NewzIntel.com

Category: Trade

  • MIL-OSI Security: Southern California Political Operative Arrested on Federal Complaint Alleging He Acted as Illegal Agent of People’s Republic of China

    Source: US FBI

    LOS ANGELES – FBI agents this morning arrested a Chino Hills man on federal charges that allege he acted as an illegal agent of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), including while serving as the campaign manager for a political candidate who was elected in 2022 to the city council of a Southern California city.

    Yaoning “Mike” Sun, 64, was arrested without incident and is expected to make his initial appearance this afternoon in United States District Court in downtown Los Angeles.

    A criminal complaint filed Tuesday and unsealed this morning charges Sun with acting as an illegal agent of a foreign power. Sun is also charged with conspiring with another man, Chen Jun, who was sentenced to federal prison last month for acting as an illegal agent of the PRC government and plotting to target U.S.-based practitioners of Falun Gong, a spiritual practice banned in China.

    According to the complaint, Sun served as the campaign manager and close personal confidante for a Southern California politician (described in the affidavit as “Individual 1”) who was running for local elected office in 2022. During the campaign, Sun allegedly communicated with Chen regarding his efforts to get Individual 1 elected. Chen discussed with Chinese government officials how the PRC could “influence” local politicians in the United States, particularly on the issue of Taiwan, according to the complaint. In November 2022, shortly after Individual 1 was elected to office, Chen instructed Sun to prepare a report on the election that was sent to Chinese government officials, who responded positively and expressed thanks, according to the complaint affidavit. Chen also sent a message to Individual 1 stating that Individual 1 was “doing a good job, I hope you can continue the good work, make Chinese people proud,” the affidavit states.

    “The conduct alleged in this complaint is deeply concerning – the defendant is charged with acting on behalf of the People’s Republic of China to influence our political system,” said United States Attorney Martin Estrada. “We cannot permit hostile foreign powers to meddle in the governance of our country. My office and our law enforcement partners will continue to prioritize the security of our nation and the preservation of the liberties that make this country the envy of the world.”

    “This case highlights the breadth of the PRC’s relentless intelligence and malign influence activities targeting the United States,” said Akil Davis, the Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office. “The FBI will continue to use all the tools at its disposal to identify PRC intelligence operations, disrupt PRC information laundering networks, and bring to justice those who seek to engage in criminal conspiracies to undermine the integrity of our elected officials.”

    About a month after Individual 1’s election, Chen arranged a lunch at a Rowland Heights restaurant with Sun and others, a gathering that Chen described to a PRC official as a “core member lunch,” the affidavit alleges. Chen subsequently described the lunch as “successful” as participants agreed to establish a “US-China Friendship Promotional Association.” While Individual 1 did not attend the meeting, Chen described Individual 1 as being part of the association and Sun serving as vice president. “This is the basic team dedicated for us,” Chen wrote to the Chinese government official.

    Chen instructed Sun in early 2023 to write up another report for Chinese officials describing “you and me cultivating and assisting [Individual 1’s] success,” according to the affidavit. In a February 2023 draft of Sun’s report, Sun described his personal background, his history of working against “Chinese secessionist forces,” and boasted that, “most proudly of all, during the 2022 U.S. midterm elections, I orchestrated and organized my team to win the election for city council member candidate [Individual 1].” In subsequent communications outlined in the affidavit, Chen instructed Sun to include a section on Individual 1, who was to be described as a “New Political Star” with connections to other prominent politicians. The affidavit also states that Chen and Sun discussed their “past struggle fighting Taiwanese independence forces . . . over the years and fighting ‘FLG’ [Falun Gong] influences” in a California city.

    In February 2023, Sun and Chen drafted a second report to PRC officials that requested an $80,000 budget to fund additional pro-PRC activities and to combat “anti-China forces” in the United States.   

    After Chen and Sun discussed a planned trip to the PRC to meet with “leadership,” and after Chen directed Sun to schedule a meeting with the Chinese consul general in Los Angeles, Sun and Individual 1 traveled to China in late August 2023.

    A criminal complaint is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    The charge of acting as an illegal agent of a foreign government carries a statutory maximum sentence of 10 years in federal prison. The charge of conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States carries a maximum statutory sentence of five years.

    This FBI is conducting the ongoing investigation in this matter.

    Assistant United States Attorney David Ryan, Chief of the National Security Division, and Assistant United States Attorney Amanda Elbogen of the Terrorism and Export Crimes Section are prosecuting this case, with assistance from Trial Attorney Garrett Coyle of the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section in the Department of Justice’s National Security Division.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI China: Global Trade and Investment Promotion Summit 2025: A snapshot of Beijing Initiative

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

    Editor’s note: Global business and trade leaders on Thursday came together at the Global Trade and Investment Promotion Summit 2025 to launch a Beijing Initiative, calling for further cooperation in the digital era to drive global growth and shared prosperity. Here, China.org.cn walks you through the highlights of the initiative.

    .

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI China: Auto powerhouse Chongqing charges ahead

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

    China SCIO | May 23, 2025

    At a sprawling Changan Automobile factory in southwestern China’s Chongqing, over 140 robotic arms moved in perfect synchrony, welding car parts with minimal human input. Automated guided vehicles zipped freely through the factory floor, weaving between workstations and enhancing both delivery speed and productivity.

    Robotic arms operate at the welding factory of Changan Automobile in southwestern China’s Chongqing, May 20, 2025. [Photo provided by Changan Automobile]

    Changan is one of China’s automotive giants headquartered in Chongqing, a city once best known as the world’s largest producer of laptops and a key mobile phone manufacturing base. In recent years, the inland metropolis has been building out a new industrial cluster centered on automobiles. Leading this shift are local champions like Changan and Seres Group, a private carmaker and partner of tech giant Huawei.

    “Chongqing has established a complete vehicle production system led by Changan and Seres,” said Mayor Hu Henghua during a group interview on May 19. In 2024, the city produced 2.54 million vehicles, ranking third nationwide, said Wang Zhijie, director of the city’s economy and information technology commission.

    Of these vehicles, 953,200 were new energy vehicles (NEVs), representing a year-on-year surge of 90.5% – nearly 60 percentage points above the national average.

    This explosive growth was no accident. The city implemented the “Chongqing Cars Go Global” campaign last year to boost auto export. As a result, exports of NEVs skyrocketed 96.5% last year, according to Hu.

    Cars are awaiting export at Chongqing Dry Port along the New International Land-Sea Trade Corridor, May 20, 2025. [Photo by Liu Jianing/China SCIO]

    One of Chongqing’s key advantages lies in its logistics capabilities. Strategically located at the intersection of the Belt and Road Initiative and the New International Land-Sea Trade Corridor, the city has developed a multidirectional, multimodal transportation network, Hu said. For example, in 2024, the land-sea trade corridor connected Chongqing with 555 ports in 127 countries and regions, according to him. 

    Chongqing’s strategy does not stop at export. It is also investing heavily in innovation. “We have established a collaborative innovation ecosystem that integrates industry, academia, and research, led by key enterprises and supported by coordinated efforts across the upstream and downstream of the industrial chain. And in the field of intelligent and connected NEVs, companies like Changan and Seres are leading the efforts,” Wang said. 

    For example, Changan has more than 18,000 engineers from 31 countries and regions, building a global R&D network connecting 10 cities in six countries, each with its own focus, according to the company. The carmaker has enhanced vehicle intelligence through its self-developed modular vehicle architecture and improved battery efficiency with its proprietary e-drive system.

    Last year, Chongqing’s investment in industrial technology upgrade grew by 24%, and it rose another 27.4% in the first quarter of 2025, Wang said. Seven Chongqing-based firms – including Changan and Seres – were selected for China’s first batch of national-level smart factory program. The city is also actively guiding suppliers to pivot from making auto parts for gas vehicles to NEV components.

    In the high-end segment, a premium model co-developed by Seres and Huawei dominated China’s luxury EV market in 2024, particularly in the price range above 500,000 yuan (US$69,403), Wang said. 

    On May 16, Changan’s plant in Rayong, Thailand, officially commenced production with an annual capacity of 100,000 NEV units, further strengthening Chongqing’s global foothold.

    MIL OSI China News –

  • MIL-OSI: Seligson & Co OMX Helsinki 25 Exchange Traded Fund: Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken Ab as a New Authorized Participant

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    Seligson & Co Fund Management Company Plc
    STOCK EXCHANGE NOTICE 23.5.2025

    SELIGSON & CO OMX HELSINKI 25 EXCHANGE TRADED FUND: SKANDINAVISKA ENSKILDA BANKEN AB AS A NEW AUTHORIZED PARTICIPANT

    Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB will be added on 26 May 2025 as a new Authorized Participant for subscription and redemption orders of fund units in the OMXH25 Exchange Traded Fund UCITS ETF. The Authorized Participants for the OMXH25 Exchange Traded Fund are thus now Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken AB, Flow Traders B.V., ABN AMRO Clearing Bank N.V., Bluefin Europe LLP, Danske Bank A/S Helsinki Branch, Evli Bank Plc, Handelsbanken AB / Finland Branch, Morgan Stanley & Co International Plc and Nordea Bank Plc.

    Seligson & Co Fund Management Company Plc
    Aleksi Härmä
    Managing Director
    email: aleksi.harma@seligson.fi
    phone: +358 (0)9 6817 8235

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Ten Chinese Nationals Charged with Large-Scale Hacking of U.S. and International Victims on Behalf of the Chinese Government

    Source: US FBI

    Eight Defendants Were Employees of i-Soon, a Chinese Company Hacking at the Direction of the Chinese Government, and Two Defendants are Chinese Officials Who Directed the Hacks

    Matthew Podolsky, the Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York; Sue J. Bai, the Head of the U.S. Department of Justice’s National Security Division; and Leslie R. Backschies, the Acting Assistant Director in Charge of the New York Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), announced the unsealing of a two-count criminal Indictment charging 10 defendants with a years-long hacking scheme committed through the Chinese company i-Soon.  At the direction of the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”) government, i-Soon employees hacked and attempted to hack victims across the globe, including a large religious organization in the U.S., critics and dissidents of the PRC government, a state legislative body, U.S. government agencies, the ministries of foreign affairs of multiple governments in Asia, and news organizations. i-Soon’s victims were of interest to the PRC government because, among other reasons, they were prominent overseas critics of the PRC government or because the PRC government considered them threatening to the rule of the Chinese Communist Party.  The 10 defendants remain at large.

    Acting U.S. Attorney Matthew Podolsky said: “State-sponsored hacking is an acute threat to our community and national security. For years, these 10 defendants—two of whom we allege are PRC officials—used sophisticated hacking techniques to target religious organizations, journalists, and Government agencies, all to gather sensitive information for the use of the PRC. These charges will help stop these state-sponsored hackers and protect our national security. The career prosecutors of this Office and our law enforcement partners will continue to uncover alleged state-sponsored hacking schemes, disrupt them, and bring those responsible to justice.”

    National Security Division Head Sue J. Bai said: “The Department of Justice will relentlessly pursue those who threaten our cybersecurity by stealing from our government and our people. Today, we are exposing the Chinese government agents directing and fostering indiscriminate and reckless attacks against computers and networks worldwide, as well as the enabling companies and individual hackers that they have unleashed. We will continue to fight to dismantle this ecosystem of cyber mercenaries and protect our national security.”  

    Acting Assistant Director in Charge Leslie R. Backschies said: “The charges announced today expose the PRC’s continued attempts to spy on and silence anyone it deems threatening to the Chinese Communist Party. As alleged in the indictment, the Chinese government tried to conceal its efforts by working through a private company, but their actions amount to years of state-sponsored hacking of religious and media organizations, numerous government agencies in multiple countries, and dissidents around the world who dared criticize the regime. The FBI will continue to work tirelessly to disrupt our adversaries’ use of emerging technology to silence dissent and undermine the rule of law across the globe.”

    As alleged in the Indictment:[1]

    The PRC’s Ministry of State Security (“MSS”) had responsibility for the PRC’s domestic counterintelligence, non-military foreign intelligence, and aspects of the PRC’s political and domestic security. The PRC’s Ministry of Public Security (“MPS”) had responsibility for the PRC’s public and political security, including responsibility for law enforcement. To acquire information of interest to the PRC government in a manner that obscured their involvement, the PRC’s MSS and MPS used an extensive network of private companies and contractors in China to conduct unauthorized computer intrusions (“hacks”) in the U.S. and elsewhere.

    One of those private companies was i-Soon.  From approximately 2016 through 2023, i-Soon and its personnel engaged in the numerous and widespread hacking of email accounts, cell phones, servers, and websites at the direction of, and in close coordination with, the PRC’s MSS and MPS. i-Soon generated tens of millions of dollars in revenue and at times had over 100 employees.

    i-Soon’s primary customers were PRC government agencies.  It worked with at least 43 different MSS or MPS bureaus and charged the MSS and MPS between approximately $10,000 and $75,000 for each email inbox it successfully hacked.

    The victims of i-Soon’s hacking included:

    • A newspaper based in New York, New York, that publishes news related to China and is opposed to the Chinese Communist Party.
    • An additional newspaper based in New York, New York.
    • The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, an agency within the Department of Defense that specializes in defense and military intelligence.
    • The U.S. Department of Commerce and the International Trade Administration, an agency within the Department of Commerce that promotes U.S. exports and defends against unfair trade practices.
    • A religious organization based in the U.S. that has thousands of churches and congregations and millions of members.
    • A Texas-based organization founded by a prominent critic of the PRC government focused on promoting human rights and religious freedom in China.
    • A news service funded by the U.S. government that delivers uncensored domestic news to audiences in Asian countries, including China, and is headquartered in Washington, D.C.
    • A state research university in the U.S.
    • The New York State Assembly, a part of the legislature of the state of New York.
    • A religious leader who lived outside of China and the U.S.
    • A newspaper based in Hong Kong, China, that has actively covered the politics of Hong Kong and continues to do so today.
    • The foreign ministry of Taiwan.
    • The foreign ministry of India.
    • The foreign ministry of South Korea.
    • The foreign ministry of Indonesia.

    In many instances, the PRC government was particularly interested in these victims because they had criticized the PRC government.  In other instances, the PRC government was particularly interested in foreign ministries because those foreign ministries were in communication with the U.S.

    In some instances, i-Soon conducted its hacking at the direct request of the MSS or MPS. In other instances, i-Soon conducted hacks on its own initiative and then sold, or attempted to sell, the stolen data to different bureaus of the MSS or MPS.

    i-Soon also trained MPS employees how to hack independently of i-Soon and offered a variety of hacking methods for sale to its customers.  i-Soon touted what it called a “industry-leading offensive and defensive technology” and a “zero-day vulnerability arsenal” used to successfully hack computer systems.  One of i-Soon’s products was software called the “Automated Penetration Testing Platform.” i-Soon advertised the platform’s ability to send email phishing attacks, to create files with malware that could provide access to victims’ computers if opened, and to clone websites of victims in order to induce them to submit personal information. An image of the interface for the Automated Penetration Testing Platform is below:

    Another of i-Soon’s products was software that allowed the user to gain unauthorized access to online accounts or computer systems by deciphering passwords—also called “password cracking.” This platform was called the “Divine Mathematician Password Cracking Platform.” An image of the interface for the Divine Mathematician Password Cracking Platform is below:

    i-Soon also sold software specifically designed to target victim accounts on a variety of computer systems and applications, including Microsoft Outlook; Gmail, the email service provided by Google LLC; the social media network X, formerly known as Twitter; the cellphone operating system Android; and the computer operating systems Windows, Macintosh, and Linux. i-Soon advertised its bespoke software as being able to overcome the unique defenses of these systems.

    For example, with respect to Twitter, i-Soon sold software with the capability to send a victim a spear phishing link and then to obtain access to and control over the victim’s Twitter account. The software had the ability to access Twitter even without the victim’s password and to bypass multi-factor authentication. After a victim’s Twitter was compromised, the software could send tweets, delete tweets, forward tweets, make comments, and like tweets. The purpose of this software was to help i-Soon’s customers, including the PRC government, use hacked Twitter accounts to understand public opinion outside of China. For example, the software could be set to keep track of keywords appearing in tweets or messages. i-Soon referred to this software as its “Public Opinion Guidance and Control Platform (Overseas).” An image from the “Public Opinion Guidance and Control Platform (Overseas)” is below:

    The 10 defendants charged are WU HAIBO, a/k/a “shutd0wn,” a/k/a “Boss Wu,” a/k/a “吴海波,” the Chief Executive Officer, and leader, of i-Soon; CHEN CHENG, a/k/a “lengmo,” a/k/a “Chief C,” a/k/a “Jesse Chen,” a/k/a “陈诚,” the Chief Operating Officer of i-Soon; WANG YAN, a/k/a “crysolo,” a/k/a “王堰,” the leader of one of i-Soon’s “penetration testing” teams; WANG ZHE, a/k/a “ken73224,” a/k/a “王哲,” the Sales Director of i-Soon; ZHOU WEIWEI, a/k/a “nullroot,” a/k/a “周伟伟,” the leader of i-Soon’s “Technology Research and Development Center”; WANG LIYU, a/k/a “PICNIC350116,” a/k/a “王立宇,” an MPS officer based in Chengdu, China; and SHENG JING, a/k/a “sjbible,” “盛晶,” the defendant, an MPS officer based in Shenzhen, China.

    If you have information leading to the identification or location of these 10 defendants, please reach out to the Department of State at rewardsforjustice.net.

    *               *                *

    HAIBO, 43; CHENG, 40; GUODONG, 32; LI, 31; YAN, 35; ZHE, 44; WEIWEI, 37; LIANG, 28; LIYU, 36; and JING, 36, all nationals of China, are charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusions, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, and conspiracy to commit wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. 

    The maximum potential sentences are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendants will be determined by a judge.

    Mr. Podolsky praised the outstanding work of the FBI.

    The case is being prosecuted by the Office’s Complex Frauds and Cybercrime Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Ryan B. Finkel, Steven J. Kochevar, and Kevin Mead are in charge of the prosecution.  Trial Attorney Gregory J. Nicosia Jr. of the National Security Division’s National Security Cyber Section provided valuable assistance.

    The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations, and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

    [1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the text of the Indictment, and the description of the Indictment set forth herein, constitutes only allegations, and every fact described therein should be treated as an allegation.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Fort Smith Arms Dealer Arrested in Austin, Texas

    Source: US FBI

    FORT SMITH – A Fort Smith man was arrested yesterday in Austin, Texas on criminal charges related to his alleged possession of an unregistered destructive device; namely, an improvised explosive bomb, which was not registered to him in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record as required by law. Mehta’s arrest ended a six-day manhunt, in which the public’s assistance was solicited in locating the defendant, who was assumed to be armed and dangerous.

    According to court documents, Neil Ravi Mehta, 31, was found to be in possession of an “improvised explosive bomb” during a federal search warrant executed at his residence on Free Ferry Road, in Fort Smith, Ark.  Law enforcement officers located the device in the top left corner of the kitchen island.  The device was x-rayed by bomb technicians on-scene, made safe, and the evidence was collected.  The following images were taken during the execution of the search warrant: 

    Mehta is charged in a Criminal Complaint with a single count of Unlawful Possession of an Unregistered Destructive Device. A Grand Jury will later hear evidence related to this investigation and determine whether additional criminal charges will be filed against Mehta.  If convicted of the charge of Unlawful Possession of an Unregistered Destructive Device, Mehta faces a maximum penalty of ten years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    U.S. Attorney David Clay Fowlkes of the Western District of Arkansas made the announcement.

    This is a joint investigation involving the following federal law enforcement agencies:  the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF); the U.S. Department of Commerce (DOC), Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), Office of Export Enforcement (OEE); the Internal Revenue Service-Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI); and the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of the Inspector General (DOL-OIG).

    Assistant U.S. Attorney Steven Mohlhenrich and First Assistant U.S. Attorney Kenneth Elser are prosecuting the case.

    A criminal complaint is merely an allegation, and all defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: San Fernando Valley Man Sentenced to More Than One Year in Prison for Sending Emails in Which He Threatened to Bomb FBI’s Los Angeles Office

    Source: US FBI

    LOS ANGELES – A San Fernando Valley man was sentenced today to 15 months in federal prison for sending threatening emails to the FBI, including ones in which he threatened to bomb the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office and referenced the notorious “Unabomber.”

    Mark William Anten, 53, of Sun Valley, was sentenced by United States District Judge Wesley L. Hsu. 

    At the conclusion of a three-day trial, a jury on June 5 found Anten guilty of two counts of threats by interstate communication.

    “Federal agents deserve our appreciation for risking their lives to enforce the law and protect our community,” said United States Attorney Martin Estrada. “Threats against law enforcement are unacceptable and we will continue to stand with the FBI and the rest of our law enforcement partners against those who threaten them.”

    “Mr. Anten double-downed on his intimidation and credible death threats to FBI employees at their place of employment,” said Akil Davis, the Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office. “There are civil, productive ways to disagree with the government if so inclined, but threats of violence is not one of them and – as evidenced by today’s sentencing – will only lead to prison.”

    From July 2023 to December 2023, Anten sent a series of increasingly threatening communications to the FBI, culminating in two threats to bomb the FBI field office in Westwood.

    The emails included repeated references to Theodore John Kaczynski, a.k.a. “The Unabomber,” whose 20-year bombing campaign killed three people and injured nearly two dozen more. Kaczynski was convicted of federal crimes, spent the bulk of his prison sentence in the Supermax federal prison in Colorado and died in a different federal prison last year.

    On November 20, 2023, two FBI task force officers interviewed Anten in front of his residence. During the interview, Anten admitted to sending the previous communications and the officers admonished him to stop contacting agents. Despite the admonition, Anten’s conduct escalated.

    On December 5, 2023, Anten sent to FBI agents an email in which he wrote, “I AM THE UNABOMBER” and “I WILL UNABOMB THE LOS ANGELES FBI HQ.” 

    The next day, Anten wrote to FBI agents, “I can go on a mass murder spree. In fact it would be very explainable by your actions.” He concluded the email with, “[y]ou ain’t getting away with this one,” and signed the email, “SuperMax or Death.”

    Anten also sent FBI agents an email, which attached a photograph depicting the results of an internet search for “how to make a dirty bomb.”

    Later that day, Anten visited the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office and later emailed agents that he visited their building and would continue to do so. Surveillance footage confirmed Anten’s presence there.

    The FBI investigated this matter.

    Assistant United States Attorneys Clifford D. Mpare of the General Crimes Section and Kedar S. Bhatia of the Terrorism and Export Crimes Section prosecuted this case.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Ontario Man Arrested on Complaint Alleging He Exported Shipments of Firearms, Ammunition, and Other Military Items to North Korea

    Source: US FBI

    LOS ANGELES – A San Bernardino County man was arrested today on a federal criminal complaint alleging that he exported to North Korea shipments of firearms, ammunition and other military items that were concealed inside shipping containers bound from Long Beach.

    Shenghua Wen, 41, of Ontario, is charged with conspiracy to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, a felony that carries a statutory maximum sentence of 20 years in federal prison.

    Wen – a Chinese national illegally residing in the United States – was arrested this morning and is expected to make his initial appearance this afternoon in United States District Court in downtown Los Angeles. His arraignment is expected to occur in the coming weeks.

    “It is essential that we protect our country from hostile foreign states that have adverse interests to our nation,” said United States Attorney Martin Estrada. “We have arrested a defendant who allegedly acted at the direction of the North Korean government by conspiring to illegally ship firearms, ammunition, and other military equipment to North Korea. I am grateful to our law enforcement partners for stopping this threat and their tireless commitment to the security of our nation.”

    “The significance of this arrest and discovery of this scheme cannot be overstated,” said FBI Los Angeles Assistant Director in Charge Akil Davis. “Not only did the investigative team prevent additional restricted items going to the North Korean regime, but they gathered valuable intelligence for the United States and our allies. I’m proud of the hard work that went into building the case against Wen by dedicated agents and our partners who specialize in cases that involve illegal exports to foreign adversaries who evade sanctions and utilize weapons and technology for nefarious purposes.”

    According to an affidavit filed on November 26 with the complaint, Wen obtained firearms, ammunition, and export-controlled technology with the intention of shipping them to North Korea – a violation of federal law and United States sanctions against that nation. Wen and his co-conspirators allegedly exported shipments of firearms and ammunition to North Korea by concealing the items inside shipping containers that were shipped from Long Beach through Hong Kong to North Korea.

    On August 14, law enforcement seized at Wen’s home two devices that he intended to send to North Korea for military use: a chemical threat identification device and a hand-held broadband receiver that detects eavesdropping devices. On September 6, law enforcement seized approximately 50,000 rounds of 9mm ammunition that Wen allegedly obtained to send to North Korea.

    A review of Wen’s iPhone revealed to law enforcement that in December 2023, Wen smuggled items from Long Beach to Hong Kong with their destination being North Korea. Messages retrieved from Wen’s cellphones revealed discussions he had earlier this year with co-conspirators about shipping military-grade equipment to North Korea. Some of these messages include photographs that Wen sent of items controlled for export under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. From January 2024 to April 2024, Wen sent emails and text messages to a U.S.-based broker about obtaining a civilian plane engine. There also were several text messages on Wen’s iPhone concerning price negotiation for the plane and its engine.

    Wen is a Chinese national who is illegally in the United States after overstaying his student visa and is therefore prohibited from possessing any firearms or ammunition. Wen lacks the required licenses from the U.S. government to export ammunition, firearms, and the other devices that law enforcement seized at his home to North Korea.

    “The results of today’s arrest and search warrants are a testament to HSI and our partner agencies commitment to national security and protecting our sensitive technology” said Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) San Diego Special Agent in Charge Shawn Gibson. “It is a federal crime to illegally obtain and export certain US technologies by foreign countries and those who seek to circumvent the law will be thoroughly investigated.”

    “Mr. Wen’s arrest is a significant advancement in our collective efforts towards protecting our national security, safeguarding sensitive U.S. technologies and other export-controlled items, and ensuring accountability for the alleged bad actions,” said Bryan D. Denny, Special Agent in Charge for the Department of Defense Office of Inspector General, Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), Western Field Office.       

    “The defendant’s alleged attempts to illicitly export firearms and military technology from the United States at the behest of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea constitute an alarming violation of sanctions and export control laws,” said Special Agent in Charge Gregory Dunlap of the Office of Export Enforcement, Los Angeles Field Office. “OEE is committed to working with our federal partners to identify and disrupt illegal export schemes that undermine regional stability and our national security interests at home and abroad.”   

    A complaint contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court.

    The FBI; Homeland Security Investigations; DCIS; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; and the Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security are investigating this matter.  

    Assistant United States Attorney Sarah E. Gerdes of the Terrorism and Export Crimes Section and Trial Attorney Ahmed Almudallal of the U.S. Department of Justice National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section are prosecuting this case. 

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Former Orange County Resident Linked to White Supremacy Group Sentenced to Two Years in Prison for Rioting at Political Rallies

    Source: US FBI

    LOS ANGELES – A former resident of Huntington Beach who has been linked to a white supremacy extremist group was sentenced today to 24 months in federal prison for planning and engaging in riots at political rallies across California.

    Robert Paul Rundo, 34, was sentenced by United States District Judge Josephine L. Staton. 

    Rundo pleaded guilty on September 13 to one count of conspiracy to violate the federal Anti-Riot Act.

    “This defendant sought to further his white-supremacist ideology by plotting riots and engaging in violence at political rallies,” said United States Attorney Martin Estrada. “Hate and violence are antithetical to American values and tear at our community. It is therefore critical that we protect the civil and constitutional rights of our community against those who promote divisiveness.”

    “After a lengthy investigation, during which the defendant became an international fugitive, Mr. Rundo has now been held accountable for his criminal activity which was motivated by his extremist dogma,” said Akil Davis, the Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles Field Office. “Mr. Rundo’s movement did not ‘rise above’ whatever differences Americans may have, but was divisive, harmful to others and ultimately led him to prison. The FBI will continue to pursue those whose ideology leads to violence and lawlessness.”

    From March 2017 to May 2018, Rundo and others participated in an organization that ultimately was rebranded as the “Rise Above Movement” (RAM). RAM representing itself as a fighting group of a new nationalist and white supremacy identity movement. As part of their membership in RAM, Rundo and others attended rallies with the intent to provoke and engage in violence.

    To prepare for violent physical conflicts, Rundo and others held hand-to-hand and other fighting training sessions, which they organized through telephone calls, social media, and text messages. Rundo organized and attended several such training sessions in 2017. On various social media platforms, Rundo and others posted messages and photographs of themselves preparing for or engaging in violence, accompanied by statements such as “#rightwingdeathsquad.”

    In March 2017, Rundo and other RAM members held a training in San Clemente to prepare to engage in violence at political events, including a rally on March 25, 2017, in Huntington Beach. At the Huntington Beach rally, Rundo and other RAM members pursued and assaulted other persons, including one protestor whom Rundo tackled and punched multiple times. Following the event, Rundo and his co-conspirators posted online photographs and videos celebrating the assaults they had committed.

    Rundo also helped organize training for RAM members in anticipation of a rally scheduled to occur on April 15, 2017, in Berkeley. At the Berkeley rally, there were several violent clashes throughout the day. In one such instance, Rundo and several of his co-conspirators crossed a police barrier erected to separate opposing groups. They then punched and kicked several people. Following the event, Rundo and his co-conspirators again posted online photographs and videos celebrating the assaults they had committed.

    On June 10, 2017, Rundo and others attended a rally in San Bernardino, at which they confronted and pursued protesters.

    In the months following these events, Rundo and his co-conspirators continued to publicly celebrate their assaults, including through online posts with photos and videos of RAM members assaulting people.

    Two other defendants have been charged in this case:

    • Robert Boman, 31, of Torrance, who has pleaded not guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate the Anti-Riot Act and one count of rioting, and has a trial date of February 18, 2025, scheduled; and
    • Tyler Laube, 28, of Redondo Beach, who pleaded guilty in October 2023 to one count of interfering with a federally protected right and later was fined $2,000 and sentenced to time already served in custody.

    The FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force investigated this case.

    Assistant United States Attorneys Kathrynne N. Seiden and Anna P. Boylan of the Terrorism and Export Crimes Section are prosecuting this case.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Banking: Joint Statement of The Special AEM-MOFCOM Consultation

    Source: ASEAN – Association of SouthEast Asian Nations

    1. The Special AEM-Ministry of Commerce (AEM-MOFCOM) Consultation was held on 20 May 2025 via videoconference. The Consultation was co-chaired by H.E. Tengku Datuk Seri Utama Zafrul Aziz, Minister of Investment, Trade and Industry of Malaysia, and H.E. Wang Wentao, Minister of Commerce of China. The Meeting also welcomed the participation of H.E. Filipus Nino Pereira, Minister of Commerce and Industry, Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste as an observer.
     
    2. The Meeting exchanged views on regional and global economic challenges that could likely impact supply chain resiliency in the region, including the current global trade tensions. These challenges disrupt the global trade order, exacerbate trade
    tensions, and weaken confidence in the rules-based Multilateral Trading System (MTS).
     
    Download the full statement here.
    The post Joint Statement of The Special AEM-MOFCOM Consultation appeared first on ASEAN Main Portal.

    MIL OSI Global Banks –

  • MIL-OSI Security: FBI’s Underwater Search and Evidence Response Team, Part 3

    Source: US FBI

    Despite the usual pitch-black environment they work in, divers rarely use lights below the surface because particulate matter churned up from walking on the bottom diffuses any light. Instead, divers often rely on intelligence gathered during the initial dive, as well as metal detectors and sonar equipment—usually controlled from the surface—to locate and direct them toward evidence and other items they’re searching for.

    Sonar, short for “sound navigation and ranging,” is a technique that uses sound waves to locate objects. It is useful for exploring and mapping bodies of water because sound waves travel farther in the water than radar and light waves. “As items go up in size, the areas that need to be searched get bigger, and the initial intelligence about the site may not be quite as concise,” said Hudson, who explained that sonar systems are especially useful in these scenarios.  

    USERT also uses remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) and autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), which both collect images and other data underwater, as well as investigate areas that are too dangerous for divers.  

    As divers find items to recover, they often place smaller objects in airtight containers and then carry them back up to the surface. 

    But if items are over 15 pounds, divers use lift bags. Smaller lift bags look similar to parachute-shaped balloons that divers can inflate underwater and attach to the items that need to be raised to the surface. Divers can inflate these bags using either a regulator or a low-pressure inflator hose. This allows the diver to adjust the buoyancy of the lift bag and to safely control the ascent. Larger lift bags can raise objects as large and heavy as 2,000-pound vehicles.
     
    Upon collecting all the items at the scene, USERT follows chain of custody guidelines. Each agency—whether the FBI or a local law enforcement department—follows its own rigorous processes. Most items are sent to a lab for further examination. Depending on the amount of time spent underwater, lab technicians can then gather information as detailed as cell phone data or DNA samples.  

    USERT: Tools of the Trade

    Peer into the Underwater Search and Evidence Response Team (USERT) toolbox to see how everyday items and specialized equipment help the team process a scene.

    See more

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI Europe: Press release – Parliament approves new tariffs on Russian and Belarussian agricultural goods

    Source: European Parliament

    MEPs backed increased tariffs on fertilisers and certain Russian and Belarusian agricultural goods on Thursday, seeking to reduce EU dependency on those imports.

    Plenary has endorsed the Commission proposal to increase by 50% EU tariffs on agricultural products from Russia and Belarus that were not yet subject to extra customs duties. The aim is to reduce EU dependence on the two countries still further. Products to be hit by the new tariffs include sugar, vinegar, flour and animal feed.

    The text also provides for a 6.5% tariff on fertilisers imported from Russia and Belarus, plus duties of between €40 and €45 per tonne for the 2025-2026 period. These tariffs will rise to €430 per tonne by 2028. Income from the sale of Russian and Belarussian fertilisers is considered to be contributing directly to the war against Ukraine.

    The proposed measures will reduce EU imports of the goods concerned significantly, whether they originate in the two countries or are exported directly or indirectly by them. It is expected that this will result in further diversification of EU fertiliser production, currently impacted by the low prices of imports.

    The legislation also tasks the Commission with monitoring price increases and any possible damage to the internal market or the EU agriculture sector, and with taking action to mitigate the impact.

    The regulation was adopted by 411 votes in favour and 100 against, with 78 abstentions.

    Quote

    The standing rapporteur for Russia Inese Vaidere (EPP, LV) said: “The regulation gradually increasing customs duties for products from Russia and Belarus will help to prevent Russia from using the EU market to finance its war machine. It is not acceptable that three years after Russia launched its full-scale war, the EU is still buying critical products in large volumes, in fact, these imports have risen significantly.

    The proposal will boost EU fertiliser production, which has taken a hit from cheap Russian imports, while giving farmers time to adjust.

    Importantly, the proposal also includes monitoring provisions enabling the Commission to follow the fertiliser market closely and take action if prices shoot up.”

    Next steps

    With approval in plenary, Parliament closed its first reading. The regulation must now be adopted formally by the Council and subsequently published in the Official Journal, before it can enter into force. For the remaining agricultural products (listed in Annex I of the proposal), the regulation will apply four weeks after the bill’s entry into force.

    Background

    Imports into the EU of urea and nitrogen-based fertilisers from Russia, already high in 2023, rose significantly in 2024. According to the Commission, imports of the fertilisers covered by this regulation reflect a situation of economic dependence on Russia. If left unchecked, the situation could harm EU food security and, in the case of fertilisers in particular, leave the Union vulnerable to possible coercive measures by Russia.

    It was to address these issues that the Commission presented its proposal to impose tariffs on fertilisers and certain agricultural products originating in Russia and Belarus, on 28 January 2025.

    MIL OSI Europe News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: PHILADELPHIA – Governor Shapiro to Highlight Positive Results of Historic Investments in K-12 Public Education, Importance of Continuing to Deliver for PA Students

    Source: US State of Pennsylvania

    May 23, 2025 – Philadelphia

    ADVISORY – PHILADELPHIA – Governor Shapiro to Highlight Positive Results of Historic Investments in K-12 Public Education, Importance of Continuing to Deliver for PA Students

    Governor Josh Shapiro will visit A. Philip Randolph Career and Technical High School to meet with students, teachers, and legislators and highlight how the historic funding he secured for public K-12 education is leading to positive results in schools across the Commonwealth. In his first two budgets, Governor Shapiro secured historic investments in our public schools, students, and teachers, delivering the largest increase in K-12 education funding in Pennsylvania history – and schools are now putting those investments to work.

    Governor Shapiro’s 2025-26 budget proposal builds on that foundation by proposing new funding for K-12 public education, with a focus on driving more dollars to the schools that need them most. It also continues our progress to build strong and safe school communities, hire and support our teachers, and expand mental health resources. The Governor’s budget creates more opportunity for our students and builds on our progress to bring vo-tech back into the classroom with a $5.5 million increase for Career and Technical Education (CTE).

    WHO:
    Governor Josh Shapiro
    Acting Secretary Carrie Rowe, Department of Education
    Dr. Tony Watlington, School District of Philadelphia Superintendent
    Arthur Steinberg, AFTPA President

    WHEN:
    Friday, May 23, 2025, at 10:00AM

    WHERE:
    A. Philip Randolph Career and Technical High School
    3101 Henry Avenue,
    Philadelphia, PA 19129

    LIVE STREAM:
    pacast.com/live/gov
    governor.pa.gov/live/

    RSVP:
    Press who are interested in attending must RSVP with the names and phone numbers for each member of their team to ra-gvgovpress@pa.gov.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Africa: International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation (ITFC) Concludes Successful Participation at the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB) Group Annual Meetings with Nearly US$ 2.6 Billion in Signed Agreements

    Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:

    ALGIERS, Algeria, May 22, 2025/APO Group/ —

    The International Islamic Trade Finance Corporation (ITFC) (www.ITFC-IDB.org), a member of the Islamic Development Bank (IsDB) Group, concluded its participation at the 2025 IsDB Group Annual Meetings in Algiers with a series of impactful achievements that underscore its role as a leading catalyst for trade and economic development in the OIC Member Countries and with the rest of the world. With a total of US$2.6 billion of agreements signed, the Corporation reaffirmed its strong commitment to supporting the socio-economic and development priorities of its member countries. These included sovereign and private sector-focused facilities, new partnerships, and strategic engagements designed to enhance trade resilience, food and energy security, and SME growth. 

    During the meetings, ITFC signed a landmark five-year framework agreement with the Republic of Senegal with total envelope amount of EUR 2 billion to support key sectors such as energy, agriculture, healthcare, and the development of small and medium-sized enterprises. Another key sovereign financing was announced with the Republic of Guinea, to provide a Murabaha trade finance facility through the Central Bank of Guinea to support the import of petroleum products and essential commodities. ITFC signed a US$100 million Murabaha facility with EBID to facilitate imports of essential commodities for private sector clients across Member Countries. Meanwhile, ITFC also renewed its strategic partnership with Afreximbank through a US$300 million Murabaha financing agreement, aimed at securing food and energy supplies and enhancing intra-African trade flows. 

    A strong focus was placed on supporting the private sector and expanding Islamic trade finance tools. ITFC signed US$10 million in Mudaraba financing with Uzbekistan’s Smartbank and signed another agreement with Agrobank to increase the total financing amount to US$ 25 million aimed at providing Shariah-compliant financing to the country’s growing private sector. Furthermore, a EUR 20 million Murabaha facility was signed with Albaraka Türk to boost access to finance for SMEs and private sector clients in Turkiye.  

    Another milestone signing was in favor of Algeria where ITFC signed a US$100 million syndicated LC confirmation facility with Crédit Populaire d’Algérie (CPA) Bank to support trade transactions of both public and private sector clients, with a special emphasis on SME development. Additionally, ITFC inked a EUR 10 million facility with Crédit Communautaire d’Afrique (CCA) Bank in Cameroon, a EUR 10 million facility with Commercial Bank Cameroon, and a US$15 million Murabaha agreement with The Alternative Bank  in Nigeria to support agricultural pre-exports and essential equipment imports. 

    The meetings with Officials and Stakeholders also provided an opportunity to strengthen regional trade development platforms. A grant agreement under the AfTIAS 2.0 program was signed with the government of Algeria to enhance cross-border trade with Tunisia. These partnerships were complemented by ITFC’s hosting of high-level dialogues during the Private Sector Forum, including a panel on trade facilitation and regional integration and a knowledge-sharing event exploring complementarities in trade and economic diversification across the OIC region. 

    The successful conclusion of the 2025 Annual Meetings reflects ITFC’s steadfast commitment to delivering integrated trade solutions that are both impactful and inclusive. By signing close to US$2.6 billion in new financing and partnership agreements, ITFC continues to strengthen its interventions that boost supply chains, promote Islamic finance, unlock new opportunities for sustainable development and improve the wellbeing of the people across its member countries.  

    MIL OSI Africa –

  • MIL-OSI USA: CFTC Staff Issues Advisory on Market Volatility Controls

    Source: US Commodity Futures Trading Commission

    CFTC Staff Issues Advisory on Market Volatility Controls | CFTC

    /PressRoom/PressReleases/9078-25
    Skip to main content

    May 22, 2025

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s Division of Clearing and Risk and Division of Market Oversight today issued a staff advisory reminding designated contract markets (DCMs) and derivatives clearing organizations (DCOs) of certain Core Principle and regulatory obligations under the Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC regulations related to controls designed to address market volatility.
    Market volatility controls can play an important role in mitigating market disruptions while supporting continued price discovery in stressed or volatile market conditions. Best practices developed by DCMs, industry groups, CFTC advisory committees, and others can help to guide the derivatives industry towards effective volatility controls. In cases where volatility controls may be in effect at times critical to DCO decisions, DCOs should exercise careful discretion and informed judgment in making those decisions in light of the economic factors relevant to the underlying market. DCOs should provide transparency to both clearing members and end users about possible impacts on, e.g., settlement prices.
    Today’s staff advisory addresses a recommendation by the CFTC’s Global Markets Advisory Committee. 

    -CFTC-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: NASA Astronaut to Answer Questions from Students in Washington State

    Source: NASA

    NASA astronaut and Spokane, Washington, native Anne McClain will participate in an event with students from the Mobius Discovery Center located in her hometown. McClain will answer prerecorded questions submitted by students from aboard the International Space Station.
    Watch the 20-minute Earth-to-space call on the NASA STEM YouTube Channel.
    The event will take place at 1:25 p.m. EDT on Tuesday, May 27. Media interested in covering the event must RSVP no later than 5 p.m. EDT on Friday, May 23, to Karen Hudson at 509-321-7125 or via email at: mkhudson@mobiusspokane.org.
    The Mobius Discovery Center will host the event for elementary, middle, and high school students from various schools across the region, nonprofit organizations, and the Kalispel Tribe. This event is designed to foster imagination among students through exploration of hands-on exhibits and science, technology, engineering, art, and mathematics learning opportunities while inspiring students to consider McClain’s career path.
    For more than 24 years, astronauts have continuously lived and worked aboard the space station, testing technologies, performing science, and developing skills needed to explore farther from Earth. Astronauts aboard the orbiting laboratory communicate with NASA’s Mission Control Center in Houston 24 hours a day through SCaN’s (Space Communications and Navigation) Near Space Network.
    Important research and technology investigations taking place aboard the space station benefit people on Earth and lays the groundwork for other agency missions. As part of NASA’s Artemis campaign, the agency will send astronauts to the Moon to prepare for future human exploration of Mars, inspiring Artemis Generation explorers, and ensuring the United States continues to lead in space exploration and discovery.
    See videos of astronauts aboard the space station at:
    https://www.nasa.gov/stemonstation
    -end-
    Gerelle DodsonHeadquarters, Washington202-358-1600gerelle.q.dodson@nasa.gov
    Sandra JonesJohnson Space Center, Houston281-483-5111sandra.p.jones@nasa.gov

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Meeting of 16-17 April 2025

    Source: European Central Bank

    Account of the monetary policy meeting of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank held in Frankfurt am Main on Wednesday and Thursday, 16-17 April 2025

    22 May 2025

    1. Review of financial, economic and monetary developments and policy options

    Financial market developments

    Ms Schnabel recalled that President Trump’s announcement on 2 April 2025 of unexpectedly high tariffs had sparked a sharp sell-off in global equity markets and in US bond markets, leading to a surge in financial market volatility. The severity of the tariffs and the manner in which they had been introduced had led to a breakdown of standard cross-market correlations, with a sell-off of US equities occurring at the same time as a sell-off of Treasuries in the context of a marked depreciation of the US dollar against major currencies.

    Movements in euro area risk-free rates reflected the opposing impacts of the historic German fiscal package and the global trade conflict. At the long end of the yield curve, the expected positive growth impulse from fiscal policy, as well as expectations of tighter monetary policy in the future, had been the dominant factors, pulling up nominal and real interest rates. At the short end of the yield curve, the decline in inflation compensation, driven mainly by falling inflation risk premia, had been larger than the rise in real yields, leading to a decline in nominal rates. These developments reflected both the negative fallout from tariffs and lower commodity prices. Investors expected the ECB to react to the evolving situation by lowering rates more than had previously been anticipated, but to start raising them again in the coming year. Amid the market turbulence, euro area bond markets had continued to function smoothly, and the bond supply had been absorbed well in the context of strong investor demand and well-functioning dealer intermediation. On the back of the sharp correction in stock prices and the marked appreciation of the euro exchange rate, financial conditions in the euro area had tightened, despite lower nominal short-term rates.

    Turning to market developments since the previous Governing Council meeting, President Trump’s announcement on 2 April 2025 had led the VIX volatility index to temporarily reach levels not seen since the COVID-19 pandemic. Within a few days the S&P 500 index had dropped by 12%, triggering sharp corrections in stock markets around the world, including in the euro area. Despite a rebound after the pausing of “reciprocal” tariffs on 9 April 2025, the US benchmark equity index had lost 8% in the year to date while euro area stock markets were almost back to the levels seen at the start of the year. Stocks in trade-sensitive US sectors had been hit much harder than other stocks, and they had also dropped by much more than their euro area counterparts.

    The market turbulence had spilled over to government bond markets, but the reaction had differed markedly between the euro area and the United States. US government bond yields had risen at the same time as the US equity sell-off, which was highly unusual because Treasury bonds normally benefited from safe-haven flows. US ten-year asset swap spreads had likewise risen sharply, which was also unusual. Meanwhile, Bund yields had declined and the spread between the Bund and overnight index swap (OIS) rates had narrowed substantially as German government bonds had continued to perform their role as a safe-haven asset.

    The risk-off sentiment had also affected the dynamics of the US dollar exchange rate, but this too had reacted differently from what would normally have been expected. In January 2025 the EUR/USD exchange rate had hit a low of 1.02, but the euro’s downward trend had been reversed around the time of the announcement in early March 2025 of the reform of the German debt brake, with a positive growth narrative for Europe emerging in light of higher defence and infrastructure spending. The euro exchange rate had received a second major boost after the 2 April tariff announcement in the United States. This strong upward move had not been driven, as was usually the case, by changes in the yield differential, which had moved in the opposite direction, but by US dollar weakness as investors had revised down their US growth expectations. Over recent weeks the US dollar had thus not benefited from the widespread risk-off mood.

    Recent developments had been reflected in global portfolio flows. The March 2025 round of the Bank of America Fund Manager Survey had recorded the strongest shift out of US equities on record, with 45% of managers reporting that they had reduced their positions. At the same time, a significant share of fund managers had reported that they had changed their positioning in favour of euro area equities. This marked a significant shift of perspectives away from US exceptionalism towards Europe being seen as the bright spot among major economies, given the expected fiscal boost in Germany and the pick-up in European defence spending.

    Dynamics in risk-free bond markets illustrated the opposing impacts of the German fiscal package and the tariff announcements over recent weeks. In the euro area, the overall increase in longer-term nominal interest rates had been driven by a rise in real rates, indicating that market participants viewed the German fiscal package as fostering long-term growth. Real rates had kept rising during the tariff tensions, as investors had continued to expect, on balance, an improved growth outlook for the euro area. By contrast, inflation compensation had decreased across the yield curve after increasing only briefly in response to the German fiscal package.

    Ms Schnabel then turned to the drivers of developments in euro area inflation compensation. On the one hand, bond market investors were pricing in higher inflation compensation owing to the expansionary German fiscal measures to be implemented over the next decade. On the other hand, concerns about the trade war had pulled inflation compensation lower, more than compensating for the impact of the German fiscal package on short to medium-term maturities. One important driver of the downward revision had been the sharp drop in oil prices in the wake of the tariff announcements and rising fears of a global recession.

    Market participants currently expected the ECB to implement a faster and deeper easing cycle towards a terminal rate of around 1.7% in May 2026. However, the ECB was expected to start raising rates again in 2026 in a J-curve pattern, with rate expectations picking up notably over longer horizons.

    In corporate bond markets, credit spreads had increased globally in response to the risk-off sentiment and the sharp sell-off in risk asset markets. However, the surge in US investment-grade corporate bond spreads had been more pronounced compared with developments in their euro area counterparts.

    Sovereign spreads had remained resilient over the past few weeks. The marked rise in the Bund yield after the announcement of the German fiscal package in March 2025 had not translated into an increase in sovereign spreads, which had even declined slightly at that time. The benign reaction of euro area government bond markets over recent weeks could be explained by expectations of positive economic spillovers from Germany to the rest of the euro area, possible prospects of increased European unity and, in the case of Italy, positive rating action.

    Government bond issuance in the euro area had continued to be absorbed well as investor demand had remained robust, with primary and secondary markets continuing to function smoothly. Higher volatility in government bond markets had not led to a meaningful deterioration in liquidity conditions, unlike in previous stress episodes. Hence, the turbulence in US Treasury markets had not had repercussions for the functioning of euro area sovereign bond markets.

    Ms Schnabel concluded by considering the implications of recent market developments for overall financial conditions. Since the March monetary policy meeting financial conditions had tightened, mainly owing to lower equity prices and a stronger nominal effective exchange rate of the euro, which had more than compensated for the easing impulse stemming from lower nominal short-term interest rates. Real rates had gradually shifted up across the yield curve. Overall, recent market developments might not only be a reflection of short-term market disturbances but also of a broader shift in global financial markets, with the euro area being one potential beneficiary.

    The global environment and economic and monetary developments in the euro area

    Starting with inflation in the euro area, Mr Lane stated that the disinflation process was well on track. Inflation had continued to develop as expected, with both headline inflation in the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HICP) and core inflation (HICP inflation excluding energy and food) declining in March. Headline inflation had declined to 2.2% in March, from 2.3% in February. Energy inflation had decreased to -1.0%, in part owing to a sharper than expected decline in oil prices, while food inflation had increased to 2.9% on the back of higher unprocessed food prices. Core inflation had declined to 2.4% in March, from 2.6% in February. While goods inflation remained stable at 0.6%, there had been a marked downward adjustment in services inflation, which had dropped to 3.5% in March from 3.7% in February, confirming the more muted repricing momentum in some services that had been expected.

    Most exclusion-based measures of underlying inflation had eased further in March. The Persistent and Common Component of Inflation (PCCI), which had the best predictive power for future headline inflation, had decreased to 2.2% in March from 2.3% in February. Domestic inflation was unchanged in March after declining to 3.9% in February, down from 4.0% in January. The differential between domestic inflation and services inflation reflected the significant deceleration of inflation in the traded services segment seen in the recent data.

    Wage growth was moderating. The annual growth rate of compensation per employee had declined to 4.1% in the fourth quarter of 2024, down from 4.5% in the third quarter and below the March 2025 projection of 4.3%. Negotiated wage growth had also come in at 4.1% in the fourth quarter of 2024. According to the April round of the Corporate Telephone Survey, leading non-financial corporations in the euro area had reduced their wage growth expectations for 2025 to 3.0%, down from 3.6% in the previous survey round. Respondents to the Survey on the Access to Finance of Enterprises had marked down their wage growth expectations for the next 12 months to 3.0%, from 3.3% in the last survey round. Looking ahead, the ECB wage tracker also pointed to a substantial decrease in annual growth of negotiated wages between 2024 and 2025, with one-off payments becoming a less dominant component of salary increases. Wage expectations reported in the Survey of Professional Forecasters and the Consensus Economics survey also signalled an easing of labour cost growth in 2025 compared with last year (between 0.7 and 1.0 percentage point), which was broadly in line with the March projections.

    Looking ahead, inflation was expected to hover close to the inflation target of 2% for the remainder of the year. Core inflation, and in particular services inflation, was expected to decline until mid-2025 as the effects from lagged repricing faded out, wage pressures receded, and past monetary policy tightening continued to feed through. Surveys confirmed this overall picture, while longer-term inflation expectations had remained well anchored around the 2% target. At the same time, market participants had markedly revised down their expectations for inflation over shorter horizons, with the one-year forward inflation-linked swap rates one year ahead, two years ahead and four years ahead declining by around 20 basis points to 1.6%, 1.7% and 1.9% respectively.

    Global growth was expected to have maintained its momentum in the first quarter of the year, with the global composite output Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) released on 3 April averaging 52.0. The manufacturing PMI had been recovering and stood above the threshold indicating expansion, while the services PMI had lost some momentum in advanced economies. However, global growth was likely to be negatively affected by the US-initiated increases in tariffs and the resulting financial market turmoil, which had come against the backdrop of already elevated geopolitical tensions.

    Triggered by concerns about global demand, oil and gas prices, along with other commodity prices, had declined sharply since 2 April. Compared with the assumption for the March projections, Brent crude oil prices were now approximately 10% lower in US dollar terms and 18.3% lower in euro terms. Gas prices stood 37% below the value embedded in the March projections. The euro had strengthened over recent weeks as investor sentiment had proven more resilient towards the euro area than towards other economies, with the EUR/USD exchange rate up 9.6% and the nominal effective exchange rate up 5.5% compared with the assumptions for the March projections.

    Euro area economic growth had slowed to 0.2%, quarter on quarter, in the fourth quarter of 2024, down from 0.4% in the third quarter. This figure was 0.1 percentage points higher than had been foreseen in the March projections. As projected, growth had been entirely driven by domestic demand. The economy was also likely to have grown in the first quarter of the year, and manufacturing had shown signs of stabilisation. The initial tariff announcements by the United States in early 2025 had so far seemed not to have materially dampened economic sentiment and might even have led to some frontloading of trade. However, some more recent surveys indicated a decline in sentiment. These included the latest Consumer Expectations Survey, the ZEW Indicator of Economic Sentiment and the Sentix Economic index.

    The labour market remained resilient. The unemployment rate had edged down to 6.1% in February. At the same time, labour demand was cooling. The job vacancy rate had remained unchanged at 2.5% in the fourth quarter of 2024 and now stood 0.8 percentage points below its peak in the second quarter of 2022. Total job postings and new postings were 16% and 26% lower respectively compared with a year ago. Additionally, fewer firms had reported that labour was a limiting factor for production. The employment PMI had remained broadly neutral in March at 50.4, pointing to stable employment conditions in the first quarter of 2025.

    Fiscal policies were identified as another potential source of resilience. Newly announced government measures were expected to have a relatively limited impact on the fiscal stance of the euro area compared with the assessment included in the March projections. But the scope for infrastructure investment and climate transition investment, as well as spending on defence in the largest euro area economy, had been substantially increased as a result of the loosening of the German debt brake, together with enhanced flexibility for greater spending on defence across euro area countries as a result of EU initiatives.

    The economic outlook was clouded by exceptional uncertainty, however. Downside risks to economic growth had increased. The major escalation in global trade tensions and the associated uncertainty were likely to lower euro area growth by dampening exports and investment. Deteriorating financial market sentiment could lead to tighter financing conditions and increased risk aversion, and could make firms and households less willing to invest and consume. Geopolitical tensions, such as Russia’s unjustified war against Ukraine and the tragic conflict in the Middle East, also remained a major source of uncertainty. At the same time, an increase in defence and infrastructure spending would add to growth.

    Increasing global trade disruptions were adding more uncertainty to the outlook for euro area inflation. Falling global energy prices and the appreciation of the euro could put further downward pressure on inflation. This could be reinforced by lower demand for euro area exports owing to higher tariffs and by a re-routing of exports into the euro area from countries with overcapacity. Adverse financial market reactions to the trade tensions could weigh on domestic demand and thereby also lead to lower inflation. By contrast, a fragmentation of global supply chains could raise inflation by pushing up import prices. A boost in defence and infrastructure spending could also raise inflation over the medium term. Extreme weather events, and the unfolding climate crisis more broadly, could drive up food prices by more than expected.

    Turning to the monetary and financial analysis, risk-free interest rates had declined in response to the escalating trade tensions. However, the risk-free ten-year OIS rate was about 20 basis points higher than at the cut-off date for the March projections. Bank bond spreads had increased by nearly 30 basis points. Credit spreads had increased by 23 basis points for investment-grade corporate bonds and by as much as 95 basis points for the high-yield segment. The Eurostoxx index had fallen by around 4.8% since the cut-off date for the March projections, while indicators of market volatility had increased.

    The latest information on the availability and cost of credit for the broader economy predated the market tensions but continued to indicate a gradual normalisation in credit conditions, though with some mixed evidence. The interest rate on new loans to firms had declined by 15 basis points in February, to 4.1%, which was about 120 basis points below its October 2023 peak. However, interest rates on new mortgages had increased by 8 basis points in February, to 3.3%, which was around 70 basis points below their November 2023 peak. Loan growth was picking up at a moderate pace. Annual growth in bank lending to firms had increased to 2.2% in February, from 2.0% in January, amid marked month-on-month volatility. Corporate debt issuance had been weak in February, but the annual growth rate had stabilised at 3.2%. Lending to households had edged up further to 1.5% on an annual basis in February, from 1.3% in January, led by mortgages. According to the latest bank lending survey for the euro area, which had been conducted between 10 and 25 March 2025, credit standards had tightened slightly further for loans to firms and consumer credit in the first quarter, while there had been an easing of credit standards for mortgages. This evidence resonated with the results of the Survey on the Access to Finance of Enterprises, which also showed almost unchanged availability of bank loans to firms in the first quarter, owing to concerns about the economic outlook and borrower creditworthiness, compounded by high uncertainty.

    Monetary policy considerations and policy options

    In summary, the incoming data confirmed that the disinflation process remained well on track. Both headline and core inflation in March had come in as expected. In particular, the projected drop in services inflation in March had been confirmed in the data and underpinned confidence in the underlying downward trajectory. The more forward-looking indicators of underlying inflation remained consistent with inflation settling at around the target in a sustained manner, with domestic inflation also coming down on the back of lower labour cost growth, which was decelerating somewhat faster than had been expected. The euro area economy had been building up some resilience against global shocks, but the outlook for growth had deteriorated materially owing to rising trade tensions. Increased uncertainty was likely to reduce confidence among households and firms, and the adverse and volatile market response to the recent trade tensions was likely to have a tightening impact on financing conditions and thereby further weigh on the euro area economic outlook.

    Based on this assessment, Mr Lane proposed lowering the three key ECB interest rates by 25 basis points. In particular, lowering the deposit facility rate – the rate through which the Governing Council steered the monetary policy stance – was rooted in its updated assessment of the inflation outlook, the dynamics of underlying inflation and the strength of monetary policy transmission. A further cut at the present meeting was important in ensuring that inflation stabilised at the target in a sustainable manner, while also avoiding the possibility that external adverse shocks to the economic outlook could be exacerbated by too high a level of the policy rate.

    Looking ahead, it remained more important than ever to maintain agility in adjusting the stance as appropriate on a meeting-by-meeting basis and to not pre-commit to any particular rate path.

    2. Governing Council’s discussion and monetary policy decisions

    Economic, monetary and financial analyses

    Regarding global conditions, members stressed that the outlook for global growth was highly uncertain. In reaction to the frequent – and often contradictory – tariff announcements and retaliation over the last few weeks, the International Monetary Fund was currently revising its World Economic Outlook. Since the Governing Council’s last monetary policy meeting the euro had appreciated by 4.2% in nominal effective terms and by 6.4% against the US dollar, driven by market expectations of a narrowing growth differential between the euro area and the United States and possibly by a broad-based investor reassessment of the risk attached to exposures to the United States. Energy and food commodity prices had also declined sharply owing to growth concerns as the trade war intensified. The combined effect of a weakening dollar and declining oil and gas prices meant that, in euro terms, oil prices had fallen by 18.3% and gas prices by 37% since the March Governing Council meeting. Macroeconomic data did not yet reflect fully the ongoing trade war, which would only show through more clearly in the data during the second quarter of 2025. The composite output PMI for global activity excluding the euro area had remained broadly stable in March.

    Global trade was expected to slow significantly. This reflected lower imports primarily from the United States, China, Mexico and Canada – all countries with sizeable reciprocal trade relations. In the first quarter trade had still been strong owing to a rebound at the beginning of the year, in part driven by a frontloading of imports in anticipation of future tariffs. However, high-frequency and more timely data (based on vessel movements) had already started weakening, in particular for US imports. Private sector forecasts for US growth in 2025 had started trending down in the run-up to the 2 April tariff announcement. However, that event, together with the deterioration in financial conditions that followed, had led to a further downward revision to US GDP growth prospects for this year, as the high uncertainty around US policies was expected to hold back investment and economic activity. In this context the impact of the confidence channel was regarded as particularly important. While most economists had assumed that with higher tariffs and a trade war the US dollar would appreciate, the latest developments pointed to adverse confidence effects and the self-defeating nature of tariffs weakening the dollar. Private sector forecasts for Chinese growth in 2025 had also been revised down since early April, as the contribution from net exports – a key source of support for Chinese growth in 2024 – was expected to decline significantly this year. The Chinese Government’s announcement of additional fiscal support to boost consumption was seen as likely to only partially offset the loss of international trade.

    In general, protectionism and policy unpredictability were seen as the ultimate sources of distress. This raised the question of whether the impact of these factors could unwind when the policy approach that had generated them might reverse. Indeed, the view was expressed that mutually beneficial trade agreements could be reached, leading to a much more benign outcome. At the same time, it was argued that, first, a complete unwinding of the 2 April tariff policy announcement was unlikely and, second, even in the event of a complete policy turnaround, it was questionable whether the world economy could return to its previous status quo.

    The recent strong appreciation of the euro was largely explained by portfolio rebalancing due to growing concerns among investors about US economic policies and the risks that these posed to large exposures to the United States. Overall, the current state of the world economy was not regarded as being at an equilibrium, and it might take several years before the global economy reached a new equilibrium. For a long time the world had been in a configuration centred on the United States running large current account deficits, with optimistic consumers, high private sector investment rates and a large fiscal deficit.

    Looking ahead, two polar scenarios could be seen. One was a stabilisation of the situation, whereby the US current account deficit was structural and largely financed by capital inflows. In this situation, the ongoing portfolio rebalancing across currencies would eventually reverse in favour of the United States, leading to a renewed real appreciation of the US dollar, partly driven by relative price adjustments. However, recent events had eroded trust in the US system, and it was challenging to envisage how it might be restored.

    The other possible direction that the global order could take was a continuation of current rebalancing trends. Such a situation could lead temporarily to much higher US inflation as a result of the combined effects of tariffs and a potentially weaker exchange rate. More generally, the new equilibrium could entail high tariffs, an increase in home bias – for trade balance or security reasons – and a more fragmented world. This more fragmented environment was likely to be characterised by stronger inflationary pressures. In addition, the move to a new equilibrium would involve costly adjustment dynamics, as firms, households and governments would have to re-optimise in light of the new constellation, but also owing to the high levels of uncertainty in the transition period. In the meantime, the erosion of confidence in the US economy and in the global order of international trade and finance was expected to result in a higher global cost structure arising from protectionist policies and a higher risk premium arising from unpredictability. An intermediate scenario was also possible, in which the euro would become increasingly attractive, thus expanding its international role as a reserve currency.

    Overall, even if it was known with certainty where the new equilibrium lay, there would still be major adjustment dynamics along the way. In addition, as global supply chains had been shaped over the years to best adapt to the old equilibrium, they would need to adjust to the new one, with a likely loss of market value for those firms that had been most engaged in the old global order. Throughout this process there would be path dependence in the dynamics of the economy.

    With regard to economic activity in the euro area, members concurred that the economic outlook was clouded by exceptional uncertainty. Euro area exporters faced new barriers to trade, although the scope and nature of those barriers remained unclear. Disruptions to international commerce, financial market tensions and geopolitical uncertainty were weighing on business investment. As consumers became more cautious about the future, they might hold back from spending, thus delaying further the more robust consumption-led recovery that the staff projections had been foreseeing for a number of projection rounds.

    At the same time, the euro area economy had been building up some resilience against the global shocks. Domestic demand had contributed significantly to euro area growth in the fourth quarter of 2024, with business investment and private consumption growing robustly in spite of the already high uncertainty. The manufacturing output PMI had risen above 50 in March for the first time in two years, while the services business activity PMI had remained in expansionary territory, with relatively solid industrial production numbers confirming information from the soft indicators. While the trade conflict was a significant drag on foreign demand, the expected fiscal spending would counter some of those effects. The economy was likely to have grown in the first quarter of the year, and manufacturing had shown signs of stabilisation. Unemployment had fallen to 6.1% in February, its lowest level since the launch of the euro. Looking ahead, a strong labour market, higher real incomes and the impact of an easier monetary policy stance should underpin spending.

    For the near term, it was argued that the likely slump in trade and the surge in uncertainty were hitting the euro area at a critical juncture, when the recovery was still weak and fragile. It was seen as becoming increasingly clear that the impact of the trade shock might be very strong in terms of activity in the United States, with potentially substantial spillovers to the euro area. Even with the additional spending on defence and infrastructure, it was likely that, on balance, euro area growth would be worse in 2025 than previously expected. Incorporating the impact from the most recent escalation of trade tensions, potential retaliatory measures from the EU and the financial market turbulence of recent weeks could weaken activity in 2025 significantly. As a result, it was suggested that the probability of a recession over the next four quarters in the euro area and the United States had increased measurably.

    However, it was also argued that, while complicated, the situation still had upside potential. First, the strong market reaction might impose some discipline on the US Administration. Second, there was room for mutually beneficial trade agreements which would de-escalate the severity of the tariff increase threatened in the 2 April announcement. Regarding the fallout for growth, the ultimate effects of the new trade frictions would crucially depend on the substitutability of items imported by the United States. The bulk of exports from the euro area to the United States comprised pharmaceuticals, machinery, vehicles and chemicals, and these were highly differentiated products which were difficult to substitute away from in the short run. This rigidity would limit the drag on the euro area’s foreign demand. Moreover, the almost prohibitive tariffs between China and the United States were seen as likely to redirect demand towards euro area firms.

    A further factor that could attenuate the repercussions of trade frictions and uncertainty was the announcement of the German fiscal package and the step-up in European defence spending, which would raise domestic demand. This new factor was seen as unmitigated good news, as it would help to revive the European growth narrative and foster confidence in the euro area. What mattered was not only the direct effects of fiscal spending on demand and activity, but also the expected crowding-in of private investment in anticipation of the future fiscal stimulus. In the Corporate Telephone Survey, firms were already reporting that they were planning to enhance capacity in view of the defence and infrastructure initiatives. The Survey on the Access to Finance of Enterprises also pointed to greater optimism among firms on investment. Construction was set to recover further. It was therefore argued that the negative impact of tariffs could be seen as more or less the same size as the positive impact coming from the fiscal expansion in Germany. Of course, the time profiles of the impacts of the two major shocks – tariff increases and fiscal stimulus – were different. In the short term the negative effects on demand would dominate, as additional investment in defence and infrastructure would take time to come on stream and support growth.

    At the same time, the view was expressed that even in the medium term defence spending would not be a clear game changer, because it would not only materialise with a delay, but would likely lift euro area GDP growth by at most a couple of tenths of a percentage point. In any case, the fiscal stimulus was still uncertain in terms of its scale and modalities of implementation. In this context, it was noted that the reaction of the markets to the fiscal announcement from Germany suggested that the euro area economy was likely to respond to the new fiscal impulse with an increase in GDP and only a very mild increase in inflation. This demonstrated that the euro area economy was not seen as constrained by structural problems.

    Overall, members assessed that downside risks to economic growth had increased. The major escalation in global trade tensions and associated uncertainties would likely lower euro area growth by dampening exports, and it might drag down investment and consumption. Deteriorating financial market sentiment could lead to tighter financing conditions, increase risk aversion and make firms and households less willing to invest and consume. Geopolitical tensions, such as Russia’s unjustified war against Ukraine and the tragic conflict in the Middle East, also remained a major source of uncertainty. At the same time, an increase in defence and infrastructure spending would add to growth.

    In view of all the uncertainties surrounding the outlook, the view was expressed that for the coming meetings of the Governing Council it was important to develop alternative scenarios. These should factor in the prevailing very high level of uncertainty and assist in identifying the relevant channels and quantifying the impact on growth, jobs and inflation. In addition to scenario analysis, it was important to use high-frequency and unconventional sources of information to better understand the direction the economy was taking. There was also a need to broaden the set of indicators to be monitored, given the challenges in interpreting some of the standard statistics which were influenced and distorted by special factors such as the frontloading of orders and the associated build-up of inventories.

    A silver lining in the turbulent situation that Europe was facing was a strong impetus for European policymakers to swiftly implement the structural reforms set out in the reports by Mario Draghi and Enrico Letta. If effective, such concrete action had the potential to become a major tailwind for the euro area economy in the future, amplifying the stimulating effect of the additional fiscal spending that was planned in Germany. At the same time, it was cautioned that, to reap all the benefits from reform, Europe had to act quickly and on an ambitious scale.

    The important policy initiatives that had been launched at the national and EU levels to increase defence spending and infrastructure investment could be expected to bolster manufacturing, which was also reflected in recent surveys. In the present geopolitical environment, it was even more urgent for fiscal and structural policies to make the euro area economy more productive, competitive and resilient. The European Commission’s Competitiveness Compass provided a concrete roadmap for action, and its proposals, including on simplification, should be swiftly adopted. This included completing the savings and investment union, following a clear and ambitious timetable, which should help savers benefit from more opportunities to invest and improve firms’ access to finance, especially risk capital. It was also important to rapidly establish the legislative framework to prepare the ground for the potential introduction of a digital euro. Governments should ensure sustainable public finances in line with the EU’s economic governance framework and prioritise essential growth-enhancing structural reforms and strategic investment.

    With regard to price developments, members concurred with the assessment presented by Mr Lane. In spite of all remaining uncertainties, the recent inflation data releases had been broadly in line with the March ECB staff projections, with respect to both headline and core inflation. This suggested that inflation was on course for the 2% target, with long-term inflation expectations also remaining well anchored. Taking the February and March inflation data together, there was now much more confidence that the baseline scenario for inflation in the March projections was materialising. This held even without the appreciation of the euro or the decline in oil prices and commodity prices that had taken place since the finalisation of the projections.

    Looking ahead, it was argued that inflation would likely be lower in 2025 than foreseen in the March projections if the exchange rate and energy prices remained around their current levels. Recent market-based measures of inflation expectations also indicated that inflation might be falling faster than previously assumed. Inflation fixings now implied that investors expected inflation (excluding tobacco) to remain just below 2% in 2025 and to decline to around 1.2% in early 2026, before returning to around 1.6% by mid-2026. This signalled that risks to price stability might now be tilted to the downside, especially in the near term. The latest information also suggested that wage growth was moderating at a slightly faster pace than previously expected. Over a longer horizon, the tighter financial conditions, including the appreciation of the euro, the sharp drop in oil and gas prices and the headwinds from weaker economic activity, were seen as important new factors dampening inflation. There was now a risk that inflation could fall well below 2% at least over the remainder of the current year. Trade diversion and price concessions by Chinese exporters could also compound the ongoing depreciation of the renminbi and exert further downward effects on inflation, if not countered by measures by the European Commission. If there were to be retaliation against the tariffs imposed on US imports from the euro area, the direct inflationary impact could be counterbalanced by other factors, including the exchange rate, weaker raw material prices or possibly tighter financial conditions. Over the short term, the countervailing effects from increased fiscal spending were, moreover, unlikely to offset the further disinflationary pressures emanating from the international environment.

    At the same time, it was underlined that upside risks had not vanished. The rising momentum that had been detected in the PCCI indicators of underlying inflation warranted monitoring to confirm whether this increase was temporary and related to repricing early in the year in line with previous seasonal patterns. Although market-based measures of inflation compensation had fallen significantly, owing to lower inflation risk premia, genuine inflation expectations had been revised to a much lesser extent, and analysts’ inflation expectations were mostly well above inflation fixings. It also had to be considered that the likely re-flattening of the Phillips curve, which reflected among other things less frequent price adjustments, implied that meaningful downward deviations of inflation from target were unlikely in the absence of a deep and protracted recession. But such an event had a low probability in light of the expected fiscal impulse. In addition, the precise impact of the stronger euro was uncertain, especially given that one of the reasons behind the appreciation was a positive confidence shock as Europe offered stability in turbulent times. Moreover, successful trade negotiations and the resolution of trade disputes could give a boost to energy prices, changing the inflation picture very quickly. Finally, while the newly announced fiscal stimulus was unlikely to cause inflationary pressure over the short term in view of the underutilised capacities, the economy was likely to bump up against capacity constraints over the medium term, especially in the labour market. Indeed, inflation expectations reported in the Consumer Expectations Survey, the Survey on the Access to Finance of Enterprises and the Survey of Professional Forecasters remained tilted to the upside over longer horizons. It was argued that, taken as a whole, the current environment posed some downside risks to inflation over the short run, but notable upside risks over the medium term. If retaliation against US tariffs affected products that were hard to substitute, such as intermediate goods, the inflationary impact could be sizeable and persistent as higher input costs from tariffs would be gradually passed on to consumers. This could more than offset the disinflationary pressure from reduced foreign demand. The closely interconnected global trade system implied that tariffs might be passed along entire supply chains. The need to absorb tariffs in profit margins at a time when these were already squeezed because of high wage growth would increase the probability and strength of the pass-through. Upside risks to inflation over the medium term were seen to hold especially in a scenario in which the trade war led to a permanently more fragmented global economy, owing to a less efficient allocation of resources, more fragile supply chains and less elastic global supply.

    Overall, increasing global trade disruptions were adding more uncertainty to the outlook for euro area inflation. Falling global energy prices and an appreciation of the euro could put further downward pressure on inflation. This could be reinforced by lower demand for euro area exports owing to higher tariffs and by a re-routing of exports into the euro area from countries with overcapacity. Adverse financial market reactions to the trade tensions could weigh on domestic demand and thereby also lead to lower inflation. By contrast, a fragmentation of global supply chains could increase inflation by pushing up import prices. A boost in defence and infrastructure spending could also lift inflation over the medium term. Extreme weather events, and the unfolding climate crisis more broadly, could drive up food prices by more than expected.

    Turning to the monetary and financial analysis, members highlighted that the period since the 5-6 March meeting had been characterised by exceptional financial market volatility. This had led to some financial data indicating sizeable daily moves that were several standard deviations away from their mean. Risk-free interest rates had declined since the March meeting in response to the escalating trade tensions, although long-term risk-free rates were still higher than at the cut-off date for the March staff projections. Equity prices had fallen amid high volatility and corporate bond spreads had widened around the globe. Partly in response to the turmoil, financial markets were now fully pricing in the expectation of a 25 basis point rate cut at the current meeting.

    The euro had strengthened considerably over recent weeks as investor sentiment proved more resilient towards the euro area than towards other economies. While the appreciation of the euro had been sizeable, since the inception of the euro the bilateral EUR/USD exchange rate had fluctuated in a relatively wide band, with the rate currently somewhere in the middle of the range. The recent adjustment across asset prices was atypical, as the financial market turbulence had come together with a rebalancing of international portfolios away from US assets towards exposures to other regions, such as the euro area. One explanation, which was supported by the coincidental weakening of the US dollar and by some initial market intelligence, was that domestic and foreign investors had moved out of US assets, possibly reflecting a loss of confidence in US fiscal and trade policies.

    Turning to broader financing conditions, the latest official statistics on corporate borrowing, which predated the market tensions, continued to indicate that past interest rate cuts had made it less expensive for firms to borrow. The average interest rate on new loans to firms had declined to 4.1% in February, from 4.3% in January. The cost to firms of issuing market-based debt had declined to 3.5% in February but there had been some upward pressure more recently. Moreover, growth in lending to firms had picked up again in February, to 2.2%, while debt securities issuance by firms had grown at an unchanged rate of 3.2%. At the same time, credit standards for business loans had tightened slightly again in the first quarter of 2025, as reported in the April round of the bank lending survey. This was mainly because banks were becoming more concerned about the economic risks faced by their customers. Demand for loans to firms had decreased slightly in the first quarter, after a modest recovery in previous quarters.

    The average rate on new mortgages, at 3.3% in February, had risen on the back of earlier increases in longer-term market rates. Mortgage lending had continued to strengthen in February, albeit at a still subdued annual rate of 1.5%, as banks had eased their credit standards and households’ demand for loans had continued to increase strongly.

    Monetary policy stance and policy considerations

    Turning to the monetary policy stance, members assessed the data that had become available since the last monetary policy meeting in accordance with the three main elements that the Governing Council had communicated in 2023 as shaping its reaction function. These comprised (i) the implications of the incoming economic and financial data for the inflation outlook, (ii) the dynamics of underlying inflation, and (iii) the strength of monetary policy transmission.

    Starting with the inflation outlook, members widely agreed that the latest data, including the HICP inflation figures for February and March and recent outturns for services inflation, provided further evidence that the disinflationary process was well on track. They thus expressed increased confidence that inflation would return to target in line with the March baseline projections.

    However, the March baseline projections had not incorporated the latest US policy announcements, which had increased downside risks to growth and inflation over the short term. The most recent forces at play, such as the negative demand shock linked to the tariff proposals and the related pervasive uncertainty, the appreciation of the euro and the decline in oil and gas prices, would further dampen the inflation outlook in the near term.

    Over the medium term the picture for inflation remained more mixed, as the effects of fiscal spending, retaliatory tariffs and the disruption of value chains might point in different directions, with each shock having an impact on growth and inflation with a different time profile. It was pointed out that the inflationary effects of tariffs might outweigh the disinflationary pressure from reduced foreign demand over the medium term, especially if the European Union retaliated by imposing tariffs on products that were not easily substitutable, such as intermediate goods. As a result, firms might suffer from rising input costs that would, over time, be passed on to consumers as the erosion of profit margins made cost absorption difficult. If this occurred at the same time as the support to economic activity from fiscal policy kicked in, there would be a significant risk of higher inflation. Overall, it was too early to draw firm conclusions at a time when many trade policy options were still on the table.

    Turning to underlying inflation, members concurred that most indicators were pointing to a sustained return of inflation to the 2% medium-term target. Wage growth had been slowing further – slightly faster than expected. In view of the high uncertainty, companies were also likely to be cautious about accepting high wage demands. Domestic inflation had remained unchanged, after falling slightly in February. This suggested that inflation had been quite stubborn despite the marked decline in services inflation, although progress had also been seen in this indicator when looking back over the past six months. The PCCI, which had the best leading indicator properties for inflation and still showed rising momentum, warranted further monitoring.

    Finally, incoming data confirmed that the transmission of monetary tightening remained largely as intended. Bank credit growth was overall on a gradual, slow recovery path, although from quite subdued levels. Nevertheless, it was increasing somewhat more strongly than had previously been expected for both non-financial corporations and households. There had been an easing of credit standards and strong demand for housing loans, which could foreshadow a pick-up in construction activity. At the same time, market-based indicators pointed to a tightening of financial conditions and, despite recent interest rate cuts, the latest round of the bank lending survey pointed to tighter credit standards for both firms and consumer credit. This was due to anticipated higher default risks against a background of weaker growth. Moreover, uncertainty had been very high and, in the presence of high uncertainty, the response of intermediaries to lower risk-free rates and, more generally, the transmission mechanism of monetary policy, were seen as more sluggish.

    Monetary policy decisions and communication

    Against this background, all members agreed with the proposal by Mr Lane to lower the three key ECB interest rates by 25 basis points. In particular, lowering the deposit facility rate – the rate through which the Governing Council steered the monetary policy stance – was justified by the updated assessment of the inflation outlook, the dynamics of underlying inflation and the strength of monetary policy transmission. Members expressed increased confidence that inflation would return to target over the medium term and that the fight against the inflation shock was nearly over.

    Some members indicated that, before the US tariff announcement on 2 April, they had considered a pause to rate cuts at the current meeting to be appropriate, preferring to wait for the next round of projections for greater clarity on the medium-term inflation outlook. These members attached a higher probability to the possibility that the trade shock would be inflationary beyond the short term, in view of the destructive effects of breaking up global value chains. While the inflationary effects of the proposed tariffs might differ for the United States and Europe, the pandemic experience had shown that, despite different weights attached to demand versus supply factors, in the end inflation developments in the two economies had been quite synchronous, and the same might occur again this time. Overall, this pointed to upside risks to inflation in the medium to long term that counterbalanced the downside risks stemming from weaker economic activity. However, recent events had convinced these members that cutting interest rates at the current meeting provided some insurance against negative outcomes and avoided contributing to additional uncertainty in times of financial market volatility. In addition, a cut at the present meeting could be seen as frontloading a possible cut at the June meeting, which underlined the need to retain full optionality for the upcoming meetings.

    At the same time, it was felt that the tariff tensions did not seem to come with the inflationary effects that many members had previously associated with such an event, at least not over the short to medium-term horizons. In part, this was because the euro was seemingly turning into more of a safe-haven currency and was subject to revaluation pressures. Disinflationary forces were thus likely to dominate in the short term. In addition, the growth outlook had weakened, with tariffs, related uncertainty and geopolitical tensions acting as a drag. In this regard, it was argued that a 25 basis point rate cut would lean against the substantial risks to growth in the short term and the tightening of financial conditions that had resulted from the tariff events, without the risk of fuelling inflation further down the line.

    In these turbulent times, members stressed the need to be a beacon of stability, thus instilling confidence and not causing more surprises in an already volatile environment, which might amplify market turbulence. This spoke in favour of a 25 basis point cut.

    A standard 25 basis point rate reduction was seen as consistent with the fact that, while very uncertain, the range of potential outcomes from the current situation still entailed some upside risks to inflation for the euro area economy. On the one hand, countervailing forces that would bring the US Administration to change course could eventually emerge. One such force had been the observed outflows from the US Treasuries market, which might have contributed to the 90-day pause applied to most US tariffs. On the other hand, there had been – and could be further – mitigating factors in the euro area. These included a more growth-supportive fiscal outlook as well as an opportunity to make swift progress on other European policy initiatives. Another factor potentially protecting against more adverse scenarios could be a stronger commitment by the Chinese Government to domestic demand-led growth in China. In addition, a possible structural increase in international demand for the euro, while entailing downside risks to inflation, was also a symptom of a largely positive development, namely a shift into European assets. A portfolio shift could lower long-term interest rates in the euro area and lead to cheaper financing for planned investment projects. Finally, the appreciation of the euro would further reduce the price of energy imports in euro terms, which could counterbalance some of the negative effects of the tariffs and the exchange rate on energy-intensive exporters.

    These arguments notwithstanding, a few members noted that they could have felt comfortable with a 50 basis point rate cut. These members attached more weight to the change in the balance of risks since the Governing Council’s March meeting, pointing out that downside risks to growth had increased and, even in the event of a relatively mild trade conflict, uncertainty was already discouraging consumption and investment. In this context, they emphasised that downside risks to inflation had clearly increased. The same members also argued that a larger interest rate cut could have offset more of the recent tightening of financial conditions, including higher corporate bond spreads and lower equity prices, which had weakened the transmission of past monetary policy decisions. In this respect it was argued that surprising the markets should not be excluded, and it was recalled that there had been previous cases in which the Governing Council had not shied away from surprises when appropriate.

    At the same time, it was argued that the optimal monetary policy response depended on the outcome of tariff negotiations, including the scope of the tariffs and the extent of potential retaliation, and on how tariffs fed through global supply chains. The view was also expressed that a forward-looking central bank should only act forcefully to the tariff shock if it expected a sharp deterioration in labour market conditions or an unanchoring of inflation expectations to the downside. However, the initial conditions, featuring a still resilient labour market and elevated momentum in underlying inflation and services inflation, made such a scenario unlikely. Moreover, the economy was coming out of a high-inflation period with consumers’ and firms’ inflation expectations one year ahead still standing at almost 3%. In such a situation, an unanchoring of inflation expectations to the downside was highly unlikely, while the higher than expected food and services inflation in March and rising momentum in services underlined the continued need to monitor inflation developments. If the decline in economic activity turned out to be short-lived, an accommodative response of monetary policy might, given transmission lags, exert its peak impact when the economy was already recovering and inflation was rising, and would therefore be misguided. It could also coincide with when fiscal policy was starting to boost domestic demand, although anticipation channels could lead to some of the impact of infrastructure and defence spending on inflation being smoothed out and dampened in the medium term. Finally, it was argued that cutting interest rates further could no longer be justified by the intention to return to neutral territory since, by various measures, monetary policy was no longer restrictive. Bank lending was recovering, domestic demand was expanding and the level of interest rates was contributing measurably to demand for all types of loan, as shown in the most recent bank lending survey.

    Looking ahead, members stressed that maintaining a data-dependent approach with full optionality at every meeting was warranted more than ever in view of the high uncertainty. Keeping a cautious approach and a firm commitment to price stability had contributed to the success so far, with inflation back on track despite unprecedented challenges. However, agility might be required in the present environment, with the need for the Governing Council to be ready to react quickly if necessary.

    Turning to communication aspects, members noted that it was time to remove the phrase “our monetary policy is becoming meaningfully less restrictive” from the monetary policy statement. Reference to a restrictive policy stance, in various formulations, had proven useful over past phases in which inflation had still been high, providing a clear message that monetary policy was contributing to disinflation. Such a signal was no longer needed. In the present conditions, dropping the sentence avoided the perception that the neutral level of interest rates was the end point of the current cycle, which was not necessarily the case. However, dropping the sentence did not imply that monetary policy had necessarily left restrictive territory. At the current juncture, there was no need to take a stand on whether monetary policy was still restrictive, already neutral or even moving into accommodative territory. Such a categorisation, especially in the current turbulent context, was very hard to provide. Instead, the change in wording was seen as consistent with an approach that was not guided by interest rate benchmarks but by the need to always determine the policy stance that was appropriate. In other words, policy would be set so as to provide the strongest assurance that inflation would be anchored sustainably at the medium-term target, given the set of initial conditions and the shocks that the Governing Council had to tackle at any given time.

    Members reiterated that the Governing Council remained determined to ensure that inflation would stabilise sustainably at its 2% medium-term target. Its interest rate decisions would continue to be based on its assessment of the inflation outlook in light of the incoming economic and financial data, the dynamics of underlying inflation and the strength of monetary policy transmission. While noting that markets were functioning in an orderly manner, it was seen as helpful to reiterate that the Governing Council stood ready to adjust all instruments within the ECB’s mandate to ensure that inflation stabilised sustainably at the medium-term target and to preserve the smooth functioning of monetary policy transmission.

    Taking into account the foregoing discussion among the members, upon a proposal by the President, the Governing Council took the monetary policy decisions as set out in the monetary policy press release. The members of the Governing Council subsequently finalised the monetary policy statement, which the President and the Vice-President would, as usual, deliver at the press conference following the Governing Council meeting.

    Monetary policy statement

    Monetary policy statement for the press conference of 17 April 2025

    Press release

    Monetary policy decisions

    Meeting of the ECB’s Governing Council, 16-17 April 2025

    Members

    • Ms Lagarde, President
    • Mr de Guindos, Vice-President
    • Mr Centeno*
    • Mr Cipollone
    • Mr Demarco, temporarily replacing Mr Scicluna*
    • Mr Dolenc, Deputy Governor of Banka Slovenije
    • Mr Elderson
    • Mr Escrivá
    • Mr Holzmann*
    • Mr Kazāks
    • Mr Kažimír
    • Mr Knot*
    • Mr Lane
    • Mr Makhlouf
    • Mr Müller
    • Mr Nagel
    • Mr Panetta
    • Mr Patsalides
    • Mr Rehn
    • Mr Reinesch*
    • Ms Schnabel
    • Mr Šimkus
    • Mr Stournaras
    • Mr Villeroy de Galhau
    • Mr Vujčić
    • Mr Wunsch

    * Members not holding a voting right in April 2025 under Article 10.2 of the ESCB Statute.

    Other attendees

    • Mr Dombrovskis, Commissioner**
    • Ms Senkovic, Secretary, Director General Secretariat
    • Mr Rostagno, Secretary for monetary policy, Director General Monetary Policy
    • Mr Winkler, Deputy Secretary for monetary policy, Senior Adviser, DG Monetary Policy

    ** In accordance with Article 284 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

    Accompanying persons

    • Mr Arpa
    • Ms Bénassy-Quéré
    • Mr Debrun
    • Mr Gavilán
    • Mr Kaasik
    • Mr Kelly
    • Mr Koukoularides
    • Mr Kroes
    • Mr Lünnemann
    • Ms Mauderer
    • Mr Martin
    • Mr Nicoletti Altimari
    • Mr Novo
    • Mr Rutkaste
    • Ms Schembri
    • Mr Šiaudinis
    • Mr Šošić
    • Mr Välimäki
    • Ms Žumer Šujica

    Other ECB staff

    • Mr Proissl, Director General Communications
    • Mr Straub, Counsellor to the President
    • Ms Rahmouni-Rousseau, Director General Market Operations
    • Mr Arce, Director General Economics
    • Mr Sousa, Deputy Director General Economics

    Release of the next monetary policy account foreseen on 3 July 2025.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: DG Okonjo-Iweala, IPU Secretary General Chungong urge parliaments to ratify WTO Fisheries Agreement

    Source: World Trade Organization

    Adopted at the WTO’s 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12) in June 2022, the Agreement tackles some of the most harmful forms of fisheries subsidies, including those that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, the depletion of overfished stocks, and unregulated high seas fishing.

    “We are on the verge of a major milestone,” said WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo- Iweala. “This Agreement is not only about preserving deteriorating fish stocks: it is about people’s livelihoods and food security. It’s about responding to problems of the global commons – and demonstrating that the multilateral trading system is delivering global public goods. We need 12 more acceptances to bring it into force. It is now time for the remaining parliaments to take action. This is about improving economic and environmental sustainability – it would be wonderful if we can get this done in time for next month’s 2025 United Nations Oceans Conference in France.”

    IPU Secretary General Martin Chungong added: “Parliaments are the vital link between global agreements and national action. By ratifying this Agreement, they can help restore marine ecosystems, support livelihoods and show that multilateralism works.”

    The joint call for action builds on the letter sent by the IPU Secretary General and the WTO Director-General in September 2023 encouraging parliamentarians to get involved in the campaign to promote the ratification of the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies.

    The upcoming 2025 United Nations Oceans Conference, taking place from 9 to 13 June in Nice, France, presents a timely opportunity for the Agreement’s ratification and entry into force, building political momentum for action to address rapidly deteriorating fish stocks.

    A prompt entry into force of the Agreement would send a powerful signal of global resolve to implement Sustainable Development Goal 14.6, which aims to eliminate harmful fisheries subsidies and promote the sustainable use of marine resources.

    The 2022 Agreement has already shown that WTO members can deliver meaningful multilateral outcomes, even amid geopolitical tensions and economic uncertainty. Finalizing ongoing negotiations on additional disciplines to address subsidies contributing to overcapacity and overfishing would further strengthen efforts toward long-term sustainability.

    The Agreement holds particular significance for coastal communities in small, vulnerable economies (SVEs) and least-developed countries (LDCs), which depend heavily on marine resources for food security, employment, and economic resilience. Many SVEs and LDCs have already ratified the Agreement, recognizing its potential to preserve marine ecosystems and advance fairness in ocean governance. Even landlocked members see value in the Agreement because it helps address food insecurity. The full list of WTO members that have deposited their instruments of acceptance is available here.

    The WTO Fisheries Funding Mechanism (Fish Fund) is ready to become operational once the Agreement enters into force. In collaboration with international partners, the Fund will provide technical assistance and capacity-building to developing economies that have ratified the Agreement. More information is available here.

    The WTO Secretariat and the IPU reaffirm their commitment to working with national and regional parliaments through technical briefings, outreach activities, and targeted support to ensure swift ratification and effective implementation of the Agreement.

    Share

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-OSI: StepStone Group Reports Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2025 Results

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NEW YORK, May 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — StepStone Group Inc. (Nasdaq: STEP), a global private markets investment firm focused on providing customized investment solutions and advisory and data services, today reported results for the quarter ended March 31, 2025. This represents results for the fourth quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2025. The Board of Directors of the Company has declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.24 per share of Class A common stock, and a supplemental cash dividend of $0.40 per share of Class A common stock, both payable on June 30, 2025, to the holders of record as of the close of business on June 13, 2025.

    StepStone issued a full detailed presentation of its fourth quarter and full fiscal year ended March 31, 2025 results, which can be accessed by visiting the Company’s website at https://shareholders.stepstonegroup.com.

    Webcast and Earnings Conference Call

    Management will host a webcast and conference call today, Thursday, May 22, 2025 at 5:00 pm ET to discuss the Company’s results for the fourth quarter and fiscal year ended March 31, 2025. The webcast will be made available on the Shareholders section of the Company’s website at https://shareholders.stepstonegroup.com. To listen to a live broadcast, go to the site at least 15 minutes prior to the scheduled start time to register. A replay will also be available on the Shareholders section of the Company’s website approximately two hours after the conclusion of the event.

    To join as a live participant in the question and answer portion of the call, participants must register at https://register-conf.media-server.com/register/BI83b497f55a944def8cfadab7f935822b. Upon registering you will receive the dial-in number and a PIN to join the call as well as an email confirmation with the details.

    About StepStone

    StepStone Group Inc. (Nasdaq: STEP) is a global private markets investment firm focused on providing customized investment solutions and advisory and data services to its clients. As of March 31, 2025, StepStone was responsible for approximately $709 billion of total capital, including $189 billion of assets under management. StepStone’s clients include some of the world’s largest public and private defined benefit and defined contribution pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and insurance companies, as well as prominent endowments, foundations, family offices and private wealth clients, which include high-net-worth and mass affluent individuals. StepStone partners with its clients to develop and build private markets portfolios designed to meet their specific objectives across the private equity, infrastructure, private debt and real estate asset classes.

    Forward-Looking Statements

    Some of the statements in this release may constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements other than statements of historical fact are forward-looking. Words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “estimate,” “expect,” “future,” “intend,” “may,” “plan” and “will” and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements reflect management’s current plans, estimates and expectations and are inherently uncertain. The inclusion of any forward-looking information in this release should not be regarded as a representation that the future plans, estimates or expectations contemplated will be achieved. Forward-looking statements are subject to various risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, global and domestic market and business conditions, our successful execution of business and growth strategies, the favorability of the private markets fundraising environment, successful integration of acquired businesses and regulatory factors relevant to our business, as well as assumptions relating to our operations, financial results, financial condition, business prospects, growth strategy and liquidity and the risks and uncertainties described in greater detail under the “Risk Factors” section of our annual report on Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on May 24, 2024, and in our annual report on Form 10-K to be filed with the SEC for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2025, and in our subsequent reports filed with the SEC, as such factors may be updated from time to time. We undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law.

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures

    To supplement our consolidated financial statements, which are prepared and presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”), we use the following non-GAAP financial measures: fee revenues, adjusted revenues, adjusted net income (on both a pre-tax and after-tax basis), adjusted net income per share, adjusted weighted-average shares, fee-related earnings, fee-related earnings margin, gross realized performance fees and performance fee-related earnings. We have provided this non-GAAP financial information, which is not calculated or presented in accordance with GAAP, as information supplemental and in addition to the financial measures presented in this earnings release that are calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. Such non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered superior to, as a substitute for or alternative to, and should be considered in conjunction with, the GAAP financial measures presented in this earnings release. The presentation of these measures should not be construed as an inference that our future results will be unaffected by unusual or non-recurring items. In addition, the non-GAAP financial measures in this earnings release may not be comparable to similarly titled measures used by other companies in our industry or across different industries. For definitions of these non-GAAP measures and reconciliations to applicable GAAP measures, please see the section titled “Non-GAAP Financial Measures: Definitions and Reconciliations.”

    Financial Highlights and Key Business Drivers/Operating Metrics

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,   Percentage Change
    (in thousands, except share and per share amounts and where noted) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024     2025     vs. FQ4’24 vs. FY’24
    Financial Highlights                      
    GAAP Results                      
    Management and advisory fees, net $ 153,410   $ 178,015   $ 184,758   $ 190,840   $ 213,401     $ 585,140   $ 767,014     39% 31%
    Total revenues   356,810     186,401     271,677     339,023     377,729       711,631     1,174,830     6% 65%
    Total performance fees   203,400     8,386     86,919     148,183     164,328       126,491     407,816     (19)% 222%
    Net income (loss)   82,542     48,045     53,138     (287,163 )   13,153       167,820     (172,827 )   (84)% na
    Net income (loss) per share of Class A common stock:                      
    Basic $ 0.48   $ 0.20   $ 0.26   $ (2.61 ) $ (0.24 )   $ 0.91   $ (2.52 )   na na
    Diluted $ 0.48   $ 0.20   $ 0.26   $ (2.61 ) $ (0.24 )   $ 0.91   $ (2.52 )   na na
    Weighted-average shares of Class A common stock:                      
    Basic   64,194,859     66,187,754     68,772,051     73,687,289     75,975,770       63,489,135     71,142,916     18% 12%
    Diluted   67,281,567     68,593,761     69,695,315     73,687,289     75,975,770       66,544,038     71,142,916     13% 7%
    Quarterly dividend per share of Class A common stock(1) $ 0.21   $ 0.21   $ 0.24   $ 0.24   $ 0.24     $ 0.83   $ 0.93     14% 12%
    Supplemental dividend per share of Class A common stock(2) $ —   $ 0.15   $ —   $ —   $ —     $ 0.25   $ 0.15     na (40)%
    Accrued carried interest allocations $ 1,354,051   $ 1,328,853   $ 1,381,110   $ 1,474,543   $ 1,495,664           10%  
                           
    Non-GAAP Results(3)                      
    Fee revenues(4) $ 153,808   $ 178,514   $ 185,481   $ 191,832   $ 214,662     $ 586,379   $ 770,489     40% 31%
    Adjusted revenues   177,357     221,165     208,788     243,905     295,861       665,060     969,719     67% 46%
    Fee-related earnings (“FRE”)   50,900     71,656     72,349     74,118     94,081       189,793     312,204     85% 64%
    FRE margin(5)   33 %   40 %   39 %   39 %   44 %     32 %   41 %      
    Gross realized performance fees   23,549     42,651     23,307     52,073     81,199       78,681     199,230     245% 153%
    Performance fee-related earnings (“PRE”)   12,128     21,803     14,540     26,596     41,543       40,994     104,482     243% 155%
    Adjusted net income (“ANI”)   37,716     57,241     53,569     52,659     80,603       139,393     244,072     114% 75%
    Adjusted weighted-average shares   115,512,301     118,510,499     118,774,233     118,935,179     118,869,111       115,134,473     118,772,442        
    ANI per share $ 0.33   $ 0.48   $ 0.45   $ 0.44   $ 0.68     $ 1.21   $ 2.05     106% 69%
                           
    Key Business Drivers/Operating Metrics (in billions)                      
    Assets under management (“AUM”)(6) $ 156.6   $ 169.3   $ 176.1   $ 179.2   $ 189.4           21%  
    Assets under advisement (“AUA”)(6)   521.1     531.4     505.9     518.7     519.7           —  
    Fee-earning AUM (“FEAUM”)   93.9     100.4     104.4     114.2     121.4           29%  
    Undeployed fee-earning capital (“UFEC”)   22.6     27.6     29.7     21.7     24.6           9%  

    _______________________________
    (1) Dividends paid, as reported in this table, relate to the preceding quarterly period in which they were earned.
    (2) The supplemental cash dividend relates to earnings in respect of our full fiscal years 2023 and 2024, respectively.
    (3) Fee revenues, adjusted revenues, FRE, FRE margin, gross realized performance fees, PRE, ANI, adjusted weighted-average shares and ANI per share are non-GAAP measures. See the definitions of these measures and reconciliations to the respective, most comparable GAAP measures under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures: Definitions and Reconciliations.”
    (4) Excludes the impact of consolidating the Consolidated Funds. See reconciliation of GAAP measures to adjusted measures that follows.
    (5) FRE margin is calculated by dividing FRE by fee revenues.
    (6) AUM/AUA reflects final data for the prior period, adjusted for net new client account activity through the period presented. Does not include post-period investment valuation or cash activity. Net asset value (“NAV”) data for underlying investments is as of the prior period, as reported by underlying managers up to the business day occurring on or after 100 days, or 115 days at the fiscal year-end, following the prior period end. When NAV data is not available by the business day occurring on or after 100 days, or 115 days at the fiscal year-end, following the prior period end, such NAVs are adjusted for cash activity following the last available reported NAV.  

    StepStone Group Inc.
    GAAP Consolidated Balance Sheets
    (in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

      As of March 31,
        2025       2024
    Assets      
    Cash and cash equivalents $ 244,791     $ 143,430
    Restricted cash   502       718
    Fees and accounts receivable   80,871       56,769
    Due from affiliates   92,723       67,531
    Investments:      
    Investments in funds   183,694       135,043
    Accrued carried interest allocations   1,495,664       1,354,051
    Legacy Greenspring investments in funds and accrued carried interest allocations(1)   629,228       631,197
    Deferred income tax assets   382,886       184,512
    Lease right-of-use assets, net   91,841       97,763
    Other assets and receivables   62,869       60,611
    Intangibles, net   263,872       304,873
    Goodwill   580,542       580,542
    Assets of Consolidated Funds:      
    Cash and cash equivalents   44,511       38,164
    Investments, at fair value   415,011       131,858
    Other assets   17,688       1,745
    Total assets $ 4,586,693     $ 3,788,807
    Liabilities and stockholders’ equity      
    Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities $ 89,731     $ 127,417
    Accrued compensation and benefits   736,695       101,481
    Accrued carried interest-related compensation   757,968       719,497
    Legacy Greenspring accrued carried interest-related compensation(1)   495,739       484,154
    Due to affiliates   331,821       212,918
    Lease liabilities   113,519       119,739
    Debt obligations   269,268       148,822
    Liabilities of Consolidated Funds:      
    Other liabilities   17,580       1,645
    Total liabilities   2,812,321       1,915,673
    Redeemable non-controlling interests in Consolidated Funds   377,897       102,623
    Redeemable non-controlling interests in subsidiaries   6,327       115,920
    Stockholders’ equity:      
    Class A common stock, $0.001 par value, 650,000,000 authorized; 76,761,399 and 65,614,902 issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively   77       66
    Class B common stock, $0.001 par value, 125,000,000 authorized; 39,656,954 and 45,030,959 issued and outstanding as of March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively   40       45
    Additional paid-in capital   421,057       310,293
    Retained earnings (accumulated deficit)   (242,546 )     13,768
    Accumulated other comprehensive income   728       304
    Total StepStone Group Inc. stockholders’ equity   179,356       324,476
    Non-controlling interests in subsidiaries   1,056,510       974,559
    Non-controlling interests in legacy Greenspring entities(1)   133,489       147,042
    Non-controlling interests in the Partnership   20,793       208,514
    Total stockholders’ equity   1,390,148       1,654,591
    Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $ 4,586,693     $ 3,788,807

    (1)   Reflects amounts attributable to consolidated VIEs for which the Company did not acquire any direct economic interests.     

    StepStone Group Inc.
    GAAP Consolidated Statements of Income (Loss)
    (in thousands, except share and per share amounts)

      Three Months Ended March 31,   Year Ended March 31,
        2025       2024       2025       2024  
    Revenues              
    Management and advisory fees, net $ 213,401     $ 153,410     $ 767,014     $ 585,140  
    Performance fees:              
    Incentive fees   5,910       2,496       32,275       25,339  
    Carried interest allocations:              
    Realized   75,935       18,054       159,653       49,401  
    Unrealized   21,177       151,757       141,547       126,908  
    Total carried interest allocations   97,112       169,811       301,200       176,309  
    Legacy Greenspring carried interest allocations(1)   61,306       31,093       74,341       (75,157 )
    Total performance fees   164,328       203,400       407,816       126,491  
    Total revenues   377,729       356,810       1,174,830       711,631  
    Expenses              
    Compensation and benefits:              
    Cash-based compensation   85,510       74,411       331,808       292,962  
    Equity-based compensation   126,197       13,937       669,126       42,357  
    Performance fee-related compensation:              
    Realized   39,656       11,421       94,748       37,687  
    Unrealized   27,777       84,014       94,272       74,694  
    Total performance fee-related compensation   67,433       95,435       189,020       112,381  
    Legacy Greenspring performance fee-related compensation(1)   61,306       31,093       74,341       (75,157 )
    Total compensation and benefits   340,446       214,876       1,264,295       372,543  
    General, administrative and other   43,152       54,310       177,354       167,317  
    Total expenses   383,598       269,186       1,441,649       539,860  
    Other income (expense)              
    Investment income   9,386       3,337       15,096       7,452  
    Legacy Greenspring investment income (loss)(1)   2,934       (33 )     (1,185 )     (9,087 )
    Investment income of Consolidated Funds   34,496       6,115       65,374       28,472  
    Interest income   3,218       1,429       10,850       3,664  
    Interest expense   (3,191 )     (2,649 )     (12,701 )     (9,331 )
    Other income (loss)   (31,024 )     (1,308 )     (32,650 )     2,455  
    Total other income   15,819       6,891       44,784       23,625  
    Income (loss) before income tax   9,950       94,515       (222,035 )     195,396  
    Income tax expense (benefit)   (3,203 )     11,973       (49,208 )     27,576  
    Net income (loss)   13,153       82,542       (172,827 )     167,820  
    Less: Net income attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries   16,316       4,443       79,282       37,240  
    Less: Net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in legacy Greenspring entities(1)   2,934       (33 )     (1,185 )     (9,087 )
    Less: Net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in the Partnership   (17,994 )     37,279       (125,850 )     59,956  
    Less: Net income attributable to redeemable non-controlling interests in Consolidated Funds   30,630       4,248       53,731       15,838  
    Less: Net income (loss) attributable to redeemable non-controlling interests in subsidiaries   (225 )     5,782       758       5,782  
    Net income (loss) attributable to StepStone Group Inc. $ (18,508 )   $ 30,823     $ (179,563 )   $ 58,091  
    Net income (loss) per share of Class A common stock:              
    Basic $ (0.24 )   $ 0.48     $ (2.52 )   $ 0.91  
    Diluted $ (0.24 )   $ 0.48     $ (2.52 )   $ 0.91  
    Weighted-average shares of Class A common stock:              
    Basic   75,975,770       64,194,859       71,142,916       63,489,135  
    Diluted   75,975,770       67,281,567       71,142,916       66,544,038  

    (1) Reflects amounts attributable to consolidated VIEs for which the Company did not acquire any direct economic interests.  

    Non-GAAP Financial Measures: Definitions and Reconciliations

    Fee Revenues

    Fee revenues represents management and advisory fees, net, including amounts earned from the Consolidated Funds which are eliminated in consolidation. We believe fee revenues is useful to investors because it presents the net amount of management and advisory fee revenues attributable to us.

    The table below presents the components of fee revenues.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024   2025
    Focused commingled funds(1)(2) $ 80,434 $ 104,798 $ 107,855 $ 105,718 $ 124,604   $ 296,667 $ 442,975
    Separately managed accounts   55,945   57,376   61,393   66,245   67,695     223,958   252,709
    Advisory and other services   16,147   14,769   14,907   17,458   19,927     60,057   67,061
    Fund reimbursement revenues(1)   1,282   1,571   1,326   2,411   2,436     5,697   7,744
    Fee revenues $ 153,808 $ 178,514 $ 185,481 $ 191,832 $ 214,662   $ 586,379 $ 770,489

    _______________________________
    (1) Reflects the add-back of management and advisory fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds, which have been eliminated in consolidation.
    (2) Includes income-based incentive fees from certain funds:

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024   2025
    Income-based incentive fees $ 753 $ 1,113 $ 1,347 $ 2,120 $ 3,377   $ 1,372 $ 7,956


    Adjusted Revenues

    Adjusted revenues represents the components of revenues used in the determination of ANI and comprise fee revenues, adjusted incentive fees and realized carried interest allocations. We believe adjusted revenues is useful to investors because it presents a measure of realized revenues.

    The table below shows a reconciliation of revenues to adjusted revenues.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March
    31, 2025    		     2024     2025  
    Total revenues $ 356,810   $ 186,401 $ 271,677   $ 339,023   $ 377,729     $ 711,631   $ 1,174,830  
    Unrealized carried interest allocations   (151,757 )   25,170   (52,215 )   (93,325 )   (21,177 )     (126,908 )   (141,547 )
    Deferred incentive fees   1,450     6   2,445     —     (513 )     2,392     1,938  
    Legacy Greenspring carried interest allocations   (31,093 )   9,089   (13,917 )   (8,207 )   (61,306 )     75,157     (74,341 )
    Management and advisory fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds(1)   398     499   723     992     1,261       1,239     3,475  
    Incentive fees for the Consolidated Funds(2)   1,549     —   75     5,422     (133 )     1,549     5,364  
    Adjusted revenues $ 177,357   $ 221,165 $ 208,788   $ 243,905   $ 295,861     $ 665,060   $ 969,719  

    _______________________________
    (1) Reflects the add-back of management and advisory fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds, which have been eliminated in consolidation.
    (2) Reflects the add back of incentive fees for the Consolidated Funds, which have been eliminated in consolidation.

    Adjusted Net Income

    Adjusted net income, or “ANI,” is a non-GAAP performance measure that we present before the consolidation of StepStone Funds on a pre-tax and after-tax basis used to evaluate profitability. ANI represents the after-tax net realized income attributable to us. ANI does not reflect legacy Greenspring carried interest allocation revenues, legacy Greenspring carried interest-related compensation and legacy Greenspring investment income (loss) as none of the economics are attributable to us. The components of revenues used in the determination of ANI (“adjusted revenues”) comprise fee revenues, adjusted incentive fees and realized carried interest allocations. In addition, ANI excludes: (a) unrealized carried interest allocation revenues and related compensation, (b) unrealized investment income (loss), (c) equity-based compensation for awards granted prior to and in connection with our IPO, profits interests issued by our non-wholly owned subsidiaries, and unrealized mark-to-market changes in the fair value of the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary, (d) amortization of intangibles, (e) net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in our subsidiaries and realized gains attributable to the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary, (f) charges associated with acquisitions and corporate transactions, and (g) certain other items that we believe are not indicative of our core operating performance (as listed in the table below). ANI is fully taxed at our blended statutory rate. We believe ANI and adjusted revenues are useful to investors because they enable investors to evaluate the performance of our business across reporting periods.

    Fee-Related Earnings

    Fee-related earnings, or “FRE,” is a non-GAAP performance measure used to monitor our baseline earnings from recurring management and advisory fees. FRE is a component of ANI and comprises fee revenues less adjusted expenses which are operating expenses other than (a) performance fee-related compensation, (b) equity-based compensation for awards granted prior to and in connection with our IPO, profits interests issued by our non-wholly owned subsidiaries, and unrealized mark-to-market changes in the fair value of the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary, (c) amortization of intangibles, (d) charges associated with acquisitions and corporate transactions, and (e) certain other items that we believe are not indicative of our core operating performance (as listed in the table below). FRE is presented before income taxes. We believe FRE is useful to investors because it provides additional insight into the operating profitability of our business and our ability to cover direct base compensation and operating expenses from total fee revenue.

    The table below shows a reconciliation of GAAP measures to additional non-GAAP measures. We use the non-GAAP measures presented below as components when calculating FRE and ANI (as defined below). We believe these additional non-GAAP measures are useful to investors in evaluating both the baseline earnings from recurring management and advisory fees, which provide additional insight into the operating profitability of our business, and the after-tax net realized income attributable to us, allowing investors to evaluate the performance of our business. These additional non-GAAP measures remove the impact of Consolidated Funds that we are required to consolidate under GAAP, and certain other items that we believe are not indicative of our core operating performance.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024     2025  
    GAAP management and advisory fees, net $ 153,410   $ 178,015   $ 184,758   $ 190,840   $ 213,401     $ 585,140   $ 767,014  
    Management and advisory fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds(1)   398     499     723     992     1,261       1,239     3,475  
    Fee revenues $ 153,808   $ 178,514   $ 185,481   $ 191,832   $ 214,662     $ 586,379   $ 770,489  
                     
    GAAP incentive fees $ 2,496   $ 841   $ 3,155   $ 22,369   $ 5,910     $ 25,339   $ 32,275  
    Adjustments(2)   2,999     6     2,520     5,422     (646 )     3,941     7,302  
    Adjusted incentive fees $ 5,495   $ 847   $ 5,675   $ 27,791   $ 5,264     $ 29,280   $ 39,577  
                     
    GAAP cash-based compensation $ 74,411   $ 78,224   $ 82,871   $ 85,203   $ 85,510     $ 292,962   $ 331,808  
    Adjustments(3)   (461 )   (428 )   (285 )   339     —       (2,140 )   (374 )
    Adjusted cash-based compensation $ 73,950   $ 77,796   $ 82,586   $ 85,542   $ 85,510     $ 290,822   $ 331,434  
                     
    GAAP equity-based compensation $ 13,937   $ 19,179   $ 37,332   $ 486,418   $ 126,197     $ 42,357   $ 669,126  
    Adjustments(4)   (12,210 )   (16,785 )   (34,947 )   (483,958 )   (123,263 )     (36,635 )   (658,953 )
    Adjusted equity-based compensation $ 1,727   $ 2,394   $ 2,385   $ 2,460   $ 2,934     $ 5,722   $ 10,173  
                     
    GAAP general, administrative and other $ 54,310   $ 41,011   $ 50,061   $ 43,130   $ 43,152     $ 167,317   $ 177,354  
    Adjustments(5)   (27,079 )   (14,343 )   (21,900 )   (13,418 )   (11,015 )     (67,275 )   (60,676 )
    Adjusted general, administrative and other $ 27,231   $ 26,668   $ 28,161   $ 29,712   $ 32,137     $ 100,042   $ 116,678  
                     
    GAAP interest income $ 1,429   $ 2,057   $ 3,016   $ 2,559   $ 3,218     $ 3,664   $ 10,850  
    Interest income earned by the Consolidated Funds(6)   (612 )   (907 )   (1,363 )   (887 )   (1,600 )     (1,645 )   (4,757 )
    Adjusted interest income $ 817   $ 1,150   $ 1,653   $ 1,672   $ 1,618     $ 2,019   $ 6,093  
                     
    GAAP other income (loss) $ (1,308 ) $ (351 ) $ 1,177   $ (2,452 ) $ (31,024 )   $ 2,455   $ (32,650 )
    Adjustments(7)   395     (72 )   (1,082 )   1,883     30,606       (3,879 )   31,335  
    Adjusted other income (loss) $ (913 ) $ (423 ) $ 95   $ (569 ) $ (418 )   $ (1,424 ) $ (1,315 )

    ______________________________
    (1) Reflects the add-back of management and advisory fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds, which have been eliminated in consolidation.
    (2) Reflects the add back of incentive fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds, which have been eliminated in consolidation, and deferred incentive fees that are not included in GAAP revenues.
    (3) Reflects the removal of compensation paid to certain employees as part of an acquisition earn-out and unrealized amounts associated with cash-based incentive awards tracked to the performance of a designated investment fund.
    (4) Reflects the removal of equity-based compensation for awards granted prior to and in connection with the IPO, profits interests issued by our non-wholly owned subsidiaries, and unrealized mark-to-market changes in the fair value of the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary.
    (5) Reflects the removal of lease remeasurement adjustments, accelerated depreciation of leasehold improvements for changes in lease terms, amortization of intangibles, transaction-related costs, unrealized mark-to-market changes in fair value for contingent consideration obligation and other non-core operating income and expenses.
    (6) Reflects the removal of interest income earned by the Consolidated Funds.
    (7) Reflects the removal of amounts for Tax Receivable Agreements adjustments recognized as other income (loss), loss associated with payment made in connection with a secondary transaction executed by one of our private wealth funds, gain associated with amounts received as part of negotiations with a third party related to certain corporate matters, loss on sale of subsidiary and the impact of consolidation of the Consolidated Funds.

    The table below shows a reconciliation of income (loss) before income tax to ANI and FRE.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024     2025  
    Income (loss) before income tax $ 94,515     54,842   $ 57,888   $ (344,715 ) $ 9,950     $ 195,396   $ (222,035 )
    Net income attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries(1)   (12,822 )   (18,951 )   (17,812 )   (32,765 )   (33,369 )     (49,220 )   (102,897 )
    Net (income) loss attributable to non-controlling interests in legacy Greenspring entities   33     1,255     4,031     (1,167 )   (2,934 )     9,087     1,185  
    Unrealized carried interest allocations   (151,757 )   25,170     (52,215 )   (93,325 )   (21,177 )     (126,908 )   (141,547 )
    Unrealized performance fee-related compensation   84,014     (10,923 )   27,748     49,670     27,777       74,694     94,272  
    Unrealized investment (income) loss   (2,280 )   (1,180 )   (430 )   656     (6,007 )     (907 )   (6,961 )
    Impact of Consolidated Funds   (4,138 )   (7,731 )   (9,267 )   (6,892 )   (35,723 )     (26,076 )   (59,613 )
    Deferred incentive fees   1,450     6     2,445     —     (513 )     2,392     1,938  
    Equity-based compensation(2)   12,210     16,785     34,947     483,958     123,263       36,635     658,953  
    Amortization of intangibles   10,423     10,250     10,250     10,250     10,250       42,406     41,000  
    Tax Receivable Agreements adjustments through earnings   90     —     —     —     (348 )     312     (348 )
    Non-core items(3)   16,780     4,137     11,349     2,094     32,474       21,565     50,054  
    Pre-tax ANI   48,518     73,660     68,934     67,764     103,643       179,376     314,001  
    Income taxes(4)   (10,802 )   (16,419 )   (15,365 )   (15,105 )   (23,040 )     (39,983 )   (69,929 )
    ANI   37,716     57,241     53,569     52,659     80,603       139,393     244,072  
    Income taxes(4)   10,802     16,419     15,365     15,105     23,040       39,983     69,929  
    Realized carried interest allocations   (18,054 )   (41,804 )   (17,632 )   (24,282 )   (75,935 )     (49,401 )   (159,653 )
    Realized performance fee-related compensation   11,421     20,848     8,767     25,477     39,656       37,687     94,748  
    Realized investment income   (1,057 )   (1,415 )   (1,621 )   (1,720 )   (3,379 )     (6,545 )   (8,135 )
    Adjusted incentive fees(5)   (5,495 )   (847 )   (5,675 )   (27,791 )   (5,264 )     (29,280 )   (39,577 )
    Adjusted interest income(5)   (817 )   (1,150 )   (1,653 )   (1,672 )   (1,618 )     (2,019 )   (6,093 )
    Interest expense   2,649     2,990     3,512     3,008     3,191       9,331     12,701  
    Adjusted other (income) loss(5)(6)   913     423     (95 )   569     418       1,424     1,315  
    Net income attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries(1)   12,822     18,951     17,812     32,765     33,369       49,220     102,897  
    FRE $ 50,900   $ 71,656   $ 72,349   $ 74,118   $ 94,081     $ 189,793   $ 312,204  

    _______________________________
    (1) Reflects the portion of pre-tax ANI attributable to non-controlling interests in our subsidiaries and realized gains attributable to the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary:

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024   2025
    FRE attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries and profits interests $ 11,559 $ 13,308 $ 14,969 $ 21,063 $ 30,451   $ 42,074 $ 79,791
    Performance related earnings / other income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries and profits interests   1,263   5,643   2,843   11,702   2,918     7,146   23,106
    Net income attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries and profits interests $ 12,822 $ 18,951 $ 17,812 $ 32,765 $ 33,369   $ 49,220 $ 102,897

    The contribution to pre-tax ANI attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries and profits interests and performance related earnings / other income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries and profits interests presented above specifically related to the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary is presented below.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024   2025
    FRE attributable to profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary $ — $ 574 $ 2,051 $ 2,956 $ 6,399     $ — $ 11,980
    Performance related earnings / other income (loss) attributable to profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary   —   51   206   11,137   (224 )     3,074   11,170
    Net income attributable to profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary $ — $ 625 $ 2,257 $ 14,093 $ 6,175     $ 3,074 $ 23,150

    The contribution to pre-tax ANI attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries and performance related earnings / other income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries presented above specifically not attributable to the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary is presented below.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024   2025
    FRE attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries $ 11,559 $ 12,734 $ 12,918 $ 18,107 $ 24,052   $ 42,074 $ 67,811
    Performance related earnings / other income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries   1,263   5,592   2,637   565   3,142     4,072   11,936
    Net income attributable to non-controlling interests in subsidiaries $ 12,822 $ 18,326 $ 15,555 $ 18,672 $ 27,194   $ 46,146 $ 79,747

    (2) Reflects equity-based compensation for awards granted prior to and in connection with the IPO, profits interests issued by our non-wholly owned subsidiaries, and unrealized mark-to-market changes in the fair value of the profits interests issued in the private wealth subsidiary.
    (3) Includes (income) expense related to the following non-core operating income and expenses:

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024     2025
    Transaction costs $ 3,985 $ 672 $ 140 $ 12   $ 179     $ 4,855   $ 1,003
    Lease remeasurement adjustments   —   —   —   —     —       (106 )   —
    Accelerated depreciation of leasehold improvements for changes in lease terms   —   —   —   —     —       1,893     —
    (Gain) loss on change in fair value for contingent consideration obligation   12,280   2,953   10,888   2,476     (205 )     17,217     16,112
    Compensation paid to certain employees as part of an acquisition earn-out   515   482   321   (394 )   —       2,194     409
    Loss on payment made in connection with private wealth fund secondary transaction   —   —   —   —     32,500       —     32,500
    Gain from negotiation of certain corporate matters   —   —   —   —     —       (5,300 )   —
    Loss on sale of subsidiary   —   —   —   —     —       812     —
    Other non-core items   —   30   —   —     —       —     30
    Total non-core operating income and expenses $ 16,780 $ 4,137 $ 11,349 $ 2,094   $ 32,474     $ 21,565   $ 50,054

    (4) Represents corporate income taxes at a blended statutory rate applied to pre-tax ANI:

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
      March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		   2024   2025  
    Federal statutory rate 21.0% 21.0% 21.0% 21.0% 21.0%   21.0%   21.0%  
    Combined state, local and foreign rate 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.2%   1.3%   1.3%  
    Blended statutory rate 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.3% 22.2%   22.3%   22.3%  

    (5) Excludes the impact of consolidating the Consolidated Funds and includes deferred incentive fees which are not included in GAAP revenues.
    (6) Excludes amounts for Tax Receivable Agreements adjustments recognized as other income (loss) ($0.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, $(0.1) million for the three months ended March 31, 2024, and $0.3 million and $(0.3) million in fiscal 2025 and fiscal 2024, respectively), loss associated with payment made in connection with a secondary transaction executed by one of our private wealth funds ($32.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and in fiscal 2025), gain associated with amounts received as part of negotiations with a third party related to certain corporate matters ($5.3 million in fiscal 2024), and loss on sale of subsidiary ($0.8 million in fiscal 2024).

    Fee-Related Earnings Margin

    FRE margin is a non-GAAP performance measure which is calculated by dividing FRE by fee revenues. We believe FRE margin is an important measure of profitability on revenues that are largely recurring by nature. We believe FRE margin is useful to investors because it enables them to better evaluate the operating profitability of our business across periods.

    The table below shows a reconciliation of FRE to FRE margin.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024     2025  
    FRE $ 50,900   $ 71,656   $ 72,349   $ 74,118   $ 94,081     $ 189,793   $ 312,204  
    Fee revenues   153,808     178,514     185,481     191,832     214,662       586,379     770,489  
    FRE margin   33 %   40 %   39 %   39 %   44 %     32 %   41 %


    Gross Realized Performance Fees

    Gross realized performance fees represents realized carried interest allocations and adjusted incentive fees. We believe gross realized performance fees is useful to investors because it presents the total performance fees realized by us.

    Performance Fee-Related Earnings

    Performance fee-related earnings, or “PRE,” represents gross realized performance fees less realized performance fee-related compensation. We believe PRE is useful to investors because it presents the performance fees attributable to us, net of amounts paid to employees as performance fee-related compensation.

    The table below shows a reconciliation of total performance fees to gross realized performance fees and PRE.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
    (in thousands) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024     2025  
    Incentive fees $ 2,496   $ 841   $ 3,155   $ 22,369   $ 5,910     $ 25,339   $ 32,275  
    Realized carried interest allocations   18,054     41,804     17,632     24,282     75,935       49,401     159,653  
    Unrealized carried interest allocations   151,757     (25,170 )   52,215     93,325     21,177       126,908     141,547  
    Legacy Greenspring carried interest allocations   31,093     (9,089 )   13,917     8,207     61,306       (75,157 )   74,341  
    Total performance fees   203,400     8,386     86,919     148,183     164,328       126,491     407,816  
    Unrealized carried interest allocations   (151,757 )   25,170     (52,215 )   (93,325 )   (21,177 )     (126,908 )   (141,547 )
    Legacy Greenspring carried interest allocations   (31,093 )   9,089     (13,917 )   (8,207 )   (61,306 )     75,157     (74,341 )
    Incentive fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds(1)   1,549     —     75     5,422     (133 )     1,549     5,364  
    Deferred incentive fees   1,450     6     2,445     —     (513 )     2,392     1,938  
    Gross realized performance fees   23,549     42,651     23,307     52,073     81,199       78,681     199,230  
    Realized performance fee-related compensation   (11,421 )   (20,848 )   (8,767 )   (25,477 )   (39,656 )     (37,687 )   (94,748 )
    PRE $ 12,128   $ 21,803   $ 14,540   $ 26,596   $ 41,543     $ 40,994   $ 104,482  

    _______________________________
    (1) Reflects the add back of incentive fee revenues for the Consolidated Funds, which have been eliminated in consolidation.

    Adjusted Weighted-Average Shares and Adjusted Net Income Per Share

    ANI per share measures our per-share earnings assuming all Class B units, Class C units and Class D units in the Partnership were exchanged for Class A common stock in SSG, including the dilutive impact of outstanding equity-based awards. ANI per share is calculated as ANI divided by adjusted weighted-average shares outstanding. We believe adjusted weighted-average shares and ANI per share are useful to investors because they enable investors to better evaluate per-share operating performance across reporting periods.

    The following table shows a reconciliation of diluted weighted-average shares of Class A common stock outstanding to adjusted weighted-average shares outstanding used in the computation of ANI per share.

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,
      March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024   2025
    ANI $ 37,716 $ 57,241 $ 53,569 $ 52,659 $ 80,603   $ 139,393 $ 244,072
                     
    Weighted-average shares of Class A common stock outstanding – Basic   64,194,859   66,187,754   68,772,051   73,687,289   75,975,770     63,489,135   71,142,916
    Assumed vesting of RSUs   512,946   673,854   921,166   491,014   270,492     512,152   590,645
    Assumed vesting and exchange of Class B2 units   2,573,762   1,732,153   —   —   —     2,542,751   431,851
    Assumed purchase under ESPP   —   —   2,098   —   —     —   529
    Exchange of Class B units in the Partnership(1)   46,272,227   45,827,707   45,212,921   41,729,937   40,122,028     46,356,244   43,233,005
    Exchange of Class C units in the Partnership(1)   1,958,507   1,849,846   1,626,812   1,016,737   965,761     2,234,191   1,365,647
    Exchange of Class D units in the Partnership(1)   —   2,239,185   2,239,185   2,010,202   1,535,060     —   2,007,849
    Adjusted weighted-average shares   115,512,301   118,510,499   118,774,233   118,935,179   118,869,111     115,134,473   118,772,442
                     
    ANI per share $ 0.33 $ 0.48 $ 0.45 $ 0.44 $ 0.68   $ 1.21 $ 2.05

    _______________________________
    (1)   Assumes the full exchange of Class B units, Class C units or Class D units in the Partnership for Class A common stock of SSG pursuant to the Class B Exchange Agreement, Class C Exchange Agreement or Class D Exchange Agreement, respectively.

    Key Operating Metrics

    We monitor certain operating metrics that are either common to the asset management industry or that we believe provide important data regarding our business. Refer to the Glossary below for a definition of each of these metrics.

    Fee-Earning AUM

      Three Months Ended   Year Ended March 31,   Percentage
    Change
    (in millions) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		     2024     2025     vs. FQ4’24
    Separately Managed Accounts                    
    Beginning balance $ 56,660   $ 58,897   $ 60,272   $ 62,121   $ 69,974     $ 55,345   $ 58,897     23%
    Contributions(1)   2,757     2,085     1,723     9,033     3,874       6,327     16,715     41%
    Distributions(2)   (795 )   (830 )   (535 )   (1,000 )   (1,225 )     (4,080 )   (3,590 )   54%
    Market value, FX and other(3)   275     120     661     (180 )   551       1,305     1,152     100%
    Ending balance $ 58,897   $ 60,272   $ 62,121   $ 69,974   $ 73,174     $ 58,897   $ 73,174     24%
                         
    Focused Commingled Funds                    
    Beginning balance $ 32,772   $ 34,961   $ 40,084   $ 42,294   $ 44,192     $ 30,086   $ 34,961     35%
    Contributions(1)   2,429     5,653     2,122     2,520     3,403       6,115     13,698     40%
    Distributions(2)   (327 )   (661 )   (282 )   (682 )   (313 )     (1,841 )   (1,938 )   (4)%
    Market value, FX and other(3)   87     131     370     60     934       601     1,495     974%
    Ending balance $ 34,961   $ 40,084   $ 42,294   $ 44,192   $ 48,216     $ 34,961   $ 48,216     38%
                         
    Total                    
    Beginning balance $ 89,432   $ 93,858   $ 100,356   $ 104,415   $ 114,166     $ 85,431   $ 93,858     28%
    Contributions(1)   5,186     7,738     3,845     11,553     7,277       12,442     30,413     40%
    Distributions(2)   (1,122 )   (1,491 )   (817 )   (1,682 )   (1,538 )     (5,921 )   (5,528 )   37%
    Market value, FX and other(3)   362     251     1,031     (120 )   1,485       1,906     2,647     310%
    Ending balance $ 93,858   $ 100,356   $ 104,415   $ 114,166   $ 121,390     $ 93,858   $ 121,390     29%

    _______________________________
    (1) Contributions consist of new capital commitments that earn fees on committed capital and capital contributions to funds and accounts that earn fees on net invested capital or NAV.
    (2) Distributions consist of returns of capital from funds and accounts that pay fees on net invested capital or NAV and reductions in fee-earning AUM from funds that moved from a committed capital to net invested capital fee basis or from funds and accounts that no longer pay fees.
    (3) Market value, FX and other primarily consist of changes in market value appreciation (depreciation) for funds that pay on NAV and the effect of foreign exchange rate changes on non-U.S. dollar denominated commitments. The three months ended March 31, 2025 and year ended March 31, 2025 include a $0.6 billion secondary transaction within focused commingled funds.    

    Asset Class Summary

      Three Months Ended   Percentage
    Change
    (in millions) March 31,
    2024    		 June 30,
    2024    		 September
    30, 2024    		 December
    31, 2024    		 March 31,
    2025    		   vs. FQ4’24
    FEAUM              
    Private equity $ 49,869 $ 54,855 $ 57,136 $ 62,811 $ 65,007   30%
    Infrastructure   20,114   20,377   20,986   23,411   23,830   18%
    Private debt   15,477   16,161   16,975   17,882   19,517   26%
    Real estate   8,398   8,963   9,318   10,062   13,036   55%
    Total $ 93,858 $ 100,356 $ 104,415 $ 114,166 $ 121,390   29%
                   
    Separately managed accounts $ 58,897 $ 60,272 $ 62,121 $ 69,974 $ 73,174   24%
    Focused commingled funds   34,961   40,084   42,294   44,192   48,216   38%
    Total $ 93,858 $ 100,356 $ 104,415 $ 114,166 $ 121,390   29%
                   
    AUM(1)              
    Private equity $ 81,942 $ 89,329 $ 91,891 $ 93,404 $ 95,937   17%
    Infrastructure   30,003   32,756   35,392   36,156   37,026   23%
    Private debt   28,491   30,336   31,854   31,987   37,133   30%
    Real estate   16,201   16,912   16,996   17,665   19,284   19%
    Total $ 156,637 $ 169,333 $ 176,133 $ 179,212 $ 189,380   21%
                   
    Separately managed accounts $ 93,938 $ 103,003 $ 107,252 $ 109,305 $ 114,806   22%
    Focused commingled funds   48,545   51,682   53,870   55,142   59,410   22%
    Advisory AUM   14,154   14,648   15,011   14,765   15,164   7%
    Total $ 156,637 $ 169,333 $ 176,133 $ 179,212 $ 189,380   21%
                   
    AUA              
    Private equity $ 270,350 $ 279,909 $ 255,125 $ 263,420 $ 262,884   (3)%
    Infrastructure   60,339   62,599   62,891   67,100   69,027   14%
    Private debt   21,976   22,280   19,328   19,325   19,726   (10)%
    Real estate   168,455   166,659   168,519   168,807   168,047   —%
    Total $ 521,120 $ 531,447 $ 505,863 $ 518,652 $ 519,684   —%
                   
    Total capital responsibility(2) $ 677,757 $ 700,780 $ 681,996 $ 697,864 $ 709,064   5%

    _____________________________
    Note: Amounts may not sum to total due to rounding. AUM/AUA reflects final data for the prior period, adjusted for net new client account activity through the period presented, and does not include post-period investment valuation or cash activity. Net asset value (“NAV”) data for underlying investments is as of the prior period, as reported by underlying managers up to the business day occurring on or after 100 days, or 115 days at the fiscal year-end, following the prior period end. When NAV data is not available by the business day occurring on or after 100 days, or 115 days at the fiscal year-end, following the prior period end, such NAVs are adjusted for cash activity following the last available reported NAV.
    (1) Allocation of AUM by asset class is presented by underlying investment asset classification.
    (2) Total capital responsibility equals assets under management (AUM) plus assets under advisement (AUA).    

    Contacts

    Shareholder Relations:
    Seth Weiss
    shareholders@stepstonegroup.com
    1-212-351-6106

    Media:
    Brian Ruby / Chris Gillick / Matt Lettiero, ICR
    StepStonePR@icrinc.com
    1-203-682-8268

    Glossary

    Assets under advisement, or “AUA,” consists of client assets for which we do not have full discretion to make investment decisions but play a role in advising the client or monitoring their investments. We generally earn revenue for advisory-related services on a contractual fixed fee basis. Advisory-related services include asset allocation, strategic planning, development of investment policies and guidelines, screening and recommending investments, legal negotiations, monitoring and reporting on investments, and investment manager review and due diligence. Advisory fees vary by client based on the scope of services, investment activity and other factors. Most of our advisory fees are fixed, and therefore, increases or decreases in AUA do not necessarily lead to proportionate changes in revenue. We believe AUA is a useful metric for assessing the relative size of our advisory business.

    Our AUA is calculated as the sum of (i) the NAV of client portfolio assets for which we do not have full discretion and (ii) the unfunded commitments of clients to the underlying investments. Our AUA reflects the investment valuations in respect of the underlying investments of our client accounts on a three-month lag, adjusted for new client account activity through the period end. Our AUA does not include post-period investment valuation or cash activity. AUA as of March 31, 2025 reflects final data for the prior period (December 31, 2024), adjusted for net new client account activity through March 31, 2025. NAV data for underlying investments is as of December 31, 2024, as reported by underlying managers up to the business day occurring on or after 115 days following December 31, 2024. When NAV data is not available by the business day occurring on or after 115 days following December 31, 2024, such NAVs are adjusted for cash activity following the last available reported NAV.

    Assets under management, or “AUM,” primarily reflects the assets associated with our separately managed accounts (“SMAs”) and focused commingled funds. We classify assets as AUM if we have full discretion over the investment decisions in an account or have responsibility or custody of assets. Although management fees are based on a variety of factors and are not linearly correlated with AUM, we believe AUM is a useful metric for assessing the relative size and scope of our asset management business.

    Our AUM is calculated as the sum of (i) the net asset value (“NAV”) of client portfolio assets, including the StepStone Funds and (ii) the unfunded commitments of clients to the underlying investments and the StepStone Funds. Our AUM reflects the investment valuations in respect of the underlying investments of our funds and accounts on a three-month lag, adjusted for new client account activity through the period end. Our AUM does not include post-period investment valuation or cash activity. AUM as of March 31, 2025 reflects final data for the prior period (December 31, 2024), adjusted for net new client account activity through March 31, 2025. NAV data for underlying investments is as of December 31, 2024, as reported by underlying managers up to the business day occurring on or after 115 days following December 31, 2024. When NAV data is not available by the business day occurring on or after 115 days following December 31, 2024, such NAVs are adjusted for cash activity following the last available reported NAV.

    Consolidated Funds refer to the StepStone Funds that we are required to consolidate as of the applicable reporting period. We consolidate funds and other entities in which we hold a controlling financial interest.

    Consolidated VIEs refer to the variable interest entities that we are required to consolidate as of the applicable reporting period. We consolidate VIEs in which we hold a controlling financial interest.

    Fee-earning AUM, or “FEAUM,” reflects the assets from which we earn management fee revenue (i.e., fee basis) and includes assets in our SMAs, focused commingled funds and assets held directly by our clients for which we have fiduciary oversight and are paid fees as the manager of the assets. Our SMAs and focused commingled funds typically pay management fees based on capital commitments, net invested capital and, in certain cases, NAV, depending on the fee terms. Management fees are only marginally affected by market appreciation or depreciation because substantially all of the StepStone Funds pay management fees based on capital commitments or net invested capital. As a result, management fees and FEAUM are not materially affected by changes in market value. We believe FEAUM is a useful metric in order to assess assets forming the basis of our management fee revenue.

    Legacy Greenspring entities refers to certain entities for which the Company, indirectly through its subsidiaries, became the sole and/or managing member in connection with the Greenspring acquisition.

    SSG refers solely to StepStone Group Inc., a Delaware corporation, and not to any of its subsidiaries.

    StepStone Funds refer to SMAs and focused commingled funds of the Company, including acquired Greenspring funds, for which the Partnership or one of its subsidiaries acts as both investment adviser and general partner or managing member.

    The Partnership refers solely to StepStone Group LP, a Delaware limited partnership, and not to any of its subsidiaries.

    Total capital responsibility equals AUM plus AUA. AUM includes any accounts for which StepStone Group has full discretion over the investment decisions, has responsibility to arrange or effectuate transactions, or has custody of assets. AUA refers to accounts for which StepStone Group provides advice or consultation but for which the firm does not have discretionary authority, responsibility to arrange or effectuate transactions, or custody of assets.

    Undeployed fee-earning capital represents the amount of capital commitments to StepStone Funds that has not yet been invested or considered active but will generate management fee revenue once invested or activated. We believe undeployed fee-earning capital is a useful metric for measuring the amount of capital that we can put to work in the future and thus earn management fee revenue thereon.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Belarus and Hungary sign roadmap for cooperation in nuclear energy until 2027

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

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

    MINSK, May 22 /Xinhua/ — Belarus and Hungary have signed a roadmap for cooperation in nuclear energy for 2025-2027, Olga Kozlovich, Head of the International Cooperation, Personnel Training and Information Support Department of the Nuclear Energy Department of the Belarusian Energy Ministry, said on Thursday. The relevant information was published by BELTA.

    The document was signed by the Department of Nuclear Energy of the Ministry of Energy, the Belarusian Nuclear Power Plant and the Hungarian Paks II NPP as part of the implementation of the memorandum of understanding between the Ministry of Energy of Belarus and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Hungary on deepening partnership in the field of nuclear energy.

    The roadmap includes activities to exchange experience in the development of nuclear energy infrastructure, ensuring nuclear and radiation safety, handling radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, and scientific and technical support for the operation of nuclear power plants.

    “Belarus has successfully implemented a project to build and commission a nuclear power plant and today shares its experience with partner countries, including Hungary, where a new nuclear power plant is also being built according to a Russian design with generation 3 water-cooled reactors. Belarusian and Hungarian nuclear scientists are developing partnerships, exchanging best practices, and an expert group on cooperation in the field of nuclear energy is working. The signed roadmap defines the priority areas of this work and will promote the mutual development of competencies in the nuclear industry,” said O. Kozlovich. -0-

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: China’s Vice Chairman Calls for Promoting Transformation of Global Trade and Investment

    Translation. Region: Russian Federal

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

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

    BEIJING, May 22 (Xinhua) — Chinese Vice President Han Zheng on Thursday called for joint efforts to promote the transformation of global trade and investment in the digital and intelligent era.

    Han Zheng made the announcement while speaking at the opening ceremony of the 2025 Global Trade and Investment Facilitation Summit in Beijing.

    According to him, the widespread use of new industries and technologies, including the digital economy and artificial intelligence, is transforming the landscape of global trade and investment, opening up broad prospects for development.

    The Vice President of China called for expanding the innovative application of digital and intelligent technologies to stimulate the recovery and development of the world economy. According to him, it is necessary to jointly promote open cooperation, mutual benefit and win-win, uphold fairness and inclusiveness, and fill the digital and intellectual gaps to create more favorable conditions for international trade and investment cooperation.

    Han Zheng also pointed out the need to use digital and intelligent technologies to ensure the stable and smooth operation of global industrial and supply chains.

    China is committed to expanding high-level opening-up and promoting high-quality development, providing broad opportunities for enterprises around the world, the vice president stressed.

    The Global Trade and Investment Promotion Summit, organized by the China Council for the Promotion of International Trade, was held for the first time in 2022.

    This year’s summit focuses on entering the digital and intelligent era and working together for common development. More than 800 people are attending the event, including heads of foreign government departments, international organizations, overseas business associations and world trade promotion organizations, as well as representatives of Chinese and overseas enterprises. –0–

    MIL OSI Russia News –

  • MIL-Evening Report: There is a growing number of ‘super-sized’ schools. Does the number of students matter?

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Rowe, Associate Professor in Education, Deakin University

    LBeddoe/Shutterstock

    Earlier this week, The Sydney Morning Herald reported one of Sydney’s top public high schools had more than 2,000 students for the first time, thanks to the booming population in the area.

    This follows similar reports of other “super-sized” schools in Victoria, Western Australia and Queensland.

    Parents may be wondering if a school’s size will impact their child’s opportunities or experience. What does the research say?

    A controversial subject

    Policy-makers have been concerned about school sizes for decades. This largely relates to declining enrolments in some areas and growing demand in others. For example, in Victoria during the Kennett government in the 1990s, some schools were merged into “super schools”.

    Super schools are attractive to policy-makers due to their ability to pool resources. However, anecdotally, parents have tended to oppose mergers on the basis that big schools detract from the community feel and personal relationships.

    There is no national data on average school size, although you can check individual school sizes on the MySchool website.

    Education authorities consider a school to be “small” if it has fewer than 300 students for primary school and fewer than 700 for high school.

    What does the research say?

    Australian-based research tends to support larger schools, on the basis they provide more curriculum choices. In a 2014 study published in the Journal of Education Policy, the authors wrote:

    large schools have more resources and are therefore better placed to offer a large range of curriculum, often including both academic and vocational subjects.

    A 2023 study similarly argued:

    smaller schools are generally less able to offer a wide range and diversity of curricular offerings compared to larger schools.

    Small schools can be beneficial

    But other education advocates argue small schools better facilitate participatory democratic environments for young people, improve discipline and sense of community.

    A 2009 review of 57 studies (the majority from the United States) published after 1990 recommended high schools do not have more than 1,000 students.

    The review said smaller schools can offer a community-like feel for students and are more likely to have smaller class sizes. A smaller school may be particularly advantageous for neurodiverse students if there are lower levels of noise and movement.

    A US-based study from 1991 found schools with less than 400 students lead to better student participation, attendance and satisfaction with school:

    The two primary arguments for large schools, cost savings and curriculum enhancement, pale in comparison with the positive schooling outcomes […] achieved by small schools.

    Smaller schools can offer a stronger sense of community.
    Dean Drobot/ Shutterstock

    But context matters

    In 2000, the Gates Foundation had a “big idea” to break up large high schools and turn them into “small learning communities” of 400 or fewer students.

    The foundation believed the initiative would lift graduation rates and student achievement, especially among minority students, because of the close relationships between students and teachers.

    But by 2008, the foundation conceded it had not worked – there had been no “dramatic improvements” in the number of students who leave high school adequately prepared for further study.

    But it’s not really about size

    So the research offers a mixed picture – this strongly suggests the size of a school on its own is not the most important factor.

    We also need to look at factors such as class size. Research shows smaller class sizes and lower teacher to student ratios are beneficial for student outcomes.

    Smaller class sizes and lower teacher to student ratios can lead to more one-on-one attention, improved relationships and lower noise levels in a classroom.

    Some studies have categorised “small classes” as between 13-17 students and larger classes as between 22-25 students.

    Teaching quality may also be improved with a smaller class size, as the teacher has more time to tailor their instruction to individual students.

    Importantly, the size of a school overall does not necessarily determine class sizes. A large school or a small school can still have large class sizes, and still struggle for quality one-on-one time.

    Similarly, a large school can still offer a strong sense of community and positive relationships between teachers and peers, depending on the way the school is organised (for example, a “school-within-a-school” or specific learning group within the school).

    If a small school is not well-resourced or does not have enough teachers, it may struggle to provide a positive, happy learning environment.

    The point is the school size on its own is not necessarily a positive or negative. What matters is what else is going on inside that school and whether it has the funding and resources to offer smaller class sizes, specialised teachers and access to a wide variety of subjects.

    Emma Rowe receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

    – ref. There is a growing number of ‘super-sized’ schools. Does the number of students matter? – https://theconversation.com/there-is-a-growing-number-of-super-sized-schools-does-the-number-of-students-matter-257012

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI USA: ICE San Antonio, federal partners lead to Treasury sanctions of high-tanking members of Cartel del Noreste, a foreign terrorist organization

    Source: US Immigration and Customs Enforcement

    WASHINGTON — The Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctioned two high-ranking members of the Mexico-based Cartel del Noreste, formerly known as Los Zetas, May 21. CDN, one of Mexico’s most violent drug trafficking organizations and a U.S.-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, has significant influence over the border region, particularly near the Laredo/Nuevo Laredo entry point. These sanctions emphasize the commitment to targeting CDN and other violent cartels involved in drug trafficking, human trafficking, arms trafficking, and other crimes that endanger the American people. The investigation is being conducted by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s San Antonio office, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ San Antonio office, and the Drug Enforcement Administration’s Houston Division. The action was closely coordinated with Mexico’s Financial Intelligence Unit, Unidad de Inteligencia Financiera. The sanctions were imposed under Executive Order 14059, which targets the proliferation of illicit drugs and their production, and Executive Order 13224, as amended, which targets terrorists and their supporters.

    “In working toward the total elimination of cartels to Make America Safe Again, the Trump Administration will hold these terrorists accountable for their criminal activities and abhorrent acts of violence,” said Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent. “CDN and its leaders have carried out a violent campaign of intimidation, kidnapping, and terrorism, threatening communities on both sides of our southern border. We will continue to cut off the cartels’ ability to obtain the drugs, money, and guns that enable their violent activities.”

    Cartel del Noreste

    CDN is a terrorist organization primarily based in the Mexican states of Tamaulipas, Coahuila, and Nuevo Leon. The group has been involved in narcotics trafficking, human trafficking, arms trafficking, money laundering, vehicle theft, and oil theft. They have also engaged in terrorist activities to intimidate American citizens and local communities in Mexico, including extortion, kidnapping, and murder.

    In March 2022, CDN fired guns and threw grenades at the U.S. Consulate in Nuevo Laredo following the arrest of a CDN member wanted in Mexico for terrorism, homicide, and extortion. The consulate was closed for nearly a month due to the attack, which was seen as a retaliatory act aimed at intimidating American diplomats serving abroad.

    On Feb. 20, the U.S. Department of State identified CDN as an FTO and a Specially Designated Global Terrorist. Prior to this designation, CDN, then known as Los Zetas, was labeled by the United States as a significant foreign narcotics trafficker on April 15, 2009, under the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act for its involvement in international narcotics trafficking. On July 24, 2011, Los Zetas was named a transnational criminal organization in the annex to Executive Order 13581. On Dec. 15, 2021, the Office of Foreign Assets Control designated CDN under Executive Order 14059.

    Sanctioning key members of Cartel del Noreste

    Firearms acquired by CDN affiliates have been smuggled into Mexico. Miguel Angel de Anda Ledezma (De Anda), a high-ranking member of CDN residing in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, oversees the procurement of guns and ammunition for the group. In this role, De Anda has facilitated payments to U.S. straw purchasers and organized firearm deliveries to Nuevo Laredo. Some of these weapons were used in terrorist activities, including one recovered after CDN attacked Mexico’s army during a patrol in March 2024.

    Ricardo Gonzalez Sauceda, who lived in Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas, was the second-in-command of CDN until his February 2025 arrest by Mexican authorities. He led an armed enforcement wing of the group and benefited from trafficked firearms in attacks on Mexican police and military, as well as drug trafficking activities. Gonzalez was arrested on Feb. 3, in connection with a CDN attack on the Mexican military in August 2024, which killed two soldiers and injured five. At the time of his arrest, Gonzalez was in possession of a rifle, a handgun, 300 grams of methamphetamine, and 1,500 fentanyl pills.

    The designations of De Anda and Gonzalez resulted from strong coordination between ICE Homeland Security Investigations, ATF, and DEA.

    Both De Anda and Gonzalez are sanctioned under Executive Orders 14059 and 13224, as amended, for being owned, controlled, or directed by CDN or acting on its behalf.

    Santions Implications

    As a result of this sanction, all property, and interests in property of the designated individuals listed above that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to the Office of Foreign Assets Control. Additionally, any entities owned 50 percent or more, directly or indirectly, by one or more blocked individuals are also blocked.

    Unless authorized by a general or specific license issued by OFAC or exempt, OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons or within (or transiting) the U.S. that involve property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons.

    Violations of U.S. sanctions may result in civil or criminal penalties for U.S. and foreign persons. OFAC may impose civil penalties for sanctions violations on a strict liability basis. OFAC’s Economic Sanctions Enforcement Guidelines provide more information regarding its enforcement of U.S. economic sanctions. Financial institutions and other individuals may also risk sanctions for engaging in certain transactions with designated or blocked persons.

    Engaging in certain transactions with the individuals designated May 21 also poses a risk of secondary sanctions under Executive Order 13224, as amended. Under this authority, OFAC can prohibit or impose strict conditions on the opening or maintenance of a correspondent or payable-through account in the U.S. for any foreign financial institution that knowingly facilitated significant transactions on behalf of a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

    Exports, reexports, or transfers of items subject to U.S. export controls involving individuals on the SDN List under Executive Order 13224, as amended, may face additional restrictions from the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security. See 15 C.F.R. section 744.8 for more details.

    The power and integrity of OFAC sanctions come not only from its ability to designate and add individuals to the SDN List, but also from its willingness to remove individuals from the list in accordance with the law. The ultimate goal of sanctions is not to punish, but to encourage positive changes in behavior. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: CFTC Resolves Technical Issues with Comment Portal

    Source: US Commodity Futures Trading Commission

    CFTC Resolves Technical Issues with Comment Portal | CFTC

    /PressRoom/PressReleases/9079-25
    Skip to main content

    May 22, 2025

    Washington, D.C. – The Commodity Futures Trading Commission today resolved a technical issue with its online comment submission portal and extended a deadline for comment submissions. The public can submit comments on 24/7 trading and perpetual contracts in derivatives markets until Friday, May 23, 2025.
    Comments on 24/7 trading can be submitted through the CFTC’s online portal. Alternatively, commenters may email a PDF of their comments along with their name and organization to [email protected].
    Comments on perpetual contracts in derivatives markets can be submitted through the CFTC’s online portal. Alternatively, commenters may email a PDF of their comments along with their name and organization to [email protected].
    Those who have previously submitted comments on these matters are encouraged to visit the respective comment portals to confirm their submissions and resubmit comments if necessary.

    -CFTC-

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Job Scam Fusion Cell disrupts fake job networks targeting Australians

    Source: Australian Ministers for Regional Development

    The National Anti-Scam Centre’s Job Scam Fusion Cell removed more than 29,000 scam social media accounts and 1850 fake job advertisements in a crackdown on employment scams targeting vulnerable Australians looking to ease cost of living pressures.

    The fusion cell, which ran from September 2024 to March 2025, has published its report highlighting the combined efforts of government, law enforcement, academics, and the private sector in a coordinated effort to tackle the sharp rise in job and employment scams.

    From 2022 to 2023, financial losses due to job scams increased by 151 per cent. In 2024, Scamwatch received more than 3000 reports of job scams, with reported losses totalling $13.7 million. Average losses to these scams were 5.1 per cent higher than the average for all other scam types.

    “Job scams have been one of the fastest growing scam types, as scammers are increasingly preying on people seeking relief from cost-of-living pressures,” ACCC Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe said.

    “These scams disproportionately impact people on low incomes, culturally and linguistically diverse communities, international students, non-resident visa holders, people with caring responsibilities, and others with limited employment options.”

    “Job scams result in significant financial losses and put people at risk of identity theft through loss of personal information. That’s why we’ve worked collaboratively to disrupt these scams through intelligence-sharing, awareness campaigns, and targeted interventions,” Ms Lowe said.

    Key initiatives undertaken and implemented by the Job Scam Fusion Cell include:

    • Working with Meta to remove 29,000 accounts sharing job scam content
    • Referring 836 scammer cryptocurrency wallets to digital currency exchanges for analysis and investigation, leading to blocking and blacklisting of wallets
    • Referring 1850 scam enablers such as websites and scam job advertisements for removal
    • Disrupting scammers’ impersonation of Australian Government entities, such as the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Department of Home Affairs, and APSJobs
    • Holding awareness and prevention forums with organisations across the tertiary education sector to enable them to deliver scams awareness messaging
    • Coordinating a social media campaign, tailored for at-risk groups
    • Creating guides for businesses, including about how to protect themselves and the community from impersonation of their business and regarding identification and disruption of Job Scam Payments
    • Establishing data sharing arrangements with cryptocurrency platforms

    The fusion cell identified key risks with the impersonation of healthcare providers in scam job advertisements being used to harvest personal information and extract money from job seekers.

    The National Anti-Scam Centre provided tailored advice to more than 40 organisations in the sector, including major state and territory hospitals, and small healthcare services, to help better protect job seekers. These efforts contributed to a near elimination of Scamwatch reports involving impersonation of healthcare organisations by March 2025.

    In addition to these specific initiatives, the fusion cell provides a great sandbox environment – participants can move beyond saying to doing, to try different techniques and see what works.  A number of Job Scam Fusion Cell initiatives are now being examined for their application to other scam types.  Others have become part of business-as-usual activity past the life of the fusion cell.

    “The work of the job scam fusion cell has been strategically targeted, drawing on data from victims’ experiences, Scamwatch and ReportCyber reports, stakeholder insights, and intelligence from participants. This approach has helped prevent and disrupt scams and has achieved significant and encouraging results,” Ms Lowe said.

    The National Anti-Scam Centre continues to work with partners across sectors to analyse emerging threats, raise awareness, and implement targeted interventions that disrupt scams before they reach consumers.

    Job and employment scams

    • Scammers advertise job opportunities so they can steal money and personal information. Stop and check any job ad that requires payment of money to make money. It could be a scam.
    • Scammers offer jobs that claim to pay well with low effort. But it’s only the scammer that will make money in the end. Often the job doesn’t exist at all.
    • Scammers pretend to be hiring on behalf of high-profile companies and online shopping platforms. They also impersonate well-known recruitment agencies.
    • Scammers may make contact unexpectedly through text message or encrypted message platforms like WhatsApp, Signal or Telegram.
    • Scammers often ask for payment claiming it is required so you can start the role and get the income they’ve promised. Don’t enter any arrangement that asks for up-front payment via bank transfer, PayID or cryptocurrency, like Bitcoin or USDT. It’s rare to get money back that is sent this way.
    • Don’t trust a job ad is real just because it appears on a trusted platform or website – scammers post fake ads too. If you come across a scammer, report it to the platform or agency and to scamwatch.gov.au.
    • Never send passport, identity documents, or bank account details to an employer or recruitment firm unless certain they are genuine.

    How to spot and avoid scams

    STOP – Don’t give money or personal information to anyone if you’re unsure. Scammers will create a sense of urgency. Don’t rush to act. Say ‘no’, hang up, delete.

    CHECK – Ask yourself could the call or text be fake? Scammers pretend to be from organisations you know and trust. Contact the organisation using information you source independently, so that you can verify if the call is real or not.

    PROTECT – Act quickly if something feels wrong. Contact your bank immediately if you lose money. If you have provided personal information call IDCARE on 1800 595 160. The more we talk the less power they have. Report scams to the National Anti-Scam Centre’s Scamwatch service at scamwatch.gov.au when you see them. If you’re contacted on a messaging platform like WhatsApp or iMessage, please also report the scam in the app.

    Background

    Fusion cells are time-limited taskforces designed to bring together expertise from government and the private sector to take timely action to address specific, urgent scam issues. The National Anti-Scam Centre is coordinating a series of fusion cells with different participants to address significant scam issues.

    The second fusion cell was announced in July 2024, following the first fusion cell on combatting investment scams.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: Hong Kong Night held in Niigata to promote closer regional Asian economic and trade ties

    Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

    Hong Kong Night held in Niigata to promote closer regional Asian economic and trade ties 
         The Chairman of the Airport Authority Hong Kong, Mr Fred Lam, was invited as the keynote speaker to share with the guests how Hong Kong International Airport connects Hong Kong and the world, enhancing Hong Kong’s competitiveness by leveraging various strengths of Hong Kong as a resilient business and innovation hub.
     
         In his keynote speech, Mr Lam recapped that Hong Kong has evolved from a manufacturing centre to a premium business and trading hub over the years with key advantages such as its free port status and low and simple tax system. He highlighted the city’s internationally recognised position as the world’s freest economy and related rankings.
     
         “Hong Kong is a leading business and trading hub. At Hong Kong International Airport (HKIA), we aim to support the city in meeting the next wave of competition by providing more value to businesses around the world and attracting more companies to invest and operate in Hong Kong. Our airport therefore must offer the highest standard of convenience and efficiency, through further extending air connectivity and leveraging technology. Our Airport City development strategy sets its sights on transforming the airport into a destination in its own right, attracting more passengers to visit or transfer at Hong Kong,” he said.
     
         Mr Lam also updated the guests on the areas where HKIA can contribute to enhancing Hong Kong’s trading hub status, including capturing the tremendous opportunities of e-commerce, streamlining the logistics operations within the region with intermodal connections, and handling new asset classes such as art storage and gold storage.
     
         The Principal Hong Kong Economic and Trade Representative (Tokyo), Miss Winsome Au, said that the Federation of Hong Kong Business Associations Worldwide is network of partners who bear testimony of how different regions of the world have been connected through doing business with Hong Kong over the years. To further enhance these connections and contribute even more significantly to regional prosperity, Hong Kong is actively seeking early accession to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and has sought valuable support for this from various member associations of the Federation of Hong Kong Business Associations Worldwide.
     
         The Federation of Hong Kong Business Associations Worldwide is a network of 49 Hong Kong Business Associations in 38 countries and regions. The member associations have strong business links to Hong Kong in their respective countries.
     
         The Asia Forum is a regional platform for the members of Hong Kong Business Associations to network, share experiences, and build contacts as well as business interests.
    Issued at HKT 7:23

    NNNN

    MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

  • MIL-OSI: Reeflex Solutions Iinc. Announces Completion of Qualifying Transaction

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWSWIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

    CALGARY, Alberta, May 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Reeflex Solutions Inc. (TSXV: RFX) (formerly Bigstack Opportunities I Inc., a capital pool company) (“Reeflex”) is pleased to announce that it has successfully completed its previously announced “Qualifying Transaction” pursuant to TSX Venture Exchange (“TSXV”) Policy 2.4 – Capital Pool Companies (the “Qualifying Transaction”). Reeflex received conditional approval from the TSXV for the Qualifying Transaction and a filing statement dated April 14, 2025 (the “Filing Statement”) with respect to the Qualifying Transaction can be found on Reeflex’s SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca.

    Trading in the common shares of Reeflex (“Reeflex Shares”) was previously halted at the request of Reeflex in connection with the initial announcement of the Qualifying Transaction and is expected to resume under the new ticker symbol “RFX” on the TSXV in two business days following the date of issuance of the bulletin by the TSXV evidencing final acceptance of the Qualifying Transaction. The new CUSIP number is 75846K105 and the new ISIN is CA75846K1057 for the Reeflex Shares.

    “Completing this Qualifying Transaction marks a significant milestone for Reeflex Solutions Inc.,” said John Babic, President and CEO of Reeflex. “Our vision to transform and expand the capabilities of Coil Solutions Inc. is now supported by the resources and opportunities of a public company. We are excited to leverage this new platform to continue driving innovation and delivering value to our stakeholders.”

    Summary of the Qualifying Transaction

    In connection with the Qualifying Transaction, Reeflex changed its name from “Bigstack Opportunities I Inc.” to “Reeflex Solutions Inc.”.

    Pursuant to the Qualifying Transaction:

    • Reeflex Coil Solutions Inc. (the “Target”) completed an acquisition of all of the issued and outstanding shares in the capital of Coil Solutions Inc. (“Coil”) from all of the shareholders of Coil for aggregate consideration of $5.8 million, subject to a post-closing working capital adjustment;
    • the Target completed a non-brokered private placement of 4,139,500 subscription receipts (each, a “Subscription Receipt”) at a price of $0.20 per Subscription Receipt for aggregate gross proceeds of $827,900. Each Subscription Receipt converted into one common share in the capital of the Target (the “Target Share”) prior to a three-cornered amalgamation (the “Amalgamation”) described below resulting in each holder of a Subscription Receipt receiving one Reeflex Share for each Subscription Receipt held; and
    • Reeflex completed the Amalgamation pursuant to which (i) the Target amalgamated with 2704122 Alberta Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reeflex, under the Business Corporations Act (Alberta), (ii) all of the issued and outstanding Target Shares immediately prior to the Amalgamation were cancelled and, in consideration therefor, the holders thereof received one Reeflex Share on the basis of one Target Share for one Reeflex Share and (iii) the amalgamated corporation, named Reeflex Coil Solutions Inc. (“Reeflex Coil”), is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reeflex and Coil is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reeflex Coil.

    Following completion of the Qualifying Transaction, the directors and officers of Reeflex are:

    • John Babic, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director;
    • Eric Szustak, Director;
    • Derrek Dobko, Director;
    • Shawn Szydlowski, Director; and
    • Trevor Conway, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary.

    In addition, Cecil Hassard and George Wu are Directors of Reeflex Coil and Bryan Hassard is Chief Operating Officer of Coil.

    As of the date hereof, there are 46,401,500 Reeflex Shares issued and outstanding, of which 36,239,500 Reeflex Shares, representing approximately 78.10% of the currently issued and outstanding Reeflex Shares, are held by the former shareholders of the Target as a result of the Qualifying Transaction. In addition, stock options to acquire 3,050,000 Reeflex Shares were issued to the board and management of Reeflex and Reeflex Coil following the completion of the Qualifying Transaction and agent’s warrants that were previously issued and outstanding to purchase up to 500,000 Reeflex Shares remain outstanding. All stock options of Reeflex held by Eric Szustak and the former directors and officers of Reeflex prior to the Qualifying Transaction were exercised pursuant to the terms of the Qualifying Transaction.

    For further information regarding the Qualifying Transaction, Reeflex, the Target and Coil, please see the Filing Statement and prior press releases related to the Qualifying Transaction, which can be found on Reeflex’s SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca.

    Early Warning Disclosure

    Upon the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, John Babic, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Reeflex, holds, directly or indirectly, or exercises control or direction over an aggregate of 11,500,000 Reeflex Shares and stock options to acquire 1,750,000 Reeflex Shares, representing 24.78% of the issued and outstanding Reeflex Shares on a non-diluted basis and 27.52% on a partially-diluted basis (assuming the exercise of Mr. Babic’s convertible securities). Prior to the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Mr. Babic did not beneficially own, or exercise control or direction over, any securities of Reeflex. Mr. Babic acquired these securities for investment purposes and may, from time to time, acquire additional securities of Reeflex or dispose of such securities as he may deem appropriate.

    Upon the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Cecil Hassard, Director of Reeflex Coil, holds, directly or indirectly, or exercises control or direction over an aggregate of 5,553,710 Reeflex Shares and stock options to acquire 100,000 Reeflex Shares, representing 11.97% of the issued and outstanding Reeflex Shares on a non-diluted basis and 12.16% on a partially-diluted basis (assuming the exercise of Mr. Hassard’s convertible securities). Prior to the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Mr. Hassard did not beneficially own, or exercise control or direction over, any securities of Reeflex. Mr. Hassard acquired these securities for investment purposes and may, from time to time, acquire additional securities of Reeflex or dispose of such securities as he may deem appropriate.

    The foregoing disclosure is being disseminated pursuant to National Instrument 62-103 – The Early Warning System and Related Take-Over Bid and Insider Reporting Issues. Copies of the early warning reports with respect to the foregoing will appear on Reeflex’s SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca and may also be obtained by contacting Reeflex as set forth below.

    Change of Auditor

    In connection with the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Clearhouse LLP will resign as auditor of Reeflex and MNP LLP will be appointed as auditor of Reeflex. In the opinion of Reeflex, no “reportable event” (as such term is defined in National Instrument 51-102 – Continuous Disclosure Obligations (“NI 51-102”)) has occurred. Reeflex is relying on section 4.11(3)(a) of NI 51-102 for an exemption from the change of auditor requirements within section 4.11 of NI 51-102.

    About Reeflex

    Reeflex is a public company delivering advanced engineering and manufacturing solutions across various industry sectors. Through our wholly-owned subsidiary, Coil Solutions Inc., we provide coil tubing injectors and downhole tools for the oil & gas sector. Our manufacturing division, Ranglar Manufacturing, specializes in custom-designed mobile equipment for a wide range of industrial applications. See www.coilsolutions.com and www.ranglar.com.

    Reeflex Contact

    For further information, please contact:

    John Babic
    President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
    Email: john.babic@reeflex.ca
    Telephone: 780-909-4220

    Cautionary Note Regarding Forward–Looking Information

    This press release contains “forward-looking information” or “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation. All statements included herein, other than statements of historical fact, including statements included in the “About Reeflex” section of this press release, are forward-looking. Generally, the forward-looking information and forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “anticipate”, “believes”, “estimates”, “expects”, “intends”, “may”, “should”, “will” or variations of such words or similar expressions. More particularly, and without limitation, this press release contains forward-looking information or forward-looking statements concerning the resumption of trading of the Reeflex Shares on the TSXV and Reeflex capitalizing on opportunities for growth in its industry. Reeflex cautions that all forward-looking information and forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain, and that actual performance may be affected by a number of material factors, assumptions and expectations, many of which are beyond the control of Reeflex, including expectations and assumptions concerning Reeflex, as well as other risks and uncertainties, including those described in Reeflex’s filings available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca. The reader is cautioned that assumptions used in the preparation of any forward-looking information or forward-looking statements may prove to be incorrect. Events or circumstances may cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted as a result of numerous known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of Reeflex. The reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking information or forward-looking statements. Such information, although considered reasonable by management at the time of preparation, may prove to be incorrect and actual results may differ materially from those anticipated. Forward-looking information and forward-looking statements contained in this press release are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement.

    The forward-looking information and forward-looking statements contained in this press release are made as of the date of this press release, and Reeflex does not undertake any obligation to update publicly or to revise any of the included forward-looking information or forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as expressly required by law.

    Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

    The securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration or an applicable exemption from the registration requirement. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of the securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI: Reeflex Solutions Inc. Announces Completion of Qualifying Transaction

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWSWIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

    CALGARY, Alberta, May 22, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Reeflex Solutions Inc. (TSXV: RFX) (formerly Bigstack Opportunities I Inc., a capital pool company) (“Reeflex”) is pleased to announce that it has successfully completed its previously announced “Qualifying Transaction” pursuant to TSX Venture Exchange (“TSXV”) Policy 2.4 – Capital Pool Companies (the “Qualifying Transaction”). Reeflex received conditional approval from the TSXV for the Qualifying Transaction and a filing statement dated April 14, 2025 (the “Filing Statement”) with respect to the Qualifying Transaction can be found on Reeflex’s SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca.

    Trading in the common shares of Reeflex (“Reeflex Shares”) was previously halted at the request of Reeflex in connection with the initial announcement of the Qualifying Transaction and is expected to resume under the new ticker symbol “RFX” on the TSXV in two business days following the date of issuance of the bulletin by the TSXV evidencing final acceptance of the Qualifying Transaction. The new CUSIP number is 75846K105 and the new ISIN is CA75846K1057 for the Reeflex Shares.

    “Completing this Qualifying Transaction marks a significant milestone for Reeflex Solutions Inc.,” said John Babic, President and CEO of Reeflex. “Our vision to transform and expand the capabilities of Coil Solutions Inc. is now supported by the resources and opportunities of a public company. We are excited to leverage this new platform to continue driving innovation and delivering value to our stakeholders.”

    Summary of the Qualifying Transaction

    In connection with the Qualifying Transaction, Reeflex changed its name from “Bigstack Opportunities I Inc.” to “Reeflex Solutions Inc.”.

    Pursuant to the Qualifying Transaction:

    • Reeflex Coil Solutions Inc. (the “Target”) completed an acquisition of all of the issued and outstanding shares in the capital of Coil Solutions Inc. (“Coil”) from all of the shareholders of Coil for aggregate consideration of $5.8 million, subject to a post-closing working capital adjustment;
    • the Target completed a non-brokered private placement of 4,139,500 subscription receipts (each, a “Subscription Receipt”) at a price of $0.20 per Subscription Receipt for aggregate gross proceeds of $827,900. Each Subscription Receipt converted into one common share in the capital of the Target (the “Target Share”) prior to a three-cornered amalgamation (the “Amalgamation”) described below resulting in each holder of a Subscription Receipt receiving one Reeflex Share for each Subscription Receipt held; and
    • Reeflex completed the Amalgamation pursuant to which (i) the Target amalgamated with 2704122 Alberta Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reeflex, under the Business Corporations Act (Alberta), (ii) all of the issued and outstanding Target Shares immediately prior to the Amalgamation were cancelled and, in consideration therefor, the holders thereof received one Reeflex Share on the basis of one Target Share for one Reeflex Share and (iii) the amalgamated corporation, named Reeflex Coil Solutions Inc. (“Reeflex Coil”), is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reeflex and Coil is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Reeflex Coil.

    Following completion of the Qualifying Transaction, the directors and officers of Reeflex are:

    • John Babic, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director;
    • Eric Szustak, Director;
    • Derrek Dobko, Director;
    • Shawn Szydlowski, Director; and
    • Trevor Conway, Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary.

    In addition, Cecil Hassard and George Wu are Directors of Reeflex Coil and Bryan Hassard is Chief Operating Officer of Coil.

    As of the date hereof, there are 46,401,500 Reeflex Shares issued and outstanding, of which 36,239,500 Reeflex Shares, representing approximately 78.10% of the currently issued and outstanding Reeflex Shares, are held by the former shareholders of the Target as a result of the Qualifying Transaction. In addition, stock options to acquire 3,050,000 Reeflex Shares were issued to the board and management of Reeflex and Reeflex Coil following the completion of the Qualifying Transaction and agent’s warrants that were previously issued and outstanding to purchase up to 500,000 Reeflex Shares remain outstanding. All stock options of Reeflex held by Eric Szustak and the former directors and officers of Reeflex prior to the Qualifying Transaction were exercised pursuant to the terms of the Qualifying Transaction.

    For further information regarding the Qualifying Transaction, Reeflex, the Target and Coil, please see the Filing Statement and prior press releases related to the Qualifying Transaction, which can be found on Reeflex’s SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca.

    Early Warning Disclosure

    Upon the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, John Babic, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of Reeflex, holds, directly or indirectly, or exercises control or direction over an aggregate of 11,500,000 Reeflex Shares and stock options to acquire 1,750,000 Reeflex Shares, representing 24.78% of the issued and outstanding Reeflex Shares on a non-diluted basis and 27.52% on a partially-diluted basis (assuming the exercise of Mr. Babic’s convertible securities). Prior to the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Mr. Babic did not beneficially own, or exercise control or direction over, any securities of Reeflex. Mr. Babic acquired these securities for investment purposes and may, from time to time, acquire additional securities of Reeflex or dispose of such securities as he may deem appropriate.

    Upon the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Cecil Hassard, Director of Reeflex Coil, holds, directly or indirectly, or exercises control or direction over an aggregate of 5,553,710 Reeflex Shares and stock options to acquire 100,000 Reeflex Shares, representing 11.97% of the issued and outstanding Reeflex Shares on a non-diluted basis and 12.16% on a partially-diluted basis (assuming the exercise of Mr. Hassard’s convertible securities). Prior to the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Mr. Hassard did not beneficially own, or exercise control or direction over, any securities of Reeflex. Mr. Hassard acquired these securities for investment purposes and may, from time to time, acquire additional securities of Reeflex or dispose of such securities as he may deem appropriate.

    The foregoing disclosure is being disseminated pursuant to National Instrument 62-103 – The Early Warning System and Related Take-Over Bid and Insider Reporting Issues. Copies of the early warning reports with respect to the foregoing will appear on Reeflex’s SEDAR+ profile at www.sedarplus.ca and may also be obtained by contacting Reeflex as set forth below.

    Change of Auditor

    In connection with the completion of the Qualifying Transaction, Clearhouse LLP will resign as auditor of Reeflex and MNP LLP will be appointed as auditor of Reeflex. In the opinion of Reeflex, no “reportable event” (as such term is defined in National Instrument 51-102 – Continuous Disclosure Obligations (“NI 51-102”)) has occurred. Reeflex is relying on section 4.11(3)(a) of NI 51-102 for an exemption from the change of auditor requirements within section 4.11 of NI 51-102.

    About Reeflex

    Reeflex is a public company delivering advanced engineering and manufacturing solutions across various industry sectors. Through our wholly-owned subsidiary, Coil Solutions Inc., we provide coil tubing injectors and downhole tools for the oil & gas sector. Our manufacturing division, Ranglar Manufacturing, specializes in custom-designed mobile equipment for a wide range of industrial applications. See www.coilsolutions.com and www.ranglar.com.

    Reeflex Contact

    For further information, please contact:

    John Babic
    President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
    Email: john.babic@reeflex.ca
    Telephone: 780-909-4220

    Cautionary Note Regarding Forward–Looking Information

    This press release contains “forward-looking information” or “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Canadian securities legislation. All statements included herein, other than statements of historical fact, including statements included in the “About Reeflex” section of this press release, are forward-looking. Generally, the forward-looking information and forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “anticipate”, “believes”, “estimates”, “expects”, “intends”, “may”, “should”, “will” or variations of such words or similar expressions. More particularly, and without limitation, this press release contains forward-looking information or forward-looking statements concerning the resumption of trading of the Reeflex Shares on the TSXV and Reeflex capitalizing on opportunities for growth in its industry. Reeflex cautions that all forward-looking information and forward-looking statements are inherently uncertain, and that actual performance may be affected by a number of material factors, assumptions and expectations, many of which are beyond the control of Reeflex, including expectations and assumptions concerning Reeflex, as well as other risks and uncertainties, including those described in Reeflex’s filings available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca. The reader is cautioned that assumptions used in the preparation of any forward-looking information or forward-looking statements may prove to be incorrect. Events or circumstances may cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted as a result of numerous known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of Reeflex. The reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking information or forward-looking statements. Such information, although considered reasonable by management at the time of preparation, may prove to be incorrect and actual results may differ materially from those anticipated. Forward-looking information and forward-looking statements contained in this press release are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement.

    The forward-looking information and forward-looking statements contained in this press release are made as of the date of this press release, and Reeflex does not undertake any obligation to update publicly or to revise any of the included forward-looking information or forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as expressly required by law.

    Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

    The securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration or an applicable exemption from the registration requirement. This press release shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of the securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful.

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI USA: WHAT THEY ARE SAYING: One, Big, Beautiful Bill Clears House

    US Senate News:

    Source: The White House
    President Donald J. Trump’s One, Big, Beautiful Bill — a once-in-a-generation opportunity to cement an America First agenda of prosperity, opportunity, and security into law — is one step closer to the finish line following its passage by the House of Representatives.
    Here’s what they’re saying about the One, Big, Beautiful Bill:
    American Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvall: “Farm Bureau applauds the House passage of H.R.1, which modernizes farm bill programs and extends and improves critical tax provisions that benefit America’s small farmers and ranchers. Updated reference prices will provide more certainty for farmers struggling through tough economic times. Making business tax deductions permanent and continuing current estate tax exemptions will ensure thousands of families will be able to pass their farms to the next generation. We urge the Senate to work together and swiftly pass legislation to deliver much-needed relief to America’s farm and ranch families.”
    U.S. Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice President Neil Bradley: “The House sent a clear message today—American workers and businesses want and need permanent tax relief. A competitive, pro-growth tax code doesn’t just grow the overall U.S. economy, it raises wages for workers and improves the lives of Americans. The legislation passed out of the House this morning contains critical measures that support main street businesses, enhance America’s global competitiveness, and bolster sustained economic growth. The Chamber commends Speaker Johnson for his leadership and commitment to ensuring the permanence of President Trump’s pro-growth tax reforms, and applauds the lawmakers involved in driving this effort forward. We encourage the Senate to continue to move the legislative process forward to deliver lasting benefits for American workers and businesses.”
    Airlines for America: “A4A commends the House for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act which includes a critical investment of $12.5 billion for modernizing the Federal Aviation Administration’s air traffic facilities, systems and infrastructure. ATC staffing shortages and antiquated equipment, such as copper wires, floppy disks and paper strips, have been a serious concern for years—we are past time to make meaningful change and ensure that the United States has a world-class aviation system. This funding is a vital down payment on updating the system that guides 27,000 flights, 2.7 million passengers and 61,000 tons of cargo every day. The legislation also makes smart, strategic investments in Customs and Border Protection personnel and training for the aviation workforce of tomorrow while supporting American energy dominance in aviation fuel production. We encourage the Senate to move swiftly to pass this bill and send it to the President.”
    National Cattlemen’s Beef Association President Buck Wehrbein: “Cattle farmers and ranchers need Congress to invest in cattle health, strengthen our resources against foreign animal disease, support producers recovering from disasters or depredation, and pass tax relief that protects family farms and ranches for future generations. Thankfully, this reconciliation bill includes all these key priorities. NCBA was proud to help pass this bill in the House and we will continue pushing for these key policies until the bill is signed into law.”
    Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi: “Big news from DC—the House just passed President Trump’s tax bill, bringing No Tax On Tips one step closer to the finish line. While it still needs to clear the Senate, this is a big win for hardworking @Uber drivers and couriers across the country 👏”
    Job Creators Network CEO Alfredo Ortiz: “Congratulations to President Trump and Speaker Johnson for passing their reconciliation bill in the House. This bill offers historic tax cuts for small businesses and ordinary Americans. By making the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act permanent and expanding key provisions, such as the small business tax deduction, which Job Creators Network was the loudest voice for, this bill offers significant tax relief for decades to come. It will allow small businesses, the backbone of the American economy, to expand, hire, raise wages, and reinvest in their communities, ushering in a new economic Golden Age. On behalf of all small businesses, JCN thanks President Trump and Speaker Johnson for their leadership in passing this bill, which the media said couldn’t be done on this aggressive timeline. Now it’s time for the Senate to follow suit and pass similar legislation, which includes the House’s key small business tax cuts, as soon as possible.”

    Click here to see how the One, Big, Beautiful Bill helps small businessesNational Association of Manufacturers President and CEO Jay Timmons: “Today’s House passage of this historic legislation marks a major victory for manufacturers across America. This pro-growth legislation preserves crucial tax policies that will enable manufacturers to create jobs, invest in their communities, grow here at home and compete globally. In short, this is a manufacturers’ bill … This is a pivotal moment. It’s time to double down on policies that encourage manufacturers to invest and create jobs in America and keep our industry strong and our nation competitive on the world stage—because when manufacturing wins, America wins.”
    Business Roundtable President and COO Kristen Silverberg: “Under Speaker Johnson’s leadership, the House has achieved a major milestone toward extending and strengthening President Trump’s historic tax reform. Business Roundtable commends the House on taking a giant step forward to protect and boost the economic benefits that tax reform delivered for American businesses, workers and families. By maintaining a competitive corporate tax rate and enhancing essential domestic and international tax provisions, the House budget reconciliation bill will help fuel U.S. investment, innovation and economic growth. As the Senate prepares to act, we stand ready to continue working with Congress and the Administration to pass the most competitive, pro-growth tax package possible.”
    American Petroleum Institute President and CEO Mike Sommers: “We applaud the House of Representatives for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to help restore American energy dominance. By preserving competitive tax policies, beginning to reverse the ‘methane fee,’ opening lease sales and advancing important progress on permitting, this historic legislation is a win for our nation’s energy future. We look forward to working with the Senate to strengthen pro-investment provisions and keep America at the forefront of energy innovation.”
    National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors CEO Eric Hoplin: “We applaud the House of Representatives for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and extend our sincere thanks to Speaker Mike Johnson, Chairman Jason Smith, the Ways and Means Committee, and House leadership for championing this pro-business, pro-worker legislation. This is a win for the people who roll up their sleeves every day to power our economy, entrepreneurs who build businesses from the ground up, and the workers who keep them running. We urge the Senate to act swiftly and send this bill to the President’s desk so America’s job creators and workers can keep driving our economy forward. The bill makes the 199A deduction permanent and expands it to 23%, helping millions of small businesses, including most wholesaler-distributors. It raises the death tax exemption, protecting family-owned businesses, and restores vital incentives that encourage investment, innovation, and long-term economic growth.”
    Small Business & Entrepreneurship Council President and CEO Karen Kerrigan: “H.R. 1 delivers a big, beautiful boost to U.S. entrepreneurship and small businesses. SBE Council applauds U.S. House passage of this critically important legislation. In addition to permanent tax relief and incentives that will help entrepreneurs and small business owners grow their firms, level up their businesses, and support their employees, various measures in the legislation correctly right-fit various federal programs and functions that have gone awry and consequently have undermined fiscal accountability and the private sector. Time is of the essence in getting the One Big Beautiful Bill to President Trump’s desk, and we urge the U.S. Senate to move post haste on the work that must be done to deliver the big benefits of the package to small business owners, all taxpayers, and the U.S. economy.”
    National Business Aviation Association President and CEO Ed Bolen: “We commend the House for recognizing the importance of improving ATC infrastructure and strengthening the controller workforce to enhance safety and efficiency in the National Airspace System. Business aviation’s ability to serve citizens, companies and communities is only possible because the U.S. leads the world in aviation … As the House reconciliation bill moves to the Senate for consideration, we look forward to working with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to advance these forward-looking provisions that bolster an essential industry, support countless workers and promote American competitiveness.”
    America’s Credit Unions President and CEO Jim Nussle: “Thank you to the U.S. House of Representatives for securing credit unions’ not-for-profit tax status as part of H.R. 1 and recognizing the industry’s importance to strong Main Streets across the country. More than 142 million Americans trust and rely on credit unions to achieve their American Dream, and this bill allows them to continue on their path of financial freedom. We will continue to advocate for policies that create more opportunities for credit unions to bolster our nation’s economic prosperity. We call on the U.S. Senate to continue to protect the credit union tax status as they consider this legislation.”
    National Taxpayers Union Executive Vice President Brandon Arnold: “The bill passed by the House contains growth-focused tax relief and some important first steps toward long-needed spending restraint. The Senate now has a strong package that it can build upon and further improve.”
    National Association of REALTORS Executive Vice President Shannon McGahn: “We appreciate House leaders for taking this important step with this tax reform bill, which supports hardworking families and strengthens the real estate economy. With lower tax rates, SALT relief, and new incentives for small businesses and community development, this proposal brings real benefits to everyday Americans.”
    National Electrical Contractors Association CEO David Long: “These provisions recognize the real-world needs of the electrical construction industry. Whether it’s power generation, grid modernization, cutting-edge data center projects, or clean energy installations, electrical contractors are at the forefront of America’s infrastructure evolution. This legislation gives our contractors the certainty they need to plan, invest, and grow.”
    American Hotel & Lodging Association President and CEO Rosanna Maietta: “This is a win for Main Street businesses. We commend lawmakers for including critical tax provisions in the budget reconciliation bill that will prevent a tax increase on American workers and the small businesses that are the backbone of America’s hotel and lodging industry. This is a critical step to stave off the expiration of important tax provisions that will provide our members, the majority of whom are small business owners, the level of certainty they need to effectively operate their businesses. We urge the U.S. Senate to swiftly pass this legislation and send it to President Trump’s desk.”
    National Pork Producers Council President Duane Stateler: “America’s pork producers are one step closer to more certainty with the House’s reconciliation bill passage, which includes necessary legislation to keep farms afloat during uncertain times.”
    Associated Equipment Distributors President and CEO Brian P. McGuire: “AED commends House Speaker Mike Johnson and his leadership team for securing House passage of the budget reconciliation bill. This legislation delivers pro-growth tax policies, streamlines energy project approvals and strengthens surface transportation infrastructure investments. We look forward to working with the Senate to ensure final passage of this comprehensive package.”
    American Federation for Children CEO Tommy Schultz: “We are grateful for the efforts of Speaker Johnson and Congressional leaders in both chambers who have stood up so far to ensure that President Trump’s goal of school choice for every family in every state becomes a reality. American parents deserve nothing less, and we will continue working to get school choice across the finish line as the Senate can deliver on a historic national school choice tax credit. Bringing school choice to every state will be a legacy item for the lawmakers who stand boldly behind parents. We will continue to stand with them to achieve this goal.”
    National Federation of Independent Business SVP for Advocacy Adam Temple: “The One Big Beautiful Bill Act includes the most important thing Congress can do to help small businesses and their workers – increasing and making the Small Business Deduction permanent. The bill also provides a tax cut for small business owners through lower individual rates, encourages new capital investments, and helps small business owners provide greater health care benefits to their employees. Members of Congress have a historic opportunity to provide over 33 million small business owners with permanent tax relief and NFIB strongly encourages them to do so.”
    Growth Energy CEO Emily Skor: “We’re grateful to our champions on Capitol Hill who have worked hard to preserve and extend rural priorities, like the 45Z clean fuel production tax credit. This budget reconciliation package would give farmers and ethanol producers the freedom and flexibility to deliver for the American people. It ultimately delivers on the President’s agenda—it’s good for rural communities, good for innovation, good for investment, and good for American energy dominance.”
    Americans for Prosperity Chief Government Affairs Officer Brent Gardner: “On behalf of our network of grassroots activists and small business owners nationwide, AFP congratulates Speaker Johnson, Majority Leader Scalise, Whip Emmer, and all the committee chairs for shepherding this legislation through the U.S. House of Representatives. Thanks to the efforts of policy champions across the House GOP conference, we are one step closer to giving Americans the pro-growth tax policy they voted for in November. Beyond cementing the foundation for a post-Biden economic recovery, we are poised to embrace an all-of-the-above approach to U.S. energy production, and finally secure our southern border.”
    National Foreign Trade Council Vice President for International Tax Policy Anne Gordon: “We would like to once again thank Chairman Smith and the Ways & Means Committee and staff for their tireless work on this bill and Speaker Johnson and the leadership team for their efforts to bring critical U.S. tax legislation one step closer to becoming a reality. We congratulate the House on passing the One, Big, Beautiful Bill and urge the Senate to take up work on it as quickly as possible.”
    American Land Title Association CEO Diane Tomb: “We commend the House for passing legislation that recognizes the needs of American small businesses, including the thousands of title and settlement companies ALTA represents. The expanded deduction under Section 199A is a welcome step that supports the long-term health of our small business members and the communities they serve. ALTA is especially pleased to see the preservation of Section 1031 like-kind exchanges, which play a vital role in fueling real estate investment, promoting property improvements and driving local economic growth. Provisions supporting homeownership, including those related to mortgage interest and capital gains exclusions, help provide certainty for buyers, sellers and lenders alike—strengthening the entire housing ecosystem. We urge the Senate to build on this momentum and protect the real estate and housing incentives that help Americans build wealth, promote generational stability and drive our economy forward.”
    NRA Institute for Legislative Action Executive Director John Commerford: “This morning, the U.S. House of Representatives passed President Trump’s One, Big, Beautiful Bill, which includes the complete removal of suppressors from the National Firearms Act (NFA). This represents a monumental victory for Second Amendment rights, eliminating burdensome regulations on the purchase of critical hearing protection devices. The NRA thanks the House members who supported this bill and urges its swift passage in the U.S. Senate.”
    RATE Coalition Executive Director Dan Combs: “Today’s vote is an historic step toward securing a tax code that rewards investment, supports job growth, and puts American workers first. This legislation builds on the success of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, preserving the policies that have helped drive wages up, unemployment down, and investment back into the U.S. economy. The House has done its part to move this forward. Now it’s time to keep that momentum going and get this across the finish line.”
    Independent Women’s Center for Economic Opportunity Director Patrice Onwuka: “BOOM. Tax cuts, welfare reforms, green spending cuts, and border strengthening. Major credit is due to @SpeakerJohnson for getting @potus @realDonaldTrump #OneBigBeautifulBill through the House. He has proven to be a quiet force for conservatives. Now onto the Senate.”
    Border Czar Tom Homan: “Thank you to the House and the leadership of President Trump in passing the Big Beautiful Bill. This Bill will add infrastructure and technology to make our gains on the borders permanent. It puts more boots on the ground to target cartel activity, alien smuggling, child trafficking and drug smuggling.  It will provide the needed funds and manpower to increase the great work of ICE on our deportation operations nationwide. We have many more public safety and national security threats to remove. This funding will allow ICE to vastly increase these efforts and keep the promise to America that we will enforce immigration law against those that are in this country illegally.  Now the Senate needs to step up. Border Security and National Security should not be a partisan issue. Let’s get this done!”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Growing a productive & resilient rural sector

    Source: NZ Music Month takes to the streets

    The Government is sharpening its focus and support for New Zealand’s world-leading food and fibre producers through Budget 2025 – backing the growth and resilience of our largest and most Important sector.
    Agriculture Minister Todd McClay says Budget 2025 confirms $4.95 billion in continuing baseline funding over the next four years for MPI to support farmers, growers, fishers, and foresters to lift on-farm productivity and profitability, strengthen rural communities, and drive higher returns at the farm and forest gate.
    “This year alone, the food and fibre sector is forecast to contribute $56.9 billion to the economy, that’s why we’re focused on unlocking new global opportunities –from the UK and EU, to the Gulf, and India– while cutting red tape so producers can get on with the job.”
    To further strengthen the sector’s resilience, Budget 2025 includes a new focus on driving growth and rural wellbeing through a series of targeted grassroots investments:

    $246 million over four years in a new Primary Sector Growth Fund (PSGF) to help lift food and fibre sector productivity, profitability, and resilience;
    $2 million over four years in a contestable rural wellbeing fund;
    $1m extra over four years for Rural Support Trusts and other organisations to support farmers and growers;
    $400,000 over four years in direct grants for New Zealand’s A&P shows;
    Ongoing support for catchment groups of $36 million over the next four years, through the Ministry for Primary Industries;
    $250,000 for the 2025/26 financial year for Rural Women New Zealand to boost its on-the-ground support for rural communities.

    “These initiatives back the people behind the sector who make our rural economy tick.”
    The new Investment Boost tax incentive will also improve cashflow and make on-farm and forest investments more affordable, allowing for Farmers and Growers to immediately deduct 20 per cent of the cost of new machinery or farm equipment, on top of existing depreciation rates.
    Budget 2025 also continues our commitment to $400 million over four years with an additional $23 million carried over to accelerate the development and rollout of new tools and technologies to reduce emissions without closing down farms or sending jobs and production overseas – a key part of ensuring the sector is globally competitive into the future.
    “When our rural communities do well, the whole country benefits. Budget 2025 is about ensuring our farmers and growers have the tools and support they need to succeed – not just for today, but for the long-term prosperity of New Zealand,” the Government’s team of Agriculture ministers, Todd McClay, Andrew Hoggard, Mark Patterson and Nicola Grigg say. 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –