Source: Toyota
Headline: Sales, Production, and Export Results for March 2025
Toyota Motor Corporation announces its sales, production, and export results for March 2025 as well as the cumulative total from January to March 2025, and the fiscal year from April 1, 2024 to March 31, 2025, including those for subsidiaries Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd. and Hino Motors, Ltd.
Source: Toyota
Headline: Sales, Production, and Export Results for March 2025
Toyota Motor Corporation announces its sales, production, and export results for March 2025 as well as the cumulative total from January to March 2025, and the fiscal year from April 1, 2024 to March 31, 2025, including those for subsidiaries Daihatsu Motor Co., Ltd. and Hino Motors, Ltd.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Richard Meade, Adjunct Associate Professor, Centre for Applied Energy Economics and Policy Research, Griffith University
With ongoing cost of living pressures, the Australian and New Zealand supermarket sectors are attracting renewed political attention on both sides of the Tasman.
Allegations of price gouging have become a political issue in the Australian federal election. At the same time, the New Zealand government has announced that “all options” are on the table to address a lack of competition in the sector – including possible breakup of the existing players.
But it is not clear breaking up the supermarkets or other government interventions will improve the sector for shoppers and suppliers.
In 2022, I co-authored a government-commissioned analysis looking at whether New Zealand’s two main supermarket groups should be forced to sell some of their stores to create a third competing chain.
We found it was possible under some scenarios that breakup could benefit consumers. But key uncertainties and implementation risks meant consumers could lose overall.
A lot hinges on whether breakup causes supermarkets’ input costs to rise or product variety to fall. Even in more positive scenarios at least some consumers could be left worse off.
Competition authorities – the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and New Zealand’s Commerce Commission – have conducted supermarket sector studies. They each expressed concern at significant barriers to entry and expansion in the sector and supermarkets’ resulting high levels of profitability.
This year, the ACCC concluded margins earned by Australia’s main supermarkets are among the highest of supermarket businesses in comparable countries. Similarly, in 2022 the Commerce Commission found New Zealand’s supermarkets were earning excess profits of around NZ$430m a year.
While high profits might mean that market power is being abused, it could also mean managers are doing a good job. Or have had a great run of luck. Alternative explanations for high profits would need to be ruled out before putting fingers on regulatory triggers.
The starting point is to acknowledge that high profits and prices go hand in hand with barriers to entry and challenges in achieving economies of scale.
In other words, some sectors are less competitive than others simply because a lack of demand or high costs make it unprofitable for additional competitors to either enter or remain in the market.
Countries like Australia and New Zealand, with low population densities and large service areas, face high costs of nationwide supply. They also face significant shipping distances from other countries. This limits the ability of overseas entrants using their existing buying and supply infrastructures.
That said, some barriers to entry might be artificial or caused by existing firms stifling new competitors.
Existing supermarkets in both countries have gained controlling stakes in the land needed to set up new supermarkets – something regulatory settings can prevent.
Another challenge for new chains is the process of getting planning and land use consents – something policymakers can address.
This points to key elements of a test for whether supermarkets are charging too much. One is a recognition that there can be natural reasons for limited competition, and unless technologies or consumer preferences change that will remain the case.
Another is a focus on the things that can be changed – whether at the firm or policy level – in a way that benefits consumers and suppliers. Finally, policymakers need to consider whether the benefits of implementing them outweigh the costs.
Building on work developed by Nobel economist Oliver Williamson, a “three-limb test” was used in the 2017 government-commissioned assessment of fuel pricing in New Zealand that I co-authored. The same could be used to assess the supermarket sector.
That three-limb test asks
If the answer to all three limbs is yes, that suggests suppliers are charging too much (or delivering too little) since there are practical ways to improve on the status quo.
A virtue of such a test is that is can be applied in any sector where there are high firm concentration, barriers to entry and high profit margins.
Importantly, the test looks beyond just what firms are (or are not) doing and asks whether policy and regulatory settings are ripe for improvements too.
The test is also pragmatic – it shouldn’t trigger changes unless they are clearly expected to do more good than harm. This is important if interventions are risky, costly or irreversible, especially in sectors that are important to all of us.
Politicians on both sides of the Tasman are floating the possibility of supermarket breakup, among other possible interventions. The three-limb test helps to identify whether any proposed interventions are a good idea and whether supermarket prices are higher than they need to be.
Richard Meade co-authored a 2022 study funded by the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment examining the costs and benefits of breaking up New Zealand’s major supermarkets. The views expressed in this article are his own, and do not purport to represent those of any other party or organisation.
– ref. This may be as good as it gets: NZ and Australia face a complicated puzzle when it comes to supermarket prices – https://theconversation.com/this-may-be-as-good-as-it-gets-nz-and-australia-face-a-complicated-puzzle-when-it-comes-to-supermarket-prices-254987
Source: New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi (CTU)
The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi is warning that the Government’s decision to adopt a new model for the vocational education and training sector will lead to massive disruptions and instability in an already fatigued sector.
“The NZCTU remains fundamentally opposed to these reforms, which will create further disruption across the sector and come off the back of a period of disruption and change in the sector over the past five years,” said NZCTU Acting President Rachel Mackintosh.
“We are concerned by the impacts that another several years of change processes will have on the sector, learners, and industries.
“Our major concern regarding the model that the Government is adopting is the risk of the creation of new private agencies competing for public funding within the sector; this model has not served New Zealand well in the past.
“Profit motives drive instability in education, and it is not a good use of resources to have multiple agencies competing for funding as they must focus attention on securing funding at the expense of focusing on delivery for learners.
“The whole process for these reforms has been flawed. There is no reason why the consultation needed to have such a narrow scope, excluding critical stakeholders, and key subject matter experts.
“The Minister’s insistence on pushing ahead with these poorly thought through reforms is likely to create several more years of instability in the sector, and more uncertainty for learners, industries, and the vocational education and training workforce,” said Mackintosh.
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
BEN TRE, Vietnam, April 24, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Nexif Ratch Energy has reached a key milestone in the development of its 80MW Ben Tre Wind Power Plant project, having successfully signed Amendment and Supplement Agreements to the original Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs) with Vietnam Electricity (EVN) on 18 April 2025.
With the expiration of the Feed-in Tariff (FiT) regime in October 2021, the Vietnamese government actively worked to establish a new pricing mechanism that reflects lower renewable energy investment costs while continuing to attract long-term private investment.
In this context, Nexif Ratch Energy has worked diligently and collaboratively with all relevant authorities to agree on a revised tariff, positioning the project as one of the first transitional wind energy projects in Vietnam to sign a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA). The successful negotiations with EVN mark a breakthrough, reflecting strong cooperation among key stakeholders, including EVN and its subsidiary, Electricity Power Trading Company (EPTC).
This achievement comes at a pivotal moment in Vietnam’s renewable energy landscape, as the country continues to strengthen its regulatory framework and accelerate the transition to cleaner energy sources. The government has taken significant steps toward this goal through the enactment of new laws, decrees, and guidelines related to the power sector, and through the revision of Power Development Plan 8 (PDP8), which proposes ambitious new renewable energy targets — an additional 16.1GW of onshore and nearshore wind, and 27.9GW of utility-scale solar capacity by 2030. These efforts are intended to drive growth in the renewable energy sector while keeping Vietnam competitive in attracting investment in green infrastructure.
Mr. Surender Singh, Chairman of the board of directors of Nexif Ratch Energy, commented, “We commend the Vietnamese government for its proactive efforts in driving the country’s energy transition. Structural changes in the energy sector require a strong and coordinated approach between government, regulators, and, importantly, investors. As we have seen with the Nexif Energy Ben Tre Wind Power Plant project, success relies on strong, ongoing partnerships to overcome challenges and unlock new opportunities for the country’s sustainable future.”
Mr. Cyril Dissescou, CEO of Nexif Ratch Energy, added “I’m proud of our team for their persistence and focus in achieving this milestone. I also want to thank EPTC for their close collaboration. This success reflects the strength of our partnerships and our shared commitment to Vietnam’s clean energy future.”
With the amended PPAs now signed and key procedural steps completed, the project is advancing towards financial close, with construction scheduled to begin in the second half of 2025. This progress underscores Nexif Ratch Energy’s commitment to delivering sustainable and reliable energy to Vietnam’s national grid, supporting the country’s energy transition, and contributing to the development of a greener future.
About Nexif Ratch Energy
Nexif Ratch Energy is a leading renewable energy company focused on the development, acquisition, construction, and operation of clean-energy projects across the Asia Pacific region. Headquartered in Singapore with regional offices in Vietnam, the Philippines and Thailand, the company’s portfolio includes 378 MW of operating, under-construction, and shovel-ready hydro, solar, and wind energy assets. Additionally, Nexif Ratch Energy has a development pipeline totaling 3.2 GW across wind, solar, and energy storage projects.
Nexif Ratch Energy is jointly owned by Nexif Energy (Singapore) with a 51% stake and RATCH Group (Thailand) with a 49% stake.
For Media Inquiries:
Chariya Poopisit
Nexif Ratch Energy
communications@nexifratch.com
A photo accompanying this announcement is available at https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/fe6c5e6a-9551-4686-b931-7e9d74be2cd4
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: Moscow Government – Government of Moscow –
The history of the Moscow Drama Theatre named after N.V. Gogol begins on April 24, 1925, when the Traveling Drama and Comedy Theatre appeared under the Central Committee of the Railway Workers’ Trade Union. The path it has taken over 100 years is described in the mos.ru article.
The troupe of the Drama and Comedy Theatre, assembled by director and actor Kirill Golovanov, played at the E. F. Kukhmisterov Railway Workers Club, workers’ clubs, at junction stations and station platforms. Tours were an important part of life – the artists showed performances for railway workers in different regions of the country. The repertoire was based on plays telling about the lives of ordinary workers.
In the 1930s, the theatre received a new name — the Central Theatre of Transport. It remained under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Railways, but faced some problems that concerned both financing and the creative component. Moscow newspapers of that time repeatedly asked the question: was the Theatre of Transport needed at all? But a solution was found: the theatre and the studio of the 2nd Moscow Art Theatre signed an agreement according to which directors and actors of the 2nd Moscow Art Theatre staged plays and gave lectures there, and the Central Committee of Railway Workers helped them during tours, providing entire carriages on trains.
In 1939, with the arrival of artistic director Nikolai Petrov, a new era began for the Theatre of Transport. Nikolai Vasilyevich, who had previously directed the Alexandrinsky Theatre in Petrograd, approached this work very systematically. The first thing he did was to invite new playwrights to collaborate. One of them was Alexander Afinogenov — his play Mashenka was staged by the Theatre of Transport simultaneously with the Mossovet Theatre, for which it was written.
In May 1941, the troupe went on tour to the Far East. The Ministry of Railways allocated a ten-car train especially for this trip: the actors, scenery, and even costumes received separate compartments. The Great Patriotic War, which began soon after, extended the planned three-month journey by two years, and the troupe’s schedule was significantly altered. Now they had to perform not only at the best city venues, but also in barracks, depots, and stations. There were cases when the troupe performed a play for only six or seven people.
Some of the theatre staff went to the front. The rest divided the duties among themselves. For example, the actors were divided into two groups: while the first set up the scenery and tidied up the costumes, the other actually played on stage. Then they changed. Among the plays that were shown in those years were “Notre Dame de Paris”, “The Barber of Seville”, “Russian People”. There was also a play “On the Eve” by Alexander Afinogenov, created especially for this theatre. The author wrote it in the first months of the war; he died in October 1941.
During these tours, the artists performed more than one thousand performances and gave about 900 concerts.
Help for the Front and Performances During the Battles. Life of Theaters During the War Years
In 1943, a very important event took place: the theater was given a building on Kazakova Street — the same one where it is located today. It was not alien to the artists — they had performed on this stage many times before, but they shared the space with various clubs and sections. Today, the 19th-century sleepers that once ran along the entire perimeter of the building are a reminder of the theater’s past — the Railway Workers’ Club. It is impossible to say exactly what their original purpose was, but now they have become that unique interior detail that brings something important to the overall atmosphere.
In 1959, the theatre was named after Nikolai Gogol — the event was timed to coincide with the 150th anniversary of the writer’s birth. By that time, the repertoire had expanded significantly, including not only plays, but also larger works, such as Vyacheslav Shishkov’s “Gloomy River”. Singer and actor Leonid Utesov shone on the stage of the Moscow N.V. Gogol Theatre, playing the lead role in the play “Shelmenko the Orderly” for one season.
In 1964, the premiere of the play “The Caucasian Chalk Circle” based on the play by Bertolt Brecht took place. The story of a woman who saved someone else’s child at the cost of her own well-being was staged by chief director Alexander Dunayev. It was one of the first productions of Brecht’s play in the country and one of the theater’s most successful performances. The main character was played by the young actress Lyudmila Gavrilova, who had just joined the troupe at the time. Today, she can also be seen on stage, for example, in the play “A Midsummer Night’s Dream”.
In 1965, the theatre was headed by director People’s Artist of the RSFSR Boris Golubovsky, who tenderly loved modern drama and prose. Thanks to him, plays began to appear in the repertoire that did not leave the stage for a very long time, such as “Riding a Dolphin”, “Until the Cart Turned Over”, “The Old Cossack Way”, “The Supreme Court” and many others. It was he who brought Boris Chirkov, Emilia Milton, Leonid Kulagin, Yevgeny Menshov, Svetlana Bragarnik, Olga Naumenko and other artists to the troupe.
In 1974, the theater showed the play “Rock and Roll at Dawn.” According to the plot, American students rehearsed the production of “Jesus Christ Superstar” – the audience of the Gogol Theater became the first in the country to hear the melodies from the famous rock opera.
In 1988, the theater was headed by director People’s Artist of Russia Sergey Yashin. He paid much attention to the plays of American playwrights Tennessee Williams and Eugene O’Neill. His plays “Suits for a Summer Hotel” and “Long Day’s Journey Into Night” were shown in the United States, and local journalists wrote that the Russian director rediscovered these authors for Americans.
Sergei Ivanovich headed the theatre until 2013. After his departure, it was decided to transform the theatre into a project with three resident troupes. In addition to performances, viewers were invited to film screenings, concerts, lectures and open discussions.
In 2022, a new page in history will be written. The artistic director was appointed director and laureate of the Moscow Prize in Literature and Art Anton Yakovlev. The repertoire was formed anew – 15 premieres were shown in 2.5 years. Anton Yuryevich himself calls mystical drama the theater’s calling card. “Storm. Temptation” based on the play by Alexander Ostrovsky.
“This performance defines the direction and form of the theatre, the essence of what I do today,” said the artistic director. “I can also include the recent premiere of the play “Crime and Punishment” among such productions. After watching it, you can understand in which direction the theatre is moving, how the actors work here.”
Also on the bill today is: “Uncle’s Dream” Fyodor Dostoevsky, “Resurrection” Leo Tolstoy, “The Eldest Son” Alexandra Vampilova and many others. Last season, the premiere of the play “Soboryane” based on the novel by Nikolai Leskov took place — it was staged in collaboration with the Russian Concert Agency. The chamber ensemble “Soloists of Moscow” under the direction of Yuri Bashmet takes part in the play. The production was shown at Russian and international festivals, it was nominated for the Russian National Theatre Award “Golden Mask”, as well as for the Union of Theatre Workers of Russia “Nail of the Season” award.
In the Power of Phantoms. How Crime and Punishment Was Staged at the Gogol TheatreSincerity with Good Taste. Yuri Bashmet on the Modern Role of Classical Music
“The Gogol Theatre is very diverse, smart, conceptual, and bright,” added Anton Yakovlev. “It professes the genre of fantastic realism and metamodernism, and advocates an interesting interpretation of classical works.”
Performances are shown on two stages. The large hall is designed for 610 seats. Three years ago, it was renovated: plastic chairs were removed and comfortable armchairs were installed, a new floor was made, the walls were painted, and modern equipment was installed. The small stage has 115 seats. In addition to performances, creative meetings and conferences are held there. Another important space of the theater is the foyer in front of the large stage. They open and close the season there, organize concerts and performances for children.
The immediate plans include, of course, new performances. Anton Yakovlev will soon begin rehearsals for a production that will combine the plays Romeo and Juliet by William Shakespeare and A Plague on Both Your Houses! by Grigory Gorin. There are plans to bring Zoyka’s Apartment and Morphine by Mikhail Bulgakov to the stage, as well as create an immersive performance based on Lady Macbeth of Mtsensk by Nikolai Leskov.
But the Gogol Theatre is not only about performances. For example, open rehearsals for spectators and director’s laboratories (jointly with GITIS) for young talents are held here. As a result of one of them, two performances were added to the repertoire – “The Overcoat” and “Notes of a Madman” based on the works of Nikolai Gogol.
In 2022, the musical and poetic project “Poetomania” began, in which artists read poetry, accompanying themselves on musical instruments. The plans include joint projects with Mosconcert, the Tyumen Philharmonic Orchestra and much more. Details are still being kept secret.
Get the latest news quicklyofficial telegram channelthe city of Moscow.
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Please Note; This Information is Raw Content Directly from the Information Source. It is access to What the Source Is Stating and Does Not Reflect
https: //vv.mos.ru/nevs/ite/153056073/
Source: New Zealand Government
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has completed a successful three-day visit to the United Kingdom, where he met with His Majesty King Charles III and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer.
“The UK is one of New Zealand’s most trusted partners, and I had a hugely productive day with Prime Minister Starmer,” Mr Luxon says.
The two leaders released a Joint Statement in which they pledged to do more to ensure the partnership remains robust in a rapidly changing world.
“Prime Minister Starmer and I underlined our commitment to the international rules-based system. We also talked about boosting bilateral trade and investment, especially while the global economy is under such extreme pressure.”
“Export growth will be critical to improving our economic prospects in the coming years so our businesses can create more jobs and lift incomes for Kiwis.
“Our free trade agreement provides New Zealand business with certainty of access to the high-value UK market where we have enjoyed export growth of more than 20 per cent in the last year.”
Mr Luxon also hosted an investment roundtable with British business leaders to promote New Zealand as open for business.
“Building on the success of our international investment summit earlier in the year, I continued to make the case for New Zealand as a place to invest, so we can get infrastructure built and grow our businesses to put more money in Kiwis’ pockets.
“During my visit to London I also witnessed a number of commercial deals between UK and New Zealand companies, worth more than $120 million.”
The Prime Ministers agreed to refresh the Joint Statement on Defence Cooperation to ensure the partnership can respond to today’s global challenges.
Mr Luxon also announced New Zealand will extend the deployment of NZDF personnel to the UK and Europe to train Ukrainian soldiers until December 2026.
Mr Luxon visited some of those soldiers, met with representatives of the UK Government, the Leader of the Opposition and New Zealand and UK businesses.
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
LEAWOOD, Kan., April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Euronet Worldwide, Inc. (“Euronet” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: EEFT), a leading global financial technology solutions and payments provider, reports first quarter 2025 financial results.
Euronet reports the following consolidated results for the first quarter 2025 compared with the same period of 2024:
See the reconciliation of non-GAAP items in the attached financial schedules.
“I am pleased that we achieved double-digit constant currency growth in adjusted operating income and adjusted EBITDA, highlighted by an 18% increase in adjusted operating income over the prior year. All segments contributed to the strong earnings. Moreover, the contribution of double-digit earnings growth reflects the strength of our strategic focus on our global payment network which concentrates on high value, digital payments complemented by cross-border transactions. On an apples-to-apples basis our adjusted EPS of $1.33 increased 18% from $1.13 in the first quarter of 2024,” stated Michael J. Brown, Euronet’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer.
“I would offer that we do not see any direct impacts on our business as a result of the recent United States’ tariff actions. With a good start to the year together with our diversified global business, we are reaffirming our expectation to produce 12% to 16% earnings growth for the year,” continued Mr. Brown.
Segment and Other Results
The EFT Processing Segment reports the following results for the first quarter 2025 compared with the same period or date in 2024:
Constant currency revenue, operating income, and adjusted EBITDA growth in the first quarter 2025 was driven by market expansion, growth across most existing markets and the addition of access fees and interchange fees in certain markets.
Moreover, the EFT Processing Segment launched operations in two additional countries — Dominican Republic and Peru.
Transaction growth outpaced revenue growth due to continued growth in high-volume low-value transactions in India.
The epay Segment reports the following results for the first quarter 2025 compared with the same period or date in 2024:
Constant currency revenue growth was driven by continued payments, digital media and mobile growth. Operating income and adjusted EBITDA growth did not keep pace with revenue growth due to the payment of $4.5 million to resolve a non-recurring, multi-year operating tax matter during the quarter. Excluding this item, adjusted operating income would have grown 22% over the first quarter 2024 – reflecting the benefit of revenue growth and effective expense management.
epay’s transactions benefited as well from the continuation of strong growth in high-volume low-value transactions in India.
The Money Transfer Segment reports the following results for the first quarter 2025 compared with the same period or date in 2024:
Constant currency revenue growth was primarily driven by double-digit growth in cross-border transactions, partially offset by a decrease in intra-US transactions. Direct-to-consumer digital transactions grew by 31%, reflecting strong consumer demand for digital products. Operating income and Adjusted EBITDA growth outpaced revenue growth due to gross margin expansion, leverage of scale and effective expense management.
Additionally, the Money Transfer segment continued to expand its industry leading global payments network to now reach 4.0 billion bank accounts, 3.2 billion wallet accounts and 624,000 payment locations.
Corporate and Other reports $20.0 million of expense for the first quarter 2025 compared with $21.3 million for the first quarter 2024. The decrease in corporate expenses is largely from the decrease in long-term share-based compensation.
Balance Sheet and Financial Position
Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents on hand was $1,393.6 million as of March 31, 2025, compared to $1,278.8 million as of December 31, 2024. Total indebtedness was $2,202.5 million as of March 31, 2025, compared to $1,949.8 million as of December 31, 2024. Availability under the Company’s revolving credit facilities was approximately $623.1 million as of March 31, 2025. The change in net debt is the result of share repurchases, the repurchase of the convertible notes, and working capital fluctuations, partially offset by cash generated from operations.
The Company repurchased 0.6 million shares for $59.6 million during the First quarter, which will improve earnings per share by 1% for future periods.
During the quarter, Euronet repurchased $492 million of convertible notes.
Non-GAAP Measures
In addition to the results presented in accordance with U.S. GAAP, the Company presents non-GAAP financial measures, such as constant currency financial measures, operating income, adjusted EBITDA, and adjusted earnings per share. These measures should be used in addition to, and not a substitute for, revenues, operating income, net income and earnings per share computed in accordance with U.S. GAAP. We believe that these non-GAAP measures provide useful information to investors regarding the Company’s performance and overall results of operations. These non-GAAP measures are also an integral part of the Company’s internal reporting and performance assessment for executives and senior management. The non-GAAP measures used by the Company may not be comparable to similarly titled non-GAAP measures used by other companies. The attached schedules provide a full reconciliation of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable U.S. GAAP financial measure.
The Company does not provide a reconciliation of its forward-looking non-GAAP measures to GAAP due to the inherent difficulty in forecasting and quantifying certain amounts that are necessary for GAAP and the related GAAP and non-GAAP reconciliation, including adjustments that would be necessary for foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations and other charges reflected in the Company’s reconciliation of historic numbers, the amount of which, based on historical experience, could be significant.
(1) Constant currency financial measures are computed as if foreign currency exchange rates did not change from the prior period. This information is provided to illustrate the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates on the Company’s results when compared to the prior period.
(2) Adjusted operating income is defined as operating income excluding non-cash purchase accounting adjustments. Adjusted operating income represents a performance measure and is not intended to represent a liquidity measure.
(3) Adjusted EBITDA is defined as net income excluding, to the extent incurred in the period, interest expense, income tax expense, depreciation, amortization, share-based compensation and other non-cash purchase accounting adjustment, non-operating or non-recurring items that are considered expenses or income under U.S. GAAP. Adjusted EBITDA represents a performance measure and is not intended to represent a liquidity measure.
(4) Adjusted earnings per share is defined as diluted U.S. GAAP earnings per share excluding, to the extent incurred in the period, the tax-effected impacts of: a) foreign currency exchange gains or losses, b) share-based compensation, c) acquired intangible asset amortization, d) non-cash income tax expense, e) non-cash purchase accounting adjustment f) non-cash investment gain g) other non-operating or non-recurring items and h) dilutive shares relate to the Company’s convertible bonds. Adjusted earnings per share represents a performance measure and is not intended to represent a liquidity measure.
Conference Call and Slide Presentation
Euronet Worldwide will host an analyst conference call on April 24, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time to discuss these results. The call may also include discussion of Company developments on the Company’s operations, forward-looking information, and other material information about business and financial matters. To listen to the call via telephone please register at Euronet Worldwide First Quarter 2025 Earnings Call. The conference call will also be available via webcast at http://ir.euronetworldwide.com. Participants should register at least five minutes prior to the scheduled start time of the event. A slideshow will be included in the webcast. A webcast replay will be available beginning approximately one hour after the event at http://ir.euronetworldwide.com and will remain available for one year.
About Euronet Worldwide, Inc.
Starting in Central Europe in 1994 and growing to a global real-time digital and cash payments network with millions of touchpoints today, Euronet now moves money in all the ways consumers and businesses depend upon. This includes money transfers, credit/debit card processing, ATMs, POS services, branded payments, foreign currency exchange and more. With products and services in more than 200 countries and territories provided through its own brand and branded business segments, Euronet and its financial technologies and networks make participation in the global economy easier, faster and more secure for everyone.
A leading global financial technology solutions and payments provider, Euronet has developed an extensive global payments network that includes 55,512 installed ATMs, approximately 1,214,000 EFT POS terminals and a growing portfolio of outsourced debit and credit card services which are under management in 69 countries; card software solutions; a prepaid processing network of approximately 735,000 POS terminals at approximately 358,000 retailer locations in 64 countries; and a global money transfer network of approximately 624,000 locations serving – countries and territories. Euronet serves clients from its corporate headquarters in Leawood, Kansas, USA, and 67 worldwide offices. For more information, please visit the Company’s website at www.euronetworldwide.com.
Statements contained in this news release that concern Euronet’s or its management’s intentions, expectations, or predictions of future performance, are forward-looking statements. Euronet’s actual results may vary materially from those anticipated in such forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including: conditions in world financial markets and general economic conditions, including impacts from pandemics; inflation; the war in the Ukraine and the related economic sanctions and tariffs; military conflicts in the Middle East; our ability to successfully integrate any acquired operations; economic conditions in specific countries and regions; technological developments affecting the market for our products and services; our ability to successfully introduce new products and services; foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations; the effects of any breach of our computer systems or those of our customers or vendors, including our financial processing networks or those of other third parties; interruptions in any of our systems or those of our vendors or other third parties; our ability to renew existing contracts at profitable rates; changes in fees payable for transactions performed for cards bearing international logos or over switching networks such as card transactions on ATMs; our ability to comply with increasingly stringent regulatory requirements, including anti-money laundering, anti-terrorism, anti-bribery, consumer and data protection and privacy; changes in laws and regulations affecting our business, including tax and immigration laws and any laws regulating payments, including dynamic currency conversion transactions; changes in our relationships with, or in fees charged by, our business partners; competition; the outcome of claims and other loss contingencies affecting Euronet; the cost of borrowing (including fluctuations in interest rates), availability of credit and terms of and compliance with debt covenants; and renewal of sources of funding as they expire and the availability of replacement funding. These risks and other risks are described in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K. Copies of these filings may be obtained via the SEC’s Edgar website or by contacting the Company. Any forward-looking statements made in this release speak only as of the date of this release. Except as may be required by law, Euronet does not intend to update these forward-looking statements and undertakes no duty to any person to provide any such update under any circumstances. The Company regularly posts important information to the investor relations section of its website.
| EURONET WORLDWIDE, INC. | |||||
| Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets | |||||
| (in millions) | |||||
| As of | |||||
| March 31, | As of | ||||
| 2025 | December 31, | ||||
| (unaudited) | 2024 | ||||
| ASSETS | |||||
| Current assets: | |||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 1,393.6 | $ | 1,278.8 | |
| ATM cash | 700.3 | 643.8 | |||
| Restricted cash | 10.8 | 9.2 | |||
| Settlement assets | 1,418.6 | 1,522.7 | |||
| Trade accounts receivable, net | 330.5 | 284.9 | |||
| Prepaid expenses and other current assets | 319.9 | 297.1 | |||
| Total current assets | 4,173.7 | 4,036.5 | |||
| Property and equipment, net | 337.4 | 329.7 | |||
| Right of use lease asset, net | 146.1 | 132.1 | |||
| Goodwill and acquired intangible assets, net | 1,070.9 | 1,048.1 | |||
| Other assets, net | 325.4 | 288.1 | |||
| Total assets | $ | 6,053.5 | $ | 5,834.5 | |
| LIABILITIES AND EQUITY | |||||
| Current liabilities: | |||||
| Settlement obligations | $ | 1,418.6 | $ | 1,522.7 | |
| Accounts payable and other current liabilities | 843.6 | 841.0 | |||
| Current portion of operating lease liabilities | 50.8 | 48.3 | |||
| Short-term debt obligations | 295.4 | 814.0 | |||
| Total current liabilities | 2,608.4 | 3,226.0 | |||
| Debt obligations, net of current portion | 1,906.0 | 1,134.4 | |||
| Operating lease liabilities, net of current portion | 97.8 | 87.4 | |||
| Capital lease obligations, net of current portion | 1.1 | 1.4 | |||
| Deferred income taxes | 57.3 | 71.8 | |||
| Other long-term liabilities | 81.2 | 84.3 | |||
| Total liabilities | 4,751.8 | 4,605.3 | |||
| Equity | 1,301.7 | 1,229.2 | |||
| Total liabilities and equity | $ | 6,053.5 | $ | 5,834.5 | |
| EURONET WORLDWIDE, INC. | |||||||
| Consolidated Statements of Operations | |||||||
| (unaudited – in millions, except share and per share data) | |||||||
| Three Months Ended | |||||||
| March 31, | |||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | ||||||
| Revenues | $ | 915.5 | $ | 857.0 | |||
| Operating expenses: | |||||||
| Direct operating costs | 561.0 | 533.7 | |||||
| Salaries and benefits | 164.1 | 154.7 | |||||
| Selling, general and administrative | 83.0 | 71.9 | |||||
| Depreciation and amortization | 32.2 | 32.7 | |||||
| Total operating expenses | 840.3 | 793.0 | |||||
| Operating income | 75.2 | 64.0 | |||||
| Other income (expense): | |||||||
| Interest income | 5.3 | 5.7 | |||||
| Interest expense | (19.4 | ) | (14.9 | ) | |||
| Foreign currency exchange (loss) | (18.1 | ) | (12.5 | ) | |||
| Other income (expense) | 2.5 | (0.1 | ) | ||||
| Total other income (expense), net | (29.7 | ) | (21.8 | ) | |||
| Income before income taxes | 45.5 | 42.2 | |||||
| Income tax expense | (7.1 | ) | (16.0 | ) | |||
| Net income | 38.4 | 26.2 | |||||
| Net loss attributable to non-controlling interests | — | — | |||||
| Net income attributable to Euronet Worldwide, Inc. | $ | 38.4 | $ | 26.2 | |||
| Add: Interest expense from assumed conversion of convertible notes, net of tax | 1.0 | 0.9 | |||||
| Net income for diluted earnings per share calculation | $ | 39.4 | $ | 27.1 | |||
| Earnings per share attributable to Euronet | |||||||
| Worldwide, Inc. stockholders – diluted | $ | 0.85 | $ | 0.55 | |||
| Diluted weighted average shares outstanding | 46,239,523 | 48,962,583 | |||||
| EURONET WORLDWIDE, INC. | |||||||||||||||||||
| Reconciliation of Net Income to Operating Income (Expense) to Adjusted Operating Income (Expense) and Adjusted EBITDA | |||||||||||||||||||
| (unaudited – in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Three months ended March 31, 2025 | |||||||||||||||||||
| EFT Processing | epay | Money Transfer | Corporate Services | Consolidated | |||||||||||||||
| Net income | $ | 38.4 | |||||||||||||||||
| Add: Income tax expense | 7.1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Add: Total other expense, net | 29.7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Operating income (expense) | $ | 23.3 | $ | 26.8 | $ | 45.1 | $ | (20.0 | ) | $ | 75.2 | ||||||||
| Add: Depreciation and amortization | 24.3 | 1.6 | 6.1 | 0.2 | 32.2 | ||||||||||||||
| Add: Share-based compensation | — | — | 0.1 | 11.2 | 11.3 | ||||||||||||||
| Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and share-based compensation (Adjusted EBITDA) | $ | 47.6 | $ | 28.4 | $ | 51.3 | $ | (8.6 | ) | $ | 118.7 | ||||||||
| Three months ended March 31, 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||
| EFT Processing | epay | Money Transfer | Corporate Services | Consolidated | |||||||||||||||
| Net income | $ | 26.2 | |||||||||||||||||
| Add: Income tax expense | 16.0 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Add: Total other expense, net | 21.8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Operating income (expense) | $ | 21.5 | $ | 26.6 | $ | 37.2 | $ | (21.3 | ) | $ | 64.0 | ||||||||
| Less: Non-cash purchase accounting adjustment | (0.4 | ) | — | — | — | (0.4 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Adjusted operating income (1) | 21.1 | 26.6 | 37.2 | (21.3 | ) | 63.6 | |||||||||||||
| Add: Depreciation and amortization | 23.6 | 1.7 | 7.3 | 0.1 | 32.7 | ||||||||||||||
| Add: Share-based compensation | — | — | — | 12.5 | 12.5 | ||||||||||||||
| Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and share-based compensation, non-cash purchase accounting adjustment (Adjusted EBITDA) | $ | 44.7 | $ | 28.3 | $ | 44.5 | $ | (8.7 | ) | $ | 108.8 | ||||||||
(1) Adjusted operating income and Adjusted EBITDA are non-GAAP measures that should be considered in addition to, and not a substitute for, net income computed in accordance with U.S. GAAP.
| EURONET WORLDWIDE, INC. | |||||||
| Reconciliation of Adjusted Earnings per Share | |||||||
| (unaudited – in millions, except share and per share data) | |||||||
| Three Months Ended | |||||||
| March 31, | |||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | ||||||
| Net income attributable to Euronet Worldwide, Inc. | $ | 38.4 | $ | 26.2 | |||
| Foreign currency exchange loss | 18.1 | 12.5 | |||||
| Intangible asset amortization(1) | 4.5 | 5.5 | |||||
| Non-cash purchase accounting adjustment(2) | — | (0.4 | ) | ||||
| Share-based compensation(3) | 11.3 | 12.5 | |||||
| Income tax effect of above adjustments(4) | — | 0.6 | |||||
| Non-cash investment gain(5) | (3.0 | ) | — | ||||
| Non-cash GAAP tax expense (benefit)(6) | (19.3 | ) | 2.5 | ||||
| Adjusted earnings(7) | $ | 50.0 | $ | 59.4 | |||
| Adjusted earnings per share – diluted(7) | $ | 1.13 | $ | 1.28 | |||
| Diluted weighted average shares outstanding (GAAP) | 46,239,523 | 48,962,583 | |||||
| Effect of adjusted EPS dilution of convertible notes | (2,347,536 | ) | (2,781,818 | ) | |||
| Effect of unrecognized share-based compensation on diluted shares outstanding | 371,757 | 355,219 | |||||
| Adjusted diluted weighted average shares outstanding | 44,263,744 | 46,535,984 | |||||
(1) Intangible asset amortization of $4.5 million and $5.5 million are included in depreciation and amortization expense of $32.2 million and $32.7 million for both the three months ended March 31, 2025 and March 31, 2024, in the consolidated statements of operations.
(2) Non-cash purchase accounting expense adjustment of $0.4 million is included in operating income for the three months ended March 31, 2024, in the consolidated statement of operations.
(3) Share-based compensation of $11.3 million and $12.5 million are included in salaries and benefits expense of $164.1 million and $154.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and March 31, 2024, respectively, in the consolidated statements of operations.
(4) Adjustment is the aggregate U.S. GAAP income tax effect on the preceding adjustments determined by applying the applicable statutory U.S. federal, state and/or foreign income tax rates.
(5) Non-cash investment gain of $3.0 million is included in other income in the consolidated statement of operations.
(6) Adjustment is the non-cash GAAP tax impact recognized on certain items such as the utilization of certain material net deferred tax assets and amortization of indefinite-lived intangible assets.
(7) Adjusted earnings and adjusted earnings per share are non-GAAP measures that should be considered in addition to, and not as a substitute for, net income and earnings per share computed in accordance with U.S. GAAP.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jennifer Parker, Adjunct Fellow, Naval Studies at UNSW Canberra, and Expert Associate, National Security College, Australian National University
Australian strategic thinking has long struggled to move beyond a narrow view of defence that focuses solely on protecting our shores. However, in today’s world, our economy could be crippled without an enemy boot stepping foot on Australian soil.
Australia’s acquisition of nuclear-powered submarines through AUKUS marks a shift in this mindset.
It is not a strategy in itself, but a structural pivot: a recognition that our vital interests lie far beyond the coastline, and that defending them requires Australia to project its maritime power.
Over a century ago, US naval officer Alfred Thayer Mahan observed that “wars are won by the economic strangulation of the enemy from the sea”.
While not universally true, this maxim is directly relevant to an island nation like Australia – 99% of our international trade moves by sea.
But not just any trade – our critical supplies of fuel, fertiliser and ammunition all come by sea. Australia’s economy and defences would be crippled if these things were stopped at sea.
These vulnerabilities are compounded by our growing dependence on undersea cables for communications.
Strategic concepts that rely on making Australia’s territory a hard target, such as the “strategic defensive”, fail to grapple with this reality, perpetuating a flawed understanding of how to defend Australia.
Viewing Australia’s interests solely through the lens of avoiding or defeating a territorial attack overlooks the reality that an adversary could cripple the nation far more easily through the maritime, space or cyber domains.
The ability to project power in the seas and oceans far from Australia’s shores is critical to protecting these seaborne supply lines and sustaining the national economy. This is where AUKUS comes in – the endurance and range of nuclear-powered submarines are a key element.
Australia’s future nuclear-powered submarines would make adversary naval task groups vulnerable if they threatened our maritime trade routes.
Much more is needed, however, to deliver a coherent maritime strategy. This includes:
expanding our surface combatant fleet
addressing the vulnerability of Australia’s limited number of resupply, mine warfare and hydrographic vessels
and resolving longstanding issues around our strategic fleet (commercial ships that could be requisitioned in a time of crisis).
We must also expand our flagged merchant shipping fleet by reforming the Australian International Shipping Register. And we must strengthen our domestic maritime security through the establishment of a national coastguard.
But AUKUS, as the centrepiece of our future undersea capability, is a good start.
AUKUS has attracted plenty of criticism — particularly following the new Trump administration’s moves away from the US’ traditional allies in Europe.
Yet, despite claims the three-phase AUKUS submarine plan is failing, it remains remarkably on track.
Like any complex defence acquisition, it carries risks. These risks include the continued political will to keep the deal on track, as well as the workforce, delivery schedule and cost pressures that come with building the submarines.
But the relevant question is not whether risks exist — if that were the test, most defence programs wouldn’t proceed. The question is whether the risks around AUKUS are being effectively mitigated.
And as the three phases of the AUKUS deal progress, these risks will continue to evolve. Australia must remain focussed on addressing them.
The political risk has been most salient recently, given the Trump administration’s actions on Europe, Ukraine, foreign aid and tariffs. But while these disruptions are significant, they were largely foreshadowed.
By contrast, the political signals coming out of Washington around AUKUS have been overwhelmingly positive. This is because AUKUS is in the US’ strategic interests as much as it is in Australia’s interests.
Importantly, the political commitment to AUKUS in Canberra, Washington and London has already been demonstrated.
The “optimal pathway” to guide the agreement into the 2030s was signed within 18 months of AUKUS’ launch in September 2021. And the AUKUS treaty that enables the US and UK to transfer nuclear submarine technology and equipment to Australia has since been signed and entered into force among all three partners.
In Australia, bipartisan support has held for over three years, with no sign of weakening.
Many critics have also focused on the risks posed by the US submarine industrial base and its ability to build nuclear-powered submarines quickly enough.
The US would need to increase its production rate to two Virginia-class submarines per year by 2028 – and subsequently to 2.33 submarines per year – in order to reach the target US fleet of 66 submarines by 2054.
But this does not preclude the sale of three Virginia-class submarines to Australia in the early 2030s. Australia is not just a recipient of submarines from the US — it will help enable the US’ undersea operations in the region.
Our role as a rotational hub for US submarines and the longstanding support we can offer the US fleet through facilities such as the Harold E. Holt submarine communications station makes our contribution far more valuable than the notional loss of three submarines on paper.
Could this change in the future? Like all international arrangements, of course it could. But there is no indication at present that it will.
The defence of Australia is not simply about protecting our continent from attack — it is about safeguarding vital national interests. For an island nation, that means securing maritime trade routes and undersea infrastructure.
Even for those concerned about the extremely unlikely prospect of invasion, a robust maritime strategy also enables threats to be defeated well before they reach our shores.
Through its emphasis on maritime power projection, AUKUS reflects a fundamental shift in how we think about defending Australia in the decades ahead.
This is the final part of a series on the future of defence in Australia. Read the other stories here.
Jennifer Parker is a 20-year veteran of the Royal Australian Navy.
– ref. Why AUKUS remains the right strategy for the future defence of Australia – https://theconversation.com/why-aukus-remains-the-right-strategy-for-the-future-defence-of-australia-254985
Source: Republic of China Taiwan
Details
2025-04-23
President Lai pays respects to Pope Francis
On the morning of April 23, President Lai Ching-te visited the Taipei Archdiocesan Curia to pay respects in a memorial ceremony for His Holiness Pope Francis. As officiant of the ceremony, President Lai burned incense and presented flowers, fruits, and wine to pay his respects to Pope Francis. At the direction of the master of ceremonies, the president then bowed three times in front of Pope Francis’s memorial portrait, conveying his grief and deep respect for the late pope. After hearing of Pope Francis’s passing on April 21, President Lai promptly requested the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to express sincere condolences from the people and government of Taiwan to the Vatican. The president also instructed Minister of Foreign Affairs Lin Chia-lung (林佳龍) to convey condolences to the Holy See’s Apostolic Nunciature in Taiwan.
Details
2025-04-23
President Lai meets US CNAS NextGen fellows
On the morning of April 23, President Lai Ching-te met with fellows from the Shawn Brimley Next Generation National Security Leaders Program (NextGen) run by the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). In remarks, President Lai thanked the government of the United States for continuing its arms sales to Taiwan over the years, supporting Taiwan’s efforts to enhance its national defense capabilities and jointly maintaining peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. The president pointed out that we will promote our “Taiwan plus one” policy, that is, new arrangements for Taiwan plus the US, and form a “Taiwan investment in the US team” to expand investment and bring about even closer Taiwan-US trade cooperation, allowing us to reduce the trade deficit and generate development that benefits both sides. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: Ms. Michèle Flournoy, chair of the CNAS Board of Directors, is a good friend of Taiwan, and she has made major contributions to Taiwan-US relations through her long-time efforts on various aspects of our cooperation. I am happy to welcome Chair Flournoy, who is once again leading a NextGen Fellowship delegation to Taiwan. CNAS is a prominent think tank focusing on US national security and defense policy based in Washington, DC. Its NextGen Fellowship has fostered talented individuals in the fields of national security and foreign affairs. This year’s delegation is significantly larger than those of the past, demonstrating the increased importance that the next generation of US leaders attach to Taiwan. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I extend my sincerest welcome to you all. The Taiwan Strait, an issue of importance for our guests, has become a global issue. There is a high degree of international consensus that peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait are indispensable elements in global security and prosperity. Facing military threats from China, Taiwan proposed the Four Pillars of Peace action plan. First, we are actively implementing military reforms, enhancing whole-of-society defense resilience, and working to increase our defense budget to more than 3 percent of GDP. Second, we are strengthening our economic resilience. As Taiwan’s economy must keep advancing, we can no longer put all our eggs in one basket. We are taking action to remain firmly rooted in Taiwan while expanding our global presence and marketing worldwide. In these efforts, we are already seeing results. Third, we are standing side-by-side with other democratic countries to demonstrate the strength of deterrence and achieve our goal of peace through strength. And fourth, Taiwan is willing, under the principles of parity and dignity, to conduct exchanges and cooperate with China towards achieving peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. This April 10 marked the 46th anniversary of the enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act. We thank the US government for continuing its arms sales to Taiwan over the years, supporting Taiwan’s efforts to enhance its national defense capabilities and jointly maintaining peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region. We look forward to Taiwan and the US continuing to strengthen collaboration on the development of both our defense industries as well as the building of non-red supply chains. This will yield even more results and further deepen our economic and trade partnership. The US is now the main destination for outbound investment from Taiwan. Moving forward, we will promote our “Taiwan plus one” policy, that is, new arrangements for Taiwan plus the US. And our government will form a “Taiwan investment in the US team” to expand investment. We hope this will bring Taiwan-US economic and trade cooperation even closer and, through mutually beneficial assistance, allow us to generate development that benefits both our sides while reducing our trade deficit. In closing, thank you once again for visiting Taiwan. We hope your trip is fruitful and leaves you with a deep impression of Taiwan. We also hope that going forward you continue supporting Taiwan and advancing even greater development for Taiwan-US ties. Chair Flournoy then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for making time to receive their delegation. Referring to President Lai’s earlier remarks, she said that it is quite an impressive group, as past members of this program have gone on to become members of the US Congress, leading government experts, and leaders in the think-tank world and in the private sector. She remarked that investing in this group is a wonderful privilege for her and that they appreciate President Lai’s agreeing to take the time to engage in exchange with them. Chair Flournoy emphasized that they are visiting Taiwan at a critical moment, when there is so much change and volatility in the geostrategic environment, a lot of uncertainty, and a lot of unpredictability. She stated that given our shared values, our shared passion for democracy and human rights, and our shared interests in peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific region, this is an important time for dialogue, collaboration, and looking for additional opportunities where we can work together towards regional peace and stability.
Details
2025-04-18
President Lai meets US delegation from Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia and the Pacific
On the afternoon of April 18, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Senator Pete Ricketts, chairman of the United States Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific, and International Cybersecurity Policy. In remarks, President Lai said we hope to promote our Taiwan plus one policy, that is, new industrial arrangements for Taiwan plus the US, to leverage the strengths of both sides and reinforce our links in such areas as the economy, trade, and technological innovation. The president said that by deepening cooperation, Taiwan and the US will be better positioned to work together on building non-red supply chains. He said a more secure and sustainable economic and trade partnership will allow us to address the challenges posed by geopolitics, climate change, and the restructuring of global supply chains. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I warmly welcome you all to Taiwan. I want to take this opportunity to especially thank Chairman Pete Ricketts and Ranking Member Chris Coons for their high regard and support for Taiwan. Chairman Ricketts has elected to visit Taiwan on his first overseas trip since taking up his new position in January. Ranking Member Coons made a dedicated trip to Taiwan in 2021 to announce a donation of COVID-19 vaccines on behalf of the US government. He also visited last May, soon after my inauguration, continuing to deepen Taiwan-US exchanges. Thanks to support from Chairman Ricketts and Ranking Member Coons, the US Congress has continued to introduce many concrete initiatives and resources to assist Taiwan through the National Defense Authorization Act and Consolidated Appropriations Act, bringing the Taiwan-US partnership even closer. For this, I want to again express my gratitude. There has long been bipartisan support in the US Congress for maintaining security in the Taiwan Strait. Faced with China’s persistent political and military intimidation, Taiwan will endeavor to reform national defense and enhance whole-of-society defense resilience. We will also make special budget allocations to ensure that our defense budget exceeds 3 percent of GDP, up from the current 2.5 percent, so as to enhance Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities. We look forward to Taiwan and the US continuing to work together to maintain peace and stability in the region. We will also promote our Taiwan plus one policy, that is, new industrial arrangements for Taiwan plus the US. We hope to leverage the strengths of both sides and reinforce our links in such areas as the economy, trade, and technological innovation, jointly promoting prosperity and development. We believe that by deepening cooperation through the Taiwan plus one policy, Taiwan and the US will be better positioned to work together on building non-red supply chains. A more secure and sustainable economic and trade partnership will allow us to address the challenges posed by geopolitics, climate change, and the restructuring of global supply chains. In closing, I wish Chairman Ricketts and Ranking Member Coons a smooth and successful visit. Chairman Ricketts then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for his hospitality. He said that he and his delegation have had a wonderful time meeting with government officials, industry representatives, and the team at the American Institute in Taiwan. Highlighting that Taiwan has long been a friend and partner of the US, he said their bipartisan delegation to Taiwan emphasizes long-time bipartisan support in the US Congress for Taiwan, and though administrations change, that bipartisan support remains. Chairman Ricketts stated that the US is committed to peace and stability in the Indo-Pacific and that they want to see peace across the Taiwan Strait. He also stated that the US opposes any unilateral change in the status of Taiwan and that they expect any differences between Taiwan and China to be resolved peacefully without coercion or the threat of force. To that end, he said, the US will continue to assist Taiwan in its self-defense and will also step up by bolstering its own defense capabilities, noting that there is broad consensus on this in the US Congress. Chairman Ricketts stated that they want to see Taiwan participate in international organizations and memberships where appropriate, and encourage Taiwan to reach out to current and past diplomatic allies to strengthen those bilateral relationships. He pointed out that the long economic relationship between the US and Taiwan is important for our as well as the entire world’s security and prosperity. He also noted that there are many opportunities for us to continue to grow the economic relationship that will help create more prosperity for our respective peoples and ensure that we are more secure in the world. Chairman Ricketts emphasized that they made this trip early on in the new US administration to work with Taiwan to develop three points: security, diplomatic relations, and the economy. He stated that in the face of rising aggression from communist China, the US will provide commensurate help to Taiwan in self-defense and that they will continue to provide the services and tools needed. In closing, Chairman Ricketts once again thanked President Lai for the hospitality and said he looks forward to dialogue on how we can continue these relationships. Ranking Member Coons then delivered remarks. Mentioning that their delegation also visited the Philippines on this trip, he said that there and in Taiwan, they have been focused on peace, stability, and security, and the ways for deepening and strengthening economic and security relations. He noted that 46 years ago, the US Senate passed the Taiwan Relations Act, adding that it was strongly bipartisan when enacted and that support for it is still strongly bipartisan today. Its core commitment, he said, is that the US will be engaged and will be a partner in ensuring that any dispute or challenge across the strait will be resolved peacefully, and that Taiwan will have the resources it needs for its self-defense. Ranking Member Coons said that between people, friendships are deepest and most enduring when they are based not just on interests but on values, and that the same is true between the US and Taiwan. Free press, free enterprise, free societies, democracy – these core shared values, he said, anchor our friendship and partnership, making them deeper. He remarked that they are grateful for the significant investment in the US being made by companies from Taiwan, but what anchors our partnership, in addition to these important investments and investments being made by Taiwan in its own security, are the values that mobilize our free-enterprise spirit and our commitment to free societies. In Europe in recent years, Ranking Member Coons said, an aggressive nation has tried to change boundaries and change history by force. He said that the US and dozens of countries committed to freedom have come to the aid of Ukraine to defend it, help it stabilize, and secure its future. So too in this region of the world, he added, the US and a bipartisan group in the US Senate are committed to stable, secure, peaceful relations and to deterring any unilateral effort to change the status quo by force. In closing, he said he is grateful for a chance to return to Taiwan after the pandemic and that he looks forward to our conversation, our partnership, and the important work we have in front of us. The delegation was accompanied to the Presidential Office by American Institute in Taiwan Taipei Office Director Raymond Greene.
Details
2025-04-17
President Lai meets New Zealand delegation from All-Party Parliamentary Group on Taiwan
On the morning of April 17, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation from New Zealand’s All-Party Parliamentary Group on Taiwan. In remarks, President Lai thanked the government of New Zealand for reiterating the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait on multiple occasions since last year. He also stated that this year, the Taiwan-New Zealand economic cooperation agreement (ANZTEC) is being implemented in its complete form. The president expressed hope that deeper collaboration in such fields as smart agriculture, food manufacturing, biomedicine, the digital economy, and clean energy, as well as exchanges among our indigenous peoples, will allow our economies and industries to continue evolving as they adapt to the challenges arising from global changes. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I extend a warm welcome to all of our guests. New Zealand’s All-Party Parliamentary Group on Taiwan was established in 2023, marking a significant milestone in the deepening of Taiwan-New Zealand relations. I would like to thank Members of Parliament Stuart Smith and Tangi Utikere for leading this delegation, and thank all our guests for demonstrating support for Taiwan through action. We currently face a rapidly changing international landscape. Authoritarian regimes continue to converge and expand. Democracies must actively cooperate and jointly safeguard peace, stability, and the prosperous development of the Indo-Pacific region. Since last year, the government of New Zealand has on multiple occasions reiterated the importance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait. On behalf of the people of Taiwan, I would like to express our sincere gratitude for these statements and demonstrations of support. This year, ANZTEC is being implemented in its complete form. We look forward to exploring even more diverse markets with New Zealand. Deeper collaboration in such fields as smart agriculture, food manufacturing, biomedicine, the digital economy, and clean energy, as well as exchanges among indigenous peoples, will allow our economies and industries to continue evolving as they adapt to the challenges arising from global changes. Taiwan and New Zealand share the universal values of democracy, freedom, and respect for human rights, and parliamentary diplomacy is a tradition practiced by democracies around the world. Looking ahead, our parliamentary exchanges and mutual visits are bound to become more frequent. This will enable us to explore even more opportunities for cooperation and further deepen and solidify the democratic partnership between Taiwan and New Zealand. Thank you once again for making the long journey to visit us. I wish you a fruitful and successful trip. I also hope that everyone can take time to see more of Taiwan, try our local cuisine, and learn more about our culture. I hope our guests will fall in love with Taiwan. MP Smith then delivered remarks, saying that it is a great pleasure and an honor to be received by President Lai. The MP, noting that President Lai already covered many of the points he planned to make, went on to say that New Zealand and Taiwan share many values. He indicated that both are trading nations that rely on easy access for imports and exports, and that is why freedom of navigation is so important. That is why New Zealand had a naval vessel sail through the Taiwan Strait, he said, to underline the importance of freedom of navigation and our mutual security. MP Smith said that they look forward to building stronger relationships and enhancing the trade between our two nations. He added that New Zealand has much to offer in the field of geothermal energy to assist Taiwan, and mentioned that New Zealand is third largest in terms of the number of rocket launchers for satellites, which could assist Taiwan with communications in the future. New Zealand has other products as well, he said, but looks for assistance from Taiwan’s technology and technological sector. Lastly, MP Smith stated that he looks forward to a long and prosperous relationship between Taiwan and New Zealand. MP Utikere then delivered remarks, indicating that like Taiwan, New Zealand is a nation that is surrounded by ocean, which means that they rely on strong partnerships with communities of interest all around the globe. He said that the all-party parliamentary friendship group that was established and that they are a part of goes a long way in ensuring that a secure relationship between our two parliaments can continue to prosper. The MP also thanked Taiwan’s Representative to New Zealand Joanne Ou (歐江安) and her team for their work, which has ensured the success of the delegation’s visit. He said that the delegation experienced meetings with ministers in Taiwan’s government, members of the legislature, and those from the non-government organization sector as well. He also said that they enjoyed the opportunity to visit Wulai, and that the strength of the connections between the indigenous peoples of Taiwan and the indigenous peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand is something that certainly landed with members of the delegation. MP Utikere noted that he will take up President Lai’s offer on experiencing more of Taiwan, and will spend a few extra days in Tainan, which he understands has a very special place in the president’s heart, adding that he looks forward to his time and experiences there. The MP concluded his remarks by saying that this will be a relationship that continues to go from strength to strength. After their remarks, the New Zealand delegation sang the Māori song “Tutira Mai Nga Iwi” to extend best wishes to Taiwan. Also in attendance at the meeting were New Zealand Members of Parliament Jamie Arbuckle, Greg Fleming, Hamish Campbell, Cameron Luxton, and Helen White.
Details
2025-04-15
President Lai meets delegation led by Tuvalu Deputy Prime Minister Panapasi Nelesone
On the afternoon of April 15, President Lai Ching-te met with a delegation led by Tuvalu Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and Economic Development Panapasi Nelesone and his wife. In remarks, President Lai thanked Tuvalu for its staunch and long-term backing of Taiwan’s international participation. The president said he looks forward to our nations deepening bilateral ties in such areas as agriculture, medicine, education, and information and communications technology and working together toward greater peace, prosperity, and development in the Pacific region. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: I extend a very warm welcome to Deputy Prime Minister Nelesone and Madame Corinna Ituaso Laafai as they lead this delegation to Taiwan. Our distinguished guests are the first delegation from Tuvalu that I have received at the Presidential Office this year. During my visit to Tuvalu last year, I met and exchanged views with Deputy Prime Minister Nelesone and the ministers present. I am delighted to meet you again today and thank you once again for the hospitality you accorded my delegation. The culture of Tuvalu and the warmth of its people are not easily forgotten. Tuvalu’s support for Taiwan has also touched us deeply. I want to take this opportunity to thank Tuvalu for staunchly backing Taiwan’s international participation over the past several decades. Our two countries have supported each other like family and have together made contributions in the international arena. Last Tuesday, I received the credentials of Ambassador Lily Tangisia Faavae and expressed my hope for Taiwan and Tuvalu continuing to deepen bilateral relations. This visit by Deputy Prime Minister Nelesone is an important step in that regard. Our two countries will be signing a labor cooperation agreement and an agreement concerning the recognition of training and certification of seafarers. This will expand bilateral cooperation at multiple levels and bring our relations even closer. Taiwan and Tuvalu are maritime nations and share the values of democracy and freedom. Our two countries have stood shoulder to shoulder to protect marine resources and address the challenges posed by climate change and authoritarianism, and we aspire to work toward greater peace, prosperity, and development in the Pacific region. Our nations have produced fruitful results in such areas as agriculture, medicine, education, and information and communications technology. I anticipate that, with the support of Deputy Prime Minister Nelesone and our distinguished guests, we can continue to employ a more diverse range of strategies to begin a new chapter in our diplomatic partnership. Together, we can make even greater and more concrete contributions to regional development. Deputy Prime Minister Nelesone then delivered remarks, first thanking President Lai for his kind words of welcome and the warm hospitality extended to his delegation. On behalf of the government and people of Tuvalu, he conveyed their gratitude to the president and the people of Taiwan for the generous support, as well as for the enduring friendship we share. He said that Taiwan’s steadfast commitment to our bilateral relationship has been instrumental in advancing our shared values of democracy, resilience, and sustainable development. From vital development assistance to cooperation in health, education, and climate change resilience, he added, Taiwan’s contributions have made a significant impact on the lives of the people of Tuvalu. For Taiwan’s recent generous donation of shoes for Tuvaluan primary school students, Deputy Prime Minister Nelesone expressed thanks to President Lai. He commented that these gifts, which underscore a deep commitment to the welfare of their youth, transcend mere material support; they are symbols of care, friendship, and hope for the future generations. Noting that our bilateral relationship is built on mutual respect, shared values, and a common vision for sustainable development in the Pacific, he expressed confidence that this partnership will continue to flourish and will serve as a beacon of cooperation and solidarity within our region. The delegation also included Tuvalu Minister of Foreign Affairs, Labour, and Trade Paulson Panapa; Minister of Public Works, Infrastructure Development and Water Ampelosa Tehulu, and was accompanied to the Presidential Office by Tuvalu Ambassador Faavae.
Details
2025-04-06
President Lai delivers remarks on US tariff policy response
On April 6, President Lai Ching-te delivered recorded remarks regarding the impact of the 32 percent tariff that the United States government recently imposed on imports from Taiwan in the name of reciprocity. In his remarks, President Lai explained that the government will adopt five response strategies, including making every effort to improve reciprocal tariff rates through negotiations, adopting a support plan for affected domestic industries, adopting medium- and long-term economic development plans, forming new “Taiwan plus the US” arrangements, and launching industry listening tours. The president emphasized that as we face this latest challenge, the government and civil society will work hand in hand, and expressed hope that all parties, both ruling and opposition, will support the measures that the Executive Yuan will take to open up a broader path for Taiwan’s economy. A translation of President Lai’s remarks follows: My fellow citizens, good evening. The US government recently announced higher tariffs on countries around the world in the name of reciprocity, including imposing a 32 percent tariff on imports from Taiwan. This is bound to have a major impact on our nation. Various countries have already responded, and some have even adopted retaliatory measures. Tremendous changes in the global economy are expected. Taiwan is an export-led economy, and in facing future challenges there will inevitably be difficulties, so we must proceed carefully to turn danger into safety. During this time, I want to express gratitude to all sectors of society for providing valuable opinions, which the government regards highly, and will use as a reference to make policy decisions. However, if we calmly and carefully analyze Taiwan’s trade with the US, we find that last year Taiwan’s exports to the US were valued at US$111.4 billion, accounting for 23.4 percent of total export value, with the other 75-plus percent of products sold worldwide to countries other than the US. Of products sold to the US, competitive ICT products and electronic components accounted for 65.4 percent. This shows that Taiwan’s economy does still have considerable resilience. As long as our response strategies are appropriate, and the public and private sectors join forces, we can reduce impacts. Please do not panic. To address the reciprocal tariffs by the US, Taiwan has no plans to adopt retaliatory tariffs. There will be no change in corporate investment commitments to the US, as long as they are consistent with national interests. But we must ensure the US clearly understands Taiwan’s contributions to US economic development. More importantly, we must actively seek to understand changes in the global economic situation, strengthen Taiwan-US industry cooperation, elevate the status of Taiwan industries in global supply chains, and with safeguarding the continued development of Taiwan’s economy as our goal, adopt the following five strategies to respond. Strategy one: Make every effort to improve reciprocal tariff rates through negotiations using the following five methods: 1. Taiwan has already formed a negotiation team led by Vice Premier Cheng Li-chiun (鄭麗君). The team includes members from the National Security Council, the Office of Trade Negotiations, and relevant Executive Yuan ministries and agencies, as well as academia and industry. Like the US-Mexico-Canada free trade agreement, negotiations on tariffs can start from Taiwan-US bilateral zero-tariff treatment. 2. To expand purchases from the US and thereby reduce the trade deficit, the Executive Yuan has already completed an inventory regarding large-scale procurement plans for agricultural, industrial, petroleum, and natural gas products, and the Ministry of National Defense has also proposed a military procurement list. All procurement plans will be actively pursued. 3. Expand investments in the US. Taiwan’s cumulative investment in the US already exceeds US$100 billion, creating approximately 400,000 jobs. In the future, in addition to increased investment in the US by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, other industries such as electronics, ICT, petrochemicals, and natural gas can all increase their US investments, deepening Taiwan-US industry cooperation. Taiwan’s government has helped form a “Taiwan investment in the US” team, and hopes that the US will reciprocate by forming a “US investment in Taiwan” team to bring about closer Taiwan-US trade cooperation, jointly creating a future economic golden age. 4. We must eliminate non-tariff barriers to trade. Non-tariff barriers are an indicator by which the US assesses whether a trading partner is trading fairly with the US. Therefore, we will proactively resolve longstanding non-tariff barriers so that negotiations can proceed more smoothly. 5. We must resolve two issues that have been matters of longstanding concern to the US. One regards high-tech export controls, and the other regards illegal transshipment of dumped goods, otherwise referred to as “origin washing.” Strategy two: We must adopt a plan for supporting our industries. For industries that will be affected by the tariffs, and especially traditional industries as well as micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises, we will provide timely and needed support and assistance. Premier Cho Jung-tai (卓榮泰) and his administrative team recently announced a package of 20 specific measures designed to address nine areas. Moving forward, the support we provide to different industries will depend on how they are affected by the tariffs, will take into account the particular features of each industry, and will help each industry innovate, upgrade, and transform. Strategy three: We must adopt medium- and long-term economic development plans. At this point in time, our government must simultaneously adopt new strategies for economic and industrial development. This is also the fundamental path to solutions for future economic challenges. The government will proactively cooperate with friends and allies, develop a diverse range of markets, and achieve closer integration of entities in the upper, middle, and lower reaches of industrial supply chains. This course of action will make Taiwan’s industrial ecosystem more complete, and will help Taiwanese industries upgrade and transform. We must also make good use of the competitive advantages we possess in such areas as semiconductor manufacturing, integrated chip design, ICT, and smart manufacturing to build Taiwan into an AI island, and promote relevant applications for food, clothing, housing, and transportation, as well as military, security and surveillance, next-generation communications, and the medical and health and wellness industries as we advance toward a smarter, more sustainable, and more prosperous new Taiwan. Strategy four: “Taiwan plus one,” i.e., new “Taiwan plus the US” arrangements: While staying firmly rooted in Taiwan, our enterprises are expanding their global presence and marketing worldwide. This has been our national economic development strategy, and the most important aspect is maintaining a solid base here in Taiwan. We absolutely must maintain a solid footing, and cannot allow the present strife to cause us to waver. Therefore, our government will incentivize investments, carry out deregulation, and continue to improve Taiwan’s investment climate by actively resolving problems involving access to water, electricity, land, human resources, and professional talent. This will enable corporations to stay in Taiwan and continue investing here. In addition, we must also help the overseas manufacturing facilities of offshore Taiwanese businesses to make necessary adjustments to support our “Taiwan plus one” policy, in that our national economic development strategy will be adjusted as follows: to stay firmly rooted in Taiwan while expanding our global presence, strengthening US ties, and marketing worldwide. We intend to make use of the new state of supply chains to strengthen cooperation between Taiwanese and US industries, and gain further access to US markets. Strategy five: Launch industry listening tours: All industrial firms, regardless of sector or size, will be affected to some degree once the US reciprocal tariffs go into effect. The administrative teams led by myself and Premier Cho will hear out industry concerns so that we can quickly resolve problems and make sure policies meet actual needs. My fellow citizens, over the past half-century and more, Taiwan has been through two energy crises, the Asian financial crisis, the global financial crisis, and pandemics. We have been able to not only withstand one test after another, but even turn crises into opportunities. The Taiwanese economy has emerged from these crises stronger and more resilient than ever. As we face this latest challenge, the government and civil society will work hand in hand, and I hope that all parties in the legislature, both ruling and opposition, will support the measures that the Executive Yuan will take to open up a broader path for Taiwan’s economy. Let us join together and give it our all. Thank you.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
Agricultural trade between China and ASEAN countries strengthened
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
2nd phase of 137th edition of Canton Fair themed on quality home furnishings opens in Guangzhou
Source: IMF – News in Russian
April 23, 2025
Speakers:
Vitor Gaspar, Director, Fiscal Affairs Department
Era Dabla‑Norris, Deputy Director, Fiscal Affairs Department
Davide Furceri, Division Chief, Fiscal Affairs Department
Moderator: Tatiana Mossot, Moderator, Senior Communications Officer
The Moderator: Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening for our viewers around the world. I am Tatiana Mossot with the IMF Communications Department, and I will be your host for today’s press briefing on the Spring Meetings 2025 Fiscal Monitor named “Fiscal Policy Under Uncertainty.” I am pleased to introduce the Director of the IMF Fiscal Affairs Department, Vitor Gaspar. He is joined by Era Dabla‑Norris, Deputy Director of the Fiscal Affairs Department, and Davide Furceri, Division Chief of the Fiscal Affairs Department. Good morning, Vitor, Era, and Davide.
Before taking your questions, let me start our briefing by turning to Vitor for his opening remarks. Vitor, the floor is yours.
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: Good morning. Many thanks for your kind introduction. Thank you all for your interest in the Fiscal Monitor, covering fiscal policies around the world. Since the last Fiscal Monitor in October 2024, global economic prospects have significantly deteriorated and risks to the economic outlook are elevated and tilted to the downside. Uncertainty is very high, and confidence has been weakening. Financial markets have partially corrected, and financing conditions have tightened.
Global public debt is very high and rising. According to the WEO reference projection in 2025, it will rise above 95 percent of GDP. It is higher and growing faster than pre‑pandemic. It will be approaching 100 percent of GDP by the end of the decade, surpassing the pandemic peak, but global numbers hide a wide diversity across countries. In the figure, every bubble represents a country. The larger the bubble, the larger the country’s GDP. The figure shows debt levels on the vertical axis and debt growth on the horizontal axis compared to pre‑pandemic. The higher the bubble in the figure, the more debt has increased compared to 2019.
119 countries are above the horizontal axis. For these countries, public debt is higher than pre‑pandemic. The further to the right in the figure, the faster debt grows compared to pre‑pandemic trends. Bubbles as you can see are all over the chart. That illustrates a wide diversity across countries. Therefore, fiscal policies must vary in line with country‑specific factors and circumstances, but in the face of turbulent and threatening times ahead, resilience is needed everywhere. Countries should redouble efforts to keep their own fiscal house in order.
Let us zoom in on the top, the right top quadrant. Countries in the quadrant have public debt higher and rising faster. This group includes 59 countries. That is about one third of the 175 countries in the chart. But their economies represent 80 percent of world GDP. Their economic weight makes them the main drivers of global trends. You can see many large bubbles in this quadrant. No surprise. Most large economies, including the largest, are there.
Now, let us focus on the remaining two thirds of countries in the world. There are 116 countries in the group that represent about 20 percent of world GDP. In the chart that you are looking at, the blue line represents all countries except for the 59 that I have mentioned before. The two lines in the chart representing the world and representing the remaining 116 countries evolve similarly up to the year of the pandemic. After 2020, as you can see, the trends diverge. The two lines actually cross in 2023. For these 116 countries, aggregate public debt is now well below pandemic levels, but going forward, it is very flat, indicating a stabilization of public debt at high levels. But the distinctive feature of the current conjuncture is uncertainty. One must go beyond referenced projections.
In the words of the Managing Director, trade policy uncertainty is off the charts. Upside risk to public debt projections dominates the outlook. The October 2024 Fiscal Monitor introduced a novel tool to quantify the distribution of debt risks around the referenced projection. We call it public debt at risk. According to this tool, global public debt three years ahead would come at 117 percent of GDP in a severe adverse scenario.
Recent developments with sharpening, increasing, and persistent uncertainty, tightening financing conditions push public debt at risk even higher. In a fast-changing and perilous world, Ministers of Finance must act urgently and decisively. They face stark tradeoffs and painful choices. Policymakers should invest their political capital in building confidence and trust. That starts with keeping their own houses in order. That is especially important in a situation that tested the resilience of individual economies, not to mention the entire system. Putting the house in order involves three policy priorities.
First, fiscal policy should be part of overall stability‑oriented macroeconomic policies. Second, fiscal policy should in most countries aim at reducing public debt and rebuilding buffers to create space to respond to spending pressures and other economic shocks through a credible medium‑term framework. Third, fiscal policy should, together with other threshold policies, aim at improving potential growth, thereby easing policy tradeoffs. In these times of high uncertainty, fiscal policy must be an anchor for confidence and stability that can contribute to a competitive economy, delivering growth and prosperity for all.
Ministers of Finance must build trust, tax fairly, spend wisely and take the long view. My colleagues and I are ready to answer any questions that you may have.
The Moderator: Thank you, Vitor. We will now open the floor to your questions, but before we do that, a couple of ground rules, please. If you want to ask a question, please raise your hand first, wait until I call you and a colleague will give you the microphone. When you ask your questions, please identify yourself and the network you are working for. And for colleagues online, please ask your questions on Webex, and we will come to you.
QUESTION: According to the report, tariffs and trade tensions have increased uncertainty and risks to economic growth. How can affected countries manage the negative impact on public confidence and growth, especially considering the high level of public debt and financial challenges they are already facing?
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: Thank you very much for your question. That allows me to summarize again the top‑level message from the Fiscal Monitor. Global public debt, as you said, is high, rising, and we always emphasize it is also risky. It rose above $100 trillion in 2024, and that was a headline six months ago. In the IMF referenced projections, that will continue rising, approaching 100 percent of GDP by the end of the decade.
But what we emphasize most at this point in time is the unusually elevated degree of uncertainty. To repeat the quote from the Managing Director, “Trade policy uncertainty is literally off the charts.” There is, therefore, a sense of urgency in policymaking. According to our public‑debt‑at‑risk tool, our estimates for three years ahead point to debt at risk at 117 percent of GDP for the world, which is a level that has not been seen in many decades.
But even that extreme adverse scenario may be under‑estimating tail risks because trade and geoeconomic uncertainty has escalated, financing conditions tightened, financial market volatility is visible from headlines, and spending pressures have intensified further. So, in those conditions, the point about countries keeping their own houses in order is crucial, and that is instrumental to deliver resilience and sustained growth from a long‑term perspective.
The Moderator: Thank you, Vitor. As you may have seen, there are two chapters, the second one is on emerging markets. And I think Era and Davide; we have some questions for you too.
QUESTION: Given the current global economic slow‑down, what are the specific challenges and impacts faced by emerging and developing countries and what policy measures can be implemented to mitigate these effects?
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Let me start with what we see as some of the key sources of uncertainty that emerging market and developing economies are facing. Vitor had laid out some of the broader issues but let me highlight three. So, in addition to the fact that we see growth prospects being marked down across the board, and we see that emerging markets and developing economies could be impacted through trade, financial and commodity channels, let me highlight three specific risks. The first is escalating uncertainty about tariffs and associated policies. In the Fiscal Monitor, we find that geoeconomic uncertainty, in particular, an escalation of geoeconomic uncertainty actually can push up debt over the medium term by about 4.5 percentage points. For emerging market economies in particular, it could be as high as 6 percent of GDP.
Why is this the case? Because essentially, with higher geoeconomic uncertainty, that can dampen growth prospects, it lowers revenues because consumption production tends to fall. It also leads to higher spending, so as a result, fiscal positions deteriorate and debt increases. That is one important source of risks.
A second source of risks is more volatile financial conditions. In the U.S., for instance, or other systemically important economies can spillover into emerging market and developing economies. And it can do so by raising sovereign borrowing costs. So, our analysis in the Fiscal Monitor shows that at 100 basis point increase in U.S. nominal Treasury yields translates into 100 basis point increase in emerging market economies’ borrowing costs. And this lasts for several months.
A third source of risk is that we have seen that debt levels are high in many emerging markets and developing economies, so interest expenses are commensurately very high, and they are eating up a larger share of the budget. So, our analysis shows that 1 percentage point of GDP increase in interest expenses results in crowding out of other essential items within the budget, such as social spending and infrastructure investment. So, as Vitor pointed out, in this environment, it is very, very important for countries to put their own fiscal house in order.
What does that mean? Country specifics will vary, but what it really means is that countries need to think about putting in place a gradual fiscal adjustment within a credible medium‑term fiscal framework. For EMDEs, where tax revenues are low, they can mobilize additional revenues by expanding the tax base. They can eliminate energy subsidies and other types of subsidies that can be distortionary. They can find ways to reprioritize spending. And most importantly, they can think about the policies that are needed to boost growth because that really can help ease these fiscal tradeoffs.
QUESTION: My question is about energy subsidies and perhaps pension reforms, which are not related to emerging markets but pretty much the same problem. It is when the margin exists in many countries when you want to have some fiscal space. But in those many countries you have already social tensions that are quite high, so what are the possibilities for countries to make those reforms that are highly unpopular most of the time if they want to have this margin created?
Ms. Dabla‑Norris: Let me talk about energy subsidies and my colleague Davide can speak a little bit about pension reforms. As you correctly pointed out, countries need to reduce debt. They need to create fiscal space. And energy subsidies and pension reforms can be important reforms that countries can undertake to generate fiscal savings. So, when we look at energy subsidy reforms in particular, energy, they account for about 1.5 percent of GDP on average in emerging markets and developing economies. And reforming them can have tremendous benefits for the economy. So let me enumerate some of them.
First, it increases energy efficiency in the economy. Secondly, it generates fiscal savings that can then be used to increase other types of social spending and needed priority infrastructure investments. And finally, many of these subsidies tend to be highly regressive, so they do not necessarily benefit the poorest segment or the most vulnerable segments of society.
In our Fiscal Monitor Chapter 2, what we did is we developed a novel real‑time measure of public sentiment. This is the sentiment of households, civil society organizations, and other stakeholders to gauge how governments can leverage strategies in order to make these kinds of reforms acceptable. There are a number of things that we found that are specific to energy subsidy reforms that I would like to talk about.
The first is that we found that reforms that are—or changes that take place gradually have greater success of being implemented. To give you an example, Colombia very recently had an energy subsidy reform. They implemented it over a two‑year period, that was preannounced, so that people had time to adjust.
A second strategy that we found successful—to be successful in shaping the acceptability of these reforms is that there was timely implementation of accompanying measures. And countries that put in place accompanying measures to really protect and support the most vulnerable, countries that put in place measures up‑front and invested in social programs and social infrastructure that was very visible to the public had a greater chance of succeeding.
We also found that policies that were well‑communicated, that built consensus, that explained the tradeoffs to people had a much higher success of being accepted by the general public. For example, Morocco made it very clear that there was going to be a comprehensive communication strategy at the very beginning, at the very outset, and the message that was conveyed was that subsidies were a poor instrument for providing social support. A host of these strategies can be used by countries to implement these politically challenging reforms.
Mr. Davide Furceri: The chapter also deals with pension reforms. We know that in many countries, spending on pensions is quite high. Just to give you a couple of numbers, in the case of advanced economies, it is 8 percent of GDP; in emerging market, about four. This spending is projected to increase due to increasing life expectancy and retirement. Reforming the pension system is important to generate fiscal savings but also to sustain labor‑force participation, as well as employment.
Some of the key messages that we find in the chapter on reforms touch upon some of the issues that Era mentioned, gradual and timly of the reform. But for pension, what we find is that strategic communication and stakeholder engagement has been especially important. Indeed, there are cases of countries that have succeeded in implementing significant reform, for example, presenting an increasing retirement age as part of the reform that was trying to sustain adequate benefit levels. Or in some cases they were creating bipartisan commissions where they were engaging with stakeholders to hear their concerns and think about implementing the reform in the best way.
An important issue when we think about pension reform is strengthening financial literacy and making sure that various stakeholders will talk about the potential benefits and cost of various pension schemes. Thank you.
The Moderator: Very last one before we move to the U.S. and the other countries and regional and then we will move to other topics.
QUESTION: I still want to focus on Chapter 2 because we are talking about developing economies and public sentiment. Era, when you were talking, you talked about subsidies being discretionary, not making the budgets, you know, complete and all of that, but we also know for many developing countries and even frontier economies, they are under pressure to cut back energy subsidies to ease debt burdens, yet these same subsidies often help keep the lights on for millions of families, low‑income families and businesses. You talked about growth earlier on. So, without these low‑income businesses, how would you also get growth? How does the IMF suggest governments manage this delicate balance and enable these countries to rationalize subsidies while safeguarding energy subsidies and cushioning the most vulnerable without leaving them behind because we are torn between having to think that subsidies are really 100 percent bad, so I really wanted to comment on that.
Then on Nigeria, energy subsidy reforms that were seen have sparked protests and public frustrations, reflecting a top balance between fiscal responsibility and social equity. How do you think that Nigeria can navigate this difficult path and what specific measures can the IMF suggest ensuring that these reforms are fair, inclusive and accepted by the public. Thank you.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Let me talk in more detail about subsidies. Thank you for your question. These are challenging reforms to undertake. Why? Because they impact people’s, small firms’ pocketbooks immediately. An increase in energy prices as the government is moving towards cost recovery, pricing impacts pocketbooks immediately. This is a very tangible impact. Whereas the benefits that I spoke of, which are energy efficiency, the ability to reallocate fiscal savings take time to materialize. They are much more diffuse. Everyone benefits from those, but the pocket impact is felt immediately. This is why it is important as we note in our chapter, this is why it is important to have—for governments to think about a comprehensive strategy on how to implement these reforms. When you look at public sentiment across different sort of steps of these reforms, what we find that is really important is that countries that put in place compensatory mechanisms — whether this is cash transfers or more targeted transfers — really for those people who need it most have an easier time in carrying out these types of reforms. So in environments where the public does not trust the government, where there is weak accountability, doing these things up‑front in a very visible way, increasing support for social programs makes it very tangible to the public that the government is going to be doing this, and it is going to be accountable, if you will, for the fiscal savings that will be generated.
QUESTION: Good morning. As risks for the fiscal outlook have intensified and debt levels may rise even further, as stated in the Fiscal Monitor, how worried are you about any sort of global debt crisis or regional crises that can appear, considering slower growth and new spending pressures on countries?
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: As you heard yesterday, recession and crisis more than an individual nature are not in our reference projections, although, of course, part of the role of the Fiscal Monitor is precisely to systemically look at risks and vulnerabilities, and our public‑debt‑at‑risk tool is one of the instruments to do exactly that.
Now, one point which I believe is very important is that precisely because risks and uncertainty are so elevated right now, there is a sense of urgency in policy action. Why? Because there is still time to adopt policies that improve resilience, and there is still time to think through what are the most relevant vulnerability scenarios that apply to individual countries, to regions, or even to broader systems. And it is very important to do that result systemically so that one is ready if and when a crisis comes. Our experience during the pandemic showed that countries that had easy access to financial markets and ample fiscal space did substantially better than others at managing the shocks associated with the pandemic.
The Moderator: Thank you. We will get back to this part of the room.
QUESTION: My question is that you just mentioned the public debt remains very elevated and also this would cause fiscal space to continue to narrow down in many countries, including some major economies. So, what consequence will this bring to the world global economy if this kind of situation continues to develop?
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: So I think that the answer that I gave to the question just now applies, given these elevated risks and uncertainties, it is crucial that countries focus on keeping their own house in order since situations around the world are so diverse, as Era emphasized, that will imply different policies in different countries. But the crucial thing is that in a situation that is as fast changing as the one we are facing now and where risks and uncertainties are so elevated, there is an urgency in acting to improve fiscal space, build buffers, and, therefore, be in a position to ensure resilience and sustain growth.
The Moderator: Thank you. We will get back to this part of the room. The gentleman with the red shirt, please.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. Allow me to back‑pedal to the EMDEs. The Fiscal Monitor speaks about the need to widen the tax base. A number of frontier market economies have been rolling out significant economic present stacks and minimum top‑up tax in line with the Pillar 1 and Pillar 2. But now this puts them in the cross‑hairs with the Trump administration, and many are now wondering whether they should be rolling back. So which pathway does the Fund see sustainable, considering many are looking at preferential access to the American market?
Mr. Davide Furceri: Regarding the tax, I think it is important to make three important points. The first is that in the current situation where many emerging market and developing countries are characterized by three factors, one, foreign aid is declining; second, we have seen that increasing financial volatility can increase interest rates in these countries. This is in a situation where interest rates over revenue for many countries is about 10 percent of GDP. Third, [volatile] financial conditions also implies that less flows will go to these countries. The point that we make in the Fiscal Monitor is that revenue and revenue mobilization can be a stable source for financing significant spending for social benefit or public investment. How we should strengthen revenue mobilization, typically there are three sorts of arrows that you can go. One is expanding the tax base. Second, eliminate tax exemptions. Third, which is also important, and that the IMF does a lot of work in terms of capacity development is strengthening tax administrations. When we think about the tax strategy, we have to consider all of these three elements, and for many emerging markets and developing countries, there are significant potential tax gains that can be achieved.
The Moderator: Yes, please.
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: Just one word of addition. Davide correctly pointed out these three very important elements, broadening the tax base, dealing with tax expenditures and strengthening revenue administration. Yesterday I participated in a high‑level panel precisely on the mobilization of resources, and these three elements were repeated by the Ministers of Pakistan, Paraguay and Rwanda, and they found this frame relevant in their own experience of trying to improve the capacity of their countries to mobilize revenues.
The Moderator: We have two questions online. I think this one will be for you, Era, about Spain. Yesterday they revised upwards the growth of Spain and have already highlighted the good performance of the Spanish economy. What should this country do with these good growth results regarding its fiscal policies in the short and medium term? And we will have another one for South Africa online.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Thank you for the question. Given Spain’s relatively strong fiscal position as well as economic position, there is scope now to front‑load some of the adjustment that they were thinking about because public debt levels in Spain still remain very high, although they have come down from the pandemic peaks. They still remain very high. This would be really important to put debt firmly down on a downward trajectory.
Accumulative adjustment of about 3 percent of GDP over the next three years, say 2025 to 2029, similar to the one that was envisaged in terms of magnitude by the authorities but more frontloaded, would help achieve the goal. Now, as Vitor has pointed out, we are encouraging countries to bring debt down for a number of reasons. This is important because you want to reduce debt risks. This is important because countries should either expand or replenish the buffers that were diminished in the wake of the pandemic and also because of ongoing uncertainties. Finally, because countries will need—countries like Spain will need to spend on other areas, population aging, climate, defense and such.
The Moderator: Just before we go to South Africa, any other European question? One time, two time, no European question in the room. OK.
QUESTION: Thank you. The question on South Africa but also on the broader region: On South Africa, the IMF is quite significantly more pessimistic on the fiscal trajectory than our own government, which sees debt stabilizing, whereas the IMF sees it rising close to 90 percent of GDP at the end of the decade. Why are you so much more pessimistic of the authorities’ promised consolidation? But also on the region, sub‑Saharan Africa more broadly, how do you see the impact of what is happening globally on the region’s ability to borrow and particularly to borrow in international markets, and given a lot of the countries in the region are in debt distress or close to debt distress, what impact will that have on the economies of the sub‑Saharan Africa? Thank you.
The Moderator: Thank you very much.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Thank you very much. Briefly on South Africa, the general government deficit in South Africa was about 6 percent of GDP in 2024. We project the fiscal deficit in 2025, although this is subject to considerable—all projections are subject to considerable uncertainties at this juncture to be around 6.6 percent of GDP. This is mainly driven by higher spending. Some of the differences stem from the fact that our projections are based on much more conservative assumptions regarding the buoyancy of the tax system, as well as the extent of primary spending compression that can be undertaken. So that really accounts for differences in projections between the two countries and also the path of debt going forward. Let me turn it over to Davide.
Mr. Davide Furceri: Yes, more broadly and on financing costs for sub‑Saharan African regions, let me point out two factors. The first is that, of course, we have seen interest rates rising. So, this increasing interest rate in many countries, including South Africa, is basically driven by two factors. You have sort of an interest rate in main advanced economies that has been on a rising trend. On the positive side, in many countries, especially those with better fiscal positions, you actually have seen spreads, so the difference between the domestic interest rate and the foreign interest rate declines. However, and this is something that we point out in the Fiscal Monitor, that increased risk, increase of risk of uncertainty, financial market volatility, can turn things around. In other words, we see that increasing financial market volatility globally can lead to an increase in spreads.
The second point is that one part we have seen for many low‑income countries since the pandemic is they are relying much more on domestic issuance of debt rather than on the foreign market. This is on one hand sort of offset some of the challenges like to the global environment but also increase some sort of domestic vulnerability, because sometimes the interest rates rise. There are things that are important to think about this strategy. But definitely, as we mentioned, interest rate is a source of rising in terms of revenue is a source of concern. Let me make the point again that we made, I think strengthening fiscal buffers, revenue mobilization are important elements to reduce — to have this trend to decline.
The Moderator: Thank you. I believe we received some questions for Latin America and, yes, there are some reporters in the room. Yes, please, the lady in the third row here.
QUESTION: Thank you. You already talked about emerging markets, but focusing on Latin America, I want to know which one—you already have talked about it too, but which one is the biggest fiscal risk and what should economies in Latin America should be thinking about doing in terms of growing and accepting new investment, for example, to confront the situation abroad? Thank you.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Thank you for your question. Many of the risks that other emerging market economies face, countries in Latin America obviously also face, we have already talked at length about that. But I am going to talk about a few things that are specific to many of the countries in Latin America. So, there is two challenges that limit fiscal flexibility in Latin America. The first is that there are spending rigidities. What I mean by that is there is a lot of amounts of spending that is mandatory, on pensions, on wages, on transfers. This leaves very little room for fiscal flexibility.
At the same time, like many other emerging markets and developing economies, spending pressures are on the rise. There are growing demands for social services, for infrastructure, for adopting to climate change, and all of these are putting pressures on the budget. Now, when you look at what has happened since the pandemic, countries have made ambitious plans to consolidate their budget. There have been ambitious announcements of fiscal consolidation plans, but at the same time expenditure increases have outpaced revenue gains. So, for many countries in the region, we see debt levels continuing to rise. And the challenge here is that we are in a world with greater uncertainty than we were even six months ago. So, it is really important for countries in the region to implement at a minimum the announced fiscal consolidation plan and to do this within credible medium‑term frameworks. Many countries in Latin America and the Caribbean region have fiscal rules. So to implement these rules, to spend efficiently, to think about the types of fiscal reforms that are needed, whether it is revenue mobilization in countries where revenue‑to‑GDP ratios are low, whether it is spending prioritization or reprioritization, to create the room that is needed for priority investments and social spending and infrastructure and such.
The Moderator: Thank you. One last question.
QUESTION: I am from Thailand. I want to ask about the overall trend of the public debt, especially for the ASEAN 5. It would be great if you could mention specifically on Thailand.
The Moderator: I think we had the Nigeria question to answer too, and we will close there. Thank you.
Mr. Davide Furceri: Let me start with Nigeria. So, Nigeria managed to do a very difficult reform that was important to deliver fiscal savings. The authorities also scaled up transfers, technical transfers. What we think there is, what is important to act on two pillars. One is to generate additional fiscal savings. We mentioned revenue mobilization. To really scale up spending on social protection, spending on investment, in a way as was mentioned, many countries, they need to spend, and there I want to go back to Vitor’s first remarks. We encourage countries to spend very wisely. Strengthening prioritization in terms of spending, strengthening the efficiency of spending is important. Final important message we would like to give for Nigeria but also for other countries is that fiscal institutions are very important. Having a medium‑term fiscal framework, Public Financial Management are key important because on the one hand they try to help the fiscal anchor, so they set apart for the fiscal adjustment, but also reduce the fiscal uncertainty per se. So as Vitor mentioned, we want the fiscal to be a source of stability and not a source of uncertainty, and that is where fiscal institutions have an important role to play.
The Moderator: Thank you. Very quickly, Era.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: On ASEAN, there is a huge variation in fiscal positions across the region. On average, the ASEAN region debt‑to‑GDP ratios are lower than they are in other emerging market and developing economies. That said, in Thailand, relative to the other countries in ASEAN, debt levels are slightly more elevated, over 60 percent of GDP. Our advice has been that fiscal policy should be prudent and parsimonious, given all the reasons we have discussed over the course of this morning. So, measures that are needed to smooth adjustment in light of higher tariffs should be thought of in a wise way, temporary, targeted measures in the context of tariff uncertainty, and ongoing consolidation plans implemented to bring debt down in a sustainable manner.
The Moderator: Thank you very much
PRESS OFFICER: Tatiana Mossot
Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org
https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/04/24/tr-042325-fm-press-briefing
Source: International Monetary Fund
April 23, 2025
Speakers:
Vitor Gaspar, Director, Fiscal Affairs Department
Era Dabla‑Norris, Deputy Director, Fiscal Affairs Department
Davide Furceri, Division Chief, Fiscal Affairs Department
Moderator: Tatiana Mossot, Moderator, Senior Communications Officer
The Moderator: Good morning, good afternoon, and good evening for our viewers around the world. I am Tatiana Mossot with the IMF Communications Department, and I will be your host for today’s press briefing on the Spring Meetings 2025 Fiscal Monitor named “Fiscal Policy Under Uncertainty.” I am pleased to introduce the Director of the IMF Fiscal Affairs Department, Vitor Gaspar. He is joined by Era Dabla‑Norris, Deputy Director of the Fiscal Affairs Department, and Davide Furceri, Division Chief of the Fiscal Affairs Department. Good morning, Vitor, Era, and Davide.
Before taking your questions, let me start our briefing by turning to Vitor for his opening remarks. Vitor, the floor is yours.
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: Good morning. Many thanks for your kind introduction. Thank you all for your interest in the Fiscal Monitor, covering fiscal policies around the world. Since the last Fiscal Monitor in October 2024, global economic prospects have significantly deteriorated and risks to the economic outlook are elevated and tilted to the downside. Uncertainty is very high, and confidence has been weakening. Financial markets have partially corrected, and financing conditions have tightened.
Global public debt is very high and rising. According to the WEO reference projection in 2025, it will rise above 95 percent of GDP. It is higher and growing faster than pre‑pandemic. It will be approaching 100 percent of GDP by the end of the decade, surpassing the pandemic peak, but global numbers hide a wide diversity across countries. In the figure, every bubble represents a country. The larger the bubble, the larger the country’s GDP. The figure shows debt levels on the vertical axis and debt growth on the horizontal axis compared to pre‑pandemic. The higher the bubble in the figure, the more debt has increased compared to 2019.
119 countries are above the horizontal axis. For these countries, public debt is higher than pre‑pandemic. The further to the right in the figure, the faster debt grows compared to pre‑pandemic trends. Bubbles as you can see are all over the chart. That illustrates a wide diversity across countries. Therefore, fiscal policies must vary in line with country‑specific factors and circumstances, but in the face of turbulent and threatening times ahead, resilience is needed everywhere. Countries should redouble efforts to keep their own fiscal house in order.
Let us zoom in on the top, the right top quadrant. Countries in the quadrant have public debt higher and rising faster. This group includes 59 countries. That is about one third of the 175 countries in the chart. But their economies represent 80 percent of world GDP. Their economic weight makes them the main drivers of global trends. You can see many large bubbles in this quadrant. No surprise. Most large economies, including the largest, are there.
Now, let us focus on the remaining two thirds of countries in the world. There are 116 countries in the group that represent about 20 percent of world GDP. In the chart that you are looking at, the blue line represents all countries except for the 59 that I have mentioned before. The two lines in the chart representing the world and representing the remaining 116 countries evolve similarly up to the year of the pandemic. After 2020, as you can see, the trends diverge. The two lines actually cross in 2023. For these 116 countries, aggregate public debt is now well below pandemic levels, but going forward, it is very flat, indicating a stabilization of public debt at high levels. But the distinctive feature of the current conjuncture is uncertainty. One must go beyond referenced projections.
In the words of the Managing Director, trade policy uncertainty is off the charts. Upside risk to public debt projections dominates the outlook. The October 2024 Fiscal Monitor introduced a novel tool to quantify the distribution of debt risks around the referenced projection. We call it public debt at risk. According to this tool, global public debt three years ahead would come at 117 percent of GDP in a severe adverse scenario.
Recent developments with sharpening, increasing, and persistent uncertainty, tightening financing conditions push public debt at risk even higher. In a fast-changing and perilous world, Ministers of Finance must act urgently and decisively. They face stark tradeoffs and painful choices. Policymakers should invest their political capital in building confidence and trust. That starts with keeping their own houses in order. That is especially important in a situation that tested the resilience of individual economies, not to mention the entire system. Putting the house in order involves three policy priorities.
First, fiscal policy should be part of overall stability‑oriented macroeconomic policies. Second, fiscal policy should in most countries aim at reducing public debt and rebuilding buffers to create space to respond to spending pressures and other economic shocks through a credible medium‑term framework. Third, fiscal policy should, together with other threshold policies, aim at improving potential growth, thereby easing policy tradeoffs. In these times of high uncertainty, fiscal policy must be an anchor for confidence and stability that can contribute to a competitive economy, delivering growth and prosperity for all.
Ministers of Finance must build trust, tax fairly, spend wisely and take the long view. My colleagues and I are ready to answer any questions that you may have.
The Moderator: Thank you, Vitor. We will now open the floor to your questions, but before we do that, a couple of ground rules, please. If you want to ask a question, please raise your hand first, wait until I call you and a colleague will give you the microphone. When you ask your questions, please identify yourself and the network you are working for. And for colleagues online, please ask your questions on Webex, and we will come to you.
QUESTION: According to the report, tariffs and trade tensions have increased uncertainty and risks to economic growth. How can affected countries manage the negative impact on public confidence and growth, especially considering the high level of public debt and financial challenges they are already facing?
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: Thank you very much for your question. That allows me to summarize again the top‑level message from the Fiscal Monitor. Global public debt, as you said, is high, rising, and we always emphasize it is also risky. It rose above $100 trillion in 2024, and that was a headline six months ago. In the IMF referenced projections, that will continue rising, approaching 100 percent of GDP by the end of the decade.
But what we emphasize most at this point in time is the unusually elevated degree of uncertainty. To repeat the quote from the Managing Director, “Trade policy uncertainty is literally off the charts.” There is, therefore, a sense of urgency in policymaking. According to our public‑debt‑at‑risk tool, our estimates for three years ahead point to debt at risk at 117 percent of GDP for the world, which is a level that has not been seen in many decades.
But even that extreme adverse scenario may be under‑estimating tail risks because trade and geoeconomic uncertainty has escalated, financing conditions tightened, financial market volatility is visible from headlines, and spending pressures have intensified further. So, in those conditions, the point about countries keeping their own houses in order is crucial, and that is instrumental to deliver resilience and sustained growth from a long‑term perspective.
The Moderator: Thank you, Vitor. As you may have seen, there are two chapters, the second one is on emerging markets. And I think Era and Davide; we have some questions for you too.
QUESTION: Given the current global economic slow‑down, what are the specific challenges and impacts faced by emerging and developing countries and what policy measures can be implemented to mitigate these effects?
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Let me start with what we see as some of the key sources of uncertainty that emerging market and developing economies are facing. Vitor had laid out some of the broader issues but let me highlight three. So, in addition to the fact that we see growth prospects being marked down across the board, and we see that emerging markets and developing economies could be impacted through trade, financial and commodity channels, let me highlight three specific risks. The first is escalating uncertainty about tariffs and associated policies. In the Fiscal Monitor, we find that geoeconomic uncertainty, in particular, an escalation of geoeconomic uncertainty actually can push up debt over the medium term by about 4.5 percentage points. For emerging market economies in particular, it could be as high as 6 percent of GDP.
Why is this the case? Because essentially, with higher geoeconomic uncertainty, that can dampen growth prospects, it lowers revenues because consumption production tends to fall. It also leads to higher spending, so as a result, fiscal positions deteriorate and debt increases. That is one important source of risks.
A second source of risks is more volatile financial conditions. In the U.S., for instance, or other systemically important economies can spillover into emerging market and developing economies. And it can do so by raising sovereign borrowing costs. So, our analysis in the Fiscal Monitor shows that at 100 basis point increase in U.S. nominal Treasury yields translates into 100 basis point increase in emerging market economies’ borrowing costs. And this lasts for several months.
A third source of risk is that we have seen that debt levels are high in many emerging markets and developing economies, so interest expenses are commensurately very high, and they are eating up a larger share of the budget. So, our analysis shows that 1 percentage point of GDP increase in interest expenses results in crowding out of other essential items within the budget, such as social spending and infrastructure investment. So, as Vitor pointed out, in this environment, it is very, very important for countries to put their own fiscal house in order.
What does that mean? Country specifics will vary, but what it really means is that countries need to think about putting in place a gradual fiscal adjustment within a credible medium‑term fiscal framework. For EMDEs, where tax revenues are low, they can mobilize additional revenues by expanding the tax base. They can eliminate energy subsidies and other types of subsidies that can be distortionary. They can find ways to reprioritize spending. And most importantly, they can think about the policies that are needed to boost growth because that really can help ease these fiscal tradeoffs.
QUESTION: My question is about energy subsidies and perhaps pension reforms, which are not related to emerging markets but pretty much the same problem. It is when the margin exists in many countries when you want to have some fiscal space. But in those many countries you have already social tensions that are quite high, so what are the possibilities for countries to make those reforms that are highly unpopular most of the time if they want to have this margin created?
Ms. Dabla‑Norris: Let me talk about energy subsidies and my colleague Davide can speak a little bit about pension reforms. As you correctly pointed out, countries need to reduce debt. They need to create fiscal space. And energy subsidies and pension reforms can be important reforms that countries can undertake to generate fiscal savings. So, when we look at energy subsidy reforms in particular, energy, they account for about 1.5 percent of GDP on average in emerging markets and developing economies. And reforming them can have tremendous benefits for the economy. So let me enumerate some of them.
First, it increases energy efficiency in the economy. Secondly, it generates fiscal savings that can then be used to increase other types of social spending and needed priority infrastructure investments. And finally, many of these subsidies tend to be highly regressive, so they do not necessarily benefit the poorest segment or the most vulnerable segments of society.
In our Fiscal Monitor Chapter 2, what we did is we developed a novel real‑time measure of public sentiment. This is the sentiment of households, civil society organizations, and other stakeholders to gauge how governments can leverage strategies in order to make these kinds of reforms acceptable. There are a number of things that we found that are specific to energy subsidy reforms that I would like to talk about.
The first is that we found that reforms that are—or changes that take place gradually have greater success of being implemented. To give you an example, Colombia very recently had an energy subsidy reform. They implemented it over a two‑year period, that was preannounced, so that people had time to adjust.
A second strategy that we found successful—to be successful in shaping the acceptability of these reforms is that there was timely implementation of accompanying measures. And countries that put in place accompanying measures to really protect and support the most vulnerable, countries that put in place measures up‑front and invested in social programs and social infrastructure that was very visible to the public had a greater chance of succeeding.
We also found that policies that were well‑communicated, that built consensus, that explained the tradeoffs to people had a much higher success of being accepted by the general public. For example, Morocco made it very clear that there was going to be a comprehensive communication strategy at the very beginning, at the very outset, and the message that was conveyed was that subsidies were a poor instrument for providing social support. A host of these strategies can be used by countries to implement these politically challenging reforms.
Mr. Davide Furceri: The chapter also deals with pension reforms. We know that in many countries, spending on pensions is quite high. Just to give you a couple of numbers, in the case of advanced economies, it is 8 percent of GDP; in emerging market, about four. This spending is projected to increase due to increasing life expectancy and retirement. Reforming the pension system is important to generate fiscal savings but also to sustain labor‑force participation, as well as employment.
Some of the key messages that we find in the chapter on reforms touch upon some of the issues that Era mentioned, gradual and timly of the reform. But for pension, what we find is that strategic communication and stakeholder engagement has been especially important. Indeed, there are cases of countries that have succeeded in implementing significant reform, for example, presenting an increasing retirement age as part of the reform that was trying to sustain adequate benefit levels. Or in some cases they were creating bipartisan commissions where they were engaging with stakeholders to hear their concerns and think about implementing the reform in the best way.
An important issue when we think about pension reform is strengthening financial literacy and making sure that various stakeholders will talk about the potential benefits and cost of various pension schemes. Thank you.
The Moderator: Very last one before we move to the U.S. and the other countries and regional and then we will move to other topics.
QUESTION: I still want to focus on Chapter 2 because we are talking about developing economies and public sentiment. Era, when you were talking, you talked about subsidies being discretionary, not making the budgets, you know, complete and all of that, but we also know for many developing countries and even frontier economies, they are under pressure to cut back energy subsidies to ease debt burdens, yet these same subsidies often help keep the lights on for millions of families, low‑income families and businesses. You talked about growth earlier on. So, without these low‑income businesses, how would you also get growth? How does the IMF suggest governments manage this delicate balance and enable these countries to rationalize subsidies while safeguarding energy subsidies and cushioning the most vulnerable without leaving them behind because we are torn between having to think that subsidies are really 100 percent bad, so I really wanted to comment on that.
Then on Nigeria, energy subsidy reforms that were seen have sparked protests and public frustrations, reflecting a top balance between fiscal responsibility and social equity. How do you think that Nigeria can navigate this difficult path and what specific measures can the IMF suggest ensuring that these reforms are fair, inclusive and accepted by the public. Thank you.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Let me talk in more detail about subsidies. Thank you for your question. These are challenging reforms to undertake. Why? Because they impact people’s, small firms’ pocketbooks immediately. An increase in energy prices as the government is moving towards cost recovery, pricing impacts pocketbooks immediately. This is a very tangible impact. Whereas the benefits that I spoke of, which are energy efficiency, the ability to reallocate fiscal savings take time to materialize. They are much more diffuse. Everyone benefits from those, but the pocket impact is felt immediately. This is why it is important as we note in our chapter, this is why it is important to have—for governments to think about a comprehensive strategy on how to implement these reforms. When you look at public sentiment across different sort of steps of these reforms, what we find that is really important is that countries that put in place compensatory mechanisms — whether this is cash transfers or more targeted transfers — really for those people who need it most have an easier time in carrying out these types of reforms. So in environments where the public does not trust the government, where there is weak accountability, doing these things up‑front in a very visible way, increasing support for social programs makes it very tangible to the public that the government is going to be doing this, and it is going to be accountable, if you will, for the fiscal savings that will be generated.
QUESTION: Good morning. As risks for the fiscal outlook have intensified and debt levels may rise even further, as stated in the Fiscal Monitor, how worried are you about any sort of global debt crisis or regional crises that can appear, considering slower growth and new spending pressures on countries?
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: As you heard yesterday, recession and crisis more than an individual nature are not in our reference projections, although, of course, part of the role of the Fiscal Monitor is precisely to systemically look at risks and vulnerabilities, and our public‑debt‑at‑risk tool is one of the instruments to do exactly that.
Now, one point which I believe is very important is that precisely because risks and uncertainty are so elevated right now, there is a sense of urgency in policy action. Why? Because there is still time to adopt policies that improve resilience, and there is still time to think through what are the most relevant vulnerability scenarios that apply to individual countries, to regions, or even to broader systems. And it is very important to do that result systemically so that one is ready if and when a crisis comes. Our experience during the pandemic showed that countries that had easy access to financial markets and ample fiscal space did substantially better than others at managing the shocks associated with the pandemic.
The Moderator: Thank you. We will get back to this part of the room.
QUESTION: My question is that you just mentioned the public debt remains very elevated and also this would cause fiscal space to continue to narrow down in many countries, including some major economies. So, what consequence will this bring to the world global economy if this kind of situation continues to develop?
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: So I think that the answer that I gave to the question just now applies, given these elevated risks and uncertainties, it is crucial that countries focus on keeping their own house in order since situations around the world are so diverse, as Era emphasized, that will imply different policies in different countries. But the crucial thing is that in a situation that is as fast changing as the one we are facing now and where risks and uncertainties are so elevated, there is an urgency in acting to improve fiscal space, build buffers, and, therefore, be in a position to ensure resilience and sustain growth.
The Moderator: Thank you. We will get back to this part of the room. The gentleman with the red shirt, please.
QUESTION: Thank you very much. Allow me to back‑pedal to the EMDEs. The Fiscal Monitor speaks about the need to widen the tax base. A number of frontier market economies have been rolling out significant economic present stacks and minimum top‑up tax in line with the Pillar 1 and Pillar 2. But now this puts them in the cross‑hairs with the Trump administration, and many are now wondering whether they should be rolling back. So which pathway does the Fund see sustainable, considering many are looking at preferential access to the American market?
Mr. Davide Furceri: Regarding the tax, I think it is important to make three important points. The first is that in the current situation where many emerging market and developing countries are characterized by three factors, one, foreign aid is declining; second, we have seen that increasing financial volatility can increase interest rates in these countries. This is in a situation where interest rates over revenue for many countries is about 10 percent of GDP. Third, [volatile] financial conditions also implies that less flows will go to these countries. The point that we make in the Fiscal Monitor is that revenue and revenue mobilization can be a stable source for financing significant spending for social benefit or public investment. How we should strengthen revenue mobilization, typically there are three sorts of arrows that you can go. One is expanding the tax base. Second, eliminate tax exemptions. Third, which is also important, and that the IMF does a lot of work in terms of capacity development is strengthening tax administrations. When we think about the tax strategy, we have to consider all of these three elements, and for many emerging markets and developing countries, there are significant potential tax gains that can be achieved.
The Moderator: Yes, please.
Mr. Vitor Gaspar: Just one word of addition. Davide correctly pointed out these three very important elements, broadening the tax base, dealing with tax expenditures and strengthening revenue administration. Yesterday I participated in a high‑level panel precisely on the mobilization of resources, and these three elements were repeated by the Ministers of Pakistan, Paraguay and Rwanda, and they found this frame relevant in their own experience of trying to improve the capacity of their countries to mobilize revenues.
The Moderator: We have two questions online. I think this one will be for you, Era, about Spain. Yesterday they revised upwards the growth of Spain and have already highlighted the good performance of the Spanish economy. What should this country do with these good growth results regarding its fiscal policies in the short and medium term? And we will have another one for South Africa online.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Thank you for the question. Given Spain’s relatively strong fiscal position as well as economic position, there is scope now to front‑load some of the adjustment that they were thinking about because public debt levels in Spain still remain very high, although they have come down from the pandemic peaks. They still remain very high. This would be really important to put debt firmly down on a downward trajectory.
Accumulative adjustment of about 3 percent of GDP over the next three years, say 2025 to 2029, similar to the one that was envisaged in terms of magnitude by the authorities but more frontloaded, would help achieve the goal. Now, as Vitor has pointed out, we are encouraging countries to bring debt down for a number of reasons. This is important because you want to reduce debt risks. This is important because countries should either expand or replenish the buffers that were diminished in the wake of the pandemic and also because of ongoing uncertainties. Finally, because countries will need—countries like Spain will need to spend on other areas, population aging, climate, defense and such.
The Moderator: Just before we go to South Africa, any other European question? One time, two time, no European question in the room. OK.
QUESTION: Thank you. The question on South Africa but also on the broader region: On South Africa, the IMF is quite significantly more pessimistic on the fiscal trajectory than our own government, which sees debt stabilizing, whereas the IMF sees it rising close to 90 percent of GDP at the end of the decade. Why are you so much more pessimistic of the authorities’ promised consolidation? But also on the region, sub‑Saharan Africa more broadly, how do you see the impact of what is happening globally on the region’s ability to borrow and particularly to borrow in international markets, and given a lot of the countries in the region are in debt distress or close to debt distress, what impact will that have on the economies of the sub‑Saharan Africa? Thank you.
The Moderator: Thank you very much.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Thank you very much. Briefly on South Africa, the general government deficit in South Africa was about 6 percent of GDP in 2024. We project the fiscal deficit in 2025, although this is subject to considerable—all projections are subject to considerable uncertainties at this juncture to be around 6.6 percent of GDP. This is mainly driven by higher spending. Some of the differences stem from the fact that our projections are based on much more conservative assumptions regarding the buoyancy of the tax system, as well as the extent of primary spending compression that can be undertaken. So that really accounts for differences in projections between the two countries and also the path of debt going forward. Let me turn it over to Davide.
Mr. Davide Furceri: Yes, more broadly and on financing costs for sub‑Saharan African regions, let me point out two factors. The first is that, of course, we have seen interest rates rising. So, this increasing interest rate in many countries, including South Africa, is basically driven by two factors. You have sort of an interest rate in main advanced economies that has been on a rising trend. On the positive side, in many countries, especially those with better fiscal positions, you actually have seen spreads, so the difference between the domestic interest rate and the foreign interest rate declines. However, and this is something that we point out in the Fiscal Monitor, that increased risk, increase of risk of uncertainty, financial market volatility, can turn things around. In other words, we see that increasing financial market volatility globally can lead to an increase in spreads.
The second point is that one part we have seen for many low‑income countries since the pandemic is they are relying much more on domestic issuance of debt rather than on the foreign market. This is on one hand sort of offset some of the challenges like to the global environment but also increase some sort of domestic vulnerability, because sometimes the interest rates rise. There are things that are important to think about this strategy. But definitely, as we mentioned, interest rate is a source of rising in terms of revenue is a source of concern. Let me make the point again that we made, I think strengthening fiscal buffers, revenue mobilization are important elements to reduce — to have this trend to decline.
The Moderator: Thank you. I believe we received some questions for Latin America and, yes, there are some reporters in the room. Yes, please, the lady in the third row here.
QUESTION: Thank you. You already talked about emerging markets, but focusing on Latin America, I want to know which one—you already have talked about it too, but which one is the biggest fiscal risk and what should economies in Latin America should be thinking about doing in terms of growing and accepting new investment, for example, to confront the situation abroad? Thank you.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: Thank you for your question. Many of the risks that other emerging market economies face, countries in Latin America obviously also face, we have already talked at length about that. But I am going to talk about a few things that are specific to many of the countries in Latin America. So, there is two challenges that limit fiscal flexibility in Latin America. The first is that there are spending rigidities. What I mean by that is there is a lot of amounts of spending that is mandatory, on pensions, on wages, on transfers. This leaves very little room for fiscal flexibility.
At the same time, like many other emerging markets and developing economies, spending pressures are on the rise. There are growing demands for social services, for infrastructure, for adopting to climate change, and all of these are putting pressures on the budget. Now, when you look at what has happened since the pandemic, countries have made ambitious plans to consolidate their budget. There have been ambitious announcements of fiscal consolidation plans, but at the same time expenditure increases have outpaced revenue gains. So, for many countries in the region, we see debt levels continuing to rise. And the challenge here is that we are in a world with greater uncertainty than we were even six months ago. So, it is really important for countries in the region to implement at a minimum the announced fiscal consolidation plan and to do this within credible medium‑term frameworks. Many countries in Latin America and the Caribbean region have fiscal rules. So to implement these rules, to spend efficiently, to think about the types of fiscal reforms that are needed, whether it is revenue mobilization in countries where revenue‑to‑GDP ratios are low, whether it is spending prioritization or reprioritization, to create the room that is needed for priority investments and social spending and infrastructure and such.
The Moderator: Thank you. One last question.
QUESTION: I am from Thailand. I want to ask about the overall trend of the public debt, especially for the ASEAN 5. It would be great if you could mention specifically on Thailand.
The Moderator: I think we had the Nigeria question to answer too, and we will close there. Thank you.
Mr. Davide Furceri: Let me start with Nigeria. So, Nigeria managed to do a very difficult reform that was important to deliver fiscal savings. The authorities also scaled up transfers, technical transfers. What we think there is, what is important to act on two pillars. One is to generate additional fiscal savings. We mentioned revenue mobilization. To really scale up spending on social protection, spending on investment, in a way as was mentioned, many countries, they need to spend, and there I want to go back to Vitor’s first remarks. We encourage countries to spend very wisely. Strengthening prioritization in terms of spending, strengthening the efficiency of spending is important. Final important message we would like to give for Nigeria but also for other countries is that fiscal institutions are very important. Having a medium‑term fiscal framework, Public Financial Management are key important because on the one hand they try to help the fiscal anchor, so they set apart for the fiscal adjustment, but also reduce the fiscal uncertainty per se. So as Vitor mentioned, we want the fiscal to be a source of stability and not a source of uncertainty, and that is where fiscal institutions have an important role to play.
The Moderator: Thank you. Very quickly, Era.
Ms. Era Dabla‑Norris: On ASEAN, there is a huge variation in fiscal positions across the region. On average, the ASEAN region debt‑to‑GDP ratios are lower than they are in other emerging market and developing economies. That said, in Thailand, relative to the other countries in ASEAN, debt levels are slightly more elevated, over 60 percent of GDP. Our advice has been that fiscal policy should be prudent and parsimonious, given all the reasons we have discussed over the course of this morning. So, measures that are needed to smooth adjustment in light of higher tariffs should be thought of in a wise way, temporary, targeted measures in the context of tariff uncertainty, and ongoing consolidation plans implemented to bring debt down in a sustainable manner.
The Moderator: Thank you very much
PRESS OFFICER: Tatiana Mossot
Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments
SMEs from across the UK will benefit from new government support to match them up with international buyers and markets.
SMEs from across the UK will benefit from new government support to match them up with international buyers and markets, to turbocharge UK exports and grow the economy as part of the Plan for Change.
The ‘Made in the UK, Sold to the World’ roadshows, kicking off today [24 April] in Blyth and taking place across all nations and regions of the UK, have been designed to directly connect international buyers with SME exporters ready to seize the opportunity to grow their businesses. Through these events, the Government is working to maximise international opportunities for UK businesses by highlighting tangible opportunities that exist in new markets.
Each event will be aligned to one of the eight key growth driving sectors outlined in Britain’s modern Industrial Strategy, channelling government support to sectors with the highest potential to create jobs, boost productivity and grow the economy. All of which will help deliver the Plan for Change to put more money in more working people’s pockets.
Highlighted sectors include clean energy, advanced manufacturing, technology, life sciences, digital and technology, and financial services.
Maximising the UK’s export potential is crucial to achieving our Plan for Change, by creating good jobs with high wages, raising productivity, and boosting the economy.
Through these roadshows, the government is focussing on supporting key growth sectors, making it quicker and easier for smaller businesses to connect with markets, grasp export opportunities and expand.
The focus of the first roadshow, taking place today, is exporting in the clean energy sector.
There will be 100 attendees at the event – made up of small businesses, trade bodies, and government representatives, as well as 30 Commercial Officers from UK embassies and consulates from around the world, and 97 buyers, all of whom will join the event virtually through pre-planned meetings.
The 97 buyers span 19 markets worldwide, from Argentina to Austria, Thailand, Turkey, Mexico, India, and the UAE.
All roadshow events will provide opportunities for delegates to meet with domestic and international Commercial Officers, who will be on hand to offer expert support and advice on specific products, markets, and export opportunities.
There will also be a designated advice zone for SMEs to learn about wider export support services offered by the Department for Business and Trade, as well as those provided by other public sectors partners like regional Growth Hubs, and trusted private sector providers like the Chambers of Commerce, Federation of Small Business, UKEF and MAKE UK.
A range of workshops and seminars on topical issues such as ‘conducting market research’ and ‘routes to market’ will take place throughout the day, led by the UK Export Academy. Several of these will feature DBT Export Champions who will speak of their own experiences in target markets.
From the Americas, Africa, Asia to Australasia, clean technologies are now established as one of the most important pillars of the global economy.
So as an Export Champion and a UK business developing innovative clean technology solutions across the world, this Made in the UK, Sold to the World roadshow event is an excellent place to discuss the latest international trends and export opportunities for UK businesses in the clean energy sector.
We know that when SMEs trade around the world, the whole economy benefits, which is why this government is so committed to supporting smaller businesses grow and export.
Just last month, the Department of Business and Trade relaunched the Board of Trade, to help businesses, and in particular the UK’s 5.5 million SMEs, boost their exports.
And later this year, we will be launching a small business strategy to raise growth and productivity across the UK’s SME population and boost the number of scale-ups.
UK businesses can access DBT’s wealth of export support via Great.gov.uk. This comprises an online support offer and a wider network of support including the Export Academy, UK Export Finance, the International Markets network, and one-to-one support from International Trade Advisers.
Source: United Kingdom – Government Statements
The conference is due to take place today, Thursday 24 April
The British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference (BIIGC) will take place at Hillsborough Castle today (Thursday 24th April), the first time the Conference has been held in Northern Ireland since 2006.
Established under the Good Friday Agreement, the BIIGC is a bilateral forum which meets regularly, aiming “to bring together the British and Irish Governments to promote cooperation at all levels on all matters of mutual interest within the competence of both Governments”.
Today’s meeting will be chaired by Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Hilary Benn and Tánaiste, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade, and Minister for Defence Simon Harris. The meeting will also be attended by the Parliamentary under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland Fleur Anderson MP and the Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan TD.
It follows the UK-Ireland summit in March when the two governments pledged to work closely to deliver security, investment and growth
This new era of co-operation with Ireland is a key part of the UK Government’s Plan for Change to put more money in working people’s pockets across the country through a future of greater national security and renewal.
At today’s BIIGC meeting, the two Governments are expected to discuss ongoing efforts to find a way forward regarding the legacy of the past in Northern Ireland. They will also cover political stability, security, and other areas of bilateral cooperation.
Secretary of State Hilary Benn said:
This will be an important meeting in developing the strong and close relationship between the UK and the Irish Governments as we continue to work together on a range of issues.
Tánaiste Simon Harris said:
I am looking forward to this significant meeting of the British Irish Intergovernmental Conference and to continuing the intensive discussions with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on the challenging but essential work of dealing with the legacy of the past.
Source: The White House
Section 1. Purpose. A bedrock principle of the United States is that all citizens are treated equally under the law. This principle guarantees equality of opportunity, not equal outcomes. It promises that people are treated as individuals, not components of a particular race or group. It encourages meritocracy and a colorblind society, not race- or sex-based favoritism. Adherence to this principle is essential to creating opportunity, encouraging achievement, and sustaining the American Dream.
But a pernicious movement endangers this foundational principle, seeking to transform America’s promise of equal opportunity into a divisive pursuit of results preordained by irrelevant immutable characteristics, regardless of individual strengths, effort, or achievement. A key tool of this movement is disparate-impact liability, which holds that a near insurmountable presumption of unlawful discrimination exists where there are any differences in outcomes in certain circumstances among different races, sexes, or similar groups, even if there is no facially discriminatory policy or practice or discriminatory intent involved, and even if everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed. Disparate-impact liability all but requires individuals and businesses to consider race and engage in racial balancing to avoid potentially crippling legal liability. It not only undermines our national values, but also runs contrary to equal protection under the law and, therefore, violates our Constitution.
On a practical level, disparate-impact liability has hindered businesses from making hiring and other employment decisions based on merit and skill, their needs, or the needs of their customers because of the specter that such a process might lead to disparate outcomes, and thus disparate-impact lawsuits. This has made it difficult, and in some cases impossible, for employers to use bona fide job-oriented evaluations when recruiting, which prevents job seekers from being paired with jobs to which their skills are most suited — in other words, it deprives them of opportunities for success. Because of disparate-impact liability, employers cannot act in the best interests of the job applicant, the employer, and the American public.
Disparate-impact liability imperils the effectiveness of civil rights laws by mandating, rather than proscribing, discrimination. As the Supreme Court put it, “[t]he way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.”
Disparate-impact liability is wholly inconsistent with the Constitution and threatens the commitment to merit and equality of opportunity that forms the foundation of the American Dream. Under my Administration, citizens will be treated equally before the law and as individuals, not consigned to a certain fate based on their immutable characteristics.
Sec. 2. Policy. It is the policy of the United States to eliminate the use of disparate-impact liability in all contexts to the maximum degree possible to avoid violating the Constitution, Federal civil rights laws, and basic American ideals.
Sec 3. Revoking Certain Presidential Actions. The following Presidential approvals of the regulations promulgated under 42 U.S.C. 2000d-1 are hereby revoked:
(a) the Presidential approval of July 25, 1966, of the Department of Justice Title VI regulations (31 Fed. Reg. 10269), as applied to 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(2) in full; and
(b) the Presidential approval of July 5, 1973, of the Department of Justice Title VI regulations (38 Fed. Reg. 17955, FR Doc. 73-13407), as applied to the words “or effect” in both places they appear in 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(3), and as applied to 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(6)(ii) and 28 C.F.R. 42.104(c)(2) in full.
Sec. 4. Enforcement Discretion to Ensure Lawful Governance. Given the limited enforcement resources of executive departments and agencies (agencies), the unlawfulness of disparate-impact liability, and the policy of this order, all agencies shall deprioritize enforcement of all statutes and regulations to the extent they include disparate-impact liability, including but not limited to 42 U.S.C. 2000e-2, 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(2)–(3), 28 C.F.R. 42.104(b)(6)(ii), and 28 C.F.R. 42.104(c)(2).
Sec. 5. Existing Regulations. (a) As delegated by Executive Order 12250 of November 2, 1980 (Leadership and Coordination of Nondiscrimination Laws), the Attorney General shall initiate appropriate action to repeal or amend the implementing regulations for Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for all agencies to the extent they contemplate disparate-impact liability.
(b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General, in coordination with the heads of all other agencies, shall report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy:
(i) all existing regulations, guidance, rules, or orders that impose disparate-impact liability or similar requirements, and detail agency steps for their amendment or repeal, as appropriate under applicable law; and
(ii) other laws or decisions, including at the State level, that impose disparate-impact liability and any appropriate measures to address any constitutional or other legal infirmities.
Sec. 6. Review of Current Matters. (a) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General and the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall assess all pending investigations, civil suits, or positions taken in ongoing matters under every Federal civil rights law within their respective jurisdictions, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that rely on a theory of disparate-impact liability, and shall take appropriate action with respect to such matters consistent with the policy of this order.
(b) Within 45 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Chair of the Federal Trade Commission, and the heads of other agencies responsible for enforcement of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (Public Law 93-495), Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (the Fair Housing Act (Public Law 90-284, as amended)), or laws prohibiting unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices shall evaluate all pending proceedings that rely on theories of disparate-impact liability and take appropriate action with respect to such matters consistent with the policy of this order.
(c) Within 90 days of the date of this order, all agencies shall evaluate existing consent judgments and permanent injunctions that rely on theories of disparate-impact liability and take appropriate action with respect to such matters consistent with the policy of this order.
Sec. 7. Future Agency Action. (a) In coordination with other agencies, the Attorney General shall determine whether any Federal authorities preempt State laws, regulations, policies, or practices that impose disparate-impact liability based on a federally protected characteristic such as race, sex, or age, or whether such laws, regulations, policies, or practices have constitutional infirmities that warrant Federal action, and shall take appropriate measures consistent with the policy of this order.
(b) The Attorney General and the Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission shall jointly formulate and issue guidance or technical assistance to employers regarding appropriate methods to promote equal access to employment regardless of whether an applicant has a college education, where appropriate.
Sec. 8. Severability. If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any individual or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its other provisions to any other individuals or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
Sec. 9. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
DONALD J. TRUMP
THE WHITE HOUSE,
April 23, 2025.
Source: US Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Acting Chairman Pham Issues Statement on OIG Audit of CFTC’s Use of Charge Cards | CFTC
/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/phamstatement042325
Skip to main content
April 23, 2025
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Commodity Futures Trading Commission Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham issued the following statement on the CFTC Office of Inspector General (OIG) Audit of CFTC’s Compliance with the Government Charge Card Abuse Prevention Act:
“I applaud the diligent work of the CFTC’s Office of the Inspector General to identify fraud, waste, and abuse in the independent audit of the agency’s Government Charge Card programs, including purchase cards and travel cards. The OIG audit did not identify any monetary violations. However, the OIG report and recommendations confirm the CFTC’s noncompliance with various requirements for internal policies and employee training—both issues I have repeatedly raised in the past, including calling for a GAO study—and instances of noncompliance relating to card deactivation for separated employees, transaction preapproval procedures, and correct interpretation and application of the Federal Travel Regulation, among other issues. This independent audit report will support my efforts to strengthen the CFTC’s management accountability and governance, and the CFTC looks forward to completing appropriate corrective action plans.”
-CFTC-
Source: IMF – News in Russian
April 23, 2025
A Concluding Statement describes the preliminary findings of IMF staff at the end of an official staff visit (or ‘mission’), in most cases to a member country. Missions are undertaken as part of regular (usually annual) consultations under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, in the context of a request to use IMF resources (borrow from the IMF), as part of discussions of staff monitored programs, or as part of other staff monitoring of economic developments.
The authorities have consented to the publication of this statement. The views expressed in this statement are those of the IMF staff and do not necessarily represent the views of the IMF’s Executive Board. Based on the preliminary findings of this mission, staff will prepare a report that, subject to management approval, will be presented to the IMF Executive Board for discussion and decision.
Washington, DC:
Recent Developments, Outlook, and Risks
The economy has continued to perform strongly. Real GDP growth was robust at 6.5 percent in 2024, supported by strong domestic demand. The external current account deficit narrowed by 2.6 percentage points of GDP to 5.0 percent in 2024 on the back of strong remittances, high commodity prices, rapidly growing non-gold exports, and the winding down of a one-off increase in imports in 2023. International reserves remain ample. The consolidated government deficit (CGD) fell by 1.7 percentage points of GDP to 3.2 percent in 2024, largely reflecting a reduction in energy subsidies and better-targeted social expenditure, with higher gold prices mitigating lower VAT revenues from high VAT refunds. However, the reduction in domestic demand from the smaller deficit was dampened by higher spending in the broader public sector, including from SOEs, facilitated by an increase in the external borrowing ceiling. Inflation remains elevated, with a headline reading of 10.3 percent year-on-year (y/y) in March 2025, reflecting last year’s needed increases in energy tariffs and other administered prices, as well as spillovers into other prices.
Growth is expected to remain robust, however, external uncertainty has ratcheted up recently. The announced global tariff increases have increased uncertainty and tightened global financial conditions and could affect Uzbekistan through external demand, commodity prices, and financial flows. Despite this uncertainty, under the baseline, real GDP growth is projected to remain close to 6 percent in 2025 and 2026, supported by continued strength in private consumption, investment, and advancement of structural reforms. The current account deficit is forecast to remain unchanged at 5 percent of GDP in 2025, as higher gold exports and broader public sector consolidation offset weaker non-gold export performance brought about by slower growth in trading partners. Inflation is expected to moderate to slightly above 8 percent y/y at end-2025, and continue to gradually decline thereafter, supported by tight macroeconomic and macroprudential policies and the continuation of structural reforms.
Elevated uncertainty presents both risks and opportunities. Key external risks stem from larger and protracted trade policy shocks, spillovers from the war in Ukraine, reduced availability of external financing, and commodity price volatility. Domestically, risks include higher-than-expected fiscal deficits, upward adjustments to borrowing ceilings, weakened bank balance sheets, and contingent liabilities from state-owned enterprises, state-owned commercial banks (SOCBs), and public-private partnerships (PPPs). Opportunities could arise from faster implementation of structural reforms, stronger capital and remittance inflows, and higher gold prices.
Fiscal Policy
The decline in the consolidated government deficit (CGD) in 2024 is welcome. Staff commends the government for reducing the CGD and remaining committed to the 3 percent medium-term fiscal target. Adhering to the external borrowing limit of US $5.5 billion in 2025 and setting future borrowing ceilings that ensure public and publicly guaranteed debt as a share of GDP doesn’t increase are paramount to enhance budget credibility, help mitigate risks from state-owned enterprises and PPPs, and alleviate demand pressures on inflation. Volatile gold prices create risks of inflationary spending pressures when they are high, and pressures to lower spending when they are low, exacerbating macroeconomic fluctuations. The authorities should thus seek to minimize responses of government spending to gold price changes.
Revenue mobilization and spending rationalization are needed to create room for development and social needs. A medium-term revenue strategy is needed to offset the 2 percentage point of GDP decline in the tax-to-GDP ratio since 2020. Tax policy options include reforming the corporate and personal income taxes, reducing income-based tax incentives, and removing ineffective customs exemptions while refraining from granting new ones. These should be complemented by revenue administration measures, including revamping the audit program and improving large taxpayer office operations, while ensuring that taxpayers’ rights are respected. In this regard, the two strategies currently under consideration, to reform the tax administration and combat the shadow economy should be approved and implemented. Rationalizing wages, reducing the cost of goods and services leveraging recent procurement reforms, accelerating state-owned enterprise reforms, further consolidating and improving the design of social assistance programs, and reforming the pension system would enhance spending efficiency.
The reform of fiscal institutions should continue in order to strengthen fiscal discipline and transparency. Staff commends the government for adhering to the budget calendar, preparing the fiscal strategy paper and fiscal risk statements, and adopting the 2025-2030 Public Financial Management Reform Strategy. Further progress is needed to unify the public investment process irrespective of the financing source, better align and integrate the preparation of capital and current budgets, cover all capital expenditures institutions are responsible for when setting their budget ceilings, and publish these ceilings with the budget documents. Importantly, to address fiscal risks from a rapidly growing PPP pipeline, the authorities have made notable progress in designing a system to monitor and manage risks from PPPs. This should be complemented by conducting a sensitivity analysis of key assumptions, include potential PPP costs in the budget, integrate PPPs in the broader public investment management framework, and lower the annual PPP cap in line with limited absorption capacity. Improving Government Financial Statistics (GFS) reporting and publishing the debt management strategy, along with annual borrowing plan, will strengthen fiscal transparency and facilitate relations with investors.
Monetary and Exchange Rate Policy
The Central Bank of Uzbekistan (CBU) should keep monetary policy tight until inflation approaches its 5 percent target. The recent policy rate hike in response to rising inflation and inflation expectations signals the CBU’s readiness to address existing pressures. Monetary policy should remain data-driven and be tightened further if core inflation or inflation expectations do not decline. The exchange rate should be gradually allowed to fluctuate in wider ranges to better reflect market conditions, serve as a shock absorber, safeguard reserves, incentivize firms to hedge foreign exchange exposures, and help avoid persistent depreciation expectations. In addition, adhering to the principle of neutrality within the calendar year will facilitate exchange rate flexibility. Staff commends the CBU for its efforts to enhance communication. Bolstering communication further will help anchor inflation expectations and ensure predictability of monetary policy. Efforts to strengthen monetary policy transmission should continue by further improving liquidity management, modernizing the reserve requirements framework, and reducing the role of the state in the banking sector and high dollarization.
Financial Sector Stability
The authorities should advance reforms of state-owned commercial banks (SOCBs) and accelerate their privatization to promote financial stability and efficient resource allocation. Their mandates should focus on profitability, and any costs arising from non-commercial operations should be fully and transparently compensated for in the budget until these operations are gradually phased out. Strengthening the corporate governance of SOCBs would support their commercial focus, facilitate privatization, promote state-owned enterprise restructuring, improve monetary policy transmission, and increase access to affordable credit for the private sector. A reduction in government ownership of banking system assets to 40 percent, as envisaged in the 2020-2025 banking reform strategy, calls for the acceleration of SOCB privatization. Transparent procedures, strong regulatory frameworks, good creditor and shareholder rights, and competitive bidding during the privatization process would ensure the attraction of qualified investors and maximize asset value. Furthermore, staff advises against current plans to keep systemic banks as policy banks, which could increase financial risks or costs to the budget.
Bank supervision should be enhanced, including by adopting international standards. Staff advises the authorities to implement the recommendations of the recent and first Financial Sector Assessment Program (FSAP) for Uzbekistan. These call for reforms to focus on strengthening bank regulation; implementing robust risk-based supervision; enhancing systemic risk analysis and stress testing; strengthening capital requirements; aligning asset classification and non-performing loan resolution with international best practices; improving payment system oversight; and establishing adequate bank resolution, crisis management, and financial safety net arrangements.
The Central Bank of Uzbekistan (CBU) should continue to closely monitor and be prepared to address emerging financial stability risks. The welcome introduction of macroprudential measures in 2023-24 has moderated household credit growth and resulted in banks’ increased attention to borrower’s creditworthiness. Nevertheless, the microlending segment has been growing rapidly as micro loans and credits are provided under less stringent conditions. While initiatives that aim at enhancing financial inclusion and deepening are welcome, they should not undermine proper credit assessment by banks, which would add to financial stability risks. The CBU should therefore strengthen risk-based supervision to limit these risks and deploy additional capital requirements or other binding macroprudential measures, as needed. It should also address risks from foreign exchange lending to unhedged corporate borrowers, and lending to individuals without formal income and to corporates facing heightened risks of insolvency or illiquidity. Phasing out preferential and directed lending should remain a priority.
Structural and Governance Reforms
After significantly advancing economic transition reforms, Uzbekistan needs to complete them and accelerate implementation of institutional reforms. Necessary energy tariff and broader administrative price increases have advanced price liberalization and should be continued until its completion to allow prices to fully reflect market forces. Significant progress has also been made with World Trade Organization accession in both bilateral and multilateral tracks, and the increased engagement with neighboring countries and other regions such as the Gulf Cooperation Council, have significantly contributed to advancing trade liberalization and diversification. Support for state-owned enterprises needs to be transparent, made conditional on restructuring, and be gradually phased out to level the playing field for the private sector. State involvement in the economy should continue to be reduced, and privatization of large state-owned enterprises should be accelerated and carried out in accordance with international best practices. Controls and direct intervention should be replaced with effective regulation and market institutions. Facilitating firm entry and exit would further contribute to stimulate a competitive environment for the private sector.
Governance, labor, and climate reforms should continue. Governance indicators have improved significantly in recent years. The enactment of the conflict-of-interest law, training of government officials to implement it, and the establishment of the Virtual Anti-Corruption Academy are welcome. Public discussion of the draft law on asset declaration for officials of the government and state enterprises, and cabinet review of the draft whistleblower protection law are expected soon. The authorities should enact and implement these laws as soon as possible. Improving transparency and access to information, particularly regarding procurement, and finalizing the National Strategy on Anti-Corruption would also contribute to improved efficiency of public spending and administration. Labor market reforms need to be accelerated to address low female labor participation, high informality, and skill mismatches. Completing the energy price reform and swiftly adopting measures to enhance water efficiency, diversify crops, and support reforestation efforts will significantly advance the climate agenda. Improving the quality of statistics would lead to better analysis and more informed policymaking.
The mission would like to thank the Uzbek authorities, stakeholders, and private sector representatives for their hospitality, constructive policy dialogue, and productive collaboration during the Article IV mission.
PRESS OFFICER: Wafa Amr
Phone: +1 202 623-7100Email: MEDIA@IMF.org
https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/04/23/mcs-042325-uzbekistan-staff-concluding-statement-of-the-2025-article-iv-mission
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
NOTABLE ITEMS FOR THE QUARTER INCLUDE:
WOODBRIDGE, N.J., April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC. (Nasdaq:NFBK) (the “Company”), the holding company for Northfield Bank, reported net income of $7.9 million, or $0.19 per diluted share, for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $11.3 million, or $0.27 per diluted share, for the three months ended December 31, 2024, and $6.2 million, or $0.15 per diluted share, for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The decrease in net income for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to the trailing quarter was primarily due to a $3.4 million, or $0.06 per share, gain on sale of property in the trailing quarter. The increase in net income in the current quarter as compared to the first quarter of 2024 was primarily the result of an increase in net interest income, attributable to lower funding costs and higher yields on interest-earning assets, partially offset by an increase in the provision for credit losses on loans.
Commenting on the quarter, Steven M. Klein, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer stated, “The Northfield team continued to focus on growing our franchise, deploying our strong capital base, and delivering solid financial performance for the quarter.” Mr. Klein commented further, “We remained focused on serving our communities, and the fundamentals of reducing our funding costs and increasing the yield on our interest-earning assets resulting in higher net interest income and net interest margin.” Mr. Klein further stated, “We remain committed to prudently managing our operating expenses, maintaining strong asset quality, and managing our strong capital levels through dividends and stock repurchases.”
Mr. Klein concluded, “I am pleased to announce that the Board of Directors has declared a cash dividend of $0.13 per common share, payable on May 21, 2025 to stockholders of record on May 7, 2025.”
Results of Operations
Comparison of Operating Results for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 and 2024
Net income was $7.9 million and $6.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and March 31, 2024, respectively. Significant variances from the comparable prior year period are as follows: a $3.9 million increase in net interest income, a $2.2 million increase in the provision for credit losses on loans, a $359,000 decrease in non-interest income, an $897,000 decrease in non-interest expense, and a $616,000 increase in income tax expense.
Net interest income for the three months ended March 31, 2025, increased $3.9 million, or 14.0%, to $31.8 million, from $27.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024, due to a $2.5 million decrease in interest expense and a $1.4 million increase in interest income. The decrease in interest expense was primarily due to a decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities which decreased by 15 basis points to 2.74% for the three months ended March 31, 2025, from 2.89% for the three months ended March 31, 2024, driven by a 20 basis point decrease in the cost of borrowed funds to 3.67% from 3.87%, partially offset by a two basis point increase in the cost of interest-bearing deposits to 2.51% from 2.49%, due to a higher concentration of certificates of deposit. The decrease in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities was primarily due to a $413.6 million, or 37.3% decrease in the average balance of borrowed funds, partially offset by a $307.8 million, or 9.9%, increase in the average balance of interest-bearing deposits. The increase in interest income was primarily due to a 23 basis point increase in the yield on interest-earning assets, specifically higher yields on mortgage-backed securities, partially offset by a $104.0 million, or 1.9%, decrease in the average balance of interest earning assets. The decrease in the average balance of interest-earning assets was primarily due to decreases in the average balance of other securities of $273.9 million, the average balance of loans of $167.4 million and the average balance of interest-earning deposits in financial institutions of $143.9 million, partially offset by an increase in the average balance of mortgage-backed securities of $483.9 million.
Net interest margin increased by 35 basis points to 2.38% for the three months ended March 31, 2025, from 2.03% for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The increase in net interest margin was primarily due to higher yields on mortgage-backed securities, coupled with a decrease in the cost of borrowed funds. The Company accreted interest income related to purchased credit-deteriorated (“PCD”) loans of $223,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2025, as compared to $426,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2024. Net interest income for the three months ended March 31, 2025, included loan prepayment income of $245,000 as compared to $351,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
The provision for credit losses on loans increased by $2.2 million to $2.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $415,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2024, primarily due to higher net charge-offs, changes in model assumptions, including a reduction in prepayment speeds and an increase in loss given defaults in the multifamily loans related to risk rating downgrades of certain loans in the portfolio. Net charge-offs were $2.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, primarily due to $2.4 million in net charge-offs on small business unsecured commercial and industrial loans, as compared to net charge-offs of $911,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2024. Management continues to closely monitor the small business unsecured commercial and industrial loan portfolio, which totaled $25.5 million at March 31, 2025.
Non-interest income decreased by $359,000, or 10.6%, to $3.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $3.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The decrease was primarily due to a decrease of $998,000 in gains on sales of trading securities, partially offset by an increase in income on bank-owned life insurance of $675,000, primarily related to the exchange of certain policies late in the fourth quarter of 2024 which have higher yields. Losses on trading securities in the three months ended March 31, 2025, were $299,000, as compared to gains of $699,000 in the three months ended March 31, 2024. The trading portfolio is utilized to fund the Company’s deferred compensation obligation to certain employees and directors of the plan. The participants of this plan, at their election, defer a portion of their compensation. Gains and losses on trading securities have no effect on net income since participants benefit from, and bear the full risk of, changes in the trading securities market values. Therefore, the Company records an equal and offsetting amount in compensation expense, reflecting the change in the Company’s obligations under the plan.
Non-interest expense decreased $897,000, or 4.0%, to $21.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $22.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The decrease was primarily due to a $990,000 decrease in employee compensation and benefits, primarily attributable to a decrease in deferred compensation expense, which is described above, and had no effect on net income. Additionally, there was a $268,000 decrease in advertising expense. Partially offsetting the decreases were increases of $263,000 in professional fees related to outsourced audit services and recruitment fees and $164,000 in other expense.
The Company recorded income tax expense of $2.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $2.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2024. The effective tax rate for both the three months ended March 31, 2025, and March 31, 2024, was 27.0%. The effective tax rate for three months ending March 31, 2025, and March 31, 2024, were negatively impacted by increased tax expense of $79,000 and $18,000, respectively, as a result of vesting of stock awards.
Comparison of Operating Results for the Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024
Net income was $7.9 million and $11.3 million for the quarters ended March 31, 2025, and December 31, 2024, respectively. Significant variances from the prior quarter are as follows: a $2.1 million increase in net interest income, a $640,000 increase in the provision for credit losses on loans, a $4.0 million decrease in non-interest income, a $613,000 increase in non-interest expense, and a $246,000 increase in income tax expense.
Net interest income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, increased by $2.1 million, or 7.1%, primarily due to a $1.7 million decrease in interest expense and a $370,000 increase in interest income. The decrease in interest expense was primarily due to an 11 basis point decrease in the cost of interest-bearing liabilities to 2.74% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, from 2.85% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, and a $7.0 million, or 0.2%, decrease in the average balance of interest-bearing liabilities attributable to an $80.4 million decrease in the average balance of borrowed funds, partially offset by a $73.3 million increase in the average balance of interest-bearing deposits. The increase in interest income was primarily due to an 11 basis point increase in the yield on interest-earning assets and a $206,000 increase in the average balance of interest-earning assets primarily due to an increase in the average balance of mortgage-backed securities of $182.4 million, partially offset by decreases in the average balance of interest-earning deposits in financial institutions of $85.2 million, the average balance of other securities of $59.4 million, and the average balance of loans of $37.5 million.
Net interest margin increased by 20 basis points to 2.38% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, from 2.18% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, primarily due to higher yields on loans and mortgage-backed securities coupled with a decrease in the cost of funds. Net interest income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, included loan prepayment income of $245,000 as compared to $215,000 for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The Company accreted interest income related to PCD loans of $223,000 for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, as compared to $568,000 for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.
The provision for credit losses on loans increased by $640,000 to $2.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, from $1.9 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The increase in the provision for the current quarter was primarily due to an increase in reserves in the commercial and industrial and in multifamily loans related to risk rating downgrades of certain loans in the portfolio, and higher net charge-offs. Net charge-offs were $2.8 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, as compared to net charge-offs of $2.0 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024.
Non-interest income decreased by $4.0 million, or 56.9%, to $3.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, from $7.0 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The decrease was primarily due to a $3.4 million gain on sale of property in the quarter ended December 31, 2024. Additionally, there was a $367,000 decrease in gains on sales of trading securities, net, and a $561,000 decrease in other income, primarily due to lower swap fee income. For the quarter ended March 31, 2025, losses on trading securities, net, were $299,000, compared to gains of $68,000 for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. Partially offsetting the decreases was a $362,000 increase in income on bank owned life insurance, primarily related to the exchange of certain policies late in the fourth quarter of 2024 which have higher yields.
Non-interest expense increased by $613,000, or 2.9%, to $21.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, from $20.8 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily due to increases of $280,000 in occupancy expense, related to higher repairs and maintenance costs, $201,000 in data processing costs due to an increase in core system expenses, $310,000 in professional fees primarily due to an increase in outsourced audit services and recruitment fees, and a $158,000 increase in credit loss expense/(benefit) for off-balance sheet exposure. The increase in credit loss/(benefit) for off-balance sheet exposure was due to a provision of $103,000 recorded during the quarter ended March 31, 2025, as compared to a benefit of $55,000 recorded during the quarter ended December 31, 2024. Partially offsetting the decreases was a $283,000 decrease in other expense.
The Company recorded income tax expense of $2.9 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2025, compared to $2.7 million for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The effective tax rate for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 was 27.0%, compared to 19.2% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024. The effective tax rate for the quarter ending December 31, 2024, was positively impacted by the revaluation of certain state deferred tax assets.
Financial Condition
Total assets increased by $43.6 million, or 0.8%, to $5.71 billion at March 31, 2025, from $5.67 billion at December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily due to an increase in available-for-sale debt securities of $145.7 million, or 13.2%, partially offset by decreases in cash and cash equivalents of $66.1 million, or 39.4%, loans receivable of $30.7 million, or 0.8% and other assets of $4.5 million, or 9.6%.
Cash and cash equivalents decreased by $66.1 million, or 39.4%, to $101.7 million at March 31, 2025, from $167.7 million at December 31, 2024, as excess liquidity was deployed into purchasing higher-yielding mortgage-backed securities. Balances fluctuate based on the timing of receipt of security and loan repayments and the redeployment of cash into higher-yielding assets such as loans and securities, or the funding of deposit outflows or borrowing maturities.
Loans held-for-investment, net, decreased by $30.7 million, or 0.8%, to $3.99 billion at March 31, 2025 from $4.02 billion at December 31, 2024, primarily due to decreases in multifamily real estate loans, partially offset by increases in home equity and lines of credit and construction and land loans. The decrease in loan balances reflects the Company’s continued strategic focus on managing concentration risk within its commercial and multifamily real estate loan portfolios, while maintaining disciplined loan pricing. Multifamily loans decreased $29.6 million, or 1.1%, to $2.57 billion at March 31, 2025 from $2.60 billion at December 31, 2024, commercial real estate loans decreased $7.2 million, or 0.8%, to $882.6 million at March 31, 2025 from $889.8 million at December 31, 2024, one-to-four family residential loans decreased $3.4 million, or 2.3%, to $146.8 million at March 31, 2025 from $150.2 million at December 31, 2024, and commercial and industrial loans decreased $1.3 million, or 0.8%, to $162.1 million at March 31, 2025 from $163.4 million at December 31, 2024, and other loans decreased $754,000, or 34.8%, to $1.4 million at March 31, 2025 from $2.2 million at December 31, 2024. Partially offsetting these decreases were increases in home equity and lines of credit of $7.3 million, or 4.2%, to $181.4 million at March 31, 2025 from $174.1 million at December 31, 2024, and construction and land loans of $4.4 million, or 12.2%, to $40.3 million at March 31, 2025 from $35.9 million at December 31, 2024.
As of March 31, 2025, non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans (as defined by regulatory guidance) to total risk-based capital was estimated at approximately 424%. Management believes that Northfield Bank (the “Bank”) maintains appropriate risk management practices including risk assessments, board-approved underwriting policies and related procedures, which includes monitoring Bank portfolio performance, performing market analysis (economic and real estate), and stressing of the Bank’s commercial real estate portfolio under severe, adverse economic conditions. Although management believes the Bank has implemented appropriate policies and procedures to manage its commercial real estate concentration risk, the Bank’s regulators could require it to implement additional policies and procedures or could require it to maintain higher levels of regulatory capital, which might adversely affect its loan originations, the Company’s ability to pay dividends, and overall profitability.
Our real estate portfolio includes credit risk exposure to loans collateralized by office buildings and multifamily properties in New York State subject to some form of rent regulation limiting rent increases for rent stabilized multifamily properties. At March 31, 2025, office-related loans represented $182.4 million, or 4.6% of our total loan portfolio, with an average balance of $1.7 million (although we have originated these type of loans in amounts substantially greater than this average) and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 59%. Approximately 39% were owner-occupied. The geographic locations of the properties collateralizing our office-related loans are: 50.0% in New York, 48.5% in New Jersey and 1.5% in Pennsylvania. At March 31, 2025, our largest office-related loan had a principal balance of $90.0 million (with a net active principal balance for the Bank of $29.5 million as we have a 33.3% participation interest), was secured by an office facility located in Staten Island, New York, and was performing in accordance with its original contractual terms. At March 31, 2025, multifamily loans that have some form of rent stabilization or rent control totaled approximately $435.8 million, or approximately 11% of our total loan portfolio, with an average balance of $1.7 million (although we have originated these type of loans in amounts substantially greater than this average) and a weighted average loan-to-value ratio of 51%. At March 31, 2025, our largest rent-regulated loan had a principal balance of $16.7 million, was secured by an apartment building located in Staten Island, New York, and was performing in accordance with its original contractual terms. Management continues to closely monitor its office and rent-regulated portfolios. For further details on our rent-regulated multifamily portfolio see “Asset Quality”.
PCD loans totaled $9.0 million and $9.2 million at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. The majority of the remaining PCD loan balance consists of loans acquired as part of a Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation-assisted transaction. The Company accreted interest income of $223,000 attributable to PCD loans for three months ended March 31, 2025, compared to $426,000 for three months ended March 31, 2024. PCD loans had an allowance for credit losses of approximately $2.7 million at March 31, 2025.
Loan balances are summarized as follows (dollars in thousands):
| March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| Real estate loans: | |||||
| Multifamily | $ | 2,567,913 | $ | 2,597,484 | |
| Commercial mortgage | 882,600 | 889,801 | |||
| One-to-four family residential mortgage | 146,791 | 150,217 | |||
| Home equity and lines of credit | 181,354 | 174,062 | |||
| Construction and land | 40,284 | 35,897 | |||
| Total real estate loans | 3,818,942 | 3,847,461 | |||
| Commercial and industrial loans | 162,133 | 163,425 | |||
| Other loans | 1,411 | 2,165 | |||
| Total commercial and industrial and other loans | 163,544 | 165,590 | |||
| Loans held-for-investment, net (excluding PCD) | 3,982,486 | 4,013,051 | |||
| PCD loans | 9,043 | 9,173 | |||
| Total loans held-for-investment, net | $ | 3,991,529 | $ | 4,022,224 | |
The Company’s available-for-sale debt securities portfolio increased by $145.7 million, or 13.2%, to $1.25 billion at March 31, 2025, from $1.10 billion at December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily attributable to purchases of securities, partially offset by paydowns and maturities. At March 31, 2025, $1.21 billion of the portfolio consisted of residential mortgage-backed securities issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or Ginnie Mae. In addition, the Company held $33.4 million in corporate bonds, substantially all of which were investment grade, $683,000 in municipal bonds and $608,000 in U.S. Government agency securities at March 31, 2025. Unrealized losses, net of tax, on available-for-sale debt securities and held-to-maturity securities approximated $16.7 million and $307,000, respectively, at March 31, 2025, and $21.8 million and $400,000, respectively, at December 31, 2024.
Equity securities were $10.9 million at March 31, 2025 and $14.3 million at December 31, 2024. Equity securities are primarily comprised of an investment in a Small Business Administration Loan Fund. This investment is utilized by the Bank as part of its Community Reinvestment Act program. The decrease in equity securities was primarily due to a decrease in money market mutual funds.
Total liabilities increased $37.2 million, or 0.7%, to $5.00 billion at March 31, 2025, from $4.96 billion at December 31, 2024. The increase was primarily attributable to an increase in borrowings of $42.8 million, partially offset by a decrease in total deposits of $6.5 million. The Company routinely utilizes brokered deposits and borrowed funds to manage interest rate risk, the cost of interest-bearing liabilities, and funding needs related to loan originations and deposit activity.
Deposits decreased $6.5 million, or 0.2%, to $4.13 billion at March 31, 2025 as compared to $4.14 billion at December 31, 2024. Brokered deposits decreased by $140.1 million, or 53.2%, as the Company placed less reliance on brokered deposits which were used as a lower-cost alternative to borrowings in the trailing quarter. Deposits, excluding brokered deposits, increased $133.6 million, or 3.4%. The increase in deposits, excluding brokered deposits, was primarily attributable to increases of $97.1 million in transaction accounts and $41.6 million in time deposits, partially offset by decreases of $4.5 million in savings accounts, and $579,000 in money market accounts. Growth in transaction accounts and time deposits was primarily due to new municipal relationships and new commercial customer relationships.
Estimated gross uninsured deposits at March 31, 2025 were $1.95 billion. This total includes fully collateralized uninsured governmental deposits and intercompany deposits of $1.01 billion, leaving estimated uninsured deposits of approximately $934.7 million, or 22.6%, of total deposits. At December 31, 2024, estimated uninsured deposits totaled $896.5 million, or 21.7% of total deposits.
Deposit account balances are summarized as follows (dollars in thousands):
| March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| Transaction: | |||||
| Non-interest bearing checking | $ | 722,994 | $ | 706,976 | |
| Negotiable orders of withdrawal and interest-bearing checking | 1,367,219 | 1,286,154 | |||
| Total transaction | 2,090,213 | 1,993,130 | |||
| Savings and money market: | |||||
| Savings | 899,674 | 904,163 | |||
| Money market | 271,566 | 272,145 | |||
| Total savings | 1,171,240 | 1,176,308 | |||
| Certificates of deposit: | |||||
| $250,000 and under | 602,959 | 580,940 | |||
| Over $250,000 | 144,255 | 124,681 | |||
| Brokered deposits | 123,289 | 263,418 | |||
| Total certificates of deposit | 870,503 | 969,039 | |||
| Total deposits | $ | 4,131,956 | $ | 4,138,477 | |
Included in the table above are business and municipal deposit account balances as follows (dollars in thousands):
| March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| Business customers | $ | 891,545 | $ | 885,769 | |
| Municipal (governmental) customers | $ | 929,611 | $ | 859,319 | |
Borrowed funds increased to $770.7 million at March 31, 2025, from $727.8 million at December 31, 2024. The increase in borrowings for the period was primarily due to a $67.0 million increase in borrowings under an overnight line of credit, partially offset by a decrease of $24.2 million in other borrowings due to maturities. Management utilizes borrowings to mitigate interest rate risk, for short-term liquidity, and to a lesser extent from time to time, as part of leverage strategies.
The following table sets forth borrowing maturities (excluding overnight borrowings and subordinated debt) and the weighted average rate by year at March 31, 2025 (dollars in thousands):
| Year | Amount | Weighted Average Rate | ||
| 2025 | $160,684 | 3.89% | ||
| 2026 | 148,000 | 4.36% | ||
| 2027 | 173,000 | 3.19% | ||
| 2028 | 154,288 | 3.96% | ||
| $635,972 | 3.83% | |||
Total stockholders’ equity increased by $6.5 million to $711.1 million at March 31, 2025, from $704.7 million at December 31, 2024. The increase was attributable to net income of $7.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025, an $8.1 million increase in accumulated other comprehensive income, associated with an increase in the estimated fair value of our debt securities available-for-sale portfolio, and a $900,000 increase in equity award activity, partially offset by $5.0 million in stock repurchases and $5.4 million in dividend payments. On February 26, 2025, the Board of Directors of the Company approved a $5.0 million stock repurchase program. During the three months ended March 31, 2025, the Company repurchased 440,150 of its common stock outstanding at an average price of $11.36 for a total of $5.0 million pursuant to approved stock repurchase plan. As of March 31, 2025, the Company has no outstanding repurchase program.
The Company’s most liquid assets are cash and cash equivalents, corporate bonds, and unpledged mortgage-related securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac, that we can either borrow against or sell. We also have the ability to surrender bank-owned life insurance contracts. The surrender of these contracts would subject the Company to income taxes and penalties for increases in the cash surrender values over the original premium payments. We also have the ability to obtain additional funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Reserve Bank of New York utilizing unencumbered and unpledged securities and multifamily loans. The Company expects to have sufficient funds available to meet current commitments in the normal course of business. The Company’s on-hand liquidity ratio as of March 31, 2025 was 24.3%.
The Company had the following primary sources of liquidity at March 31, 2025 (dollars in thousands):
| Cash and cash equivalents(1) | $ | 89,139 | |
| Corporate bonds(2) | $ | 19,323 | |
| Multifamily loans(2) | $ | 547,043 | |
| Mortgage-backed securities (issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, Fannie Mae, or Freddie Mac)(2) | $ | 1,102,759 | |
(1) Excludes $12.5 million of cash at Northfield Bank.
(2) Represents estimated remaining borrowing potential.
The Company and the Bank utilize the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (“CBLR”) framework. At March 31, 2025, the Company and the Bank’s estimated CBLR ratios were 12.08% and 12.62%, respectively, which exceeded the minimum requirement to be considered well-capitalized of 9%.
Asset Quality
The following table details total non-accrual loans (excluding PCD), non-performing assets, loans over 90 days delinquent on which interest is accruing, and accruing loans 30 to 89 days delinquent at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 (dollars in thousands):
| March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||||
| Non-accrual loans: | |||||||
| Held-for-investment | |||||||
| Real estate loans: | |||||||
| Multifamily | $ | 2,565 | $ | 2,609 | |||
| Commercial mortgage | 4,565 | 4,578 | |||||
| Home equity and lines of credit | 1,267 | 1,270 | |||||
| Commercial and industrial | 4,972 | 5,807 | |||||
| Total non-accrual loans | 13,369 | 14,264 | |||||
| Loans delinquent 90 days or more and still accruing: | |||||||
| Held-for-investment | |||||||
| Real estate loans: | |||||||
| Multifamily | — | 164 | |||||
| One-to-four family residential | 878 | 882 | |||||
| Home equity and lines of credit | 140 | 140 | |||||
| Total loans held-for-investment delinquent 90 days or more and still accruing | 1,018 | 1,186 | |||||
| Non-performing loans held-for-sale | |||||||
| Commercial mortgage | 4,397 | 4,397 | |||||
| Commercial and industrial | 500 | 500 | |||||
| Total non-performing loans held-for-sale | 4,897 | 4,897 | |||||
| Total non-performing loans | 19,284 | 20,347 | |||||
| Total non-performing assets | $ | 19,284 | $ | 20,347 | |||
| Non-performing loans to total loans | 0.48 | % | 0.51 | % | |||
| Non-performing assets to total assets | 0.34 | % | 0.36 | % | |||
| Accruing loans 30 to 89 days delinquent | $ | 6,845 | $ | 9,336 | |||
Accruing Loans 30 to 89 Days Delinquent
Loans 30 to 89 days delinquent and on accrual status totaled $6.8 million and $9.3 million at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. The following table sets forth delinquencies for accruing loans by type and by amount at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 (dollars in thousands):
| March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||
| Held-for-investment | |||||
| Real estate loans: | |||||
| Multifamily | $ | 1,296 | $ | 2,831 | |
| Commercial mortgage | 147 | 78 | |||
| One-to-four family residential | 2,584 | 2,407 | |||
| Home equity and lines of credit | 1,141 | 1,472 | |||
| Commercial and industrial loans | 1,674 | 2,545 | |||
| Other loans | 3 | 3 | |||
| Total delinquent accruing loans held-for-investment | $ | 6,845 | $ | 9,336 | |
The decrease in delinquent multifamily loans was primarily due to one relationship totaling $2.1 million that became current during the quarter ended March 31, 2025. The decrease in delinquent commercial and industrial loans was primarily due to five unsecured small business loans that were charged off totaling $797,000. Management continues to monitor the unsecured small business commercial and industrial loan portfolio which represents the majority of the commercial and industrial delinquencies in the table above.
PCD Loans (Held-for-Investment)
The Company accounts for PCD loans at estimated fair value using discounted expected future cash flows deemed to be collectible on the date acquired. Based on its detailed review of PCD loans and experience in loan workouts, management believes it has a reasonable expectation about the amount and timing of future cash flows and accordingly has classified PCD loans ($9.0 million at March 31, 2025 and $9.2 million at December 31, 2024, respectively) as accruing, even though they may be contractually past due. At March 31, 2025, 2.1% of PCD loans were past due 30 to 89 days, and 25.2% were past due 90 days or more, as compared to 2.9% and 27.1%, respectively, at December 31, 2024.
Our multifamily loan portfolio at March 31, 2025 totaled $2.57 billion, or 64% of our total loan portfolio, of which $435.8 million, or 11%, included loans collateralized by properties in New York with units subject to some percentage of rent regulation. The table below sets forth details about our multifamily loan portfolio in New York (dollars in thousands).
| % Rent Regulated | Balance | % Portfolio Total NY Multifamily Portfolio | Average Balance | Largest Loan | LTV* | Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR)* | 30-89 Days Delinquent | Non-Accrual | Special Mention | Substandard | |||||||||||||||||||
| 0 | $ | 279,630 | 39.1 | % | $ | 1,175 | $ | 16,441 | 50.6 | % | 1.48x | $ | 580 | $ | 499 | $ | — | $ | 1,800 | ||||||||||
| >0-10 | 4,696 | 0.6 | 1,565 | 2,107 | 50.9 | 1.33 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >10-20 | 18,397 | 2.6 | 1,415 | 2,834 | 48.7 | 1.40 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >20-30 | 19,268 | 2.7 | 2,141 | 5,449 | 53.2 | 1.65 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >30-40 | 14,958 | 2.1 | 1,247 | 3,037 | 47.8 | 1.59 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >40-50 | 21,558 | 3.0 | 1,268 | 2,710 | 46.9 | 1.77 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >50-60 | 9,298 | 1.3 | 1,550 | 2,313 | 39.4 | 1.80 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >60-70 | 20,765 | 2.9 | 2,966 | 11,181 | 53.4 | 1.51 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >70-80 | 22,158 | 3.1 | 2,462 | 4,874 | 47.5 | 1.43 | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >80-90 | 20,516 | 2.9 | 1,140 | 3,124 | 46.1 | 1.64 | — | — | 1,124 | — | |||||||||||||||||||
| >90-100 | 284,164 | 39.7 | 1,733 | 16,698 | 51.6 | 1.60 | 665 | 2,067 | 3,630 | 4,389 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $ | 715,408 | 100.0 | % | $ | 1,442 | $ | 16,698 | 50.6 | % | 1.55x | $ | 1,245 | $ | 2,566 | $ | 4,754 | $ | 6,189 | ||||||||||
The table below sets forth our New York rent-regulated loans by county (dollars in thousands).
| County | Balance | LTV* | DSCR* | |||||
| Bronx | $ | 116,944 | 51.2 | % | 1.60x | |||
| Kings | 184,545 | 50.5 | % | 1.57 | ||||
| Nassau | 2,155 | 35.8 | % | 1.88 | ||||
| New York | 48,838 | 46.3 | % | 1.61 | ||||
| Queens | 37,633 | 44.3 | % | 1.69 | ||||
| Richmond | 32,258 | 60.1 | % | 1.41 | ||||
| Westchester | 13,405 | 58.7 | % | 1.78 | ||||
| Total | $ | 435,778 | 50.6 | % | 1.59x | |||
* Weighted Average
None of the loans that are rent-regulated in New York are interest only. During the remainder of 2025, 27 loans with an aggregate principal balance of $46.0 million will re-price.
About Northfield Bank
Northfield Bank, founded in 1887, operates 37 full-service banking offices in Staten Island and Brooklyn, New York, and Hunterdon, Middlesex, Mercer, and Union counties, New Jersey. For more information about Northfield Bank, please visit www.eNorthfield.com.
Forward-Looking Statements: This release may contain certain “forward looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, and may be identified by the use of such words as “may,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “plan,” “estimate,” “predict,” “continue,” and “potential” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Examples of forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, estimates with respect to the financial condition, results of operations and business of Northfield Bancorp, Inc. Any or all of the forward-looking statements in this release and in any other public statements made by Northfield Bancorp, Inc. may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions Northfield Bancorp, Inc. might make or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties as described in our SEC filings, including, but not limited to, those related to general economic conditions, particularly in the market areas in which the Company operates, competition and demand for financial services in our market area, fluctuations in real estate values and both residential and commercial real estate market conditions, changes in liquidity, the size and composition of our deposit portfolio and the percentage of uninsured deposits in the portfolio, competition among depository and other financial institutions, including with respect to fees and interest rates, changes in laws or government regulations or policies affecting financial institutions, including changes in the monetary policies of the U.S. Treasury and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the imposition of tariffs or other domestic or international governmental policies, changes in the quality and/or composition of our loan and securities portfolios, prepayment speeds, charge-offs and/or credit loss provisions, our ability to access cost-effective funding, changes in the value of our goodwill or other intangible assets, changes in regulatory fees, assessments and capital requirements, inflation and changes in the interest rate environment that reduce our margins, reduce the fair value of financial instruments or reduce our ability to originate loans, the failure to maintain current technologies and to successfully implement future information technology enhancements, cyber security and fraud risks against our information technology and those of our third-party providers, the ability of third-party providers to perform their obligations to us, the effects of war, conflict, and acts of terrorism, our ability to successfully integrate acquired entities, and adverse changes in the securities markets. Consequently, no forward-looking statement can be guaranteed. Northfield Bancorp, Inc. does not intend to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this release, or conform these statements to actual events.
Company Contact:
William R. Jacobs
Chief Financial Officer
Tel: (732) 499-7200 ext. 2519
(Tables follow)
| NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC. | ||||||||
| SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA | ||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts) (unaudited) | ||||||||
| At or For the Three Months Ended | ||||||||
| March 31, | December 31 | |||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | 2024 | ||||||
| Selected Financial Ratios: | ||||||||
| Performance Ratios (1) | ||||||||
| Return on assets (ratio of net income to average total assets) | 0.56 | % | 0.43 | % | 0.79 | % | ||
| Return on equity (ratio of net income to average equity) | 4.52 | 3.59 | 6.40 | |||||
| Average equity to average total assets | 12.43 | 12.04 | 12.28 | |||||
| Interest rate spread | 1.76 | 1.39 | 1.54 | |||||
| Net interest margin | 2.38 | 2.03 | 2.18 | |||||
| Efficiency ratio (2) | 61.57 | 71.43 | 56.75 | |||||
| Non-interest expense to average total assets | 1.53 | 1.55 | 1.46 | |||||
| Non-interest expense to average total interest-earning assets | 1.61 | 1.63 | 1.53 | |||||
| Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities | 129.42 | 128.66 | 129.20 | |||||
| Asset Quality Ratios: | ||||||||
| Non-performing assets to total assets | 0.34 | 0.29 | 0.36 | |||||
| Non-performing loans (3) to total loans (4) | 0.48 | 0.41 | 0.51 | |||||
| Allowance for credit losses to non-performing loans (5) | 242.73 | 214.83 | 227.72 | |||||
| Allowance for credit losses to total loans held-for-investment, net (6) | 0.87 | 0.89 | 0.87 | |||||
(1) Annualized where appropriate.
(2) The efficiency ratio represents non-interest expense divided by the sum of net interest income and non-interest income.
(3) Non-performing loans consist of non-accruing loans and loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing (excluding PCD loans), and are included in total loans held-for-investment, net.
(4) Includes originated loans held-for-investment, PCD loans, acquired loans and loans held-for-sale.
(5) Excludes loans held-for-sale.
(6) Includes originated loans held-for-investment, PCD loans, and acquired loans.
| NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC. | |||||||
| CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS | |||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts) (unaudited) | |||||||
| March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||||
| ASSETS: | |||||||
| Cash and due from banks | $ | 12,523 | $ | 13,043 | |||
| Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions | 89,139 | 154,701 | |||||
| Total cash and cash equivalents | 101,662 | 167,744 | |||||
| Trading securities | 13,003 | 13,884 | |||||
| Debt securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value | 1,246,473 | 1,100,817 | |||||
| Debt securities held-to-maturity, at amortized cost | 8,883 | 9,303 | |||||
| Equity securities | 10,855 | 14,261 | |||||
| Loans held-for-sale | 4,897 | 4,897 | |||||
| Loans held-for-investment, net | 3,991,529 | 4,022,224 | |||||
| Allowance for credit losses | (34,921 | ) | (35,183 | ) | |||
| Net loans held-for-investment | 3,956,608 | 3,987,041 | |||||
| Accrued interest receivable | 19,648 | 19,078 | |||||
| Bank-owned life insurance | 177,398 | 175,759 | |||||
| Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock, at cost | 38,350 | 35,894 | |||||
| Operating lease right-of-use assets | 27,345 | 27,771 | |||||
| Premises and equipment, net | 21,431 | 21,985 | |||||
| Goodwill | 41,012 | 41,012 | |||||
| Other assets | 42,435 | 46,932 | |||||
| Total assets | $ | 5,710,000 | $ | 5,666,378 | |||
| LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY: | |||||||
| LIABILITIES: | |||||||
| Deposits | $ | 4,131,956 | $ | 4,138,477 | |||
| Federal Home Loan Bank advances and other borrowings | 709,159 | 666,402 | |||||
| Subordinated debentures, net of issuance costs | 61,498 | 61,442 | |||||
| Lease liabilities | 31,630 | 32,209 | |||||
| Advance payments by borrowers for taxes and insurance | 29,270 | 24,057 | |||||
| Accrued expenses and other liabilities | 35,338 | 39,095 | |||||
| Total liabilities | 4,998,851 | 4,961,682 | |||||
| STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY: | |||||||
| Total stockholders’ equity | 711,149 | 704,696 | |||||
| Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity | $ | 5,710,000 | $ | 5,666,378 | |||
| Total shares outstanding | 42,676,274 | 42,903,598 | |||||
| Tangible book value per share(1) | $ | 15.70 | $ | 15.46 | |||
(1) Tangible book value per share is calculated based on total stockholders’ equity, excluding intangible assets (goodwill and core deposit intangibles), divided by total shares outstanding as of the balance sheet date. Core deposit intangibles were $57 and $69 at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively, and are included in other assets.
| NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC. | ||||||||||
| CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME | ||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except share and per share amounts) (unaudited) | ||||||||||
| For the Three Months Ended | ||||||||||
| March 31, | December 31, | |||||||||
| 2025 | 2024 | 2024 | ||||||||
| Interest income: | ||||||||||
| Loans | $ | 45,283 | $ | 46,047 | $ | 45,902 | ||||
| Mortgage-backed securities | 12,009 | 4,398 | 9,160 | |||||||
| Other securities | 797 | 3,841 | 1,428 | |||||||
| Federal Home Loan Bank of New York dividends | 862 | 970 | 885 | |||||||
| Deposits in other financial institutions | 1,141 | 3,392 | 2,347 | |||||||
| Total interest income | 60,092 | 58,648 | 59,722 | |||||||
| Interest expense: | ||||||||||
| Deposits | 21,191 | 19,273 | 22,031 | |||||||
| Borrowings | 6,291 | 10,663 | 7,169 | |||||||
| Subordinated debt | 819 | 828 | 837 | |||||||
| Total interest expense | 28,301 | 30,764 | 30,037 | |||||||
| Net interest income | 31,791 | 27,884 | 29,685 | |||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 2,582 | 415 | 1,942 | |||||||
| Net interest income after provision for credit losses | 29,209 | 27,469 | 27,743 | |||||||
| Non-interest income: | ||||||||||
| Fees and service charges for customer services | 1,620 | 1,615 | 1,634 | |||||||
| Income on bank-owned life insurance | 1,639 | 964 | 1,277 | |||||||
| (Losses)/gains on trading securities, net | (299 | ) | 699 | 68 | ||||||
| Gain on sale of property | — | — | 3,402 | |||||||
| Other | 62 | 103 | 623 | |||||||
| Total non-interest income | 3,022 | 3,381 | 7,004 | |||||||
| Non-interest expense: | ||||||||||
| Compensation and employee benefits | 11,775 | 12,765 | 11,761 | |||||||
| Occupancy | 3,533 | 3,553 | 3,253 | |||||||
| Furniture and equipment | 414 | 484 | 436 | |||||||
| Data processing | 2,122 | 2,147 | 1,921 | |||||||
| Professional fees | 1,072 | 809 | 762 | |||||||
| Advertising | 250 | 518 | 287 | |||||||
| Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance | 617 | 588 | 625 | |||||||
| Credit loss expense/(benefit) for off-balance sheet exposures | 103 | 83 | (55 | ) | ||||||
| Other | 1,549 | 1,385 | 1,832 | |||||||
| Total non-interest expense | 21,435 | 22,332 | 20,822 | |||||||
| Income before income tax expense | 10,796 | 8,518 | 13,925 | |||||||
| Income tax expense | 2,920 | 2,304 | 2,674 | |||||||
| Net income | $ | 7,876 | $ | 6,214 | $ | 11,251 | ||||
| Net income per common share: | ||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 0.19 | $ | 0.15 | $ | 0.28 | ||||
| Diluted | $ | 0.19 | $ | 0.15 | $ | 0.27 | ||||
| Basic average shares outstanding | 40,864,529 | 42,367,243 | 40,889,355 | |||||||
| Diluted average shares outstanding | 40,922,829 | 42,408,953 | 41,029,275 | |||||||
| NORTHFIELD BANCORP, INC. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ANALYSIS OF NET INTEREST INCOME | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) (unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| For the Three Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | March 31, 2024 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Average Outstanding Balance | Interest | Average Yield/ Rate(1) | Average Outstanding Balance | Interest | Average Yield/ Rate(1) | Average Outstanding Balance | Interest | Average Yield/ Rate(1) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-earning assets: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans(2) | $ | 4,007,266 | $ | 45,283 | 4.58 | % | $ | 4,044,787 | $ | 45,902 | 4.51 | % | $ | 4,174,668 | $ | 46,047 | 4.44 | % | ||||||||
| Mortgage-backed securities(3) | 1,132,715 | 12,009 | 4.30 | 950,309 | 9,160 | 3.83 | 648,811 | 4,398 | 2.73 | |||||||||||||||||
| Other securities(3) | 118,082 | 797 | 2.74 | 177,462 | 1,428 | 3.20 | 391,980 | 3,841 | 3.94 | |||||||||||||||||
| Federal Home Loan Bank of New York stock | 36,929 | 862 | 9.47 | 37,065 | 885 | 9.50 | 39,599 | 970 | 9.85 | |||||||||||||||||
| Interest-earning deposits in financial institutions | 118,983 | 1,141 | 3.89 | 204,146 | 2,347 | 4.57 | 262,884 | 3,392 | 5.19 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-earning assets | 5,413,975 | 60,092 | 4.50 | 5,413,769 | 59,722 | 4.39 | 5,517,942 | 58,648 | 4.27 | |||||||||||||||||
| Non-interest-earning assets | 277,586 | 277,067 | 266,428 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 5,691,561 | $ | 5,690,836 | $ | 5,784,370 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing liabilities: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Savings, NOW, and money market accounts | $ | 2,502,664 | $ | 12,148 | 1.97 | % | $ | 2,424,370 | $ | 11,997 | 1.97 | % | $ | 2,464,297 | $ | 12,331 | 2.01 | % | ||||||||
| Certificates of deposit | 923,713 | 9,043 | 3.97 | 928,658 | 10,034 | 4.30 | 654,328 | 6,942 | 4.27 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing deposits | 3,426,377 | 21,191 | 2.51 | 3,353,028 | 22,031 | 2.61 | 3,118,625 | 19,273 | 2.49 | |||||||||||||||||
| Borrowed funds | 695,281 | 6,291 | 3.67 | 775,722 | 7,169 | 3.68 | 1,108,880 | 10,663 | 3.87 | |||||||||||||||||
| Subordinated debt | 61,461 | 819 | 5.40 | 61,406 | 837 | 5.42 | 61,239 | 828 | 5.44 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities | 4,183,119 | 28,301 | 2.74 | 4,190,156 | 30,037 | 2.85 | 4,288,744 | 30,764 | 2.89 | |||||||||||||||||
| Non-interest bearing deposits | 706,217 | 703,886 | 699,640 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Accrued expenses and other liabilities | 94,819 | 97,918 | 99,594 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | 4,984,155 | 4,991,960 | 5,087,978 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Stockholders’ equity | 707,406 | 698,876 | 696,392 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity | $ | 5,691,561 | $ | 5,690,836 | $ | 5,784,370 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | $ | 31,791 | $ | 29,685 | $ | 27,884 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest rate spread(4) | 1.76 | % | 1.54 | % | 1.39 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest-earning assets(5) | $ | 1,230,856 | $ | 1,223,613 | $ | 1,229,198 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin(6) | 2.38 | % | 2.18 | % | 2.03 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Average interest-earning assets to interest-bearing liabilities | 129.42 | % | 129.20 | % | 128.66 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
(1) Average yields and rates are annualized.
(2) Includes non-accruing loans.
(3) Securities available-for-sale and other securities are reported at amortized cost.
(4) Net interest rate spread represents the difference between the weighted average yield on interest-earning assets and the weighted average cost of interest-bearing liabilities.
(5) Net interest-earning assets represent total interest-earning assets less total interest-bearing liabilities.
(6) Net interest margin represents net interest income divided by average total interest-earning assets.
Translation. Region: Russian Federal
Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
Mikhail Mishustin took part in a board meeting dedicated to summing up the work of the Ministry of Finance and setting goals for the future.
Before the meeting, the Prime Minister toured the National Centre “Russia” and familiarised himself with the exhibition “Journey across Russia”.
From the transcript:
M. Mishustin: Dear Anton Germanovich! Dear colleagues!
I am glad to welcome you all to this hall.
We have just visited the National Centre “Russia” and the interactive exhibition “Journey across Russia”. It is a logical continuation of the large-scale exhibition that was recently held at VDNKh on the instructions of the President and received more than 18 million visitors, including from abroad. The most important achievements of the country, all our regions, aroused great interest among the guests. And we really have something to be proud of. Thousands of different events were held there. Now its continuation has become the new National Centre, which will work here permanently.
This site is widely represented – we saw it today – by the cultural and natural assets of our federal districts. There is also room for technologies, innovations, achievements that the country has achieved over the past decades.
Such exhibitions help visitors – and, importantly, young people – understand the scale and power of the state. Its potential and the opportunities that every citizen of our country, regions and businesses have. Guests will discover new names, goods and services, technological innovations that are produced in our regions. And all of this can be seen right here, in the center of the capital.
Important state and public events for young people and the older generation, for volunteers and entrepreneurs, cultural figures, and innovators are already taking place here.
To be continued…
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Source: US State of Colorado
President Trump’s tariff tax disaster is creating uncertainty in the economy, and drying up investment by plunging markets into chaos
COLORADO – Today, Governor Polis and Attorney General Phil Weiser announced that the state will take legal action against the Trump administration over its failed tariff taxes that are destroying our economy, increasing costs on Americans, plunging markets, and putting America on the track to a recession. Colorado joins Oregon, Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont.
“Tariffs are awful for Americans and our economy, and it’s important to use every legal tool possible to reduce trade barriers and increase prosperity. Today, Colorado is standing up against President Trump’s recessionary tariff tax increase, which has been disastrous and is jeopardizing both U.S. leadership and the world economy. Here in Colorado, tariffs are already hurting Colorado agriculture and small businesses. We will do everything we can legally to prevent tariffs that are bad for businesses and all Americans,” said Colorado Governor Jared Polis.
Today, Governor Polis hosted Colorado-Mexico Friendship Day and has met with businesses across the state about the negative impacts of Trump’s tariffs on Colorado jobs and the economy.
“Coloradans are already starting to feel the effects of the Trump tariffs, with rising prices to consumers and the State of Colorado resulting from them,” Weiser said. “Under the Constitution, only Congress has the power to tax and impose tariffs and there is no ‘emergency’ that justifies the Trump tariffs. We are challenging these tariffs in court because they are illegal and, as one study concluded, they will ‘increase inflation, result in nearly 800,000 lost jobs, and shrink the American economy by $180 billion a year’.”
The lawsuit challenges President Trump’s executive orders calling for higher tariffs on most products worldwide. These tariffs impose a 25 percent tariff on most products from Canada and Mexico, and a 10 percent tariff on most products from the rest of the world. It also challenges President Trump’s plan to raise tariffs on imports from 46 other trading partners on July 9.
Studies of the tariffs President Trump issued in his first term show that 95 percent of the cost of tariffs are paid by Americans. The Federal Reserve and the International Monetary Fund project that this round of tariffs will cause inflation.
The lawsuit explains that under Article I of the Constitution, only Congress has the “Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises.” The executive orders cite the powers granted by the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), but that law applies only when an emergency presents “unusual and extraordinary threat” from abroad and does not give the President the power to impose tariffs. Congress enacted IEEPA in 1977. No President had imposed tariffs based on IEEPA until President Trump did so this year.
The case is State of Oregon, et al., v. Trump, et al. and was filed in the U.S. Court of International Trade.
The case is led by Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield and Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes. Also joining the lawsuit are the attorneys general of Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont.
In 2024, Colorado exported a record $10.5 billion of goods to the world and imported $16.8 B in goods. Colorado’s top export partners are Mexico ($1.7B), Canada ($1.6B), China ($0.8B) South Korea ($0.6B), and Malaysia ($0.6 B), accounting for half of all Colorado exports in 2024. Top export commodities include meat (17%); nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery (15%); electric machinery (13%); optic, photo, medical or surgical instruments (11%); and aircraft, spacecraft, and related parts (5%). In 2022, exports from Colorado supported an estimated 40 thousand jobs.
Colorado in 2024 exported $500 million in aerospace, spacecraft, and related parts, accounting for roughly 4.8% of all Colorado exports. The European Union, Brazil, France, Canada and Mexico were the top five export destinations, accounting for 63% of Colorado’s aerospace exports. In 2024, Colorado imported $1 billion of aerospace, spacecraft and related parts, accounting for roughly 6.2% of all Colorado imports. Switzerland, the EU, Germany, Canada, and France were the top five import sources, accounting for over 90% of Colorado’s aerospace imports.
An estimated 820,200 jobs in Colorado are supported by international trade, representing 20.8% of all jobs in the state. Colorado’s top import partners are Canada ($5.4 B), China ($1.8 B), Mexico ($1.1 B), Switzerland ($0.9 B) and Germany ($0.9 B), accounting for 60% of imports in 2024. Top import commodities include oil, mineral fuel (20%); electric machinery (14%); nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery (11%); optic, photo, medical or surgical instruments (8%); and aircraft, spacecraft and related parts (6%).
In addition to the commodities traded, Colorado also trades services and runs a services trade surplus. In 2022, Colorado exported $16 B in services, supporting 97,260 jobs. Top services export markets were Canada ($1.3 B), the United Kingdom ($0.9 B), Mexico ($0.9 B), and China ($0.6 B). As a bloc, the EU was the top services export market with $3.8 B in services exports supporting over 18,900 jobs.
###
Source: Government of Canada News (2)
Ottawa, Ontario, April 23, 2025—The Canadian International Trade Tribunal today initiated a preliminary injury inquiry into a complaint by Sivaco Wire Group 2004 L.P, of Marieville, Quebec and ArcelorMittal Long Products Canada G.P., of Contrecoeur, Quebec, that they have suffered injury as a result of the dumping of certain carbon or alloy steel wire originating in or exported from the People’s Republic of China, the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, the Republic of India, the Italian Republic, the Federation of Malaysia, the Portuguese Republic, the Kingdom of Spain, the Kingdom of Thailand, the Republic of Türkiye, and the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. The Tribunal’s inquiry is conducted pursuant to the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA) as a result of the initiation of a dumping investigation by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).
On June 19, 2025, the Tribunal will determine whether there is a reasonable indication that the alleged dumping has caused injury or retardation, or is threatening to cause injury, as these words are defined in SIMA. If so, the CBSA will continue its investigation and, by July 21, 2025, will make a preliminary determination. If this preliminary determination indicates that there has been dumping, the CBSA will then continue its investigation and, concurrently, the Tribunal will initiate a final injury inquiry.
The Tribunal is an independent quasi-judicial body that reports to Parliament through the Minister of Finance. It hears cases on dumped and subsidized imports, safeguard complaints, complaints about federal government procurement and appeals of customs and excise tax rulings. When requested by the federal government, the Tribunal also provides advice on other economic, trade and tariff matters.
Any interested person, association or government that wishes to participate in the Tribunal’s inquiry may do so by filing a Form I – Notice of Participation.
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
WILMINGTON, N.C., April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. (NYSE: LOB) (“Live Oak” or “the Company”) today reported first quarter of 2025 net income attributable to the Company of $9.7 million, or $0.21 per diluted share.
Live Oak’s performance in the quarter compared to the fourth quarter of 2024, includes these notable items:
“Live Oak Bank demonstrated strong growth across our lending and deposit franchises in the first quarter, all while navigating the current small business credit cycle and a backdrop of economic uncertainty,” said Live Oak Chairman and CEO James S. (Chip) Mahan III. “We have an unwavering dedication to small business and staying close to our customers in these turbulent times remains paramount. Small business is the backbone of America, and we continue to support our nation’s entrepreneurs with the capital they need to create jobs, drive innovation, and serve their communities well.”
Conference Call
Live Oak will host a conference call to discuss the Company’s financial results and business outlook tomorrow, April 24, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. ET. The call will be accessible by telephone and webcast using Conference ID: 75855. A supplementary slide presentation will be posted to the website prior to the event, and a replay will be available for 12 months following the event. The conference call details are as follows:
Live Telephone Dial-In
U.S.: 800.549.8228
International: +1 646.564.2877
Pass Code: None Required
Live Webcast Log-In
Webcast Link: investor.liveoakbank.com
Registration: Name and Email Required
Multi-Factor Code: Provided After Registration
(1) See accompanying GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation.
| First Quarter 2025 Key Measures | ||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) | Increase (Decrease) | |||||||||||||||||
| 1Q 2025 | 4Q 2024 | Dollars | Percent | 1Q 2024 | ||||||||||||||
| Total revenue (1) | $ | 126,113 | $ | 128,067 | $ | (1,954 | ) | (1.5 | )% | $ | 116,208 | |||||||
| Total noninterest expense | 84,017 | 81,257 | 2,760 | 3.4 | 77,737 | |||||||||||||
| Income before taxes | 13,132 | 13,229 | (97 | ) | (0.7 | ) | 22,107 | |||||||||||
| Effective tax rate | 26.4 | % | 25.6 | % | n/a | n/a | (24.8 | )% | ||||||||||
| Net income attributable to Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. | $ | 9,717 | $ | 9,900 | $ | (183 | ) | (1.8 | )% | $ | 27,586 | |||||||
| Diluted earnings per share | 0.21 | 0.22 | (0.01 | ) | (5 | ) | 0.60 | |||||||||||
| Loan and lease production: | ||||||||||||||||||
| Loans and leases originated | $ | 1,396,223 | $ | 1,421,118 | $ | (24,895 | ) | (1.8 | )% | $ | 805,129 | |||||||
| % Fully funded | 46.0 | % | 42.4 | % | n/a | n/a | 43.8 | % | ||||||||||
| Total loans and leases: | $ | 11,061,866 | $ | 10,579,376 | $ | 482,490 | 4.6 | % | $ | 9,223,310 | ||||||||
| Total assets: | 13,595,704 | 12,943,380 | 652,324 | 5.0 | 11,505,569 | |||||||||||||
| Total deposits: | 12,395,945 | 11,760,494 | 635,451 | 5.4 | 10,383,361 | |||||||||||||
(1) Total revenue consists of net interest income and total noninterest income.
Important Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
Statements in this press release that are based on other than historical data or that express the Company’s plans or expectations regarding future events or determinations are forward-looking within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements based on historical data are not intended and should not be understood to indicate the Company’s expectations regarding future events. Forward-looking statements provide current expectations or forecasts of future events or determinations. These forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or determinations, nor should they be relied upon as representing management’s views as of any subsequent date. Forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from those presented, either expressed or implied, in this press release. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements include changes in Small Business Administration (“SBA”) rules, regulations or loan products, including the Section 7(a) program, changes in SBA standard operating procedures or changes in Live Oak Banking Company’s status as an SBA Preferred Lender; changes in rules, regulations or procedures for other government loan programs, including those of the United States Department of Agriculture; the impacts of any pandemic or public health situation on trade (including supply chains and export levels), travel, employee productivity and other economic activities that may have a destabilizing and negative effect on financial markets, economic activity and customer behavior; adverse developments in the banking industry highlighted by high-profile bank failures and the potential impact of such developments on customer confidence, liquidity, and regulatory responses to these developments; a reduction in or the termination of the Company’s ability to use the technology-based platform that is critical to the success of its business model, including a failure in or a breach of operational or security systems or those of its third-party service providers; risks relating to the material weakness we identified in our internal control over financial reporting; technological risks and developments, including cyber threats, attacks, or events; competition from other lenders; the Company’s ability to attract and retain key personnel; market and economic conditions and the associated impact on the Company; operational, liquidity and credit risks associated with the Company’s business; changes in political and economic conditions, including any prolonged U.S. government shutdown; the impact of heightened regulatory scrutiny of financial products and services and the Company’s ability to comply with regulatory requirements and expectations; changes in tariffs and trade barriers, including potential changes in U.S. and international trade policies and the resulting impact on the Company and its customers; a deterioration of the credit rating for U.S. long-term sovereign debt, actions that the U.S. government may take to avoid exceeding the debt ceiling, and uncertainties surrounding the debt ceiling and the federal budget; adverse results, including related fees and expenses, from pending or future lawsuits, government investigations or private actions; and the other factors discussed in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and available at the SEC’s Internet site (http://www.sec.gov). Except as required by law, the Company specifically disclaims any obligation to update any factors or to publicly announce the result of revisions to any of the forward-looking statements included herein to reflect future events or developments.
About Live Oak Bancshares, Inc.
Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. (NYSE: LOB) is a financial holding company and the parent company of Live Oak Bank. Live Oak Bancshares and its subsidiaries partner with businesses that share a groundbreaking focus on service and technology to redefine banking. To learn more, visit www.liveoak.bank.
Contacts:
Walter J. Phifer | CFO | Investor Relations | 910.202.6926
Claire Parker | Corporate Communications | Media Relations | 910.597.1592
| Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. Quarterly Statements of Income (unaudited) (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended | 1Q 2025 Change vs. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1Q 2025 | 4Q 2024 | 3Q 2024 | 2Q 2024 | 1Q 2024 | 4Q 2024 | 1Q 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Interest income | % | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loans and fees on loans | $ | 195,616 | $ | 194,821 | $ | 192,170 | $ | 181,840 | $ | 176,010 | 0.4 | 11.1 | |||||||||||||
| Investment securities, taxable | 11,089 | 10,490 | 9,750 | 9,219 | 8,954 | 5.7 | 23.8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other interest earning assets | 6,400 | 7,257 | 7,016 | 7,389 | 7,456 | (11.8 | ) | (14.2 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total interest income | 213,105 | 212,568 | 208,936 | 198,448 | 192,420 | 0.3 | 10.7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Interest expense | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Deposits | 110,888 | 113,357 | 110,174 | 105,358 | 101,998 | (2.2 | ) | 8.7 | |||||||||||||||||
| Borrowings | 1,685 | 1,737 | 1,762 | 1,770 | 311 | (3.0 | ) | 441.8 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total interest expense | 112,573 | 115,094 | 111,936 | 107,128 | 102,309 | (2.2 | ) | 10.0 | |||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income | 100,532 | 97,474 | 97,000 | 91,320 | 90,111 | 3.1 | 11.6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Provision for loan and lease credit losses | 28,964 | 33,581 | 34,502 | 11,765 | 16,364 | (13.7 | ) | 77.0 | |||||||||||||||||
| Net interest income after provision for loan and lease credit losses | 71,568 | 63,893 | 62,498 | 79,555 | 73,747 | 12.0 | (3.0 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Noninterest income | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Loan servicing revenue | 8,298 | 8,524 | 8,040 | 7,347 | 7,624 | (2.7 | ) | 8.8 | |||||||||||||||||
| Loan servicing asset revaluation | (4,728 | ) | (2,326 | ) | (4,207 | ) | (2,878 | ) | (2,744 | ) | (103.3 | ) | (72.3 | ) | |||||||||||
| Net gains on sales of loans | 18,648 | 18,356 | 16,646 | 14,395 | 11,502 | 1.6 | 62.1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net (loss) gain on loans accounted for under the fair value option | (1,034 | ) | 195 | 2,255 | 172 | (219 | ) | (630.3 | ) | (372.1 | ) | ||||||||||||||
| Equity method investments (loss) income | (2,239 | ) | (2,739 | ) | (1,393 | ) | (1,767 | ) | (5,022 | ) | 18.3 | 55.4 | |||||||||||||
| Equity security investments (losses) gains, net | 20 | 12 | 909 | 161 | (529 | ) | 66.7 | (103.8 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Lease income | 2,573 | 2,456 | 2,424 | 2,423 | 2,453 | 4.8 | 4.9 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Management fee income | — | — | 1,116 | 3,271 | 3,271 | — | (100.0 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Other noninterest income | 4,043 | 6,115 | 7,142 | 11,035 | 9,761 | (33.9 | ) | (58.6 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total noninterest income | 25,581 | 30,593 | 32,932 | 34,159 | 26,097 | (16.4 | ) | (2.0 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Noninterest expense | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Salaries and employee benefits | 48,008 | 45,214 | 44,524 | 46,255 | 47,275 | 6.2 | 1.6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Travel expense | 2,795 | 2,628 | 2,344 | 2,328 | 2,438 | 6.4 | 14.6 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Professional services expense | 3,024 | 2,797 | 3,287 | 3,061 | 1,878 | 8.1 | 61.0 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Advertising and marketing expense | 3,665 | 1,979 | 2,473 | 3,004 | 3,692 | 85.2 | (0.7 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Occupancy expense | 2,737 | 2,558 | 2,807 | 2,388 | 2,247 | 7.0 | 21.8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Technology expense | 9,251 | 9,406 | 9,081 | 7,996 | 7,723 | (1.6 | ) | 19.8 | |||||||||||||||||
| Equipment expense | 3,745 | 3,769 | 3,472 | 3,511 | 3,074 | (0.6 | ) | 21.8 | |||||||||||||||||
| Other loan origination and maintenance expense | 4,585 | 4,812 | 4,872 | 3,659 | 3,911 | (4.7 | ) | 17.2 | |||||||||||||||||
| Renewable energy tax credit investment (recovery) impairment | — | 1,172 | 115 | 170 | (927 | ) | (100.0 | ) | (100.0 | ) | |||||||||||||||
| FDIC insurance | 3,551 | 3,053 | 1,933 | 2,649 | 3,200 | 16.3 | 11.0 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other expense | 2,656 | 3,869 | 2,681 | 2,635 | 3,226 | (31.4 | ) | (17.7 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total noninterest expense | 84,017 | 81,257 | 77,589 | 77,656 | 77,737 | 3.4 | 8.1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Income before taxes | 13,132 | 13,229 | 17,841 | 36,058 | 22,107 | (0.7 | ) | (40.6 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Income tax expense | 3,464 | 3,386 | 4,816 | 9,095 | (5,479 | ) | 2.3 | (163.2 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Net income | 9,668 | 9,843 | 13,025 | 26,963 | 27,586 | (1.8 | ) | (65.0 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Net loss attributable to non-controlling interest | 49 | 57 | — | — | — | (14.0 | ) | 100.0 | |||||||||||||||||
| Net income attributable to Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. | $ | 9,717 | $ | 9,900 | $ | 13,025 | $ | 26,963 | $ | 27,586 | (1.8 | ) | (64.8 | ) | |||||||||||
| Earnings per share | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.22 | $ | 0.28 | $ | 0.60 | $ | 0.62 | (4.5 | ) | (66.1 | ) | |||||||||||
| Diluted | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.22 | $ | 0.28 | $ | 0.59 | $ | 0.60 | (4.5 | ) | (65.0 | ) | |||||||||||
| Weighted average shares outstanding | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Basic | 45,377,965 | 45,224,470 | 45,073,482 | 44,974,942 | 44,762,308 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Diluted | 45,754,499 | 46,157,979 | 45,953,947 | 45,525,082 | 45,641,210 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. Quarterly Balance Sheets (unaudited) (Dollars in thousands) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| As of the quarter ended | 1Q 2025 Change vs. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 1Q 2025 | 4Q 2024 | 3Q 2024 | 2Q 2024 | 1Q 2024 | 4Q 2024 | 1Q 2024 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Assets | % | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | $ | 744,263 | $ | 608,800 | $ | 666,585 | $ | 615,449 | $ | 597,394 | 22.3 | 24.6 | |||||||||||||
| Certificates of deposit with other banks | 250 | 250 | 250 | 250 | 250 | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Investment securities available-for-sale | 1,312,680 | 1,248,203 | 1,233,466 | 1,151,195 | 1,120,622 | 5.2 | 17.1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Loans held for sale | 367,955 | 346,002 | 359,977 | 363,632 | 310,749 | 6.3 | 18.4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Loans and leases held for investment (1) | 10,693,911 | 10,233,374 | 9,831,891 | 9,172,134 | 8,912,561 | 4.5 | 20.0 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses on loans and leases | (190,184 | ) | (167,516 | ) | (168,737 | ) | (137,867 | ) | (139,041 | ) | (13.5 | ) | (36.8 | ) | |||||||||||
| Net loans and leases | 10,503,727 | 10,065,858 | 9,663,154 | 9,034,267 | 8,773,520 | 4.4 | 19.7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Premises and equipment, net | 259,113 | 264,059 | 267,032 | 267,864 | 258,071 | (1.9 | ) | 0.4 | |||||||||||||||||
| Foreclosed assets | 2,108 | 1,944 | 8,015 | 8,015 | 8,561 | 8.4 | (75.4 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Servicing assets | 56,911 | 56,144 | 52,553 | 51,528 | 49,343 | 1.4 | 15.3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Other assets | 348,697 | 352,120 | 356,314 | 376,370 | 387,059 | (1.0 | ) | (9.9 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 13,595,704 | $ | 12,943,380 | $ | 12,607,346 | $ | 11,868,570 | $ | 11,505,569 | 5.0 | 18.2 | |||||||||||||
| Liabilities and shareholders’ equity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Liabilities | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Deposits: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Noninterest-bearing | $ | 386,108 | $ | 318,890 | $ | 258,844 | $ | 264,013 | $ | 226,668 | 21.1 | 70.3 | |||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing | 12,009,837 | 11,441,604 | 11,141,703 | 10,443,018 | 10,156,693 | 5.0 | 18.2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total deposits | 12,395,945 | 11,760,494 | 11,400,547 | 10,707,031 | 10,383,361 | 5.4 | 19.4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Borrowings | 110,247 | 112,820 | 115,371 | 117,745 | 120,242 | (2.3 | ) | (8.3 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Other liabilities | 58,065 | 66,570 | 83,672 | 82,745 | 74,248 | (12.8 | ) | (21.8 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | 12,564,257 | 11,939,884 | 11,599,590 | 10,907,521 | 10,577,851 | 5.2 | 18.8 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Shareholders’ equity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Preferred stock, no par value, 1,000,000 shares authorized, none issued or outstanding | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Class A common stock (voting) | 370,513 | 365,607 | 361,925 | 356,381 | 349,648 | 1.3 | 6.0 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Class B common stock (non-voting) | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | ||||||||||||||||||
| Retained earnings | 724,215 | 715,767 | 707,026 | 695,172 | 669,307 | 1.2 | 8.2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss | (67,698 | ) | (82,344 | ) | (61,195 | ) | (90,504 | ) | (91,237 | ) | 17.8 | 25.8 | |||||||||||||
| Total shareholders’ equity attributed to Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. | 1,027,030 | 999,030 | 1,007,756 | 961,049 | 927,718 | 2.8 | 10.7 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Non-controlling interest | 4,417 | 4,466 | — | — | — | (1.1 | ) | 100.0 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total shareholders’ equity | 1,031,447 | 1,003,496 | 1,007,756 | 961,049 | 927,718 | 2.8 | 11.2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 13,595,704 | $ | 12,943,380 | $ | 12,607,346 | $ | 11,868,570 | $ | 11,505,569 | 5.0 | 18.2 | |||||||||||||
(1) Includes $316.8 million, $328.7 million, $343.4 million, $363.0 million and $379.2 million measured at fair value for the quarters ended March 31, 2025, December 31, 2024, September 30, 2024, June 30, 2024, and March 31, 2024 respectively.
| Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. Quarterly Selected Financial Data (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) |
|||||||||||||||||||
| As of and for the three months ended | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1Q 2025 | 4Q 2024 | 3Q 2024 | 2Q 2024 | 1Q 2024 | |||||||||||||||
| Income Statement Data | |||||||||||||||||||
| Net income attributable to Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. | $ | 9,717 | $ | 9,900 | $ | 13,025 | $ | 26,963 | $ | 27,586 | |||||||||
| Per Common Share | |||||||||||||||||||
| Net income, diluted | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.22 | $ | 0.28 | $ | 0.59 | $ | 0.60 | |||||||||
| Dividends declared | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | ||||||||||||||
| Book value | 22.62 | 22.12 | 22.32 | 21.35 | 20.64 | ||||||||||||||
| Tangible book value (1) | 22.55 | 22.05 | 22.24 | 21.28 | 20.57 | ||||||||||||||
| Performance Ratios | |||||||||||||||||||
| Return on average assets (annualized) | 0.30 | % | 0.31 | % | 0.43 | % | 0.93 | % | 0.98 | % | |||||||||
| Return on average equity (annualized) | 3.78 | 3.85 | 5.21 | 11.39 | 11.93 | ||||||||||||||
| Net interest margin | 3.20 | 3.15 | 3.33 | 3.28 | 3.33 | ||||||||||||||
| Efficiency ratio (1) | 66.62 | 63.45 | 59.72 | 61.89 | 66.89 | ||||||||||||||
| Noninterest income to total revenue | 20.28 | 23.89 | 25.35 | 27.22 | 22.46 | ||||||||||||||
| Selected Loan Metrics | |||||||||||||||||||
| Loans and leases originated | $ | 1,396,223 | $ | 1,421,118 | $ | 1,757,856 | $ | 1,171,141 | $ | 805,129 | |||||||||
| Outstanding balance of sold loans serviced | 4,949,962 | 4,715,895 | 4,452,750 | 4,292,857 | 4,329,097 | ||||||||||||||
| Asset Quality Ratios | |||||||||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses to loans and leases held for investment (3) | 1.83 | % | 1.69 | % | 1.78 | % | 1.57 | % | 1.63 | % | |||||||||
| Net charge-offs (3) | $ | 6,774 | $ | 33,566 | $ | 1,710 | $ | 8,253 | $ | 3,163 | |||||||||
| Net charge-offs to average loans and leases held for investment (2) (3) | 0.27 | % | 1.39 | % | 0.08 | % | 0.38 | % | 0.15 | % | |||||||||
| Nonperforming loans and leases at historical cost (3) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Unguaranteed | $ | 99,907 | $ | 81,412 | $ | 49,398 | $ | 37,340 | $ | 43,117 | |||||||||
| Guaranteed | 322,993 | 222,885 | 166,177 | 122,752 | 105,351 | ||||||||||||||
| Total | 422,900 | 304,297 | 215,575 | 160,092 | 148,468 | ||||||||||||||
| Unguaranteed nonperforming historical cost loans and leases, to loans and leases held for investment (3) | 0.96 | % | 0.82 | % | 0.52 | % | 0.42 | % | 0.51 | % | |||||||||
| Nonperforming loans at fair value (4) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Unguaranteed | $ | 9,938 | $ | 9,115 | $ | 8,672 | $ | 9,590 | $ | 7,942 | |||||||||
| Guaranteed | 58,100 | 54,873 | 49,822 | 51,570 | 47,620 | ||||||||||||||
| Total | 68,038 | 63,988 | 58,494 | 61,160 | 55,562 | ||||||||||||||
| Unguaranteed nonperforming fair value loans to fair value loans held for investment (4) | 3.14 | % | 2.77 | % | 2.53 | % | 2.64 | % | 2.09 | % | |||||||||
| Capital Ratios | |||||||||||||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 capital (to risk-weighted assets) | 10.70 | % | 11.04 | % | 11.19 | % | 11.85 | % | 11.89 | % | |||||||||
| Tier 1 leverage capital (to average assets) | 8.03 | 8.21 | 8.60 | 8.71 | 8.69 | ||||||||||||||
Notes to Quarterly Selected Financial Data
(1) See accompanying GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation.
(2) Quarterly net charge-offs as a percentage of quarterly average loans and leases held for investment, annualized.
(3) Loans and leases at historical cost only (excludes loans measured at fair value).
(4) Loans accounted for under the fair value option only (excludes loans and leases carried at historical cost).
| Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. Quarterly Average Balances and Net Interest Margin (Dollars in thousands) |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 |
Three Months Ended December 31, 2024 |
||||||||||||||||||
| Average Balance |
Interest | Average Yield/Rate |
Average Balance |
Interest | Average Yield/Rate |
||||||||||||||
| Interest-earning assets: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-earning balances in other banks | $ | 581,267 | $ | 6,400 | 4.47 | % | $ | 603,758 | $ | 7,257 | 4.78 | % | |||||||
| Investment securities | 1,379,797 | 11,089 | 3.26 | 1,340,027 | 10,490 | 3.11 | |||||||||||||
| Loans held for sale | 407,953 | 8,612 | 8.56 | 339,394 | 7,361 | 8.63 | |||||||||||||
| Loans and leases held for investment (1) | 10,388,872 | 187,004 | 7.30 | 10,030,353 | 187,460 | 7.44 | |||||||||||||
| Total interest-earning assets | 12,757,889 | 213,105 | 6.77 | 12,313,532 | 212,568 | 6.87 | |||||||||||||
| Less: Allowance for credit losses on loans and leases | (165,320 | ) | (155,498 | ) | |||||||||||||||
| Noninterest-earning assets | 534,133 | 551,265 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 13,126,702 | $ | 12,709,299 | |||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing liabilities: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing checking | $ | 350,491 | $ | 3,929 | 4.55 | % | $ | 350,304 | $ | 4,350 | 4.94 | % | |||||||
| Savings | 5,540,147 | 51,604 | 3.78 | 5,333,338 | 52,308 | 3.90 | |||||||||||||
| Money market accounts | 127,908 | 120 | 0.38 | 138,021 | 176 | 0.51 | |||||||||||||
| Certificates of deposit | 5,563,004 | 55,235 | 4.03 | 5,376,290 | 56,523 | 4.18 | |||||||||||||
| Total deposits | 11,581,550 | 110,888 | 3.88 | 11,197,953 | 113,357 | 4.03 | |||||||||||||
| Borrowings | 111,919 | 1,685 | 6.11 | 114,561 | 1,737 | 6.03 | |||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities | 11,693,469 | 112,573 | 3.90 | 11,312,514 | 115,094 | 4.05 | |||||||||||||
| Noninterest-bearing deposits | 342,482 | 281,874 | |||||||||||||||||
| Noninterest-bearing liabilities | 58,739 | 83,373 | |||||||||||||||||
| Shareholders’ equity | 1,027,547 | 1,028,426 | |||||||||||||||||
| Non-controlling interest | 4,465 | 3,112 | |||||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 13,126,702 | $ | 12,709,299 | |||||||||||||||
| Net interest income and interest rate spread | $ | 100,532 | 2.87 | % | $ | 97,474 | 2.82 | % | |||||||||||
| Net interest margin | 3.20 | 3.15 | |||||||||||||||||
| Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities | 109.10 | % | 108.85 | % | |||||||||||||||
(1) Average loan and lease balances include non-accruing loans and leases.
| Live Oak Bancshares, Inc. GAAP to Non-GAAP Reconciliation (Dollars in thousands) |
|||||||||||||||||||
| As of and for the three months ended | |||||||||||||||||||
| 1Q 2025 | 4Q 2024 | 3Q 2024 | 2Q 2024 | 1Q 2024 | |||||||||||||||
| Total shareholders’ equity | $ | 1,031,447 | $ | 1,003,496 | $ | 1,007,756 | $ | 961,049 | $ | 927,718 | |||||||||
| Less: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Goodwill | 1,797 | 1,797 | 1,797 | 1,797 | 1,797 | ||||||||||||||
| Other intangible assets | 1,529 | 1,568 | 1,606 | 1,644 | 1,682 | ||||||||||||||
| Tangible shareholders’ equity (a) | $ | 1,028,121 | $ | 1,000,131 | $ | 1,004,353 | $ | 957,608 | $ | 924,239 | |||||||||
| Shares outstanding (c) | 45,589,633 | 45,359,425 | 45,151,691 | 45,003,856 | 44,938,673 | ||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 13,595,704 | $ | 12,943,380 | $ | 12,607,346 | $ | 11,868,570 | $ | 11,505,569 | |||||||||
| Less: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Goodwill | 1,797 | 1,797 | 1,797 | 1,797 | 1,797 | ||||||||||||||
| Other intangible assets | 1,529 | 1,568 | 1,606 | 1,644 | 1,682 | ||||||||||||||
| Tangible assets (b) | $ | 13,592,378 | $ | 12,940,015 | $ | 12,603,943 | $ | 11,865,129 | $ | 11,502,090 | |||||||||
| Tangible shareholders’ equity to tangible assets (a/b) | 7.56 | % | 7.73 | % | 7.97 | % | 8.07 | % | 8.04 | % | |||||||||
| Tangible book value per share (a/c) | $ | 22.55 | $ | 22.05 | $ | 22.24 | $ | 21.28 | $ | 20.57 | |||||||||
| Efficiency ratio: | |||||||||||||||||||
| Noninterest expense (d) | $ | 84,017 | $ | 81,257 | $ | 77,589 | $ | 77,656 | $ | 77,737 | |||||||||
| Net interest income | 100,532 | 97,474 | 97,000 | 91,320 | 90,111 | ||||||||||||||
| Noninterest income | 25,581 | 30,593 | 32,932 | 34,159 | 26,097 | ||||||||||||||
| Total revenue (e) | $ | 126,113 | $ | 128,067 | $ | 129,932 | $ | 125,479 | $ | 116,208 | |||||||||
| Efficiency ratio (d/e) | 66.62 | % | 63.45 | % | 59.72 | % | 61.89 | % | 66.89 | % | |||||||||
| Pre-provision net revenue (e-d) | $ | 42,096 | $ | 46,810 | $ | 52,343 | $ | 47,823 | $ | 38,471 | |||||||||
This press release presents non-GAAP financial measures. The adjustments to reconcile from the non-GAAP financial measures to the applicable GAAP financial measure are included where applicable in financial results presented in accordance with GAAP. The Company considers these adjustments to be relevant to ongoing operating results. The Company believes that excluding the amounts associated with these adjustments to present the non-GAAP financial measures provides a meaningful base for period-to-period comparisons, which will assist regulators, investors, and analysts in analyzing the operating results or financial position of the Company. The non-GAAP financial measures are used by management to assess the performance of the Company’s business for presentations of Company performance to investors, and for other reasons as may be requested by investors and analysts. The Company further believes that presenting the non-GAAP financial measures will permit investors and analysts to assess the performance of the Company on the same basis as that applied by management. Non-GAAP financial measures have inherent limitations, are not required to be uniformly applied, and are not audited. Although non-GAAP financial measures are frequently used by shareholders to evaluate a company, they have limitations as an analytical tool and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of results reported under GAAP.
Source: US State of New York
overnor Kathy Hochul and New York Attorney General Letitia James today announced that New York State and a coalition of 11 other states are suing the Trump administration for illegally imposing unprecedented tax hikes on Americans in the form of tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The Trump administration’s IEEPA tariffs raise taxes on imports from nearly every country on Earth, including America’s closest allies and trading partners, and they have already caused severe economic damage. The lawsuit, filed by Attorney General James and a coalition of attorneys general, argues that Congress has not granted the president the authority to impose these tariffs and therefore the administration violated the law by imposing them through executive orders, social media posts, and agency orders. The coalition seeks a court order halting these IEEPA tariffs, including the worldwide tariffs that were paused on April 9, and preventing the Trump administration from enforcing or implementing them.
“President Trump’s reckless tariffs have skyrocketed costs for consumers and unleashed economic chaos across the country. New York is standing up to fight back against the largest federal tax hike in American history,” Governor Hochul said. “Attorney General James and I are partnering on this litigation on behalf of New York consumers, because we can’t let President Trump push our country into a recession.”
New York State Attorney General Letitia James said, “The president does not have the power to raise taxes on a whim, but that’s exactly what President Trump has been doing with these tariffs. Donald Trump promised that he would lower prices and ease the cost of living, but these illegal tariffs will have the exact opposite effect on American families. His tariffs are unlawful and if not stopped, they will lead to more inflation, unemployment, and economic damage.”
Since February, President Trump has been unilaterally imposing sweeping tariffs against America’s closest trading partners. These tariffs expanded in a series of announcements in April to now cover nearly every country worldwide, including places that are not involved in international trade, such as the Heard and McDonald Islands, which have no known human inhabitants.
In addition to the severe economic damage that President Trump’s tariffs have already caused, the coalition warns they could cause even more destruction if allowed to continue. The lawsuit argues the IEEPA tariffs will increase unemployment, raise inflation, and threaten Americans’ wages by slowing economic growth. The president’s tariffs will harm the states and their residents by making important goods ranging from electronics to building materials more expensive and scarce.
These costs will severely impact New Yorkers. Economists estimate the increased tariffs will cost the average family thousands of dollars per year, and a report from the New York City Comptroller estimated that even a mild recession caused by the tariffs would lead to over 35,000 lost jobs in New York City alone. New York state agencies could end up paying over $100 million in extra costs due to tariffs increasing prices. Retaliatory tariffs imposed by Canada on the hundreds of millions of dollars in electricity that New York imports every year would cause New Yorkers’ energy bills to spike. Across the state, small businesses that rely on imports are already reeling from the threat of higher prices and uncertainty caused by the administration’s policies. In Central New York, the Cortland Standard, one of the oldest family-owned newspapers in the country, announced it would cease publication in part due to an expected tariff on newsprint.
The lawsuit, filed in the United States Court of International Trade, asserts that President Trump has no authority to impose tariffs as he has. While the president has declared emergencies and invoked IEEPA to justify these tariffs, not once has any other president used IEEPA to impose tariffs like this in the five decades since it became law. As the coalition argues in the lawsuit, the law was not designed to allow the president to unilaterally impose worldwide tariffs indiscriminately. In addition, the coalition argues that the Trump administration has overstepped its authority and violated the Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act by imposing these tariffs.
With this lawsuit, the coalition is seeking a court order declaring the Trump administration’s IEEPA tariff orders to be in violation of the law and ordering the administration to stop implementing or enforcing these tariffs.
Joining Attorney General James in filing this lawsuit are the attorneys general of Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, and Vermont.
Governor Hochul has been in contact with federal leaders regarding the devastating effects tariffs will have on New York’s residents, businesses and our economy. The Governor has consulted with federal partners, economists and heard from business owners, trade groups, agribusiness and other stakeholders on the hardships tariffs will have on New York State.
Source: United States Attorneys General 1
A former U.S. Army intelligence analyst was sentenced today to 84 months in prison for conspiring to collect and transmit national defense information, including sensitive, non-public U.S. military information, to an individual he believed was affiliated with the Chinese government.
Korbein Schultz, 25, of Wills Point, Texas, pleaded guilty in August 2024 to conspiring to collect and transmit national defense information, unlawfully exporting controlled information to China, and accepting bribes in exchange of sensitive, non-public U.S. government information.
“This defendant swore an oath to defend the United States — instead, he betrayed it for a payout and put America’s military and service members at risk,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The Justice Department remains vigilant against China’s efforts to target our military and will ensure that those who leak military secrets spend years behind bars.”
“This sentencing is a stark warning to those who betray our country: you will pay a steep price for it,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “The People’s Republic of China is relentless in its efforts to steal our national defense information, and service members are a prime target. The FBI and our partners will continue to root out espionage and hold those accountable who abandon their obligation to safeguard defense information from hostile foreign governments.”
“Those who collaborate with America’s foreign adversaries put our country, and those who defend it, at grave risk and we will do whatever it takes to hold them accountable for their crimes,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Robert E. McGuire for the Middle District of Tennessee. “We will proudly stand in support of our men and women in uniform and work diligently to protect them from people like the defendant who would sell them out for a few bucks.”
“Protecting classified information is paramount to our national security, and this sentencing reflects the ramifications when there is a breach of that trust,” said Brigadier General Rhett R. Cox, Commanding General of the Army Counterintelligence Command. “This Soldier’s actions put Army personnel at risk placing individual gain above personal honor. Army Counterintelligence Command, in close collaboration with the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Intelligence Community, remains steadfast in our commitment to safeguarding our nation’s secrets and urges all current and former Army personnel to report any suspicious contact immediately.”
According to court documents, between May 2022 until his arrest in March 2024, Schultz engaged in an ongoing conspiracy to provide dozens of sensitive U.S. military documents — many containing export-controlled tactical and technical information — directly to a foreign national residing in the People’s Republic of China. Despite clear indications that this individual, who is referenced in the Indictment as Conspirator A, was likely connected to the Chinese government, the defendant continued the relationship in exchange for financial compensation. In exchange for approximately $42,000, Schultz provided documents and data related to U.S. military capabilities, including:
Conspirator A first contacted the defendant through a freelance web-based work platform shortly after the defendant received his Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearance. Masquerading as a client from a geopolitical consulting firm, Conspirator A solicited the defendant to produce detailed analyses on U.S. military capabilities and planning, particularly in relation to Taiwan and the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
As the relationship progressed, Conspirator A’s demands grew increasingly specific and sensitive — requesting technical manuals, operational procedures, and intelligence assessments. Conspirator A made explicit his interest in materials that were not publicly available and encouraged the defendant to seek out higher levels of classification, emphasizing “exclusiveness” and “CUI and better.” Schultz agreed to obtain higher levels of classified information for Conspirator A in exchange for money.
The defendant, fully aware of the grave national security implications, used his position and access to restricted databases — including closed U.S. government computer networks — to download and transmit at least 92 sensitive U.S. military documents.
The case also revealed attempts by the defendant to recruit his friend and fellow Army intelligence analyst into the conspiracy. At the time, Schultz’s friend was assigned to the U.S. Department of Defense’s Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), which is the combatant command that covers China and its regional areas of influence. Schultz and Conspirator A discussed the need to recruit another person into their scheme who had better access to classified material. They agreed that such recruitment needed to be done in a “nice and slow fashion.”
The FBI’s Nashville Field Office investigated the case, with valuable assistance from the U.S. Army Counterintelligence Command and the Department of Defense.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Josh Kurtzman for the Middle District of Tennessee and Trial Attorneys Adam Barry and Christopher Cook of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section prosecuted the case.
Source: US State of North Dakota
A former U.S. Army intelligence analyst was sentenced today to 84 months in prison for conspiring to collect and transmit national defense information, including sensitive, non-public U.S. military information, to an individual he believed was affiliated with the Chinese government.
Korbein Schultz, 25, of Wills Point, Texas, pleaded guilty in August 2024 to conspiring to collect and transmit national defense information, unlawfully exporting controlled information to China, and accepting bribes in exchange of sensitive, non-public U.S. government information.
“This defendant swore an oath to defend the United States — instead, he betrayed it for a payout and put America’s military and service members at risk,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The Justice Department remains vigilant against China’s efforts to target our military and will ensure that those who leak military secrets spend years behind bars.”
“This sentencing is a stark warning to those who betray our country: you will pay a steep price for it,” said FBI Director Kash Patel. “The People’s Republic of China is relentless in its efforts to steal our national defense information, and service members are a prime target. The FBI and our partners will continue to root out espionage and hold those accountable who abandon their obligation to safeguard defense information from hostile foreign governments.”
“Those who collaborate with America’s foreign adversaries put our country, and those who defend it, at grave risk and we will do whatever it takes to hold them accountable for their crimes,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Robert E. McGuire for the Middle District of Tennessee. “We will proudly stand in support of our men and women in uniform and work diligently to protect them from people like the defendant who would sell them out for a few bucks.”
“Protecting classified information is paramount to our national security, and this sentencing reflects the ramifications when there is a breach of that trust,” said Brigadier General Rhett R. Cox, Commanding General of the Army Counterintelligence Command. “This Soldier’s actions put Army personnel at risk placing individual gain above personal honor. Army Counterintelligence Command, in close collaboration with the Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Intelligence Community, remains steadfast in our commitment to safeguarding our nation’s secrets and urges all current and former Army personnel to report any suspicious contact immediately.”
According to court documents, between May 2022 until his arrest in March 2024, Schultz engaged in an ongoing conspiracy to provide dozens of sensitive U.S. military documents — many containing export-controlled tactical and technical information — directly to a foreign national residing in the People’s Republic of China. Despite clear indications that this individual, who is referenced in the Indictment as Conspirator A, was likely connected to the Chinese government, the defendant continued the relationship in exchange for financial compensation. In exchange for approximately $42,000, Schultz provided documents and data related to U.S. military capabilities, including:
Conspirator A first contacted the defendant through a freelance web-based work platform shortly after the defendant received his Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS/SCI) clearance. Masquerading as a client from a geopolitical consulting firm, Conspirator A solicited the defendant to produce detailed analyses on U.S. military capabilities and planning, particularly in relation to Taiwan and the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
As the relationship progressed, Conspirator A’s demands grew increasingly specific and sensitive — requesting technical manuals, operational procedures, and intelligence assessments. Conspirator A made explicit his interest in materials that were not publicly available and encouraged the defendant to seek out higher levels of classification, emphasizing “exclusiveness” and “CUI and better.” Schultz agreed to obtain higher levels of classified information for Conspirator A in exchange for money.
The defendant, fully aware of the grave national security implications, used his position and access to restricted databases — including closed U.S. government computer networks — to download and transmit at least 92 sensitive U.S. military documents.
The case also revealed attempts by the defendant to recruit his friend and fellow Army intelligence analyst into the conspiracy. At the time, Schultz’s friend was assigned to the U.S. Department of Defense’s Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM), which is the combatant command that covers China and its regional areas of influence. Schultz and Conspirator A discussed the need to recruit another person into their scheme who had better access to classified material. They agreed that such recruitment needed to be done in a “nice and slow fashion.”
The FBI’s Nashville Field Office investigated the case, with valuable assistance from the U.S. Army Counterintelligence Command and the Department of Defense.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Josh Kurtzman for the Middle District of Tennessee and Trial Attorneys Adam Barry and Christopher Cook of the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section prosecuted the case.
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)
SOUDERTON, Pa., April 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Univest Financial Corporation (“Univest” or the “Corporation”) (NASDAQ: UVSP), parent company of Univest Bank and Trust Co. (the “Bank”) and its insurance, investments and equipment financing subsidiaries, announced net income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 of $22.4 million, or $0.77 diluted earnings per share, compared to net income of $20.3 million, or $0.69 diluted earnings per share, for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
Dividend
On April 23, 2025, Univest declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.22 per share to be paid on May 21, 2025 to shareholders of record as of May 7, 2025, which represents an increase of $0.01 per share, or 4.8%. Univest had last increased its dividend by $0.01 per share in May 2022.
One-Time Items
The financial results for the quarter included tax-free bank owned life insurance (“BOLI”) death benefits claims of $1.0 million, which represented $0.04 diluted earnings per share.
Loans
Gross loans and leases increased $6.5 million, or 0.1% (0.4% annualized), from December 31, 2024. Gross loans and leases increased $254.0 million, or 3.9%, from March 31, 2024, primarily due to increases in commercial, commercial real estate, residential mortgage loans and home equity loans, partially offset by decreases in construction loans and lease financings.
Deposits, Borrowings and Liquidity
Total deposits decreased $100.8 million, or 1.5% (6.0% annualized), from December 31, 2024, primarily due to seasonal declines in public funds deposits and decreases in commercial and consumer deposits, partially offset by an increase in brokered deposits. Total deposits increased $253.1 million, or 4.0%, from March 31, 2024, due to increases in consumer, commercial, and public funds deposits, partially offset by a decrease in brokered deposits. Noninterest-bearing deposits totaled $1.4 billion and represented 21.5% of total deposits at March 31, 2025, compared to $1.4 billion representing 20.9% of total deposits at December 31, 2024. Unprotected deposits, which excludes insured, internal, and collateralized deposit accounts, totaled $1.5 billion at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024. This represented 21.9% of total deposits at March 31, 2025, compared to 22.0% at December 31, 2024.
Total borrowings decreased $57.0 million, or 14.8%, from December 31, 2024, primarily due to maturities of long-term FHLB advances totaling $50.0 million. These borrowings were replaced with brokered deposits during the quarter.
As of March 31, 2025, the Corporation and its subsidiaries reported cash and cash equivalents totaling $169.1 million and had committed borrowing capacity of $3.7 billion, of which $2.3 billion was available. The Corporation and its subsidiaries also maintained uncommitted funding sources from correspondent banks of $468.0 million at March 31, 2025. Future availability under these uncommitted funding sources is subject to the prerogatives of the granting banks and may be withdrawn at will.
Net Interest Income and Margin
Net interest income of $56.8 million for the first quarter of 2025 increased $5.3 million, or 10.3%, from the first quarter of 2024 and $1.3 million, or 2.4%, from the fourth quarter of 2024. The increase in net interest income for the first quarter of 2025 compared to the first quarter of 2024 was driven by higher average balances of loans and increased yields on interest earning assets, as well as a reduction in our overall cost of funds. The increase in net interest income for the first quarter of 2025 compared to the fourth quarter of 2024 was primarily driven by lower average balances of interest-bearing liabilities and related costs outpacing decreases in income from interest-earning deposits with other banks.
Net interest margin, on a tax-equivalent basis, was 3.09% for the first quarter of 2025, compared to 2.88% for the first and fourth quarters of 2024. Excess liquidity reduced net interest margin by approximately three basis points for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to approximately 14 basis points for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and approximately three basis points for the quarter ended March 31, 2024. Excluding the impact of excess liquidity, the net interest margin, on a tax-equivalent basis, would have been 3.12% for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to 3.02% for the quarter ended December 31, 2024 and 2.91% for the quarter ended March 31, 2024.
Noninterest Income
Noninterest income for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 was $22.4 million, a decrease of $3.2 million, or 12.4%, from the comparable period in the prior year.
Other service fee income decreased $3.7 million, or 57.8%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to a $3.4 million net gain from the sale of mortgage servicing rights associated with $591.1 million of serviced loans in the first quarter of 2024. Additionally, net servicing fees on sold mortgage loans decreased by $177 thousand, primarily attributable to the previously mentioned sale of mortgage servicing rights.
Other income decreased $780 thousand, or 76.1%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to decreases in other real estate owned income, fees on risk participation agreements for interest rate swaps and gains on sale of Small Business Administration loans.
Net gain on mortgage banking activities decreased $292 thousand, or 31.1%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to decreased salable volume.
Insurance commission and fee income decreased $312 thousand, or 4.3%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to a decrease in contingent income of $700 thousand, which was $1.6 million and $2.3 million, for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. Contingent income is largely recognized in the first quarter of the year. The decrease was partially offset by an increase of $404 thousand in revenue for commercial lines.
BOLI income increased $1.1 million, or 132.7%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to the previously discussed death benefits claims.
Investment advisory commission and fee income increased $419 thousand, or 8.1%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to new customer relationships and appreciation of assets under management and supervision.
Service charges on deposit accounts increased $323 thousand, or 17.3%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to an increase in treasury management income.
Noninterest Expense
Noninterest expense for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 was $49.3 million, a decrease of $746 thousand, or 1.5%, from the comparable period in the prior year.
Salaries, benefits and commissions decreased $512 thousand, or 1.6%, for the quarter ended March 31, 2025 compared to the comparable period in the prior year, primarily due to an increase in compensation capitalized and a decrease in medical claims expense, partially offset by an increase in incentive compensation due to increased profitability.
Tax Provision
The effective income tax rate was 18.7% and 20.5% for the quarters ended March 31, 2025 and March 31, 2024, respectively. The discrete tax effect of vested equity compensation awards favorably impacted the first quarter of 2025 by 71 basis points and unfavorably impacted the first quarter of 2024 by 74 basis points. Additionally, the effective tax rate for the three months ended March 31, 2025 was favorably impacted by 76 basis points from the proceeds of BOLI death benefits. Excluding the discrete impact of vested equity compensation awards and BOLI death benefits, the effective tax rate was 20.2% for the three months ended March 31, 2025 compared to 19.8% for the three months ended March 31, 2024.
Asset Quality and Provision for Credit Losses
Nonperforming assets totaled $34.0 million at March 31, 2025, $33.2 million at December 31, 2024, and $40.0 million at March 31, 2024.
Net loan and lease charge-offs were $1.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 compared to $767 thousand and $1.4 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2024, respectively.
The provision for credit losses was $2.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 compared to $2.4 million and $1.4 million for the three months ended December 31, 2024 and March 31, 2024, respectively. The allowance for credit losses on loans and leases as a percentage of loans and leases held for investment was 1.28% at March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024, and 1.30% at March 31, 2024.
Share Repurchases
During the quarter ended March 31, 2025, the Corporation repurchased 221,760 shares of common stock at an average price of $29.22 per share. Including brokerage fees and excise tax, the average price per share was $29.54. As of March 31, 2025, 1,178,394 shares are available for repurchase under the Share Repurchase Plan.
Conference Call
Univest will host a conference call to discuss first quarter 2025 results on Thursday, April 24, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. EST. Participants may preregister at https://www.netroadshow.com/events/login?show=175e015e&confId=80607. The general public can access the call by dialing 1-833-470-1428; using Access Code 021974. A replay of the conference call will be available through May 1, 2025 by dialing 1-866-813-9403; using Access Code 718470.
About Univest Financial Corporation
Univest Financial Corporation (UVSP), including its wholly-owned subsidiary Univest Bank and Trust Co., Member FDIC, has approximately $8.0 billion in assets and $5.2 billion in assets under management and supervision through its Wealth Management lines of business at March 31, 2025. Headquartered in Souderton, Pa. and founded in 1876, the Corporation and its subsidiaries provide a full range of financial solutions for individuals, businesses, municipalities and nonprofit organizations primarily in the Mid-Atlantic Region. Univest delivers these services through a network of more than 50 offices and online at www.univest.net.
This press release and the reports Univest files with the Securities and Exchange Commission often contain “forward-looking statements” relating to trends or factors affecting the financial services industry and, specifically, the financial condition and results of operations, business, prospects and strategies of Univest. These forward-looking statements involve certain risks and uncertainties in that there are a number of important factors that could cause Univest’s future financial condition, results of operations, business, prospects or strategies to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to: (1) competition and demand for financial services in our market area; (2) inflation and/or changes in interest rates, which may adversely impact our margins and yields, reduce the fair value of our financial instruments, reduce our loan originations and/or lead to higher operating costs and higher costs we pay to retain and attract deposits; (3) changes in asset quality, prepayment speeds, loan sale volumes, charge-offs and/or credit loss provisions; (4) fluctuations in real estate values and both residential and commercial real estate market conditions; (5) changes in liquidity, including the size and composition of our deposit portfolio and the percentage of uninsured deposits in the portfolio; (6) our ability to access cost-effective funding; (7) changes in economic conditions nationally and in our market, including potential recessionary conditions and the levels of unemployment in our market area; (8) changes in the economic assumptions or methodology used to calculate our allowance for credit losses; (9) legislative, regulatory, accounting or tax changes; (10) monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, including the policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; (11) the imposition of tariffs or other domestic or international governmental policies; (12) the failure to maintain current technologies and to successfully implement future information technology enhancements; (13) technological issues that may adversely affect our operations or those of our customers; (14) a failure or breach in our operational or security systems or infrastructure, including cyberattacks; (15) changes in the securities markets; (16) the current or anticipated impact of military conflict, terrorism or other geopolitical events; (17) our ability to enter into new markets successfully and capitalize on growth opportunities and/or (18) risk factors mentioned in the reports and registration statements Univest files with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
(UVSP – ER)
| Univest Financial Corporation | |||||||||||||||||||
| Consolidated Selected Financial Data (Unaudited) | |||||||||||||||||||
| March 31, 2025 | |||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Balance Sheet (Period End) | 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 09/30/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | ||||||||||||||
| ASSETS | |||||||||||||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | $ | 73,319 | $ | 75,998 | $ | 78,346 | $ | 66,808 | $ | 49,318 | |||||||||
| Interest-earning deposits with other banks | 95,815 | 252,846 | 426,354 | 124,103 | 152,288 | ||||||||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | 169,134 | 328,844 | 504,700 | 190,911 | 201,606 | ||||||||||||||
| Investment securities held-to-maturity | 130,889 | 134,111 | 137,681 | 140,112 | 143,474 | ||||||||||||||
| Investment securities available for sale, net of allowance for credit losses | 364,503 | 357,361 | 354,100 | 342,776 | 350,819 | ||||||||||||||
| Investments in equity securities | 1,667 | 2,506 | 2,406 | 2,995 | 3,355 | ||||||||||||||
| Federal Home Loan Bank, Federal Reserve Bank and other stock, at cost | 35,732 | 38,980 | 40,235 | 37,438 | 37,394 | ||||||||||||||
| Loans held for sale | 13,150 | 16,653 | 17,131 | 28,176 | 13,188 | ||||||||||||||
| Loans and leases held for investment | 6,833,037 | 6,826,583 | 6,730,734 | 6,684,837 | 6,579,086 | ||||||||||||||
| Less: Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases | (87,790 | ) | (87,091 | ) | (86,041 | ) | (85,745 | ) | (85,632 | ) | |||||||||
| Net loans and leases held for investment | 6,745,247 | 6,739,492 | 6,644,693 | 6,599,092 | 6,493,454 | ||||||||||||||
| Premises and equipment, net | 47,175 | 46,671 | 47,411 | 48,174 | 48,739 | ||||||||||||||
| Operating lease right-of-use assets | 27,182 | 28,531 | 29,260 | 29,985 | 30,702 | ||||||||||||||
| Goodwill | 175,510 | 175,510 | 175,510 | 175,510 | 175,510 | ||||||||||||||
| Other intangibles, net of accumulated amortization | 8,061 | 8,309 | 7,158 | 7,701 | 7,473 | ||||||||||||||
| Bank owned life insurance | 139,482 | 139,351 | 138,744 | 137,823 | 137,896 | ||||||||||||||
| Accrued interest and other assets | 117,435 | 112,098 | 106,708 | 114,753 | 102,958 | ||||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 7,975,167 | $ | 8,128,417 | $ | 8,205,737 | $ | 7,855,446 | $ | 7,746,568 | |||||||||
| LIABILITIES | |||||||||||||||||||
| Noninterest-bearing deposits | $ | 1,433,995 | $ | 1,414,635 | $ | 1,323,953 | $ | 1,397,308 | $ | 1,401,806 | |||||||||
| Interest-bearing deposits: | 5,224,503 | 5,344,624 | 5,530,195 | 5,098,014 | 5,003,552 | ||||||||||||||
| Total deposits | 6,658,498 | 6,759,259 | 6,854,148 | 6,495,322 | 6,405,358 | ||||||||||||||
| Short-term borrowings | 4,031 | 11,181 | 8,256 | 11,781 | 4,816 | ||||||||||||||
| Long-term debt | 175,000 | 225,000 | 225,000 | 250,000 | 250,000 | ||||||||||||||
| Subordinated notes | 149,386 | 149,261 | 149,136 | 149,011 | 148,886 | ||||||||||||||
| Operating lease liabilities | 30,062 | 31,485 | 32,246 | 33,015 | 33,744 | ||||||||||||||
| Accrued expenses and other liabilities | 54,718 | 64,930 | 59,880 | 62,180 | 60,095 | ||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | 7,071,695 | 7,241,116 | 7,328,666 | 7,001,309 | 6,902,899 | ||||||||||||||
| SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY | |||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock, $5 par value: 48,000,000 shares authorized and 31,556,799 shares issued | 157,784 | 157,784 | 157,784 | 157,784 | 157,784 | ||||||||||||||
| Additional paid-in capital | 300,634 | 302,829 | 301,262 | 300,166 | 298,914 | ||||||||||||||
| Retained earnings | 541,776 | 525,780 | 512,938 | 500,482 | 488,790 | ||||||||||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax benefit | (37,922 | ) | (43,992 | ) | (41,623 | ) | (54,124 | ) | (54,740 | ) | |||||||||
| Treasury stock, at cost | (58,800 | ) | (55,100 | ) | (53,290 | ) | (50,171 | ) | (47,079 | ) | |||||||||
| Total shareholders’ equity | 903,472 | 887,301 | 877,071 | 854,137 | 843,669 | ||||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 7,975,167 | $ | 8,128,417 | $ | 8,205,737 | $ | 7,855,446 | $ | 7,746,568 | |||||||||
| For the three months ended, | |||||||||||||||||||
| Balance Sheet (Average) | 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | 12/31/23 | ||||||||||||||
| Assets | $ | 7,981,043 | $ | 8,163,347 | $ | 8,005,265 | $ | 7,721,540 | $ | 7,696,575 | |||||||||
| Investment securities, net of allowance for credit losses | 500,078 | 500,748 | 493,334 | 493,140 | 500,983 | ||||||||||||||
| Loans and leases, gross | 6,856,503 | 6,758,649 | 6,730,791 | 6,640,536 | 6,577,365 | ||||||||||||||
| Deposits | 6,617,653 | 6,804,483 | 6,641,324 | 6,353,752 | 6,303,854 | ||||||||||||||
| Shareholders’ equity | 896,811 | 880,237 | 864,406 | 844,572 | 842,546 | ||||||||||||||
| Univest Financial Corporation | |||||||||||||||||||
| Consolidated Summary of Loans by Type and Asset Quality Data (Unaudited) | |||||||||||||||||||
| March 31, 2025 | |||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Summary of Major Loan and Lease Categories (Period End) | 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 09/30/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | ||||||||||||||
| Commercial, financial and agricultural | $ | 1,034,361 | $ | 1,037,835 | $ | 1,044,043 | $ | 1,055,332 | $ | 1,014,568 | |||||||||
| Real estate-commercial | 3,546,402 | 3,530,451 | 3,442,083 | 3,373,889 | 3,283,729 | ||||||||||||||
| Real estate-construction | 281,785 | 274,483 | 285,616 | 313,229 | 379,995 | ||||||||||||||
| Real estate-residential secured for business purpose | 536,082 | 536,095 | 530,674 | 532,628 | 524,196 | ||||||||||||||
| Real estate-residential secured for personal purpose | 992,767 | 994,972 | 969,562 | 952,665 | 922,412 | ||||||||||||||
| Real estate-home equity secured for personal purpose | 189,119 | 186,836 | 182,901 | 179,150 | 177,446 | ||||||||||||||
| Loans to individuals | 16,930 | 21,250 | 26,794 | 26,430 | 27,200 | ||||||||||||||
| Lease financings | 235,591 | 244,661 | 249,061 | 251,514 | 249,540 | ||||||||||||||
| Total loans and leases held for investment, net of deferred income | 6,833,037 | 6,826,583 | 6,730,734 | 6,684,837 | 6,579,086 | ||||||||||||||
| Less: Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases | (87,790 | ) | (87,091 | ) | (86,041 | ) | (85,745 | ) | (85,632 | ) | |||||||||
| Net loans and leases held for investment | $ | 6,745,247 | $ | 6,739,492 | $ | 6,644,693 | $ | 6,599,092 | $ | 6,493,454 | |||||||||
| Asset Quality Data (Period End) | 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 09/30/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | ||||||||||||||
| Nonaccrual loans and leases, including nonaccrual loans held for sale | $ | 11,126 | $ | 12,667 | $ | 15,319 | $ | 16,200 | $ | 20,363 | |||||||||
| Accruing loans and leases 90 days or more past due | 322 | 321 | 310 | 205 | 268 | ||||||||||||||
| Total nonperforming loans and leases | 11,448 | 12,988 | 15,629 | 16,405 | 20,631 | ||||||||||||||
| Other real estate owned | 22,433 | 20,141 | 20,915 | 20,007 | 19,220 | ||||||||||||||
| Repossessed assets | 79 | 76 | 79 | 149 | 167 | ||||||||||||||
| Total nonperforming assets | $ | 33,960 | $ | 33,205 | $ | 36,623 | $ | 36,561 | $ | 40,018 | |||||||||
| Nonaccrual loans and leases / Loans and leases held for investment | 0.16 | % | 0.19 | % | 0.23 | % | 0.24 | % | 0.31 | % | |||||||||
| Nonperforming loans and leases / Loans and leases held for investment | 0.17 | % | 0.19 | % | 0.23 | % | 0.25 | % | 0.31 | % | |||||||||
| Nonperforming assets / Total assets | 0.43 | % | 0.41 | % | 0.45 | % | 0.47 | % | 0.52 | % | |||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases | $ | 87,790 | $ | 87,091 | $ | 86,041 | $ | 85,745 | $ | 85,632 | |||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases / Loans and leases held for investment | 1.28 | % | 1.28 | % | 1.28 | % | 1.28 | % | 1.30 | % | |||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases / Nonaccrual loans and leases | 789.05 | % | 687.54 | % | 561.66 | % | 529.29 | % | 420.53 | % | |||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases / Nonperforming loans and leases | 766.86 | % | 670.55 | % | 550.52 | % | 522.68 | % | 415.06 | % | |||||||||
| For the three months ended, | |||||||||||||||||||
| 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 09/30/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | |||||||||||||||
| Net loan and lease charge-offs | $ | 1,686 | $ | 767 | $ | 820 | $ | 809 | $ | 1,406 | |||||||||
| Net loan and lease charge-offs (annualized)/Average loans and leases | 0.10 | % | 0.05 | % | 0.05 | % | 0.05 | % | 0.09 | % | |||||||||
| Univest Financial Corporation | ||||||||||||||
| Consolidated Selected Financial Data (Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||
| March 31, 2025 | ||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||
| For the three months ended, | ||||||||||||||
| For the period: | 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 09/30/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | |||||||||
| Interest income | $ | 103,416 | $ | 107,476 | $ | 106,438 | $ | 99,832 | $ | 98,609 | ||||
| Interest expense | 46,635 | 52,004 | 53,234 | 48,805 | 47,142 | |||||||||
| Net interest income | 56,781 | 55,472 | 53,204 | 51,027 | 51,467 | |||||||||
| Provision for credit losses | 2,311 | 2,380 | 1,414 | 707 | 1,432 | |||||||||
| Net interest income after provision for credit losses | 54,470 | 53,092 | 51,790 | 50,320 | 50,035 | |||||||||
| Noninterest income: | ||||||||||||||
| Trust fee income | 2,161 | 2,265 | 2,110 | 2,008 | 2,108 | |||||||||
| Service charges on deposit accounts | 2,194 | 2,192 | 2,037 | 1,982 | 1,871 | |||||||||
| Investment advisory commission and fee income | 5,613 | 5,457 | 5,319 | 5,238 | 5,194 | |||||||||
| Insurance commission and fee income | 6,889 | 4,743 | 5,238 | 5,167 | 7,201 | |||||||||
| Other service fee income | 2,707 | 3,473 | 1,815 | 3,044 | 6,415 | |||||||||
| Bank owned life insurance income | 1,959 | 1,012 | 921 | 1,086 | 842 | |||||||||
| Net gain on sales of investment securities | – | – | 18 | – | – | |||||||||
| Net gain on mortgage banking activities | 647 | 1,320 | 1,296 | 1,710 | 939 | |||||||||
| Other income | 245 | 868 | 1,396 | 745 | 1,025 | |||||||||
| Total noninterest income | 22,415 | 21,330 | 20,150 | 20,980 | 25,595 | |||||||||
| Noninterest expense: | ||||||||||||||
| Salaries, benefits and commissions | 30,826 | 31,518 | 30,702 | 30,187 | 31,338 | |||||||||
| Net occupancy | 2,853 | 2,751 | 2,723 | 2,679 | 2,872 | |||||||||
| Equipment | 1,122 | 1,147 | 1,107 | 1,088 | 1,111 | |||||||||
| Data processing | 4,364 | 4,146 | 4,154 | 4,161 | 4,495 | |||||||||
| Professional fees | 1,797 | 1,669 | 1,579 | 1,466 | 1,688 | |||||||||
| Marketing and advertising | 353 | 552 | 490 | 715 | 416 | |||||||||
| Deposit insurance premiums | 1,151 | 1,102 | 1,097 | 1,098 | 1,135 | |||||||||
| Intangible expenses | 130 | 155 | 164 | 188 | 187 | |||||||||
| Other expense | 6,732 | 7,618 | 6,536 | 7,126 | 6,832 | |||||||||
| Total noninterest expense | 49,328 | 50,658 | 48,552 | 48,708 | 50,074 | |||||||||
| Income before taxes | 27,557 | 23,764 | 23,388 | 22,592 | 25,556 | |||||||||
| Income tax expense | 5,162 | 4,823 | 4,810 | 4,485 | 5,251 | |||||||||
| Net income | $ | 22,395 | $ | 18,941 | $ | 18,578 | $ | 18,107 | $ | 20,305 | ||||
| Net income per share: | ||||||||||||||
| Basic | $ | 0.77 | $ | 0.65 | $ | 0.64 | $ | 0.62 | $ | 0.69 | ||||
| Diluted | $ | 0.77 | $ | 0.65 | $ | 0.63 | $ | 0.62 | $ | 0.69 | ||||
| Dividends declared per share | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.21 | $ | 0.21 | ||||
| Weighted average shares outstanding | 29,000,567 | 29,070,039 | 29,132,948 | 29,246,977 | 29,413,999 | |||||||||
| Period end shares outstanding | 28,962,648 | 29,045,877 | 29,081,108 | 29,190,640 | 29,337,919 | |||||||||
| Univest Financial Corporation | |||||||||||||||||||
| Consolidated Selected Financial Data (Unaudited) | |||||||||||||||||||
| March 31, 2025 | |||||||||||||||||||
| For the three months ended, | |||||||||||||||||||
| Profitability Ratios (annualized) | 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 09/30/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | ||||||||||||||
| Return on average assets | 1.14 | % | 0.92 | % | 0.92 | % | 0.94 | % | 1.06 | % | |||||||||
| Return on average shareholders’ equity | 10.13 | % | 8.56 | % | 8.55 | % | 8.62 | % | 9.69 | % | |||||||||
| Return on average tangible common equity (1)(3) | 12.69 | % | 10.79 | % | 10.84 | % | 11.01 | % | 12.38 | % | |||||||||
| Net interest margin (FTE) | 3.09 | % | 2.88 | % | 2.82 | % | 2.84 | % | 2.88 | % | |||||||||
| Efficiency ratio (2) | 61.6 | % | 65.5 | % | 65.7 | % | 67.1 | % | 64.6 | % | |||||||||
| Capitalization Ratios | |||||||||||||||||||
| Dividends declared to net income | 27.2 | % | 32.2 | % | 33.0 | % | 33.9 | % | 30.5 | % | |||||||||
| Shareholders’ equity to assets (Period End) | 11.33 | % | 10.92 | % | 10.69 | % | 10.87 | % | 10.89 | % | |||||||||
| Tangible common equity to tangible assets (1) | 9.31 | % | 8.92 | % | 8.71 | % | 8.81 | % | 8.80 | % | |||||||||
| Common equity book value per share | $ | 31.19 | $ | 30.55 | $ | 30.16 | $ | 29.26 | $ | 28.76 | |||||||||
| Tangible common equity book value per share (1) | $ | 25.06 | $ | 24.43 | $ | 24.05 | $ | 23.17 | $ | 22.70 | |||||||||
| Regulatory Capital Ratios (Period End) | |||||||||||||||||||
| Tier 1 leverage ratio | 9.80 | % | 9.51 | % | 9.53 | % | 9.74 | % | 9.65 | % | |||||||||
| Common equity tier 1 risk-based capital ratio | 10.97 | % | 10.85 | % | 10.88 | % | 10.72 | % | 10.71 | % | |||||||||
| Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio | 10.97 | % | 10.85 | % | 10.88 | % | 10.72 | % | 10.71 | % | |||||||||
| Total risk-based capital ratio | 14.35 | % | 14.19 | % | 14.27 | % | 14.09 | % | 14.11 | % | |||||||||
| (1) Non-GAAP metric. A reconciliation of this and other non-GAAP to GAAP performance measures is included below. | |||||||||||||||||||
| (2) Noninterest expense to net interest income before loan loss provision plus noninterest income adjusted for tax equivalent income. | |||||||||||||||||||
| (3) Net income before amortization of intangibles to average tangible common equity. | |||||||||||||||||||
| Univest Financial Corporation | ||||||||||||||
| Average Balances and Interest Rates (Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||
| For the Three Months Ended, | ||||||||||||||
| Tax Equivalent Basis | March 31, 2025 | December 31, 2024 | ||||||||||||
| Average | Income/ | Average | Average | Income/ | Average | |||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | Balance | Expense | Rate | Balance | Expense | Rate | ||||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Interest-earning deposits with other banks | $ | 119,997 | $ | 1,360 | 4.60 | % | $ | 402,753 | $ | 4,852 | 4.79 | % | ||
| Obligations of state and political subdivisions* | 879 | 4 | 1.85 | 1,290 | 7 | 2.16 | ||||||||
| Other debt and equity securities | 499,199 | 4,019 | 3.27 | 499,458 | 3,815 | 3.04 | ||||||||
| Federal Home Loan Bank, Federal Reserve Bank and other stock | 37,561 | 687 | 7.42 | 39,407 | 746 | 7.53 | ||||||||
| Total interest-earning deposits, investments and other interest-earning assets | 657,636 | 6,070 | 3.74 | 942,908 | 9,420 | 3.97 | ||||||||
| Commercial, financial, and agricultural loans | 990,860 | 17,020 | 6.97 | 972,840 | 17,492 | 7.15 | ||||||||
| Real estate—commercial and construction loans | 3,704,232 | 52,676 | 5.77 | 3,631,142 | 53,163 | 5.82 | ||||||||
| Real estate—residential loans | 1,729,146 | 21,542 | 5.05 | 1,708,795 | 21,249 | 4.95 | ||||||||
| Loans to individuals | 19,438 | 393 | 8.20 | 25,803 | 522 | 8.05 | ||||||||
| Tax-exempt loans and leases | 230,133 | 2,861 | 5.04 | 233,036 | 2,652 | 4.53 | ||||||||
| Lease financings | 182,694 | 3,240 | 7.19 | 187,033 | 3,296 | 7.01 | ||||||||
| Gross loans and leases | 6,856,503 | 97,732 | 5.78 | 6,758,649 | 98,374 | 5.79 | ||||||||
| Total interest-earning assets | 7,514,139 | 103,802 | 5.60 | 7,701,557 | 107,794 | 5.57 | ||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | 56,690 | 56,989 | ||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases | (87,822 | ) | (86,812 | ) | ||||||||||
| Premises and equipment, net | 46,852 | 47,155 | ||||||||||||
| Operating lease right-of-use assets | 27,761 | 28,891 | ||||||||||||
| Other assets | 423,423 | 415,567 | ||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 7,981,043 | $ | 8,163,347 | ||||||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing checking deposits | $ | 1,222,012 | $ | 7,075 | 2.35 | % | $ | 1,275,348 | $ | 8,504 | 2.65 | % | ||
| Money market savings | 1,840,194 | 18,035 | 3.97 | 1,954,246 | 20,653 | 4.20 | ||||||||
| Regular savings | 702,543 | 763 | 0.44 | 705,222 | 817 | 0.46 | ||||||||
| Time deposits | 1,476,495 | 16,106 | 4.42 | 1,499,998 | 17,247 | 4.57 | ||||||||
| Total time and interest-bearing deposits | 5,241,244 | 41,979 | 3.25 | 5,434,814 | 47,221 | 3.46 | ||||||||
| Short-term borrowings | 6,909 | 14 | 0.82 | 7,102 | 1 | 0.06 | ||||||||
| Long-term debt | 217,500 | 2,361 | 4.40 | 225,000 | 2,501 | 4.42 | ||||||||
| Subordinated notes | 149,319 | 2,281 | 6.20 | 149,194 | 2,281 | 6.08 | ||||||||
| Total borrowings | 373,728 | 4,656 | 5.05 | 381,296 | 4,783 | 4.99 | ||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities | 5,614,972 | 46,635 | 3.37 | 5,816,110 | 52,004 | 3.56 | ||||||||
| Noninterest-bearing deposits | 1,376,409 | 1,369,669 | ||||||||||||
| Operating lease liabilities | 30,675 | 31,864 | ||||||||||||
| Accrued expenses and other liabilities | 62,176 | 65,467 | ||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | 7,084,232 | 7,283,110 | ||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities and noninterest-bearing deposits (“Cost of Funds”) | 6,991,381 | 2.71 | 7,185,779 | 2.88 | ||||||||||
| Shareholders’ Equity: | ||||||||||||||
| Common stock | 157,784 | 157,784 | ||||||||||||
| Additional paid-in capital | 302,653 | 301,895 | ||||||||||||
| Retained earnings and other equity | 436,374 | 420,558 | ||||||||||||
| Total shareholders’ equity | 896,811 | 880,237 | ||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 7,981,043 | $ | 8,163,347 | ||||||||||
| Net interest income | $ | 57,167 | $ | 55,790 | ||||||||||
| Net interest spread | 2.23 | 2.01 | ||||||||||||
| Effect of net interest-free funding sources | 0.86 | 0.87 | ||||||||||||
| Net interest margin | 3.09 | % | 2.88 | % | ||||||||||
| Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities | 133.82 | % | 132.42 | % | ||||||||||
| * Obligations of states and political subdivisions are tax-exempt earning assets. | ||||||||||||||
| Notes: For rate calculation purposes, average loan and lease categories include deferred fees and costs and purchase accounting adjustments. | ||||||||||||||
| Net interest income includes net deferred costs amortization of $554 thousand and $676 thousand for the three months ended March 31, | ||||||||||||||
| 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. | ||||||||||||||
| Nonaccrual loans and leases have been included in the average loan and lease balances. Loans held for sale have been included | ||||||||||||||
| in the average loan balances. Tax-equivalent amounts for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and December 31, 2024 have | ||||||||||||||
| been calculated using the Corporation’s federal applicable rate of 21.0%. | ||||||||||||||
| Univest Financial Corporation | ||||||||||||||
| Average Balances and Interest Rates (Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||
| For the Three Months Ended March 31, | ||||||||||||||
| Tax Equivalent Basis | 2025 | 2024 | ||||||||||||
| Average | Income/ | Average | Average | Income/ | Average | |||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | Balance | Expense | Rate | Balance | Expense | Rate | ||||||||
| Assets: | ||||||||||||||
| Interest-earning deposits with other banks | $ | 119,997 | $ | 1,360 | 4.60 | % | $ | 120,845 | $ | 1,609 | 5.36 | % | ||
| Obligations of state and political subdivisions* | 879 | 4 | 1.85 | 1,951 | 12 | 2.47 | ||||||||
| Other debt and equity securities | 499,199 | 4,019 | 3.27 | 499,032 | 3,647 | 2.94 | ||||||||
| Federal Home Loan Bank, Federal Reserve Bank and other stock | 37,561 | 687 | 7.42 | 39,115 | 724 | 7.44 | ||||||||
| Total interest-earning deposits, investments and other interest-earning assets | 657,636 | 6,070 | 3.74 | 660,943 | 5,992 | 3.65 | ||||||||
| Commercial, financial, and agricultural loans | 990,860 | 17,020 | 6.97 | 934,649 | 16,523 | 7.11 | ||||||||
| Real estate—commercial and construction loans | 3,704,232 | 52,676 | 5.77 | 3,575,142 | 50,641 | 5.70 | ||||||||
| Real estate—residential loans | 1,729,146 | 21,542 | 5.05 | 1,618,188 | 19,555 | 4.86 | ||||||||
| Loans to individuals | 19,438 | 393 | 8.20 | 27,315 | 548 | 8.07 | ||||||||
| Tax-exempt loans and leases | 230,133 | 2,861 | 5.04 | 232,380 | 2,464 | 4.26 | ||||||||
| Lease financings | 182,694 | 3,240 | 7.19 | 189,691 | 3,169 | 6.72 | ||||||||
| Gross loans and leases | 6,856,503 | 97,732 | 5.78 | 6,577,365 | 92,900 | 5.68 | ||||||||
| Total interest-earning assets | 7,514,139 | 103,802 | 5.60 | 7,238,308 | 98,892 | 5.49 | ||||||||
| Cash and due from banks | 56,690 | 54,870 | ||||||||||||
| Allowance for credit losses, loans and leases | (87,822 | ) | (86,495 | ) | ||||||||||
| Premises and equipment, net | 46,852 | 50,592 | ||||||||||||
| Operating lease right-of-use assets | 27,761 | 31,121 | ||||||||||||
| Other assets | 423,423 | 408,179 | ||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 7,981,043 | $ | 7,696,575 | ||||||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||||||||||
| Interest-bearing checking deposits | $ | 1,222,012 | $ | 7,075 | 2.35 | % | $ | 1,180,696 | $ | 8,218 | 2.80 | % | ||
| Money market savings | 1,840,194 | 18,035 | 3.97 | 1,705,291 | 19,220 | 4.53 | ||||||||
| Regular savings | 702,543 | 763 | 0.44 | 769,926 | 905 | 0.47 | ||||||||
| Time deposits | 1,476,495 | 16,106 | 4.42 | 1,238,878 | 13,630 | 4.42 | ||||||||
| Total time and interest-bearing deposits | 5,241,244 | 41,979 | 3.25 | 4,894,791 | 41,973 | 3.45 | ||||||||
| Short-term borrowings | 6,909 | 14 | 0.82 | 10,127 | 5 | 0.20 | ||||||||
| Long-term debt | 217,500 | 2,361 | 4.40 | 292,486 | 2,883 | 3.96 | ||||||||
| Subordinated notes | 149,319 | 2,281 | 6.20 | 148,818 | 2,281 | 6.16 | ||||||||
| Total borrowings | 373,728 | 4,656 | 5.05 | 451,431 | 5,169 | 4.61 | ||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities | 5,614,972 | 46,635 | 3.37 | 5,346,222 | 47,142 | 3.55 | ||||||||
| Noninterest-bearing deposits | 1,376,409 | 1,409,063 | ||||||||||||
| Operating lease liabilities | 30,675 | 34,166 | ||||||||||||
| Accrued expenses and other liabilities | 62,176 | 64,578 | ||||||||||||
| Total liabilities | 7,084,232 | 6,854,029 | ||||||||||||
| Total interest-bearing liabilities and noninterest-bearing deposits (“Cost of Funds”) | 6,991,381 | 2.71 | 6,755,285 | 2.81 | ||||||||||
| Shareholders’ Equity: | ||||||||||||||
| Common stock | 157,784 | 157,784 | ||||||||||||
| Additional paid-in capital | 302,653 | 300,679 | ||||||||||||
| Retained earnings and other equity | 436,374 | 384,083 | ||||||||||||
| Total shareholders’ equity | 896,811 | 842,546 | ||||||||||||
| Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity | $ | 7,981,043 | $ | 7,696,575 | ||||||||||
| Net interest income | $ | 57,167 | $ | 51,750 | ||||||||||
| Net interest spread | 2.23 | 1.94 | ||||||||||||
| Effect of net interest-free funding sources | 0.86 | 0.94 | ||||||||||||
| Net interest margin | 3.09 | % | 2.88 | % | ||||||||||
| Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities | 133.82 | % | 135.39 | % | ||||||||||
| * Obligations of states and political subdivisions are tax-exempt earning assets. | ||||||||||||||
| Notes: For rate calculation purposes, average loan and lease categories include deferred fees and costs and purchase accounting adjustments. | ||||||||||||||
| Net interest income includes net deferred costs amortization of $554 thousand and $453 thousand for the three months ended | ||||||||||||||
| March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. | ||||||||||||||
| Nonaccrual loans and leases have been included in the average loan and lease balances. Loans held for sale have been included | ||||||||||||||
| in the average loan balances. Tax-equivalent amounts for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024 have been | ||||||||||||||
| calculated using the Corporation’s federal applicable rate of 21.0%. | ||||||||||||||
| Univest Financial Corporation | |||||
| Loan Portfolio Overview (Unaudited) | |||||
| March 31, 2025 | |||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | |||||
| Industry Description | Total Outstanding Balance | % of Commercial Loan Portfolio | |||
| CRE – Retail | $ | 469,397 | 8.7 | % | |
| Animal Production | 394,279 | 7.3 | |||
| CRE – Multi-family | 360,743 | 6.7 | |||
| CRE – Office | 299,751 | 5.6 | |||
| CRE – 1-4 Family Residential Investment | 278,386 | 5.2 | |||
| CRE – Industrial / Warehouse | 253,136 | 4.7 | |||
| Hotels & Motels (Accommodation) | 207,710 | 3.8 | |||
| Specialty Trade Contractors | 189,427 | 3.5 | |||
| Nursing and Residential Care Facilities | 177,053 | 3.3 | |||
| Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers | 146,911 | 2.7 | |||
| Merchant Wholesalers, Durable Goods | 146,037 | 2.7 | |||
| Homebuilding (tract developers, remodelers) | 140,612 | 2.6 | |||
| Repair and Maintenance | 134,183 | 2.5 | |||
| Crop Production | 110,882 | 2.1 | |||
| CRE – Mixed-Use – Residential | 109,872 | 2.0 | |||
| Wood Product Manufacturing | 101,606 | 1.9 | |||
| Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services | 95,730 | 1.8 | |||
| Food Services and Drinking Places | 86,916 | 1.6 | |||
| Administrative and Support Services | 83,145 | 1.5 | |||
| Merchant Wholesalers, Nondurable Goods | 83,088 | 1.5 | |||
| Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing | 78,181 | 1.4 | |||
| Real Estate Lenders, Secondary Market Financing | 75,461 | 1.4 | |||
| Religious Organizations, Advocacy Groups | 65,857 | 1.2 | |||
| CRE – Mixed-Use – Commercial | 64,683 | 1.2 | |||
| Miniwarehouse / Self-Storage | 64,553 | 1.2 | |||
| Personal and Laundry Services | 64,508 | 1.2 | |||
| Education | 62,362 | 1.2 | |||
| Amusement, Gambling, and Recreation Industries | 61,437 | 1.1 | |||
| Food Manufacturing | 56,400 | 1.0 | |||
| Industries with >$50 million in outstandings | $ | 4,462,306 | 82.7 | % | |
| Industries with <$50 million in outstandings | $ | 936,324 | 17.3 | % | |
| Total Commercial Loans | $ | 5,398,630 | 100.0 | % | |
| Consumer Loans and Lease Financings | Total Outstanding Balance | ||||
| Real Estate-Residential Secured for Personal Purpose | 992,767 | ||||
| Real Estate-Home Equity Secured for Personal Purpose | 189,119 | ||||
| Loans to Individuals | 16,930 | ||||
| Lease Financings | 235,591 | ||||
| Total – Consumer Loans and Lease Financings | $ | 1,434,407 | |||
| Total | $ | 6,833,037 | |||
| Univest Financial Corporation | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-GAAP Reconciliation | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| March 31, 2025 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Non-GAAP to GAAP Reconciliation | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Management uses non-GAAP measures in its analysis of the Corporation’s performance. These measures should not be considered a substitute for GAAP basis measures nor should they be viewed as a substitute for operating results determined in accordance with GAAP. Management believes the presentation of the non-GAAP financial measures, which exclude the impact of the specified items, provides useful supplemental information that is essential to a proper understanding of the financial results of the Corporation. See the table below for additional information on non-GAAP measures used throughout this earnings release. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| As of or for the three months ended, | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| (Dollars in thousands) | 03/31/25 | 12/31/24 | 09/30/24 | 06/30/24 | 03/31/24 | |||||||||||||||||
| Net income | $ | 22,395 | $ | 18,941 | $ | 18,578 | $ | 18,107 | $ | 20,305 | ||||||||||||
| Amortization of intangibles, net of tax | 103 | 122 | 130 | 149 | 148 | |||||||||||||||||
| Net income before amortization of intangibles | $ | 22,498 | $ | 19,063 | $ | 18,708 | $ | 18,256 | $ | 20,453 | ||||||||||||
| Shareholders’ equity | $ | 903,472 | $ | 887,301 | $ | 877,071 | $ | 854,137 | $ | 843,669 | ||||||||||||
| Goodwill | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Other intangibles (a) | (2,104 | ) | (2,263 | ) | (2,147 | ) | (2,157 | ) | (2,273 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Tangible common equity | $ | 725,858 | $ | 709,528 | $ | 699,414 | $ | 676,470 | $ | 665,886 | ||||||||||||
| Total assets | $ | 7,975,167 | $ | 8,128,417 | $ | 8,205,737 | $ | 7,855,446 | $ | 7,746,568 | ||||||||||||
| Goodwill | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Other intangibles (a) | (2,104 | ) | (2,263 | ) | (2,147 | ) | (2,157 | ) | (2,273 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Tangible assets | $ | 7,797,553 | $ | 7,950,644 | $ | 8,028,080 | $ | 7,677,779 | $ | 7,568,785 | ||||||||||||
| Average shareholders’ equity | $ | 896,811 | $ | 880,237 | $ | 864,406 | $ | 844,572 | $ | 842,546 | ||||||||||||
| Average goodwill | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | (175,510 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Average other intangibles (a) | (2,162 | ) | (2,146 | ) | (2,086 | ) | (2,222 | ) | (2,318 | ) | ||||||||||||
| Average tangible common equity | $ | 719,139 | $ | 702,581 | $ | 686,810 | $ | 666,840 | $ | 664,718 | ||||||||||||
| (a) Amount does not include mortgage servicing rights | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Source: Africa Press Organisation – English (2) – Report:
WASHINGTON D.C., United States of America, April 23, 2025/APO Group/ —
Buoyed by last year’s successful Africa Investment Forum’s Market Days that generated $29.2 billion of investment interest, its nine founding partners are bracing for an even bigger and better event later this year.
The 2024 Africa Investment Forum Market Days attracted more than 2,300 investors and participants from 83 countries around the world, more than 40 boardrooms, and 15 sponsors, including investment banks, insurers, and export credit agencies. Many more sponsors are lining up for the 2025 edition.
Meeting on Monday evening in Washington, DC, on the sidelines of the World Bank and IMF Spring Meetings, the partners reflected on the Forum’s remarkable seven-year journey, which has mobilized more than $225 billion in investment interest and established itself as a global investment movement for Africa.
The partners include the African Development Bank, Afreximbank, Africa50, Africa Finance Corporation, Development Bank of Southern Africa, Islamic Development, European Investment Bank, Trade and Development Bank, and newcomer, the Arab Bank for Economic Development in Africa (BADEA).
The President of the African Development Bank Group and Chairman of the Africa Investment Forum, Dr. Akinwumi Adesina said, “We have elevated Africa. We have showcased Africa. We have changed perceptions on Africa,” adding, “We have shown our belief in Africa, which has demonstrated to the world that indeed Africa is a bankable destination.”
“Africa will not be developed by aid. It will be developed by investment,” Adesina said, a vision that has guided the Forum since its launch in 2018.
The meeting outlined how the Forum has transformed perceptions about investing in Africa while delivering high-quality deal pipelines. To date, 22 deals have closed, with 41% of the financing provided by founding partners alongside other institutional investors.
Partners also discussed the Africa Investment Forum Partnership Framework to guarantee the Forum’s sustainability, The long-term governance and sustainability framework is expected to be formally signed at the May African Development Bank Annual Meetings in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire.
As Adesina prepares to conclude his tenure as president of the African Development Bank in September, he expressed profound gratitude to the partners for their support and commitment to the Forum.
At Monday’s meeting, the partners unanimously committed to the Africa Investment Forum because of its convening power to mobilize critical investments for transformative projects across the continent.
The CEO of Africa 50, Alain Ebobise spoke about the Forum’s uniqueness because “it focuses not on speeches but on people transacting in boardrooms,” adding, “We are ready to bring on board more sponsors.”
The President and CEO of Africa Finance Corporation, Samaila Zubairu said, “As Africans we have to take ownership of our development. The Africa Investment Forum is an initiative that demonstrates that.”
Boitumelo Mosako, the CEO of the Development Bank of Southern Africa, reiterated this, saying, ” The only way to be certain about the future is by creating it.”
Praising last year’s Market Days event as “fantastic,” the President of the Trade and Development Bank, Admassu Tadesse, pointed to the forum’s strength as a strong global brand promoting synergies among its founding partners.
Representing BADEA, the Director of Private Sector, Diab Karrar said that even though BADEA joined the Africa Investment Forum last year, they had always supported the initiative because “we believe in it.”
The Executive Vice President of Global Trade Bank, Afreximbank, Haytham El Maayergi, expressed a strong commitment to supporting the Africa Investment Forum.
Andrew McDowell, Director General of the European Investment Bank Global, spoke about the importance of institutional collaboration, which helps institutions like his make informed decisions about investment in Africa.
“It has been my greatest honor to develop and advance the Africa Investment Forum with you all. “Let us continue to fast-track Africa’s development together, now and in the future!” declared Adesina
US Senate News:
Source: United States Senator for Louisiana Bill Cassidy
WASHINGTON — U.S. Senators Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA), Chuck Grassley (R-IA), and colleagues reintroduced the Combating Organized Retail Crime Act to crack down on flash mob robberies and intricate retail theft schemes, establish a coordinated multi-agency response, and create new tools to tackle evolving trends in organized retail theft.
“If we can do anything to help law enforcement, we should,” said Dr. Cassidy. “Organized crime always looks to expand its territory. Let’s fight back.”
The Combating Organized Retail Crime Actwould:
Establish an Organized Retail and Supply Chain Crime Coordination Center within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security that combines expertise from state and local law enforcement agencies and retail industry representatives.
Create new tools to assist in federal investigation and prosecution of organized retail crime and help recapture lost goods and proceeds.
Cassidy and Grassley were joined by U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), James Risch (R-ID), Jacky Rosen (D-NV), Ted Budd (R-NC), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Bill Hagerty (R-TN), Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Steve Daines (R-MT), Katie Britt (R-AL), and Ted Cruz (R-TX) in introducing the legislation.
Background
According to the National Retail Federation (NRF), more than 84 percent of retailers report that violence and aggression from criminal activities has become more of a concern since 2022, resulting in injuries and deaths among employees, customers, security officers, and law enforcement personnel. NRF also estimates that larceny incidents increased by 93 percent in 2023 compared to 2019. In recent years, criminal organizations have increasingly turned to retail crime to generate illicit profits, using internet-based tools to organize flash mobs, sell stolen goods, and move money.
The Combating Organized Retail Crime Actis supported by the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the Major County Sheriffs of America, the National Retail Federation, the Retail Industry Leaders Association, the Reusable Packaging Association, the Association of American Railroads, the American Trucking Association, UPS, DHL, the U.S. Dairy Export Council, the National Milk Producers Foundation, the Intermodal Association of North America, the Transportation Intermediaries Association, the PASS (Protect America’s Small Sellers) Coalition, the International Downtown Association, Amazon, the World Shipping Council, Pirate Ship, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC), International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC), National District Attorneys Association (NDAA), World Shipping Council, and the Home Depot.