Category: Trade

MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: 3rd India-Japan Steel Dialogue Organized to Strengthen Bilateral Cooperation in the Steel Sector

Source: Government of India

Posted On: 05 FEB 2025 6:47PM by PIB Delhi

The 3rd India-Japan Steel Dialogue was successfully held on February 4, 2025, at Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi, jointly organized by the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI), Japan, and the Ministry of Steel, India. The dialogue was co-chaired by Mr. Vinod Kumar Tripathi, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Steel, Government of India, and Mr. Hideyuki Urata, Deputy Director General, METI, Japan, leading the respective delegations from both nations.

During the discussions, both sides exchanged insights on the current economic developments in India and Japan, an overview of the steel sector in both countries, the latest trends in the steel industry, the status of steel trade between the two countries, and the international steel market. The Indian delegation highlighted strategic initiatives by the Government of India to promote ease of doing business, sustained growth in steel demand driven by infrastructure investment, and concrete steps such as the release of the Green Steel Report and the Taxonomy of Green Steel. Additionally, India’s firm resolve to promote research and development in the sector, coupled with demographic advantages, presents significant opportunities for Japanese investors.

The dialogue also provided a platform to share perspectives on key issues, including the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (EU CBAM), which has major implications for global steel trade.

The Japanese side shared insights into current economic developments and advancements in the Japanese steel industry. They also provided updates on ongoing capacity-building programs and discussed other issues of mutual interest.

A key highlight of the meeting was the review of progress and future for ongoing capacity-building initiatives aimed at enhancing technology collaboration and skill development. Both sides reaffirmed their commitment to deepening cooperation in areas of mutual interest and identifying pathways to further strengthen strategic relationships in the steel sector. The Japanese delegation assured continued support for investments in newer steel technologies in India. In turn, India reiterated its commitment to ensure ease of doing business for Japanese companies under the framework of the dialogue.

The India-Japan Steel Dialogue serves as an institutional mechanism to enhance bilateral collaboration in steel production, product diversification, and workplace safety. This partnership is guided by the Memorandum of Cooperation (MoC) on the steel sector, signed between the two countries on December 22, 2020. The dialogue underscores the shared vision of India and Japan in fostering innovation, sustainable growth, and resilience in the steel industry.

******

TPJ/NJ

(Release ID: 2100091) Visitor Counter : 43

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: HKSAR Government expresses strong disapproval of US’ imposition of additional duty on products of Hong Kong and temporary suspension of inbound postal items containing goods from Hongkong Post

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

HKSAR Government expresses strong disapproval of US’ imposition of additional duty on products of Hong Kong and temporary suspension of inbound postal items containing goods from Hongkong Post
HKSAR Government expresses strong disapproval of US’ imposition of additional duty on products of Hong Kong and temporary suspension of inbound postal items containing goods from Hongkong Post
******************************************************************************************

The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR) today (February 5) expressed strong disapproval of the imposition of additional 10 per cent duty on products of Hong Kong set out in the Federal Register notice (the “FR Notice”) of the United States (US) Customs and Border Protection and the Department of Homeland Security, and the temporary suspension of inbound postal items containing goods from Hongkong Post by the US Postal Service. The spokesman for the HKSAR Government said, “The US’ imposition of additional duty on products of Hong Kong ignores the basic fact that Hong Kong is a separate customs territory, which is recognised by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and clearly stipulated in Article 116 of the Basic Law. We have been a staunch supporter of rule-based multilateral trading system, maintaining constructive and mutually beneficial trade relations with our trading partners all over the world including the US. In 2023, the US was the third largest trading partner of Hong Kong, with the total merchandise trade value amounting to US$60.3 billion. At the same time, Hong Kong is the US’ 27th largest trading partner. During the past 10 years, the US has realised a trade surplus of US$271.5 billion with Hong Kong, the largest among its global trading partners. These figures clearly demonstrate the close economic interaction between Hong Kong and the US, as well as the vast business interests of US businesses in Hong Kong.” “As a founding member of the WTO, the HKSAR has all along been upholding the principle of free and unimpeded trade. We strongly oppose any attempts to undermine Hong Kong’s reputation and erode our status as a separate customs territory. We urge the US to take urgent actions to rectify the FR Notice as well as to lift the suspension of accepting inbound postal items containing goods from the Hongkong Post as a matter of priority. “We are closely monitoring developments. If the US does not rectify its wrongdoing, we will take all possible actions to defend our legitimate interests, including consider taking up the matter in the WTO,” stressed the spokesman.

Ends/Wednesday, February 5, 2025Issued at HKT 20:29

NNNN

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: CFS urges public not to consume a batch of French raw milk cheese suspected to be contaminated with Shiga toxin-producing E. coli

Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region

CFS urges public not to consume a batch of French raw milk cheese suspected to be contaminated with Shiga toxin-producing E. coli
CFS urges public not to consume a batch of French raw milk cheese suspected to be contaminated with Shiga toxin-producing E. coli
******************************************************************************************

The Centre for Food Safety (CFS) of the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department today (February 5) urged the public not to consume a batch of raw milk cheese imported from France due to possible contamination with Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC). The trade should stop using or selling the affected product immediately if they possess it. Product details are as follows:Product name: MORBIER LAIT CRU DE SCEY AOP 7KG MEULEBrand: PERRIN VERMOTPlace of origin: FrancePack size: 6.56 kilogramsBest-before date: February 23, 2025Batch number: 34008Importer: Culina HK Limited “The CFS received a notification from the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed of the European Commission that the above-mentioned product is being recalled in France due to possible contamination with STEC. Upon learning of the incident, the CFS immediately contacted local importers for follow-up. A preliminary investigation found that the above-mentioned importer had imported into Hong Kong the affected batch of the product concerned,” a spokesman for the CFS said. The importer concerned has stopped sale and removed the affected batch of the product from shelves and initiated a recall according to the CFS’s instructions. Enquiries about the recall can be made to the importer’s hotline at 2342 3221 during office hours. “People will contract STEC-causing gastro-intestinal disease through consumption of contaminated water or undercooked and contaminated foods. Intestinal bleeding and serious complications such as hemolytic uraemic syndrome may also develop in some people,” the spokesman said. The CFS will alert the trade to the incident, and will continue to follow up and take appropriate action. The investigation is ongoing.

Ends/Wednesday, February 5, 2025Issued at HKT 19:55

NNNN

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: CFTC Announces Prediction Markets Roundtable

Source: US Commodity Futures Trading Commission

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Commodity Futures Trading Commission will hold a public roundtable in approximately 45 days at the conclusion of its requests for information on certain sports-related event contracts. The goal of the roundtable is to develop a robust administrative record with studies, data, expert reports, and public input from a wide variety of stakeholder groups to inform the Commission’s approach to regulation and oversight of prediction markets, including sports-related event contracts.
The roundtable will be held in the Conference Center at the CFTC’s headquarters at Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street N.W., Washington, D.C. Further information on the roundtable will be released once details are finalized.
“Unfortunately, the undue delay and anti-innovation policies of the past several years have severely restricted the CFTC’s ability to pivot to common-sense regulation of prediction markets,” said Acting Chairman Caroline D. Pham. “Despite my repeated dissents and other objections since 2022, the current Commission interpretations regarding event contracts are a sinkhole of legal uncertainty and an inappropriate constraint on the new Administration. Prediction markets are an important new frontier in harnessing the power of markets to assess sentiment to determine probabilities that can bring truth to the Information Age. The CFTC must break with its past hostility to innovation and take a forward-looking approach to the possibilities of the future.
“As the preeminent federal regulator mandated to oversee the $400 trillion notional derivatives markets that drive the real economy and safeguard the public interest, the CFTC is required to follow the rule of law and the Administrative Procedure Act to change course. This roundtable is a necessary first step in order to establish a holistic regulatory framework that will both foster thriving prediction markets and protect retail customers from binary options fraud such as deceptive and abusive marketing and sales practices. The CFTC appreciates the proactive engagement from market participants and looks forward to working together to support innovation while ensuring robust customer protection in our markets.”
The CFTC has identified several key obstacles to balanced regulation of prediction markets: existing Commission orders issued to designated contract markets (DCMs) pursuant to regulation 40.11 and related Commission interpretations; Commission rulemakings on event contracts; federal circuit court of appeals and district court orders and opinions, including that “gaming involves games”; the CFTC’s legal arguments and litigating positions in several ongoing federal court cases; CFTC-registered entities’ legal arguments in court that event contracts based on games or sports contests or sporting events constitute “gaming” and are therefore prohibited under the Commodity Exchange Act; staff interpretations, other guidance, and current practices on event contracts; existing law and regulation applicable to DCMs and futures commission merchants (FCMs); CFTC examinations, enforcement actions, and investigations; and other issues including but not limited to Constitutional questions such as the Commerce Clause, States’ rights and State regulatory schemes, Federalism, Federal preemption doctrines, and First Nations’ sovereignty as well as other federal laws applicable to sports betting.
The roundtable will include the above topics, in addition to retail binary options fraud and customer protection, potential revisions to Part 38 and Part 40 of CFTC regulations to address prediction markets, and other improvements to the regulation of event contracts to facilitate innovation. Participants will include a wide variety of experts and stakeholders representing numerous and diverse interests in these issues.
Members of the public may provide feedback, suggestions, and requests to participate as panelists on the roundtable by February 21, 2025 via email to [email protected] with “Prediction Markets Roundtable” in the subject field.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: U.S. Army Major Sentenced to 70 Months for Smuggling Firearms to Ghana

Source: Office of United States Attorneys

RALEIGH, N.C. – Kojo Owuso Dartey, age 42, of Fort Liberty, was sentenced to 70 months in prison and three years of supervised release for false statements made to an agency of the United States, false declarations before the court, conspiracy, dealing in firearms without a license, delivering firearms without notice to the carrier, smuggling goods from the United States, and illegally exporting firearms without a license. On April 23, 2024, Dartey was found guilty by a jury after trial.

According to court records and evidence presented at trial, Kojo Owusu Dartey, 42, provided a tip that resulted in a 16-defendant marriage fraud scheme between soldiers on Fort Liberty and foreign nationals from Ghana. In preparation for and at the trial of U.S. v. Agyapong held between June 28 and July 2, 2021, Dartey lied to federal law enforcement about his sexual relationship with a defense witness and lied on the stand and under oath about the relationship. During that trial, Dartey purchased seven firearms in the Fort Liberty area and tasked a U.S. Army Staff Sergeant at Fort Campbell, Kentucky, to purchase three firearms there and send them to Dartey in North Carolina. Dartey then hid all the firearms inside blue barrels underneath rice and household goods and with assistance from an Army Chief Warrant Officer smuggled the barrels out of the Port of Baltimore, Maryland, on a container ship to the Port of Tema in Ghana. The Ghana Revenue Authority recovered the firearms and reported the seizure to the DEA attaché in Ghana and the ATF Baltimore Field Division.

Daniel Bubar, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina, made the announcement after sentencing by Chief U.S. District Judge Richard E. Myers II. The Bureau of Tobacco, Alcohol and Firearms (ATF), Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID), and the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Office of Export Enforcement investigated the case. Assistant U.S. Attorney Gabriel J. Diaz prosecuted the case.

Related court documents and information can be found on the website of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina or on PACER by searching for Case No.5:23-cr-00165-M-RJ-1.

MIL Security OSI –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Ahead of Hearing, Warren Pushes Trump Trade Representative on Tariff Policy

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren

February 05, 2025

Warren Questions Greer on Trade Agenda, Tariff Exemptions for Trump’s Allies and Special Interests

“Tariffs are an important strategic economic tool, but Donald Trump’s desire to start and stop random trade wars will not protect jobs, keep Americans safe, or bring down costs for families.”

Text of Letter (PDF)

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs (BHUA) and member of the Senate Finance Committee, wrote to Jamieson Greer, nominee to be U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), ahead of his February 6, 2025 confirmation hearing, probing his views on trade. Senator Warren asked Mr. Greer to address her concerns with the administration’s tariff strategy, corporate influence over trade agreements, corporations offshoring of jobs, and other trade-related concerns.

The USTR is responsible for developing and promoting the U.S. trade agenda and leading trade negotiations on behalf of the U.S., playing a critical role in the economy. This week, the Trump administration announced new tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China. During the last Trump administration, corporations and their lobbyists abused tariff exclusion loopholes to receive secretive exemptions from President Trump and his trade team. The Commerce Department’s Inspector General found that the process for receiving an exemption was “neither transparent nor objective.”

“(T)he President does not appear to have a strategic plan in place to ensure that his proposed tariffs are implemented in a way that secures wins for hardworking Americans and precludes carveouts for special interests,” wrote Senator Warren. “Instead, he has threatened, and withdrawn tariff threats in a chaotic and haphazard manner that has only resulted in uncertainty for American consumers, workers, and manufacturers, as well as our allies.”

Large multinational companies have also gained outsized influence in trade negotiations and trade disputes. For decades, membership of the trade advisory committee has leaned heavily in favor of billionaire corporations and their industry associations, and Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions have allowed corporations to sue governments—including the United States—for pursuing public policies they may disagree with. Senator Warren encouraged Mr. Greer to pursue the removal of ISDS provisions from trade agreements with U.S. allies.

Senator Warren also wrote that she believes large corporations have too many incentives to move jobs and manufacturing abroad. “In order to reverse the negative effects offshoring has had on the American economy, the Administration must invest in domestic industry and eliminate incentives for corporations to hide their profits abroad,” the senator wrote.

Senator Warren also expressed support for the Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program to help American workers whose jobs are displaced by trade. “Renewing TAA is a no-brainer, and I hope you will support it to make sure that workers at home get a fair deal,” said Senator Warren.

In order to better understand Mr. Greer’s approach to trade, Senator Warren asked him to prepare to answer questions on his vision for the Trump administration’s trade agenda on February 6, 2025, the date of his confirmation hearing.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: 02.05.2025 Cruz, Fetterman, Slotkin Introduce Bipartisan Bill to Prohibit Strategic Petroleum Reserve Sales to Foreign Adversaries

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Texas Ted Cruz

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), John Fetterman (D-Penn.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) introduced theBanning SPR Oil Exports to Foreign Adversaries Act. The bipartisan bill prohibits the sale or export of oil from the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, or any entity owned or controlled by those nations.
Upon introduction, Sen. Cruz said, “The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is meant to protect the U.S. during crises, not supply our adversaries. Under President Biden, part of this reserve was sold, benefiting China’s strategic interests. There is strong bipartisan consensus around preventing such a sale from being repeated. I’m proud to work with Senator Fetterman and Senator Slotkin on this legislation, which will prevent U.S. oil reserves from being sold to adversarial nations.”
Sen. Fetterman said, “The Strategic Petroleum Reserve protects America’s energy, economic, and national security. We must prioritize the safety of America and our allies – we cannot allow our adversaries to purchase oil from our critical energy reserves. This is a commonsense bill with strong bipartisan support. I’m proud to introduce it with Senator Cruz, Senator Slotkin, and my colleagues in the House. I look forward to getting it signed into law this congress.”
Sen. Slotkin said, “Our Strategic Petroleum Reserve is meant to bolster our national security, and it should never be sold to hostile nations like Russia, Iran or China. This bipartisan bill prevents hostile nations from buying oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve. Energy security shouldn’t ever be a partisan issue, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill and fortify our energy security as a nation.”
The companion legislation was introduced in the House by U.S. Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-Penn.-6).
Rep. Houlahan said, “When I heard there was a loophole enabling our foreign adversaries to purchase oil from our strategic reserves, I was shocked and outraged. When gas prices rise, releases from the strategic reserve are meant to ease the financial burden for working families—not potentially end up in the hands of those who wish our service members, country, and NATO Allies harm. Closing this loophole requires a Congressional fix, and I’m proud to partner with Reps. Don Bacon and Jay Obernolte to do just that. We’ve seen support for it in the past; it’s time to get this bill across the finish line and signed into law.”
Read the bill text here.
BACKGROUND
Sen. Cruz previously led a bipartisan effort to have an amendment similar to the bill included in the FY24 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The amendment was agreed to by the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support. The House companion bill, introduced by Representatives Houlahan (D-PA) and Don Bacon (R-NE), also passed the House unanimously as a part of the FY24 NDAA.
The SPR, which was established by Congress in 1975 in response to OPEC’s oil embargo against the United States, exists to minimize the impacts of oil supply shocks on the United States. Today, as the world’s largest supply of emergency crude oil, it continues to protect and strengthen U.S. national, economic, and energy security. The U.S. Department of Energy manages the SPR and regularly conducts public sales of excess crude oil to the highest bidders through competitive public auction. During both the Biden and Trump Administrations, foreign companies with direct ties to our adversaries have won these auctions, giving anti-democratic regimes access to critical energy reserves.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: Prime Minister to travel to Paris and Brussels to strengthen transatlantic co-operation and advance global progress on AI
Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced that he will travel to Paris, France, and to Brussels, Belgium, from February 8 to 12, 2025, to strengthen transatlantic co-operation and advance global progress on artificial intelligence (AI).

In Paris, the Prime Minister will participate in the AI Action Summit hosted by the President of France, Emmanuel Macron. He will engage with leaders across business and public policy about how we can power the next generation of AI to unlock good-paying jobs and opportunities. Canada is at the centre of this shift, accelerating the innovation and economic potential of AI, while being thoughtful about navigating trust and safety. Seizing this moment is important for the future of Canadian innovation, economic productivity, and our economic security. At the Summit, the Prime Minister will deliver a keynote speech underscoring Canada’s role as a global leader in AI and highlight the importance of working in partnership to develop these technologies responsibly and safely.

As this year’s G7 President, Canada is committed to working alongside international partners in the face of geopolitical instability and threats against the rules-based international order – challenges that have been accelerated by technology, disinformation, and climate change. On the margins of the Summit, Prime Minister Trudeau will meet with other world leaders to tackle these challenges and renew progress on shared priorities, including international trade, peace and security, and global economic stability.

Prime Minister Trudeau will then travel to Brussels for a Canada-European Union (EU) Leaders’ Meeting, where he will join his EU counterparts to help secure a strong, prosperous future for people on both sides of the Atlantic. The leaders will discuss ways to advance our collective efforts to strengthen transatlantic security, protect the rules-based international order, continue supporting Ukraine, and create opportunities for our peoples, building on the success of the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). While in Brussels, the Prime Minister will also meet with the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Mark Rutte, and reaffirm Canada’s commitment to working with the Alliance to uphold democracy, peace, and security.

Throughout the trip, Prime Minister Trudeau will strengthen and deepen transatlantic co-operation, advance efforts to solve the world’s most pressing challenges, and deliver on the priorities of Canadians.

Quote

“Transatlantic collaboration – in defence and security, in innovation and energy, in business and trade – are essential to Canada’s success. In Paris and Brussels, we will strengthen Canada’s alliances and partnerships, and put Canadians at the forefront of every opportunity, including artificial intelligence.”

Quick Facts
- This will be Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s 11th official visit to France.
- France is a key ally for Canada on the international stage. France is a member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the G7, and the G20, as well as a permanent member of the United Nations (UN) Security Council, a founding member of the European Union (EU), and a leading partner in La Francophonie.
- In 2023, France was Canada’s third-largest merchandise export market in the EU and its 12th-largest trading partner globally, with two-way merchandise trade totalling $12.9 billion.
- The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit in Paris is the third global summit of its kind. It follows the AI Seoul Summit, which Prime Minister Trudeau attended virtually last year, and the AI Safety Summit that was hosted by the UK in 2023.
- Representatives from Canada’s federal research granting agencies will be participating in the AI Action Summit.
- In Budget 2024, the Government of Canada announced a $2.4 billion package of measures to secure Canada’s AI advantage. These investments will accelerate job growth in Canada’s AI sector and beyond, boost productivity by helping researchers and businesses develop and adopt AI, and ensure this is done responsibly.
- This will be Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s sixth official visit to Belgium.
- Canada and the EU share a strong partnership and a long history of close people-to-people ties, commercial relations, and institutional co-operation. We work together on trade, international peace and security, digital innovation, the fight against climate change, and migration, among other priorities.
- With its 27 Member States, the EU as a group is Canada’s second-largest destination for goods and services exports, after the United States of America. In 2023, trade between Canada and the EU reached a total of $157.3 billion in combined goods and services.
- The Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) was signed in 2016 and has been provisionally applied since 2017. Since then, bilateral merchandise trade between Canada and the EU has grown by more than 60 per cent.
- Canada is a founding member of NATO. The Alliance is a cornerstone of Canadian security and defence policy and an important platform for Canada’s contributions to international peace and security.
Associated Links

MIL OSI Canada News –
February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Cantwell Takes to Senate Floor to Oppose Trump’s Trade Philosophy: No to Tariffs, Yes to Innovation, Collaboration & Growth

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Washington Maria Cantwell

02.05.25

Cantwell Takes to Senate Floor to Oppose Trump’s Trade Philosophy: No to Tariffs, Yes to Innovation, Collaboration & Growth

In speech on Senate floor, Cantwell advocates for new U.S. trade agreements with Southeast Asia, the Middle East, & the Americas to strengthen ties with allies & grow the economy at home; Cantwell slams proposed Trump tariffs: “The payers in this dispute are never the government leaders … it’s the workers who lose their job.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, delivered a speech on the Senate floor calling for the United States to establish new trade agreements with Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Latin America – and to repudiate the trade philosophy of President Donald Trump, whose proposed tariffs on goods from Canada, Mexico, and China would spark a trade war, drive up costs for American consumers, harm domestic businesses across hundreds of industries, and compromise the United States’ global leadership in the free trade ecosystem.

“It’s better to have a job than be attracted to join a terrorist organization. It’s better to create economic stability than fueling poverty and migration […] Last week, I spoke about additional investments the United States needs to make in Panama, Latin America, and others, to link and modernize bilateral agreements that help us counter China,” Sen. Cantwell said. “Free trade agreements are a way for us — not tariffs — to gain the leverage we want. South Asia could play an important role in this coalition building, particularly in the Indo-Pacific region. But I want us to go further. I want us to understand that U.S.-led negotiations in a Middle East free trade agreement to build on the momentum of a ceasefire in Gaza could further stabilize that region.”

In her speech, Sen. Cantwell railed against President Donald Trump’s tariff’s proposal, likening his isolationist trade policies to an attempt to make time stand still – a futile goal at any point, but especially during the modern information age, when countries are more interconnected than ever and the United States is locked in an innovation race in artificial intelligence and quantum technology. She also called on the United States to invest in its workforce, research & development, science, and capital investment to modernize its manufacturing and stay competitive.

“To outcompete our adversaries, we need coalitions, not go-it-alone strategies. Why do we fear this if we think our principles are correct? But somehow the current administration thinks that we’ve been hurt more than we’ve been helped in this global equation, and they want us to believe that somehow there is a win-win situation on tariffs that they can deliver on,” Sen. Cantwell said.

“Tariffs are a distortion of markets. Tariffs mean we disagree. It very rarely means the disagreement will be resolved quickly. It usually means people will retaliate, and the escalation of that retaliation will hurt consumers so much so that eventually someone will blink,” she continued. “The payers in this dispute, though, are never the government leaders. No, it’s the workers who lose their job. It’s the family that pays higher cost. It’s the community that loses their economic activity and tax revenue.”

In Washington state: Two out of every five jobs are tied to trade and related industries. In 2023, the state imported $19.9 billion of goods from Canada – primarily oil, gas, lumber, and electrical power — making our northern neighbors Washington state’s largest trade partner. Also in 2023, the state imported $1.7 billion in goods from Mexico, including motor vehicles, vehicle parts, and household appliances. More information about how President Trump’s proposed tariffs will impact businesses and consumers in the State of Washington is HERE.

Sen. Cantwell has remained a steadfast supporter of free trade to grow the economy in the State of Washington and nationwide. Sen. Cantwell was the leading voice in negotiations to end India’s 20% retaliatory tariff on American apples, which devastated Washington state’s apple exports. India had once been the second-largest export market for American apples, but after then-President Trump imposed tariffs on steel and aluminum in his first term, India imposed retaliatory tariffs in response and U.S. apple exports plummeted. The impact on Washington apple growers was severe: apple exports from the state dropped from $120 million in 2017 to less than $1 million by 2023. In September 2023, India ended its retaliatory tariffs on apples and pulse crops following several years of Sen. Cantwell’s advocacy, which was welcome news to the state’s more than 1,400 apple growers and the 68,000-plus workers they support.

In May 2023, Sen. Cantwell sent a letter urging the Biden Administration to help U.S. potato growers finally get approval to sell fresh potatoes in Japan. In June 2023, Sen. Cantwell hosted U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), then-chair of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, in Washington state for a forum with 30 local agricultural leaders in Wenatchee to discuss the Farm Bill.

In 2022, Sen. Cantwell spearheaded passage of the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, a law to crack down on skyrocketing international ocean shipping costs and ease supply chain backlogs that raise prices for consumers and make it harder for U.S. farmers and exporters to get their goods to the global market.

In August 2020, during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, Sen. Cantwell sent a letter to then-Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue requesting aid funds be distributed to wheat growers. In December 2018, Sen. Cantwell celebrated the passage of the Farm Bill, which included $500 million of assistance for farmers, including those who grow wheat.

In 2019, Sen. Cantwell helped secure a provision in the $16 billion USDA relief package, ensuring sweet cherry growers could access emergency funding to offset the impacts of tariffs and other market disruptions.

Video of today’s speech is available HERE; and a transcript of Sen. Cantwell’s remarks is available HERE.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 6, 2025

MIL-OSI: Bpce: Groupe BPCE Results Q4-24 & 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Paris, February 5, 2025

STRONG PERFORMANCES IN 2024

• Excellent performance in Q4-24 •
• Net income (Group share) of €3.5bn in 2024, strong growth of +26% •
• VISION 2030: dynamic implementation of the strategic project •

Q4-24: net banking income at €6bn, up +11% YoY; very good performance achieved by retail banking and the global businesses; net income of €913m, +140% YoY
2024: net banking income of €23.3bn, 5% growth YoY driven by all the business lines; gross operating income up by a strong 18% notably thanks to good cost control; reported net income²of €3.5bn, up by 26% YoY

Very high levels of solvency and liquidity with a CET1 ratio of 15.6%³ and a LCR of 142%⁴ at end-2024

RETAIL BANKING & INSURANCE Sharp 14% growth in revenues in Q4-24 and 4% in 2024 driven in particular by the confirmed rebound in net interest margins and commissions. The Banque Populaire and Caisse d’Epargne retail banking networks enjoyed sustained growth in their customer bases with the addition of 846,000 new clients⁶in 2024

Local & regional financing: €84bn of funding for our clients of individual, professional, corporate, and institutional clients; 1% year-on-year growth in loan outstandings, rising to a total of €724bn at end-December 2024
Deposits & savings⁷up by €5bn year-on-year, reaching a total of €681bn at end-December 2024
Insurance: gross inflows⁸ of €14.9bn in life insurance in 2024. Premiums up 15% in 2024 YoY. The equipment rate⁹for P&C and Personal Protection insurance stood at ~35% at end-December 2024

Financial Solutions & Expertise: net banking income remained stable in Q4-24 and rose by 2% in full-year 2024 vs. a high basis of comparison in 2023. Good performance reported by the Leasing and Consumer Credit activities
Digital & Payments: +5% growth in the number of card transactions at end-December 2024 YoY. Oney net banking income up 8% in full-year 2024

GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES Strong revenue growth, +8% in Q4-24 and full-year 2024; very dynamic business development in Corporate & Investment Banking, net banking income up 5% in Q4-24 year-on-year; very good performance achieved by Asset Management with net banking income up 11% in Q4-24 year-on-year

Corporate & Investment Banking: net banking income of €1.1bn in Q4-24; +19% growth in revenues in Q4-24 YoY for Global Markets, driven by the Fixed-income and Equity segments; net banking income up 2% for Global Finance, driven in particular by Trade Finance activities, and up by 6% for Investment Banking activities in Q4-24
Asset & Wealth Management: Natixis IM’s assets under management up 13% YtD, reaching an all-time high of €1,317bn at end-December 2024; very high net fund inflows of €40bn in full-year 2024, particularly from Fixed-Income expertise; net banking income of €968m in Q4-24, reflecting strong growth of 11% YoY.

Expenses remained stable year-on-year in 2024 and good improvement in the cost/income by 3.5pp

Prudent provisioning policy: cost of risk of €2.1bn in 2024, i.e. 24bps, standing below the announced guidance level; €596 million in Q4-24, down 20% year-on-year

Financial strength: CET1 ratio of 15.6%³at end-December 2024; liquidity reserves of €302bn

VISION 2030 strategic project: fast-paced and dynamic implementation

April 2024: announcement of the project to acquire SGEF, making Groupe BPCE the European leader in equipment leasing; completion of the transaction scheduled for Q1-25.
June 2024: plan to create France’s No. 1 payment processor in partnership with BNP Paribas with a view to becoming one of the top 3 players in Europe.
June 2024: commercial partnerships with two leaders in their respective markets: Leroy Merlin and Verisure
January 2025: announcement of plan to create Europe’s leading asset manager in a joint venture with Generali.
Plans to create a shared technology platform for retail banking activities

¹ See the notes on methodology annexed to this press release ²Group share ³ Ratio estimated at end-December 2024 integrating pro forma the coming impact of SGEF and Nagelmackers acquisitions ⁴Average end-of month LCRs in Q4-24 ⁵ Estimated at end-December 2024 ⁶ 196,100 new active clients over the year ⁷ On-balance sheet savings & deposits within the scope of the Retail Banking & Insurance business unit ⁸ Excluding reinsurance treaty with CNP Assurance ⁹ Scope of the individual clients in the BP and CE retail banking networks

Nicolas Namias, Chairman of the Management Board of BPCE, said: “2024 marked the return of strong performance across all our business lines. Groupe BPCE saw its earnings grow by 26% over the year as a whole and by a total of 140% in the fourth quarter of 2024.

Banques Populaires and Caisses d’Epargne benefited from the confirmed rebound in their net interest margin along with an extremely buoyant level of commercial activity, illustrated by the arrival of 846,000 new clients in 2024. All the business lines serving the retail banking networks – Insurance, Payments, Financial Solutions & Expertise – generated growth both in full-year 2024 and in the 4^thquarter of the year. It also proved to be a remarkable quarter and full-year period for the global business lines managed by Natixis CIB and Natixis IM with, in particular, 19% revenue growth in our capital markets activities in the fourth quarter, and a record-breaking 40 billion euros in net inflows for our asset management activities in the course of the year.

These results testify to the dynamic implementation of our VISION 2030 strategic project. In the space of a year, we announced the planned acquisition of SGEF, making the Group the front-ranking European equipment leasing specialist, an initiative due to be completed early this year; the creation, with BNP Paribas, of the French leader in payment processing, with a view to becoming one of the top 3 players in Europe; plans to create a champion in asset management with Generali that would be No.1 in Europe in terms of revenues and one of the top 10 asset management specialists worldwide. Today, we announce our ambition to create a common technological platform for the Banques Populaires and Caisses d’Epargne by setting up a joint information system. Designed to further enhance the Group’s performance, this project sets out to optimize the service offered to our 35 million clients and to improve the day-to-day lives of our employees and, in the process, support the development of retail banking in France. These projects give concrete expression to our determination to pursue well-balanced development across our three priority growth areas: France, Europe, and the rest of the world.

These extremely exciting prospects for the months ahead will be driven by our staff of employees, who this year demonstrated their tremendous mobilization and enthusiasm during the Olympic & Paralympic Games Paris 2024. We gave expression to our promise to share the Games with as many people as possible in every territorial region of France. This event enabled us to strengthen our ties with our clients both in regional France and around the world, and we will continue to foster these relationships by contributing to the sustainable development of the economies in which we do business, in line with our cooperative values.”

The quarterly financial statements of Groupe BPCE for the period ended December 31, 2024, approved by the Management Board on February 3, 2025, were verified and reviewed by the Supervisory Board, at a meeting chaired by Eric Fougère on February 5, 2025.

In this document, 2023 figures have been restated on a pro-forma basis (see annex for the reconciliation of reported data to pro-forma data).

Groupe BPCE

€m¹	Q4-24	Q4-23	% Change	2024	2023	% Change
Net banking income	6,046	5,462	11%	23,317	22,198	5%
Operating expenses	(4,184)	(4,129)	1%	(16,384)	(16,328)	0%
Gross operating income	1,862	1,332	40%	6,933	5,870	18%
Cost of risk	(596)	(744)	(20)%	(2,061)	(1,731)	19%
Income before tax	1,262	537	135%	4,956	4,182	19%
Income tax	(326)	(159)	106%	(1,357)	(1,340)	1%
Net income – Group share	913	381	140%	3,520	2,804	26%
Exceptional items	(64)	(100)	(35)%	(155)	(122)	28%
Underlying²net income – Group share	977	481	103%	3,675	2,925	26%
Underlying cost to income ratio³	67.8%	74.6%	(6.8)pp	69.4%	72.9%	(3.5)pp

¹ Reported figures as far as “Net income (Group share)” ² “Underlying” means exclusive of exceptional items ³ The underlying cost/income ratio of Groupe BPCE is calculated on the basis of net banking income and operating expenses excluding exceptional items. The calculations are detailed in the annex on pages 18 and 24.

1. Groupe BPCE

Unless specified to the contrary, the financial data and related comments refer to the reported results of the Group and
business lines; changes express differences between Q4-24 and Q4-23 and between full-year 2024 and full-year 2023.

Groupe BPCE’s net banking income rose by 11% to reach 6,046 million euros in Q4-24 thanks to strong commercial activity in all business lines. At the end of December 2024, it stood at 23,317 million euros, up 5%.

Revenues from the Retail Banking & Insurance business unit (RB&I) rose 14% in Q4-24 to 4,064 million euros and stood at 15,397 million euros in full-year 2024, representing growth of 4%. Banques Populaires and Caisses d’Epargne put up a strong commercial performance, attracting more than 846,000 new clients¹ across all markets since the beginning of the year.

Revenues in the Financial Solutions & Expertise business unit, stable in Q4-24 and up 2% in full-year 2024, were driven in particular by the leasing and consumer credit businesses. The Insurance business unit benefited from strong business momentum in life insurance with gross new inflows² of 14.9 billion euros. Business was buoyant for the Digital & Payments business unit with renewed momentum for Oney.

Revenues from the Global Financial Services (GFS) business unit were up 8% in Q4-24 and full-year 2024, reaching a total of 2,055 million euros and 7,947 million euros respectively. Corporate & Investment Banking revenues, buoyed up by strong commercial performance across all its business lines, came to 1,087 million euros in Q4-24, up 5%, and to 4,440 million euros in full-year 2024, up 7%. The net banking income generated by Asset & Wealth Management stood at 968 million euros in Q4-24, up 11%, and reached a total of 3,507 million euros in full-year 2024, up 10%. Assets under management, which rose to their highest level ever thanks to record-breaking fund inflows and positive market and currency effects, rose by 13% in the course of the year to reach 1,317 billion euros.

The net interest margin stood at 7.6 billion euros, up 4% year-on-year, while commission income, which reached 11 billion euros in full-year 2024, was up 7% year-on-year.

In full-year 2024, operating expenses remained stable at 16,384 million euros, rising 1% to 4,184 million euros in Q4-24, benefitting from positive jaws effects over the 2 periods.

The underlying cost/income ratio³ improved by 6.8pp in Q4-24 to 67.8%, and by 3.5pp in full-year 2024 to 69.4%

Gross operating income rose by 40% to 1,862 million euros in Q4-24, and by 18% to 6,933 million euros in full-year 2024.

Groupe BPCE’s cost of risk, which came to -2,061 million euros in 2024, increased by a total of 19% vs. a low basis of comparison in 2023. In Q4-24, it stood at -596 million euros, down 20%.

Performing loans are deemed to be rated ‘Stage 1’ or ‘Stage 2,’ while loans with proven risk are rated ‘Stage 3.’

¹ 196,100 new active clients in full-year 2024 ² Excluding the reinsurance treaty with CNP Assurances³ The underlying cost/income ratio of Groupe BPCE is calculated on the basis of net banking income and operating expenses excluding exceptional items. The calculations are detailed in the annex on page 24

For Groupe BPCE, the amount of provisions for performing loans rated ‘Stage 1’ or ‘Stage 2’ corresponds:

For the quarter, to a reversal of 31 million euros in Q4-24 vs. an allocation of 34 million euros in Q3-24 and vs. an allocation of 145 million euros in Q4-23,
For the 12-month period, a reversal of 177 million euros in 2024 vs. a reversal of 112 million euros in 2023.

Provisions for loan outstandings with proven risk, rated ‘Stage 3,’ correspond:

For the quarter, to an allocation of 627 million euros in Q4-24 vs. an allocation of 488 million euros in Q3-24 and vs. an allocation of 598 million euros in Q4-23,
For the 12-month period, an allocation of 2,238 million euros in 2024 vs. an allocation of 1,843 million euros in 2023.

In Q4-24, the cost of risk for Groupe BPCE stood at 28bps in terms of gross customer outstandings, down 7bps. This figure includes a reversal of 1bp on performing loans (vs. an allocation of 7bps in Q4-23) and an allocation on loan outstandings with proven risk of 29bps vs. an allocation of 28bps in Q4-23.
In Q4-24, the cost of risk remained stable for the Retail Banking & Insurance business unit at 30bps, including a 1bp provision for performing loans (vs. a 5bps allocation to provisions in Q4-23) and a 30bps allocation on loan outstandings with proven risk, as in Q4-23.
The cost of risk for the Corporate & Investment Banking business unit came to 55bps (vs. 37bps in Q4-23), including a 13bps reversal on performing loans (vs. a 16bps provision in Q4-23) and a 67bps provision on loans with proven risk (vs. a 21bps provision in Q4-23).

In 2024, Groupe BPCE’s cost of risk stood at 24bps of gross customer loan outstandings. This figure includes a 2bps reversal of provisions on performing loans (vs. a 1bp reversal in 2023) and a 26bps provision on loans with proven risk (vs. a 22bps provision in 2023).
The cost of risk was 24bps for the Retail Banking & Insurance business unit (21bps in 2023), including a 2bps reversal on performing loans (as in 2023) and a 26bps provision on loans with proven risk (vs. a 23bps provision in 2023).
The cost of risk for the Corporate & Investment Banking business unit came to 40bps (24bps in 2023), including a 6bps reversal on performing loans (vs. a 4bps reversal in 2023) and a 46bps provision on loans with proven risk (vs. a 28bps provision in 2023).

The ratio of non-performing loans to gross loan outstandings stood at 2.5% at December 31, 2024, up 0.1pp compared with end-December 2023.

Reported net income (Group share) came to 913 million euros in Q4-24, up 140%. In full-year 2024, it stood at 3,520 million euros, up 26%.

The impact of exceptional items on net income (Group share) was -64 million euros in Q4-24 vs. -100 million euros in Q4-23 and -155 million euros in full-year 2024 vs. -122 million euros in full-year 2023.

Underlying net income (Group share)¹ rose by 103% to stand at 977 million euros in Q4-24, and grew by 26% to 3,675 million euros in full-year 2024.

1 “Underlying” means exclusive of exceptional items

2. A Group mobilized to decarbonize the economy and committed to making impact accessible to all

Strong commitments in 2024

Climate commitments:

The Group has published new decarbonization ambitions for the 11¹ most highly emissive industrial sectors: Aluminum, Aviation, Commercial real estate, Residential real estate, Agriculture, Automotive, Steel and Cement, and has strengthened its ambitions in the Power Generation and Oil & Gas sectors.

Environmental commitments:

Groupe BPCE has strengthened its commitment by joining act4nature international.

Social commitments by providing financing for players in the social & solidarity-based economy, in social housing and the Public Sector.

Innovative and concrete actions for our clients

The Banques Populaires and Caisses d’Epargne retail banking networks have launched innovations to facilitate home ownership and offer all individual customers energy-efficient renovation solutions to preserve the value of their real-estate assets: for example, by the end of November 2024, over 640 million euros in financing had been granted for energy-efficient home renovation, and the Advice and Sustainable Solutions digital module had received over 5 million unique visitors.
The Group serves the SME and ISE clients of the Banques Populaires and Caisses d’Epargne, as well as local communities by providing locally-based advice and by financing the transition of their business models. It has also strengthened its partnership with the European Investment Bank (EIB) for the innovation and energy transition with over one billion euros in transition and decarbonization financing.
Green revenues in the CIB rose by +14% in 2024 YoY, driven by sustainable finance and renewable energy & new energy activities including tailored-made solutions and dedicated expertise provided by the Green Hub.

Groupe BPCE, a pioneer in sustainable finance, launched 5 green and social bond issues in the course of 2024 for an aggregate value of more than 3.6 billion euros, including the 1^st Social Bond with a profit-sharing coupon for the benefit of the Institut Robert-Debré du Cerveau de l’Enfant (Children’s Brain Development Institute), supported by APHP (Paris Public Hospitals).

¹ Given the insignificant amount of Natixis CIB’s financing dedicated to freight and passenger ships, Groupe BPCE has not published its action plan for this industrial sector

3. Capital, loss-absorbing capacity, liquidity, and funding

3.1 CET1¹ratio

Groupe BPCE’s CET1 ratio at end-December 2024 stood at an estimated 16.2%, unchanged from the previous quarter. It includes the following impacts:

Retained earnings: +21bps,
Net issuance of cooperative shares: +3bps,
Change in risk-weighted assets: – 33bps,
Other changes, including variations in the prudential backstop provision, items included under Other Comprehensive Income, and other adjustments: +4bps.

The Group’s CET1 ratio – presented on a pro-forma basis to reflect the inclusion of the future impacts of the SGEF and Nagelmackers acquisitions (-54bps) – stands at 15.6%,

At end-December 2024, Groupe BPCE held an equity buffer estimated at 18.6 billion euros above the threshold for triggering the maximum distributable amount (MDA) for equity capital, taking account of the prudential requirements laid down by the ECB applicable on January 2, 2025.

3.2 TLAC ratio¹

The Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) stood at an estimated 122.1 billion euros at the end of December 2024. The TLAC ratio, expressed as a percentage of risk-weighted assets, stood at an estimated 26.7%² at the end of December 2024 (without taking account of preferred senior debt for the calculation of this ratio), well above the standard requirements of the Financial Stability Board that were equal to 22.4% at January 2, 2025.

3.3 MREL ratio¹

Expressed as a percentage of risk-weighted assets at December 31, 2024, Groupe BPCE’s subordinated MREL ratio (without taking account of preferred senior debt for the calculation of this ratio) and the total MREL ratio stood at 26.7%² and 34.6%, well above the minimum requirements laid down by the SRB at January 2, 2025 of 22.4%³ and 27.3%³ respectively.

3.4 Leverage ratio¹

At December 31, 2024, the estimated leverage ratio stood at 5.1%, well above the requirement.

3.5 Liquidity reserves at a high level

The LCR (Liquidity Coverage Ratio) for Groupe BPCE is well above the regulatory requirement of 100%, at an average of 142% of month-end LCRs for the 4^th quarter 2024.
Liquidity reserves stood at 302 billion euros at December 2024, representing a coverage ratio of 177% of short-term financial debt (including short-term maturities of medium- to long-term financial debt).

3.6 MLT funding plan: 32% of the 2025 objectives completed as at January 31, 2025

The size of the MLT funding plan, excluding structured private placements and Asset Backed Securities (ABS), has been set at 23 billion euros for 2025. The breakdown per type of debt is as follows:

10 billion euros in TLAC funding: 2.0 billion euros in Tier 2 funding and 8 billion euros in senior non-preferred debt,
3 billion euros senior preferred debt,
10 billion euros in covered bonds.

The target for ABS is 8 billion euros.

At January 31, 2025, Groupe BPCE had raised 7.3 billion euros, excluding structured private placements and ABS (32% of the 23 billion euro funding plan):

5.6 billion euros in TLAC funding: 1.7 billion euros in Tier 2 funding (87% of requirements) and 3.9 billion euros in senior non-preferred debt (49% of requirements),
1.7 billion euros in covered bonds (17% of requirements).

At January 31, 2025, the amount of ABS raised came to a total of 0.7 billion euros, i.e. 8% of the target.

Capital adequacy, Total loss-absorbing capacity – see the note on methodology
¹ Estimated at December 31, 2024 ² Groupe BPCE has chosen to waive the possibility provided by Article 72 Ter (3) of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) to use senior preferred debt to ensure compliance with its TLAC/subordinated MREL requirements. ³ Following reception of MREL’s annual letter for 2024

4. Results of the business lines

4.1 Retail Banking & Insurance

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	4,064	14%	15,397	4%
Operating expenses	(2,497)	(0)%	(9,902)	1%
Gross operating income	1,567	45%	5,495	10%
Cost of risk	(556)	(13)%	(1,751)	16%
Income before tax	998	142%	3,807	8%
Exceptional items	(45)	(60)%	(115)	3%
Underlying²income before tax	1,044	98%	3,922	8%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	60.4%	(8.5)pp	63.6%	(2.2)pp

At end-December 2024, loan outstandings rose by 1% to 724 billion euros. Outstanding home loans remained stables at 400 billion euros, while equipment loans rose by 3% during the year to 199 billion euros.

At end-December 2024, on-balance sheet customer deposits & savings totaled 681 billion euros, representing an increase of 5 billion euros year-on-year, with a 5% rise in term accounts and a 3% year-on-year increase in both regulated and unregulated passbook savings accounts.

Net banking income for the Retail Banking & Insurance business unit rose by 14% in Q4-24 to 4,064 million euros, and by 4% in full-year 2024 to 15,397 million euros. In Q4-24, these changes reflect the good level of business activities: in the networks, revenues rose by 17% for the Banque Populaire retail banking network and by 14% for the Caisse d’Épargne network. Net banking income for both networks also recorded growth in full-year 2024, by 4% for the Banque Populaire network and by 3% for the Caisse d’Épargne network.

The Financial Solutions & Expertise business lines continued to benefit from strong sales momentum, particularly in the leasing segment. Revenues remained stable in Q4-24 but saw 2% growth in full-year 2024. In Insurance, premiums⁴ rose by 15% in 2024, driven by both Non-Life Insurance and Life & Personal Protection Insurance. The Digital & Payments business unit reported a 14% increase in revenues in Q4-24 and 7% growth in full-year 2024, driven by card transactions and instant payment operations.

Operating expenses remained tightly managed, stable in Q4-24 at 2,497 million euros, and up by just 1% in full-year 2024 to 9,902 million euros.

The underlying cost/income ratio³ improved by 8.5pp in Q4-24 to 60.4%, and by 2.2pp in full-year 2024 to 63.6%.

The business unit’s gross operating income benefited from a strong positive jaws effect, rising by 45% in Q4-24 to
1,567 million euros and by 10% in full-year 2024 to 5,495 million euros.

The cost of risk amounted to -556 million euros in Q4-24, down 13%, and stood at -1,751 million euros in 2024, up 16%.

For the business unit as a whole, income before tax amounted to 998 million euros in Q4-24, up 142%, and stood at 3,807 million in full-year 2024, up 8%.

Underlying income before tax² amounted to 1,044 million euros in Q4-24, up 98%, and came to 3,922 million euros in full-year 2024, up 8%.

4.1.1 Banque Populaire network
The Banque Populaire retail banking network is comprised of 14 cooperative banks (12 regional Banques Populaires along
with CASDEN Banque Populaire and Crédit Coopératif) and their subsidiaries, Crédit Maritime Mutuel, and the Mutual
Guarantee Companies.

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	1,614	17%	6,098	4%
Operating expenses	(980)	1%	(4,047)	2%
Gross operating income	634	56%	2,051	8%
Cost of risk	(266)	(6)%	(814)	25%
Income before tax	352	137%	1,285	(2)%
Exceptional items	(17)	77%	(51)	ns
Underlying²income before tax	369	133%	1,336	2%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	59.7%	(10.2)pp	65.5%	(1.9)pp

Loan outstandings remained stable year-on-year, standing at 301 billion euros at the end of December 2024.
On-balance sheet customer deposits & savings decreased by 2 billion euros year-on-year at the end of December 2024, with term accounts remaining stable during the 12-month period, while both regulated and unregulated passbook savings accounts saw 2% year-on-year growth.

Net banking income came to 6,098 million euros in full-year 2024, up 4% year-on-year. This included 3.2 billion euros in net interest margin^4,5 up 5% year-on-year, and 2.9 billion euros in commissions⁵ (up 3% year-on-year).
In Q4-24, net banking income came to a total of 1,614 million euros, up 17% year-on-year.

Operating expenses rose by a limited 1% in Q4-24 to 980 million euros, and increased by 2% in full-year 2024, to 4,047 million euros.
The underlying cost/income ratio³ consequently saw a 10.2pp improvement in Q4-24, to 59.7%, and a 1.9pp improvement in full-year 2024, to 65.5%.

Gross operating income benefited from positive jaws effects, rising by 56% to 634 million euros in Q4-24 and by 8% to 2,051 million euros in full-year 2024.

The cost of risk stood at -266 million euros in Q4-24, down 6%, and -814 million euros in 2024, up 25%.

Income before tax came to 352 million euros in Q4-24 (+137%) and 1,285 million euros in 2024 (-2%).

Underlying income before tax² amounted to 369 million euros in Q4-24 (+133%) and 1,336 million euros in full-year 2024
(+2%).

¹ Reported figures until “Income before tax” ² “Underlying” means exclusive of exceptional items ³ The business line cost/income ratios have been calculated on the basis of net banking income and underlying operating expenses ⁴ Excluding provisions for home-purchase savings schemes ⁵ Income on regulated savings has been restated to account for the net interest margin and included under commissions

4.1.2 Caisse d’Epargne network
The Caisse d’Epargne retail banking network comprises 15 individual Caisses d’Epargne along with their subsidiaries

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	1,616	14%	6,054	3%
Operating expenses	(1,084)	0%	(4,216)	1%
Gross operating income	531	55%	1,838	10%
Cost of risk	(205)	(6)%	(640)	16%
Income before tax	328	161%	1,200	7%
Exceptional items	(27)	171%	(60)	ns
Underlying²income before tax	355	162%	1,260	13%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	65.4%	(9.8)pp	68.7%	(2.7)pp

Loan outstandings rose by 1% year-on-year to 376 billion euros at the end of December 2024.
On-balance sheet customer deposits & savings increased by 5 billion euros year-on-year, with growth in term accounts (+12%) and an increase in regulated and unregulated passbook savings accounts (+3%).

Net banking income rose by 3% to reach 6,054 million euros in full-year 2024, including:

2.6 billion euros in net interest margin^4,5, down 3% year-on-year,
3.4 billion euros in commissions⁵ up 7% year-on-year.

Net banking income came to a total of 1,616 million euros, up 14% year-on-year, in Q4-24 and stood at 6,054 million euros, up 3% year-on-year in full-year 2024.

Operating expenses remained stable at 1,084 million euros in Q4-24, and rose by 1% in full-year 2024 to 4,216 million euros.

The underlying cost/income ratio³ improved by 9.8pp to 65.4% in Q4-24 and by 2.7pp to 68.7% in full-year 2024.

Gross operating income benefited from positive jaws effects in Q4-24 (+55%), rising to 531 million euros, and enjoyed 10% growth in full-year 2024, rising to 1,838 million euros.

The cost of risk came to -205 million euros in Q4-24, down 6%, and to -640 million euros in 2024, up 16%.

Income before tax rose by 161% to 328 million euros in Q4-24, and came to 1,200 million euros in 2024.
(+7%).

Underlying income before tax² amounted to 355 million euros in Q4-24 (+162%) and 1,260 million euros in full-year 2024
(+13%).

4.1.3 Financial Solutions & Expertise

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	334	(0)%	1,303	2%
Operating expenses	(169)	1%	(636)	1%
Gross operating income	165	(2)%	667	3%
Cost of risk	(38)	(30)%	(108)	11%
Income before tax	125	11%	555	2%
Exceptional items	0	ns	0	ns
Underlying²income before tax	125	11%	555	1%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	50.7%	1.0pp	48.8%	(0.3)pp

Sales momentum remained strong in services designed for individual customers, particularly in consumer credit, with average loan outstandings (personal loans and revolving credit) up 7% year-on-year, consolidating the Group’s position as France’s leading bank for consumer credit.

The Leasing activity continued to provide robust support to companies with growth in average outstandings (+10% year-on-year) chiefly driven by equipment leasing (+17%). Energéco, a player committed to the renewable energies sector, had an exceptional year with production exceeding, for the first time, one billion transactions arranged.

Despite the unfavorable business environment, the business lines working in the housing and real estate sector demonstrated their resilience with confirmation in Q4-2024 of the positive upturn of activity in personal loan guarantees, leading to an increase in gross written premiums (+2% in Q4-24 year-on-year vs. -40% in the first 9 months of 2024).

Net banking income for the Financial Solutions & Expertise business unit remained stable at 334 million euros in Q4-24, but rose 2% to 1,303 million euros in full-year 2024.

Operating expenses, which stood at 169 million euros in Q4-24 and 636 million euros in full-year 2024, remained tightly managed.

The underlying cost/income ratio³ increased by 1.0pp in Q4-24 to 50.7% and improved by 0.3pp in full-year 2024 to 48.8%.

Gross operating income, which came to 165 million euros in Q4-24, was down 2%; it stood at 667 million euros in full-year 2024, up 3%.

The cost of risk stood at -38 million euros in Q4-24, down 30%, and at -108 million euros in full-year 2024 (+11%).

Income before tax rose by 11% to 125 million euros in Q4-24 and increased by 2% to 555 million euros in full-year 2024.

Underlying income before tax² rose by 11% in Q4-24 and by 1% in full-year 2024, to 125 million euros and 555 million euros respectively.

4.1.4 Insurance¹
The results presented below concern the Insurance business unit held directly by BPCE since March 1, 2022.

€m²	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	171	17%	694	10%
Operating expenses³	(36)	(10)%⁴	(143)	(12)%⁴
Gross operating income	135	28%	550	17%
Income before tax	141	32%	566	19%
Exceptional items	0	ns	0	ns
Underlying⁵income before tax	141	30%	566	17%
Underlying cost/income ratio⁶	21.3%	(5.3)pp	20.7%	(4.1)pp

In Q4-24, premiums⁷ reached 4.8 billion euros, up 12% thanks to the considerable dynamism demonstrated by Life Insurance and Life & Personal Protection insurance. In full-year 2024, premiums⁷ rose by 15% to 18.6 billion euros, with a 16% increase for Life & Personal Protection insurance and a 9% increase for Property & Casualty insurance.

Life insurance assets under management⁷ reached 103 billion euros at the end of December 2024 thanks to record-breaking net inflows in both euro funds and unit-linked products. Since the end of December 2023, life insurance assets have risen by 12%, driven by significant positive inflows in both euro funds and unit-linked products. Gross inflows⁷ in life insurance stood at 14.9 billion euros in 2024. Unit-linked products accounted for 53% of inflows⁷ at the end of December 2024.

In the Property & Casualty segment, the client equipment rate for both networks was approximately 35%⁸ at the end of December 2024, up 0.5pp since the end of December 2023.

Net banking income rose by 17% in Q4-24 to 171 million euros, and rose by 10% to 694 million euros in full-year 2024.

Operating expenses³ fell by 10%⁴ year-on-year in Q4-24 to 36 million euros, and by 12%⁴ in full-year 2024 to 143 million euros.

The underlying cost/income ratio⁶ improved by 5.3pp to stand at 21.3% in Q4-24, and improved by 4.1pp to reach 20.7% in full-year 2024.

Thanks to positive jaws effects in Q4-24 and full-year 2024, EBITDA rose by 28% and 17% respectively.

Income before tax also improved, rising by 32% to 141 million euros in Q4-24 and by 19% to 566 million euros in full-year 2024.

Underlying⁵income before tax came to 141 million euros in Q4-24 (+30%) and to 566 million euros in full-year 2024 (+17%).

¹ BPCE Assurances ² Reported figures until “Income before tax” ³ “Operating expenses” corresponds to “non-attributable expenses” under IFRS 17, i.e. all costs that are not directly attributable to insurance contracts ⁴ At constant method: +7% in Q4-24 YoY and +4% in 2024 YoY ⁵ “Underlying” means exclusive of exceptional items ⁶ The business line cost/income ratios have been calculated on the basis of net banking income and underlying operating expenses ⁷ Excluding reinsurance treaty with CNP Assurance
⁸ Scope: combined individual clients of the BP and CE networks

4.1.5 Digital & Payments

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	227	14%	873	7%
o/w Payments	128	10%	491	6%
o/w Oney	99	19%	382	8%
Operating expenses	(173)	1%	(646)	(1)%
o/w Payments	(108)	9%	(394)	3%
o/w Oney	(65)	(10)%	(252)	(7)%
Gross operating income	54	96%	227	39%
Cost of risk	(33)	(52)%	(126)	(26)%
Income before tax	20	ns	97	ns
Exceptional items	(1)	(99)%	(5)	(96)%
Underlying²income before tax	21	ns	102	125%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	76.2%	(3.5)pp	73.9%	(2.1)pp

Digital & AI

At the end of December 2024, 11.8 million customers were active on Banques Populaires and Caisses d’Epargne mobile applications (up 3% vs. end-December 2023).

The “AI for all” in-house generative AI solution was being used by over 26,000 employees at the end of December 2024 (i.e. 25% of all Group employees.)

Thanks to transformative AI, 10 million documents had been verified automatically (+71%) by end-December 2024.

Payments

Net banking income enjoyed 10% growth in Q4-24 and 6% growth in full-year 2024, while operating expenses rose 9% in Q4-24 and 3% in full-year 2024.

The widespread use of Wero (European Payments Initiative) enables all customers to send and receive money via instant account-to-account payments in less than 10 seconds. Wero handles 2 million transactions per month and serves over 2 million active customers.

In the Payment Solutions business, the number of card transactions rose by 5% year-on-year, with continued growth in mobile and instant payments (+54% and +49% year-on-year respectively) and the ongoing rollout of Android POS terminals (multiplied by a factor of 2). The launch of Google Pay has strengthened our range of mobile products.

Oney Bank

Net banking income rose by 8% in 2024 thanks to improved margin rates and the asset repricing effect. Oney maintained its leadership position in the BNPL⁴ segment in France while business was robust in Europe outside France (+19% in volumes year-on-year).

Management expenses remained well under control, falling by 7% in full-year 2024.

The sharp drop in the cost of risk in 2024 (-26% YoY) confirms the positive impact of our action plans.
Net banking income for the Digital & Payments business unit rose by 14% in Q4-24 and by 7% in full-year 2024, to reach 227 million euros and 873 million euros respectively.

The business unit’s operating expenses were up 1% in Q4-24 and down 1% in full-year 2024, to reach 173 million euros and 646 million euros respectively.

This led to a 3.5pp improvement in the underlying cost/income ratio³ to 76.2% in Q4-24 and a 2.1pp improvement to 73.9% in full-year 2024.

Gross operating income, which benefitted from positive jaws effects, rose by 96% in Q4-24 to 54 million euros, and by 39% to 227 million euros in full-year 2024.

The cost of risk fell by 52% in Q4-24 to -33 million euros, and by 26% in full-year 2024 to -126 million euros.

Income before tax amounted to 20 million euros in Q4-24 and 97 million euros full-year 2024.

Underlying²income before tax came to 21 million euros in Q4-24 and 102 million euros in full-year 2024, equal to a sharp rise of 125%.

4.2 Global Financial Services
The GFS business unit includes the Asset & Wealth Management activities and the Corporate & Investment Banking activities of
Natixis.

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	Constant Fx % change	2024	% Change	Constant Fx % change
Net banking income	2,055	8%	7%	7,947	8%	8%
o/w CIB	1,087	5%	5%	4,440	7%	7%
o/w AWM	968	11%	10%	3,507	10%	10%
Operating expenses	(1,501)	8%	7%	(5,651)	7%	7%
o/w CIB	(738)	5%	5%	(2,889)	8%	8%
o/w AWM	(763)	11%	10%	(2,763)	6%	6%
Gross operating income	553	8%	7%	2,296	10%	10%
Cost of risk	(86)	18%		(268)	73%
Income before tax	479	14%		2,051	4%
Exceptional items	0	ns		0	ns
Underlying²income before tax	479	10%		2,051	3%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	73.1%	0.7pp		71.1%	(0.1)pp

GFS revenues rose by 8% in both Q4-24 and full-year 2024 to respectively 2,055 million euros (+7% at constant exchange rates) and 7,947 million euros (+8% at constant exchange rates). These trends are the result of the robust performance of our global business lines.

In Q4-24, revenues generated by the Corporate & Investment Banking business rose by 5% to 1,087 million euros thanks, in particular, to the strong performance achieved by the Global Markets (+19%) and Global Finance (+2%) activities in full-year 2024. Net banking income for the CIB business in full-year 2024 rose by 7% to 4,440 million euros.

In Q4-24, Asset & Wealth Management revenues rose 10% at constant exchange rates to 968 million euros, chiefly thanks to higher management fees year-on-year. Assets under management rose by 13% since the begging of the year to reach a historic high of 1,317 billion euros, with record inflows and a strong positive market and change effects.

GFS operating expenses increased by 8% in Q4-24 and by 7% in 2024, to respectively 1,501 million euros (+7% at constant exchange rates) and 5,651 million euros (+7% at constant exchange rates). This rise in expenses is in line with revenue growth, leading to positive jaws effects in full-year 2024.

In Q4-24, Corporate & Investment Banking operating expenses rose by 5% in line with revenue growth. Asset & Wealth Management expenses rose by 10% at constant exchange rates in Q4-24.

The underlying cost/income ratio³ was 73.1% in Q4-24 and 71.1% in full-year 2024, up 0.7pp and down 0.1pp respectively.

Gross operating income rose 8% in Q4-24 to 553 million euros (+7% at constant exchange rates); it rose 10% in full-year 2024 to 2,296 million euros (+10% at constant exchange rates).

The cost of risk increased by 18% in Q4-24 and by 73% in full-year 2024, to -86 million euros and -268 million euros respectively.

Income before tax rose by 14% in Q4-24 to 479 million euros, and by 4% in full-year 2024 to 2,051 million euros.

Underlying²income before tax for Q4-24 was 479 million euros, up 10%, and stood at 2,051 million euros in full-year 2024, up 3%.

4.2.1 Corporate & Investment Banking
The Corporate & Investment Banking (CIB) business unit includes the Global markets, Global finance, Investment banking and
M&A activities of Natixis.

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	1,087	5%	4,440	7%
Operating expenses	(738)	5%	(2,889)	8%
Gross operating income	349	5%	1,551	3%
Cost of risk	(98)	60%	(282)	78%
Income before tax	262	3%	1,293	(3)%
Exceptional items	0	ns	0	ns
Underlying²income before tax	262	1%	1,293	(4)%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	67.9%	0.2pp	65.1%	1.2pp

Global Markets revenues rose by 19% to 452 million euros in full-year 2024. Revenues generated by the Equity business rose 53% to 96 million euros in Q4-24, driven by a strong performance in the Global Securities Financing activity. FIC-T revenues rose by 14% to 354 million euros in Q4-24, driven by a strong performance in the Credit and Foreign Exchange segments.

Global Finance revenues were up 2%, rising to 466 million euros in Q4-24 thanks to the sustained momentum of Trade Finance activities.

Investment Banking revenues were up 6% to 50 million euros in Q4-24, driven by the Acquisition & Strategic Finance and SECM business lines.
The M&A business lines recorded revenues of 361 million euros in full-year 2024, up 11% year-on-year.
Natixis Partners has acquired a stake in Financière de Courcelles in order to strengthen its position in the French M&A market within the small, mid, and upper mid-cap segments.

Net banking income generated by the Corporate & Investment Banking business unit rose by 5% in Q4-24 and by 7% in full-year 2024, to 1,087 million euros and 4,440 million euros respectively.

Operating expenses, which stood at 738 million euros in Q4-24, reflect 5% growth; expenses rose 8% in full-year 2024 to 2,889 million euros, in line with revenue growth.

The underlying cost/income ratio³ increased by 0.2pp to 67.9% in Q4-24, and by 1.2pp to 65.1% in full-year 2024.

Gross operating income rose by 5% in Q4-24 to 349 million euros, and by 3% in full-year 2024 to 1,551 million euros.

The cost of risk stood at -98 million euros, up 60%, in Q4-24, and at -282 million euros, up 78%, in full-year 2024.

Income before tax was up 3% to 262 million euros in Q4-24, and down 3% to 1,293 million euros in full-year 2024.

Underlying²income before tax was up 1% to 262 million euros in Q4-24, and down 4% to 1,293 million euros in full-year 2024.

4.2.2 Asset & Wealth Management
The business unit includes the Asset & Wealth Management activities of Natixis.

€m¹	Q4-24	% Change	2024	% Change
Net banking income	968	11%	3,507	10%
Operating expenses	(763)	11%	(2,763)	6%
Gross operating income	205	12%	744	27%
Income before tax	217	32%	759	21%
Exceptional items	0	ns	0	ns
Underlying²income before tax	217	24%	759	16%
Underlying cost/income ratio³	78.8%	1.0pp	78.8%	(2.0)pp

In Asset Management, assets under management⁴ reached an all-time high of 1,317 billion euros at the end of December 2024, up 13% since the beginning of the year, with record net inflows and strong positive market and currency effects.

Net inflows into Asset Management⁴ reached 40 billion euros in full-year 2024, chiefly thanks to fixed-income products from Loomis Sayles and DNCA, and to life insurance products. Private asset inflows remained positive on an annual basis.

ESG assets accounted for 40.3% of assets under management at the end of December 2024.

Asset management revenues grew at constant exchange rates by 10% in full-year 2024 but also in Q4-2024, driven by a higher level of average assets under management (+10% in Q4-2024).

In Asset Management⁴ in full-year 2024, the total fee rate (excluding performance fees) stood at 25.2bps (stable) and at 36.8bps excluding insurance asset management (-1.1bp).

Net banking income for the Asset & Wealth Management business unit rose by 11% in Q4-24 to 968 million euros, and by 10% in full-year 2024 to 3,507 million euros.

Operating expenses came to 763 million euros, up 11% in Q4-24, and to 2,763 million euros, up 6% in full-year 2024.

The underlying cost/income ratio³increased by 1.0pp in Q4-24 to 78.8%, and improved by 2.0pp in full-year 2024 to 78.8%.

Gross operating income rose by 12% to 205 million euros in Q4-24, and by 27% to 744 million euros in full-year 2024.

Income before tax came to 217 million euros in Q4-24 (+32%), and to 759 million euros in full-year 2024 (+21%).

Underlying²income before tax rose by 24% to 217 million euros in Q4-24, and by 16% to 759 million euros in full-year 2024.

¹ Reported figures until “Income before tax” ² “Underlying” means exclusive of exceptional items ³ The business line cost/income ratios have been calculated on the basis of net banking income and underlying operating expenses ⁴ Asset management: Europe includes Dynamic Solutions and Vega IM; North America includes WCM IM; excluding Wealth Management

ANNEXES

Notes on methodology

Presentation on the pro-forma quarterly results

The 2023 quarterly series are presented pro forma with changes in standards and organization:
The sectoral reallocation of the results of the private equity activities of the entities BP Développement & CE Développement from Corporate center to RB&I and GFS divisions.
The new management standards adopted by Natixis (including the normative allocation of capital to the business lines) within the GFS division.
The main evolutions impact RB&I, GFS and the Corporate center.
The data for 2023 has been recalculated to obtain a like-for-like basis of comparison.
The quarterly series of Groupe BPCE remain unchanged.
The tables showing the transition from reported 2023 to pro-forma 2023 are presented on annexes.

Exceptional items

Exceptional items and the reconciliation of the reported income statement to the underlying income statement of Groupe BPCE are detailed in the annexes.

Net banking income

Customer net interest income, excluding regulated home savings schemes, is computed on the basis of interest earned from transactions with customers, excluding net interest on centralized savings products (Livret A, Livret Développement Durable, Livret Épargne Logement passbook savings accounts) in addition to changes in provisions for regulated home purchase savings schemes. Net interest on centralized savings is assimilated to commissions.

Operating expenses

Operating expenses correspond to the aggregate total of the “Operating Expenses” (as presented in the second amendment of Group’s universal registration document, note 4.7 appended to the consolidated financial statements of Groupe BPCE) and “Depreciation, amortization and impairment for property, plant and equipment and intangible assets.”

Cost/income ratio

Groupe BPCE’s cost/income ratio is calculated on the basis of net banking income and operating expenses excluding exceptional items. The calculations are detailed in the annexes.
Business line cost/income ratios are calculated on the basis of underlying net banking income and operating expenses.

Cost of risk

The cost of risk is expressed in basis points and measures the level of risk per business line as a percentage of the volume of loan outstandings; it is calculated by comparing net provisions booked with respect to credit risks of the period to gross customer loan outstandings at the beginning of the period.

Loan oustandings and deposits & savings

Restatements regarding transitions from book outstandings to outstandings under management are as follows:
Loan outstandings: the scope of outstandings under management does not include securities classified as customer loans and receivables and other securities classified as financial operations,
Deposits & savings: the scope of outstandings under management does not include debt securities (certificates of deposit and savings bonds).

Capital Adequacy

Common Equity Tier 1 is determined in accordance with the applicable CRR II/CRD IV rules, after deductions.
Additional Tier-1 capital takes account of subordinated debt issues that have become non-eligible and subject to ceilings at the phase-out rate in force.
The leverage ratio is calculated in accordance with the applicable CRR II/CRD V rules. Centralized outstandings of regulated savings are excluded from the leverage exposures as are Central Bank exposures for a limited period of time (pursuant to ECB decision 2021/27 of June 18, 2021).

Total loss-absorbing capacity

The amount of liabilities eligible for inclusion in the numerator used to calculate the Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) ratio is determined by article 92a of CRR. Please note that a quantum of Senior Preferred securities has not been included in our calculation of TLAC.
This amount is consequently comprised of the 4 following items:

Common Equity Tier 1 in accordance with the applicable CRR II/CRD IV rules,
Additional Tier-1 capital in accordance with the applicable CRR II/CRD IV rules,
Tier-2 capital in accordance with the applicable CRR II/CRD IV rules,
Subordinated liabilities not recognized in the capital mentioned above and whose residual maturity is greater than 1 year, namely:
- The share of additional Tier-1 capital instruments not recognized in common equity (i.e. included in the phase-out),
- The share of the prudential discount on Tier-2 capital instruments whose residual maturity is greater than 1 year,
- The nominal amount of Senior Non-Preferred securities maturing in more than 1 year.

Liquidity

Total liquidity reserves comprise the following:

Central bank-eligible assets include: ECB-eligible securities not eligible for the LCR, taken for their ECB valuation (after ECB haircut), securities retained (securitization and covered bonds) that are available and ECB-eligible taken for their ECB valuation (after ECB haircut) and private receivables available and eligible for central bank funding (ECB and the Federal Reserve), net of central bank funding,
LCR eligible assets comprising the Group’s LCR reserve taken for their LCR valuation,
Liquid assets placed with central banks (ECB and the Federal Reserve), net of US Money Market Funds deposits and to which fiduciary money is added.

Short-term funding corresponds to funding with an initial maturity of less than, or equal to, 1 year and the short-term maturities of medium-/long-term debt correspond to debt with an initial maturity date of more than 1 year maturing within the next 12 months.
Customer deposits are subject to the following adjustments:

Addition of security issues placed by the Banque Populaire and Caisse d’Epargne retail banking networks with their customers, and certain operations carried out with counterparties comparable to customer deposits
Withdrawal of short-term deposits held by certain financial customers collected by Natixis in pursuit of its intermediation activities.

Business line indicators – BP & CE networks

Average rate (%) for residential mortgages: the average client rate for residential mortgages corresponds to the weighted average of actuarial rates for committed residential mortgages, excluding ancillary items (application fees, guarantees, creditor insurance). The rates are weighted by the amounts committed (offers made, net of cancellations) over the period under review. The calculation is based on aggregate residential mortgages, excluding zero interest rate loans.

Average rate (%) for consumer loans: the average client rate for consumer loans corresponds to the weighted average of the actuarial rates for committed consumer loans, excluding ancillary items (application fees, guarantees, creditor insurance). The rates are weighted by the amounts committed (offers made net of cancellations) over the period under review. The calculation is based on the scope of amortizable consumer loans, excluding overdraft and revolving loans.

Average rate (%) for equipment loans: the average customer rate for equipment loans is the average of the actuarial rates for equipment loans in each volume-weighted market.

Digital indicators

The number of active customers using mobile apps corresponds to the number of customers who have made at least one visit via one mobile apps over one month.
The number of documents checked automatically corresponds to the number of documents transmitted by customers through their digital spaces or in a physical branch and checked automatically: eligibility for the LEP popular passbook savings account and customer intelligence documents (KYC) for consumer loans, mortgages (digital) and new business relationships (digital and physical branches).

Impact indicators

Financing for energy-efficient home renovation for individual clients: this indicator calculates the aggregate annual production of loans granted to individual customers (natural persons) to finance energy renovation work, expressed in €m:

– Rénovation Energétique (Energy Renovation): consumer credit for environmentally-friendly properties,
– ECO PTZ MPR: consumer credit designed for renovation work eligible for the MaPrimeRenov program (government scheme to support energy-efficient home renovation work) for up to a total of €30,000,
– ECO PTZ: interest-free regulated home improvement loan for up to a total of €50,000

Number of unique visitors to the ‘Advice and Sustainable Solutions’ digital module: this indicator calculates the aggregate annual number of unique visitors who consult the ‘Advice and sustainable solutions’ page on BP and CE mobile applications.

Financing BtoB clients in their transition and decarbonization efforts: this indicator calculates the aggregate annual amount of loans granted to businesses to help finance their transition and decarbonization efforts, expressed in €m. This aggregate total is derived from the sum of BtoB loan amounts (Green loans + Impact loans + Vehicle Leasing + Green Lease with Purchase Option/Long-Term Rental agreements (LOA/LDD Green).

Within the scope of CIB activities, Green revenues are comprised of:

Sustainable Finance (GSH scope)
Renewable & new energies franchises
Activities with clients/assets rated Dark & Medium Green (Green Weighting Factor).

(restated for scope reconciliations).

Reconciliation of 2023 data to pro forma data

Retail banking and Insurance	Q1-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	3,891	(2,496)	1,107	(269)	840
Sectoral reallocation	12	(1)	11	0	11
Pro forma figures	3,903	(2,497)	1,118	(269)	851

Global Financial Services	Q1-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	1,822	(1,303)	590	(146)	432
Sectoral reallocation	0	0	0	0	0
New rules	32	(2)	30	(4)	26
Pro forma figures	1,854	(1,305)	621	(151)	458

Corporate center	Q1-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	102	(788)	(729)	(10)	(739)
Sectoral reallocation	(12)	1	(11)	0	(11)
New rules	(32)	2	(30)	4	(26)
Pro forma figures	57	(785)	(771)	(5)	(776)

Retail banking and Insurance	Q2-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	3,655	(2,459)	952	(224)	729
Sectoral reallocation	(15)	(1)	(15)	(0)	(15)
Pro forma figures	3,640	(2,460)	936	(224)	713

Global Financial Services	Q2-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	1,798	(1,282)	429	(115)	300
Sectoral reallocation	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)	(0)
New rules	31	(5)	26	(3)	22
Pro forma figures	1,829	(1,287)	455	(118)	322

Corporate center	Q2-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	13	(58)	(44)	(14)	(56)
Sectoral reallocation	15	1	16	0	16
New rules	(31)	5	(26)	3	(22)
Pro forma figures	(3)	(52)	(54)	(10)	(63)

Retail banking and Insurance	Q3-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	3,721	(2,358)	1,072	(268)	799
Sectoral reallocation	(13)	(1)	(14)	0	(14)
Pro forma figures	3,709	(2,359)	1,058	(268)	785

Global Financial Services	Q3-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	1,736	(1,279)	444	(114)	319
Sectoral reallocation	(0)	(0)	(0)	0	(0)
New rules	31	(4)	27	(4)	23
Pro forma figures	1,767	(1,283)	470	(118)	341

Corporate center	Q3-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	(3)	(175)	(176)	(23)	(200)
Sectoral reallocation	13	1	14	0	14
New rules	(31)	4	(27)	4	(23)
Pro forma figures	(21)	(170)	(189)	(19)	(210)

Retail banking and Insurance	Q4-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	3,557	(2,497)	395	(122)	294
Sectoral reallocation	19	(1)	18	(0)	18
Pro forma figures	3,576	(2,499)	413	(122)	312

Global Financial Services	Q4-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	1,874	(1,389)	391	(118)	255
Sectoral reallocation	0	(1)	(0)	(0)	(0)
New rules	33	(4)	29	(3)	26
Pro forma figures	1,908	(1,394)	420	(121)	280

Corporate center	Q4-23
€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Income before tax	Income tax	Net income
Reported figures	31	(243)	(249)	81	(168)
Sectoral reallocation	(20)	2	(18)	0	(18)
New rules	(33)	4	(29)	3	(26)
Pro forma figures	(22)	(237)	(296)	84	(211)

Q4-24 & Q4-23 results : reconcialiation of reported data to alternative performance measures

€m		Net banking income	Operating expenses	Cost of risk	Gains or losses on other assets	Income before tax	Net income – Group share
Reported Q4-24 results		6,046	(4,184)	(596)	(35)	1,262	913
Transformation and reorganization costs	Business lines/Corporate center	0	(86)		(1)	(87)	(64)
Disposals	Corporate center				(1)	(1)	(1)
Q4-24 results excluding exceptional items		6,045	(4,098)	(596)	(34)	1,349	977

€m		Net banking income	Operating expenses	Cost of risk	Gains or losses on other assets	Income before tax	Net income – Group share
Pro forma reported Q4-23 results		5,462	(4,129)	(744)	(43)	537	381
Transformation and reorganization costs	Business lines/Corporate center	(5)	(54)	(34)		(93)	(57)
Disposals	Corporate center				(43)	(43)	(43)
Pro forma Q4-23 results excluding exceptional items		5,467	(4,076)	(710)	(0)	672	481

2024 & 2023 results : reconcialiation of reported data to alternative performance measures

€m		Net banking income	Operating expenses	Cost of risk	Gains or losses on other assets	Income before tax	Net income – Group share
Reported 2024 results		23,317	(16,384)	(2,061)	28	4,956	3,520
Transformation and reorganization costs	Business lines/Corporate center	3	(208)		(1)	(206)	(153)
Disposals	Corporate center	0			(3)	(3)	(3)
2024 results excluding exceptional items		23,314	(16,176)	(2,061)	32	5,165	3,675

€m		Net banking income	Operating expenses	Cost of risk	Gains or losses on other assets	Income before tax	Net income – Group share
Pro forma reported 2023 results		22,198	(16,328)	(1,731)	8	4,182	2,804
Transformation and reorganization costs	Business lines/Corporate center	2	(213)	(32)		(242)	(164)
Disposals	Corporate center				(45)	(45)	(44)
Litigations	Business lines/Corporate center	87				87	87
Pro forma 2023 results excluding exceptional items		22,108	(16,115)	(1,699)	53	4,381	2,925

Groupe BPCE : underying cost to income ratio

€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Underlying cost income ratio
Q4-24 reported figures	6,046	(4,184)
Impact of exceptional items	0	(86)
Q4-24 underlying figures	6,045	(4,098)	67.8%

€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Underlying cost income ratio
Q4-23 Pro forma reported figures	5,462	(4,129)
Impact of exceptional items	(5)	(54)
Q4-23 Pro forma underlying figures	5,467	(4,076)	74.6%

Groupe BPCE : underying cost to income ratio

€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Underlying cost income ratio
2024 reported figures	23,317	(16,384)
Impact of exceptional items	3	(208)
2024 underlying figures	23,314	(16,176)	69.4%

€m	Net banking income	Operating expenses	Underlying cost income ratio
2023 Pro forma reported figures	22,198	(16,328)
Impact of exceptional items	89	(213)
2023 Pro forma underlying figures	22,108	(16,115)	72.9%

Groupe BPCE : quarterly income statement per business line

	RETAIL BANKING & INSURANCE		GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES		CORPORATE CENTER		GROUPE BPCE
€m	Q4-24	Q4-23	Q4-24	Q4-23	Q4-24	Q4-23	Q4-24	Q4-23	%
Net banking income	4,064	3,576	2,055	1,908	(73)	(22)	6,046	5,462	11%
Operating expenses	(2,497)	(2,499)	(1,501)	(1,394)	(186)	(237)	(4,184)	(4,129)	1%
Gross operating income	1,567	1,077	553	514	(259)	(259)	1,862	1,332	40%
Cost of risk	(556)	(643)	(86)	(73)	46	(28)	(596)	(744)	(20)%
Income before tax	998	413	479	420	(215)	(296)	1,262	537	x 2
Income tax	(222)	(122)	(124)	(121)	19	84	(326)	(159)	x 2
Non-controlling interests	(5)	21	(18)	(19)	0	1	(23)	3	ns
Net income – Group share	772	312	337	280	(196)	(211)	913	381	x 2

Groupe BPCE : 2024 income statement per business line

	RETAIL BANKING & INSURANCE		GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES		CORPORATE CENTER		GROUPE BPCE
€m	2024	2023	2024	2023	2024	2023	2024	2023	%
Net banking income	15,397	14,828	7,947	7,358	(27)	12	23,317	22,198	5%
Operating expenses	(9,902)	(9,815)	(5,651)	(5,269)	(831)	(1,244)	(16,384)	(16,328)	0%
Gross operating income	5,495	5,013	2,296	2,088	(858)	(1,232)	6,933	5,870	18%
Cost of risk	(1,751)	(1,505)	(268)	(154)	(43)	(72)	(2,061)	(1,731)	19%
Income before tax	3,807	3,526	2,051	1,966	(902)	(1,310)	4,956	4,182	19%
Income tax	(891)	(882)	(534)	(507)	67	49	(1,357)	(1,340)	1%
Non-controlling interests	(14)	18	(66)	(56)	1	1	(79)	(38)	x 2
Net income – Group share	2,902	2,661	1,452	1,402	(834)	(1,260)	3,520	2,804	26%

Groupe BPCE : quarterly series

GROUPE BPCE
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	5,815	5,467	5,455	5,462	5,753	5,626	5,892	6,046
Operating expenses	(4,587)	(3,799)	(3,812)	(4,129)	(4,151)	(4,008)	(4,041)	(4,184)
Gross operating income	1,228	1,667	1,642	1,332	1,602	1,618	1,851	1,862
Cost of risk	(326)	(342)	(319)	(744)	(382)	(560)	(523)	(596)
Income before tax	968	1,337	1,339	537	1,233	1,124	1,336	1,262
Net income – Group share	533	973	917	381	875	806	925	913

Groupe BPCE : Consolidated balance sheet

ASSETS €m	Dec. 31, 2024	Dec. 31, 2023
Cash and amounts due from central banks	133,186	152,669
Financial assets at fair value through profit or loss	230,521	214,582
Hedging derivatives	7,624	8,855
Financial assets at fair value through other comprehensive income	57,166	48,073
Securities at amortized cost	27,021	26,373
Loans and advances to banks and similar at amortized cost	115,862	108,631
Loans and receivables due from customers at amortized cost	851,843	839,457
Revaluation difference on interest rate risk-hedged portfolios	(856)	(2,626)
Financial investments of insurance activities	115,631	103,615
Insurance contracts issued – Assets	1,134	1,124
Reinsurance contracts held – Assets	9,320	9,564
Current tax assets	640	829
Deferred tax assets	4,160	4,575
Accrued income and other assets	16,444	14,611
Non-current assets held for sale	438	–
Investments in accounted for using equity method	2,146	1,616
Investment property	733	717
Property, plant and equipment	6,085	6,023
Intangible assets	1,147	1,110
Goodwill	4,312	4,224
TOTAL ASSETS	1,584,558	1,544,022

LIABILITIES €m	Dec. 31, 2024	Dec. 31, 2023
Amounts due to central banks	1	2
Financial liabilities at fair value through profit or loss	218,963	204,023
Hedging derivatives	14,260	14,973
Debt securities	304,957	292,598
Amounts due to banks and similar	69,953	79,634
Amounts due to customers	723,090	711,658
Revaluation difference on interest rate risk-hedged portfolios, liabilities	14	159
Insurance contracts issued – Liabilities	117,551	106,137
Reinsurance contracts held – Liabilities	119	149
Current tax liabilities	2,206	2,026
Deferred tax liabilities	1,323	1,640
Accrued expenses and other liabilities	20,892	22,492
Liabilities associated with non-current assets held for sale	312	–
Provisions	4,748	4,825
Subordinated debt	18,401	18,801
Shareholders’ equity	87,768	84,905
Equity attributable to equity holders of the parent	87,137	84,351
Non-controlling interests	630	553
TOTAL LIABILITIES	1,584,558	1,544,022

Groupe BPCE : Goodwill

€m	Dec. 31, 2023	Acquisitions	IRFS5 reclassifications	Translation adjustments	Dec. 31, 2024
Retail Banking & Insurance	822	58			879
Asset & Wealth Management	3,257	1	(72)	95	3,280
Corporate & Investment Banking	144			7	151
Total	4,224	58	(72)	102	4,312

Groupe BPCE: Statement of changes in shareholders’ equity

€m	Equity attributable to shareholders’ equity
December 31, 2023	84,407
Restatements¹	(56)
December 31, 2023 restated	84,351
Distributions	(833)
Change in capital (cooperative shares)	90
Impact of acquisitions and disposals on non-controlling interests (minority interests)	(48)
Income	3,520
Changes in gains & losses directly recognized in equity	144
Capital gains and losses reclassified as reserves	(31)
Others	(56)
December 31, 2024	87,137

¹ Opening shareholders’ equity has been adjusted for Funding Valuation Adjustments whose non-material impact on income has not given rise to a change in the latter in the 2024 consolidated financial statements

Retail Banking & Insurance: quarterly income statement

	BANQUE POPULAIRE NETWORK			CAISSE D’EPARGNE NETWORK			FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS & EXPERTISE			INSURANCE			DIGITAL & PAYMENTS				OTHER NETWORK				RETAIL BANKING & INSURANCE
€m	Q4-24	Q4-23	%	Q4-24	Q4-23	%	Q4-24	Q4-23	%	Q4-24	Q4-23	%	Q4-24	Q4-23	%	Q4-24		Q4-23	%	Q4-24		Q4-23	%
Net banking income	1,614	1,382	17%	1,616	1,423	14%	334	335	(0)%	171	146	17%	227	199	14%	101		91	12%	4,064		3,576	14%
Operating expenses	(980)	(975)	1%	(1,084)	(1,081)	0%	(169)	(167)	1%	(36)	(41)	(10)%	(173)	(171)	1%	(53)		(63)	(16)%	(2,497)		(2,499)	(0)%
Gross operating income	634	407	56%	531	343	55%	165	168	(2)%	135	105	28%	54	27	96%	48		28	75%	1,567		1,077	45%
Cost of risk	(266)	(282)	(6)%	(205)	(218)	(6)%	(38)	(54)	(31)%				(33)	(69)	(52)%	(15)		(19)	(23)%	(556)		(643)	(13)%
Income before tax	352	149	x2	328	126	x3	125	112	12%	141	107	32%	20	(89)	ns	33		9	x4	998		413	x2
Income tax	(73)	(45)	62%	(78)	(20)	x4	(33)	(27)	22%	(29)	(25)	16%	0	(2)	ns	(8)		(2)	x4	(222)		(122)	82%
Non-controlling interests	(0)	(6)	(94)%	(1)	(3)	(66)%	0	(0)	ns	0	(1)	ns	(3)	30	ns					(5)		21	ns
Net income – Group share	278	98	x3	248	103	x2	92	85	8%	112	81	39%	16	(61)	ns	25		7	x4	772		312	x2

	BANQUE POPULAIRE NETWORK			CAISSE D’EPARGNE NETWORK			FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS & EXPERTISE			INSURANCE			DIGITAL & PAYMENTS				OTHER NETWORK				RETAIL BANKING & INSURANCE
€m	2024	2023	%	2024	2023	%	2024	2023	%	2024	2023	%	2024	2023	%	2024		2023	%	2024		2023	%
Net banking income	6,098	5,862	4%	6,054	5,858	3%	1,303	1,274	2%	694	633	10%	873	816	7%	375		384	(2)%	15,397		14,828	4,%
Operating expenses	(4,047)	(3,970)	2%	(4,216)	(4,181)	1%	(636)	(630)	1%	(143)	(163)	(12)%	(646)	(652)	(1)%	(213)		(218)	(2)%	(9,902)		(9,815)	1%
Gross operating income	2,051	1,892	8%	1,838	1,677	10%	667	644	3%	550	470	17%	227	164	39%	162		166	(2)%	5,495		5,013	10%
Cost of risk	(814)	(651)	25%	(640)	(553)	16%	(108)	(98)	11%				(126)	(171)	(26)%	(62)		(33)	89%	(1,751)		(1,505)	16%
Income before tax	1,285	1,308	(2)%	1,200	1,125	7%	555	545	2%	566	475	19%	97	(68)	ns	103		140	(26)%	3,807		3,526	8%
Income tax	(307)	(329)	(7)%	(264)	(254)	4%	(146)	(140)	4%	(123)	(99)	24%	(27)	(25)	9%	(24)		(35)	(30)%	(891)		(882)	1%
Non-controlling interests	(9)	(24)	(64)%	(5)	(7)	(24)%	0	(0)	ns	0	(0)	ns	(0)	49	ns					(14)		18	ns
Net income – Group share	970	954	2%	931	864	8%	409	405	1%	443	376	18%	70	(43)	ns	79		106	(25)%	2,902		2,661	9%

Retail Banking & Insurance: 2024 income statement

Retail banking & insurance: quarterly series

RETAIL BANKING & INSURANCE
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	3,903	3,640	3,709	3,576	3,763	3,701	3,869	4,064
Operating expenses	(2,497)	(2,460)	(2,359)	(2,499)	(2,547)	(2,456)	(2,403)	(2,497)
Gross operating income	1,406	1,180	1,350	1,077	1,217	1,245	1,467	1,567
Cost of risk	(308)	(252)	(302)	(643)	(296)	(475)	(423)	(556)
Income before tax	1,118	936	1,058	413	934	831	1,044	998
Net income – Group share	851	713	785	312	709	637	785	772

Retail Banking & Insurance: Banque Populaire and Caisse d’Epargne networks quarterly series

BANQUE POPULAIRE NETWORK
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	1,569	1,442	1,469	1,382	1,489	1,489	1,506	1,614
Operating expenses	(1,018)	(1,015)	(961)	(975)	(1,043)	(1,025)	(999)	(980)
Gross operating income	551	427	508	407	445	464	508	634
Cost of risk	(132)	(110)	(127)	(282)	(125)	(228)	(195)	(266)
Income before tax	434	328	398	149	329	290	315	352
Net income – Group share	332	240	284	98	252	210	230	278

CAISSE D’EPARGNE NETWORK
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	1,537	1,465	1,432	1,423	1,454	1,467	1,517	1,616
Operating expenses	(1,066)	(1,041)	(993)	(1,081)	(1,085)	(1,038)	(1,008)	(1,084)
Gross operating income	470	424	440	343	368	429	509	531
Cost of risk	(136)	(84)	(115)	(218)	(100)	(176)	(159)	(205)
Income before tax	334	340	325	126	270	252	350	328
Net income – Group share	253	256	253	103	208	194	281	248

Retail Banking & Insurance: FSE quarterly series

FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS & EXPERTISE
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	315	306	318	335	327	320	322	334
Operating expenses	(157)	(151)	(154)	(167)	(162)	(154)	(151)	(169)
Gross operating income	158	155	164	168	166	166	171	165
Cost of risk	(6)	(19)	(18)	(54)	(24)	(22)	(24)	(38)
Income before tax	151	136	146	112	141	143	146	125
Net income – Group share	112	102	107	85	104	106	108	92

Retail Banking & Insurance: Insurance quarterly series

INSURANCE
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	180	126	181	146	188	118	217	171
Operating expenses	(43)	(37)	(42)	(41)	(42)	(25)	(40)	(36)
Gross operating income	137	89	139	105	146	93	177	135
Income before tax	139	93	137	107	149	99	177	141
Net income – Group share	109	83	103	81	113	92	126	112

Retail Banking & Insurance: Digital & Payments quarterly series

DIGITAL & PAYMENTS
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	205	203	209	199	215	214	218	227
Operating expenses	(161)	(163)	(157)	(171)	(160)	(159)	(154)	(173)
Gross operating income	44	40	52	27	55	55	64	54
Cost of risk	(32)	(41)	(29)	(69)	(31)	(32)	(30)	(33)
Income before tax	8	(6)	19	(89)	24	22	32	20
Net income – Group share	7	(3)	13	(61)	17	16	21	16

Retail Banking & Insurance: Other network quarterly series

OTHER NETWORK
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	97	97	99	91	91	93	90	101
Operating expenses	(51)	(52)	(52)	(63)	(55)	(55)	(51)	(53)
Gross operating income	46	45	47	28	37	38	39	48
Cost of risk	(2)	2	(14)	(19)	(16)	(17)	(14)	(15)
Income before tax	52	47	33	9	20	25	25	33
Net income – Group share	39	36	25	7	16	19	20	25

Global Financial Services: quarterly income statement per business line

	ASSET AND WEALTH MANAGEMENT		CORPORATE & INVESTMENT BANKING		GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES
€m	Q4-24	Q4-23	Q4-24	Q4-23	Q4-24	Q4-23	%
Net banking income	968	874	1,087	1,034	2,055	1,908	8%
Operating expenses	(763)	(691)	(738)	(703)	(1,501)	(1,394)	8%
Gross operating income	205	183	349	331	553	514	8%
Cost of risk	12	(12)	(98)	(62)	(86)	(73)	18%
Share in net income of associates	0	0	12	4	12	4	x3
Gains or losses on other assets	0	(7)	0	(17)	0	(24)	ns
Income before tax	217	165	262	255	479	420	14%
Net income – Group share	143	105	194	176	337	280	20%

Global Financial Services: 2024 income statement per business line

	ASSET AND WEALTH MANAGEMENT		CORPORATE & INVESTMENT BANKING		GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES
€m	2024	2023	2024	2023	2024	2023	%
Net banking income	3,507	3,192	4,440	4,166	7,947	7,358	8%
Operating expenses	(2,763)	(2,604)	(2,889)	(2,666)	(5,651)	(5,269)	7%
Gross operating income	744	588	1,551	1,500	2,296	2,088	10%
Cost of risk	14	4	(282)	(158)	(268)	(154)	73%
Share in net income of associates	0	0	23	13	23	14	67%
Gains or losses on other assets	0	35	0	(17)	0	18	ns
Income before tax	759	627	1,293	1,338	2,051	1,966	4%
Net income – Group share	500	425	952	977	1,452	1,402	4%

Global Financial Services: quarterly series

GLOBAL FINANCIAL SERVICES
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	1,854	1,829	1,767	1,908	1,933	1,983	1,976	2,055
Operating expenses	(1,305)	(1,287)	(1,283)	(1,394)	(1,368)	(1,366)	(1,415)	(1,501)
Gross operating income	549	542	483	514	564	617	561	553
Cost of risk	27	(91)	(17)	(73)	(58)	(82)	(41)	(86)
Income before tax	621	455	470	420	510	539	525	479
Net income – Group share	458	322	341	280	364	384	366	337

Corporate & Investment Banking: quarterly series

CORPORATE & INVESTMENT BANKING
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	1,074	1,056	1,002	1,034	1,102	1,133	1,118	1,087
Operating expenses	(661)	(651)	(650)	(703)	(706)	(694)	(751)	(738)
Gross operating income	412	405	352	331	396	439	367	349
Cost of risk	21	(90)	(28)	(62)	(54)	(91)	(39)	(98)
Income before tax	437	318	328	255	346	352	333	262
Net income – Group share	321	233	247	176	255	261	242	194

Asset & Wealth Management: quarterly series

ASSET & WEALTH MANAGEMENT
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	781	773	764	874	830	850	858	968
Operating expenses	(644)	(636)	(633)	(691)	(662)	(673)	(664)	(763)
Gross operating income	137	137	131	183	168	178	194	205
Cost of risk	6	(1)	11	(12)	(5)	9	(2)	12
Income before tax	184	136	143	165	163	187	192	217
Net income – Group share	137	89	94	105	109	123	124	143

Corporate center: quarterly series

CORPORATE CENTER
€m	Q1-23	Q2-23	Q3-23	Q4-23	Q1-24	Q2-24	Q3-24	Q4-24
Net banking income	57	(3)	(21)	(22)	57	(58)	46	(73)
Operating expenses	(785)	(52)	(170)	(237)	(236)	(186)	(223)	(186)
Gross operating income	(728)	(55)	(191)	(259)	(179)	(244)	(176)	(259)
Cost of risk	(46)	1	0	(28)	(28)	(2)	(59)	46
Share in income of associates	2	0	1	(9)	3	0	1	5
Gains or losses on other assets	(0)	0	(0)	(0)	(6)	1	3	(8)
Income before tax	(771)	(54)	(189)	(296)	(210)	(245)	(232)	(215)
Net income – Group share	(776)	(63)	(210)	(211)	(198)	(215)	(226)	(196)

DISCLAIMER

This document may contain forward-looking statements and comments relating to the objectives and strategy of Groupe BPCE. By their very nature, these forward-looking statements inherently depend on assumptions, project considerations, objectives and expectations linked to future events, transactions, products and services as well as on suppositions regarding future performance and synergies.

No guarantee can be given that such objectives will be realized; they are subject to inherent risks and uncertainties and are based on assumptions relating to the Group, its subsidiaries and associates and the business development thereof; trends in the sector; future acquisitions and investments; macroeconomic conditions and conditions in the Group’s principal local markets; competition and regulation. Occurrence of such events is not certain, and outcomes may prove different from current expectations, significantly affecting expected results. Actual results may differ significantly from those anticipated or implied by the forward-looking statements. Groupe BPCE shall in no event have any obligation to publish modifications or updates of such objectives.

Information in this presentation relating to parties other than Groupe BPCE or taken from external sources has not been subject to independent verification; the Group makes no statement or commitment with respect to this third-party information and makes no warranty as to the accuracy, fairness, precision or completeness of the information or opinions contained in this press release. Neither Groupe BPCE nor its representatives shall be held liable for any errors or omissions or for any harm that may result from the use of this presentation or of its contents or any related material, or of any document or information referred to in this presentation.

The financial information presented in this document relating to the fiscal period ended December 31, 2024 has been drawn up in compliance with IFRS standards, as adopted in the European Union.
This financial information is not the equivalent of summary financial statements for an interim period as defined by IAS 34 “Interim Financial Reporting”.

Preparation of the financial information requires Management to make estimates and assumptions in certain areas regarding uncertain future events.

These estimates are based on the judgment of the individuals preparing this financial information and the information available at the date of the balance sheet. Actual future results may differ from these estimates. For further information, see chapter 5, part 5.1, note 2.3 “Use of estimates and judgments” of the Universal Registration Document 2023 filed with the Autorité des Marchés Financiers, the French financial markets authority.
With respect to the financial information of Groupe BPCE for the quarter ended December 31, 2024, and in view of the context mentioned above, attention should be drawn to the fact that the estimated increase in credit risk and the calculation of expected credit losses (IFRS 9 provisions) are largely based on assumptions that depend on the macroeconomic context.

Significant factors liable to cause actual results to differ from those anticipated in the projections are related to the banking and financial environment in which Groupe BPCE operates, which exposes it to a multitude of risks. These potential risks liable to affect Groupe BPCE’s financial results are detailed in the “Risk factors & risk management” chapter of the latest amendment to the 2023 Universal Registration Document filed with the Autorité des Marchés Financiers.

Investors are advised to consider the uncertainties and risk factors liable to affect the Group’s operations when examining the information contained in the projection elements.

The financial results contained in this presentation have not been reviewed by the statutory auditors. The quarterly financial information of Groupe BPCE for the period ended December 31, 2024, approved by the Management Board at a meeting convened on February 3, 2025, were verified and reviewed by the Supervisory Board at a meeting convened on February 5, 2025.

The sum of the values shown in the tables and analyses may differ slightly from the total reported owing to rounding effects.

About Groupe BPCE
Groupe BPCE is the second-largest banking group in France. Through its 100,000 staff, the group serves 35 million customers – individuals, professionals, companies, investors and local government bodies – around the world. It operates in the retail banking and insurance fields in France via its two major networks, Banque Populaire and Caisse d’Epargne, along with Banque Palatine and Oney. It also pursues its activities worldwide with the wholesale banking expertise of Natixis Corporate & Investment Banking and with the asset & wealth management services provided by Natixis Investment Managers.
The Group’s financial strength is recognized by four financial rating agencies: Moody’s (A1, stable outlook), Standard & Poor’s (A+, stable outlook), Fitch (A+, stable outlook) and R&I (A+, stable outlook).

groupebpce.com

Attachment

Groupe BPCE_PR_Results_Q4-24 & 2024_FV

The MIL Network –

February 6, 2025

MIL-OSI Canada: New B.C. council will advocate for forestry workers
Source: Government of Canada regional news
The Province has formed a new council to advance British Columbia’s interests in the long-standing softwood lumber dispute with the United States.

The council brings together leaders from the forestry sector and labour, alongside experts on U.S. relations and officials from the B.C. government.

The B.C. Softwood Lumber Advisory Council convened its first meeting on Jan. 30, 2025, and will meet regularly. It advises the Minister of Forests on the dispute, including the sixth administrative review, providing recommendations on steps B.C. can take to eliminate the 14.4% softwood lumber duties. The council will also help the Province advocate to the federal government as these duties continue to take their toll on B.C.’s forestry sector.

“The U.S. has imposed unjustified softwood lumber duties on Canada for years, and we anticipate that they will likely double before the end of this year,” said Ravi Parmar, Minister of Forests. “Bringing this team together, I am ready to throw the full weight of B.C. in the ring to fight these duties. We are going to defend the hard-working forestry workers of B.C. from these unfair duties.”

Parmar will chair the council with a focus on diplomatic and trade strategy and measures to fight for B.C.’s interests in the softwood lumber dispute with the U.S. Council members are:
- Harry Bains, former minister of labour, Government of B.C.
- Dan Battistella, former president, Interior Lumber Manufacturers’ Association
- Linda Coady, former president and CEO, BC Council of Forest Industries
- Geoff Dawe, national president, Public and Private Workers of Canada
- Rick Doman, chairman, Boreal Carbon Corporation and former forestry executive
- Scott Lunny, western director, United Steelworkers
- Gavin McGarrigle, western regional director, Unifor
- Ric Slaco, former vice-president and chief forester, Interfor
- Dallas Smith, president and CEO, Na̲nwak̲olas Council
“The U.S. forest industry alleges that Canadian softwood lumber is subsidized and companies sell in the U.S. at below-market prices,” Parmar said. “This is wrong; these allegations couldn’t be farther from the truth. We’ve been very clear that we’re happy to come to the table, but that can’t happen if the U.S. industry isn’t willing to negotiate.”

Although this dispute with the U.S. goes back decades, this most recent iteration of the dispute follows the expiry of the Softwood Lumber Agreement in 2015. At the request of the U.S. lumber industry, the U.S. imposed duties on Canadian softwood lumber, starting in 2017. The B.C. government has worked with the Government of Canada to pursue claims through all available avenues, including under the North American Free Trade Agreement, the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement, the World Trade Organization and the U.S. Court of International Trade.

Past dispute settlement panels have consistently ruled in Canada’s favour in the ongoing softwood lumber dispute, determining that B.C.’s forest policies are compliant with international agreements.

Quick Facts:
- B.C. softwood lumber accounts for nearly 10% of lumber used to build American homes.
- Canada is the U.S.’s largest source of forest product imports, making up 44% in 2023.
- U.S. consumers will pay for these tariffs and duties, leading to higher prices for the goods and materials people need to build homes, or repair and remodel them.
- In 2023, B.C. exported more than $3.3 billion worth of softwood lumber to the U.S.
Learn More:

To learn more about the history of softwood lumber dispute and the actions B.C. has taken, visit: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/forestry/competitive-forest-industry/softwood-lumber-trade-with-the-u-s
MIL OSI Canada News –
February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Net Zero Council relaunched to supercharge Clean Energy Superpower Mission
Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

Government relaunches an expanded Net Zero Council, bringing together business, civil society and local authorities to drive the clean energy transition as part of the Plan for Growth.
New Net Zero Council is tasked with ensuring the clean energy transition drives economic growth and creates jobs as part of government’s Plan for Change

brings together a broader range of representatives from organisations including World Wildlife Fund, Design Council and Local Government Association, alongside others including Siemens, HSBC and Nestle

Council to deepen public-private partnership to maximise economic opportunities for the UK

Leaders from major businesses, civil society and local authorities have backed the government’s pro-growth and clean energy superpower missions following a meeting of the relaunched Net Zero Council (5 February), with a plan to help sectors accelerate to net zero and support thousands of jobs.

Co-chaired by Energy Secretary Ed Miliband and Co-operative Group CEO Shrine Khoury-Haq, the Council brings together leaders from some of the UK’s biggest businesses, charities and organisations, as well as trade unions and local authorities.

New members include representatives from the Trades Union Congress and Design Council, bringing expertise of green skills and jobs creation to the council to support the government’s mission for clean energy growth on the path to net zero.

This broader coalition strengthens the Council’s ability to unlock the opportunities of decarbonisation, with major industry players such as Siemens, Nestle and HSBC returning to the Council alongside new members including the Local Government Association and Aviva Investors to seize the growth opportunities of decarbonising the economy.

The first meeting focused on agreeing the Council’s priorities for 2025/26, which will include:

a new focus on providing expert input to inform government strategies relating to net zero

supporting the development and delivery of sector roadmaps, helping businesses to develop transition plans and investors to identify opportunities

supporting small and medium-sized enterprises to decarbonise while maximising the benefits of the transition

informing the government’s approach to public engagement and developing products to support public participation with net zero

A new Delivery Group will oversee the Council’s workstreams and help to drive progress.

The relaunch reflects a new mission-led approach, ensuring government actively engages with a broad range of industry leaders and stakeholders to drive progress towards net zero. This will support the Plan for Change to help deliver new jobs and economic opportunities while ensuring a fair transition.

Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said:

Businesses and leaders across our country recognise that clean power and accelerating towards net zero represents the economic opportunity of the 21st century.

It is one which will protect bills, create jobs, and tackle the climate crisis. This Council is about mission-driven leadership, bringing government, business and civil society together to turn ambition into action.

By working in partnership, we can drive the investment, innovation and industrial transformation needed to make the UK a clean energy superpower.

Climate Minister Kerry McCarthy said:

The relaunch of the Net Zero Council comes at a critical moment in the UK’s journey towards a clean energy future.

Bringing together leaders from across business, finance and civil society, the Council will play a crucial role in accelerating net zero ambitions, driving economic growth and creating thousands of jobs.

Shirine Khoury-Haq, CEO of The Co-operative Group, said:

Working urgently for a faster, fairer transition to a greener, cleaner economy is an absolute imperative. For the sake of our planet and for every community here in the UK and around the globe, it’s crucial we work together to unlock the significant opportunities the transition will bring for economic growth too.

I’m therefore delighted to be continuing in my role as Co-chair of the Net Zero Council. The science couldn’t be clearer that we must act collectively and decisively, and co-operation between businesses, civic society and government is what we need now more than ever.

While the Council itself is made up of senior leaders from key sectors, it is committed to an inclusive engagement strategy, ensuring a broad range of voices contribute to net zero delivery beyond formal members. This approach will ensure that businesses, communities and experts across the UK have opportunities to inform strategy, share best practices and help shape the transition.

Statements from Net Zero Council and Delivery Group members

Bev Cornaby, Director of the UK Corporate Leaders Group (CLG UK), said:

The relaunch of the Net Zero Council marks an important step in strengthening collaboration between government, business, civil society, and local government to accelerate the UK’s transition to net zero. Businesses are ready to lead, invest, and innovate, but they need the right policy framework and long-term clarity to unlock the full potential of a clean, competitive economy. The UK Corporate Leaders Group welcomes the opportunity to bring business leadership and ambition to the Council, supporting accelerated delivery and ensuring that government strategies are informed by real-world insights and that industry can play a central role in delivering a net zero future.

David Thomas, Chief Executive of Barratt Redrow, said:

I’m pleased to join the Net Zero Council at a critical time for the environment and as we scale up to build the new high quality, energy efficient homes the UK desperately needs.

Government has set out its clear ambition to shift to clean energy, meanwhile the homebuilding industry is making good progress towards delivering net zero homes and places – but we must unite behind one plan and work together to build a sustainable future.

Minnie Moll, Chief Executive of the Design Council, said:  

I am honoured to join the Net Zero Council to contribute to this crucial national mission and represent the voice of design as a transformative tool for innovation. Design has the power to cut across sectors, fuelling innovative thinking, embracing circular approaches, and turning the challenges of climate change into opportunities for economic growth, improved quality of life, and a cleaner, more sustainable future for all. We are excited to bring our expertise to this ambitious mission and support the UK’s leadership in becoming a clean energy superpower.

John Scanlon, Chief Executive Officer for SUEZ recycling and recovery UK said:

I am delighted to bring SUEZ’s expertise in the circular economy to the Net Zero Council. Often unseen, the work of the waste and resources sector sits at the core of the delivery of the Industrial Strategy – at the same time as we are taking steps to decarbonise our own operations, the sector is helping other sectors to decarbonise by providing secondary resources for manufacturing, and energy and fuels for transport, homes and industry. A resource efficient economy is a thriving economy and I’m looking forward to working in partnership with industry peers to advance the Government’s mission to become a Clean Energy Superpower.

Ian Simm, Founder & Chief Executive, Impax Asset Management said:

It’s very encouraging to see the Net Zero Council relaunched and I welcome the decision to expand its membership to include representatives from civil society and local government. The Council has a vital role to play at a moment when pivotal decisions are being made that will decide the future shape of the UK economy, not least on housing, infrastructure, and energy supply. I look forward to providing an investor’s view regarding how the Council can maximise its impact and effectiveness, both in helping to shape the shift to a net-zero economy and in supporting the Government’s broader and much needed growth agenda.

 Jennifer Beckwith, Senior Manager, CBI, said:

Accelerating to net zero and achieving growth is society’s defining economic challenge – one that can only be achieved through industry and government partnership. Inaction on the transition is costlier than action and business wants to play its part in achieving sustainable growth.

Increasing decarbonisation beyond the power sector is the big opportunity to grow clean energy markets, scale infrastructure and advance green technologies. The government leading collaboration across business and finance sectors powerfully signals to investors a focus on delivery that can help get capital moving.

Ed Lockhart, Convenor, Broadway Initiative, said:

UK businesses need certainty, including on the transition to a clean energy future, to invest, grow and ultimately improve living standards.

By launching the Net Zero Council aligned to the clean energy mission, the Government is providing a much-needed platform for the business community, financial institutions, civil society and Government to work in partnership on a shared and inclusive long-term plan.

The Broadway Initiative looks forward to bringing business and environmental organisations together to make the most of this opportunity.

Share this page

The following links open in a new tab

Share on Facebook (opens in new tab)

Share on Twitter (opens in new tab)

Updates to this page

Published 5 February 2025
MIL OSI United Kingdom –
February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Economics: Global Trade Verein: BaFin warns against website gtv-holdings.com

Source: Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht – In English

The German Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) warns against offers on the website gtv-holdings.com. According to its findings, the Global Trade Verein, Zurich, Switzerland, offers financial and investment services there without a license.

Der Betreiber tritt auf seiner Website unter der Bezeichnung Global Trade Verein auf, ohne Nennung einer Rechtsform. Unter diesem Namen lässt sich kein Eintrag im Schweizer Handelsregister finden.

The operator appears on its website under the name Global Trade Verein, without mentioning a legal form. No entry can be found under this name in the Swiss commercial register.

Anyone offering financial or investment services or crypto-asset services in Germany requires a license from BaFin. However, some companies offer such services without the required license. Information on whether a particular company is authorized by BaFin can be found in the company database.

The information provided by BaFin is based on Section 37 (4) of the German Banking Act (KWG) and Section 10 (7) of the German Crypto Markets Supervision Act (KMAG).

Please be aware:

BaFin, the German Federal Criminal Police Office (Bundeskriminalamt – BKA) and the German state criminal police offices (Landeskriminalämter) recommend that consumers seeking to invest money online should exercise the utmost caution and do the necessary research beforehand in order to identify fraud attempts at an early stage.

MIL OSI Economics –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI: BitMart Introduces Credit/Debit Card Payment for Crypto Purchases with Zero Fees & Exclusive Rewards
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Mahe, Seychelles , Feb. 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — BitMart, a leading global cryptocurrency exchange, is excited to announce the launch of its new Credit/Debit Card Buy Crypto feature. This new service allows users worldwide to purchase cryptocurrencies directly using fiat currencies such as USD, EUR, and GBP, providing a seamless and efficient way to enter the crypto market.

Key Features & Benefits
- Convenient Transactions: BitMart Users can buy crypto directly with their credit or debit cards without navigating complex deposit processes.
- Multi-Currency Support: A wide range of fiat currencies are accepted, catering to global users.
- Broad Crypto Selection: Supports the purchase of major cryptocurrencies, including BTC, ETH, USDT, and more.
- Faster & Cheaper: Instant transaction confirmation with lower fees compared to traditional payment methods.
- Integrated Experience: No need to switch to third-party services—users can complete transactions smoothly and efficiently within BitMart’s platform.
Global Reach & Enhanced Security

This feature enables BitMart users from regions including EEA, North America, South America, and Asia to fund their accounts effortlessly. BitMart has partnered with leading global payment service providers to ensure top-tier security for all transactions, giving users peace of mind when purchasing digital assets.

Limited-Time Zero Fee Promotion & Exclusive Rewards – Share 15,000 USDT

To celebrate the launch, BitMart is introducing an exclusive Zero-Fee Promotion along with additional incentives from Feb. 05 – March 04:
1. Zero Processing Fees: Users who buy crypto with a credit or debit card during the promotion period will enjoy zero transaction fees.
2. Referral Bonus: The first 100 users daily who purchase at least 100 USDT in crypto and invite a friend to do the same will receive a 5 USDT reward each.
3. 3% Cashback for Futures Trading: Users who transfer funds to their futures account can earn up to 3% cashback on transferred assets.
4. VIP Savings Privilege: Users who accumulate at least 500 USDT in crypto purchases will gain VIP access to exclusive savings products for seven days.
Total Rewards Pool: 15,000 USDT available for participants, distributed on a first-come, first-served basis.

Join the Future of Crypto Transactions Today

BitMart’s new Credit/Debit Card Buy Crypto feature simplifies crypto purchases, lowers entry barriers, and enhances user experience. Don’t miss out on this opportunity to trade seamlessly with zero fees and exciting rewards.

For more details, visit BitMart’s official website.

About BitMart
BitMart is the premier global digital asset trading platform. With millions of users worldwide and ranked among the top crypto exchanges on CoinGecko, it currently offers 1,600+ trading pairs with competitive trading fees. Constantly evolving and growing, BitMart is interested in crypto’s potential to drive innovation and promote financial inclusion. To learn more about BitMart, visit their Website, follow their X (Twitter), or join their Telegram for updates, news, and promotions. Download BitMart App to trade anytime, anywhere.

Disclaimer:

Use of BitMart services is entirely at your own risk. All crypto investments, including earnings, are highly speculative in nature and involve substantial risk of loss. Past, hypothetical, or simulated performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. The value of digital currencies can go up or down and there can be a substantial risk in buying, selling, holding, or trading digital currencies. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital currencies is suitable for you based on your personal investment objectives, financial circumstances, and risk tolerance. BitMart does not provide any investment, legal, or tax advice.

The MIL Network –
February 6, 2025

MIL-OSI Russia: IMF Executive Board Concludes 2024 Article IV Consultation with Chile

Source: IMF – News in Russian

February 5, 2025

Washington, DC: The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) concluded the Article IV consultation^[1] with Chile on February 3, 2025 and endorsed the staff appraisal without a meeting on a lapse-of-time basis.^[2]

The economy’s imbalances have been largely resolved. Real GDP is expected to expand by 2.2 percent in 2024, close to its potential pace, driven by the strong mining and service exports, and 2-2.5 percent in 2025, related to an expected recovery in domestic demand. However, the recovery has been uneven across industries, with the construction sector lagging and the unemployment rate remaining high. Inflation is set to return to the 3-percent target in early 2026, after the impact of the significant increase in electricity tariffs between June 2024 and early 2025 subsides. The current account deficit has continued to narrow and is projected to reach around 2½ percent of GDP in 2024 and 2025.

External risks and uncertainty remain elevated. The commodity price volatility linked to the economic outlook of Chile’s main trading partners and the pace of the global green transition is a key external risk. Moreover, the uncertainty surrounding monetary and fiscal policies in advanced economies could lead to tight financial conditions for longer periods of time and higher financial volatility. Domestically, concerns about crime, migration, and inequality persist; and political polarization is hindering the structural reform progress.

Policies have supported macroeconomic stability. The Central Bank of Chile lowered the monetary policy rate by 325 basis points since January 2024 to 5 percent in December 2024. The headline fiscal deficit is projected to reach 2.7 percent of GDP in 2024 due to a notable revenue underperformance and despite significant spending restraint compared to the budget. The 2025 budget envisions a notable deficit reduction within a medium-term fiscal plan toward a broadly balanced fiscal position by 2027. By setting the neutral level of the countercyclical capital buffer at 1 percent of risk-weighted assets with a gradual and state-contingent implementation path from the current level of 0.5 percent, the Central Bank of Chile has provided banks with planning certainty for strengthening financial resilience.

Executive Board Assessment

The economy is broadly balanced but external risks are elevated. Chile’s macroeconomic position is sound due to its very strong fundamentals, policies, and policy frameworks. Real GDP is growing around its potential and inflation is expected to reach the 3-percent target in early 2026. The current account deficit has continued to narrow, and the 2024 external position is assessed as moderately weaker than implied by medium-term fundamentals. Public debt is still relatively low and sustainable with high probability. However, the external environment is unstable and uncertain, which calls for policies that further strengthen economic buffers to provide additional policy space for future shocks.

Lifting Chile’s growth potential is a must to raise living standards and tackle social and fiscal pressures. Taking a consultative approach, the government is advancing several growth initiatives, including: (i) expediting investment permit applications and environmental evaluations to encourage investment, (ii) fostering the development of emerging industries, particularly those related to renewable energy to maximize the benefits from the global green transition, and (iii) facilitating R&D. Swift and consistent implementation of these initiatives is crucial, especially in rationalizing the regulatory burden and improving essential infrastructure. Additionally, better integrating women into the labor market could partially offset the unfavorable demographic trends. The proposed new development bank requires a targeted mandate, sound risk management practices, and robust corporate governance.

The goal of a broadly balanced fiscal position by 2027 remains appropriate but has become more challenging. The authorities’ commitment to fiscal restraint by adjusting spending plans in 2024 and 2025 is welcome. To achieve a balanced fiscal position over the next three years, a gap of at least 1 percent of GDP needs to be filled. This could be achieved largely from the important tax compliance law if its implementation yields the planned additional revenue and is not used for new spending initiatives. It is therefore crucial to carefully monitor developments in tax compliance and remain flexible to adjust current spending in case revenue mobilization falls short of plans, while aiming to preserve public investment outlays in support of medium-term growth. Ensuring that any structural spending increases align with higher structural revenues is vital for fiscal sustainability, while unifying fragmented social programs could enhance access and effectiveness for the most vulnerable.

Continuous enhancements to Chile’s already very strong fiscal framework would foster fiscal policy formulation and transparency. For instance, providing more details on debt-creating flows outside the fiscal deficit (“below-the-line” items) would strengthen the monitoring of fiscal pressures. Updating fiscal forecasting methods, in line with the government’s plans, could improve revenue projections in the context of economic and policy shifts. Adopting a medium-term strategy to rebuild the size of the Economic and Social Stabilization Fund (ESSF) would help provide resources to respond to future shocks. Finally, simplifying the presentation of the fiscal targets and budget execution in the Public Finance Report could deepen the understanding of the fiscal balance rule framework.

A pension reform is essential to ensure adequate pensions and address the fiscal costs of population aging. Raising contribution rates and the number of contribution periods is vital for sustainably self-financing old-age pensions. The minimum guaranteed pension (PGU) has strengthened the system’s solidarity, increased replacement ratios, and reduced old-age poverty, but it also incurs high fiscal costs. With the ratio of pensioners to the working-age population set to nearly double in two decades, it is crucial to manage public spending pressures while maintaining a solid safety net. Targeting the PGU to the most vulnerable elderly, linking the retirement age to life expectancy, and implementing the proposed unemployment insurance for pension contributions could further strengthen the system.

A cautious data dependent approach to the pace of monetary policy easing is warranted. The BCCh’s monetary policy adjustments have been in line with its inflation-targeting framework. The real monetary policy rate is close to its estimated neutral range. With near-term inflation risks tilted to the upside, future cuts to the policy rate should remain contingent on evidence that inflation is heading decisively back to its target.

Rebuilding international reserve buffers is important for enhancing resilience. While the flexible exchange rate plays a critical role as a shock absorber, the Central Bank of Chile’s access to international liquidity can provide an additional shield against potential external shocks. This underscores the importance of incorporating a comprehensive international liquidity framework into the central bank’s longer-term financial stability strategy. The strategy and operational design should continue to follow high transparency standards, be persistent and robust to changes in external risks, and minimize distortions in the foreign exchange market.

The financial system remains resilient despite rising vulnerabilities related to the real estate sector and lower financial market depth. The real estate sector is expected to recover modestly as long-term interest rates gradually decline, and there are several mitigants to credit risk associated with lending to this sector. Nevertheless, supervisors need to carefully monitor banks and insurers’ portfolio quality and buffers, including by closing commercial real estate data gaps and enhancing stress test models. Rebuilding the depth of local financial markets by increasing pension contributions, which would increase the pool of investable savings, is important to help reduce market volatility and sensitivity to shocks.

Financial sector policies need to continue reinforcing resilience. The recent adoption of a positive neutral level of the counter-cyclical capital buffer with a gradual and state-contingent implementation provides banks with planning certainty. The ongoing implementation of Basel III capital and liquidity requirements needs to be completed. Prompt implementation of the Financial Market Resilience Law would enhance the BCCh’s ability to respond to financial distress situations. Other priorities continue to include adopting an industry-funded deposit insurance and a bank resolution framework, providing budget independence to the CMF, further enhancing bank corporate governance, and implementing the Consolidated Debt Registry.

Table 1. Chile: Selected Economic Indicators, 2023-27

GDP (2023), in trillions of pesos	282		Quota
GDP (2023), in billions of U.S. dollars	336		in millions of SDRs		1,744
Per capita (2023), U.S. dollars	16,815		in % of total		0.37
Population (2023), in millions	19.96
Main products and exports	Copper
Key export markets	China, U.S., Euro area
			Proj.
	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027

Output	(Annual percentage change, unless otherwise specified)
Real GDP	0.2	2.2	2.2	2.3	2.3
Total domestic demand	-4.2	1.0	2.4	2.3	2.3
Consumption	-3.9	1.6	1.9	2.2	2.1
Fixed capital formation	-1.1	-1.0	4.3	3.4	3.7
Exports of goods and services	-0.3	5.5	4.3	4.7	3.9
Imports of goods and services	-12.0	1.2	4.4	4.3	3.2
Output gap (in percent)	0.0	-0.1	-0.1	0.0	0.0

Employment
Unemployment rate (in percent, annual average)	8.7	8.5	8.2	8.0	7.8

Prices
GDP deflator	6.6	6.0	4.1	2.9	2.7
Change of CPI (end of period)	3.9	4.5	3.5	3.0	3.0
Change of CPI (period average)	7.6	3.9	4.2	3.1	3.0

Public Sector Finances	(In percent of GDP, unless otherwise specified)
Central government revenue	22.9	22.1	23.0	23.8	23.9
Central government expenditure	25.3	24.8	24.8	24.7	24.3
Central government fiscal balance	-2.4	-2.7	-1.8	-0.8	-0.4
Central government structural fiscal balance 1/	-3.4	-3.1	-2.1	-1.2	-0.5
Central government gross debt	39.4	42.7	43.7	44.1	43.5
Public sector gross debt 2/	70.2	73.5	74.5	74.9	74.4

Balance of Payments
Current account balance (% of GDP) 3/	-3.5	-2.3	-2.5	-2.5	-2.7
Foreign direct investment net flows (% of GDP) 3/	-4.6	-4.0	-2.6	-2.9	-2.9
Gross external debt (% of GDP) 4/	71.1	77.5	76.5	76.6	75.7
Sources: Central Bank of Chile, Ministry of Finance, Haver Analytics, and IMF staff calculations and projections.
1/ The structural fiscal balance includes adjustments for output, copper prices, and lithium revenues based on IMF calculations. The lithium adjustment starts in 2022.
2/ Includes liabilities of the central government, the Central Bank of Chile and public enterprises. Excludes Recognition Bonds.
3/ Calculated as a share of US$ GDP.
4/ Data from Dipres for the government and from BCCh for all other sectors. Calculated as a share of US$ GDP.

[1] Under Article IV of the IMF’s Articles of Agreement, the IMF holds bilateral discussions with members, usually every year. A staff team visits the country, collects economic and financial information, and discusses with officials the country’s economic developments and policies. On return to headquarters, the staff prepares a report, which forms the basis for discussion by the Executive Board.

[2] The Executive Board takes decisions under its lapse-of-time procedure when the Board agrees that a proposal can be considered without convening formal discussions.

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

PRESS OFFICER: Jose Luis De Haro

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

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2025/02/04/pr25027-chile-imf-executive-board-concludes-2024-article-iv-consultation

MIL OSI

MIL OSI Russia News –

February 6, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Benjamin C. Mizer Delivers Remarks at Press Conference Announcing Criminal and Civil Actions Related to Unlawful Advertising and Sale of Dietary Supplements

Source: United States Attorneys General 13

Remarks as prepared for delivery

Good afternoon.

We are here today to explain critical steps the federal government is taking to stem the tide of unlawful dietary supplements being sold to consumers nationwide.

Almost every day, news sources on the Internet, television and in print feature stories about the dangers of dietary supplements: A supplement is laced with an undeclared pharmaceutical ingredient. A study is released about adverse health consequences of a so-called natural remedy. An athlete or member of the military falls ill after taking an untested energy product. These stories arise across the country all too often.

Consumers turn to supplements when they want to lose weight, get an edge in athletic performance, or improve their overall well-being. From California to Maine, consumers ingest pills, powders and liquids every day, not knowing whether they are wasting money or whether they may end up harming, rather than helping, themselves. Unfortunately, many of these products are not what they purport to be or cannot do what the distributors claim they can do. In some instances, consumers might be choosing supplements over other, proven therapies for serious conditions under the mistaken belief that these products can help.

I am honored to be joined at the podium today by my colleagues from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS), the Department of Defense (DoD), and the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA). Today we are announcing a sweep of actions targeting unlawful dietary supplement makers and marketers. Over the past year, we have pursued civil and criminal cases against more than 100 makers and marketers of dietary supplements and similar products.

A centerpiece of the sweep announced today is the indictment of USPlabs, relating to widely popular workout and weight loss supplements. Bestselling dietary supplements, with names like Jack3d, OxyElite Pro, and OxyElite Pro “New Formula” and “Advanced Formula,” raked in hundreds of millions of dollars in sales.

As alleged in the indictment unsealed today, the defendants were on a perpetual search for the next miracle ingredient. That search generally focused on Chinese chemical manufacturers. When they found an ingredient that they believed was promising – and knowing full well how the market for dietary supplements operated – they doctored packaging, labeling, and other paperwork to defraud others about what the product was. Much of the alleged fraud focused on the defendants’ claims that their products were made from natural plant extracts. In truth, as one defendant put it, “lol stuff is completely 100 % synthethic [sic]”.

These fraudulent claims ensured that the synthetic chemicals entered the United States, got on store shelves, and were purchased by consumers. As alleged in the indictment, the defendants falsified paperwork to stay off the radar of regulatory agencies – when the products crossed the border and as they circulated in commerce. They made misrepresentations to convince well-known retailers, who had concerns about untested synthetic chemicals, to sell their products. They falsified labeling and marketing materials to convince consumers, who prized natural ingredients, to buy their products. All of these people – regulators, retailers and consumers – trusted that the defendants were telling the truth about their products. All of these people were deceived.

This deception put lives at risk. The indictment describes the safety testing – or, more accurately, the lack of safety testing – that the defendants undertook before hawking these factory-made stimulants. For instance, the indictment alleges that the defendants sometimes tested the ingredients on themselves and sold the ones that made them feel good. With one product, the defendants allegedly recognized that the substance could potentially cause “liver toxicity.” Yet without conducting a single test to determine whether that substance was safe, they went ahead and sold it, working from the baseless assumption that they weren’t using enough of the substance in their products to cause problems.

But there were problems. There was an outbreak of liver injuries allegedly associated with the OxyElite Pro New Formula. Consumers experienced jaundice; several needed transplants to save their lives. How did the defendants respond? As the indictment alleges, they promised the FDA and the public that they would stop distributing the product at issue. They didn’t. Instead, they undertook a surreptitious, all-hands-on-deck effort to sell as much of the product as they could.

We are here today, in part, to take an important step in holding USPlabs accountable for its actions. The indictment unsealed today charges USPlabs in Texas, four of its executives, and one of its consultants with a series of crimes associated with the sale of dietary supplements. Charged with these defendants is S.K. Laboratories based in Southern California, which manufactured many of USPlabs’ products, and one of S.K. Laboratories’ executives. As noted, this is just a step. All of the defendants will have their day in court. Whatever the outcome, I am confident that the dedicated men and women – from the Department of Justice and the special agents from the FDA and IRS Criminal Investigation – who have worked so hard to bring us to this point will ensure that justice is served.

The allegations against USPlabs and its operators should serve as a wake-up call to the supplement industry. The unmistakable message is that the Department of Justice and its partners will be vigilant when it comes to the health and safety of the American public. Fighting illegal activity in the dietary supplement industry is a high priority on our consumer protection agenda.

The USPlabs case is only one of the many cases brought as part of the sweep announced today. Over the past year, law enforcement and regulatory officials have focused efforts on many additional products that cause high levels of concern among health officials nationwide.

Many of the cases we have brought relate to products that misrepresent the ingredients they contain.

We have also brought cases involving products that make unsupported claims about their effects. In numerous matters, the defendants are selling products online through websites and touting their products to consumers for the cure, treatment, or prevention of diseases ranging from cancer to Alzheimer’s disease to herpes. Making these disease cure claims defines these products as drugs under the law. And even though they were warned by the FDA – and in some cases, through joint letters with the FTC – to stop making such claims, a number of the individuals and companies at issue continued to make these claims and promote their products as treatments or cures for diseases. Yet these drugs lack substantial evidence of safety and effectiveness. They are also being sold without adequate directions for their use. Selling them in interstate commerce in these circumstances is illegal.

The government is taking a multi-faceted approach to combat the problem of unlawful dietary supplements. In addition to criminal actions, we are using civil and administrative tools to safeguard consumers from harmful products. As part of this sweep, the Department of Justice brought a dozen civil injunctive actions (including five in the last week) under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and in some cases, using the civil mail fraud injunction statute, seeking to stop the defendant entities and individuals from violating the law. In these cases we are asking the courts to order the defendants to stop their illegal conduct and to put in place processes and procedures to prevent them from violating the law in the future. Our partner agencies, including the FTC, FDA, USPIS, DoD and USADA, are taking other measures both to enforce the law and to educate the public.

As I mentioned, I stand here in partnership with other agencies with whom we have joined forces to address this problem. Through enforcement and education, each agency is performing its own mission to protect consumers or service members or athletes from dangerous, ineffective products. You will hear more from my colleagues about the actions their agencies are taking. Together, through cooperation and teamwork, we can multiply the impact of our efforts. These actions will not put an end to this widespread problem. But they will go some distance toward bringing change to the industry.

We are not here to criticize the entire supplement marketplace. Not every supplement contains an undisclosed ingredient. Not every label lies about what is contained in the bottle. Not every claim about dietary supplements is unsupported by scientific evidence.

But consumers must be on guard before taking dietary supplements. Oftentimes, it may be difficult or impossible to tell the conditions under which the supplements are manufactured, and it is challenging to sort through real scientific substantiation for a product as compared to unsupported hype.

How can consumers perform their own due diligence?

Talk to your health care provider. At physical exams, ask a physician whether the bottle seen on store shelves or on the Internet could cause you harm, or whether it is worth the money you are spending to buy it.

Consult the public education materials provided by the FTC, FDA, DoD and USADA. The FDA’s website, for example, includes tips for making informed decisions and evaluating dietary supplements, and the FTC’s website also has a wealth of information.

The Department of Defense and USADA have developed extraordinary tools, including a cell phone app, to help consumers make informed choices about supplements.

This is only the beginning. Thanks to the partnerships we have built, our efforts in this area will continue. We will keep investigating violators and we will use all available tools at our disposal to advance our enforcement goals and to protect consumers.

MIL Security OSI –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Director Tracy Toulou of the Office of Tribal Justice Testifies Before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Oversight Hearing “Tribal Law and Order Act (TLOA) — Five Years Later: How Have the Justice Systems in Indian Country Improved?”

Source: United States Attorneys General 13

Remarks as prepared for delivery

Chairman Barrasso, Vice-Chairman Tester and Members of the Committee:

I am honored to appear before you to discuss the implementation efforts of the Department of Justice to fulfill our responsibilities as established in the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 (TLOA) and, ultimately, to improve public safety in Indian country. In introducing this Act in April 2009, Chairman Dorgan illuminated some of the hard realities faced by tribes in modern times, including: astonishingly high rates of violence, criminal exploitation of complex and sometimes confusing jurisdiction and crippling limitations on the legal authorities of tribal governments to ensure safety on their lands. The introduction of TLOA included a charge to the federal government to provide tribal governments with the tools they need to better protect their communities, to live up to our treaty and trust obligations and to be more accountable for our efforts to enhance public safety in Indian country. Thank you for the opportunity to provide an overview of the department’s efforts over the past five years to fulfill our responsibilities under this Act and honor our broader obligations to Indian country.

In October 2009, the department held a listening session with tribal leaders to help guide and inform the department’s policies, programs and activities affecting Indian country going forward. Our leadership recognized the need to swiftly and meaningfully improve our contributions to public safety in Indian country and as a result of this listening session, launched a department-wide initiative to enhance public safety in Indian country, which is ongoing. With the passage of TLOA in July 2010, the department’s initiative expanded to absorb new responsibilities and assumed a renewed sense of urgency. Our work to enhance public safety has been and continues to be, shaped by our commitment to empower tribal governments; to improve coordination and collaboration at the federal, tribal, state and local levels; and to be appropriately accountable for the work we do.

Empowering Tribal Governments

The department views tribes as partners in ensuring public safety in Indian country and is committed to maximizing tribal control over tribal affairs. It is our belief, informed by experience, that challenges faced by tribes are generally best met by tribal solutions. In support of this commitment and the government-to-government nature of our relationships with tribes, the department has worked to fulfill its responsibilities under TLOA in a way that will ultimately empower tribes to operate with more autonomy.

In order to support law enforcement activity by tribal officials in Indian country, tribes require access to law enforcement databases. Under TLOA, the department must ensure that tribal law enforcement officials have access to national crime information databases. The ability of tribes to fully engage in national criminal justice information sharing via state networks, which are the long-time conduit for such activities, has been dependent upon regulations, statutes and policies of the states that may not consistently enable tribal participation. In order to improve access for tribes, the department has established two new programs and partnered on a third.

First, the Justice Telecommunications System (JUST) program, which was launched in 2010, provided participating tribes with access to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC). This program is ongoing and currently serves 23 tribes. This program, as well as the other two programs to improve data base access, were the result of on-going, substantive dialog with tribal governments and law enforcement.

Second, the department recently launched a more comprehensive access program based on feedback from tribes and lessons learned from the JUST program: the Department of Justice’s Tribal Access Program for National Crime Information (TAP). The TAP program, first announced in August 2015, is designed to provide access to CJIS services, including: Next Generation Identification (NGI); National Data Exchange (N-DEx); Law Enforcement Enterprise Portal (LEEP); National Crime Information Center (NCIC); National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS); and Nlets, the International Justice and Public Safety Network. Nlets is an interstate public safety network for the exchange of law enforcement, criminal justice and public safety information owned by the states. Nlets supports inquiry into state databases, such as motor vehicle, driver’s license and criminal history, as well as inquiry into several federal databases, such as Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA) Drug Pointer Index, ICE’s Law Enforcement Support Center and FAA’s Aircraft Registration and Canada’s Canadian Police Information Center. With funding from the Office of Justice Programs’ (OJP) Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering and Tracking (SMART), the TAP program has selected ten tribal participants to help provide user feedback on the training, technical assistance, equipment, and maintenance of this program. Early feedback has been very positive and it is our intention to eventually make this program available to any interested tribe. We will continue to work with Congress for additional funding to more broadly deploy the program.

The TAP Program was the result of a 2014 working group, which consisted of representatives from the Departments of Justice and the Interior. From this same close collaboration, the department partnered with Interior’s Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of Justice Services (BIA-OJS) in a third program known as “BIA Purpose Code X,” which gives tribes the ability through BIA-OJS to perform emergency name-based background checks for child placement purposes. This is a crucial capability for tribal social service agencies seeking emergency placement of children in Indian country.

The Department of Justice has increased its efforts to support tribal governments that are exercising expanded sentencing authority rooted in TLOA. While TLOA properly does not require the department to review or certify a tribe’s use of enhanced felony sentencing authority or the status of a tribe’s efforts to amend its codes and court processes to provide defendants with the due process protections described in TLOA, we have taken steps to help ensure that tribes interested in exercising enhanced sentencing authority have knowledge of and access to relevant resources. For example, OJP’s Bureau of Justice Assistance’s Tribal Civil and Criminal Legal Assistance Program has provided training and technical services to support tribal civil and criminal legal procedures, legal infrastructure enhancements, public education and the development and enhancement of tribal justice systems. More specifically, training and technical services have included the following: indigent legal defense services; civil legal assistance; public defender services; and strategies for the development and enhancement of tribal court policies, procedures and codes.

The provision of high-quality training to tribal representatives has been an area of increased activity within the department since the passage of TLOA. The department believes that ensuring access to quality training is a necessary element to bolstering tribal autonomy. In July 2010, the Executive Office of U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA) launched the National Indian Country Training Initiative (NICTI) to ensure that federal prosecutors and agents, as well as state and tribal criminal justice personnel, receive the training and support needed to address the particular challenges relevant to Indian country prosecutions. Importantly, the department covers the costs of travel and lodging for tribal attendees at classes sponsored by the NICTI. This allows many tribal criminal justice officials to receive cutting-edge training from national experts at no cost to the student or tribe. The NICTI has sponsored approximately 75 training courses, and reached over 200 tribal, federal and state agencies.

Additionally, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) announced a forthcoming training course to be held at the FLETC campus in Artesia, New Mexico. Jointly taught by FBI and BIA “mentors” and FLETC common core instructors, the course will include instruction in forensic evidence collection and preparatory instruction on investigations common to Indian country, such as domestic violence, child abuse, violent crimes, human trafficking and drug trafficking. This course will be held four times each year, with a total of 24 students in each session. This course, the result of collaboration between FBI, BIA and FLETC, was developed out of a recognized need to train federal and tribal law enforcement officers together. Another recent training was held by the DEA. In September 2015, the National Native American Law Enforcement Association held a collaborative training event where the DEA provided on-site training on clandestine lab awareness for first responders, emerging technologies, and money laundering. The training included federal, state, local, and tribal partners with Indian country responsibility.

One of the most meaningful displays of the department’s commitment to a government-to-government relationship with tribes is in our efforts to cross-deputize tribal law enforcement officials. In doing so, we not only expand their authorities, but we send an important message that we are partners and allies with tribes in our collective efforts to enhance public safety in Indian country. The Special Assistant U.S. Attorney (SAUSA) Program was developed prior to the passage of TLOA to train tribal prosecutors in federal criminal law, procedure and investigative techniques to increase prosecutions in federal court, tribal court, or both. The program enables tribal prosecutors to bring cases in federal court and to serve as co-counsel with federal prosecutors on felony investigations and prosecutions of offenses originating in tribal communities. The program has grown considerably since the passage of TLOA. To date, there are 25 SAUSAs representing 23 tribes. In addition to the SAUSA program, the Department of Justice investigative agencies have cross-deputized tribal law enforcement officers through joint task forces. For example, the FBI has deputized 85 tribal law enforcement officers as part of the Safe Trails Task Forces. There are currently 15 active Safe Trails Task Forces located around the country, working to combat violent crime, drugs, gangs and gaming violations.

In 2014, the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) fulfilled a key provision of TLOA by accepting certain tribal offenders sentenced in tribal courts for placement in BOP institutions. The pilot program allowed any federally-recognized tribe to request that the BOP incarcerate a tribal member convicted of a violent crime under the terms of Section 234 of TLOA and authorized the BOP to house up to 100 tribal offenders at a time, nationwide.

A fundamental goal of the BOP is to reduce future criminal activity by encouraging inmates to participate in a range of programs that have been proven to help them adopt a crime-free lifestyle upon their return to the community. Through the pilot program, tribal offenders have access to the BOP’s many self-improvement programs, including work in prison industries and other institution jobs, vocational training, education, treatment for substance use disorders, classes on parenting and anger management, counseling, religious observance opportunities and other programs that teach essential life skills. BOP has also ensured that there are culturally-appropriate offerings for native inmates. In addition to increasing access to critical programs and treatments, the pilot program facilitated tribes’ ability to exercise enhanced sentencing authority under TLOA, which is an important indication of support for tribal sovereignty. The pilot program was, by all accounts, a success and both tribes and the department would be supportive of necessary Congressional action to reauthorize this program.

An important part of our support to tribes is necessarily tied to funds. The department launched the Coordinated Tribal Assistance Solicitation (CTAS) in 2010, as a response to tribes’ request for increased flexibility. Through CTAS, tribes and tribal consortia are able to submit a single application to apply for a broad range of the Department of Justice tribal grant programs. Through CTAS, the department has awarded over 1,400 grants totaling more than $620 million. Over time, we have refined this solicitation to enable tribes to take a truly comprehensive approach to improving public safety in tribal communities. Under TLOA, the department was required to offer specific grants for delinquency prevention and response and to include dedicated funding for regional information sharing. To date, we have awarded more than $44 million in support of tribal youth programs and more than $108 million to support regional information sharing systems. The department continually seeks feedback from tribes on ways to improve CTAS and each year with our solicitation announcement we also communicate steps we have taken during the previous year to improve the process. The most recent solicitation was released on Nov. 19, 2015, with an application deadline of Feb. 23, 2016. It incorporates a number of changes, including the elimination of certain eligibility requirements, broadening allowable activities and extending the award period for certain grants. Each year, the intention is to increase the accessibility and usefulness of CTAS grants.

In parallel to our outward-facing efforts, the department has made a number of internal structural changes to ensure our revamped presence in Indian country is long-lived.

Evolution of Agency Infrastructure

To ensure that the day-to-day operations at the department are supportive of the policy and programmatic changes we have made since the passage of TLOA, we have made a number of internal adjustments across the department, from headquarters to field offices. The intent in making these changes was to absorb the principles that drive the TLOA and our response to that Act, thus integrating them into the way we do business at the department. Indeed, although not a direct response to TLOA, the department issued Attorney General Guidelines Stating Principles for Working with Federally Recognized Tribes (Statement of Principles) in December 2014 to guide and inform all of the department’s interactions with federally-recognized tribes. This Statement of Principles serves as a point of reference for department employees and, importantly, a standard to which tribes can hold the department accountable.

In 1995, then-Attorney General Janet Reno established the Office of Tribal Justice (OTJ). OTJ has operated continuously since then, although it was not made permanent until the passage of TLOA. On Nov. 17, 2010, less than four months after TLOA’s enactment, the department published in the Federal Register a final rule that established OTJ as a permanent, standalone component of the department. My office serves as a principal point of contact in the department for federally-recognized tribes, provides legal, policy and programmatic advice to the Attorney General with respect to the treaty and trust relationship between the United States and Indian tribes, promotes internal uniformity of department policies and litigation positions relating to Indian country and coordinates with other federal agencies and with state and local governments on their initiatives in Indian country.

The U.S. Attorneys’ Offices with Indian country in their districts play a primary role in our interactions with tribes. U.S. Attorneys’ Offices often are the nexus of activity when federal involvement on reservations is necessary, from investigations to prosecutions to providing services to victims. Every U.S Attorney’s Office, whose district includes Indian country or a federally-recognized tribe, has at least one Tribal Liaison and some districts have more than one. Along with the TLOA-driven requirement that each relevant office appoint a Tribal Liaison, the U.S. Attorneys are required to hold annual consultations with tribes in their districts. In order to assist the U.S. Attorney’s Offices and the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee’s Native American Issues Subcommittee, as well as to serve as a liaison to other department components, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys formally established the position of Native American Issues Coordinator.

These changes to the structure of the department were driven by the department’s support for and fulfillment of its responsibilities under TLOA. There have been a series of policy shifts that are not a direct response to the Act but are in keeping with the spirit of that legislation. For example, the issuance of the Department of Justice Statement of Principles, discussed earlier, marks an important shift in our approach at all levels of the department to interacting with tribes. Similarly, the Department of Justice Consultation Policy is based on three guiding principles: that the department must engage with tribal nations on a government-to-government basis; that tribal sovereignty and Indian self-determination are now and must always be, the foundations of every policy or program; and that communication and coordination with our tribal partners, among federal agencies and with our state and local counterparts are essential to accountability and to success.

Greater Accountability

Accountability is a critical element in a true partnership and the department has taken a number of steps to increase our accountability to tribes. The TLOA-mandated reports were intended to promote greater transparency of department activities in Indian country and the process of responding has been a useful exercise for our agency to scrutinize trends and patterns of activity. In some cases, the reports have revealed a need to expand our agency response to meet specific needs and organize our resources more effectively, such as those related to long-term detention. In other cases, the reporting process highlighted positive impacts that department activity has had in Indian country over time and a need to perpetuate beneficial initiatives, such as the BOP pilot program report and the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Report. In tracking prosecutions and crime data, the department has benefitted from taking a focused look at our response to trends in Indian country and as a result is in a better position to adjust our resources internally to address emerging trends and issues.

The department has made progress over the past five years in bolstering our government-to-government relationship with tribes and in honoring our treaty and trust obligations. We are all fully cognizant that there is significant work still to be done to live up to our responsibilities in Indian country and we are committed to seeing this work through. We appreciate Congress’ efforts to foster public safety and look forward to working closely with our partners in Indian country to fully honor our responsibilities. I will be happy to answer any questions you may have.

MIL Security OSI –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General John P. Carlin Delivers Remarks at Practising Law Institute’s Coping with U.S. Export Controls and Sanctions 2015 Conference
Source: United States Attorneys General 13

Remarks as prepared for delivery

Thank you for that introduction, and for the opportunity to be a part of this important discussion.

As you all know, foreign governments and other non-state adversaries of the United States are engaged in an aggressive campaign to evade U.S. sanctions regimes and acquire sensitive U.S. technology. In so doing, they threaten our economy, our prosperity and, most importantly, our national security. Disrupting these national security threats is among the highest priorities of the Department of Justice, and the National Security Division.

But the responsibility of protecting our nation from these threats is a shared one. Your clients – the companies you represent – and thus, you, have a critical role to play.

Because our companies have our nation’s crown jewels in their possession. They house information targeted by thieves ranging from foreign powers bent on economic and military superiority, to individual criminals who know the market demand for this information, to terrorists who wish to create weapons of mass destruction.

Of course, companies have a responsibility to comply with the export control and sanctions regime. We must also recognize that our companies are not immune from becoming unwitting victims of thieves and spies. We live in an age where the threats we face are not limited to unlawful shipments and deliveries of goods. Threats are also posed by insiders and through cyberspace. Therefore, to protect what we value, our national assets, companies must learn how to comply with the law and how to protect themselves.

That is why it is good to see such a strong turnout. Lawyers are on the front line helping clients adapt to an ever evolving export control regime. Lawyers shape strategy – hardening collective defenses and counseling companies on best practices.

For example, sitting here today, you know to help your clients comply with export controls and sanctions. Regimes designed to keep export controlled data and trade secrets out of the hands of rogue nations or terrorists.

But have you had the chance to counsel those same clients when a cyber-hacker exfiltrated that information? If you have not, unfortunately, it may only be a matter of time. Cases involving the theft of export-controlled information via hacking are no longer uncommon.

Recently, we’ve brought cases where hackers targeted cleared U.S. defense contractors and stole massive amounts of sensitive data related to military technology, including export-controlled software. These cases are not the first of their kind, and they will almost certainly not be the last.

You have the power to help your clients protect themselves. In a modern, interconnected world, there is quickly emerging a blending of practice areas. Trade controls blends with data privacy, and export controls and sanctions trigger questions not only of compliance but of cybersecurity.

It is a fascinating time to be a practicing lawyer in this area, but one that brings with it grave responsibility.

Today, we’ll talk about a broad range of issues that go into being a modern export control practitioner.

National Security Division

But first, I can explain a bit about the National Security Division of the Department of Justice.

The National Security Division was created in the wake of the September 11th terrorist attacks, in part in response to a specific recommendation from the WMD Commission.

The Commission identified intelligence failures that contributed to the attacks. It highlighted the danger of the so-called wall between foreign intelligence and law enforcement. We needed to be able to connect the dots. We needed to change.

So in 2006, Congress created the National Security Division, creating the first new litigating division in the Department in almost half a century. The National Security Division brings all of the department’s resources to bear. We bring down the wall, uniting prosecutors and law enforcement officials with intelligence attorneys and the Intelligence Community.

We are responsible for executing the highest priority of the Department of Justice – to protect this nation from the full range of national security threats we face. We are proud to have this essential mission.

At the top of our priority list is protecting our nation from terrorist threats. In recent days, you’ve heard everyone from the president to the attorney general and the director of the FBI speaking at length about the steps we are taking to combat that threat each and every day.

Just yesterday, we arrested Jalil Ibn Ameer Aziz, 19, a U.S. citizen and resident of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, on charges of conspiring to provide, and attempting to provide, material support to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL). Aziz is alleged to have served as an intermediary between ISIL supporters. Passing location information, including maps and a phone number, to assist persons seeking to travel and travel to and wage jihad with ISIL.

Although it may not seem so at first, fighting terrorism and preventing the illegal export of U.S. technology are interrelated goals. Take the case of Feras Diri. Diri is indicted in the very same district as Aziz. We allege he was involved in a scheme to illegally export U.S. goods to Syria in violation of U.S. sanctions. Some of these good were dual-use items. It doesn’t take much to imagine the consequences of those items falling into the wrong hands once it reaches Syria.

One of the most significant national security threats we face, is the protection of our nation’s assets – including export controlled information, as well as other sensitive information that may be targeted by nation states and terrorists. In so doing, we take an intelligence-driven, threat-based approach.

We have an entire section devoted to this work – the Counterintelligence and Export Control Section, or simply CES. We changed the name as part of a restructure to reflect the significance of export control and sanctions enforcement. This year, CES also finalized a new Strategic Plan, setting forth an aggressive, comprehensive approach. We know from experience that those seeking to do us harm will look for any available vulnerability to exploit. They use all tools against us; it is our responsibility to do the same. Our strategy is driven by the intelligence picture we see, which helps us prioritize and focus on the areas of most significant threat.

Our Priorities and Our Regime

Two of our highest priority areas involve China and WMDs. Both are subject to export controls and regulations.

Our economy profits from exports, and we support the flow of goods across borders. But we must balance economic gain with the real threat to national security posed by certain technologies falling into the wrong hands.

That is why our export control regime is so important. It is the best way to keep sensitive military and dual-use technologies, or even information that could be used in weapons of mass destruction, from ending up in the hands of terrorists and other adversaries. They protect our innovation from being turned against us.

With an ever-growing and evolving set of threats targeting our sensitive technologies and information, we must be vigilant. We must look at how transactions could make us more vulnerable, and do everything in our power to mitigate those vulnerabilities.

Take China – despite a long-standing U.S. arms embargo, China continues to surge efforts to acquire advanced U.S. military technology. China seeks U.S. persons with expertise to illegally provide services and know-how related to sensitive, export-controlled U.S. technology for military gain. As an example, they targeted U.S. experts on jet engines to assist in developing Chinese-made engines. If successful, our military edge over China is reduced; our country is put at greater risk. Knowing what China seeks and why is essential to any sound export compliance and training program.

Iranian Sanctions

Likewise, a high priority remains Iran.

Earlier this year, the United States, Iran, the E.U. and five other nations reached a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

The sanctions relief specified in the JCPOA does not go into effect until Implementation Day – which does not occur until after Iran has completed all necessary nuclear steps, as verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Even after Implementation Day, sanctions relief will not affect most laws and regulations enforced by the Department of Justice.

With few exceptions, U.S. or foreign persons involved in the export or re-export of U.S. goods or services to Iran remain subject to prosecution under the Iranian Transactions and Sanctions Regulations, as do U.S. persons involved in Iranian transactions.

The only sanctions relief relates to:
- the export, re-export, sale, lease or transfer to Iran of commercial passenger aircraft, parts and services for civil end-uses;
- the import of Iranian-origin carpets and foodstuffs; and
- certain transactions involving Iran by foreign entities owned or controlled by a U.S. person.
Looking beyond the sanctions to other U.S. export regulations, the JCPOA will have no effect on the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) and Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Likewise, our commitment to prosecuting cases where defense articles on the U.S. Munitions List (USML), defense services and items subject to the EAR are exported to Iran remains as strong as ever.

So as a practical matter, what does this mean? Bottom line, companies and individuals, whether U.S. or foreign, need to remain vigilant when it comes to any possible commercial or financial interactions with Iran. We will continue to investigate and, where appropriate, prosecute U.S. export control and sanctions cases involving Iran under our domestic authorities. Because anything else is simply unacceptable.

The export control and sanctions regime in place exists to protect this nation from the proliferation threat. From sensitive information and technology that could pose a grave danger in the wrong hands making its way to terrorists. From our innovation being used to develop weapons of mass destruction or ballistic missiles.

Iran remains a designated state sponsor of terrorism, and we will not take our eye off of countering Iran’s efforts to support international terrorism and other destabilizing activities in the region.

Corporate Misconduct

U.S. companies – particularly in large international corporate structures, must understand this reality.

The risks – not only compliance-based risks, but security risks – must be front of mind, and we hope that as the lawyers who counsel, advise and represent these companies, you will talk frankly about them.

At the Department of Justice, we continue to prioritize corporate misconduct related to export control and sanctions violations. The deputy attorney general issued guidance and directed changes to the U.S. Attorneys’ Manual to reflect the department’s sharpened focus in this area including on individual corporate defendants.

To provide you clarity as you advise clients, we will provide guidance to make clear our current practices on voluntary self-disclosure of export and sanctions criminal violations. We want to be transparent about our process and the factors we consider when assessing voluntary self-disclosures. That way, the benefits for your clients are clear, and you can provide clear counsel.

Because when a company voluntarily self-discloses export control and sanctions misconduct, fully cooperates and appropriately remediates, we will grant the company a significantly reduced penalty. That can include a non-prosecution agreement (NPA), a reduced period of supervised compliance, a reduced fine and forfeiture and no requirement for a monitor.

If one or more aggravating factors are present to a substantial degree – like numerous willful shipments of defense articles to a foreign terrorist organization – a more stringent resolution might be necessary. In all cases, however, the company that voluntary discloses will find itself in a better position one that does not.

We are also discussing these issues with our regulatory partners to help you understand how the Department of Justice fits in to the broader regime. The Department of Justice guidance we ultimately issue on VSDs will not supplant or supersede obligations to regulators. Our ultimate goal is to be more transparent, so that companies will have more certainty about the benefits of self-disclosure are when dealing with prosecutors. In the end, we think this is good for our national security mission and good for business.

Voluntary self-disclosure is responsible. But even if you choose not to pursue the route of voluntary self-disclosure and cooperation, your corporate clients need to remain vigilant or they may suffer serious consequences.

Time and again, we have shown that willfully facilitating illegal transactions will not go unpunished.

Earlier this year, Schlumberger Oilfield Holdings Ltd. (SOHL), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Schlumberger Ltd., one of the largest oil and gas services companies in the world, pleaded guilty and agreed to pay a penalty of over $232 million for conspiring to violate the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) by willfully facilitating illegal transactions and engaging in trade with Iran and Sudan.

What it ultimately came down to, was that one subsidiary failed to adequately train its employees to ensure that all U.S. persons, including non-U.S. citizens who resided in the United States, complied with Schlumberger Ltd.’s sanctions policies and compliance procedures.

We will not hesitate to prosecute individuals and entities that facilitate illegal transactions in violation of U.S. sanctions.

Vigilance is essential. Policies and procedures are simply not enough. They must be fully executed and reinforced. Simply “checking the box” by implementing an export control and sanctions compliance program without the proper support or follow through will not insulate a company from prosecution.

Another point to keep in mind is the need to know your markets and your people. When you’re part of a large corporate family with many segments located overseas, some subject to very different export control laws in foreign countries, you have be careful to ensure that conduct illegal in the U.S. does not become practice here. If you have doubts, check with your regulator. Something a foreign national employee does overseas may have been entirely legal there, but once transferred here, is a crime.

When working with your clients on these and other difficult issues, implore them to be vigilant. These are complicated areas, and it takes sound advice and a high level of scrutiny to ensure compliance.

Insider Threats

Unfortunately, compliance is only one piece of the puzzle. Because, in addition to the compliance risks that are common in global operations, your corporate clients – and, in fact, even potentially their outside counsel –also are vulnerable to the threats from insiders and hackers.

Insider threats – threats from trusted employees and contractors – is now a significant problem. And they are threat to national security when they steal sensitive export-controlled technology.

For instance, Mozaffar Khazaee stole materials from each of three defense contractors who employed him, including materials relating to the F35 Joint Strike Fighter. He attempted to illegally export a shipping container’s worth of those proprietary, export-controlled materials to Iran in order to gain employment there. After pleading guilty, he received 97 months in prison.

Although that sentence sends a strong message to any insider who would consider violating the trust of his or her employer, deterrence alone is not enough.

So what can you do to address this problem? Report incidents of suspected insider theft as soon as they are detected. Create detailed internal training and compliance programs designed to neutralize threats before they even occur, and provide evidence of willful or knowing conduct in the event an insider is not deterred.

Cyber-Enabled Export Violations

That helps with threats from within our perimeters. But unfortunately, we also face them from outside our borders. That is why another of our export control enforcement priorities is to combat cyber exfiltration of sensitive U.S. technologies, including ITAR-controlled technical data.

In the digital age, foreign nations and their agents can now steal information, including export-controlled technical data and technology, without setting foot on American soil. Left unchecked, cyber espionage can erode our strategic advantages across commercial and military spectrums.

When possible, we will use investigations, arrests and prosecutions, to disrupt efforts to steal from you and your clients. We will also look to use all other legally available tools to deter, like sanctions, designations, diplomacy and other tactics.

But your partnership is critical. You can harden your defenses, create resilient systems, evaluate your cyber hygiene and cooperate with law enforcement when your defenses simply aren’t enough.

That is why we at the National Security Division and others throughout the U.S. government, including the FBI, have made cooperation with the private sector a key component of our export control strategy.

Outreach

We work with U.S. companies, across all industry sectors, to ensure that our national security interests are protected. We have spent time and energy in face-to-face sit downs so that we may better understand the concerns and challenges faced by U.S. companies, share guidance and information, and be there to help with protection, detection, attribution and response. We can warn our companies that manufacture or sell targeted U.S. parts and technology when certain bad actors are seeking the particular parts and technology they make.

Corporate outreach helps sensitize industry to the threat and thereby maximizes the prevention of export control and sanctions violations. We believe that through such efforts we can help stem the flow of those sensitive goods out of the U.S. to malicious end-users that would use them to threaten our national security interests and the safety of our warfighters.

It’s likely that many of you here today have clients that we’ve already met with recently to discuss these types of issues. If you do not, we would certainly welcome the opportunity to do so in the future.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we recognize that our export control laws and sanctions regimes are complex and have a significant impact on the U.S. economy. But they are there to protect against the many threats we face.

And you play a critical role in that effort. You and your clients can successfully negotiate the current export control and sanctions regimes and help keep America safe.

Scrutinize closely each and every transaction undertaken with a foreign counterparty, whether a good or a financial transaction.

Make sure that you understand the relevant compliance and sanctions regimes and how they apply.

Make a voluntary self-disclosure to the National Security Division when you discover a willful violation of U.S. export control laws.

Develop robust training and compliance programs.

Focus not only on internal compliance, but on the threats posed by insiders and through cyberspace.

Harden your cyber defenses.

Develop a relationship with law enforcement, so that we may share valuable information with you to help you protect yourself, and be there to help you respond when your defense may simply not be enough.

Profits may be the lifeblood of our corporations, but cutting corners here in the interest of the bottom line, is potentially catastrophic. You and your clients risk enforcement actions, financial penalties and prison time. But perhaps more significantly, doing so can provide a dangerous capability to an adversary who wishes to bring about damage, destruction or death to many. So understanding and addressing how to comply with these regimes and neutralize these threats is not only the responsible thing to do, but the only thing to do.

The National Security Division will continue to approach export controls and sanctions with a broad and varied toolkit. We will continue to vigorously pursue and prosecute those who violate our nation’s export control laws, but that is not how we define success. Success is working with you to increase education and compliance and to prevent sensitive controlled technologies from falling into the wrong hands. We will combat threats posed by insiders and through cyberspace. And we will coordinate with our colleagues throughout the federal government to use an all tools approach – prosecution, listing, sanctions and other means of disruption – to combat national security threats.

With the careful calibration of these tools and with an eye toward mitigating vulnerabilities and defending against threats, we can protect the national security while simultaneously fostering economic growth and job creation.

Thank you for inviting me here this morning, and for your interest in these issues.

MIL Security OSI –
February 6, 2025

MIL-OSI Economics: IMF Executive Board Concludes 2024 Article IV Consultation with Chile

Source: International Monetary Fund

February 5, 2025

Executive Board Assessment

Table 1. Chile: Selected Economic Indicators, 2023-27

GDP (2023), in trillions of pesos	282		Quota
GDP (2023), in billions of U.S. dollars	336		in millions of SDRs		1,744
Per capita (2023), U.S. dollars	16,815		in % of total		0.37
Population (2023), in millions	19.96
Main products and exports	Copper
Key export markets	China, U.S., Euro area
			Proj.
	2023	2024	2025	2026	2027

Output	(Annual percentage change, unless otherwise specified)
Real GDP	0.2	2.2	2.2	2.3	2.3
Total domestic demand	-4.2	1.0	2.4	2.3	2.3
Consumption	-3.9	1.6	1.9	2.2	2.1
Fixed capital formation	-1.1	-1.0	4.3	3.4	3.7
Exports of goods and services	-0.3	5.5	4.3	4.7	3.9
Imports of goods and services	-12.0	1.2	4.4	4.3	3.2
Output gap (in percent)	0.0	-0.1	-0.1	0.0	0.0

Employment
Unemployment rate (in percent, annual average)	8.7	8.5	8.2	8.0	7.8

Prices
GDP deflator	6.6	6.0	4.1	2.9	2.7
Change of CPI (end of period)	3.9	4.5	3.5	3.0	3.0
Change of CPI (period average)	7.6	3.9	4.2	3.1	3.0

Public Sector Finances	(In percent of GDP, unless otherwise specified)
Central government revenue	22.9	22.1	23.0	23.8	23.9
Central government expenditure	25.3	24.8	24.8	24.7	24.3
Central government fiscal balance	-2.4	-2.7	-1.8	-0.8	-0.4
Central government structural fiscal balance 1/	-3.4	-3.1	-2.1	-1.2	-0.5
Central government gross debt	39.4	42.7	43.7	44.1	43.5
Public sector gross debt 2/	70.2	73.5	74.5	74.9	74.4

Balance of Payments
Current account balance (% of GDP) 3/	-3.5	-2.3	-2.5	-2.5	-2.7
Foreign direct investment net flows (% of GDP) 3/	-4.6	-4.0	-2.6	-2.9	-2.9
Gross external debt (% of GDP) 4/	71.1	77.5	76.5	76.6	75.7
Sources: Central Bank of Chile, Ministry of Finance, Haver Analytics, and IMF staff calculations and projections.
1/ The structural fiscal balance includes adjustments for output, copper prices, and lithium revenues based on IMF calculations. The lithium adjustment starts in 2022.
2/ Includes liabilities of the central government, the Central Bank of Chile and public enterprises. Excludes Recognition Bonds.
3/ Calculated as a share of US$ GDP.
4/ Data from Dipres for the government and from BCCh for all other sectors. Calculated as a share of US$ GDP.

[2] The Executive Board takes decisions under its lapse-of-time procedure when the Board agrees that a proposal can be considered without convening formal discussions.

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

PRESS OFFICER: Jose Luis De Haro

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

MIL OSI Economics –

February 6, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Bill Baer Delivers Remarks Highlighting Elder Justice at the State Of Financial Fraud in America Event
Source: United States Attorneys General 13

Remarks as prepared for delivery

Thank you Robert for that kind introduction and for your leadership and dedication as CEO of Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA). And thank you to the Stanford Center on Longevity and the FINRA Investor Education Foundation, for hosting this conference and for the great work that you do. It is an honor to join with the many people in this audience who dedicate their lives to combatting financial fraud and protecting elderly Americans. This is a noble and enduring effort.

As many people here know, financial fraud targeted at the elderly is a serious problem. At the beginning of 2011, the first Baby Boomers reached the age of 65. I reached that milestone myself just last year. Indeed, 10,000 Americans turn 65 every day, and the percentage of Americas over 65 is growing. 5.8 percent of this group experiences identity theft in a given year. I had that ugly experience just last month. 13.8 percent experiences consumer fraud in a given year. 4.5 percent of people over 50 experience financial fraud in a five-year period. While there are varying accounts about how much the overall financial loss is, it is well into the billions of dollars.

Statistics aside, we are here together because we know all too well that this is a problem that takes a personal toll. Almost all of us know someone who has been the victim of financial fraud. And while it affects people of all ages, it can be especially devastating for elderly people, many of whom are dependent on their savings and are concerned about their own mental decline or other people’s perception of their mental decline.

I recently saw letters written by the victims of a set of schemes that we took action against. One described having sent “hundreds of checks” for a company’s “great offers” and tried to explain to the fraudster that “due to bad eyes, [he] has to use magnifying glasses to read” and had “been caught paying many times for th[e] very same offer.” Another, believing that the con men would send him a promised gift, tried to explain that he had sent his prior payments by money order and was now enclosing cash, “all [he] can send.” Another explained that when she gets the vast inheritance she’d been promised, she would use it to help her family, the homeless and needy children.

The nature and scope of elder fraud varies tremendously. At the Department of Justice, we see small, family based schemes, such as caregivers tricking elderly victims out of their savings or abusing powers of attorney. We see institutional schemes, such as nursing homes that provide unnecessary services or bill for services never provided. And we see global fraud networks that are—quite literally—organized crime. These schemes involve networks of businesses with careful divisions of labor. They target millions of Americans, maintain lists of victims, and, once someone has been duped, target those people again and again. One recent victim wrote a letter explaining: “Each day I keep getting more and more offers and it’s almost impossible for me to keep up with them.”

Large and diverse problems like this require broad based solutions. We at the Department of Justice know we can’t solve this problem alone. Coordination is essential not only with our federal partners, but with local, state and international authorities. And public and private partnerships are key to our understanding of the scope of the problem and to the lasting success of any solution.

Research into basic questions, such as why are elderly people vulnerable, and how can we detect fraud and abuse, is critical to attacking the problem. The FINRA Foundation and Stanford Center on Longevity launched the Financial Fraud Research Center five years ago. As some of your ongoing research has demonstrated, there is a natural decline in cognition as people age, especially ability to think fast and process new information. The elderly are sometimes lonely or otherwise socially isolated. Some are uncomfortable with technology. Many have pools of relatively liquid retirement assets. Some are dependent on caregivers. All of these factors make the elderly particularly susceptible to certain schemes.

There is much more to learn. The Department of Justice has invested in partnerships to help us all better understand the causes and risk factors associated with elder financial exploitation. For example, just a few weeks ago, we announced an award of nearly $800,000 to the Urban Institute and the University of Southern California to develop and test prevention programs that will address elder abuse, neglect and financial exploitation. To enhance our understanding of financial exploitation by conservators and guardians, last year our Office for Victims of Crime funded a project to search for innovative, evidence-based programs and practices that successfully detect and remedy conservator fraud. And people like you are furthering our understanding. This conference is highlighting emerging research on susceptibility to fraud and fraud prevention.

Beyond efforts to understand how and why elder fraud occurs, continuing dedication to enforcement is required to stop it. This is not a partisan issue. We have seen Democratic and Republican administrations alike express a shared commitment to using all tools in the Department of Justice’s enforcement arsenal. Back in the 1990s, under Attorney General Reno, the Department of Justice created the Elder Justice Initiative to centralize information, facilitate training, and coordinate within the Department and across the federal government. During the Bush Administration, the Department of Justice initiated an elder mistreatment research grant program, funding cutting edge research on elder abuse and financial exploitation that continues today.

During this Administration, Congress created the Elder Justice Coordinating Council as part of the Affordable Care Act to facilitate interagency cooperation at the highest of levels. At the Department of Justice, we formed the Attorney General’s Advisory Committee’s Elder Justice Working Group, which is comprised of U.S. Attorneys from across the country who are dedicated to improving our information sharing on financial scams targeting the elderly. And just this year, we created ten regional Elder Justice Task Forces that operate throughout the country, partnering with state and local law enforcement and prosecutors to enhance our collective response to elder financial fraud and abuse.

Our Elder Justice Initiative has also been assisting with community capacity building. This includes supporting the training of local law enforcement and prosecutors. And to enhance civil legal aid to seniors, in June 2016, the Department of Justice, in collaboration with the Corporation for National and Community Service, launched the Elder Justice AmeriCorps, the first-ever army of lawyers and paralegals to help elderly victims of abuse and exploitation. The program will support 300 AmeriCorps members throughout the country and is expected to reach over 8,000 older adults over the next two years.

A multi-faceted problem requires coordination between different federal agencies; it demands a whole of government approach. Mail is involved; we must coordinate with the Postal Inspection Service. Money is involved; we must coordinate with the Treasury Department. People target the elderly; we must coordinate with agencies that serve the elderly, such as the Social Security Administration.

And more and more, we are seeing schemes that are highly complex and global. Stopping these schemes require extensive cooperation—not just with state and local authorities, but also across the federal government and with our international counterparts. For example, the Department of Justice’s Consumer Protection Branch co-chairs the International Mass-Marketing Fraud Working Group, a network of civil and criminal law enforcement agencies from Australia, Belgium, Canada, Europol, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom and the United States.

We can point to meaningful progress. In the past several years, we have successfully shut down several international lottery scams where con men and women have contacted elderly victims in the United States, told the victims they won cash and prizes, and persuaded them to send thousands of dollars in fees to release the money. Of course, the victims never received cash or prizes in return. In a series of cases, perpetrators made calls from Jamaica using Voice Over Internet Protocol technology that made it appear as if the calls were coming from the United States. They convinced victims to send money to middlemen in South Florida and North Carolina, who forwarded the money to Jamaica. We have had great success breaking up these networks through joint efforts between Jamaican law enforcement and U.S. agencies including the Postal Inspection Service, Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Marshals Service, Federal Trade Commission and Internal Revenue Service. Since 2009, the Department of Justice has prosecuted or is prosecuting over 100 individuals linked to such lottery schemes, and has convicted and sentenced over 40 defendants.

We have had similar success going after global “psychic schemes.” Con men and women send letters purportedly written by “world-renowned psychics” stating that they had a vision revealing that the recipient has the opportunity to obtain great wealth. The letters appear personalized, refer to the recipient by name, and often contain portions that appear handwritten. The solicitations urge victims to purchase products and services that will ensure this good fortune. Investigations by the Department of Justice and Postal Inspection Service, among others, revealed the complexity of these schemes. Not only were there the fraudsters themselves, but there were separate companies performing different roles, such as processing victim payments and maintaining databases of consumers who responded to solicitations. In a two-week period, one company in the United States processed as much as $500,000 in payments for just one psychic scheme. We have discovered similar companies in Quebec, Hong Kong, Switzerland and France.

Perhaps the most significant example of cooperation to date were our wide-ranging enforcement actions taken in September of this year to dismantle a global network of mass mailing schemes targeting elderly and vulnerable victims. The schemes involved a network with components in Canada, France, India, the Netherlands, Singapore, Switzerland, Turkey and the United States. The network included an India-based printer that manufactured solicitations and arranged for bulk shipment to U.S. victims; a mailer in Switzerland; list brokers in the United States who bought and sold lists of victims so that once victims had fallen prey, others could target them; a “caging” service in the Netherlands that collected money; and a Canadian payment processor that, for more than 20 years, helped dozens of international fraudsters gain access to U.S. banks and take money from Americans. Stopping this network involved coordination between the Department of Justice, Department of Treasury, Postal Inspection Service, Federal Trade Commission, Iowa Attorney General’s office and counterparts in other countries. Just to give you a sample of the coordinated actions, on Sept. 22, 2016:
- The Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control blocked assets from the Canadian payment processor and a network of individuals and entities across 18 countries.
- The Justice Department filed criminal charges and a civil injunction against a Turkish mass mailer.
- The Justice Department brought a series of civil actions to shut down companies based in the United States, India, Switzerland and Singapore. These companies were responsible for mailing millions of multi-piece solicitations to potential victims throughout the United States.
- The Justice Department entered into a consent decree with two Dutch “caging” businesses that collected and forward money. Our efforts were coordinated with Dutch authorities who executed search warrants on the businesses and took control of the Dutch post office boxes used to receive victims’ funds.
- The Federal Trade Commission filed a case against a related mass-mailer, printer, and list broker.
- The Iowa Attorney General negotiated a compliance agreement with two firms that brokered victim lists.
Of course, what matters even more than going after these schemes is preventing people from falling prey in the first place. Here too, federal agencies are working in cooperation and dedicated to the effort. The Department of Justice has distributed educational materials about these kinds of scams, the U.S. Postal Inspection Service has developed an electronic press kit for media outlets, my former colleagues at the Federal Trade Commission operate a “Pass It On” campaign that encourages people to share information about frauds that affect older Americans, the Social Security Administration is educating beneficiaries through its network of over 1,200 field offices nationwide, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has produced a mail fraud alert placemat in coordination with Meals on Wheels America to distribute to seniors nationwide. Similarly, private organizations that work in the area of elder justice and consumer protection are doing their part. For example, AARP will be posting information through its Fraud Watch Network. And the Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, is alerting consumers about a variety of elder scams.

Going forward, the Department of Justice will continue to work with private, local, state, federal and global partners. And we urge all of you to tell us where the Department can do more. The federal government’s work on behalf of the elderly began long before this Administration, and it will continue long after. I expect that my successors, and my successors’ successors, will share our commitment to making sure our parents, grandparents and friends age with grace and dignity. And I look forward to all of you, who have worked so hard in this area, working with the next Administration to combat financial fraud and protect elderly Americans. Thank you again for having me here today.

MIL Security OSI –
February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General Jesse Panuccio Delivers Remarks to the American Bar Association Section of Antitrust Law Fall Forum

Source: United States Attorneys General 13

Remarks as prepared for delivery

Good morning. Thank you, Jim, for that kind introduction, and special thanks to you and your co-chair of this Fall Forum, Debbie Feinstein, for inviting me. It is an honor to join the distinguished attorneys in attendance here.

As you just heard, the Office of the Associate Attorney General works closely with the Antitrust Division, and I’d like to begin by saying just a few words about the men and women who work there. The Division is led by a superlative team. Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim is an expert in the field and a tireless advocate for the American consumer. Andrew Finch, his principal deputy, draws on his broad private-sector antitrust experience to supervise all aspects of the Division’s civil and criminal matters. Barry Nigro, another deputy, is a walking encyclopedia of merger law and practice. And the many other front office appointees bring to the Division an incredible breadth and depth of knowledge and determination. Behind them, of course, stand the career lawyers, economists, and staff of the Antitrust Division who, as many of you know firsthand, are smart, resourceful, and tenacious in upholding the law and protecting competition for the benefit of the American economy. We appreciate their public service and hard work, and we are so fortunate that they have chosen to lend their expertise and talent to our shared mission at the Department of Justice.

Speaking of which, it is worth reciting the DOJ mission statement for those of you who have never heard it. It reads as follows: “To enforce the law and defend the interests of the United States according to the law; to ensure public safety against threats foreign and domestic; to provide federal leadership in preventing and controlling crime; to seek just punishment for those guilty of unlawful behavior; and to ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans.” Much of this mission statement is outward facing—we are the cops and we go after the robbers. But the first and last clauses of the mission statement require something more: we must “enforce the law” and “ensure fair and impartial administration of justice.” And if we are truly to “enforce the law” and fairly administer justice, we cannot be focused solely on how legal commands apply to those outside the Department. We must also focus on how the law constrains and cabins the Department—and the federal government as a whole.

This is a theme, and a tension, as old as our government itself. James Madison, famously lamenting in Federalist 51 that men are not angels and thus need a government, explained: “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” Our government is adept at creating rules to control the governed, but it sometimes fails to control itself. Over the last two years, some of our priorities at the Department have been aimed at this latter virtue—at controlling ourselves.

I would like to discuss one of those priorities today—namely, regulatory reform, which is an imperative need for an administrative state that has grown mightily over the last seventy-five years and in ways that Madison and his compatriots could have never imagined when they created the checks and balances they thought would oblige the government to control itself.

Early in 2017, the President issued several executive orders on regulatory reform. For example, Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to eliminate two regulations for each new one and to impose zero net regulatory costs. Executive Order 13777 directs agency heads to appoint Regulatory Reform Officers and Task Forces to implement regulatory reform initiatives and identify burdensome regulations for repeal, replacement, or modification. These are important measures. As Neomi Rao, Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), recently explained in a Washington Post editorial, lifting unduly burdensome regulations promotes economic growth and “the spirit of liberty that animates our productive and innovative society.”

Accordingly, at the Department of Justice, we take this regulatory reform mandate very seriously. While the Department does not generate the same volume of regulations as, say, the Environmental Protection Agency, we do have components that issue regulations, such as the Drug Enforcement Agency, which regulates doctors, pharmacies, and hospitals under the Controlled Substances Act; the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, which regulates the firearms and explosives industries; and the Civil Rights Division, which regulates state and local governments, public accommodations, and commercial facilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Each of these components is working to ensure that their regulatory agendas comply with the executive orders.

But, in my view, the Department’s most critical contribution to regulatory reform has not come by way of any particular substantive regulatory change, but rather through our focus on improving the regulatory process by promoting transparency, accountability, and public participation. Such procedural reforms can often outlive more newsworthy substantive changes to individual rules, and they can lead to better and less burdensome substantive decisionmaking.

One of the first areas of procedural reform we focused upon is reigning in the use of guidance documents. To understand why this is so important, let me first set the stage by returning to Federalist 51. There, Madison wrote that “[i]n republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” Accordingly, as Madison explained in Federalist 48, “it is against the enterprising ambition of this department that the people ought to indulge all their jealousy and exhaust all their precautions.” Acting on this belief, the Founders wrote a Constitution in which the first article (establishing Congress) is much more finely wrought than, and is more than double the length of, the second article (establishing the executive). The Founders viewed the legislative branch—with the power to make policy and thus restrict liberty—as the foremost danger among equals, and thus much more carefully cabined that branch through structural protections (or “precautions” as Madison called them in both Federalist 48 and 51).

But we twenty-first century Americans, for better or worse, live in the age of the administrative state, where most substantive rules that are binding on the People are created by Executive Branch agencies exercising rulemaking powers delegated by Congress. That means that the threat from the “enterprising ambition” that Madison feared now comes more often from the administrators than from the legislators. Accordingly, we also need procedural protections—“precautions,” as Madison called them—to cabin those ambitions.

We have some such protections in the form of the Administrative Procedure Act. When Congress delegates to an executive agency the authority to regulate—that is, to create binding rights and obligations for the public—the APA normally requires that such authority be exercised through notice-and-comment rulemaking. These rulemaking processes require a lot of input and serious deliberation; there are many steps, and they sometimes proceed slowly or not at all. They are designed this way, just like the Constitution is designed to require many steps for the enactment of statutes. Process protects liberty.

But regulators like to regulate, and everyone likes a shortcut. So it has come to pass that, with increasing frequency, administrative agencies, including the Department of Justice, issue so-called guidance documents that effectively bind the public. The guidance documents do not go through the notice-and-comment process required by the APA; indeed, they do not go through any transparent or regularized process at all. They just spring forth fully formed, and the public is expected to comply. Some commentators have begun to call such guidance, perhaps fairly, “regulatory dark matter.” The threat such a regime poses to our constitutional structure, and the liberty it protects, is manifest.

Accordingly, with this in mind, in November 2017, Attorney General Sessions signed a memorandum prohibiting the Department of Justice from issuing guidance documents that “impose new requirements on entities outside the Executive Branch.” The memorandum lays out five principles that must govern any future guidance, including that the document should disclaim any force or effect of law and “should not be used for the purpose of coercing persons or entities” to take or refrain from taking any actions beyond what is already required under the law.

A few months later, in January 2018, we took the next step to reign in inappropriate use of subregulatory guidance. The Associate Attorney General issued a new policy that prohibits the use of agency guidance documents in affirmative civil litigation in a manner that would convert such guidance into binding rules of conduct. This ensures that DOJ will not do with another agency’s guidance what it cannot do with its own under the Sessions Memo. As the memorandum explains: “That a party fails to comply with agency guidance expanding upon statutory or regulatory requirements does not mean that the party violated those underlying legal requirements; agency guidance documents cannot create any additional legal obligations.”

Now, I realize that I am at an antitrust, and not an administrative law, conference. So what does all of this mean for the Antitrust Division? Well, the Division, often in conjunction with the Federal Trade Commission, has issued numerous guidance documents, including, for example, intellectual property guidelines and, of course, the horizontal merger guidelines. Under our view, none of these guidelines create binding rights or rules that have the force of law. The guidelines can be useful in ensuring transparency by explaining how the Antitrust Division uses its prosecutorial discretion. But the Antitrust Division will not treat a violation of the guidelines as presumptively or conclusively establishing a violation of the underlying legal requirements. The Division must bring cases in court if it seeks to assert that a violation of the law has occurred, and it must prove such a violation by reference to statutory law and judicial precedent.

With that, let me turn from the dark matter of guidance documents to another particle in the regulatory cosmos, but one that is even less visible: the consent decree.

A consent decree is a binding court judgment, and it can serve an important function in a range of cases and enforcement areas. But some consent decree are voluminous in their requirements and have virtually perpetual life. They are, in effect, a set of regulations for a single party, overseen by the Department of Justice, a federal judge, and, quite often, a private-party monitor appointed by the court. In practice, consent decrees can result in one or all of these entities directing the day-to-day operations of a business or local government agency for years on end. As should be obvious from the description, such a regime can be as intrusive as—if not more intrusive than—a regulation.

Thirty years ago, Assistant Attorney General Rick Rule, whom many of you know, gave a speech about telecommunications policy to the Brookings Institution. He noted that the Reagan Administration’s best known accomplishment in antitrust law was the breakup of AT&T.   The ongoing monitoring required under the AT&T consent decree, however, created, in his words, a “mixed legacy” because of the institutional harms flowing from requiring the Antitrust Division and a federal court to be, in effect, telecommunications regulators. Federal courts and the Antitrust Division, Rule said, “inherently lack many of the resources crucial to successful regulation.” He explained that effective regulation requires technical expertise, regulatory experience, and administrative processes that federal courts and federal prosecutors simply lack.

That is one problem, but it is not the only problem. Some consent decrees stray not only beyond the practical resources and expertise of the enforcers, but also beyond the legal authority of what the government could do by other means. Imposing conditions that could not be obtained through litigation to judgment is similar to creating regulations beyond the bounds of law. And just because a court imposes such a decree does not make it appropriate or wise. Courts, like executive branch agencies, can exceed their powers and distort constitutional norms. As with our commitment to abstaining from regulation through guidance, the Department of Justice must take care to avoid going beyond our lawful authority through the entry of consent decrees.

Accordingly, while consent decrees can be necessary and appropriate in certain circumstances, we are requiring Department litigators in all components to proceed with due caution and care before entering into new cosent decrees. Effective consent decree management is a key part of our regulatory reform and good government efforts.

And, as with our other efforts, the Antitrust Division has been doing its part. For example, last year, at this every forum, Assistant Attorney General Delrahim gave a speech on antitrust and deregulation. He made the case that a behavioral consent decree substitutes regulation for competition. He also announced that the Antitrust Division would disfavor behavioral consent decrees, calling them “the wolf of regulation dressed in . . . sheep’s clothing.”   Indeed. The notion that the Department of Justice can fine-tune the operations of large businesses, for years on end, to prevent competitive harm is simply untenable from a first principles standpoint and unwarranted from a pro-competitive and pro-liberty standpoint.

Avoiding behavioral consent decrees is not the only step that the Antitrust Division is taking in this area. Earlier this year, the Division launched its Judgment Termination Initiative, through which the Division is identifying and terminating legacy consent decrees that no longer protect competition. To understand why this is important, it is helpful to turn again to something Administrator Rao explained earlier this year. She described the problem of “cumulative regulations.”   When the government is always adding regulations but never repealing old ones, regulatory accretion occurs—the regulatory text expands and expands, with some regulations serving no purpose and others affirmatively harming economic growth and American competitiveness.

Consent decrees can suffer from the same infirmity. Indeed, from the first cases brought under the Sherman Act until 1979, antitrust consent decrees were perpetual. In that year, the Division changed its policy such that future settlements would have “sunset” provisions that would automatically terminate a decree on a date certain, usually after ten years. But while the Division recognized forty years ago that perpetual decrees were not in the public interest, there has been no effort to address the perpetual decrees that were entered prior to that date.

Until now. Assistant Attorney General Delrahim and his team deserve great credit for tackling this issue. And there is a lot of work to do. There are nearly 1,300 legacy judgments still on the books, including some decrees that are more than one hundred years old. There is, for example, a decree from 1914 concerning rubber hoof pads for horseshoes. Another one from 1921 relates to music rolls for player pianos. And yet another, my personal favorite, controls the market for horse-buggy whips. This state of affairs, my friends, is not good government. This is not prudent and careful regulatory action. This is ancient, cosmic junk unnecessarily floating around the regulatory atmosphere.

These outdated decrees pose a particular problem given the common-law nature of the antitrust laws, the construction of which evolve through judicial decisionmaking closely informed by economic analysis. Under the Sherman Act, only unreasonable—which is to say anticompetitive—restraints of trade are condemned. Courts look to economic analysis to understand what is unreasonable. And as economic analysis has matured and been refined over decades, courts have recognized that certain practices, once condemned, are not only not harmful to competition, but can even be procompetitive.

The Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in the Leegin case provides one example of such a change.   In that case, the Court overturned a nearly century-old per se prohibition on resale price maintenance.   It recognized that resale price maintenance can help stimulate interbrand competition. The antitrust laws are designed to protect just such competition because it is output enhancing. By contrast, intrabrand competition, such as when independent retailers engage in a price war to undersell a product from the same manufacturer, is not output enhancing.

Yet a perpetual consent decree related to resale price maintenance entered any year between 1911 and 1979 would have frozen the old prohibition in place. Such an ongoing, indefinite prohibition against lawful behavior does not serve to protect competition or to advance the rule of law. Indeed, it affirmatively undermines both.

Perpetual consent decrees rarely continue to protect competition, and those that are more than ten years old should be terminated absent compelling circumstances. To expedite the termination of outdated consent decrees, the Antitrust Division has engaged in a comprehensive effort to review all of its legacy judgments. Each judgment was assigned to a Division attorney, who examined court papers, internal case files, and publicly available information to determine whether the judgment continued to serve competition. Judgments for which termination is recommended are then posted, by judicial district, to the Division’s website for a thirty-day public comment period.

The judgments in sixty of seventy-nine judicial districts have been posted to the Division’s website for public comment. Once the thirty-day public comment period closes for a particular judicial district, the Division will review any comments received and, if appropriate, prepare a motion to terminate the judgments.

Already, in July, the Division moved to terminate nineteen legacy judgments in the District Court here in the District of Columbia. And the court granted that motion on August 15. The Division is actively working to prepare other motions in other districts.

The Division will move to terminate such decrees where the essential terms of the judgment have been satisfied, where most defendants no longer exist, where the judgment largely prohibits that which the antitrust laws already prohibit, or where market conditions likely have changed. Of course, as with the Leegin example, the Division will also seek to terminate decrees for which the relevant antitrust jurisprudence has changed and the conduct prohibited might actually be procompetitive.

I know that the Judgment Termination Initiative is a top priority for AAG Delrahim and the Division. I applaud the hard work that has gone into this effort already and the commitment of the Division to see it through.

With that, let me close by saying thank you, again, for the opportunity to be here. We are hard at work at the Department of Justice, including at the Antitrust Division, in our efforts to enforce the law and fairly administer justice. As I have stated, that includes applying the limits of the law to ourselves, or, as Madison put it, to controlling ourselves. We will continue to advance this cause, and we hope it makes a difference in helping the American people and economy flourish. Thank you very much.

MIL Security OSI –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Security: Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim Remarks at the American Bar Association Antitrust Section Fall Forum

Source: United States Attorneys General 13

“November Rain”: Antitrust Enforcement on Behalf of American Consumers and Taxpayers

Good morning, and thank you for the kind introduction. I’d like to thank the American Bar Association for your invitation to this year’s Fall Forum and Deb Garza for her leadership of the Section this year.

I find it hard to believe it’s been only a little more than a year since I was confirmed as AAG and spoke at last year’s Fall Forum. Over the past year, the Antitrust Division has been hard at work on behalf of American consumers. We made a number of significant enforcement actions this week, but before I turn to those, I’d like to update you on a few recent changes in the Front Office.

First, Michael Murray recently joined us from the Deputy Attorney General’s office, where he served as Associate Deputy Attorney General. Mike now will be a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Front Office, where he will be overseeing our Appellate Section and our 4A damage actions on behalf of the American taxpayer. Mike has significant appellate experience, including as a law clerk for Justice Anthony Kennedy.

In addition, our new acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General for Economics is Jeff Wilder. Jeff received his Ph.D. from MIT and has distinguished himself as an outstanding economist serving as one of the leaders in the Division’s Economic Analysis Group, and we’re happy to have him join us in the Front Office.

Some of you may remember that at last year’s Fall Forum, I spoke about antitrust and deregulation. In those remarks, I focused on remedies, including our preference for structural remedies and our emphasis on making consent decrees more enforceable. I also discussed our commitment to the view that antitrust enforcement is law enforcement, not industrial regulation, and that the Antitrust Division should strive to accomplish its law enforcement mission in the most efficient and effective way possible. The Division has stood by those principles.

More recently, in a speech at Georgetown, I announced several improvements to the merger review process. We are making good on those changes as well. Today, we posted a model timing agreement and a model voluntary request letter on our website. Those documents increase transparency and predictability and will help merging businesses and their counsel know what to expect as part of the merger review process. We’ve also begun tracking the duration of merger reviews more carefully, so that we can monitor our performance and factors affecting it. You will recall our goal is to resolve investigations within six months of filing, provided that the parties cooperate and comply with our document and data requests during the entire process.

I would like to focus the remainder of my remarks today on four important settlements in the last week that reflect the Antitrust Division’s commitment to vigilant and effective antitrust enforcement.

As some of you may have seen, the Division announced just yesterday a set of global settlements with three South Korean companies. Those unprecedented settlements resolve criminal charges and civil claims arising from a bid-rigging conspiracy that targeted fuel supply contracts to U.S. military bases in South Korea. They are the result of tremendous hard work in parallel criminal and civil investigations by the Antitrust Division’s Washington Criminal I Section, the Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture Section, and the Fraud Section of the Civil Division. We were assisted ably by our partners at the FBI and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service.

The United States currently maintains numerous military bases in South Korea, housing American soldiers, marines, airmen, and sailors in the region. These military bases need fuel for various purposes, and two Department of Defense agencies, the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) and Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES), contract with South Korean companies to supply fuel to the numerous U.S. military bases throughout South Korea.

Our investigation, which is ongoing, revealed that SK Energy, GS Caltex, Hanjin Transportation, along with other co-conspirators, rigged bids and fixed prices for fuel supply contracts issued by the U.S. military in South Korea for over a decade. They cheated the Military and American taxpayers out of precious limited resources. As a result of the conspiracy, the Department of Defense paid substantially more for fuel supply services. Although the immediate victim here was the U.S. military, the American taxpayer, you and me, ultimately footed the bill.

The three companies agreed yesterday to plead guilty to criminal charges under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and they will pay at least $82 million in criminal fines for their involvement in the conspiracy. Importantly, the three defendants have also agreed to cooperate with the ongoing criminal investigation of the conduct.

Robert Jackson, who is one of my legal heroes, recognized that bid rigging is particularly harmful to government purchasers. When he served as Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Antitrust Division, Jackson broadly denounced arrangements that “compel purchasers to pay a price based on calculation, not competition,” and specifically emphasized that “[w]hatever the effect of this on private buyers, it completely destroys the mechanism set up by federal, state, and municipal governments to keep favoritism and corruption out of public buying.”

The harm Jackson recognized still exists today, and these settlements serve as an important reminder that the Justice Department and its law enforcement partners will investigate aggressively and prosecute without hesitation companies who cheat the United States government and the American taxpayer.

We did not stop there. We are committed to using all authorities Congress has granted to us to remedy antitrust injuries to the American taxpayer. Those tools include the authority conferred in Section 4A of the Clayton Act. Section 4A is an important but underused enforcement tool that allows the government to recover treble damages for antitrust violations when the government itself is the victim.

To that end, the Division established a parallel civil enforcement team, led by Kathy O’Neill and a group of capable litigators from the Transportation, Energy, and Agriculture Section to pursue parallel civil actions for damages. We negotiated separate civil resolutions with each of the three defendants on behalf of American taxpayers. We also worked alongside our partners in the Civil Division’s Fraud Section, who pursued charges against the defendants under the False Claims Act for making false statements to the government in connection with their conspiracy.

To resolve both the civil antitrust and the False Claims Act violations, these three defendants have agreed to pay an additional $154 million in total. They also have agreed to cooperate fully with the Division’s ongoing civil investigation and to implement effective antitrust compliance programs.

These historic cases mark the first significant settlements under Section 4A in many years. In fact, as far as we can tell based on our records, they are the largest settlements the government has ever recovered since the enactment of Section 4A.

Let me take a step back to review the history of Section 4A.

When Congress enacted the Sherman Act in 1890 and the Clayton Act in 1914, neither statute contained a provision specifically allowing the government to recover damages it suffered as a result of an antitrust violation. In 1939, the United States, led by Assistant Attorney General Thurman Arnold, brought its first-ever antitrust suit for damages on its own behalf.   The government claimed authority to do so under Section 7 of the Sherman Act, which was the predecessor of Section 4 of the Clayton Act. As most of you know, Section 4 permits “any person” injured by an antitrust violation to recover the damages they suffered.

In that pioneering case, United States v. Cooper, the government alleged that eighteen defendants had “collusively fixed” bids that were “identical to the penny on eighty-two different sizes of tires” sold to the United States. The defendants successfully moved to dismiss the action on the question of whether the government is a “person” entitled to bring an action for damages under the statute. The Second Circuit affirmed, and the Supreme Court ultimately held that the United States is not a “person” entitled to sue.

In 1955, Congress amended the Clayton Act in response to the Court’s ruling in Cooper by adding Section 4A. As originally enacted, Section 4A allowed the government to recover only single damages, so that the government could recover damages where it was the victim of an antitrust violation.

At first, the Division used Section 4A aggressively, filing numerous cases for damages throughout the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1980s, however, the government brought only four cases under Section 4A—a remarkable decline from the prior two decades. Some attributed this drop, in part, to the Supreme Court’s Illinois Brick decision in 1978, because many of the cases brought in the ‘60s and ‘70s involved claims by the United States as an indirect purchaser. The government, however, increasingly purchases goods and services directly.

The next milestone came in 1990, when Congress amended the Clayton Act again to allow the government to seek treble damages in Section 4A cases.

Since 1990, a span of nearly thirty years, only three Section 4A cases have been filed. In 1991, the Division recovered $250,000 from two companies for rigging bids to purchase surplus gunpowder. In 1994, the Division filed suit against two defense contractors for entering into a “teaming” arrangement that eliminated competition in supplying the Department of Defense with cluster bombs. In that case, the Division recovered $4 million on behalf of American taxpayers and obtained an $8 million discount on the bid price. In 2012, the Division challenged collusion between two companies bidding on four natural gas leases at auctions run by the Bureau of Land Management. The Division recovered $275,000 from each company.

The American Taxpayer deserves to see a revitalization of the government’s Section 4A authority. This week’s settlements are only the first in that direction. Going forward, the Division will exercise 4A authority to seek compensation for taxpayers when the government has been the victim of an antitrust violation. We hope that these efforts will also deter future violations.

In light of our policy of seeking damages under Section 4A where available, I would like to address how parallel criminal and civil enforcement will proceed going forward.

First, the Division’s new focus on Section 4A enforcement will not require any changes to the Division’s leniency policy. The Division offers strong incentives to come forward to report criminal antitrust violations in exchange for leniency, and those incentives do not change when the government is harmed by the violation.

The Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act of 2004, better known as ACPERA, created another valuable incentive for leniency applications. Under ACPERA’s detrebling provision, those who successfully qualify for leniency will be subject only to single damages in follow-on civil suits, rather than treble damages. In addition, those who successfully qualify for leniency are not subject to joint and several liability.

This detrebling incentive will apply to any Section 4A claims brought by the government. We will also follow the underlying requirements for ACPERA in Section 4A cases: companies will need to cooperate with the civil team, as they would with any private plaintiff, in order to reap the detrebling benefits.

The bottom line is that the Division’s enforcement of Section 4A will increase the incentive for co-conspirators in cartel cases to come forward.

Separately, I should note that global resolutions like the ones announced yesterday should serve the interests of the parties as well. Cooperating companies subject to penalties under multiple statutes can gain certainty and finality. Employees, customers, and investors can resolve the problem and move on. This is consistent with the Department’s broader policies on coordination of corporate penalties.

Next, as we pursue Section 4A damages going forward, global resolutions of criminal and civil antitrust liability will help maintain a consistent policy on how to calculate civil damages. Yesterday’s settlements underscore this point. They provide that SK Energy, GS Caltex, and Hanjin each will pay an amount calculated to exceed the overcharge paid by the government. At the same time, the amount reflects both the value of the cooperation commitments each defendant made as a condition of settlement and the cost savings the Division realized by avoiding extended litigation.

As a general matter, if the government is required to litigate claims it brings under Section 4A, the government will seek treble damages. In addition, we anticipate that earlier cooperators will benefit by paying a lower multiple of damages, because the value of their cooperation is higher earlier in our investigation.

I will turn now to another significant settlement the Division filed this week, one which resolves a complaint against six broadcast television companies alleging that they engaged in widespread, unlawful sharing of non-public, competitively sensitive information. Along with the complaint, the Division filed proposed final judgments requiring the companies to cease such conduct and to undergo rigorous compliance and reporting measures for the next seven years.

We uncovered this conduct during our investigation into Sinclair Broadcasting Group’s proposed acquisition of Tribune Media Company, which has since been abandoned.

As we allege in the complaint, the defendants agreed in local broadcasting markets throughout the United States to exchange revenue pacing information and other competitively sensitive information. “Pacing” compares a broadcast station’s revenues booked for a certain time period to the revenues booked in the same point in the previous year. Pacing indicates how each station is performing versus the rest of the market and provides insight into each station’s remaining spot advertising for the period.

We discovered that the defendants had been exchanging pacing information either directly between stations or corporate headquarters, or indirectly through national representatives that help local stations sell advertisements to national advertisers. By exchanging this information, the broadcasters were better able to anticipate whether their competitors were likely to raise, maintain, or lower spot advertising prices, which in turn helped inform the stations’ own pricing strategies and negotiations with advertisers. As a result, the information exchanges harmed the competitive price-setting process.

We have not heard any legitimate pro-competitive justification for this conduct. We are therefore pleased that these companies recognized that a protracted investigation and litigation would serve no purpose, and we welcome their cooperation as our investigation continues. We also want to remind businesses, as well as the antitrust practitioners that advise them, that agreements between competitors to exchange competitively sensitive information can violate the antitrust laws and lead to a civil enforcement action even if the conduct does not amount to the type of hard core cartel conduct that the Antitrust Division prosecutes criminally.

Finally, this morning we announced the third significant enforcement resolution this week—a settlement with Atrium Health, formerly known as Carolinas Healthcare System. We were joined in the settlement by the North Carolina Attorney General’s Office, and we thank them for their partnership in this action. The settlement resolves over two years of civil antitrust litigation challenging the hospital system’s use of anticompetitive steering restrictions in its contracts with major health insurers. These steering restrictions prevented health insurers from promoting innovative health plans and more cost-effective healthcare providers.

Atrium is the dominant hospital system in the Charlotte, North Carolina metropolitan area. It used its market power to limit major health insurers’ ability to introduce plans designed to encourage consumers to choose cost-effective healthcare providers. Specifically, Atrium would agree to participate in a broad network plan only if the insurer would commit not to introduce other plans that would steer patients away from Atrium. The steering restrictions also deliberately constrained insurers from providing consumers with transparency into the comparative cost and quality of their healthcare alternatives.

Because the steering restrictions were in place, insurers could not introduce more innovative health insurance plans that create financial incentives for patients to use lower-cost healthcare services. Needless to say, competition for patients encourages healthcare providers to reduce costs, lower prices, and increase quality. These steering restrictions inhibited competition among healthcare providers to provide higher quality, lower-cost services.

The resolution prevents Atrium from enforcing the steering restrictions in its contracts with major health insurers. If approved by the Court, it will restore competition between healthcare providers in Charlotte, North Carolina.

I would like to make a broader point about the Division’s settlements this week. The consent decrees in all three cases, like all other decrees the Division has entered into the past 13 months, include specific new provisions designed to improve their enforceability.

These provisions (i) address the burden of proof in a civil contempt action by providing that the preponderance standard will apply; (ii) make defendants responsible for reimbursing the government for all costs it incurs in connection with enforcing the decree; (iii) allow the United States to seek a one-time extension of the term of the decree in the event of a violation, or to terminate the decree early if continuation is no longer necessary or in the public interest. Another provision addresses interpretation of the decree by stating that courts can enforce any provisions that are stated specifically and in reasonable detail, whether or not they are clear and unambiguous on their face.

The Division serves as a guardian of American consumers, and we act in the public’s trust. When the Division enters into a consent decree to resolve charges of anticompetitive conduct, we will hold parties’ feet to the fire and enforce the decrees.

Finally, last Friday, three defendants pled guilty to conspiring to rig bids and allocate the market in auctions of foreclosed properties in Palm Beach County, Florida. This case is unlike the Division’s prior foreclosure auction prosecutions because the auction occurred online rather than in-person, and the collusion occurred primarily by text message rather than in-person. It is a good illustration of the fact that while defendants may use new platforms and technologies to commit antitrust crimes, the Division too is evolving and stands ready to prosecute these crimes in the digital age.

The conspiracy took place in the aftermath of the financial crisis, which affected the housing market nationwide and the Florida real estate market in particular. Defendants and their affiliated business entities were the largest buyers of foreclosed properties in Palm Beach County. Together, the commerce affected by the defendants’ collusion was $25 million.

The Division began an investigation into possible collusion in online foreclosure auctions in Palm Beach County, Florida after receiving an anonymous citizen complaint that included a link to a YouTube video detailing the collusion.

Co-conspirators texted each other to coordinate their bidding and facilitate the conspiracy to obtain foreclosed homes at suppressed prices. Most commonly, bidders would agree to stop bidding or to refrain from bidding at their co-conspirators’ request. In some instances, they lowered bids for each other’s benefit.

After learning of the investigation, one of the defendants used and encouraged other co-conspirators to use a text messaging application to continue colluding. He believed that law enforcement would be unable to read or trace any messages sent through the application.

The three defendants were indicted by a grand jury in November 2017. Since then, all three have pleaded guilty.

I will conclude by taking this opportunity to highlight the outstanding attorneys and economists at the Antitrust Division. They are the core of executing the Division’s mission and work tirelessly in their commitment to protect competition and consumers.

It has been a busy year at the Antitrust Division. We have been working hard on behalf of America’s consumers and taxpayers, and look forward to continuing our efforts on their behalf in the year to come.

Thank you.

MIL Security OSI –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Asia-Pac: US additional duty rejected

Source: Hong Kong Information Services

The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government today expressed strong disapproval of the imposition of additional 10% duty on Hong Kong products set out in the Federal Register notice of the US Customs & Border Protection and the Department of Homeland Security, and the temporary suspension of inbound postal items containing goods from Hongkong Post by the US Postal Service.

The Hong Kong SAR Government said the US’ imposition of additional duty on Hong Kong products ignores the basic fact that Hong Kong is a separate customs territory, which is recognised by the World Trade Organization (WTO) and clearly stipulated in the Basic Law Article 116.

It highlighted that Hong Kong has been a staunch supporter of rule-based multilateral trading system, maintaining constructive and mutually beneficial trade relations with trading partners all over the world, including the US.

As a founding member of the WTO, the Hong Kong SAR has all along been upholding the principle of free and unimpeded trade. The Hong Kong SAR Government strongly opposes any attempts to undermine the city’s reputation and erode its status as a separate customs territory.

The Hong Kong SAR Government urged the US to take urgent action to rectify the notice as well as lift the suspension of accepting inbound postal items containing goods from Hongkong Post as a matter of priority.

It emphasised that if the US does not rectify its wrongdoing, the Hong Kong SAR Government will take all possible actions to defend the city’s legitimate interests, including considering taking up the matter in the WTO.

MIL OSI Asia Pacific News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI: Double Your Deposit and Get $50 Bonus with 100x Leverage Crypto Trading at BexBack – No KYC!

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

SINGAPORE, Feb. 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — With the price of bitcoin once again trading below $100,000, many analysts believe it will enter a long period of high volatility. Holding spot positions may not continue to generate profits in the short term. BexBack Exchange is stepping up its efforts to provide traders with irresistible preferential packages. The platform now offers a 100% deposit bonus, a $50 welcome bonus for new users, and a 100x leverage on cryptocurrency trading, creating unparalleled opportunities for investors.

What Is 100x Leverage and How Does It Work?

Simply put, 100x leverage allows you to open larger trading positions with less capital. For example:

Suppose the Bitcoin price is $100,000 that day, and you open a long contract with 1 BTC. After using 100x leverage, the transaction amount is equivalent to 100 BTC.

One day later, if the price rises to $105,000, your profit will be (105,000 – 100,000) * 100 BTC / 100,000 = 5 BTC, a yield of up to 500%.

With BexBack’s deposit bonus

BexBack offers a 100% deposit bonus. If the initial investment is 2 BTC, the profit will increase to 10 BTC, and the return on investment will double to 1000%.

Note: Although leveraged trading can magnify profits, you also need to be wary of liquidation risks.

How Does the 100% Deposit Bonus Work?
The deposit bonus from BexBack cannot be directly withdrawn but can be used to open larger positions and increase potential profits. Additionally, during significant market fluctuations, the bonus can serve as extra margin, effectively reducing the risk of liquidation.

About BexBack?

BexBack is a leading cryptocurrency derivatives platform that offers 100x leverage on BTC, ETH, ADA, SOL, and XRP futures contracts. It is headquartered in Singapore with offices in Hong Kong, Japan, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Argentina. It holds a US MSB (Money Services Business) license and is trusted by more than 500,000 traders worldwide. Accepts users from the United States, Canada, and Europe. There are no deposit fees, and traders can get the most thoughtful service, including 24/7 customer support.

Why recommend BexBack?

No KYC Required: Start trading immediately without complex identity verification.

100% Deposit Bonus: Double your funds, double your profits.

High-Leverage Trading: Offers up to 100x leverage, maximizing investors’ capital efficiency.

Demo Account: Comes with 10 BTC in virtual funds, ideal for beginners to practice risk-free trading.

Comprehensive Trading Options: Feature-rich trading available via Web and mobile applications.

Convenient Operation: No slippage, no spread, and fast, precise trade execution.

Global User Support: Enjoy 24/7 customer service, no matter where you are.

Lucrative Affiliate Rewards: Earn up to 50% commission, perfect for promoters.

Take Action Now—Don’t Miss Another Opportunity!

If you missed the previous crypto bull run, this could be your chance. With BexBack’s 100x leverage and 100% deposit bonus and $50 bonus for new users (complete one trade within one week of registration), you can be a winner in the new bull run.

Sign up on BexBack now, claim your exclusive bonus and start accumulating more BTC today!

Website: www.bexback.com

Contact: business@bexback.com

Contact:
Amanda
business@bexback.com

Disclaimer: This content is provided by BexBack. The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the content provider. The information provided in this press release is not a solicitation for investment, nor is it intended as investment advice, financial advice, or trading advice. It is strongly recommended you practice due diligence, including consultation with a professional financial advisor, before investing in or trading cryptocurrency and securities. Please conduct your own research and invest at your own risk.

Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:

https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/2d7570e1-dd49-41f2-bb56-fdde6bb57717

https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b704fe83-5d72-424f-8e4d-faedb85932fd

https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b1489dbf-1cba-4388-8bb7-dd56cd0dd96f

https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/3653b677-5659-44e3-b40f-346380acd8ca

The MIL Network –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI: Zero Hash expands stablecoin offerings with addition of Ripple USD (RLUSD)
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

CHICAGO, Feb. 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Zero Hash, the leading crypto and stablecoin infrastructure platform, today announced it has expanded its stablecoin support by integrating Ripple USD (RLUSD), a new regulated stablecoin issued by Ripple. This integration allows Zero Hash customers to access RLUSD on both the XRP Ledger and Ethereum networks.

Zero Hash’s API and SDK infrastructure now supports over 65 digital assets, including 5 stablecoins, across multiple chains, reinforcing its position as the comprehensive solution for platforms seeking to design and build new ways to store, exchange and move value globally. RLUSD is now part of Zero Hash’s stablecoin engine, powering leading FinTechs and start ups across:
- Payments
  - Remittances
  - Payins
  - Payouts
  - Account Funding
  - Tokenization payment rails
  - AI agent payments
- Trading
  - Swaps
  - Onramp / offramp
  - Custody
  - Deposits and withdrawals
- Treasury
“The addition of RLUSD to our ecosystem demonstrates Zero Hash’s commitment to providing our customers with access to the most innovative and regulated stablecoin technologies,” said Edward Woodford, Founder and CEO at Zero Hash. “Zero Hash now offers RLUSD to all partners who can seamlessly embed through our API and SDK. Zero Hash offers the tech stack that powers use cases spanning payouts including Stripe, on-ramping including Shift4 and tokenization payment rails including Franklin Templeton.”

RLUSD is designed to meet the growing demand for a reliable, compliant stablecoin in the digital asset space. Key features¹ of RLUSD include: (i) One-to-one backing with US dollars held in reserve; (ii) issuance by a New York State-regulated trust company; (iii) Monthly reserve attestations by an independent certified public accountant; and, (iv) native issuance on both the XRP Ledger and Ethereum networks.

¹Ripple USD

About Zero Hash

Zero Hash is the leading crypto and stablecoin infrastructure provider that seamlessly connects fiat, crypto and stablecoins in one platform, enabling a better way to move and transfer value globally.

Through its embeddable infrastructure, start-ups, enterprises and Fortune 500 companies build a diverse range of use cases: cross-border payments, commerce, trading, remittance, payroll, tokenization, wallets and on and off-ramps.

Zero Hash Holdings is backed by investors, including Point72 Ventures, Bain Capital Ventures, and NYCA.

Zero Hash LLC is a FinCen-registered Money Service Business and a regulated Money Transmitter that can operate in 51 US jurisdictions. Zero Hash LLC and Zero Hash Liquidity Services LLC are licensed to engage in virtual currency business activity by the New York State Department of Financial Services. In Canada, Zero Hash LLC is registered as a Money Service Business with FINTRAC.

Zero Hash Australia Pty Ltd. is registered with AUSTRAC as a Digital Currency Exchange Provider, with DCE registered provider number DCE100804170-001. This registration enables Zero Hash to offer its crypto services in Australia. Zero Hash Australia Pty Ltd. is registered on the New Zealand register of financial service providers, with Financial Service Provider (FSP) number FSP1004503. A FSP in New Zealand is a registration and does not mean that Zero Hash Australia Pty Ltd. is licensed by a New Zealand regulator to provide crypto services. Zero Hash Australia Pty Ltd.’s registration on the New Zealand register of financial service providers does not mean that Zero Hash Australia is subject to active regulation or oversight by a New Zealand regulator. Zero Hash Europe B.V. is registered as a Virtual Asset Services Provider (VASP) registration by the Dutch Central Bank (Relation number: R193684). Zero Hash Europe Sp. Zoo is registered as a VASP by the Tax Administration Chamber of Poland in Katowice (Registration number RDWW – 1212).

Connect with Zero Hash

Website | Twitter | LinkedIn | Medium

Zero Hash Contact
Shaun O’keeffe
(855) 744-7333
media@zerohash.com

Zero Hash Disclosures

Zero Hash services and product offerings, including the availability of certain chains/networks for supported stabletoken and crypto assets, may not be available in all jurisdictions. Zero Hash accounts are not subject to FDIC or SIPC protections, or any such equivalent protections that may exist outside of the US. Zero Hash’s technical support and enablement of any asset is not an endorsement of such asset and is not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any crypto asset. The value of any cryptocurrency, including digital assets pegged to fiat currency, commodities, or any other asset, may go to zero. Zero Hash is not registered with the SEC or FINRA. Zero Hash does not provide any securities services and is not a custodian of securities, including security tokens, on behalf of customers.

The MIL Network –
February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI Canada: Prime Minister announces Canada-U.S. Economic Summit
Source: Government of Canada – Prime Minister

While the tariffs proposed by the United States have been paused for 30 days, this is an important opportunity to build a long-term prosperity agenda for Canada. One that is resilient, that breaks down barriers between provinces and territories, and that is diversified in global trade.

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced the Canada-U.S. Economic Summit, a landmark event hosted with members of the Council on Canada-U.S. Relations to galvanize business and investment across Canada. The Summit will take place in Toronto, Ontario, on February 7, 2025.

The Canada-U.S. Economic Summit will build on the work of the Prime Minister’s Council on Canada-U.S. Relations and bring together Canadian leaders in trade, business, public policy, and organized labour. Using their sectoral expertise, the leaders will explore ways to grow Canada’s economy, make it easier to build and trade within the country, diversify export markets, and rejuvenate productivity. The Summit will see increased co-ordination, co-operation, and interoperability between partners, including through issue- and sector-specific conversations.

Canada is the ninth-largest economy in the world. We have world-class talent, critical minerals, natural resources, a dynamic tech ecosystem, and an ambition to grow. The Canada-U.S. Economic Summit is our ambition in action – the next stride in fully unlocking our economic growth.

The Canadian government, Canadian businesses, Canadian organized labour, Canadian civil society, and tens of millions of Canadians from coast to coast to coast are aligned and united with the same mission – building a stronger Canada, with more jobs, bigger paycheques, and long-term prosperity.

Quote

“The Canada-U.S. Economic Summit is Team Canada at its best. We are bringing together partners across business, civil society, and organized labour to find ways to galvanize our economy, create more jobs and bigger paycheques, make it easier to build and trade within our borders, and diversify export markets. We want businesses, investors, and workers to choose Canada.”

Quick Facts
- Canada and the U.S. are each other’s largest trade partners, with nearly $3.6 billion (US$2.7 billion) worth of goods and services crossing the border each day in 2023.
- Backed by an investment of $1.3 billion and built around five pillars, Canada’s Border Plan is bolstering border security, strengthening our immigration system, and contributing to ensuring Canada’s future prosperity.
- Last year, more than $530 billion worth of goods and services moved across provincial and territorial borders, representing almost 20 per cent of Canada’s gross domestic product.
- On January 17, 2025, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau convened the first meeting of the newly established Council on Canada-U.S. Relations. The Council, which comprises leaders in business, innovation, and policy, will provide advice to the Prime Minister and Cabinet on issues related to Canada-U.S. relations, including the threat of tariffs.
- The Committee on Internal Trade consists of all federal, provincial, and territorial ministers responsible for internal trade, and is responsible for supervising the implementation of the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA). This includes providing oversight over a number of CFTA working groups, assisting in the resolution of disputes, approving the annual operating budget of the Internal Trade Secretariat, and considering any other matter that may affect the operation of the CFTA.
Associated Links

MIL OSI Canada News –
February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI USA: Hospital Payment Program and Medical Debt Relief Initiative Approved for Another Year

Source: US State of North Carolina

Headline: Hospital Payment Program and Medical Debt Relief Initiative Approved for Another Year

Hospital Payment Program and Medical Debt Relief Initiative Approved for Another Year
hejones1
Tue, 02/04/2025 – 17:05

The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services received approval from the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services to continue the Healthcare Access and Stabilization Program (HASP) that makes hospital incentives for the state’s medical debt relief initiative possible. The first two years were approved in July 2024. This new approval supports the state’s work to relieve more than $4 billion and a decade’s worth of medical debt for nearly 2 million low-and middle-income North Carolinians and prevent accumulation of new debt going forward.

“Carrying medical debt for too many people is like carrying a financial anvil. North Carolina’s medical debt relief initiative is giving these folks a clean credit slate,” said Governor Josh Stein. “I am pleased that CMS has approved this initiative for another year so we can continue to create a stronger health care system and healthier North Carolina for every person.”

In its third year, for services provided to Medicaid managed care enrollees from July 2025 to June 2026, the HASP program will include nearly $6.5 billion in gross revenue if all North Carolina hospitals continue to participate in the medical debt relief initiative. Importantly, HASP dollars are not being used to implement medical debt relief for consumers. Rather, hospitals are required to relieve medical debt deemed uncollectable and adopt certain charity care policies as a condition of eligibility to receive enhanced HASP payments.

North Carolina’s program is the first in the nation to leverage Medicaid state directed payment authority to encourage hospitals to both relieve historical medical debt and adopt forward-looking protections to prevent the accumulation of debt.

“North Carolina’s innovative medical debt relief plan ensures people with low-income are protected from harmful debt collection practices and financial ruin,” said NC Health and Human Services Secretary Dev Sangvai. “This program is a win-win for North Carolina so that people can receive the care they need without fear of costly medical debt while supporting financial sustainability for hospitals.”

Last year, all 99 acute care hospitals in the state signed on to participate. In addition to mitigating medical debt, hospitals are also required to implement more robust and standardized financial assistance policies and eliminate reporting of medical debt to credit agencies.

More than 20 million Americans had outstanding medical debt in 2021. Among those experiencing health care-related debt nationally, more than 40 percent have fully or nearly exhausted personal savings or taken on credit card debt to cover their medical debts. Other than income and job loss, medical expenses are the highest contributor to personal bankruptcy in the United States. The ultimate impact is significant harm to patients – eight in 10 people with medical debt have deferred needed medical care due to the expense.

Research shows that medical debt relief is a highly bi-partisan issue with strong support from Democratic and Republican leaders. Polling shows 80% of people want their state and federal elected officials to pass policies to reduce health care costs. Medical debt relief is an initiative leadership can use to significantly improve the lives of their constituents.

People who are eligible do not need to take any action to have their medical debt relieved. Hospitals are working with Undue Medical Debt to notify patients directly if they meet the eligibility requirements. For more information about HASP and North Carolina’s Medical Debt Relief Incentive Program, please see the FAQ and Toolkit for other states interested in implementing similar programs.

El Departamento de Salud y Servicios Humanos de Carolina del Norte recibió la aprobación de los Centros de Servicios de Medicare y Medicaid (CMS, por sus siglas en inglés) para continuar el Programa de Acceso y Estabilización de la Atención Médica (HASP) que hace posible los incentivos hospitalarios para la iniciativa estatal de alivio de la deuda médica. Los dos primeros años fueron aprobados en julio de 2024. Esta nueva aprobación respalda el trabajo del estado para aliviar más de $4 mil millones y una década de deuda médica para casi 2 millones de habitantes de Carolina del Norte de bajos y medianos ingresos y evitar la acumulación de nueva deuda en el futuro.

“Llevar deudas médicas para demasiadas personas es como llevar un yunque financiero. La iniciativa de alivio de la deuda médica de Carolina del Norte está dando a estas personas un borrón y cuenta nueva”, dijo el gobernador Josh Stein. “Me complace que los CMS hayan aprobado esta iniciativa por un año más para que podamos continuar creando un sistema de atención médica más sólido y una Carolina del Norte más saludable para cada persona”.

En su tercer año, para los servicios prestados a los afiliados a la atención administrada de Medicaid desde julio de 2025 hasta junio de 2026, el programa HASP incluirá casi $6.5 mil millones en ingresos brutos si todos los hospitales de Carolina del Norte continúan participando en la iniciativa de alivio de la deuda médica. Es importante destacar que los dólares de HASP no se están utilizando para implementar el alivio de la deuda médica para los consumidores. Más bien, los hospitales están obligados a aliviar la deuda médica considerada incobrable y adoptar ciertas políticas de atención de caridad como condición de elegibilidad para recibir pagos HASP mejorados.

El programa de Carolina del Norte es el primero en la nación en aprovechar la autoridad de pago dirigida por el estado de Medicaid para alentar a los hospitales a aliviar la deuda médica histórica y adoptar protecciones para evitar la acumulación de deuda.

“El innovador plan de alivio de la deuda médica de Carolina del Norte garantiza que las personas con bajos ingresos estén protegidas de las prácticas dañinas de cobro de deudas y la ruina financiera”, dijo el secretario de Salud y Servicios Humanos de Carolina del Norte, Dev Sangvai. “Este programa es beneficioso para Carolina del Norte para que las personas puedan recibir la atención que necesitan sin temor a una deuda médica costosa y al mismo tiempo apoyar la sostenibilidad financiera de los hospitales”.

El año pasado, los 99 hospitales de cuidados intensivos del estado se inscribieron para participar. Además de mitigar la deuda médica, los hospitales también deben implementar políticas de asistencia financiera más sólidas y estandarizadas y eliminar la notificación de la deuda médica a las agencias de crédito.

Más de 20 millones de estadounidenses tenían deudas médicas pendientes en 2021. Entre las personas que experimentan deudas relacionadas con la atención médica a nivel nacional, más del 40 por ciento han agotado por completo o casi por completo sus ahorros personales o se han endeudado con tarjetas de crédito para pagar sus deudas médicas. Aparte de los ingresos y la pérdida de empleo, los gastos médicos son el mayor contribuyente a la bancarrota personal en los Estados Unidos. El impacto final es un gran daño para los pacientes: ocho de cada diez personas con deudas médicas han diferido la atención médica necesaria debido al gasto.

La investigación muestra que el alivio de la deuda médica es un tema altamente bipartidista con un fuerte apoyo de los líderes demócratas y republicanos. Las encuestas muestran que el 80% de las personas quieren que sus funcionarios electos estatales y federales aprueben políticas para reducir los costos de atención médica. El alivio de la deuda médica es una iniciativa que el liderazgo puede utilizar para mejorar significativamente las vidas de sus constituyentes.

Las personas que son elegibles no necesitan tomar ninguna medida para que se les alivie su deuda médica. Los hospitales están trabajando con Undue Medical Debt para notificar directamente a los pacientes si cumplen con los requisitos de elegibilidad. Para obtener más información sobre HASP y el Programa de Incentivos para el Alivio de Deudas Médicas de Carolina del Norte, consulte las Preguntas frecuentes y el Kit de herramientas para otros estados interesados en implementar programas similares.

Feb 5, 2025

MIL OSI USA News –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI: Rumble Announces Final Results of its Tender Offer

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

LONGBOAT KEY, Fla, Feb. 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Rumble (NASDAQ:RUM) (“Rumble” or the “Company”), the video-sharing platform and cloud services provider, announced today the final results of its tender offer to purchase up to 70,000,000 shares of its Class A common stock, par value $0.0001 per share (the “Class A Common Stock”), at a purchase price of $7.50 per share, in cash, less any applicable withholding taxes and without interest, representing an aggregate purchase price of $525 million. The tender offer expired at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on February 4, 2025.

Based on the final count by the depositary for the tender offer, 70,061,168 shares of common stock were validly and successfully tendered and not properly withdrawn.

Pursuant to the terms of the tender offer, Rumble has accepted for purchase 70,000,000 shares of common stock on a pro-rata basis, except for tenders of odd lots, which will be accepted in full, for a total cost of $525 million, excluding fees and expenses related to the tender offer. The proration factor for the tender offer, after giving effect to the priority of the odd lots, was 0.9991284. The depositary will promptly pay for the shares accepted for purchase and will return all other shares tendered and not purchased.

The tender offer was undertaken pursuant to the terms of the previously announced Transaction Agreement between Rumble and Tether Investments Limited, dated December 20, 2024. Of the 70,061,168 shares of common stock that were validly tendered and not properly withdrawn, 70,000,000 shares were tendered by certain existing stockholders of Rumble, including certain executive officers and directors of Rumble (or affiliates thereof), who had entered into separate tender and support agreements with the Company on December 20, 2024, pursuant to which such supporting stockholders agreed, among other things, to tender a minimum of 70,000,000 shares in the tender offer on the same terms and conditions as other stockholders of the Company, including with respect to the purchase price of $7.50 per share and the applicable proration provisions.

Stockholders who have questions or would like additional information about the tender offer may contact the information agent for the tender offer, Georgeson LLC, at (833) 880-2584 (toll free) or by email at RumbleOffer@Georgeson.com. The dealer manager for the tender offer was Cantor Fitzgerald & Co.

ABOUT RUMBLE

Rumble is a high-growth video platform and cloud services provider that is creating an independent infrastructure. Rumble’s mission is to restore the internet to its roots by making it free and open once again. For more information, visit: corp.rumble.com.

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements in this press release constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Statements contained in this press release that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements and include, for example, statements regarding our expectations or beliefs regarding our proposed transaction with Tether. Certain of these forward-looking statements can be identified by using words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “intends,” “estimates,” “targets,” “expects,” “endeavors,” “forecasts,” “well underway,” “could,” “will,” “may,” “future,” “likely,” “on track to deliver,” “on a trajectory,” “continues to,” “looks forward to,” “is primed to,” “plans,” “projects,” “assumes,” “should” or other similar expressions. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, and our actual results could differ materially from future results expressed or implied in these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements included in this release are based on our current beliefs and expectations of our management as of the date of this release. These statements are not guarantees or indicative of future performance. Important assumptions and other important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those forward-looking statements include uncertainties as to the timing of the transactions; uncertainties as to the percentage of shares of Rumble stock tendered, and the resulting proration factor, in the offer; the possibility that various closing conditions for the transactions may not be satisfied or waived; the risk that we may be unable to derive additional benefits from the relationship with Tether, including increased advertising revenue, cloud revenue, and expansion into cryptocurrency payments; the risk that stockholder litigation in connection with the transactions may result in significant costs of defense, indemnification and liability; risks inherent with our increasing affiliation with crypto assets, including volatility; as well as regulatory and reputational risks; the risks of implementing a new treasury diversification strategy; our ability to grow and manage future growth profitably over time, maintain relationships with customers, compete within our industry and retain key employees; the possibility that we may be adversely impacted by economic, business, and/or competitive factors; our limited operating history makes it difficult to evaluate our business and prospects; our recent and rapid growth may not be indicative of future performance; we may not continue to grow or maintain our active user base, and may not be able to achieve or maintain profitability; risks relating to our ability to attract new advertisers, or the potential loss of existing advertisers or the reduction of or failure by existing advertisers to maintain or increase their advertising budgets; Rumble Cloud, our recently launched cloud services business, may not achieve success and, as a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected; negative media campaigns may adversely impact our financial performance, results of operations, and relationships with our business partners, including content creators and advertisers; spam activity, including inauthentic and fraudulent user activity, if undetected, may contribute, from time to time, to some amount of overstatement of our performance indicators; we collect, store, and process large amounts of user video content and personal information of our users and subscribers and, if our security measures are breached, our sites and applications may be perceived as not being secure, traffic and advertisers may curtail or stop viewing our content or using our services, our business and operating results could be harmed, and we could face governmental investigations and legal claims from users and subscribers; we may fail to comply with applicable privacy laws; we are subject to cybersecurity risks and interruptions or failures in our information technology systems and, notwithstanding our efforts to enhance our protection from such risks, a cyber incident could occur and result in information theft, data corruption, operational disruption and/or financial loss; we may be found to have infringed on the intellectual property of others, which could expose us to substantial losses or restrict our operations; we may face liability for hosting a variety of tortious or unlawful materials uploaded by third parties, notwithstanding the liability protections of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996; we may face negative publicity for removing, or declining to remove, certain content, regardless of whether such content violated any law; paid endorsements by our content creators may expose us to regulatory risk, liability, and compliance costs, and, as a result, may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations; our traffic growth, engagement, and monetization depend upon effective operation within and compatibility with operating systems, networks, devices, web browsers and standards, including mobile operating systems, networks, and standards that we do not control; our business depends on continued and unimpeded access to our content and services on the internet and, if we or those who engage with our content experience disruptions in internet service, or if internet service providers are able to block, degrade or charge for access to our content and services, we could incur additional expenses and the loss of traffic and advertisers; we face significant market competition, and if we are unable to compete effectively with our competitors for traffic and advertising spend, our business and operating results could be harmed; we rely on data from third parties to calculate certain of our performance metrics and real or perceived inaccuracies in such metrics may harm our reputation and negatively affect our business; changes to our existing content and services could fail to attract traffic and advertisers or fail to generate revenue; we derive the majority of our revenue from advertising and the failure to attract new advertisers, the loss of existing advertisers, or the reduction of or failure by existing advertisers to maintain or increase their advertising budgets would adversely affect our business; we depend on third-party vendors, including internet service providers, advertising networks, and data centers, to provide core services; hosting and delivery costs may increase unexpectedly; we have offered and intend to continue to offer incentives, including economic incentives, to content creators to join our platform, and these arrangements may involve fixed payment obligations that are not contingent on actual revenue or performance metrics generated by the applicable content creator but rather are based on our modeled financial projections for that creator, which if not satisfied may adversely impact our financial performance, results of operations and liquidity; we may be unable to develop or maintain effective internal controls; potential diversion of management’s attention and consumption of resources as a result of acquisitions of other companies and success in integrating and otherwise achieving the benefits of recent and potential acquisitions; we may fail to maintain adequate operational and financial resources or raise additional capital or generate sufficient cash flows; changes in tax rates, changes in tax treatment of companies engaged in e-commerce, the adoption of new tax legislation, or exposure to additional tax liabilities may adversely impact our financial results; compliance obligations imposed by new privacy laws, laws regulating social media platforms and online speech in certain jurisdictions in which we operate, or industry practices may adversely affect our business; and those additional risks, uncertainties and factors described in more detail under the caption “Risk Factors” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2023, and in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). We do not intend, and, except as required by law, we undertake no obligation, to update any of our forward-looking statements after the issuance of this release to reflect any future events or circumstances. Given these risks and uncertainties, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. Rumble on Social Media Investors and others should note that we announce material financial and operational information to our investors using our investor relations website (investors.rumble.com), press releases, SEC filings and public conference calls and webcasts. We also intend to use certain social media accounts as a means of disclosing information about us and our services and for complying with our disclosure obligations under Regulation FD: the @rumblevideo X (formerly Twitter) account (x.com/rumblevideo), the @gamingonrumble X (formerly Twitter) account (x.com/gamingonrumble), the @rumble TRUTH Social account (truthsocial.com/@rumble), the @chrispavlovski X (formerly Twitter) account (x.com/chrispavlovski), and the @chris TRUTH Social account (truthsocial.com/@chris), which Chris Pavlovski, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, also uses as a means for personal communications and observations. The information we post through these social media channels may be deemed material. Accordingly, investors should monitor these social media channels in addition to following our press releases, SEC filings and public conference calls and webcasts. The social media channels that we intend to use as a means of disclosing the information described above may be updated from time to time as listed on our investor relations website.

For investor inquiries, please contact:

Rumble IR

Shannon Devine
MZ Group, MZ North America
203-741-8811
rumble@mzgroup.us

Rumble PR
press@rumble.com

The MIL Network –

February 6, 2025
MIL-OSI: Sampo’s Board of Directors has resolved on a share split

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Sampo plc, stock exchange release, 5 February 2025 at 3:35 pm EET

Sampo’s Board of Directors has resolved on a share split

The Board of Directors of Sampo plc has today resolved on a share split by way of a share issue without consideration in proportion to shares owned by shareholders. The resolution is based on the authorisation granted by Sampo’s Annual General Meeting held on 25 April 2024.

In the share split, Sampo will issue four (4) new A shares for each existing A share and four (4) new B shares for each existing B share to shareholders in proportion to their existing holdings on the record day of the share issuance on 12 February 2025. In total, 2,152,191,088 new Sampo A shares and 800,000 new Sampo B shares will be issued. Following the registration of the new shares, Sampo’s total share count will amount to 2,691,238,860 shares.

The new shares are expected to be registered with the Finnish Trade Register on or about 12 February 2025. The new shares shall be issued without consideration as book-entries in the book-entry system maintained by Euroclear Finland Oy. The new shares shall, where applicable, be further registered as Swedish depository receipts in the securities depository and settlement register maintained by Euroclear Sweden AB and in the form of share entitlements book-entered in VP Securities A/S in Denmark.

Trading in the new A shares on Nasdaq Helsinki, Nasdaq Stockholm (in the form of Swedish depository receipts) and Nasdaq Copenhagen (in the form of share entitlements) is expected to commence on or about 13 February 2025. However, the new Swedish depository receipts are expected to be available on the accounts in Euroclear Sweden on or about 14 February 2025. The share split does not require any action from shareholders nor holders of Swedish depository receipts. The share split will not affect Sampo’s ISIN codes.

SAMPO PLC
Board of Directors

For further information, please contact:

Sami Taipalus
Head of Investor Relations
tel. +358 10 516 0030

Maria Silander
Communications Manager, Media Relations
tel. +358 10 516 0031

Distribution:
Nasdaq Helsinki
Nasdaq Stockholm
Nasdaq Copenhagen
London Stock Exchange
FIN-FSA
The principal media
www.sampo.com

The MIL Network –

February 6, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, December and Annual 2024

Source: US Bureau of Economic Analysis

The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $98.4 billion in December, up $19.5 billion from $78.9 billion in November, revised.

U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit
Deficit:	$98.4 Billion	+24.7%°
Exports:	$266.5 Billion	–2.6%°
Imports:	$364.9 Billion	+3.5%°
Next release: Thursday, March 6, 2025 (°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, February 5, 2025

Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)

December exports were $266.5 billion, $7.1 billion less than November exports. December imports were $364.9 billion, $12.4 billion more than November imports.

The December increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $18.9 billion to $123.0 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.6 billion to $24.5 billion.

For 2024, the goods and services deficit increased $133.5 billion, or 17.0 percent, from 2023. Exports increased $119.8 billion or 3.9 percent. Imports increased $253.3 billion or 6.6 percent.

Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)

The average goods and services deficit increased $4.7 billion to $83.8 billion for the three months ending in December.

Average exports decreased $1.2 billion to $268.8 billion in December.
Average imports increased $3.5 billion to $352.7 billion in December.

Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $19.2 billion from the three months ending in December 2023.

Average exports increased $9.8 billion from December 2023.
Average imports increased $29.0 billion from December 2023.

Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)

Exports of goods decreased $7.5 billion to $170.2 billion in December.

Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $6.7 billion.

Consumer goods decreased $1.8 billion.
- Pharmaceutical preparations decreased $1.4 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $1.8 billion.
- Crude oil decreased $0.9 billion.
- Other petroleum products decreased $0.3 billion.
- Other precious metals decreased $0.3 billion.
- Fertilizers, pesticides, and insecticides decreased $0.3 billion.
Capital goods decreased $1.4 billion.
- Computers decreased $0.9 billion.
- Civilian aircraft increased $1.4 billion.
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines decreased $0.9 billion.
- Trucks, buses, and special purpose vehicles decreased $0.4 billion.
- Other automotive parts and accessories decreased $0.3 billion.

Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.8 billion.

Exports of services increased $0.4 billion to $96.3 billion in December.

Travel increased $0.3 billion.
Financial services increased $0.1 billion.

Imports (exhibits 4, 6, and 8)

Imports of goods increased $11.4 billion to $293.1 billion in December.

Imports of goods on a Census basis increased $11.3 billion.

Industrial supplies and materials increased $10.8 billion.
- Finished metal shapes increased $9.2 billion.
- Nonmonetary gold increased $1.0 billion.
Consumer goods increased $2.2 billion.
- Toys, games, and sporting goods increased $0.8 billion.
- Cell phones and other household goods increased $0.8 billion.
Capital goods increased $1.3 billion.
- Computers increased $1.2 billion.
- Computer accessories increased $0.9 billion.
- Civilian aircraft decreased $1.1 billion.
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines decreased $2.2 billion.
- Passenger cars decreased $1.6 billion.

Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.1 billion.

Imports of services increased $1.0 billion to $71.8 billion in December.

Transport increased $0.5 billion.
Travel increased $0.3 billion.

Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)

The real goods deficit increased $14.9 billion, or 15.4 percent, to $111.9 billion in December, compared to a 17.3 percent increase in the nominal deficit.

Real exports of goods decreased $5.4 billion, or 3.7 percent, to $141.9 billion, compared to a 3.8 percent decrease in nominal exports.
Real imports of goods increased $9.5 billion, or 3.9 percent, to $253.8 billion, compared to a 4.0 percent increase in nominal imports.

Revisions

In addition to revisions to source data for the November statistics, the seasonally adjusted goods data were revised for January through November so that the totals of the seasonally adjusted months equal the annual totals.

Revisions to November exports

Exports of goods were revised up $0.1 billion.
Exports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.

Revisions to November imports

Imports of goods were revised up $0.8 billion.
Imports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.

Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)

The December figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($5.0), South and Central America ($3.5), United Kingdom ($2.3), Hong Kong ($0.7), Brazil ($0.4), Saudi Arabia ($0.4), Belgium ($0.3), and Australia ($0.2). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with China ($25.3), European Union ($20.4), Mexico ($15.2), Switzerland ($13.0), Vietnam ($11.4), Canada ($7.9), Germany ($7.6), Taiwan ($6.9), Ireland ($6.2), South Korea ($5.6), Japan ($5.5), India ($4.9), Italy ($4.1), Malaysia ($2.5), France ($1.1), Israel ($0.8), and Singapore ($0.4).

The deficit with Switzerland increased $9.1 billion to $13.0 billion in December. Exports decreased $0.7 billion to $1.2 billion and imports increased $8.4 billion to $14.2 billion.
The deficit with Canada increased $2.9 billion to $7.9 billion in December. Exports decreased $0.4 billion to $29.1 billion and imports increased $2.5 billion to $37.0 billion.
The deficit with Ireland decreased $3.1 billion to $6.2 billion in December. Exports decreased $0.1 billion to $1.2 billion and imports decreased $3.2 billion to $7.5 billion.

Annual Summary for 2024

Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)

For 2024, the goods and services deficit was $918.4 billion, up $133.5 billion from $784.9 billion in 2023. Exports were $3,191.6 billion, up $119.8 billion from 2023. Imports were $4,110.0 billion, up $253.3 billion from 2023.

The 2024 increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $148.5 billion, or 14.0 percent, to $1,211.7 billion and an increase in the services surplus of $14.9 billion, or 5.4 percent, to $293.3 billion.

The goods and services deficit was 3.1 percent of current-dollar gross domestic product in 2024, up from 2.8 percent in 2023.

Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)

Exports of goods increased $38.6 billion to $2,083.8 billion in 2024.

Exports of goods on a Census basis increased $47.1 billion.

Capital goods increased $40.2 billion.
- Computer accessories increased $11.3 billion.
- Civilian aircraft engines increased $8.7 billion.
- Computers increased $8.2 billion.
- Semiconductors increased $8.1 billion.
Other goods increased $17.9 billion. (See the “Notice” for more information.)
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines decreased $10.8 billion.
- Other automotive parts and accessories decreased $4.3 billion.
- Passenger cars decreased $4.0 billion.
- Trucks, buses, and special purpose vehicles decreased $3.0 billion.

Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $8.5 billion.

Exports of services increased $81.2 billion to $1,107.8 billion in 2024.

Travel increased $26.3 billion.
Other business services increased $16.0 billion.
Telecommunications, computer, and information services increased $11.9 billion.
Financial services increased $11.6 billion.

Imports (exhibits 4, 6, and 8)

Imports of goods increased $187.1 billion to $3,295.6 billion in 2024.

Imports of goods on a Census basis increased $187.2 billion.

Capital goods increased $103.3 billion.
- Computer accessories increased $33.5 billion.
- Computers increased $28.3 billion.
- Semiconductors increased $9.4 billion.
- Other industrial machinery increased $9.0 billion.
Consumer goods increased $48.4 billion.
- Pharmaceutical preparations increased $43.6 billion.
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $16.1 billion.
- Passenger cars increased $10.0 billion.
- Other automotive parts and accessories increased $4.8 billion.
Foods, feeds, and beverages increased $15.9 billion.
- Meat products increased $3.5 billion.
- Fruits, frozen juices increased $2.3 billion.
- Bakery products increased $2.2 billion.
- Other foods increased $2.0 billion.
- Vegetables increased $1.7 billion.

Net balance of payments adjustments decreased $0.2 billion.

Imports of services increased $66.2 billion to $814.4 billion in 2024.

Travel increased $19.2 billion.
Charges for the use of intellectual property increased $12.2 billion.
Transport increased $11.7 billion.
Insurance services increased $11.5 billion.

Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)

The real goods deficit increased $98.8 billion, or 9.6 percent, to $1,132.4 billion in 2024, compared to a 13.2 percent increase in the nominal deficit.

Real exports of goods increased $41.7 billion, or 2.5 percent, to $1,737.8 billion, compared to a 2.3 percent increase in nominal exports.
Real imports of goods increased $140.5 billion, or 5.1 percent, to $2,870.2 billion, compared to a 6.1 percent increase in nominal imports.

Goods by Selected Countries and Areas – Census Basis (exhibits 14 and 14a)

The 2024 figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($55.5), South and Central America ($47.3), Hong Kong ($21.9), Australia ($17.9), and United Kingdom ($11.9). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with China ($295.4), European Union ($235.6), Mexico ($171.8), Vietnam ($123.5), Ireland ($86.7), Germany ($84.8), Taiwan ($73.9), Japan ($68.5), South Korea ($66.0), Canada ($63.3), India ($45.7), Thailand ($45.6), Italy ($44.0), Switzerland ($38.5), Malaysia ($24.8), Indonesia ($17.9), France ($16.4), Austria ($13.1), and Sweden ($9.8).

The deficit with the European Union increased $26.9 billion to $235.6 billion in 2024. Exports increased $2.6 billion to $370.2 billion and imports increased $29.4 billion to $605.8 billion.
The deficit with Taiwan increased $26.1 billion to $73.9 billion in 2024. Exports increased $2.4 billion to $42.3 billion and imports increased $28.5 billion to $116.3 billion.
The surplus with the Netherlands increased $12.7 billion to $55.5 billion in 2024. Exports increased $8.3 billion to $89.6 billion and imports decreased $4.4 billion to $34.1 billion.

All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.

Next release: March 6, 2025, at 8:30 a.m EST
U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, January 2025

Notice

Impact of Canada Border Services Agency’s (CBSA) Release of CBSA Assessment and Revenue Management (CARM)

The CBSA introduced a new accounting system (CARM) on October 21, 2024. As a result, importers in Canada have experienced delays in filing shipment information. These delays affected the compilation of statistics on U.S. exports of goods to Canada for September through December 2024, which are derived from data compiled by Canada through the United States – Canada Data Exchange. A dollar estimate of the filing backlog is included in estimates for late receipts and, following the Census Bureau’s customary practice for late receipt estimates, is included in the export end-use category “Other goods” as well as in exports to Canada. This estimate will be replaced with the actual transactions reported by the Harmonized System classification in June 2025 with the release of “U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, Annual Revision.” Until then, please refer to the supplemental spreadsheet “CARM Exports to Canada Corrections,” which provides a breakdown of the late receipts by 1-digit end-use category. This spreadsheet will be updated as late export transactions are received to reflect reassignments from the initial “Other goods” category to the appropriate 1-digit end-use category.

If you have questions or need additional information, please contact the Census Bureau, Economic Indicators Division, International Trade Macro Analysis Branch, on 800-549-0595, option 4, or at eid.international.trade.data@census.gov or BEA, Balance of Payments Division, at InternationalAccounts@bea.gov.

Upcoming Changes to the Real (Chained-Dollar) Series

Effective with the release of the February 2025 statistics on April 3, 2025, the Census Bureau will continue to use the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes to calculate the chained-dollar series (exhibits 10 and 11). The BLS will be implementing changes to the indexes with the release of the February 2025 U.S. Import and Export Price Indexes on March 18, 2025. The changes to the indexes could impact the chained-dollar values. Please refer to the BLS notice for additional information on the Upcoming Change to Data Source for Import and Export Price Indexes: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact the Census Bureau, Economic Statistical Methods Division, International Trade Statistical Methods Branch, on 301-763-3080.

MIL OSI USA News –

February 6, 2025

Category: Trade

Quote

Quick Facts

Associated Links

Cantwell Takes to Senate Floor to Oppose Trump’s Trade Philosophy: No to Tariffs, Yes to Innovation, Collaboration & Growth

Statements from Net Zero Council and Delivery Group members

Share this page

Updates to this page

Please be aware:

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

Quote

Quick Facts

Associated Links