.hk/en/EIndexbySubject.html?pcode=B1060001&scode=270).

         For enquiries about the CPIs, please contact the Consumer Price Index Section of the C&SD (Tel: 3903 7374 or email: cpi@censtatd.gov.hk).

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI: McAdam Included on USA Today’s list of the Best Financial Advisory Firms 2025

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    PHILADELPHIA, April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — McAdam, a national financial services firm headquartered in Philadelphia, has been named on the USA Today list of Best Financial Advisory Firms 2025. This is the third year in a row McAdam has been recognized on the list. This prestigious award is presented by USA Today and Statista Inc., the world-leading statistics portal and industry ranking provider. The awards list was announced on April 23rd, 2025, and can be viewed on USATODAY.COM.

    The Best Financial Advisory Firms 2025 list is awarded to the top registered investment advisory (RIA) firms in the United States based on two dimensions:

    • Recommendations from financial advisors, clients, and industry experts:
      Recommendations were collected via an independent survey among over 30,000 individuals. Clients, industry experts, and financial advisors working for an RIA firm could recommend the RIA firms they find commendable.
    • Development of Assets under Management (AUM):
      Both short-term (12-month) and long-term (5-year) AUM development were analyzed using publicly available data.

    Based on the results of the study, McAdam is pleased to be recognized on USA TODAY’s list of the Best Financial Advisory Firms 2025.

    “Our firm is honored to be included on the national USA Today list of ‘Best Financial Advisory Firms’ for the third time.   The independent survey affirms our company has developed strong lasting relationships in the industry. McAdam advisors and staff each make important contributions in building our brand awareness one client interaction at a time,” said Chief Executive Officer Michael McAdam.     

    Statista publishes hundreds of worldwide industry rankings and company listings with high-profile media partners. This research and analysis service is based on the success of statista.com, the leading data and business intelligence portal that provides statistics, relevant business data, and various market and consumer studies and surveys.

    About McAdam LLC.

    Founded in 2008, McAdam Financial is a nationally recognized independent financial advisory firm. Its Philadelphia headquarters leads a nationwide network of fiduciary financial advisors operating in Boston, Chicago, and Tysons Corner. The firm is dedicated to helping clients achieve their financial goals through a comprehensive approach that includes retirement planning, 401(k) optimization, tax and insurance analysis, investment planning, education planning, estate planning, and employer benefits optimization. McAdam Financial provides specialized strategies to grow, sustain, and protect wealth, helping enable clients to enjoy a secure and fulfilling retirement.

    Important Disclosures

    Awards, rankings, ratings, and/or recognition by unaffiliated rating services and/or publications are not indicative of McAdam’s future performance, should not be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that such client will experience a certain level of results if McAdam is engaged, or continues to be engaged to provide investment advisory services, nor should they be construed as a current or past endorsement of McAdam by any of its clients.

    Rankings published by magazines, and others, generally base their selections exclusively on information prepared and/or submitted by the recognized adviser. Such awards, rankings, ratings, and/or recognition are no guarantee of future investment success. Working with a highly rated advisor does not ensure that a client or prospective client will experience a higher level of performance. Generally, rankings are based on information prepared and submitted by the adviser.

    The awards listed do not require memberships or payment for consideration. By virtue of disclosing an award ranking, McAdam is disclosing favorable ratings (to the extent that McAdam is ranked above other advisors) and unfavorable ratings (to the extent that McAdam is ranked below other advisors). The awards and rankings are independently granted. McAdam is not affiliated with the awarding rating services or and/or publications listed.

    Securities offered only by duly registered individuals through Madison Avenue Securities, LLC (MAS), member FINRA/SIPC. Investment advisory services offered only by duly registered individuals of McAdam, LLC, a registered investment advisor. Insurance products and services offered through McAdam Financial. McAdam, LLC and McAdam Financial are not affiliated with MAS.

    Contact:
    Kevin McAdam, CFA
    P: (203) 912-2779
    Email: Kevin@McAdamFA.com

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Commission finds Apple and Meta in breach of the Digital Markets Act

    Source: EuroStat – European Statistics

    European Commission Press release Brussels, 23 Apr 2025 Today, the European Commission found that Apple breached its anti-steering obligation under the Digital Markets Act (DMA), and that Meta breached the DMA obligation to give consumers the choice of a service that uses less of their personal data.

    MIL OSI Europe News

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Mar inflation up 1.4%

    Source: Hong Kong Information Services

    Overall consumer prices rose 1.4% year-on-year in March, smaller than the average rate of increase in January and February, the Census & Statistics Department announced today.
     
    Netting out the effects of the Government’s one-off relief measures, underlying inflation was 1%, also smaller than the average rate of increase in January and February.
     
    Compared with a year before, price increases were recorded in March in the following categories: electricity, gas and water; alcoholic drinks and tobacco; transport; housing; meals out and takeaway food; miscellaneous goods; and miscellaneous services.  
     
    Meanwhile, year-on-year decreases were logged in clothing and footwear; basic food; and durable goods.
     
    The Government said overall inflation should remain modest in the near term, adding that external price pressures should be broadly in check, though escalating trade conflicts continue to warrant attention.

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News

  • MIL-OSI Africa: Flooding incidents in Ghana’s capital are on the rise. Researchers chase the cause

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Stephen Appiah Takyi, Senior Lecturer, Department of Planning, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST)

    Urban flooding is a major problem in the global south. In west and central Africa, more than 4 million people were affected by flooding in 2024. In Ghana, cities suffer damage from flooding every year.

    Ghana’s president, John Dramani Mahama, has established a task force to find ways of improving flood resilience in the country. This is partly driven by an increase in flooding incidents in cities such as Accra and Kumasi in the last decade.

    We are urban planning and sustainability scholars. In a recent paper we analysed whether flooding in Accra, Ghana’s capital, was caused by climate change or poor land use planning.

    We conclude from our analysis that flooding is caused by poor and uncoordinated land use planning rather than climate change. We recommend that the physical planning department and other regulatory agencies are equipped to ensure the effective enforcement the relevant land use regulations.

    Mixed push factors

    The Accra metropolitan area is one of the 29 administrative units of Ghana’s Greater Accra region. It is the most populous region in Ghana, with over five million residents, according to the 2021 Housing and Population Census.

    We interviewed 100 households living in areas such as Kaneshie, Adabraka and Kwame Nkrumah Circle. These areas experience a high incidence of floods. Representatives of agencies such as the Physical Planning Department of the Accra Metropolitan Assembly, the National Disaster Management Organisation and the Environmental Protection Agency were interviewed too, about:

    • the nature and areas most prone to flooding in the study area

    • the frequency of flooding

    • land use planning and regulations and their influence on flooding.

    About 40% of the people we interviewed attributed flooding to both weak enforcement of land use regulation and changes in rainfall patterns. Most of the households (52%) said floods in Accra were the result of weak enforcement of land use regulations, while 8% blamed changes in land use regulations.

    We also analysed recorded data on flood incidence and rainfall. We found no correlation between increased rainfall and flooding. For example in 2017 there was a decrease in rainfall, but an increase in flooding.

    This finding points to the fact that rainfall isn’t the only factor contributing to flooding in the city.

    The agencies and city residents reported that between 2008 and 2018, they could see that more people were encroaching on the city’s wetlands by building homes and commercial infrastructure. This has changed the natural flow of water bodies. The Greater Accra Metropolitan and its environs has major wetlands such as Densu Delta, Sakumo Lagoon and Songor Lagoon.

    Interview respondents noted that the siting of unauthorised buildings and the encroachment on buffer zones of water bodies in the city could have been averted. They blamed political interference in the enforcement of land use regulation. The government makes the situation worse in two ways, they said:

    • planning standards and regulations are neglected in the development process. The processes involved in acquiring development permits are cumbersome and expensive, so people go ahead and develop without permits.

    • regulatory institutions and authorities are ineffective. This is clear from the fact that planning happens chaotically. No attention is given to the ecological infrastructure that’s needed.

    The way forward

    We conclude that land use malpractices remain the dominant causes of flooding in Accra. They include:

    • poor disposal of solid waste, which eventually blocks drains and results in water overflow during heavy rains

    • building on wetlands as a result of non-compliance or non-enforcement of land use regulations.

    There is an urgent need for Ghana’s cities to adopt best practices in waste management. These include recycling of plastic waste and composting for urban agriculture. An environmental excise tax was introduced in 2011 to fund plastic waste recycling and support waste management agencies.

    The increasing encroachment on wetlands should be addressed through the strict enforcement of buffer regulations. Planning authorities and the judiciary can collaborate on this. The city must also encourage green infrastructure, like rain gardens, green roofs, permeable pavement, street trees and rain harvesting systems. Research has shown these to be environmentally sustainable and cost-effective approaches to managing storm water.

    Another suggested approach is the introduction of the polluter pays principle in city management. This is a system where city residents who are involved in the pollution of the environment are made to pay for the cost of mitigating the impact. Residents who dispose of waste indiscriminately and encroach on wetlands would be made to pay for the cost of the environmental degradation. Cities such as Barcelona and Helsinki have applied this principle in the management of their industrial discharge and contaminated waste.

    Finally, there should be incentives for city residents to promote environmental sustainability. For example, a deposit refund system has been introduced in several states in the US and Australia. In this system, consumers are made to pay a deposit after purchasing items that can be recycled, such as plastic bottles, and the deposit is reimbursed to the consumer after the return of the empty bottles to a retail store.

    – Flooding incidents in Ghana’s capital are on the rise. Researchers chase the cause
    – https://theconversation.com/flooding-incidents-in-ghanas-capital-are-on-the-rise-researchers-chase-the-cause-254000

    MIL OSI Africa

  • MIL-OSI Global: New survey shows the extent of class privilege in UK journalism

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Imke Henkel, Lecturer in Journalism and Media, University of Leeds

    UK journalism has a class problem. This statement will not surprise most people familiar with UK newsrooms. What is astonishing, though, is the scarcity of empirical data that could help us better understand the extent to which class inequality affects journalists and their work.

    For the first time, research by my colleagues and me an for the report UK Journalists in the 2020s uses a representative sample of UK journalists to measure their socioeconomic background. The vast majority of our respondents came from a privileged background, measured by their schooling and by the job held by their main household earner when they were a child.

    Previous research on this issue was based on considerably more limited data. In July 2009, a report commissioned by the then Labour government found that journalism was one of two professions that had experienced the biggest decline in social mobility (the other being accountancy).

    Research by the Sutton Trust established repeatedly (most recently in 2019), that leading news editors, broadcasters and newspaper columnists are about six to seven times more likely to be privately educated than the general population, a typical marker for privilege in Britain.

    Some of the best data we have regarding UK journalists’ social class was collected by the National Council for the Training of Journalists, who since 2017 has regularly published reports on the diversity among UK journalists.

    However, as the report’s author Mark Spilsbury concedes, the findings have a considerable margin of error. The report uses data from the UK Government Labour Force Survey, and only extrapolates its figures for the small fraction of journalists within that workforce.

    Our report, for the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at the University of Oxford, draws on a survey that media researchers Neil Thurman, Sina Thäsler-Kordonouri and I conducted between September 27 and November 30 2023.

    We used data from the 2021 Census for England, Wales, and Northern Ireland and from the Roxhill Media database to estimate the total number of UK journalists to be 68,279. Given how notoriously reluctant journalists are to respond to surveys, already swamped as they are with similar requests, we sent our questionnaire to 16,497 randomly selected participants.

    We considered journalists to be those who worked for a media outlet with an identifiable focus on news, and who earned at least 50% of their income from journalism or worked at least 50% of their working week as a journalist. To be included in our survey, respondents also needed to work for a news outlet with a UK base and that was aimed, at least in part, at a UK audience.

    After data cleaning, we retained a final sample of 1,130 respondents, a sufficient size to achieve a confidence level of at least 95% and a maximum error margin of 3%.

    Our survey is part of the international Worlds of Journalism Study, which uses the same core questionnaire across 75 countries. The survey covers a wide range of topics, including journalists’ demographics, working conditions and their experience of safety and wellbeing.

    For the UK study, we added two questions regarding journalists’ socioeconomic background. First, we asked what job the main earner in their households held when the respondents were 14 years old. Second, we asked about the school journalists attended: fee-paying private or state primary and secondary school, non-fee-paying selective secondary school (such as grammar school) or a school not in the UK.


    Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.

    Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.


    The question on parents’ occupation allowed respondents to write in the title of the relevant job. We coded the replies manually using the nine categories of the Office for National Statistics’ 2020 Standard Occupational Classification.

    Seventy-one percent of journalists in our sample came from a privileged background, with the main earner in their childhood household holding a job within the three top categories of the classification. Only 12% of our respondents came from a working-class background (sales and customer service occupations; process, plant and machine operatives and elementary occupations).




    Read more:
    Know your place: what happened to class in British politics – a podcast series from The Conversation Documentaries


    We lack the data for an outright comparison with the general population. But the 2021 census gives an indication. It shows that 23.3% of the main earner in all households in England and Wales held a job in the highest AB social grade, about equivalent to the top three categories in our classification. Nearly double (43.9%) fell into the social grade C2 and DE, roughly equivalent with our bottom three categories.

    Journalists’ privilege also shows in their schooling. Twenty-two percent of journalists in our sample attended a fee-paying secondary, and 13% attended a fee-paying primary school. Around 6% of the general pupil population in England attends private schools, and fewer in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

    Does privilege matter?

    Our data does not suggest that a privileged upbringing makes it more likely for journalists to hold a top management position. Where it does make a difference, though, is whether they work for national media or outlets with international presence (like the Guardian or the Financial Times). Of those who do only 9% come from a working-class background, while 72% come from a privileged one (the rest come from the middle groups in our classification).

    In contrast, 20% of journalists working for local and regional outlets (including regional arms of national outlets, such as BBC Wales) have a working-class background, and 57% grew up in a more privileged household.

    Our survey also shows other areas of inequality. An interesting one is age. Both women and journalists from an ethnic minority background seem to drop out of the profession after the age of 50. Journalists with an Asian or Black background in particular remain underrepresented compared to the overall population, as they were in 2015.

    Female journalists are also still less well paid, less likely to have a permanent contract or to hold a top management role than their male colleagues. They also more often report feeling stressed out. Their disadvantage against their male colleagues may well be a reason.

    New survey data shows that of those who work for national media, 72% are from a privileged background.
    Zeynep Demir Aslim/Shutterstock

    One reason for the privileged background of so many journalists will be that journalism has become a thoroughly academic profession. Nine out of ten journalists in our sample were university educated.

    In an increasingly complex world, there may be good reasons for those who report on it to undergo an academic training. However, as some scholars have argued, trust in journalism not only depends on accurate and reliable reporting, but also on emotional and social factors that are essential for the relationship between journalists and audiences.

    Given the lack of trust in news and rising news avoidance among UK audiences, the inequalities our report found should be of concern. If journalists are found to belong to a privileged elite they are less likely to be trusted by the general public. Reliable data on the inequalities that shape the journalism profession is a necessary start to tackle this problem.

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

    ref. New survey shows the extent of class privilege in UK journalism – https://theconversation.com/new-survey-shows-the-extent-of-class-privilege-in-uk-journalism-254838

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-Evening Report: Flooding incidents in Ghana’s capital are on the rise. Researchers chase the cause

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Appiah Takyi, Senior Lecturer, Department of Planning, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST)

    Urban flooding is a major problem in the global south. In west and central Africa, more than 4 million people were affected by flooding in 2024. In Ghana, cities suffer damage from flooding every year.

    Ghana’s president, John Dramani Mahama, has established a task force to find ways of improving flood resilience in the country. This is partly driven by an increase in flooding incidents in cities such as Accra and Kumasi in the last decade.

    We are urban planning and sustainability scholars. In a recent paper we analysed whether flooding in Accra, Ghana’s capital, was caused by climate change or poor land use planning.

    We conclude from our analysis that flooding is caused by poor and uncoordinated land use planning rather than climate change. We recommend that the physical planning department and other regulatory agencies are equipped to ensure the effective enforcement the relevant land use regulations.

    Mixed push factors

    The Accra metropolitan area is one of the 29 administrative units of Ghana’s Greater Accra region. It is the most populous region in Ghana, with over five million residents, according to the 2021 Housing and Population Census.

    We interviewed 100 households living in areas such as Kaneshie, Adabraka and Kwame Nkrumah Circle. These areas experience a high incidence of floods. Representatives of agencies such as the Physical Planning Department of the Accra Metropolitan Assembly, the National Disaster Management Organisation and the Environmental Protection Agency were interviewed too, about:

    • the nature and areas most prone to flooding in the study area

    • the frequency of flooding

    • land use planning and regulations and their influence on flooding.

    About 40% of the people we interviewed attributed flooding to both weak enforcement of land use regulation and changes in rainfall patterns. Most of the households (52%) said floods in Accra were the result of weak enforcement of land use regulations, while 8% blamed changes in land use regulations.

    We also analysed recorded data on flood incidence and rainfall. We found no correlation between increased rainfall and flooding. For example in 2017 there was a decrease in rainfall, but an increase in flooding.

    This finding points to the fact that rainfall isn’t the only factor contributing to flooding in the city.

    The agencies and city residents reported that between 2008 and 2018, they could see that more people were encroaching on the city’s wetlands by building homes and commercial infrastructure. This has changed the natural flow of water bodies. The Greater Accra Metropolitan and its environs has major wetlands such as Densu Delta, Sakumo Lagoon and Songor Lagoon.

    Interview respondents noted that the siting of unauthorised buildings and the encroachment on buffer zones of water bodies in the city could have been averted. They blamed political interference in the enforcement of land use regulation. The government makes the situation worse in two ways, they said:

    • planning standards and regulations are neglected in the development process. The processes involved in acquiring development permits are cumbersome and expensive, so people go ahead and develop without permits.

    • regulatory institutions and authorities are ineffective. This is clear from the fact that planning happens chaotically. No attention is given to the ecological infrastructure that’s needed.

    The way forward

    We conclude that land use malpractices remain the dominant causes of flooding in Accra. They include:

    • poor disposal of solid waste, which eventually blocks drains and results in water overflow during heavy rains

    • building on wetlands as a result of non-compliance or non-enforcement of land use regulations.

    There is an urgent need for Ghana’s cities to adopt best practices in waste management. These include recycling of plastic waste and composting for urban agriculture. An environmental excise tax was introduced in 2011 to fund plastic waste recycling and support waste management agencies.

    The increasing encroachment on wetlands should be addressed through the strict enforcement of buffer regulations. Planning authorities and the judiciary can collaborate on this. The city must also encourage green infrastructure, like rain gardens, green roofs, permeable pavement, street trees and rain harvesting systems.
    Research has shown these to be environmentally sustainable and cost-effective approaches to managing storm water.

    Another suggested approach is the introduction of the polluter pays principle in city management. This is a system where city residents who are involved in the pollution of the environment are made to pay for the cost of mitigating the impact. Residents who dispose of waste indiscriminately and encroach on wetlands would be made to pay for the cost of the environmental degradation. Cities such as Barcelona and Helsinki have applied this principle in the management of their industrial discharge and contaminated waste.

    Finally, there should be incentives for city residents to promote environmental sustainability. For example, a deposit refund system has been introduced in several states in the US and Australia. In this system, consumers are made to pay a deposit after purchasing items that can be recycled, such as plastic bottles, and the deposit is reimbursed to the consumer after the return of the empty bottles to a retail store.

    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. Flooding incidents in Ghana’s capital are on the rise. Researchers chase the cause – https://theconversation.com/flooding-incidents-in-ghanas-capital-are-on-the-rise-researchers-chase-the-cause-254000

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-OSI Global: Flooding incidents in Ghana’s capital are on the rise. Researchers chase the cause

    Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Stephen Appiah Takyi, Senior Lecturer, Department of Planning, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST)

    Urban flooding is a major problem in the global south. In west and central Africa, more than 4 million people were affected by flooding in 2024. In Ghana, cities suffer damage from flooding every year.

    Ghana’s president, John Dramani Mahama, has established a task force to find ways of improving flood resilience in the country. This is partly driven by an increase in flooding incidents in cities such as Accra and Kumasi in the last decade.

    We are urban planning and sustainability scholars. In a recent paper we analysed whether flooding in Accra, Ghana’s capital, was caused by climate change or poor land use planning.

    We conclude from our analysis that flooding is caused by poor and uncoordinated land use planning rather than climate change. We recommend that the physical planning department and other regulatory agencies are equipped to ensure the effective enforcement the relevant land use regulations.

    Mixed push factors

    The Accra metropolitan area is one of the 29 administrative units of Ghana’s Greater Accra region. It is the most populous region in Ghana, with over five million residents, according to the 2021 Housing and Population Census.

    We interviewed 100 households living in areas such as Kaneshie, Adabraka and Kwame Nkrumah Circle. These areas experience a high incidence of floods. Representatives of agencies such as the Physical Planning Department of the Accra Metropolitan Assembly, the National Disaster Management Organisation and the Environmental Protection Agency were interviewed too, about:

    • the nature and areas most prone to flooding in the study area

    • the frequency of flooding

    • land use planning and regulations and their influence on flooding.

    About 40% of the people we interviewed attributed flooding to both weak enforcement of land use regulation and changes in rainfall patterns. Most of the households (52%) said floods in Accra were the result of weak enforcement of land use regulations, while 8% blamed changes in land use regulations.

    We also analysed recorded data on flood incidence and rainfall. We found no correlation between increased rainfall and flooding. For example in 2017 there was a decrease in rainfall, but an increase in flooding.

    This finding points to the fact that rainfall isn’t the only factor contributing to flooding in the city.

    The agencies and city residents reported that between 2008 and 2018, they could see that more people were encroaching on the city’s wetlands by building homes and commercial infrastructure. This has changed the natural flow of water bodies. The Greater Accra Metropolitan and its environs has major wetlands such as Densu Delta, Sakumo Lagoon and Songor Lagoon.

    Interview respondents noted that the siting of unauthorised buildings and the encroachment on buffer zones of water bodies in the city could have been averted. They blamed political interference in the enforcement of land use regulation. The government makes the situation worse in two ways, they said:

    • planning standards and regulations are neglected in the development process. The processes involved in acquiring development permits are cumbersome and expensive, so people go ahead and develop without permits.

    • regulatory institutions and authorities are ineffective. This is clear from the fact that planning happens chaotically. No attention is given to the ecological infrastructure that’s needed.

    The way forward

    We conclude that land use malpractices remain the dominant causes of flooding in Accra. They include:

    • poor disposal of solid waste, which eventually blocks drains and results in water overflow during heavy rains

    • building on wetlands as a result of non-compliance or non-enforcement of land use regulations.

    There is an urgent need for Ghana’s cities to adopt best practices in waste management. These include recycling of plastic waste and composting for urban agriculture. An environmental excise tax was introduced in 2011 to fund plastic waste recycling and support waste management agencies.

    The increasing encroachment on wetlands should be addressed through the strict enforcement of buffer regulations. Planning authorities and the judiciary can collaborate on this. The city must also encourage green infrastructure, like rain gardens, green roofs, permeable pavement, street trees and rain harvesting systems.
    Research has shown these to be environmentally sustainable and cost-effective approaches to managing storm water.

    Another suggested approach is the introduction of the polluter pays principle in city management. This is a system where city residents who are involved in the pollution of the environment are made to pay for the cost of mitigating the impact. Residents who dispose of waste indiscriminately and encroach on wetlands would be made to pay for the cost of the environmental degradation. Cities such as Barcelona and Helsinki have applied this principle in the management of their industrial discharge and contaminated waste.

    Finally, there should be incentives for city residents to promote environmental sustainability. For example, a deposit refund system has been introduced in several states in the US and Australia. In this system, consumers are made to pay a deposit after purchasing items that can be recycled, such as plastic bottles, and the deposit is reimbursed to the consumer after the return of the empty bottles to a retail store.

    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. Flooding incidents in Ghana’s capital are on the rise. Researchers chase the cause – https://theconversation.com/flooding-incidents-in-ghanas-capital-are-on-the-rise-researchers-chase-the-cause-254000

    MIL OSI – Global Reports

  • MIL-OSI: Best Crypto Casinos 2025: JACKBIT | Rated Top Bitcoin Casino with NO KYC

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    LARNACA, Cyprus, April 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Crypto casino is booming in 2025, but not all platforms are equal. After reviewing dozens, JACKBIT Casino stands out for its top bonuses, newest games, fast sign-up, and no-KYC policy. In this guide, we cover its pros and cons, welcome offers, and what makes it a top crypto casino this year.

    >>CLAIM FREE SPINS & RAKEBACK BONUS at JACKBIT CASINO !<<

    Discover the Best Bitcoin Casino with Free Spins in 2025: JACKBIT Casino

    What makes JACKBIT stand out from the crowd? It’s more than just its sleek user interface or its massive library of 7,000+ casino games, or free spins. JACKBIT delivers a truly next-level crypto gambling experience—with

    instant deposits and withdrawals, zero KYC requirements, and a VIP system that pays back up to 30% in rakeback. As one of the leading bitcoin casinos, JACKBIT ensures user safety and a positive gambling experience, making it a top choice for responsible gamblers.

    Throw in $10,000 in weekly giveaways, 10,000 free spins every week, BTC 10 weekly cashback, and access to the most advanced crypto sportsbook on the market, and JACKBIT becomes more than just a casino—it’s a crypto-powered entertainment hub.

    CLICK HERE TO GET 30% RAKEBACK BONUS + 100 FREE SPINS + NO KYC

    Why We Chose JACKBIT as the Top Online Bitcoin Casino

    >Jackbit Bitcoin Casino Bonus (2025)

    JACKBIT is raising the bar in 2025 with one of the most rewarding crypto casino bonus lineups around:

    Welcome Bonus: 30% Rakeback + 100 Free Spins Wager Free + No KYC

    • 30% Rakeback on Losses
    • 100 Free Spins on First Deposit
    • No KYC Required to Play or Withdraw
    • $10,000 in Weekly Cash Giveaways
    • 10,000 Free Spins Given Away Weekly

    Whether you’re a casual player or a seasoned high roller, JACKBIT’s top bitcoin gambling sites promotions deliver real value. The rakeback system ensures you get up to 30% of your losses back, automatically credited to your account. It’s a rare feature that rewards consistent play and loyalty.

    Plus, the ongoing giveaways offer serious value, with thousands of dollars in cash and free spins distributed every single week. JACKBIT doesn’t just claim to be rewarding—it proves it, week after week.

    How to Join JACKBIT Bitcoin Casino: A Step-by-Step Guide

    Getting started with JACKBIT Casino is quick, easy, and completely hassle-free—even for players in the U.S. With no KYC requirements, you can dive into the action instantly, without uploading any personal documents. Follow these simple steps to join:

    Step 1: Visit the Official JACKBIT Bitcoin Casino

    Head straight to the JACKBIT crypto Casino sign-up page and click the “Sign Up” button in the top right corner to begin.

    Step 2: Set Up Your Account

    Fill out the short registration form with the following details:

    • Your email address
    • A strong password
    • Your country of residence
    • Preferred currency (crypto and fiat options available)

    Agree to the terms and conditions, then click “Create Account.”

    Step 3: Fund Your Account

    Once registered, go to the “Wallet” section to make your first deposit. JACKBIT supports a variety of payment methods like:

    • Bitcoin (BTC)
    • Ethereum (ETH)
    • Tether (USDT)
    • And more payment methods

    Pro Tip: Don’t forget to claim your 30% Rakeback + 100 Free Spins welcome bonus with your first deposit!

    Step 4: Start Playing

    With your account funded, you’re ready to explore JACKBIT’s full range of games. Jump into:

    • Thousands of online slots
    • Live dealer tables
    • The industry-leading crypto sportsbook

    Whether you’re here to spin, bet, or win big—JACKBIT Bitcoin casino delivers from the very first click.

    Why Crypto Casinos

    Crypto casinos have revolutionized the online gaming industry by offering a unique and exciting way to play casino games using cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Litecoin. These casinos provide a secure, transparent, and fair gaming experience, making them a popular choice among players. With the rise of crypto casinos, players can now enjoy a wide range of games, including slots, table games, live dealer games, and more, all from the comfort of their own homes.

    One of the key advantages of crypto casinos is the enhanced security they offer. Transactions made with cryptocurrencies are encrypted and decentralized, reducing the risk of fraud and ensuring that players’ funds are safe. Additionally, the use of blockchain technology allows for provably fair gaming, where players can verify the fairness of each game outcome.

    Crypto casinos also offer a level of anonymity that traditional online casinos cannot match. Players can register and play without providing personal information, thanks to the no KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements. This makes the gaming experience more private and secure.

    In summary, crypto casinos combine the thrill of online gaming with the benefits of cryptocurrency, providing a modern and innovative way to enjoy casino games. Whether you’re a fan of slots, table games, or live dealer games, crypto casinos offer a diverse and exciting gaming experience.

    Getting Started with Crypto Casinos

    Getting started with crypto casinos is easy and straightforward. To begin, players need to choose a reputable and trustworthy crypto casino that offers a wide range of games and accepts their preferred cryptocurrency. Once they have selected a casino, they can create an account and make a deposit using their cryptocurrency wallet.

    Many crypto casinos offer generous welcome bonuses, free spins, and other promotions to new players, making it an excellent way to start their gaming journey. These bonuses can significantly boost your initial bankroll, giving you more opportunities to explore the casino’s game offerings.

    Here’s a step-by-step guide to getting started with crypto casinos:

    1. Choose a Reputable Crypto Casino: Look for a casino with a good reputation, a wide range of games, and positive player reviews. Ensure that the casino supports your preferred cryptocurrency.
    2. Create an Account: Register by providing basic information such as your email address and creating a strong password. Some casinos may also ask for your country of residence and preferred currency.
    3. Make a Deposit: Go to the casino’s wallet section and make a deposit using your cryptocurrency wallet. Most crypto casinos support a variety of cryptocurrencies, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Tether.
    4. Claim Your Welcome Bonus: Don’t forget to claim your welcome bonus, which may include free spins and deposit bonuses. These bonuses can give you a great start and increase your chances of winning.
    5. Start Playing: With your account funded and your bonus claimed, you’re ready to start playing. Explore the casino’s game library, which may include slots, table games, live dealer games, and more.

    By following these steps, you can easily get started with crypto casinos and enjoy a thrilling and rewarding gaming experience.

    Best Ways to Play at JACKBIT Bitcoin Casino

    Whether you’re a crypto-savvy high roller or a casual gamer looking for quick fun, JACKBIT bitcoin casino offers countless ways to play. A key promotional feature is the reload bonus, which encourages both new and returning players to keep engaging with the platform. Here’s how to maximize your gaming experience:

    JACKBIT provides various promotional offers, including a generous deposit bonus that matches a percentage of your initial deposit. This significantly increases your available gaming funds and enhances your overall engagement with the platform.

    1. Explore the 7,000+ casino games

    JACKBIT hosts one of the largest game collections online, offering a wide variety of crypto gambling games—including:

    • Top-tier slots from providers like Pragmatic Play, Nolimit City, and Hacksaw Gaming
    • Live casino tables with real dealers for blackjack, roulette, baccarat, and game shows
    • Bitcoin blackjack for enhanced player experience with faster transactions, lower fees, and added privacy
    • Crypto crash and instant games like Aviator and Plinko for fast-paced action

    Pro Tip: Use the search bar or filters to discover hidden gems and new releases.

    Playing games on JACKBIT allows users to engage with various types of online casino platforms, making it easy to enjoy activities like bingo and traditional slot games using cryptocurrencies.

    2. Take Advantage of Rakeback, Bonuses & Free Spins

    One of the most significant advantages of playing at crypto casinos is the opportunity to take advantage of rakeback, bonuses, and free spins. Rakeback is a reward program that gives players a percentage of their losses back, while bonuses and free spins provide players with extra funds to play with.

    Many crypto casinos offer generous welcome bonuses, reload bonuses, and other promotions to keep players engaged and entertained. For example, a welcome bonus might include a percentage match on your first deposit, along with free spins on popular slot games. Reload bonuses, on the other hand, offer additional funds on subsequent deposits, ensuring that players always have something to look forward to. Additionally, joining a VIP club can provide exclusive benefits such as unique bonuses, cashback deals, and personalized rewards for high-stakes players, elevating the gaming experience.

    Free spins are another popular promotion, giving players the chance to spin the reels of selected slot games without using their own funds. These spins can lead to significant winnings, making them a favorite among players.

    To make the most of these bonuses and promotions, it’s essential to read the terms and conditions carefully. Pay attention to wagering requirements, which dictate how many times you need to play through the bonus before you can withdraw any winnings. By understanding these requirements, you can maximize your gaming experience and increase your chances of winning.

    JACKBIT’s bonus system is built for longevity. Maximize your returns with:

    • Up to 30% rakeback on your gameplay losses
    • 100 free spins on your first deposit
    • $10,000 weekly giveaways
    • 10,000 free spins given away weekly

    These free spin offers are part of promotional incentives designed to enhance your gaming experience. It is important to understand the wagering requirement attached to these bonuses to fully benefit from them.

    DON’T JUST PLAY—GET REWARDED WHILE YOU PLAY

    3. Play Anytime, Anywhere

    JACKBIT is fully optimized for mobile gaming. Whether you’re using a phone or tablet, you’ll get:

    • Lightning-fast loading speeds
    • Smooth navigation
    • Full access to games, promotions, and payments

    Perfect for crypto betting on the go. Top Bitcoin gambling sites are also adapting to mobile trends, ensuring functionality and user-friendliness across devices.

    4. Dive Into the Crypto Sportsbook

    Bet on 140+ sports and thousands of live events every month with JACKBIT’s top-tier sportsbook, one of the leading betting sites offering a range of features for users. Highlights include:

    • 82,000+ live events monthly
    • 4,500+ betting types
    • 75,000+ pre-match events

    Great for sports bettors who want fast, crypto-friendly bets and a variety of betting options.

    5. Stay Anonymous, Stay in Control

    Thanks to no KYC requirements, JACKBIT bitcoin casino lets you play anonymously. Enjoy:

    • Instant registration
    • Fast deposits & instant withdrawals
    • Total control over your data

    Perfect for privacy-first players.

    Why JACKBIT Stands Out as the Best Crypto Casino with Minimum Deposits and Withdrawals

    JACKBIT has earned its reputation as the best crypto casino due to its extensive range of casino games, including live casino games, video poker games, and classic table games. Among bitcoin gambling platforms, JACKBIT bitcoin casino site stands out for offering an authentic casino experience with competitive odds, ensuring that players have the best chance to win big. The Bitcoin casino offers a user-friendly interface and seamless navigation, making it easy for players to access their favorite games and enjoy a thrilling gaming experience.

    The Bitcoin casino’s commitment to innovation is evident in its incorporation of cutting-edge technology, providing players with a visually stunning and immersive gaming environment. Many Bitcoin casinos, including JACKBIT, offer regular promotions and bonuses, such as free spins and deposit bonuses, to keep the excitement alive and reward loyal players.

    JACKBIT Bitcoin Casino Pros & Cons

    Pros:

    • 30% Rakeback on All Bets (welcome bonus)
    • 100 Free Spins on First Deposit
    • $10,000 + 10,000 Free Spins Weekly
    • Best Crypto Sportsbook in 2025
    • 7,000+ Casino Games
    • No KYC Policy
    • Fast Crypto Withdrawals
    • Top VIP Program

    Cons:

    • Not available in some restricted countries (use a VPN for access)

    Accepted Payment Methods at Jackbit online casino

    Cryptocurrencies

    Jackbit online casino supports a wide array of cryptocurrencies for both deposits and withdrawals, including:​

    • Bitcoin (BTC)
    • Ethereum (ETH)
    • Tether (USDT)
    • Binance Coin (BNB)
    • USD Coin (USDC)
    • Tron (TRX)
    • Dogecoin (DOGE)
    • Litecoin (LTC)
    • Ripple (XRP)
    • Bitcoin Cash (BCH)
    • Monero (XMR)
    • Dash (DASH)
    • Solana (SOL)
    • Cardano (ADA)
    • Polygon (MATIC)
    • Shiba Inu (SHIB)
    • Chainlink (LINK)
    • Dai (DAI)
    • BUSD​

    These cryptocurrencies can be used for both deposits and withdrawals, providing flexibility for crypto enthusiasts. ​

    Traditional Payment Methods

    While Jackbit is primarily a crypto-focused platform, it also accepts Visa and Mastercard for deposits. However, withdrawals are typically processed through cryptocurrencies. ​

    Transaction Details

    • Deposit Processing Time: Instant for both crypto and card deposits.
    • Withdrawal Processing Time: Typically within 1 hour; however, in some cases, it may take up to one business day.
    • Minimum Deposit: Varies by cryptocurrency; for example, the minimum deposit is approximately $50.
    • Minimum Withdrawal: Depends on the selected cryptocurrency.
    • Withdrawal Limits: Up to €25,000 per week and €50,000 per month.
    • Fees: Jackbit does not charge fees for crypto deposits. ​

    ️ Verification Requirements

    Jackbit operates with a non-mandatory KYC policy, allowing players to deposit and play without immediate identity verification. However, for large withdrawals or if suspicious activity is detected, the casino may request verification documents. ​

    Currency Exchange

    For players preferring fiat currencies, Jackbit offers the option to purchase cryptocurrencies directly through the platform using Visa or Mastercard, facilitating easy conversion from EUR, USD, or CAD to your chosen crypto. ​

    Jackbit crypto Casino’s diverse payment options, swift transaction times, and user-friendly policies make it a convenient choice for both crypto enthusiasts and traditional players.

    Best Games at JACKBIT crypto Casino

    JACKBIT crypto Casino boasts a world-class collection of over 7,000 games—from high-volatility slots to immersive live dealer tables and crypto-exclusive titles. Whether you’re chasing big wins or just spinning for fun, here are the best games to try at JACKBIT:

    Top Online Slots

    If you’re into spinning reels, JACKBIT crypto casino delivers premium slots with stunning graphics, thrilling bonus features, and enticing progressive jackpots. Some of the fan favorites include:

    • Sweet Bonanza (Pragmatic Play) – Candy-themed chaos with tumbling wins and free spins.
    • Wanted Dead or a Wild (Hacksaw Gaming) – A wild-west, high-volatility slot with massive win potential.
    • Gates of Olympus (Pragmatic Play) – Multipliers rain from the gods in this legendary hit.
    • Book of Dead (Play’n GO) – A classic Egyptian-themed slot with big RTP and bonus rounds + 100 free spins available.
    • The Dog House Megaways (Pragmatic Play) – Cute pups, sticky wilds, and explosive payouts.
    • Jammin’ Jars (Push Gaming) – Funky fruit, cluster wins, and exciting bonus features.

    Pro Tip: Look for “Bonus Buy” slots to fast-track your way into free spins and features.

    Best Live Casino Games

    Powered by Evolution, Pragmatic Live, and other top providers, JACKBIT’s live casino gives you the real-deal Vegas vibe—without ever leaving your screen.

    • Lightning Roulette – A thrilling twist on classic roulette with huge multipliers.
    • Blackjack VIP – For high rollers who want fast-paced action and high limits.
    • Crazy Time & Monopoly Live – Game-show-style live games with massive multipliers and interactive fun.
    • Baccarat Squeeze – For fans of high-stakes drama and slow-reveal tension.

    All live dealer games are crypto-friendly and fully mobile-optimized.

    Crash & Instant Games

    For players who like fast-paced, high-risk thrills, JACKBIT offers instant and crash games that pay out in seconds:

    • Aviator – Watch the plane soar—cash out before it crashes!
    • Plinko – Drop the ball and hope for a big multiplier.
    • Dice & Mines – Simple yet addictive games with customizable risk.

    These games are perfect for crypto players looking to flip coins fast.

    Crypto Sportsbook Games

    If sports betting is your game, JACKBIT’s sportsbook is one of the most complete on the crypto scene:

    • 82,000+ live monthly events
    • 4,500+ bet types across 140+ sports
    • Esports, live stats, and instant crypto payouts

    Great for betting on everything from Premier League to CS:GO.

    Crypto Casino Software Providers

    Crypto casino software providers play a crucial role in the online gaming industry by developing and supplying games to crypto casinos. Some of the top crypto casino software providers include Pragmatic Play, Evolution Gaming, and Hacksaw Gaming. These providers offer a wide range of games, including slots, table games, and live dealer games, all of which are designed to provide a fair and exciting gaming experience.

    Pragmatic Play is known for its high-quality slots and innovative game features. Their games often come with stunning graphics, engaging themes, and exciting bonus rounds. Popular titles from Pragmatic Play include “Sweet Bonanza” and “The Dog House Megaways.”

    Evolution Gaming is a leader in live dealer games, offering an authentic casino experience with real dealers and high-definition streaming. Their games include classics like blackjack, roulette, and baccarat, as well as unique game-show-style titles like “Crazy Time” and “Monopoly Live.”

    Hacksaw Gaming is another top provider, known for its creative and high-volatility slots. Games like “Wanted Dead or a Wild” offer thrilling gameplay and the potential for massive wins.

    These software providers ensure that crypto casinos offer a diverse and exciting gaming experience, with something for every type of player. Whether you prefer spinning the reels of a slot game or enjoying the thrill of live dealer games, these providers have you covered.

    A Leader in Bitcoin Gambling sites with Live Dealer Games, free spins & Customer Support

    As a leading crypto casino, JACKBIT stands out among BTC gambling sites by providing a seamless experience for both deposits and withdrawals as well as free spins. With instant deposits and withdrawals, players can enjoy their winnings without delay.

    The Bitcoin gambling sites also offer a generous welcome bonus, live casino games, and BTC 30% weekly cashback, making it an attractive choice for both new and seasoned players. JACKBIT crypto casino supports a wide variety of cryptocurrencies, including BTC and ETH, ensuring that players can easily manage their funds using their preferred digital currency rather than other bitcoin gambling sites.

    JACKBIT’s commitment to security is unwavering, with advanced encryption technology and robust security measures in place to protect players’ personal and financial information.

    Additionally, JACKBIT is KYC VPN friendly, allowing players to maintain anonymity and privacy while enjoying a seamless gaming experience without restrictions. The crypto gambling site’s dedication to providing a safe and secure gaming environment has earned it a loyal following among crypto enthusiasts.

    A Trusted Name in Bitcoin Online Gambling Sites with Multiple Trending Casino Games

    When it comes to choosing a trusted crypto gambling site, there are many options to consider. However, not all sites are created equal, and some stand out from the rest due to their reputation, game selection, and player experience.

    Trusted Bitcoin casino sites offer a wide range of games, from slots and table games to live dealer games and sports betting. These sites are known for their fair play, secure transactions, and excellent customer support.

    For example, a top Bitcoin gambling site might offer thousands of slot games with instant deposits and withdrawals from leading providers like Pragmatic Play and Evolution Gaming. These games come with exciting themes, high-quality graphics, and the potential for big wins. Table games like blackjack, roulette, and baccarat are also popular, providing a classic casino experience.

    Live dealer games bring the excitement of a real casino to your screen, with professional dealers and interactive gameplay. Sports betting is another popular option, allowing players to bet on their favorite sports and events with competitive odds.

    In summary, trusted Bitcoin gambling sites offer a comprehensive and enjoyable gaming experience, with a wide range of games and features to suit every player. Whether you’re a fan of slots, table games, live dealer games, or sports betting, these sites provide a secure and exciting way to enjoy online gambling.

    A Trusted Name in Sports betting & Bitcoin casino with trending casino games & with a Bitcoin Casino bonus including instant deposits and withdrawals

    JACKBIT crypto casino has become synonymous with trust and reliability in the online gambling space. As one of the many Bitcoin gambling sites, it offers a cryptocurrency-based gambling experience with extensive game libraries, enticing promotions, and user-friendly features. Bitcoin casino sites like JACKBIT provide advantages such as instant withdrawals, a diverse array of gaming options, and generous bonuses, all specifically tailored for players using cryptocurrencies. The Bitcoin casino is known for its provably fair games, ensuring fair play for all users. Additionally, JACKBIT’s customer support is top-notch, providing assistance whenever needed. The casino’s support team is available 24/7, ready to assist players with any questions or concerns they may have.

    JACKBIT’s crypto casino transparency and commitment to fair play have made it a favorite among players seeking a reputable and trustworthy online casino. The Bitcoin casino offers an extensive library of crypto casino games, including popular titles from leading providers, and ensures that players always have access to the latest and greatest in online gaming.

    A Diverse Online Casino Game

    From sports betting to bitcoin slots, JACKBIT crypto casino caters to all types of players. The Bitcoin casino features a wide array of games from top providers like Pragmatic Play and Evolution Gaming. Whether you’re a fan of jackpot slots, enjoy the simplicity of dice games, or prefer the thrill of live dealer games, JACKBIT has something for all casino enthusiasts. The casino’s diverse selection of games, including exciting jackpot games, ensures that players never run out of options, with new titles added regularly to keep the gaming experience fresh and exciting.

    JACKBIT’s sports betting platform offers competitive odds and a wide range of betting options, allowing sports enthusiasts to place bets on their favorite teams and events. Additionally, platforms like Mega Dice feature an extensive range of over 4,000 casino games and a robust sportsbook, making it an appealing choice for both casino enthusiasts and sports bettors.

    The crypto casino’s live dealer games provide an authentic casino experience, with real dealers and interactive gameplay that brings the excitement of a brick-and-mortar casino to the comfort of your home.

    Promotions and Deposit Bonuses of Best Crypto Casino Online

    Best crypto casinos are known for their enticing promotions and bonuses, designed to attract new players and keep existing ones engaged. These can range from generous welcome bonuses to exciting free spins and loyalty programs. For instance, some crypto casinos offer a welcome bonus of up to 1 BTC, along with 50 free spins on popular slot games. This gives new players a substantial boost to start their gaming journey.

    In addition to the welcome bonuses, players can also benefit from deposit bonuses, which can match a percentage of their deposits, sometimes up to 100%. Reload bonuses are another popular promotion, offering players additional funds on subsequent deposits. Weekly free spins, free bets, and other ongoing promotions keep the excitement alive, providing players with more opportunities to win big. These bonuses not only enhance the gaming experience but also increase the chances of hitting those coveted jackpots.

    Security, Safety & Customer Support

    Security and safety are paramount in the world of crypto casinos. These platforms employ advanced encryption technology to safeguard player data and ensure that all transactions are secure. This means that your personal and financial information is protected at all times. Additionally, crypto casinos use provably fair algorithms to guarantee that games are fair and random, providing a level playing field for all players.

    Many crypto & Bitcoin gambling sites are licensed and regulated by reputable authorities, such as the Curacao Gaming Authority. This ensures that they operate in a fair and transparent manner, adhering to strict standards of conduct. Players can also enhance their security by using VPNs, adding an extra layer of protection to their gaming experience. With these measures in place, players can enjoy their favorite games with confidence, knowing that their safety is a top priority.

    Mobile Gaming

    Mobile gaming has become a cornerstone of the crypto casino experience, allowing players to access their favorite games from anywhere, at any time. Many best crypto casinos have developed mobile-friendly websites and apps that are optimized for use on smartphones and tablets. This means you can enjoy seamless gameplay, whether you’re at home or on the go.

    With mobile devices, players can easily deposit and withdraw funds, play games, and participate in promotions, all with a few taps on their screens. The convenience and accessibility of mobile device gaming have made crypto casinos more appealing than ever. Whether you’re waiting for a bus or relaxing at home, you can dive into the exciting world of crypto casino gaming whenever you want.

    Final Words on Best Bitcoin Gambling Sites No KYC VPN Friendly

    JACKBIT’s recognition as the best bitcoin casino online for 2025 is a testament to its dedication to providing a superior gaming experience. As one of the best crypto casinos, JACKBIT excels in software quality, game variety, bonuses, and user experience.

    With its robust selection of games, secure payment methods, and exceptional customer service, JACKBIT is set to continue leading the crypto casino industry rather than many Bitcoin casinos in the industry. Whether you’re a seasoned gambler or new to the world of crypto gambling, JACKBIT is the perfect platform to explore the exciting world of the best crypto gambling sites. The casino’s commitment to innovation within the crypto gambling space, security, and player satisfaction ensures that it remains at the forefront of the online gambling industry.

    FAQ about Best Crypto gambling Sites with NO KYC, VPN Friendly

    What makes JACKBIT the best crypto casino?

    JACKBIT offers a comprehensive selection of casino games, including live casino games and online casino games, along with secure and instant deposits, free spins, casino games, and withdrawal options. As a leading Bitcoin online gambling site, JACKBIT’s reputation for fair play and generous bonuses, such as free spins, further enhances its appeal.

    JACKBIT’s cutting-edge technology and user-friendly interface make it a top choice for players seeking an exceptional gaming experience, especially those interested in playing games like bingo and traditional slot games using cryptocurrencies.

    Can I play sports betting on JACKBIT Bitcoin casino?

    Yes, JACKBIT provides a robust sports betting platform, allowing players to place bets on a wide range of sports events with competitive odds. The platform offers various betting options, catering to both casual bettors and seasoned sports enthusiasts. JACKBIT’s sports betting section is designed to provide an engaging and rewarding experience for all players.

    Are there live dealer games available at this crypto casino?

    Absolutely, JACKBIT features an exciting array of live dealer games that bring the authentic casino experience directly to your screen. Players can interact with real dealers and enjoy the thrill of live gaming from the comfort of their own homes. The live dealer games & dice games at JACKBIT are powered by top providers, ensuring high-quality streaming and immersive gameplay.

    Is JACKBIT a reliable platform for online gambling & provably fair games?

    Yes, JACKBIT is renowned for its reliability and trustworthiness in the online gambling industry, offering provably fair games and excellent customer support. The casino’s commitment to security and transparency ensures that players can enjoy their gaming experience with peace of mind. JACKBIT’s reputation as a trusted name in online gambling has made it a popular choice among players worldwide.

    Can I find JACKBIT on bitcoin gambling sites with instant deposits and withdrawals?

    Yes, JACKBIT is prominently featured on many top crypto gambling sites as a leading choice for crypto casino gaming. The casino’s stellar reputation and wide range of gaming options make it a preferred platform for players seeking a top-tier crypto gambling experience. JACKBIT’s presence on reputable bitcoin gambling sites further solidifies its status as a leading player in the industry.

    What sets JACKBIT apart from the best crypto gambling sites?

    JACKBIT stands out among the best crypto gambling sites due to its extensive range of dice games, attractive bonuses, and user-friendly interface. The platform supports a variety of cryptocurrencies, offers innovative incentives, and ensures low transaction fees, making it an appealing choice for players. JACKBIT’s commitment to providing a secure and enjoyable gambling experience, along with features like instant withdrawal for transaction efficiency, makes it a top contender in the crypto gambling market.

    Types of Crypto Casino Games

    Crypto casino games come in a variety of forms, catering to different player preferences and offering a unique twist on traditional casino gaming. The most common types include slots, table games, live dealer games, and specialty games like Crash and Plinko.

    Slots are a staple in any crypto casino, offering a range of themes, mechanics, and betting limits. From classic fruit machines to modern video slots with intricate storylines and bonus features, there’s something for every slot enthusiast. Popular titles often come from renowned providers like Pragmatic Play and Hacksaw Gaming, ensuring high-quality graphics and engaging gameplay.

    Table games such as blackjack, roulette, and baccarat provide a more traditional casino experience. These games are perfect for players who enjoy strategy and skill-based gaming. Crypto casinos often offer multiple variations of these classic games, catering to both beginners and seasoned players.

    Live dealer games offer an immersive experience with real-time interaction with professional dealers. Powered by top providers like Evolution Gaming, these games bring the excitement of a brick-and-mortar casino to your screen. Players can enjoy live blackjack, roulette, baccarat, and even game-show-style titles like Crazy Time and Monopoly Live.

    Specialty games like Crash and Plinko add a unique twist to the traditional casino experience. These games are fast-paced and often involve simple mechanics with high-risk, high-reward potential. For example, in Crash, players must cash out before a multiplier crashes, while Plinko involves dropping a ball to land on a high multiplier.

    With the rise of crypto casinos, players can now enjoy these games with the added benefits of cryptocurrency, including fast transactions, anonymity, and provably fair gaming. This diverse selection ensures that every player can find something to enjoy, making crypto casinos a popular choice for online gaming enthusiasts.

    Bitcoin Online Gambling

    Bitcoin online gambling has surged in popularity, offering players a secure, fast, and anonymous way to enjoy their favorite casino games. Bitcoin casinos provide a wide range of games, including slots, table games, and live dealer games, all of which can be played using Bitcoin.

    One of the primary advantages of Bitcoin online gambling is the speed of transactions. Deposits and withdrawals are processed almost instantly, allowing players to access their funds without delay. This is a significant improvement over traditional payment methods, which can take several days to process.

    Security is another major benefit. Bitcoin transactions are encrypted and decentralized, reducing the risk of fraud and ensuring that players’ funds are safe. Additionally, Bitcoin casinos often employ advanced security measures, such as two-factor authentication and SSL encryption, to protect players’ personal and financial information.

    Anonymity is a key feature of Bitcoin online gambling. Players can register and play without providing personal information, thanks to the no KYC (Know Your Customer) requirements. This makes the gaming experience more private and secure, appealing to players who value their privacy.

    Bitcoin casinos also offer generous welcome bonuses, reload bonuses, and other promotions to attract new players. These bonuses can significantly boost your initial bankroll, giving you more opportunities to explore the casino’s game offerings. For example, a welcome bonus might include a percentage match on your first deposit, along with free spins on popular slot games.

    In summary, Bitcoin online gambling provides a more convenient, secure, and rewarding gaming experience. With fast deposits and withdrawals, low transaction fees, and increased security, it’s no wonder that more players are turning to Bitcoin casinos for their online gaming needs.

    A Trusted Name in Sports betting & Bitcoin casino with trending casino games & with a Bitcoin Casino bonus including instant deposits and withdrawals

    Comparison of Gambling Sites

    When comparing gambling sites, several factors come into play, including the range of games, bonuses and promotions, payment methods, and customer support. The best Bitcoin gambling sites excel in these areas, providing a comprehensive and enjoyable gaming experience.

    Range of Games: The best gambling sites offer a wide variety of games, including slots, table games, and live dealer games. A diverse game library ensures that players have plenty of options to choose from, catering to different preferences and skill levels. Look for sites that feature games from top providers like Pragmatic Play, Evolution Gaming, and Hacksaw Gaming.

    Bonuses and Promotions: Generous bonuses and promotions are a hallmark of top gambling sites. These can include welcome bonuses, reload bonuses, free spins, and loyalty programs. Bonuses not only enhance the gaming experience but also increase the chances of winning. It’s important to read the terms and conditions, especially the wagering requirements, to fully benefit from these offers.

    Payment Methods: A variety of payment methods is crucial for a seamless gaming experience. The best Bitcoin gambling sites support multiple cryptocurrencies, such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Litecoin, as well as traditional payment methods like credit cards and bank transfers. Fast deposits and withdrawals, with low transaction fees, are essential for player satisfaction.

    Customer Support: Reliable customer support is a key factor in choosing a gambling site. The best sites offer 24/7 support through multiple contact options, including live chat, email, and phone. Prompt and helpful customer service ensures that any issues or questions are resolved quickly, enhancing the overall gaming experience.

    Reputation: A strong reputation is built on positive player reviews and high ratings. Trusted gambling sites are licensed and regulated by reputable authorities, ensuring fair play and transparency. Look for sites with a proven track record of reliability and trustworthiness.

    By considering these factors, players can make an informed decision when choosing a gambling site that meets their needs and provides a secure and enjoyable gaming experience.

    Email: support@jackbit.com

    Legal Disclaimer
    This content is for informational purposes only and not legal, financial, or gambling advice. Ensure compliance with local gambling laws. No warranties are made regarding accuracy. Readers are responsible for verifying information and ensuring legal compliance. Gambling may be restricted in some regions.

    Affiliate Disclosure
    Some links may be affiliate links, earning a commission at no cost to you. Recommendations are based on objective evaluation, and partnerships do not influence conclusions.

    Disclaimer: This press release is provided by the Jackbit. The statements, views, and opinions expressed in this content are solely those of the content provider and do not necessarily reflect the views of this media platform or its publisher. We do not endorse, verify, or guarantee the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of any information presented. We do not guarantee any claims, statements, or promises made in this article. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered financial, investment, or trading advice.

    Investing in crypto and mining-related opportunities involves significant risks, including the potential loss of capital. It is possible to lose all your capital. These products may not be suitable for everyone, and you should ensure that you understand the risks involved. Seek independent advice if necessary. Speculate only with funds that you can afford to lose. Readers are strongly encouraged to conduct their own research and consult with a qualified financial advisor before making any investment decisions. However, due to the inherently speculative nature of the blockchain sector—including cryptocurrency, NFTs, and mining—complete accuracy cannot always be guaranteed.

    Neither the media platform nor the publisher shall be held responsible for any fraudulent activities, misrepresentations, or financial losses arising from the content of this press release. In the event of any legal claims or charges against this article, we accept no liability or responsibility.

    A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/ae192d0f-d29a-4a8e-a8d3-d5a7732306a7

    The MIL Network

  • MIL-Evening Report: Why do Labor and the Coalition have so many similar policies? It’s simple mathematics

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabriele Gratton, Professor of Politics and Economics and ARC Future Fellow, UNSW Sydney

    Pundits and political scientists like to repeat that we live in an age of political polarisation. But if you sat through the second debate between Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition leader Peter Dutton last Wednesday night, you’d be forgiven for asking what polarisation people are talking about.

    While the two candidates may have different values, as Albanese said, the policies they propose and the view of society they have put forward in this campaign don’t differ so much.

    Why so similar?

    On housing supply, Dutton promises to help local councils solve development bottlenecks. The PM says his government is already starting to do the same thing.

    To tackle the cost-of-living crisis, one wants to reduce the government’s cut of petrol prices. The other is having the government pay for part of our energy bills.

    What about the future of a multicultural Australia? One party says they’ll cap international student numbers to lower immigration. The other is trying to do precisely the same. (Even though the policy may be irrelevant to near-future immigration and have little impact on housing costs.)

    Surely, you might think, many Australians must have more progressive ideas than those Albanese is proposing. And surely many Australians would like more conservative policies than those Dutton is coming up with.

    If that’s the case, you’re probably wondering: why are the two leaders focusing their campaigns on such similar platforms?

    Lining up the voters

    More than 70 years ago, the same questions motivated the work of economists Duncan Black and Anthony Downs. In fact, social scientists had been fascinated by these questions since the Marquis de Condorcet, a philosopher and mathematician, first attempted a mathematical analysis of majority voting at the time of the French Revolution.

    Black and Downs both arrived at a striking conclusion: when two candidates compete to win a majority of votes, they will converge their electoral campaign on (roughly) identical policies, even when the voters at large have very differing policy preferences.

    Their argument, sometimes referred to as the Median Voter Theorem, goes as follows.

    Imagine we could line up all 18,098,797 Australian enrolled voters from the most progressive at the extreme left to the most conservative at the extreme right. Then, a choice of electoral platform by a candidate may be imagined as the candidate placing himself somewhere on this ideal line up of voters.

    Now imagine Albanese were to propose a strongly progressive platform and Dutton were to opt for a strongly conservative one. Naturally, those voters “closer” to Albanese’s platform will probably put Labor ahead of the Coalition in their ballot. Similarly, those closer to Dutton will put the Coalition ahead.

    Let us imagine that in this situation Albanese would secure a majority of seats. What could Dutton do to win? The answer is: move a bit to the left.

    In doing so, Dutton would win over some voters who were previously closer to Albanese than to himself. Meanwhile, all the voters to the right of Dutton will remain closer to him than to Albanese. The net result would be simply a swing in favour of Dutton.

    The problem of where to set up shop

    In 1957, Downs realised that the problem of choosing where to place your platform to attract more voters has the the same mathematical form as the problem firms face when choosing where to place their outlets to attract more customers. Harold Hotelling, a mathematical statistician and economist, had studied the firms’ problem in 1929. So Downs could simply apply Hotelling’s mathematical tool to his new political problem.

    Downs showed that, as Dutton and Albanese compete for voters, they will end up converging to the same platform. One that does not allow for a further move that can swing voters. This platform will be what social choice scholars call a Condorcet winner, meaning more than half of voters would choose it over any other platform.

    In fact, there is only one such platform: the policy preferred by a voter who is more conservative than exactly half of the voters and more progressive than exactly half of the voters. The voter exactly in the middle of our idealised line-up. The median voter.

    A centrist equilibrium

    When Albanese and Dutton are both proposing the median voter’s preferred platform, they both have about the same chances of winning the election: 50%. However, neither can do anything to improve their chances.

    In this situation, if Dutton were to move a little more right, he would simply lose to Albanese some of the voters just to the right of the median voter. If Albanese were to move a little more left, he would lose to Dutton some of the voters just left of the median voter.

    They are in what game theorists call a Nash equilibrium: a situation where neither of them can gain by changing their strategy.

    Not literal, but still illuminating

    Downs’ result should not be taken literally.

    Politicians may have inherent motivations to promote certain policies, beyond just winning votes. And sometimes political leaders can offer new views of society, changing how voters think about what a just and prosperous future should look like.

    However, at least with leaders like Albanese and Dutton, and in the presence of a (mostly) two-party system like in Australia, Downs’ model shows us what the democratic electoral process tends towards: parties that compete to appeal to the most median centrist voters.

    Gabriele Gratton is the recipient of an Australian Research Council Future Fellowship (FT210100176, “Resilient Democracy for the 21st Century”) and his research is supported under the Australian Research Council’s Discovery Projects funding scheme (Project DP240103257, “The Economics of (Mis)Information in the Age of Social Media”).

    ref. Why do Labor and the Coalition have so many similar policies? It’s simple mathematics – https://theconversation.com/why-do-labor-and-the-coalition-have-so-many-similar-policies-its-simple-mathematics-254804

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz

  • MIL-Evening Report: ER Report: A Roundup of Significant Articles on EveningReport.nz for April 23, 2025

    ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on April 23, 2025.

    The ‘responsible gambling’ mantra does nothing to prevent harm. It probably makes things worse
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Charles Livingstone, Associate Professor, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University Haelen Haagen/Shutterstock Recent royal commissions and inquiries into Crown and Star casino groups attracted much media attention. Most of this was focused on money laundering and other illegalities. The Victorian royal commission found widespread

    This election, Gen Z and Millennials hold most of the voting power. How might they wield it?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Intifar Chowdhury, Lecturer in Government, Flinders University The centre of gravity of Australian politics has shifted. Millennials and Gen Z voters, now comprising 47% of the electorate, have taken over as the dominant voting bloc. But this generational shift isn’t just about numerical dominance. It’s also about

    Only a third of Australians support increasing defence spending: new research
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Dunley, Senior Lecturer in History and Maritime Strategy, UNSW Sydney National security issues have been a constant feature of this federal election campaign. Both major parties have spruiked their national security credentials by promising additional defence spending. The Coalition has pledged to spend 3% of Australia’s

    After stunning comeback, centre-left Liberals likely to win majority of seats at Canadian election
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne In Canada, the governing centre-left Liberals had trailed the Conservatives by more than 20 points in January, but now lead by five points and are likely to

    The Greens are hoping for another ‘greenslide’ election. What do the polls say?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Narelle Miragliotta, Associate Professor in Politics, Murdoch University Election talk is inevitably focused on Labor and the Coalition because they are the parties that customarily form government. But a minor party like the Greens is consequential, regardless of whether the election delivers a minority government. Certainly, the

    Victory for US press freedom and workers – court grants injunction in VOA media case
    Asia Pacific Report The US District Court for the District of Columbia has granted a preliminary injunction in Widakuswara v Lake, affirming the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM) was unlawfully shuttered by the Trump administration, Acting Director Victor Morales and Special Adviser Kari Lake. The decision enshrines that USAGM must fulfill its legally required

    Scientists claim to have found evidence of alien life. But ‘biosignatures’ might hide more than they reveal
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Campbell Rider, PhD Candidate in Philosophy – Philosophy of Biology, University of Sydney Artist’s impression of the exoplanet K2-18b A. Smith/N. Madhusudhan (University of Cambridge) Whether or not we’re alone in the universe is one of the biggest questions in science. A recent study, led by astrophysicist Nikku

    What would change your mind about climate change? We asked 5,000 Australians – here’s what they told us
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kelly Kirkland, Research Fellow in Psychology, The University of Queensland LOOKSLIKEPHOTO/Shutterstock Australia just sweltered through one of its hottest summers on record, and heat has pushed well into autumn. Once-in-a-generation floods are now striking with alarming regularity. As disasters escalate, insurers are warning some properties may soon

    Even experts disagree over whether social media is bad for kids. We examined why
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Simon Knight, Associate Professor, Transdisciplinary School, University of Technology Sydney A low relief sculpture depicting Plato and Aristotle arguing adorning the external wall of Florence Cathedral. Krikkiat/Shutterstock Disagreement and uncertainty are common features of everyday life. They’re also common and expected features of scientific research. Despite this,

    Australian women are wary of AI being used in breast cancer screening – new research
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alison Pearce, Associate Professor, Health Economics, University of Sydney Okrasiuk/Shutterstock Artificial intelligence (AI) is becoming increasingly relevant in many aspects of society, including health care. For example, it’s already used for robotic surgery and to provide virtual mental health support. In recent years, scientists have developed AI

    These 3 climate misinformation campaigns are operating during the election run-up. Here’s how to spot them
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alfie Chadwick, PhD Candidate, Monash Climate Change Communication Research Hub, Monash University Australia’s climate and energy wars are at the forefront of the federal election campaign as the major parties outline vastly different plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and tackle soaring power prices. Meanwhile, misinformation about

    Port of Darwin’s struggling Chinese leaseholder may welcome an Australian buy-out
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Colin Hawes, Associate professor of law, University of Technology Sydney Slow Walker/Shutterstock Far from causing trade frictions, an Australian buyout of the Port of Darwin lease may provide a lifeline for its struggling Chinese parent company Landbridge Group. Both Labor and the Coalition have proposed such a

    When rock music met ancient archeology: the enduring power of Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Craig Barker, Head, Public Engagement, Chau Chak Wing Museum, University of Sydney Sony Music The 1972 concert film Pink Floyd Live at Pompeii, back in cinemas this week, remains one of the most unique concert documentaries ever recorded by a rock band. The movie captured the band

    Gambling in Australia: how bad is the problem, who gets harmed most and where may we be heading?
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alex Russell, Principal Research Fellow, CQUniversity Australia Mick Tsikas/AAP, Joel Carret/AAP, Darren England/AAP, Ihor Koptilin/Shutterstock, The Conversation, CC BY Gambling prevalence studies provide a snapshot of gambling behaviour, problems and harm in our communities. They are typically conducted about every five years. In some Australian states and

    Lest we forget? Aside from Anzac Day, NZ has been slow to remember its military veterans
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alexander Gillespie, Professor of Law, University of Waikato Fiona Goodall/Getty Images Following some very public protests, including Victoria Cross recipient Willie Apiata handing back his medal, the government’s announcement of an expanded official definition of the term “veteran” brings some good news for former military personnel ahead

    Dutton promises Coalition would increase defence spending to 3% of GDP ‘within a decade’
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra Opposition Leader Peter Dutton will promise a Coalition government would boost Australia’s spending on defence to 2.5% of GDP within five years and 3% within a decade. Launching the Coalition’s long-awaited defence policy on Wednesday in Western Australia, Dutton will

    Leaders trade barbs and well-worn lines in unspectacular third election debate
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joshua Black, Visitor, School of History, Australian National University Anthony Albanese and Peter Dutton have met for the third leaders’ debate of this election campaign, this time on the Nine network. And while the debate traversed much of the same ground as the first two, the quick-fire

    Election Diary: Dutton in third debate gives Labor ammunition for its scare about cuts
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra In the leaders’ third head-to-head encounter, on Nine on Tuesday, Peter Dutton’s bluntness when pressed on cuts has given more ammunition to Labor’s scare campaign about what a Coalition government might do. “When John Howard came into power, there was

    To truly understand Pope Francis’ theology – and impact – you need to look to his life in Buenos Aires
    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fernanda Peñaloza, Senior Lecturer in Latin American Studies, University of Sydney Pope Francis’ journey from the streets of Flores, a neighbourhood in Buenos Aires, Argentina, to the Vatican, is a remarkable tale. Born in 1936, Jorge Bergoglio was raised in a middle-class family of Italian Catholic immigrants.

    Bougainville takes the initiative in mediation over independence
    By Don Wiseman, RNZ Pacific senior journalist In recent weeks, Bougainville has taken the initiative, boldly stating that it expects to be independent by 1 September 2027. It also expects the PNG Parliament to quickly ratify the 2019 referendum, in which an overwhelming majority of Bougainvilleans supported independence. In a third move, it established a

    MIL OSI AnalysisEveningReport.nz