Ukraine – Page 149 – NewzIntel.com

MIL-OSI Security: Chair of the NATO Military Committee: ‘Finland will never again navigate the darkness alone.’

Source: NATO

On 24 and 25 October 2024 Chair of the NATO Military Committee Admiral Bauer visited Finland, upon the invitation of its Chief of Defence General Janne Jaakkola. Admiral Bauer’s visit underscored the value of Finland as a NATO Ally and the important contributions it provides to NATO’s deterrence and defence.

On Thursday 24 October, Admiral Bauer visited the Guards Jaeger Regiment and met with Finnish Defence Support Association members. This gave the opportunity to engage with members and meet current Finnish conscripts.

In the evening, Admiral Bauer addressed the Finnish National Defence Course Association. This association brings together leaders from across society Finnish society who complete a prestigious national course covering in-depth topics of security and defence. Admiral Bauer’s speech praised the spirit of resilience engraved in Finland’s national defence and emphasised what NATO can learn from Finland’s Comprehensive Security Strategy and Total Defence Concept.

Admiral Bauer took the opportunity to discuss Finland’s transition to NATO membership, and looked ahead to the future of its membership in the Alliance. The Chair of the NATO Military Committee stated “Finland’s movement into NATO is a transition, not a transformation. It is an opportunity to inspire Allies, whilst embracing a posture of international resilience. I urge you all to hold the spirit of ‘sisu’ as a firebrand leading the way as you carve out this new path. Knowing that there are friends on either side. And that you need never again navigate the darkness alone.”

On Friday 25 October, Admiral Bauer met with Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, Minister of Foreign Affairs Elina Valtonen, Minister of Defence Anti Häkkänen and the Finnish Parliamentary Defence Committee. These engagements allowed Admiral Bauer the opportunity to discuss strategic developments in NATO’s deterrence and defence and the need for continued support for Ukraine. In his engagements with the Finnish political and military leadership, Admiral Bauer praised the strength that Finland’s membership brings to NATO. Admiral Bauer commended the synergy of Finland’s civilian and military infrastructures and sectors in contributing towards societal resilience. He also underscored the crucial role of defence industries in Allied deterrence and defence.

MIL Security OSI –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Russia’s Brics summit shows determination for a new world order – but internal rifts will buy the west some time

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Stefan Wolff, Professor of International Security, University of Birmingham

The recent Brics summit in the Russian city of Kazan was less notable for what happened at the meeting than for what happened before, on the margins, or not at all. Among the notable things that did not happen was another expansion of the organisation.

Since the addition of Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) at the 2023 Brics summit in Johannesburg, which almost doubled the number of member countries from the original five (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), further enlargement has stalled.

Argentina, which was also invited in 2023, declined to join. Saudi Arabia, another 2023 invitee, has not acted on the offer to become a member either. Its de-facto ruler, crown prince Mohammad bin Salman, was among the notable absentees in Kazan.

And Kazakhstan, Russia’s largest neighbour in Central Asia, decided not to join shortly before the summit. This drew Russia’s ire, resulting in a prompt ban on imports of a range of agricultural products from Kazakhstan in retaliation.

While invitees have declined the opportunity to join Brics, a long list of applicants have not been offered membership. According to a statement by Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin, at a meeting of senior Brics security officials in September, 34 countries have expressed an interest in closer relations with Brics in some form.

This appears to be a substantial increase in interest in Brics membership compared to a year ago, when South Africa’s foreign minister, Naledi Pandor, listed 23 applicants ahead of the 2023 summit.

But the fact that, since then, only six invitations have been extended – and four accepted – indicates that formal enlargement of the organisation, at least for now, has been stymied by the inability of current members to forge consensus over the next round of expansion and the reluctance on the part of some invitees to be associated with the organisation.

Meetings on the margins

The summit declaration may offer little of substance. But there were a number of bilateral meetings before and in the margins of the gathering that are more indicative of the direction of Brics. Perhaps most importantly, India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, and China’s president, Xi Jinping, held their first face-to-face discussion in five years.

This is a remarkable change from just a few months ago, when tensions between New Delhi and Beijing were intense enough for Modi to cancel his participation in the summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in Astana, Kazakhstan. Yet, with a deal now reached over their countries’ longstanding border dispute, the two most populous and, in terms of GDP, economically most powerful members of Brics have an opportunity to rebuild their fraught relations.

A warming of relations between China and India could generate more momentum for Brics to deliver on its ambitious agenda to develop, and ultimately implement, a vision for a new global order. Implicit in this would be a shift of leadership in Brics from China and Russia to China and India, and with it, potentially a change from an anti-western to a non-western agenda.

This is, of course, something that exercises Putin. He acknowledged as much when he referred to the global south and global east in his remarks at the summit’s opening meeting. He also emphasised that it was important “to maintain balance and ensure that the effectiveness of Brics mechanisms is not diminished”.

In his own bilateral meetings before and during the summit, Putin drove home the point that, despite western efforts, Russia was far from isolated on the world stage. One-to-one meetings with Xi, Modi, South Africa’s president, Cyril Ramaphosa, and the president of the UAE, Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan, gave Putin the chance to push his own vision of Brics as a counterpoint to the US-led west.

This may be a view shared in the global east – Russia, China and Iran, as well as non-Brics members North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela. But many in the global south – particularly India and Brazil – are unlikely to go all in with this agenda. They will focus on benefiting from their Brics membership as much as possible while maintaining close ties with the west.

Lacking a coherent agenda

India is the most significant player in Brics when it comes to balancing between east and west. Nato member Turkey is the equivalent on the outside. The country’s president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, travelled to Kazan and did not shy away from an hour-long meeting with his “dear friend” Putin.

The relationship between Moscow and Ankara is fractious and complex across a wide range of crises from the South Caucasus, to Syria, Libya and Sudan. Yet, on perhaps the most divisive issue of all, Russian aggression towards Ukraine, Turkey has consistently maintained opened channels of communication with Russia and remains the only Nato power able to do so.

The fact that there has been relatively little public pressure from official sources in the west on Erdoğan to stop is probably a reflection that such communication channels are still valued in the west. This, and Nato’s continued cooperation with India, point to a hedging strategy by the west. India cooperates with the US, Australia and Japan – the so-called Quad group of nations – on security in the Indo-Pacific, and it has maintained political dialogue with Nato since 2019.

Turkey and India may not see eye-to-eye with the west on all issues. But neither do they with the global east camp inside Brics, and especially not with Russia. If nothing else, this limits the ability of Brics to forge a coherent agenda, deepen integration and ultimately mount a credible challenge to the existing order.

Relying on India and Turkey to do the west’s bidding in undermining Brics, however, is not a credible long-term strategy. Brics may have achieved little as an organisation, but the Kazan summit declaration indicates that its key players continue to harbour aspirations for more.

However, as the flailing expansion drive of the organisation indicates, there is also an internal battle in Brics over its future direction. This, in turn, creates space and time for the west to exercise more positive and constructive influence in the ongoing process of reshaping the international order.

The global east may be beyond redemption, but there is still a massive opportunity to reengage with the global south.

Stefan Wolff is a past recipient of grant funding from the Natural Environment Research Council of the UK, the United States Institute of Peace, the Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, the British Academy, the NATO Science for Peace Programme, the EU Framework Programmes 6 and 7 and Horizon 2020, as well as the EU’s Jean Monnet Programme. He is a Trustee and Honorary Treasurer of the Political Studies Association of the UK and a Senior Research Fellow at the Foreign Policy Centre in London.

– ref. Russia’s Brics summit shows determination for a new world order – but internal rifts will buy the west some time – https://theconversation.com/russias-brics-summit-shows-determination-for-a-new-world-order-but-internal-rifts-will-buy-the-west-some-time-241610

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Rep. Panetta’s Statement Calling on Congress to Prioritize the Repeal of Outdated Trade Restrictions with Kazakhstan

Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jimmy Panetta (D-Calif)

Monterey, CA – United States Representative Jimmy Panetta (CA-19), chair of the House Kazakhstan Caucus, released the following statement reiterating his call for the repeal of outdated trade restrictions with Kazakhstan:

“As we approach Kazakhstan’s Republic Day, celebrating its sovereignty from the Soviet Union, I call on the U.S. Congress to prioritize the removal of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment as it applies to Kazakhstan.”

“The Jackson-Vanik Amendment is a Cold War relic, interfering with the United States’ efforts to grow our trade and diplomatic relationships with countries that surround Russia. This amendment continues to prevent Kazakhstan from receiving Permanent Normal Trade Relations status, despite its full compliance with the Trade Act of 1974 and status as a country annually granted Normal Trade Relations.

“Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Congress removed the application of the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to numerous former Soviet states, including Albania, Estonia, Armenia, Ukraine, Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, and notably, Russia. Kazakhstan remains a glaring outlier.

“Kazakhstan is a respected member of the World Trade Organization and a reliable partner in implementing U.S. sanctions and export control regimes. The bilateral trade relationship between the United States and Kazakhstan totals $2.5 billion each year. Strengthening our trade relationship with Kazakhstan has the potential to open a new trading partner for critical minerals and other resources while fostering greater investment and diplomatic ties between our two nations. It is long overdue to eliminate this outdated amendment’s application to Kazakhstan, and I will continue my efforts to achieve this goal.”

###

MIL OSI USA News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Announces Results for the Quarter and Period Ended September 30, 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

3rd Quarter 2024 Highlights:

Diluted earnings per share for the current quarter was $0.45 per share, an increase of 15 percent from the prior quarter diluted earnings per share of $0.39 per share.
Net income was $51.1 million for the current quarter, an increase of $6.3 million, or 14 percent, from the prior quarter net income of $44.7 million and a decrease of $1.4 million, or 3 percent, from the prior year third quarter net income of $52.4 million.
The net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, for the current quarter was 2.83 percent, an increase of 15 basis points from the prior quarter net interest margin of 2.68 percent.
Net interest income was $180 million for the current quarter, an increase of $13.8 million, or 8 percent, from the prior quarter net interest income of $166 million and an increase of $13.2 million, or 8 percent, from the prior year third quarter net interest income of $167 million.
The loan portfolio of $17.181 billion increased $329 million, or 2 percent, during the current quarter and organically increased $57.6 million, or 1 percent annualized, during the current quarter.
Total core deposits of $20.711 billion, increased $613 million, or 3 percent, during the current quarter and organically increased $216 million, or 4 percent annualized, during the current quarter.
Non-interest bearing deposits of $6.408 billion, increased $314 million, or 5 percent, during the current quarter and organically increased $221 million, or 14 percent annualized, during the current quarter.
The loan yield of 5.69 percent in the current quarter increased 11 basis points from the prior quarter loan yield of 5.58 percent and increased 42 basis points from the prior year third quarter loan yield of 5.27 percent.
The total cost of funding (including non-interest bearing deposits) of 1.79 percent in the current quarter decreased 1 basis point from the prior quarter total cost of funding of 1.80 percent.
Stockholders’ equity of $3.245 billion increased $108 million, or 3 percent, during the current quarter and increased $370 million, or 13 percent, over the prior year third quarter.
The Company declared a quarterly dividend of $0.33 per share. The Company has declared 158 consecutive quarterly dividends and has increased the dividend 49 times.
The Company completed the acquisition and core system conversion of six Montana branch locations of Rocky Mountain Bank division (“RMB”) of HTLF Bank, a wholly owned subsidiary of Heartland Financial USA, Inc. with total assets of $403 million, total gross loans of $272 million and total deposits of $397 million.

Year-to-date 2024 Highlights:

Net income for the first nine months of 2024 was $128 million, a decrease of $40.2 million, or 24 percent, from the prior year first nine months net income of $169 million.
Interest income for the first nine months of 2024 was $843 million, an increase of $98.7 million, or 13 percent, over the $744 million of interest income for the first nine months of 2023.
The loan portfolio increased $983 million, or 6 percent, during the first nine months of 2024 and organically increased $261 million, or 2 percent, during the first nine months of 2024.
The $2.740 billion of FRB Bank Term Funding (“BTFP”) was paid off during the current year through a combination of Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances and cash.
Dividends declared in the first nine months of 2024 were $0.99 per share.
The Company completed the acquisition and core system conversion of Community Financial Group, Inc., the parent company of Wheatland Bank (collectively, “Wheatland”), a leading eastern Washington community bank headquartered in Spokane with total assets of $778 million.

Financial Summary

	At or for the Three Months ended									At or for the Nine months ended
(Dollars in thousands, except per share and market data)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024		Mar 31, 2024		Sep 30, 2023		Sep 30, 2024		Sep 30, 2023
Operating results
Net income	$	51,055		44,708		32,627		52,445		128,390		168,611
Basic earnings per share	$	0.45		0.39		0.29		0.47		1.14		1.52
Diluted earnings per share	$	0.45		0.39		0.29		0.47		1.13		1.52
Dividends declared per share	$	0.33		0.33		0.33		0.33		0.99		0.99
Market value per share
Closing	$	45.70		37.32		40.28		28.50		45.70		28.50
High	$	47.71		40.18		42.75		36.45		47.71		50.03
Low	$	35.57		34.35		34.74		26.84		34.35		26.77
Selected ratios and other data
Number of common stock shares outstanding		113,394,786		113,394,092		113,388,590		110,879,365		113,394,786		110,879,365
Average outstanding shares – basic		113,394,758		113,390,539		112,492,142		110,877,534		113,093,583		110,857,788
Average outstanding shares – diluted		113,473,107		113,405,491		112,554,402		110,886,959		113,137,861		110,882,718
Return on average assets (annualized)		0.73	%	0.66	%	0.47	%	0.75	%	0.62	%	0.83	%
Return on average equity (annualized)		6.34	%	5.77	%	4.25	%	7.12	%	5.47	%	7.72	%
Efficiency ratio		64.92	%	67.97	%	74.41	%	63.31	%	68.98	%	62.10	%
Loan to deposit ratio		83.16	%	84.03	%	82.04	%	79.25	%	83.16	%	79.25	%
Number of full time equivalent employees		3,434		3,399		3,438		3,314		3,434		3,314
Number of locations		232		231		232		221		232		221
Number of ATMs		279		286		285		274		279		274

KALISPELL, Mont., Oct. 24, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Glacier Bancorp, Inc. (NYSE: GBCI) reported net income of $51.1 million for the current quarter, an increase of $6.3 million, or 14 percent from the prior quarter net income of $44.7 million and a decrease of $1.4 million, or 3 percent, from the $52.4 million of net income for the prior year third quarter. Diluted earnings per share for the current quarter was $0.45 per share, an increase of 15 percent from the prior quarter diluted earnings per share of $0.39 per share and a decrease of 4 percent from the prior year third quarter diluted earnings per share of $0.47. The decrease in net income compared to the prior year third quarter was due to the increase in funding costs and the increased costs associated with the acquisitions of Wheatland and RMB over the prior year third quarter. “Our positive business trends through the third quarter. We were very pleased to see solid earnings, margin and deposit growth,” said Randy Chesler, President and Chief Executive Officer. “We finalized the acquisition of the Rocky Mountain Bank Montana branches from Heartland and welcome the employees to the Glacier team.”

Net income for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 was $128 million, a decrease of $40.2 million, or 24 percent, from the $169 million net income for the first nine months of the prior year. Diluted earnings per share for the first nine months of 2024 was $1.13 per share, a decrease of $0.39 per share from the prior year first nine months diluted earnings per share of $1.52. The decrease in net income for the first nine months of the current year compared to the prior year first nine months was primarily due to the significant increase in funding costs. In addition, the current year-to-date results included increased operating costs and a $9.7 million provision for credit losses associated with the acquisitions of Wheatland and RMB.

On July 19, 2024, the Company completed the acquisition of six RMB branches in Montana. The branches have been combined with Glacier Bank divisions operating in Montana, including First Bank of Montana, First Security Bank of Bozeman, First Security Bank of Missoula, Valley Bank, and Western Security Bank. On January 31, 2024, the Company completed the acquisition of Wheatland, headquartered in Spokane, Washington. Wheatland had 14 branches in eastern Washington and was combined with the North Cascades Bank division under the name Wheatland Bank, division of Glacier Bank. The Wheatland Bank division now operates with a combined 23 branches in Central and Eastern Washington and is a Top 5 community bank by deposit share in Eastern Washington. The Company’s results of operations and financial condition include the Wheatland and RMB acquisitions beginning on the acquisition date of each. The following table discloses the preliminary fair value estimates of select classifications of assets and liabilities acquired:

	Wheatland		RMB
(Dollars in thousands)	January 31, 2024		July 19, 2024		Total
Total assets	$	777,659	$	403,052	$	1,180,711
Cash and cash equivalents		12,926		76,781		89,707
Debt securities		187,183		—		187,183
Loans receivable		450,403		271,569		721,972
Non-interest bearing deposits		277,651		93,534		371,185
Interest bearing deposits		339,304		303,156		642,460
Borrowings		58,500		4,305		62,805
Core deposit intangible		16,936		9,794		26,730
Goodwill		38,369		29,794		68,163

Asset Summary

										$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023		Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023
Cash and cash equivalents	$	987,833		800,779		1,354,342		1,672,094		187,054		(366,509	)	(684,261	)
Debt securities, available-for-sale		4,436,578		4,499,541		4,785,719		4,741,738		(62,963	)	(349,141	)	(305,160	)
Debt securities, held-to-maturity		3,348,698		3,400,403		3,502,411		3,553,805		(51,705	)	(153,713	)	(205,107	)
Total debt securities		7,785,276		7,899,944		8,288,130		8,295,543		(114,668	)	(502,854	)	(510,267	)
Loans receivable
Residential real estate		1,837,697		1,771,528		1,704,544		1,653,777		66,169		133,153		183,920
Commercial real estate		10,833,841		10,713,964		10,303,306		10,292,446		119,877		530,535		541,395
Other commercial		3,177,051		3,066,028		2,901,863		2,916,785		111,023		275,188		260,266
Home equity		931,440		905,884		888,013		869,963		25,556		43,427		61,477
Other consumer		401,158		394,587		400,356		402,075		6,571		802		(917	)
Loans receivable		17,181,187		16,851,991		16,198,082		16,135,046		329,196		983,105		1,046,141
Allowance for credit losses		(205,170	)	(200,955	)	(192,757	)	(192,271	)	(4,215	)	(12,413	)	(12,899	)
Loans receivable, net		16,976,017		16,651,036		16,005,325		15,942,775		324,981		970,692		1,033,242
Other assets		2,456,643		2,453,581		2,094,832		2,153,149		3,062		361,811		303,494
Total assets	$	28,205,769		27,805,340		27,742,629		28,063,561		400,429		463,140		142,208

Total debt securities of $7.785 billion at September 30, 2024 decreased $115 million, or 1 percent, during the current quarter and decreased $510 million, or 6 percent, from the prior year third quarter. Debt securities represented 28 percent of total assets at September 30, 2024 compared to 30 percent at December 31, 2023 and 30 percent at September 30, 2023.

The loan portfolio of $17.181 billion at September 30, 2024 increased $329 million, or 2 percent, during the current quarter. Excluding the RMB acquisition, the loan portfolio organically increased $57.6 million, or 1 percent annualized, during the current quarter. Excluding the RMB and Wheatland acquisitions, the loan portfolio organically increased $261 million, or 2 percent, during the first nine months of 2024 and increased $324 million, or 2 percent, from the prior year third quarter.

Credit Quality Summary

	At or for the Nine Months ended			At or for the Six Months ended		At or for the Year ended		At or for the Nine Months ended
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023
Allowance for credit losses
Balance at beginning of period	$	192,757		192,757		182,283		182,283
Acquisitions		3		3		—		—
Provision for credit losses		21,138		14,157		20,790		16,609
Charge-offs		(12,406	)	(8,430	)	(15,095	)	(10,284	)
Recoveries		3,678		2,468		4,779		3,663
Balance at end of period	$	205,170		200,955		192,757		192,271
Provision for credit losses
Loan portfolio	$	21,138		14,157		20,790		16,609
Unfunded loan commitments		(1,366	)	(2,390	)	(5,995	)	(4,827	)
Total provision for credit losses	$	19,772		11,767		14,795		11,782
Other real estate owned	$	432		432		1,032		—
Other foreclosed assets		201		198		471		48
Accruing loans 90 days or more past due		11,551		4,692		3,312		3,855
Non-accrual loans		15,937		12,686		20,816		38,380
Total non-performing assets	$	28,121		18,008		25,631		42,283
Non-performing assets as a percentage of subsidiary assets		0.10	%	0.06	%	0.09	%	0.15	%
Allowance for credit losses as a percentage of non-performing loans		730	%	1,116	%	799	%	455	%
Allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans		1.19	%	1.19	%	1.19	%	1.19	%
Net charge-offs as a percentage of total loans		0.05	%	0.04	%	0.06	%	0.04	%
Accruing loans 30-89 days past due	$	56,213		49,678		49,967		15,253
U.S. government guarantees included in non-performing assets	$	1,802		1,228		1,503		1,057

Non-performing assets as a percentage of subsidiary assets at September 30, 2024 was 0.10 percent compared to 0.06 percent in the prior quarter and 0.15 percent in the prior year third quarter. Non-performing assets of $28.1 million at September 30, 2024 increased $10.1 million, or 56 percent, over the prior quarter and decreased $14.2 million, or 33 percent, over the prior year third quarter.

Early stage delinquencies (accruing loans 30-89 days past due) as a percentage of loans at September 30, 2024 were 0.33 percent compared to 0.29 percent for the prior quarter end and 0.09 percent for the prior year third quarter. Early stage delinquencies of $56.2 million at September 30, 2024 increased $6.5 million from the prior quarter and increased $41.0 million from prior year third quarter.

The current quarter credit loss expense of $8.0 million included $2.8 million of provision for credit losses on loans and $799 thousand of provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments from the acquisition of RMB. Excluding the acquisition of RMB, the current quarter credit loss expense was $4.4 million, including $4.2 million of credit loss expense from loans and $225 thousand of credit loss expense from unfunded loan commitments.

For the first nine months of the current year, the provision for credit losses of $19.8 million included $8.1 million of provision for credit losses on loans and $1.6 million of provision for credit losses on unfunded loan commitments from the acquisitions of Wheatland and RMB.

The allowance for credit losses on loans (“ACL”) as a percentage of total loans outstanding at September 30, 2024 was 1.19 percent and remained unchanged from the prior year end and the prior year third quarter. Loan portfolio growth, composition, average loan size, credit quality considerations, economic forecasts and other environmental factors will continue to determine the level of the provision for credit losses for loans.

Credit Quality Trends and Provision for Credit Losses on the Loan Portfolio

(Dollars in thousands)	Provision for Credit Losses Loans		Net Charge-Offs		ACL as a Percent of Loans		Accruing Loans 30-89 Days Past Due as a Percent of Loans		Non-Performing Assets to Total Subsidiary Assets
Third quarter 2024	$	6,981	$	2,766	1.19	%	0.33	%	0.10	%
Second quarter 2024		5,066		2,890	1.19	%	0.29	%	0.06	%
First quarter 2024		9,091		3,072	1.19	%	0.37	%	0.09	%
Fourth quarter 2023		4,181		3,695	1.19	%	0.31	%	0.09	%
Third quarter 2023		5,095		2,209	1.19	%	0.09	%	0.15	%
Second quarter 2023		5,254		2,473	1.19	%	0.16	%	0.12	%
First quarter 2023		6,260		1,939	1.20	%	0.16	%	0.12	%
Fourth quarter 2022		6,060		1,968	1.20	%	0.14	%	0.12	%

Net charge-offs for the current quarter were $2.8 million compared to $2.9 million in the prior quarter and $2.2 million for the prior year third quarter. Net charge-offs of $2.8 million included $1.9 million in deposit overdraft net charge-offs and $815 thousand of net loan charge-offs.

Supplemental information regarding credit quality and identification of the Company’s loan portfolio based on regulatory classification is provided in the exhibits at the end of this press release. The regulatory classification of loans is based primarily on collateral type while the Company’s loan segments presented herein are based on the purpose of the loan.

Liability Summary

						$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024		Jun 30, 2024	Dec 31, 2023	Sep 30, 2023	Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023
Deposits
Non-interest bearing deposits	$	6,407,728	6,093,430	6,022,980	6,465,353	314,298		384,748		(57,625	)
NOW and DDA accounts		5,363,476	5,219,838	5,321,257	5,253,367	143,638		42,219		110,109
Savings accounts		2,801,077	2,862,034	2,833,887	2,872,362	(60,957	)	(32,810	)	(71,285	)
Money market deposit accounts		2,854,540	2,858,850	2,831,624	2,994,631	(4,310	)	22,916		(140,091	)
Certificate accounts		3,284,609	3,064,613	2,915,393	2,742,017	219,996		369,216		542,592
Core deposits, total		20,711,430	20,098,765	19,925,141	20,327,730	612,665		786,289		383,700
Wholesale deposits		3,334	2,994	4,026	67,434	340		(692	)	(64,100	)
Deposits, total		20,714,764	20,101,759	19,929,167	20,395,164	613,005		785,597		319,600
Repurchase agreements		1,831,501	1,629,504	1,486,850	1,499,696	201,997		344,651		331,805
Deposits and repurchase agreements, total		22,546,265	21,731,263	21,416,017	21,894,860	815,002		1,130,248		651,405
Federal Home Loan Bank advances		1,800,000	2,350,000	—	—	(550,000	)	1,800,000		1,800,000
FRB Bank Term Funding		—	—	2,740,000	2,740,000	—		(2,740,000	)	(2,740,000	)
Other borrowed funds		84,168	88,149	81,695	73,752	(3,981	)	2,473		10,416
Subordinated debentures		133,065	133,024	132,943	132,903	41		122		162
Other liabilities		397,221	365,459	351,693	347,452	31,762		45,528		49,769
Total liabilities	$	24,960,719	24,667,895	24,722,348	25,188,967	292,824		238,371		(228,248	)

Total core deposits of $20.711 billion at September 30, 2024 increased $613 million, or 3 percent, from the prior quarter and increased $786 million, or 4 percent, from the prior year end. Total core deposits organically increased $217 million, or 4 percent annualized, during the current quarter and decreased $227 million, or 1 percent, from the prior year end.

Total non-interest bearing deposits of $6.408 billion, increased $314 million, or 5 percent, from the prior quarter and increased $385 million, or 6 percent, from the prior year end. Non-interest bearing deposits organically increased $221 million, or 14 percent annualized, during the current quarter and increased $13.6 million, or 23 basis points, from the prior year end. Non-interest bearing deposits represented 31 percent of total deposits at June 30, 2024, compared to 30 percent at December 31, 2023 and 32 percent at September 30, 2023.

FHLB borrowings of $1.800 billion decreased $550 million, or 23 percent, during the current quarter. Upon maturity in the first quarter of 2024, the Company paid off its $2.740 billion BTFP borrowings with a combination of $2.140 billion in FHLB borrowings and cash.

Stockholders’ Equity Summary

										$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023		Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023
Common equity	$	3,507,356		3,492,096		3,394,394		3,374,961		15,260		112,962		132,395
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(262,306	)	(354,651	)	(374,113	)	(500,367	)	92,345		111,807		238,061
Total stockholders’ equity		3,245,050		3,137,445		3,020,281		2,874,594		107,605		224,769		370,456
Goodwill and intangibles, net		(1,106,336	)	(1,066,790	)	(1,017,263	)	(1,019,690	)	(39,546	)	(89,073	)	(86,646	)
Tangible stockholders’ equity	$	2,138,714		2,070,655		2,003,018		1,854,904		68,059		135,696		283,810

Stockholders’ equity to total assets		11.50	%	11.28	%	10.89	%	10.24	%
Tangible stockholders’ equity to total tangible assets		7.89	%	7.74	%	7.49	%	6.86	%
Book value per common share	$	28.62		27.67		27.24		25.93		0.95	1.38	2.69
Tangible book value per common share	$	18.86		18.26		18.06		16.73		0.60	0.80	2.13

Tangible stockholders’ equity of $2.139 billion at September 30, 2024 increased $68.1 million, or 3 percent, compared to the prior quarter and was primarily the result of a decrease in unrealized loss on the available-for-sale debt securities which was partially offset by the increase in goodwill and core deposit intangibles associated with the acquisition of RMB. Tangible stockholders’ equity at September 30, 2024 increased $136 million, or 7 percent, compared to the prior year end and was primarily due to $92.4 million of Company common stock issued for the acquisition of Wheatland and the decrease in the unrealized loss on the available-for-sale securities. The increase was partially offset by the increase in goodwill and core deposits associated with the acquisitions of Wheatland and RMB. Tangible book value per common share of $18.86 at the current quarter end increased $0.80 per share, or 4 percent, from the prior year end and increased $2.13 per share, or 13 percent, from the prior year third quarter.

Cash Dividends
On September 24, 2024, the Company’s Board of Directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.33 per share. The dividend was payable October 17, 2024 to shareholders of record on October 8, 2024. The dividend was the Company’s 158th consecutive regular dividend. Future cash dividends will depend on a variety of factors, including net income, capital, asset quality, general economic conditions and regulatory considerations.

Operating Results for Three Months Ended September 30, 2024 Compared to June 30, 2024, March 31, 2024 and September 30, 2023

Income Summary
	Three Months ended									$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024		Mar 31, 2024		Sep 30, 2023		Jun 30, 2024	Mar 31, 2024		Sep 30, 2023
Net interest income
Interest income	$	289,578		273,834		279,402		264,906		15,744	10,176		24,672
Interest expense		109,347		107,356		112,922		97,852		1,991	(3,575	)	11,495
Total net interest income		180,231		166,478		166,480		167,054		13,753	13,751		13,177
Non-interest income
Service charges and other fees		20,587		19,422		18,563		19,304		1,165	2,024		1,283
Miscellaneous loan fees and charges		4,970		4,821		4,362		4,322		149	608		648
Gain on sale of loans		4,898		4,669		3,362		4,046		229	1,536		852
Gain (loss) on sale of securities		26		(12	)	16		(65	)	38	10		91
Other income		4,223		3,304		3,686		2,633		919	537		1,590
Total non-interest income		34,704		32,204		29,989		30,240		2,500	4,715		4,464
Total income	$	214,935		198,682		196,469		197,294		16,253	18,466		17,641
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)		2.83	%	2.68	%	2.59	%	2.58	%

Net Interest Income
The current quarter interest income of $290 million increased $15.7 million, or 6 percent, over the prior quarter and increased $24.7 million, or 9 percent, over the prior year third quarter, with both increases being primarily due to the increase in the loan yields and the increase in average balances of the loan portfolio. The loan yield of 5.69 percent in the current quarter increased 11 basis points from the prior quarter loan yield of 5.58 percent and increased 42 basis points from the prior year third quarter loan yield of 5.27 percent.

The current quarter interest expense of $109 million increased $2.0 million, or 2 percent, over the prior quarter and was primarily attributable to the increase in average deposit balances. The current quarter interest expense increased $11.5 million, or 12 percent, over the prior year third quarter and was primarily the result of an increase in rates on deposits and borrowings. Core deposit cost (including non-interest bearing deposits) was 1.37 percent for the current quarter compared to 1.36 percent in the prior quarter and 1.03 percent for the prior year third quarter. The total cost of funding (including non-interest bearing deposits) of 1.79 percent in the current quarter decreased 1 basis point from the prior quarter. The current quarter cost of funds increased 21 basis points from the prior year third quarter which was primarily the result of the increased deposit rates.

The net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, for the current quarter was 2.83 percent, an increase of 15 basis points from the prior quarter net interest margin of 2.68 percent and was primarily driven by an increase in loan yields. The net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, for the current quarter was an increase of 25 basis points from the prior year third quarter net interest margin of 2.58 percent and was primarily driven by an increase in loan yields which more than offset the total cost of funding. Core net interest margin excludes the impact from discount accretion and non-accrual interest. Excluding the 4 basis points from discount accretion, the core net interest margin was 2.79 percent in the current quarter compared to 2.63 percent in the prior quarter and 2.55 in the prior year third quarter. “The growth in the loan portfolio at higher yields was funded primarily by the remix of lower yield cash flow from the securities portfolio,” said Ron Copher, Chief Financial Officer. “In addition, the growth in non-interest bearing deposits and the reduction in wholesale funding contributed to the improvement in the current quarter net interest margin.”

Non-interest Income
Non-interest income for the current quarter totaled $34.7 million, which was an increase of $2.5 million, or 8 percent, over the prior quarter and an increase of $4.5 million, or 15 percent, over the prior year third quarter. Service charges and other fees of $20.6 million for the current quarter increased $1.2 million, or 6 percent, compared to the prior quarter and increased $1.3 million, or 7 percent, compared to the prior year third quarter. Gain on the sale of residential loans of $4.9 million for the current quarter increased $229 thousand, or 5 percent, compared to the prior quarter and increased $852 thousand, or 21 percent, from the prior year third quarter. Other income of $4.2 million increased $919 thousand, or 28 percent, over the prior quarter and increased $1.6 million, or 60 percent, over the prior year third quarter, with both increases being driven by a $1.2 million gain on the sale of repossessed property during the current quarter.

Non-interest Expense Summary

	Three Months ended					$ Change from
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024		Jun 30, 2024	Mar 31, 2024	Sep 30, 2023	Jun 30, 2024		Mar 31, 2024		Sep 30, 2023
Compensation and employee benefits	$	85,083	84,434	85,789	77,387	649		(706	)	7,696
Occupancy and equipment		11,989	11,594	11,883	10,553	395		106		1,436
Advertising and promotions		4,062	4,362	3,983	4,052	(300	)	79		10
Data processing		9,196	9,387	9,159	8,730	(191	)	37		466
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets		13	149	25	15	(136	)	(12	)	(2	)
Regulatory assessments and insurance		5,150	5,393	7,761	6,060	(243	)	(2,611	)	(910	)
Intangibles amortization		3,367	3,017	2,760	2,428	350		607		939
Other expenses		25,848	22,616	30,483	20,351	3,232		(4,635	)	5,497
Total non-interest expense	$	144,708	140,952	151,843	129,576	3,756		(7,135	)	15,132

Total non-interest expense of $145 million for the current quarter increased $3.8 million, or 3 percent, over the prior quarter and increased $15.1 million, or 12 percent, over the prior year third quarter. Compensation and employee benefits increased $7.7 million, or 10 percent, from the prior year third quarter and was driven by annual salary increases, increased performance-related compensation and increases from the acquisitions of Wheatland and RMB.

Other expenses of $25.8 million increased $3.2 million, or 14 percent, from the prior quarter, which was attributable to several miscellaneous category increases including an increase of $1.2 million in outside consulting services. In addition, the current quarter other expenses included $586 thousand of gains from the sale of former branch facilities and disposal of fixed assets compared to $1.5 million in the prior quarter. Other expenses increased $5.5 million, or 27 percent, from the prior year third quarter as a result of several miscellaneous category increases including an increase of $2.7 million in outside consulting services and an increase of $1.6 million in acquisition-related expenses. Acquisition-related expense was $1.9 million in the current quarter compared to $1.8 million in the prior quarter and $279 thousand in the prior year third quarter.

Federal and State Income Tax Expense
Tax expense during the third quarter of 2024 was $11.2 million, an increase of $1.7 million, or 18 percent, compared to the prior quarter and a decrease of $567 thousand, or 5 percent, from the prior year third quarter. The effective tax rate in the current quarter was 17.9 percent compared to 17.5 percent in the prior quarter and 18.3 percent in the prior year third quarter.

Efficiency Ratio
The efficiency ratio was 64.92 percent in the current quarter compared to 67.97 percent in the prior quarter and 63.31 percent in the prior year third quarter. The decrease from the prior quarter was principally driven by the increase in net interest income that more than offset the increase in non-interest expense.

Operating Results for Nine Months Ended September 30, 2024 Compared to September 30, 2023

Income Summary
	Nine months ended
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024			Sep 30, 2023			$ Change			% Change
Net interest income
Interest income	$	842,814		$	744,159		$	98,655		13	%
Interest expense		329,625			218,933			110,692		51	%
Total net interest income		513,189			525,226			(12,037	)	(2	)%
Non-interest income
Service charges and other fees		58,572			56,042			2,530		5	%
Miscellaneous loan fees and charges		14,153			12,451			1,702		14	%
Gain on sale of loans		12,929			9,974			2,955		30	%
Gain (loss) on sale of securities		30			(202	)		232		(115	)%
Other income		11,213			8,949			2,264		25	%
Total non-interest income		96,897			87,214			9,683		11	%
Total Income	$	610,086		$	612,440		$	(2,354	)	—	%
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)		2.70	%		2.79	%

Net Interest Income
Net-interest income of $513 million for the first nine months of 2024 decreased $12.0 million, or 2 percent, over 2023 and was primarily driven by increased interest expense which outpaced the increase in interest income. Interest income of $843 million for 2024 increased $98.7 million, or 13 percent, from the prior year and was primarily attributable to the increase in the loan portfolio and an increase in loan yields. The loan yield was 5.58 percent during the first nine months of 2024, an increase of 44 basis points from the prior year first nine months loan yield of 5.14 percent.

Interest expense of $330 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased $111 million, or 51 percent, over the same period in the prior year and was primarily the result of higher interest rates on deposits. Core deposit cost (including non-interest bearing deposits) was 1.36 percent for the first nine months of 2024 compared to 0.62 percent for the same period in the prior year. The total funding cost (including non-interest bearing deposits) for the first nine months of 2024 was 1.81 percent, which was an increase of 59 basis points over the first nine months of the prior year funding cost of 1.22 percent.

The net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, during the first nine months of 2024 was 2.70 percent, a 9 basis points decrease from the net interest margin of 2.79 percent for the first nine months of the prior year. Excluding the 4 basis points from discount accretion and the 1 basis point from non-accrual interest, the core net interest margin was 2.65 percent in the first nine months of the current year compared to 2.77 percent in the prior year first nine months.

Non-interest Income
Non-interest income of $96.9 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased $9.7 million, or 11 percent, over the same period last year. Gain on sale of residential loans of $12.9 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased by $3.0 million, or 30 percent, over the first nine months of the prior year. Other income of $11.2 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased $2.3 million, or 25 percent, over the same period last year and was primarily driven by a $1.2 million gain on the sale of repossessed property during the current quarter.

Non-interest Expense Summary

	Nine months ended
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024		Sep 30, 2023		$ Change		% Change
Compensation and employee benefits	$	255,306	$	237,628	$	17,678	7	%
Occupancy and equipment		35,466		33,045		2,421	7	%
Advertising and promotions		12,407		12,020		387	3	%
Data processing		27,742		25,241		2,501	10	%
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets		187		41		146	356	%
Regulatory assessments and insurance		18,304		16,277		2,027	12	%
Core deposit intangibles amortization		9,144		7,304		1,840	25	%
Other expenses		78,947		63,606		15,341	24	%
Total non-interest expense	$	437,503	$	395,162	$	42,341	11	%

Total non-interest expense of $438 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased $42.3 million, or 11 percent, over the same period in the prior year. Compensation and employee benefits expense of $255 million in the first nine months of 2024 increased $17.7 million, or 7 percent, over the same period in the prior year and was driven by annual salary increases and the acquisitions of Wheatland and RMB. Data processing expenses of $27.7 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased $2.5 million, or 10 percent, from the same period in the prior year. Regulatory assessments and insurance expense of $18.3 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased $2.0 million, or 12 percent, over the same period in the prior year which was principally due to the accrual adjustment for the FDIC special assessment. Other expenses of $78.9 million for the first nine months of 2024 increased $15.3 million, or 24 percent, from the first nine months of the prior year and was primarily driven by an increase of $8.6 million of acquisition-related expenses, which was partially offset by gains of $3.1 million from the sale of former branch facilities and disposal of fixed assets.

Provision for Credit Losses
The provision for credit loss expense was $19.8 million for the first nine months of 2024, an increase of $8.0 million, or 68 percent, over the same period in the prior year and was primarily attributable to $9.7 million from the acquisitions of Wheatland and RMB. Net charge-offs for the first nine months of 2024 were $8.7 million compared to $6.6 million in the first nine months of 2023.

Federal and State Income Tax Expense
Tax expense of $24.4 million for the first nine months of 2024 decreased $12.5 million, or 34 percent, over the prior year. The effective tax rate for the first nine months of 2024 was 16.0 percent compared to 17.9 percent for the same period in the prior year. The decrease in tax expense and the resulting effective tax rate was the result of a combination of increased federal tax credits and a decrease in the pre-tax income.

Efficiency Ratio
The efficiency ratio was 68.98 percent for the first nine months of 2024 compared to 62.10 percent for the same period of 2023. The increase from the prior year was primarily attributable to the increase in interest expense in the current year that outpaced the increase in interest income and increased non-interest expense.

Forward-Looking Statements
This news release may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about the Company’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions that are not historical facts, and other statements identified by words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “should,” “projects,” “seeks,” “estimates” or other comparable words or phrases of a future or forward-looking nature. These forward-looking statements are based on current beliefs and expectations of management and are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond the Company’s control. In addition, these forward-looking statements are based on assumptions that are subject to change. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results (express or implied) or other expectations in the forward-looking statements, including those made in this news release:

risks associated with lending and potential adverse changes in the credit quality of the Company’s loan portfolio;
changes in monetary and fiscal policies, including interest rate policies of the Federal Reserve Board, which could adversely affect the Company’s net interest income and margin, the fair value of its financial instruments, profitability, and stockholders’ equity;
legislative or regulatory changes, including increased FDIC insurance rates and assessments, changes in the review and regulation of bank mergers, or increased banking and consumer protection regulations, that may adversely affect the Company’s business and strategies;
risks related to overall economic conditions, including the impact on the economy of an uncertain interest rate environment, inflationary pressures, and geopolitical instability, including the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East;
risks associated with the Company’s ability to negotiate, complete, and successfully integrate any future acquisitions;
costs or difficulties related to the completion and integration of pending or future acquisitions;
impairment of the goodwill recorded by the Company in connection with acquisitions, which may have an adverse impact on earnings and capital;
reduction in demand for banking products and services, whether as a result of changes in customer behavior, economic conditions, banking environment, or competition;
deterioration of the reputation of banks and the financial services industry, which could adversely affect the Company’s ability to obtain and maintain customers;
changes in the competitive landscape, including as may result from new market entrants or further consolidation in the financial services industry, resulting in the creation of larger competitors with greater financial resources;
risks presented by public stock market volatility, which could adversely affect the market price of the Company’s common stock and the ability to raise additional capital or grow through acquisitions;
risks associated with dependence on the Chief Executive Officer, the senior management team and the Presidents of Glacier Bank’s divisions;
material failure, potential interruption or breach in security of the Company’s systems or changes in technological which could expose the Company to cybersecurity risks, fraud, system failures, or direct liabilities;
risks related to natural disasters, including droughts, fires, floods, earthquakes, pandemics, and other unexpected events;
success in managing risks involved in the foregoing; and
effects of any reputational damage to the Company resulting from any of the foregoing.

The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly correct or update any forward-looking statement if it later becomes aware that actual results are likely to differ materially from those expressed in such forward-looking statement.

Conference Call Information
A conference call for investors is scheduled for 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time on Friday, October 25, 2024. Please note that our conference call host no longer offers a general dial-in number. Investors who would like to join the call may now register by following this link to obtain dial-in instructions: https://register.vevent.com/register/BI32ee03ea65c34bd794e0027768d383d4. To participate via the webcast, log on to: https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/9bh88vfv.

About Glacier Bancorp, Inc.
Glacier Bancorp, Inc. (NYSE: GBCI), a member of the Russell 2000® and the S&P MidCap 400® indices, is the parent company for Glacier Bank and its Bank divisions located across its eight state Western U.S. footprint: Altabank (American Fork, UT), Bank of the San Juans (Durango, CO), Citizens Community Bank (Pocatello, ID), Collegiate Peaks Bank (Buena Vista, CO), First Bank of Montana (Lewistown, MT), First Bank of Wyoming (Powell, WY), First Community Bank Utah (Layton, UT), First Security Bank (Bozeman, MT), First Security Bank of Missoula (Missoula, MT), First State Bank (Wheatland, WY), Glacier Bank (Kalispell, MT), Heritage Bank of Nevada (Reno, NV), Mountain West Bank (Coeur d’Alene, ID), The Foothills Bank (Yuma, AZ), Valley Bank of Helena (Helena, MT), Western Security Bank (Billings, MT), and Wheatland Bank (Spokane, WA).

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023
Assets
Cash on hand and in banks	$	342,105		271,107		246,525		264,067
Interest bearing cash deposits		645,728		529,672		1,107,817		1,408,027
Cash and cash equivalents		987,833		800,779		1,354,342		1,672,094
Debt securities, available-for-sale		4,436,578		4,499,541		4,785,719		4,741,738
Debt securities, held-to-maturity		3,348,698		3,400,403		3,502,411		3,553,805
Total debt securities		7,785,276		7,899,944		8,288,130		8,295,543
Loans held for sale, at fair value		46,126		39,745		15,691		29,027
Loans receivable		17,181,187		16,851,991		16,198,082		16,135,046
Allowance for credit losses		(205,170	)	(200,955	)	(192,757	)	(192,271	)
Loans receivable, net		16,976,017		16,651,036		16,005,325		15,942,775
Premises and equipment, net		466,977		451,515		421,791		415,343
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets		633		630		1,503		48
Accrued interest receivable		114,121		102,279		94,526		104,476
Deferred tax asset		125,432		155,834		159,070		203,745
Intangibles, net		52,780		43,028		31,870		34,297
Goodwill		1,053,556		1,023,762		985,393		985,393
Non-marketable equity securities		98,285		121,810		12,755		11,330
Bank-owned life insurance		188,971		187,793		171,101		170,175
Other assets		309,762		327,185		201,132		199,315
Total assets	$	28,205,769		27,805,340		27,742,629		28,063,561
Liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits	$	6,407,728		6,093,430		6,022,980		6,465,353
Interest bearing deposits		14,307,036		14,008,329		13,906,187		13,929,811
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase		1,831,501		1,629,504		1,486,850		1,499,696
FHLB advances		1,800,000		2,350,000		—		—
FRB Bank Term Funding		—		—		2,740,000		2,740,000
Other borrowed funds		84,168		88,149		81,695		73,752
Subordinated debentures		133,065		133,024		132,943		132,903
Accrued interest payable		35,382		31,000		125,907		91,874
Other liabilities		361,839		334,459		225,786		255,578
Total liabilities		24,960,719		24,667,895		24,722,348		25,188,967
Commitments and Contingent Liabilities		—		—		—		—
Stockholders’ Equity
Preferred shares, $0.01 par value per share, 1,000,000 shares authorized, none issued or outstanding		—		—		—		—
Common stock, $0.01 par value per share, 234,000,000 shares authorized		1,134		1,134		1,109		1,109
Paid-in capital		2,447,200		2,445,479		2,350,104		2,348,305
Retained earnings – substantially restricted		1,059,022		1,045,483		1,043,181		1,025,547
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(262,306	)	(354,651	)	(374,113	)	(500,367	)
Total stockholders’ equity		3,245,050		3,137,445		3,020,281		2,874,594
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	28,205,769		27,805,340		27,742,629		28,063,561

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

	Three Months ended							Nine months ended
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	Sep 30, 2024		Jun 30, 2024		Mar 31, 2024	Sep 30, 2023		Sep 30, 2024	Sep 30, 2023
Interest Income
Investment securities	$	46,371	42,165		56,218	53,397		144,754	144,697
Residential real estate loans		23,118	21,754		20,764	18,594		65,636	51,508
Commercial loans		196,901	188,326		181,472	173,437		566,699	493,706
Consumer and other loans		23,188	21,589		20,948	19,478		65,725	54,248
Total interest income		289,578	273,834		279,402	264,906		842,814	744,159
Interest Expense
Deposits		70,607	67,852		67,196	54,697		205,655	98,942
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase		14,737	13,566		12,598	10,972		40,901	24,185
Federal Home Loan Bank advances		22,344	24,179		4,249	—		50,772	26,910
FRB Bank Term Funding		—	—		27,097	30,229		27,097	63,160
Other borrowed funds		252	353		344	489		949	1,428
Subordinated debentures		1,407	1,406		1,438	1,465		4,251	4,308
Total interest expense		109,347	107,356		112,922	97,852		329,625	218,933
Net Interest Income		180,231	166,478		166,480	167,054		513,189	525,226
Provision for credit losses		8,005	3,518		8,249	3,539		19,772	11,782
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		172,226	162,960		158,231	163,515		493,417	513,444
Non-Interest Income
Service charges and other fees		20,587	19,422		18,563	19,304		58,572	56,042
Miscellaneous loan fees and charges		4,970	4,821		4,362	4,322		14,153	12,451
Gain on sale of loans		4,898	4,669		3,362	4,046		12,929	9,974
Gain (loss) on sale of securities		26	(12	)	16	(65	)	30	(202	)
Other income		4,223	3,304		3,686	2,633		11,213	8,949
Total non-interest income		34,704	32,204		29,989	30,240		96,897	87,214
Non-Interest Expense
Compensation and employee benefits		85,083	84,434		85,789	77,387		255,306	237,628
Occupancy and equipment		11,989	11,594		11,883	10,553		35,466	33,045
Advertising and promotions		4,062	4,362		3,983	4,052		12,407	12,020
Data processing		9,196	9,387		9,159	8,730		27,742	25,241
Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets		13	149		25	15		187	41
Regulatory assessments and insurance		5,150	5,393		7,761	6,060		18,304	16,277
Intangibles amortization		3,367	3,017		2,760	2,428		9,144	7,304
Other expenses		25,848	22,616		30,483	20,351		78,947	63,606
Total non-interest expense		144,708	140,952		151,843	129,576		437,503	395,162
Income Before Income Taxes		62,222	54,212		36,377	64,179		152,811	205,496
Federal and state income tax expense		11,167	9,504		3,750	11,734		24,421	36,885
Net Income	$	51,055	44,708		32,627	52,445		128,390	168,611

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Average Balance Sheets

	Three Months ended
	September 30, 2024						June 30, 2024
(Dollars in thousands)	Average Balance		Interest & Dividends		Average Yield/ Rate		Average Balance		Interest & Dividends		Average Yield/ Rate
Assets
Residential real estate loans	$	1,850,066	$	23,118	5.00	%	$	1,796,787	$	21,754	4.84	%
Commercial loans ¹		13,957,304		198,556	5.66	%		13,740,455		189,939	5.56	%
Consumer and other loans		1,324,142		23,188	6.97	%		1,290,587		21,589	6.73	%
Total loans ²		17,131,512		244,862	5.69	%		16,827,829		233,282	5.58	%
Tax-exempt debt securities ³		1,660,643		14,710	3.54	%		1,707,269		15,111	3.54	%
Taxable debt securities ^{4, 5}		7,073,967		34,001	1.92	%		7,042,885		29,461	1.67	%
Total earning assets		25,866,122		293,573	4.52	%		25,577,983		277,854	4.37	%
Goodwill and intangibles		1,092,632						1,068,250
Non-earning assets		836,878						754,491
Total assets	$	27,795,632					$	27,400,724
Liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits	$	6,237,166	$	—	—	%	$	6,026,709	$	—	—	%
NOW and DDA accounts		5,314,459		16,221	1.21	%		5,221,883		15,728	1.21	%
Savings accounts		2,829,203		5,699	0.80	%		2,914,538		6,014	0.83	%
Money market deposit accounts		2,887,173		15,048	2.07	%		2,904,438		14,467	2.00	%
Certificate accounts		3,211,842		33,597	4.16	%		3,037,638		31,593	4.18	%
Total core deposits		20,479,843		70,565	1.37	%		20,105,206		67,802	1.36	%
Wholesale deposits ⁶		3,122		42	5.47	%		3,726		50	5.50	%
Repurchase agreements		1,723,553		14,738	3.40	%		1,597,887		13,566	3.41	%
FHLB advances		1,828,533		22,344	4.78	%		2,007,747		24,179	4.76	%
Subordinated debentures and other borrowed funds		219,472		1,658	3.01	%		224,778		1,759	3.15	%
Total funding liabilities		24,254,523		109,347	1.79	%		23,939,344		107,356	1.80	%
Other liabilities		336,906						344,105
Total liabilities		24,591,429						24,283,449
Stockholders’ Equity
Stockholders’ equity		3,204,203						3,117,275
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	27,795,632					$	27,400,724
Net interest income (tax-equivalent)			$	184,226					$	170,498
Net interest spread (tax-equivalent)					2.73	%					2.57	%
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)					2.83	%					2.68	%

______________________________

¹	Includes tax effect of $1.7 million and $1.6 million on tax-exempt municipal loan and lease income for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.
²	Total loans are gross of the allowance for credit losses, net of unearned income and include loans held for sale. Non-accrual loans were included in the average volume for the entire period.
³	Includes tax effect of $2.1 million and $2.2 million on tax-exempt debt securities income for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.
⁴	Includes interest income of $4.8 million and $1.9 million on average interest-bearing cash balances of $357.0 million and $0.14 billion for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.
⁵	Includes tax effect of $203 thousand and $211 thousand on federal income tax credits for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively.
⁶	Wholesale deposits include brokered deposits classified as NOW, DDA, money market deposit and certificate accounts with contractual maturities.

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Average Balance Sheets (continued)

	Three Months ended
	September 30, 2024						September 30, 2023
(Dollars in thousands)	Average Balance		Interest & Dividends		Average Yield/ Rate		Average Balance		Interest & Dividends		Average Yield/ Rate
Assets
Residential real estate loans	$	1,850,066	$	23,118	5.00	%	$	1,649,947	$	18,594	4.51	%
Commercial loans ¹		13,957,304		198,556	5.66	%		13,120,479		174,822	5.29	%
Consumer and other loans		1,324,142		23,188	6.97	%		1,263,775		19,478	6.11	%
Total loans ²		17,131,512		244,862	5.69	%		16,034,201		212,894	5.27	%
Tax-exempt debt securities ³		1,660,643		14,710	3.54	%		1,732,227		14,486	3.34	%
Taxable debt securities ^{4, 5}		7,073,967		34,001	1.92	%		8,485,157		41,052	1.94	%
Total earning assets		25,866,122		293,573	4.52	%		26,251,585		268,432	4.06	%
Goodwill and intangibles		1,092,632						1,020,868
Non-earning assets		836,878						528,145
Total assets	$	27,795,632					$	27,800,598
Liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits	$	6,237,166	$	—	—	%	$	6,461,350	$	—	—	%
NOW and DDA accounts		5,314,459		16,221	1.21	%		5,231,741		12,906	0.98	%
Savings accounts		2,829,203		5,699	0.80	%		2,840,620		3,492	0.49	%
Money market deposit accounts		2,887,173		15,048	2.07	%		3,039,177		12,646	1.65	%
Certificate accounts		3,211,842		33,597	4.16	%		2,462,266		23,151	3.73	%
Total core deposits		20,479,843		70,565	1.37	%		20,035,154		52,195	1.03	%
Wholesale deposits ⁶		3,122		42	5.47	%		188,523		2,502	5.27	%
Repurchase agreements		1,723,553		14,738	3.40	%		1,401,765		10,972	3.11	%
FHLB advances		1,828,533		22,344	4.78	%		—		—	—	%
FRB Bank Term Funding		—		—	—	%		2,740,000		30,229	4.38	%
Subordinated debentures and other borrowed funds		219,472		1,658	3.01	%		208,336		1,954	3.72	%
Total funding liabilities		24,254,523		109,347	1.79	%		24,573,778		97,852	1.58	%
Other liabilities		336,906						302,564
Total liabilities		24,591,429						24,876,342
Stockholders’ Equity
Stockholders’ equity		3,204,203						2,924,256
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	27,795,632					$	27,800,598
Net interest income (tax-equivalent)			$	184,226					$	170,580
Net interest spread (tax-equivalent)					2.73	%					2.48	%
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)					2.83	%					2.58	%

______________________________

¹	Includes tax effect of $1.7 million and $1.4 million on tax-exempt municipal loan and lease income for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
²	Total loans are gross of the allowance for credit losses, net of unearned income and include loans held for sale. Non-accrual loans were included in the average volume for the entire period.
³	Includes tax effect of $2.1 million and $1.9 million on tax-exempt debt securities income for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
⁴	Includes interest income of $4.8 million and $15.1 million on average interest-bearing cash balances of $357.0 million and $1,106.1 million for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
⁵	Includes tax effect of $203 thousand and $215 thousand on federal income tax credits for the three months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
⁶	Wholesale deposits include brokered deposits classified as NOW, DDA, money market deposit and certificate accounts with contractual maturities.

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Average Balance Sheets (continued)

	Nine Months ended
	September 30, 2024						September 30, 2023
(Dollars in thousands)	Average Balance		Interest & Dividends		Average Yield/ Rate		Average Balance		Interest & Dividends		Average Yield/ Rate
Assets
Residential real estate loans	$	1,798,202	$	65,636	4.87	%	$	1,570,911	$	51,508	4.37	%
Commercial loans ¹		13,737,866		571,540	5.56	%		12,910,691		498,152	5.16	%
Consumer and other loans		1,299,463		65,725	6.76	%		1,236,158		54,248	5.87	%
Total loans ²		16,835,531		702,901	5.58	%		15,717,760		603,908	5.14	%
Tax-exempt debt securities ³		1,695,965		44,978	3.54	%		1,745,764		44,978	3.44	%
Taxable debt securities ^{4, 5}		7,429,971		106,939	1.92	%		8,240,041		107,338	1.74	%
Total earning assets		25,961,467		854,818	4.40	%		25,703,565		756,224	3.93	%
Goodwill and intangibles		1,071,024						1,023,274
Non-earning assets		734,681						510,332
Total assets	$	27,767,172					$	27,237,171
Liabilities
Non-interest bearing deposits	$	6,077,392	$	—	—	%	$	6,770,242	$	—	—	%
NOW and DDA accounts		5,270,842		47,866	1.21	%		5,140,668		22,606	0.59	%
Savings accounts		2,881,273		17,368	0.81	%		2,930,420		5,070	0.23	%
Money market deposit accounts		2,913,206		43,907	2.01	%		3,253,138		28,654	1.18	%
Certificate accounts		3,083,866		96,365	4.17	%		1,638,163		34,613	2.82	%
Total core deposits		20,226,579		205,506	1.36	%		19,732,631		90,943	0.62	%
Wholesale deposits ⁶		3,603		149	5.49	%		213,465		7,999	5.01	%
Repurchase agreements		1,612,021		40,901	3.39	%		1,238,139		24,185	2.61	%
FHLB advances		1,397,258		50,772	4.77	%		738,004		26,910	4.81	%
FRB Bank Term Funding		824,672		27,097	4.39	%		1,929,322		63,160	4.38	%
Subordinated debentures and other borrowed funds		220,835		5,200	3.15	%		208,891		5,737	3.67	%
Total funding liabilities		24,284,968		329,625	1.81	%		24,060,452		218,934	1.22	%
Other liabilities		345,822						256,022
Total liabilities		24,630,790						24,316,474
Stockholders’ Equity
Stockholders’ equity		3,136,382						2,920,697
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	27,767,172					$	27,237,171
Net interest income (tax-equivalent)			$	525,193					$	537,290
Net interest spread (tax-equivalent)					2.59	%					2.71	%
Net interest margin (tax-equivalent)					2.70	%					2.79	%

______________________________

¹	Includes tax effect of $4.8 million and $4.4 million on tax-exempt municipal loan and lease income for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
²	Total loans are gross of the allowance for credit losses, net of unearned income and include loans held for sale. Non-accrual loans were included in the average volume for the entire period.
³	Includes tax effect of $6.5 million and $7.0 million on tax-exempt debt securities income for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
⁴	Includes interest income of $17.2 million and $24.5 million on average interest-bearing cash balances of $631.7 million and $624.0 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
⁵	Includes tax effect of $629 thousand and $644 thousand on federal income tax credits for the nine months ended September 30, 2024 and 2023, respectively.
⁶	Wholesale deposits include brokered deposits classified as NOW, DDA, money market deposit and certificate accounts with contractual maturities.

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Loan Portfolio by Regulatory Classification

	Loans Receivable, by Loan Type												% Change from
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024			Dec 31, 2023			Sep 30, 2023			Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023
Custom and owner occupied construction	$	235,915		$	233,978		$	290,572		$	306,106		1	%	(19)	%	(23)	%
Pre-sold and spec construction		203,610			198,219			236,596			287,048		3	%	(14)	%	(29)	%
Total residential construction		439,525			432,197			527,168			593,154		2	%	(17)	%	(26)	%
Land development		205,704			209,794			232,966			234,995		(2)	%	(12)	%	(12)	%
Consumer land or lots		189,705			190,781			187,545			184,685		(1)	%	1	%	3	%
Unimproved land		109,237			108,763			87,739			87,089		—	%	25	%	25	%
Developed lots for operative builders		67,140			57,140			56,142			62,485		18	%	20	%	7	%
Commercial lots		98,644			99,036			87,185			84,194		—	%	13	%	17	%
Other construction		689,638			810,536			900,547			982,384		(15)	%	(23)	%	(30)	%
Total land, lot, and other construction		1,360,068			1,476,050			1,552,124			1,635,832		(8)	%	(12)	%	(17)	%
Owner occupied		3,121,900			3,087,814			3,035,768			2,976,821		1	%	3	%	5	%
Non-owner occupied		4,001,430			3,941,786			3,742,916			3,765,266		2	%	7	%	6	%
Total commercial real estate		7,123,330			7,029,600			6,778,684			6,742,087		1	%	5	%	6	%
Commercial and industrial		1,387,538			1,400,896			1,363,479			1,363,198		(1)	%	2	%	2	%
Agriculture		1,047,320			962,384			772,458			785,208		9	%	36	%	33	%
1st lien		2,462,885			2,353,912			2,127,989			2,054,497		5	%	16	%	20	%
Junior lien		77,029			56,049			47,230			47,490		37	%	63	%	62	%
Total 1-4 family		2,539,914			2,409,961			2,175,219			2,101,987		5	%	17	%	21	%
Multifamily residential		921,138			1,027,962			796,538			714,822		(10)	%	16	%	29	%
Home equity lines of credit		1,004,300			974,000			979,891			950,204		3	%	2	%	6	%
Other consumer		221,517			220,755			229,154			233,980		—	%	(3)	%	(5)	%
Total consumer		1,225,817			1,194,755			1,209,045			1,184,184		3	%	1	%	4	%
States and political subdivisions		993,871			777,426			834,947			833,618		28	%	19	%	19	%
Other		188,792			180,505			204,111			209,983		5	%	(8)	%	(10)	%
Total loans receivable, including loans held for sale		17,227,313			16,891,736			16,213,773			16,164,073		2	%	6	%	7	%
Less loans held for sale ¹		(46,126	)		(39,745	)		(15,691	)		(29,027	)	16	%	194	%	59	%
Total loans receivable	$	17,181,187		$	16,851,991		$	16,198,082		$	16,135,046		2	%	6	%	6	%

______________________________

¹	Loans held for sale are primarily 1st lien 1-4 family loans.

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Credit Quality Summary by Regulatory Classification

	Non-performing Assets, by Loan Type					Non- Accrual Loans	Accruing Loans 90 Days or More Past Due	Other real estate owned and foreclosed assets
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024		Jun 30, 2024	Dec 31, 2023	Sep 30, 2023	Sep 30, 2024	Sep 30, 2024	Sep 30, 2024
Custom and owner occupied construction	$	202	206	214	219	202	—	—
Pre-sold and spec construction		3,705	2,908	763	763	2,942	763	—
Total residential construction		3,907	3,114	977	982	3,144	763	—
Land development		583	—	35	80	22	561	—
Consumer land or lots		458	429	96	314	241	217	—
Unimproved land		—	—	—	36	—	—	—
Developed lots for operative builders		531	608	608	608	—	531	—
Commercial lots		47	47	47	188	—	47	—
Other construction		—	25	—	12,884	—	—	—
Total land, lot and other construction		1,619	1,109	786	14,110	263	1,356	—
Owner occupied		1,903	1,992	1,838	1,445	662	809	432
Non-owner occupied		1,335	257	11,016	15,105	1,335	—	—
Total commercial real estate		3,238	2,249	12,854	16,550	1,997	809	432
Commercial and Industrial		2,455	2,044	1,971	1,367	1,408	1,047	—
Agriculture		6,040	2,442	2,558	2,450	2,164	3,876	—
1st lien		6,065	2,923	2,664	2,766	3,724	2,341	—
Junior lien		279	492	180	363	279	—	—
Total 1-4 family		6,344	3,415	2,844	3,129	4,003	2,341	—
Multifamily residential		392	385	395	—	392	—	—
Home equity lines of credit		2,867	2,145	2,043	1,612	1,903	964	—
Other consumer		1,111	1,089	1,187	942	663	247	201
Total consumer		3,978	3,234	3,230	2,554	2,566	1,211	201
Other		148	16	16	1,141	—	148	—
Total	$	28,121	18,008	25,631	42,283	15,937	11,551	633

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Credit Quality Summary by Regulatory Classification (continued)

	Accruing 30-89 Days Delinquent Loans, by Loan Type								% Change from
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024		Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023		Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023
Custom and owner occupied construction	$	13	$	1,323	$	2,549	$	—	(99)	%	(99)	%	n/m
Pre-sold and spec construction		1,250		816		1,219		599	53	%	3	%	109	%
Total residential construction		1,263		2,139		3,768		599	(41)	%	(66)	%	111	%
Land development		157		—		163		44	n/m		(4)	%	257	%
Consumer land or lots		747		411		624		528	82	%	20	%	41	%
Unimproved land		39		158		—		87	(75)	%	n/m		(55)	%
Commercial lots		—		—		2,159		1,245	n/m		(100)	%	(100)	%
Other construction		—		21		—		—	(100)	%	n/m		n/m
Total land, lot and other construction		943		590		2,946		1,904	60	%	(68)	%	(50)	%
Owner occupied		5,641		4,326		2,222		652	30	%	154	%	765	%
Non-owner occupied		13,785		8,119		14,471		213	70	%	(5)	%	6,372	%
Total commercial real estate		19,426		12,445		16,693		865	56	%	16	%	2,146	%
Commercial and industrial		3,125		17,591		12,905		2,946	(82)	%	(76)	%	6	%
Agriculture		16,932		5,288		594		604	220	%	2,751	%	2,703	%
1st lien		6,275		2,637		3,768		1,006	138	%	67	%	524	%
Junior lien		13		17		1		355	(24)	%	1,200	%	(96)	%
Total 1-4 family		6,288		2,654		3,769		1,361	137	%	67	%	362	%
Home equity lines of credit		4,567		5,432		4,518		3,638	(16)	%	1	%	26	%
Other consumer		2,227		2,192		3,264		1,821	2	%	(32)	%	22	%
Total consumer		6,794		7,624		7,782		5,459	(11)	%	(13)	%	24	%
Other		1,442		1,347		1,510		1,515	7	%	(5)	%	(5)	%
Total	$	56,213	$	49,678	$	49,967	$	15,253	13	%	13	%	269	%

______________________________

n/m – not measurable

Glacier Bancorp, Inc. Credit Quality Summary by Regulatory Classification (continued)

	Net Charge-Offs (Recoveries), Year-to-Date Period Ending, By Loan Type									Charge-Offs	Recoveries
(Dollars in thousands)	Sep 30, 2024			Jun 30, 2024		Dec 31, 2023		Sep 30, 2023		Sep 30, 2024	Sep 30, 2024
Pre-sold and spec construction	$	(4	)	(4	)	(15	)	(12	)	—	4
Land development		(21	)	(1	)	(135	)	(134	)	—	21
Consumer land or lots		(21	)	(22	)	(19	)	(14	)	—	21
Unimproved land		5		5		—		—		5	—
Commercial lots		319		319		—		—		319	—
Other construction		—		—		889		—		—	—
Total land, lot and other construction		282		301		735		(148	)	324	42
Owner occupied		(73	)	(73	)	(59	)	(104	)	—	73
Non-owner occupied		(3	)	(2	)	799		500		—	3
Total commercial real estate		(76	)	(75	)	740		396		—	76
Commercial and industrial		1,272		644		364		(11	)	1,839	567
Agriculture		65		68		—		—		68	3
1st lien		(34	)	(22	)	66		98		—	34
Junior lien		(60	)	(55	)	24		32		10	70
Total 1-4 family		(94	)	(77	)	90		130		10	104
Multifamily residential		—		—		(136	)	—		—	—
Home equity lines of credit		(31	)	1		(6	)	20		35	66
Other consumer		753		493		1,097		816		1,056	303
Total consumer		722		494		1,091		836		1,091	369
Other		6,561		4,611		7,447		5,430		9,074	2,513
Total	$	8,728		5,962		10,316		6,621		12,406	3,678

Visit our website at www.glacierbancorp.com

CONTACT: Randall M. Chesler, CEO
(406) 751-4722
Ron J. Copher, CFO
(406) 751-7706

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Nations: Readout of the Secretary-General’s meeting with H.E. Mr. Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation

Source: United Nations secretary general

On the margins of the BRICS Summit in Kazan, the Secretary-General met with H.E. Mr. Vladimir Putin, President of the Russian Federation.

The Secretary-General reiterated his position that the Russian invasion of Ukraine was in violation of the United Nations Charter and international law. He further underlined United Nations support for peace, in line with the remarks he delivered at the BRICS summit. **

The Secretary-General expressed his belief that establishing freedom of navigation in the Black Sea is of paramount importance for Ukraine, the Russian Federation and for the world’s food and energy security. He fully supports the continuation of negotiations in this regard and expresses his deep appreciation for the work being done by Türkiye.

The Secretary-General and the President also discussed the situation in the Middle East, in particular the absolute need for a ceasefire in Gaza and Lebanon, as well as the need to avoid a further regional escalation.

The Secretary-General and the President also discussed the questions of development and the international financial system.

** From the Secretary-General’s BRICS remarks: “A just peace in line with the UN Charter, international law and General Assembly resolutions.”

MIL OSI United Nations News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Update 256 – IAEA Director General Statement on Situation in Ukraine

Source: International Atomic Energy Agency – IAEA

Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) lost the connection to its only remaining 330 kilovolt (kV) back-up power line for a second time this month, once again leaving the facility dependent on one single source of the external electricity it needs for reactor cooling and other key nuclear safety and security functions, Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi said today.

The IAEA team stationed at the plant was informed that the power line was disconnected for more than 26 hours between Monday and Tuesday this week due to unspecified damage on the other side of the Dnipro River. It took place three weeks after another disconnection of the same line. In both instances, the ZNPP continued to receive electricity from its sole 750 kV line. Before the military conflict, Europe’s largest nuclear power plant (NPP) had four 750 kV and six 330 kV lines available.

“What once would have been unthinkable – a major nuclear power plant suffering repeated off-site power cuts – has become a frequent occurrence during this devastating war. The situation is clearly not getting any better in this regard. The nuclear safety and security situation at the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant remains highly precarious,” Director General Grossi said.

Underlining the persistent risks, the IAEA team has continued to hear explosions every day over the past week, although no damage to the ZNPP was reported.

The IAEA team members conducted walkdowns across the site as part of their activities to assess nuclear safety and security at the plant, including observing the testing of an emergency diesel generator (EDG) of reactor unit 4. In meetings with plant staff, they discussed other important topics, such as the modernization of control systems for the site’s EDGs as well as updated procedures related to the ZNPP’s radiation protection programme.

As a follow up to their visit last week to the cooling tower damaged by a major fire in August, the team members also discussed with the ZNPP how it will assess the extent of the damage, including the selection of an external contractor to carry out this work.

The IAEA teams present at the Khmelnytskyy, Rivne and South Ukraine NPPs and the Chornobyl site reported that nuclear safety and security is being maintained despite the effects of the ongoing conflict, including air raid alarms for several days over the past week.

At the South Ukraine NPP, the IAEA team was informed that reactor unit 1 was disconnected from the grid for about four hours on Tuesday evening due to a spurious signal to the unit’s protection systems without the reactor safety systems being activated. The root cause of the event is being investigated. The reactor – one of three at the plant – is again generating power for the grid.

At the request of Ukraine, an IAEA team is visiting six electrical substations in Ukraine this week, as part of the Agency’s work to assess the status of the electrical grid infrastructure essential to nuclear safety that began in September. During the visits, the team reviews the operational consequences of actual and potential damage to substations which supply off-site power to the country’s NPPs.

Reliable access to off-site power is one of the Seven Indispensable Pillars for ensuring nuclear safety and security during an armed conflict outlined by Director General Grossi two and a half years ago. The safety of operating NPPs is dependent on a stable grid connection, but the situation in this regard has become increasingly precarious in recent months.

The IAEA already has teams of staff stationed at all of Ukraine’s NPPs who contribute to maintaining nuclear safety and security during the military conflict.

The IAEA is continuing to implement its comprehensive programme of assistance in support of nuclear safety and security in Ukraine, including by delivering requested equipment. This week, two spectrometry systems enhancing the analytical capabilities of the hydrometeorological organizations of the Ukraine’s State Emergency Service were procured and delivered, funded by Switzerland. It was the 71st equipment delivery to Ukraine, totaling over 12.1 million euro since the start of the armed conflict.

In addition, the Agency has coordinated the delivery of the two static test benches from the Rivne NPP to the supplier for repair during an outage of reactor unit 2. The repair was funded by Norway. The repair should be completed by the end of April next year, when the repaired test benches will be returned to the plant to enable the unit’s restart. The equipment is used in the nuclear and other industries to stress test components, including hydraulic shock absorbers.

MIL Security OSI –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Statement from President Joe Biden on World Polio Day

US Senate News:

Source: The White House
The United States is proudly a leader and core strategic partner in the world’s quest to eradicate polio and because of our efforts, the world has a historic window of opportunity to end polio for good. Today, we reaffirm our commitment to secure a polio-free future.
Through our leadership in the Global Polio Eradication Initiative, our sustained commitment to ending polio has resulted in 20 million people walking today who otherwise could have been paralyzed. We have reduced the number of children paralyzed by 99.9 percent and vaccinated over 3 billion children against polio. However, polio persists in some of the world’s most challenging environments.
If high vaccination rates against polio are not achieved and maintained, including amidst instability, conflict, and misinformation mounting around the world, the risk of polio outbreaks will rise even in places long considered polio-free, like we’ve recently seen in New York, London, and Ukraine as well as in Gaza, where all parties must ensure the safe and effective implementation of the polio vaccination campaign that is urgently needed throughout Gaza.
In order to achieve the goal of eradicating polio, the world must rally together. Delivering a polio-free world with stronger health systems and communities is not only the right thing to do for humanity, but a smart investment in the health of future generations and our collective global health security. Together, we can make it a reality.

MIL OSI USA News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Economics: Transcript of Press Briefing: Middle East and Central Asia Department Regional Economic Outlook October 2024

Source: International Monetary Fund

October 24, 2024

PARTICIPANTS:

JIHAD AZOUR, Director of Middle East and Central Asia Department, International Monetary Fund

ANGHAM AL SHAMI, Communications Officer, International Monetary Fund

* * * * *

MS. AL SHAMI: Good morning. Good afternoon to those of you in the region. Thank you for joining us to this press briefing on the Regional Economic Outlook for the Middle east and Central Asia. I’m Angham Al Shami from the Communications Department here at the IMF. If you’re joining us online, we do have Arabic and French interpretations on the IMF Regional Economic Outlook page and IMF Press Center. So please join us there and we have interpretations also in the room. I’m joined here today by Jihad Azour, the Director of the Middle East and Central Asia Department here at the IMF and he’s going to give us an overview of the outlook for the region. Jihad over to you.

MR. AZOUR: Angham, thank you very much. Good morning everyone and welcome to the 2024 Annual Meetings. Before taking your questions, I will make few brief remarks to highlight three key messages regarding the economic outlook for the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), as well as the Caucasus and Central Asia (CCA). First, regarding the outlook, growth is set to strengthen in the near term in both MENA and the CCA regions. However, exposure to broader geoeconomic developments is adding to uncertainty. Hence, our 2025 forecasts come with important caveats.

Let me start with the Middle East and North Africa. This year has been challenging, with conflicts causing devastating human suffering and economic damage. Oil production cuts are contributing to sluggish growth in many economies, too. The recent escalation in Lebanon has increased uncertainty in the MENA region. The second important issue is on growth. For 2024, growth is projected at 2.1 percent, a downgrade revision of 0.6 percent from the April WEO forecast, and this is largely due to the impact of the conflict and the prolonged OPEC+ production cuts. To the extent that these gradually abate, we anticipate stronger growth of 4 percent in 2025. However, uncertainty about when these factors will ease is still very high.

MENA oil exporters are expected to see growth rise from 2.3 percent this year to 4 percent in 2025, contingent on the expiration of the voluntary oil production cuts. Growth in oil importers is projected to recover from 1.5 percent in 2024 to 3.9 percent in 2025, assuming conflicts ease. Let me now turn to the outlook for Caucasus and Central Asia. The CCA regions continue to show robust growth, which was revised up to 4.3 percent in 2024, with growth of 4.5 percent expected for next year. However, some economies are seeing tentative signs of slower trade and other inflows, especially on the remittance side. Subdued oil production is weighing on the medium-term growth prospect for CCA oil exporters. And for oil importers, growth projects depend on the reform implementation. The disinflation process is continuing and is continuing across both MENA and CCA region with headline inflation coming down significantly compared to the peak levels over the past two years. However, inflation remains elevated in few cases due to country specific challenges.

My second point is on the medium-term growth prospects. Medium-term growth prospects have faded over the past two decades and are now relatively weak in many economies. Changing these dynamics requires steady reform implementation. Priorities are for the MENA and CCA regions include governance improvement, job creation, especially for women and youth, investment promotion and financial development. Achieving stronger and more resilient growth will not only foster job creation and greater inclusion, but will also help reduce elevated debt levels and enable progress toward the development of social spending goals.

My third point is on the uncertainty. High uncertainty means that the economic outlook is fraught with risks. The recent intensification of conflict in Lebanon has increased uncertainty and risks to a further level, and the risk of further escalation in the MENA region is the main issue here in terms of increase in risks. This fluid situation is not yet factored in our analysis, and downside risks could be material depending on the extent of the escalation. We are closely monitoring the situation and assessing the potential economic impacts. Overall, the impact will depend on the severity of any potential escalation. The conflict could impact the region through multiple channels. Beyond the impact on output, other key channels of transmissions could include tourism, trade, potential refugee and migration flows, oil and gas market volatility, financial markets and social unrest.

Concern is also high about the possibility of prolonged conflict in Sudan, increased geoeconomic fragmentation, volatility in commodity prices, especially for the oil exporting countries, high debt and financing needs for emerging markets and recurrent climate shocks. In the CCA, risks are primarily associated with potential financial instability resulting from sudden shift in trade and financial flows, and for both regions, failure to implement sufficient reform could constrain already muted prospects for medium term growth.

Before opening the floor to your questions, let me emphasize the Fund’s commitment to supporting economies across the region. Our engagement remains strong in terms of financing and presence. Since early 2020, the Fund has approved $47.7 billion in financing to countries across MENA and CCA and we have carried out capacity development projects for 31 countries only in the last fiscal years. Thank you very much for being here today and I’m now happy to take your questions.

MS. AL SHAMI: So, we’ll now turn to your questions. If you’re on Webex, please turn on your camera and raise your hand and we will call on you. And if you’re in the room, please raise your hand. So let’s start with maybe the middle right here, the gentleman.

QUESTIONER: Hello and good morning, Jihad. I wanted to bring you back to your comments about the risks of an escalation in the region. Obviously, the human toll of this would be horrific, but in terms of the impact on the economies in the region, particularly Egypt, which is already suffering from an extreme loss of revenues from the Suez Canal, and then Lebanon, which you’ve had discussions with in the past, those really never went anywhere because of lack of commitment to do reforms. What are the prospects of having to either redo some of the programs or create new ones if there’s an escalation? Thank you.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you, Dave. Maybe we’ll take another question on the conflict. Kyle, second row here.

QUESTIONER: Hi, good morning. Thank you for taking my question. Earlier this morning, the Managing Director said the outlook for the MENA is significantly downgraded and she cited mostly the geopolitical conflict. So could you walk us through, like, where exactly the economic impact has been felt since the April release?

MS. AL SHAMI: Maybe we’ll take those two questions, Jihad, on the conflict.

AZOUR: Thank you very much. Well, first of all, the conflict is inflicting heavy human toll, and our hearts goes to all the victims and those who were, in their life and livelihoods were affected by the escalation of the conflict. Of course, the impact of the conflict is to be differentiated between countries who are at the epicenter. The group of countries who are severely affected by the conflict, Gaza, West Bank, the whole Palestinian economy has been severely affected. Lebanon also. And the Lebanese economy was severely affected, with more than 1.2 million people displaced, which represent almost 25 percent of the population, destruction of livelihoods in a broad region that is mainly agriculture, and the impact on some key sectors like tourism and trade. Therefore, the severely affected countries are seeing a large drop in their economic activity, and they will face contraction in their economies in the context of high inflation.

The second group I would call the group of partially affected countries. And here we have countries like Jordan, Syria and Egypt. And you have mentioned Egypt. The main channel of impact on Egypt is trade. The reduction in trade volume going through the Suez Canal has affected revenues by more than 60 to 70 percent on average for the Suez Canal, which would represent between 4 and a half to , $5 billion of loss in revenues. For Jordan, the impact is mainly on tourism, which is not the case for Egypt. Those are the two main countries affected. Syria of course, is affected, but we have very little information on that. This second group of partially affected countries, authorities have already started to take actions to protect their economies against that. And we have the indirectly affected countries. And here we have to look at the channels of transmission. Trade is one. The other one is the impact on tourism. The impact on oil and gas has been relatively muted so far, except high volatility in the short term. We did not see a major impact on the oil and gas sector yet. I think one has to recognize that it’s a highly uncertain moment and therefore things are changing constantly and we are ourselves updating regularly our assessment of the situation. Our numbers, for example, for the outlook do not report the latest development in the last months or so and therefore we will be updating our numbers. This high level of uncertainty is affecting countries with vulnerabilities. And this is where the Fund is in fact acting in providing support to countries in order to help them go through these severe shocks.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you, Jihad. We’ll go for another round of questions. Maybe we’ll go to the first gentleman in the first row, please.

QUESTIONER: Many Arab countries have taken on significant debt to fund infrastructure and economic reforms. What the strategies does the IMF recommend for managing the tracing debt levels, particularly for non-oil economies and taking into consideration what’s happening in the region with all the conflicts.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you. We have another question that we received that’s also on debt. What are the projections of the Fund concerning the region’s debt levels amid the ongoing regional tensions?

MR. AZOUR: Thank you for your questions. Well, of course the high level of debt has been one of the main issues that several economies in the region, especially the middle income and the emerging economies of the region are facing. And here I would address the issue in three levels. The level of debt that constitute a major macroeconomic stability issue. And we recommend countries to address this by having an inclusive but sustained fiscal consolidations in order to reduce the risk level, in order to strengthen their capacity to raise revenues and reduce the overall macroeconomic risk. And when the Fund is asked, the Fund is providing support to many countries on that front.

The second dimension is the financing dimension. The overall financing need for this year are going to be around $286 billion, almost $6 billion higher for the whole region in terms of financing need. Compared to last year, this include not only, I would say all importing middle income countries, but the whole region and therefore securing enough financing is another issue. And the third one that is becoming a challenging issue that requires a combination of measures is the cost of debt service. The cost of debt service because of the increase in interest rate has become one of the main, I would say, fiscal issue that countries are facing.

The last point, I would add, is the fact that recently we were witnessing a greater reliance on local markets when it comes to financing the local debt. Therefore, the nexus between the governor, the government and the market and the local market has increased. And this is why it’s important to have a clear medium term reform agenda in order to reduce the weight of the debt, to improve fiscal space, but also to provide more comfort to investors to broaden the finance space.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you, Jihad. We’ll turn now to the online questions, and we have Fatima Ibrahim. Fatima, if you’re online, you can come in. Okay. Otherwise we’ll take some questions from the floor. We’ll start maybe with the gentleman in the middle. Yeah.

QUESTIONER: Good morning, this is Adil from Daily Business Recorder, Pakistan. Thank you for taking my question. So the World Economic Outlook projects Pakistan’s growth rate at a higher rate compared to last year, 3.2 percent. The modest growth of 2.4 percent last year was predominantly driven by the agriculture sector, which had its best performance in the last two decades, right. The services sector also benefited from agriculture success while the manufacturing was negative. The agriculture sector faces significant downside risks this time. While manufacturing is also highly constrained by high energy tariffs and weak demand locally. Do you think a higher growth rate can be achieved without fiscal expansion the way Pakistan has primed the pump in the past after securing an IMF program? Or do you think it can happen sustainably? Thank you.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you. Any other questions on Pakistan before we — any other questions on Pakistan? Okay.

MR. AZOUR: Thank you very much. Yes, the projections are showing that the Pakistani economy will grow at 2.4 percent this year compared to minus 0.2 percent last year and expected for next year to grow at 3.2 percent. This constitutes an improvement at a time where we are seeing also inflation going down from 29 percent last year to 12.6 percent this year and we expect inflation to go down to 10.6 percent next year.

Of course, the reform package that the government of Pakistan has put together has several objectives. One is to achieve fiscal sustainability by addressing some of the long awaited fiscal issues, especially on increasing the share of revenues in order to reduce the deficit, but also to improve the quality of the revenues by addressing some of the issues that existed in terms of tax collection and also in terms of special regimes. Reforming the SOEs is also an important priority that will increase the capacity of Pakistan to provide a greater space for the private sector, level the playing field and increase FDIs by doing so. This will allow the Pakistani economy to be more export driven and also to be ready to attract additional investment.

The monetary policy is also helping by tackling the issue of inflation and also by reducing any construction constraints on capital flows as well as also on the exchange transfers which also with the broad context of reforms will allow additional predictability and will reduce the risks or the constraints on the current account. Therefore, the package of reform that has been set has not only the ambition to strengthen stability in terms of macroeconomic stability and reduced financing risks, but also has the ambition to reform some of the key sectors including the energy and the SOEs, improve the business environment, attract more FDRs and allow the economy to be more export driven which will unleash the potential of the Pakistani economy without having an impact on the current account.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you Jihad. We’ll turn now online. I’m going to read your questions because I have them here. Two questions on Egypt. Question is regarding negotiations that Egypt will start with the IMF regarding the timing of implementing the economic reforms. Does the IMF see that any of these can be delayed? And the second point how does the IMF see the situation of the Egyptian economy in light of the recent developments? And have you tested that during your projections regarding growth and energy prices?

If those that want to ask on Egypt we’ll start here — many hands. Yes, the gentleman here.

QUESTIONER: I will speak in Arabic. It’s a technical point, Mr. Jihad. I wanted to ask you about the policies of the Fund that they aim at improving the living standards of the citizens and to reach the most vulnerable population. And during the negotiations, some of those negotiations they contradict with these principles I mean increasing the price of energy. I mean again for floating the price of the pound and adjustment of some prices of the commodities such as power. And this is part of the reform program. Does this apply to the current situation in Egypt in general? Whether I speak about improving the standards of living especially as these put more pressures on the vulnerable population.

MS. AL SHAMI: Please any other questions? We’ll take the gentleman please be brief so we can take other questions.

QUESTIONER: My question like Mrs. Georgieva said today that she’s going to visit Egypt in like within 10 days for like discussing the maybe reassessment in the program and that came in context with President he said that the economic situation it might lead Egypt to like rethinking about the reform program with the IMF. Can you highlight in which points might like Mrs. Georgieva is going to discuss? Are you going to change the program? Are you going to change your condition for reforming program or it’s just going to be trying to convince Egyptian regime that the reform program that you have already agreed is going as usual and as you see like this came in contact with my colleague from Egypt about suffering of increasing price for gas and many other goods and stuff in Egypt. So like what’s going on exactly in this meeting between Ms. Georgieva and President Sisi Thank you.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you. We’ll take one last question on Egypt and then we’ll move on the second, third row please.

QUESTIONER: My question is, is there any possibility of increasing the size of Egypt’s long given the widening of the conflict in the Middle east in recent weeks? Thank you.

MS. AL SHAMI: We’ll turn to you Jihad.

MR. AZOUR: Okay. In fact there are three levels of the different questions. One is on the economic situation in Egypt. The second is on the program and the relationship between the Fund and Egypt and also on some of the specific measures. Well, first of all, and I will answer part in Arabic and part in English for the question that came from the online audience. Like other countries in the region, Egypt has been subjected to the impact of the increase in tension due to the conflict. I mentioned earlier, Egypt is a country that is partially affected and mainly the impact was on the revenues from the Suez Canal. Luckily, the impact on tourism was almost muted. We did not see any drop for a sector that employs a large part of the population. Therefore, there are two levels of impact. The direct impact of the conflict and the high level of uncertainty that affects Egypt as much as affect other countries in the region, especially in terms of attracting direct investment and attracting inflows.

On the other side, there are certain number of internal issues that the authorities are dealing with. The high level of inflation is one. Inflation has reached last year35 percent and it’s important if we want to preserve the purchasing power of the people, especially the low- and middle-income people, is to address inflation. The best way to protect the livelihood of people is by reducing the level of price increase. Therefore, the first pillar of the program was to strengthen stability and also protect the economy from external shocks. This economy has been subjected to external shocks over the last four years Covid and then the war in Ukraine and then the recent conflict in the region. And this is where the importance, for example of the flexibility of the exchange rate. The flexibility of the exchange rate will reduce the impact of external shocks that could destabilize the local economy, would give more predictability in terms of capital flows and will reduce the risk of using other type of measures that would have an impact on economic activity.

Therefore, it’s very important to preserve it because it’s the best way to reduce the impact of external shocks on the local economy. Of course, it has to go hand in hand with monetary policy that works on addressing inflation. Inflation is going down and I think this is a positive news. We expect it next year to reach 16 percent. Of course, there are some short term hikes when some of the measures are introduced, but those are usually short lived impact. Therefore, monetary policy is also a priority in order to reduce the macro instability, but also reduce the pressure on the low middle income people. Three is we need to create growth. Also, we’re happy to see that the growth prospects for next year are improving 4 percent for the fiscal year 2025. But I think we can do more. How to do more is by allowing the private sector to be investing, creating jobs. And the best way to do it is for the state to give more space to the private sector and also for the state to be, I would say allowing them the competition to take place. And this requires to accelerate some of the reforms of the SOEs, including increasing the private sector share in those investments.

The program has been built based on those objectives and when shocks occurred, the Fund responded very quickly. We have increased the size of the program from $3 billion to $8 billion in the last review that took place in April. Taking into consideration that Egypt has been subjected to the shock of the conflict. The other also positive element that FDIs have increased with 35, 34 billion dollars of investment from UAE. I think this provided additional needed investment and also needed inflow. And we hope that this investment will be one of the elements that will bring growth to Egypt. Therefore, in terms of inflows Egypt has been receiving, in addition to what the Fund has provided, what the UAE has provided also additional financing from bilateral and multilateral institutions. The World Bank, the EU have increased their financing to Egypt and therefore, going back to the question, should we revisit the size of the program? I think the macroeconomic conditions today are showing that the program as it’s designed and its finance is still appropriate.

On the question of some of the specific. The impact of some of the specific measures here, I think we have to differentiate between two dimensions. There are certain measures who have impact and those need to be countered by some other measures, especially on the social front. And we are happy to see that the various programs that exist, Takaful and Karama and other programs are activated in order to address some of these issues. Whenever you introduce those kind of fiscal measures, you need to protect the most vulnerable. You need to allow the mostly affected and those who have limited capacity to be protected. And therefore, when you do so, it allows you to create fiscal buffers, especially on the revenue side, to make it fairer and more effective i.e.not to have all the tax burden on the low income or middle-income people through consumption tax to increase the progressivity in the tax system, but also on the other hand, to provide more on the social protection level the program has in it.And the Fund team is working with authorities on the way to make sure that what is in the program is sufficient enough and what needs to be done to improve the outreach of the social program. And during the visit of the MD, this will be one of the priority issues that the MD will raise and will discuss is how effective the social protection programs are. Therefore, I think whenever you have to address imbalances that have been there for some time, there are some consolidation. But you want to make sure that this consolidation is growth friendly, is inclusive and also it provides sustainable economic transformation.

This is how the program has been designed. It has been designed to live in a shock prone world. It has been designed in order to allow the economy to be more geared toward growth that is driven by export and create more opportunities. Of course the uncertainty in the region is high. We take this into consideration and earlier I mentioned that we are constantly looking at the impact. We’re looking also at the potential escalations and what does it mean for our countries.

But again, I think it’s important in the case of Egypt as well as also in Jordan. Those programs provide an anchor of stability at a time of uncertainty. I think there is a great value of those programs. We saw it in Jordan with the upgrade of Jordan in terms of rating. Those programs provide an anchor of stability, and I think what the region needs today is stability. And this is on that premise that we are engaging with countries in the region, and we are in fact we’re ready to engage and to provide more support.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you, Jihad. Let’s turn to the room. Maybe we’ll go to the gentleman in the back. Yes, right here. Thank you.

QUESTIONER: He will ask the question in Arabic. In light of the environment in the GCC region, what are your projections for growth and specifically the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, your projections for growth?

MR. AZOUR: No doubt, no doubt that the GCC countries have managed over the past years to adapt to a large number of shocks and challenges that are being witnessed in the region and the whole world. Starting from COVID pandemic and oil shocks. And oil countries and GCC countries have maintained a certain level of growth despite the fact that there was the OPEC+ and its agreements.

For 2024, our projections are better than 2023. The growth is about 1.2 percent in 2024 and will improve in 2025 to reach 4.2 percent in 25. And this is very important if we put this in the framework of the fact that the main driving force behind the growth in the GCC countries is the development of non-oil economy. And this is a very important element. The development of non-oil economy was a main leverage for growth and the Gulf countries maintained a good level of growth ranging between 3 to 4 percent for non-oil growth under our investments that are aimed to develop other economic sectors in the future such as renewable energy as well as technology which contribute to increasing the capacity of these countries to increase the revenue, to diversify the sources of revenue for the economy and to adapt to the economic changes all over the world.

With regard to economy of Saudi Arabia, we expect that this year the growth will be 1.5 percent which is an improvement as compared to growth last year which was minus 0.2 percent. And for next year it will be 4.6 percent for Saudi Arabia. What has contributed to this in the first place? The economic development, non-oil economy in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and also the production which has been improving and also the unwinding of the OPEC agreement. And again the question.

MS. AL SHAMI: If not, we’ll turn to the room. Maybe the — yes. . Yes, we can hear you now.

QUESTIONER: Good evening. Thank you and good evening. Mr. Jihad, I would like to ask in Arabic my question. What made the IMF expect that the growth will be 2.9 percent for Jordan next year compared to 2.5 percent this year. In light of the continuing war in the Middle East. This is first. Second question. The IMF in its last review has said that the revenue of Jordan have decreased, whereas other estimates would say that the revenue have increased. How would you interpret these different estimates or different numbers? And what can Jordan do to increase its revenues? Thank you,Also a few questions.

MS. AL SHAMI: Please be brief. Thank you.

QUESTIONER: Hello, can you hear me well?

MS. AL SHAMI: Yes, we can hear you.

QUESTIONER: Thank you for this opportunity. First of all, to ask my questions. I would like to ask you about the upcoming COP 29 conference which is scheduled to be held in Azerbaijan very soon. And what are specific initiatives that the IMF plans to support during the conference to promote sustainable development?

MS. AL SHAMI: We lost — okay, I think we can’t hear you, but we’ll come back. Maybe we’ll take one in the room. Yes, please.

QUESTIONER: I’m from Kazakhstan. So my question is, how do you evaluate the effect of the war in Ukraine on the economies of Central Asian region, specifically my country, Kazakhstan? Because we’re located too close to Russia and my country has the same border with it, and we are tied economically.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you. So that was a question on Kazakhstan and we had an earlier question, Azerbaijan. You want to have one final question before we turn to you, Jihad.

QUESTIONER: I have a question about the main obstacles to foreign investment in Saudi Arabia and what the authorities can do in order to improve that. Thank you.

MR. AZOUR: Thank you. The first question I think is about the economic impact in Jordan of the war. Of course, the Jordanian economy is close to the hot area. Jordan was affected in tourism, as I said before. And this impact on tourism also affected the economy in Jordan. Also trade and the Aqaba port. The impact continues, but no doubt the uncertainty and the fluidity is very high. However, last year and this year Jordan managed to maintain economic stability and to achieve an acceptable growth rate, 2.3. This year we expect it to improve to 2.5 percent if the situation continues as it is and there was no more escalation in the region. We attribute this to the measures taken by the government in the previous years in order to improve the performance of the economy and to achieve stabilization.

The Jordanian economy proved to be resilient despite the tensions. The additional good factor is that inflation is low. And the Central bank of Jordan managed to keep low inflation at 1.8 percent this year, which contributes to the easing of monetary policy. With regard to the point about the revenues, the amount of revenues, I’ll go back to you when I talk with the team. But what I want to say is that in the past few years Jordan achieved successes in raising revenues which contributed to lower deficits and better stability, which enabled Jordan to secure the main financial needs and to keep stability and to increase investments and financial flows. And we’ve seen this improvement at the beginning of this year in the form of the higher rating agencies rating for Jordan.

The COP 29 the COP 29 the Fund has been an important partner to Azerbaijan for the preparation of the COP 29. As you know, last year and before, the Fund has been extremely involved and the Fund has scaled up its support to members on the climate side by providing programs to help countries accelerate their transformation and finance long term climate priorities. The Fund is also mainstreaming the climate issues in the surveillance and is providing a wealth of knowledge on the priorities, including for the Caucasus and Central Asia region where the Fund has recently produced a series of analytical pieces about the importance of adaptation for the region as well as also how to tackle the issue of mitigation and climate finance. And I would encourage you and others to look at those. Those are important pieces that will be featured during the COP 29. Of course, we had recently during this week meetings with the authorities and the Fund is looking forward to maintain its active partnership with the authorities and play an important role in COP 29.

The last question was impact of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine on CCA countries and in particular on Kazakhstan. Of course, let me say a few words on that. Countries in the CCA in general have been able over the last four years and specifically over the last two years to protect their economies from the negative impact of the war in Ukraine and at the same time they were able to address the other risk that was coming from the increase in inflation or inflationary pressure. When it comes to Kazakhstan, we project growth this year to be at 3.5 percent and we expect it to improve next year and reach 4.6 percent. Of course, part of it is also due to the new investments in energy and in the new the new oil and gas fields, but also to the good performance of the non-oil sector.

Clearly here also the level of uncertainty is high, and we recommend countries to maintain on one hand their reform drive to preserve macroeconomic stability and on the other hand to accelerate structural reforms to regain levels of growth that would be needed in order to allow economic convergence between Central Asia and Caucasus countries with their peers to this gap to widen. And this afternoon we will. Sorry. Tomorrow we will have a special session on the medium-term growth priorities, including the structural reforms. And we will tackle some of the priorities for Kazakhstan as well as also other Central Asian countries.

The last question is obstacles to investment in Saudi Arabia. This is the last question. You want it in Arabic or English? In Arabic. If we look at the past few years under Vision 2030, you will see that there are some reforms that have contributed primarily to the improvement of the investment climate and to increase the growth rate outside of the government scope. There was lower unemployment, especially among the youth, and also an increase in the participation of women. And this has improved things despite all the volatilities and all the oil production cuts. These reforms and investment projects that were adopted improve the size of the economy and make it more able to attract investments in the oil sector and also other like entertainment and technology.

In the past year there was a revisiting of the priorities, and the priority was more priority was given to technology, AI, climate. All of this opens the door for more direct investment from abroad as in Saudi Arabia, also in the region. Direct investment in the past 10 years was not as aspired. There are internal reasons and also regional reasons because of the volatility and also because the global economic development reduced direct investments in the region.

MS. AL SHAMI: Today’s briefing. Thank you very much all for joining us today. Jihad, any final words on the launch?

MR. AZOUR: One, I would like to thank you very much again, I would like to ask you to remain tuned. I mentioned in my opening that the volatility of the situation requires from us and the high level of uncertainty to keep ourselves updated and to keep updating you. This afternoon we will. Sorry. Tomorrow afternoon we will have an interesting session that looks into not the short-term where the level of uncertainty is extremely high, but the medium-term. What are the priorities in terms of growth? What are the priorities also in terms of investment? We will launch officially with the details with the tables the outlook in Dubai next week. It will be on October 31st and then immediately also we will launch the outlook for Caucuses and Central Asia.

Tomorrow at 3pm I would like to invite you all for an interesting session where we are going to discuss one of our key analytical chapters that has to focus on medium term growth. With that, thank you very much. I’m sure there are follow up questions. Myself and the team who is here will be ready to provide you with additional answers to your questions.

MS. AL SHAMI: Thank you all. Thank you very much.

* * * * *

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

PRESS OFFICER: Angham Al Shami

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

@IMFSpokesperson

MIL OSI Economics –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Banking: Transcript of European Economic Outlook October 2024 Press Briefing

Source: International Monetary Fund

October 24, 2024

Speakers:
Alfred Kammer, Director, European Department, IMF
Helge Berger, Deputy Director, European Department, IMF
Oya Celasun, Deputy Director, European Department, IMF
Moderator:
Camila Perez, Senior Communications Officer, IMF

MS. PEREZ: Hi everyone, thanks so much for joining today’s press conference on the release of the European Economic Outlook. My name is Camila Perez. I’m a Communications Officer here at the IMF. And we’re here with Alfred Kammer, Director of the European Department. We’re also here with two of his Deputies, Oya Celasun and Helge Berger. We’re going to get started with some opening remarks from Mr. Kammer, and then we’re going to go to the floor and online to take your questions. Alfred?

MR: KAMMER: Welcome to this press conference on the Economic Outlook for Europe.

Headline inflation has come within reach in targets in advanced European economies, but progress remains uneven in Central, Eastern and Southeastern European countries. CESEE as we call it. A moderate recovery is underway. This reflects that financial conditions are still tight, as the easing cycle will take time to take effect. Importantly, the rebound also reflects a high level of uncertainty that keeps consumers and investors cautious.

Our main message today is that Europe’s recovery is falling short of its full potential. And more importantly, the medium-term outlook is no better. Europe has fallen behind, and I will come to this theme back later, but let’s briefly look at our near-term outlook first.

Our baseline foresees a modest increase in growth for 2024 and 2025. On inflation, we expect the ECB to sustainably reach its target by mid-‘25. For most CESEE countries, it will take a year longer until 2026. So for this to materialize, Europe needs a safe pair of hands. Central banks should pursue a smooth loosening path in advanced economies, and they need to be more careful and ease more cautiously in several CESEE countries, as real wages may outpace productivity growth there. We also recommend tightening the fiscal stance across most of Europe. We are expecting a recovery, but deficits are too large to stabilize public debt.

The good news is that the EU has agreed on a fiscal rules framework addressing sustainability concerns while allowing for investment in green transitions and infrastructure. And now we need to follow through. But the urgency for policy action is even more acute when it comes to the medium-term, and that’s really what our report is focusing on. Europe has an underwhelming potential growth rate, and when we are looking at the medium-term, that is not changing.

Compared to the U.S., income per capita is a stunning 30 percent lower and the gap has remained unchanged for two decades. And I should say at the turn of the century that gap did not exist. Low productivity in CESEE and a low capital stock, are the main reasons.

Our report identifies three factors holding Europe back. First, Europe markets are too fragmented to provide the needed scale for firms to grow. Second, Europe has no shortage of savings, but its capital markets fail to provide to boost young and productive firms. In addition, Europe is missing skilled labor where it is needed. A deeper, more integrated Single Market can resolve most of these issues. This means removing the barriers that still prevent goods, services, capital, and labor to flow freely between countries.

We estimate existing barriers in Europe’s Single Market to be equivalent to an ad-valorem tariff of 44 percent for manufacturing, between U.S. states it is 15 percent, and that tariff equivalent is 110 percent for services between EU countries. These are staggering numbers that illustrate how much income Europe leaves on the table.

While private investment is key, there is also a need for public investment. For example, on infrastructure, connectivity, nd in addition, deepening and broadening, the Single Market could support a faster growing and more resilient Europe.

New Member states joining the EU in 2004 saw that GDP per capita increase by more than 30 percent in the 15 years after EU accession, helped by strong reforms and market access. And the larger Single Market also helped old member countries. So Europe can close the gap with the global frontier if it builds on its most important asset. And I have been emphasizing that in the past and I continue to emphasize that. And that is the EU’s Single Market.

So, what are some of the immediate steps which we are outlining? Open energy, telecommunications, and financial services sectors. This will bring more private sector investment, dynamism, and innovation. Advance the capital markets union. This will funnel savings to the most productive firms and startups, make a real effort to ease administrative barriers to firms entering markets, especially in the service sector, and improve infrastructure, institutions and governance in CESEE countries.

So, in conclusion, Europe has the means to lift growth to its full potential. This is completely under Europe’s control, and it needs to be done. Thank you.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks so much, Alfred. We’re going to get started with some questions in the room. I see there are some colleagues online. We will get to you. But we’re going to take the first question. The gentleman in the second row. Thank you.

Question: Thank you so much. In the recent World Economic Outlook, the IMF predicted a slightly better growth for Europe in this year and worse dynamics in 2025, especially for emerging and developing economies. You already described some factors which are driving this process.

But I have a question regarding the particular issue. This is Russia’s war in Ukraine. How does this factor affect the dynamics in Europe now? And secondly, the IMF significantly marked down the projection for Ukraine, at the same time saying Ukraine’s economy remains resilient despite the war. Could you elaborate, please, on the exact reasons for these negative expectations? What could be done more to improve the situation in Ukraine? Thank you.

MR: KAMMER: So let me start first with the general impact of Russia’s war in Ukraine on the European outlook. When you’re seeing the growth trajectory, it hasn’t changed very much over the last year. And the main reason why Europe is doing poorly is really the large Russian induced energy price shock Europe is going through. So we are seeing this year, coming out of this crisis, moderate recovery. It’s driven mostly by consumption, as real wages are strengthening. And we are expecting then next year that we will have a handoff to investment demand when policy rates, interest rates, are going to come down.

So very much when you’re looking at some of the more detailed pictures, Germany very much affected because of the energy price shock, still because of its energy intensive manufacturing. That’s a direct impact of the Russian war. If you’re looking at the tightening cycle of the ECB, that had to be harsher simply because inflation was higher. That’s a result of Russia’s war in Ukraine.

So that is the general trajectory we are on. But we also have revised down growth for 2025. And what we’re seeing is a bit of moderation in the recovery we have been projecting. And again, it’s a result of the uncertainty created as part of the environment and Russia’s war in Ukraine. That’s an uncertainty for consumers, which are wondering what is going to happen with energy prices and with the future. That is an uncertainty on the investor side, on wondering what is happening in the medium-term. And these headwinds are going to stay with Europe for the time being. So that is the direct impact we are seeing that Russia’s war on Ukraine has still implications for Europe’s economic developments.

On your second point, with regard to the growth in Ukraine. Growth numbers this year have been brutally affected by the bombing of the energy infrastructure in Ukraine, and that dampens growth and also the outlook. And in addition, of course, like for all of Europe, this creates uncertainty in Ukraine, and it has a dampening effect on aggregate demand. And when you’re looking at our projections for 2025, we also have downgraded those for Ukraine. And that is a reflection that Russia’s war in Ukraine is going to continue. We had assumed that it would stop earlier. It doesn’t. And those are, again, additional costs for the Ukrainian economy.

On Ukraine. The economic team has been doing and is still doing a marvelous job in terms of, one, maintaining macrostability. Two, supporting the economy to get growth going and supporting enterprises to operate this environment, protect vulnerable people suffering from the war. And three, preparing the fundamentals for hopefully a reconstruction that will come soon and the medium-term path to EU accession.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks so much, Alfred. We’re going to go with the lady on the third road, please.

Question: Thank you. My question is related with — Spain has one of the best growth prospects in Europe. What recommendations do you have to ensure that this good momentum continues when the European funds end? And I would also like to know if you have any advice for the housing problem that the country is facing, which has provoked numerous protests by citizens who cannot buy a house due to speculation and high prices. Thank you.

MR: KAMMER: Spain had indeed a very strong growth performance. That was a result of what we saw on the tourism front, very much still, to some extent, a Pandemic implication. Spain, finally, we saw also, because of lower interest rates and more confidence, a pickup in investment that has been supporting growth. And when we are looking at the supply side, we see the large employment increases have been supported also by immigration. So those were growth drivers we saw in Spain. They will moderate a bit in 2025, but they still will carry on. And of course, implementation of the Next Generation EU will not only have short-term positive impacts but also impacts on the medium-term growth projections for Spain.

I think when it comes to our policy recommendation for Spain, when you’re looking at the growth performance right now, it was labor intensive, so it was driven by an increase in employment. In future, what we need to see is a growth performance, which is driven by an increase in productivity. And when I mentioned the word productivity and you asked me a question on any country in Europe, that’s the key word. Productivity is an issue in every single member country in Europe. And that needs to be the focus of strong policy reforms. Those are reforms domestically and the structural reforms we have been talking about in our Article IVs.

But importantly, these are reforms which need to be carried out EU-wide in order to get the productivity increases we need from the Single Market, from companies and firms to be able to grow to scale, go to the global technology frontier and produce and to see a very dynamic business sector. That’s an issue for Spain, but this is an issue for all other countries, and Europe can help there. This is not a national action per se, but this is an action at the European level. But it requires will at the national level to go for European reforms.

MS. PEREZ: Thank you so much. We’re going to go to the middle of the room. The lady in the third row, please.

QUESTION: Hello, two questions, if I may, on different topics. You mentioned the importance of integrating Europe’s capital markets. In this context, how important is it for Europe to have bigger banks? Would you welcome the potential merger of UniCredit and Commerzbank? And if capital markets are very important, should the German government drop its objection to this potential bank tie-up? Have you also communicated a message to the German government? And on a completely different topic, you’ve warned about the need for advanced economies to carry out fiscal consolidation and to reduce their borrowing after many years of emergency spending. The UK Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, today has said that she will change her measure of her debt target to one which promotes investment. Would you welcome this kind of step, given your worries about the fiscal overhangs from the Pandemic?

MR: KAMMER: Thank you. Yeah, maybe I’ll start with your first question on the capital markets union and the banking union. Critically important for Europe. When we see drilling down why we have that productivity gap. One is companies cannot grow to scale. The second problem is lack of business dynamism. And lack of business dynamism stands for we have startups in Europe as we have in the U.S., but they are not getting the same kind of chance in terms of funding. Because as a startup you need equity financing, especially when you’re in the tech sector and you produce intangibles, you cannot provide that as collateral to banks. You need venture capital. And when you’re looking at venture capital, Europe versus the U.S., it’s four times as high in the U.S. than it’s in Europe. So startups in Europe start with a big handicap. And therefore, banking union and the capital markets union are essentially for those startups to grow and be productive, create employment, and push up GDP per capita.

And yes, as part of the operating to scale for European economies, that they’re not just national players in 27 national countries, but Pan-European players as the U.S. companies are. You need also larger Pan-European banks. And that means we see that one way of doing this is through merger and consolidations. So this is part of helping creating scale in the banking system. And therefore, these mergers and these mergers are welcome. And yes, that has been our recommendation that these mergers should take place now.n individual merger transactions we are not commenting, but our advice is very clear: that the general direction is clear – mergers are needed.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks.

MR: KAMMER: On the UK?

MR. BERGER: Sure, thanks. I would have been disappointed if there had been no question on the UK. Always popular.

Let’s start with some good news. You have seen that our growth numbers for this year went up 1.1 percent instead of 0.7. Next year at 1.5. So that’s the trajectory, upward looking, against which we discuss fiscal policy.

So if you allow me to step back before coming to the fiscal framework on the debt question, we recognize that the government very helpfully is committed to reduce the debt level in percent of GDP over the next five years, or at least to stabilize it. So that’s very welcome. It’s in line with longstanding recommendations from our UK team. Now, this is going to require a notable fiscal effort. As you know, the deficit levels are high. There are spending pressures waiting to be tackled in the healthcare system and social care. We also have very high public investment needs. There’s transport. There’s housing. There’s climate. So all of this needs to be put within one umbrella going forward.

The team has always maintained that this can be done in different ways, including prioritizing spending or increasing fiscal revenues. It’s deliberate, or in the middle, and not an end. You know, your governments will have to see what is best suited to the situation at hand. We’re looking forward to the autumn budget, which will give us clarity on how all of this will hang together.

Now, in this context, of course, it’s very important to operate within a fiscal framework that’s well understood. We have told many countries, not just the UK, in the past that we like well-organized and explained fiscal frameworks. They help to anchor the policy of the budget over the medium-term. Can help ensure that public debt indeed goes in a direction we wanted to go. Now, in order to facilitate growth, which is part of any such endeavor of reducing public debt, public investment is important. So you need to find a way to protect this as you define your fiscal framework. Now, in this context, we’ll have to see how this new proposal is, you know, really laid out in detail. Again, we will learn more when we have the budget, and it’s good to look all of this together in one go.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks so much. We’re going to go online. I see Anton has raised his hand. Go ahead, Anton, please.

QUESTION: Thank you for doing this. As the IMF recently raised its 2024 growth forecast for Russia from 3.2% to 3.6%, what factors contributed to this upward revision despite the ongoing geopolitical tensions and economic sanctions? How are the existing and potential future sanctions on Russia affecting its long-term economic stability? Are there areas of the Russian economy showing resilience despite these sanctions? Thank you very much.

MS. PEREZ: I believe we have other questions on Russia. online. Please go ahead.

QUESTION: Good day, everyone. I have a question about the 2025 outlook for Russian’s economy. Since compared to the April outlook, the outlook was downgraded from 1.8 to 1.3 of GDP. And I want to ask, can you elaborate what impacted this forecast and including the fact that Russian Central Bank is close to increasing the key rate to 20-21 percent from 19 percent. How critical the risks for the Russian economy are now? And can you elaborate on its future from this perspective?

MS. PEREZ: Thank you. I think in the room, gentlemen in the first row, please.

QUESTION: Hello. Good afternoon. I wanted to follow up on a monetary policy question. So to what extent does this tightening monetary policy by Russian Central Bank will impact Russian economy and will it be effective for fighting inflation from your point of view? And the second question from my side, why did the IMF adjust the projections for Russian debt level for 2024 and 2025 downwards in comparison with April’s economic outlook? Thank you.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks so much.

MR. KAMMER: Okay, so quite a number of questions. To the 2024 upgrade that was mostly mechanical, reflecting data outturns for the first half, and they have been reflected in our forecast. What we are seeing right now in the Russian economy, that it is pushing against capacity constraint. So we have a positive output gap, or you could put it differently – the Russian economy is overheating. What we are expecting for next year is simply also the impact that going over your supply capacity, you cannot maintain for very long. So we see an impact on moving into more normal territory there. And of course, that is supported by a tight monetary policy by the Central Bank of Russia. A tight monetary policy, in order to bring down inflation, slows down aggregate demand, and in 2025 will have these effects on GDP. That’s why we are seeing the slowdown in 2025.

Now, with regard to the longer-term outlook for Russia, as we have been saying before, the medium term looks dim, potential growth has been reduced. That is a result of less technology transfers, less ability to finance. That will impact the productive capacity of the Russian economy in the medium-term, and that will stop the convergence towards Western European per capita GDP levels, which Russia was on more than ten years ago. And this is an effect of the sanctioned regime, which is in place. With regard to the debt levels. I think that is a simple reflection of that the nominal GDP has been revised up, and therefore, debt to GDP ratios are coming down.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks so much. We’re going to go with the gentleman in the fourth row, gray shirt, please. Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. Once again, we are talking about tariffs. And in your report you highlight the risks of EU tariffs on Chinese EV cars. But is it so much more important for Europe to keep its trade free than to protect strategic sector of its industry? Thank you very much.

MS. CELASUN: Thank you very much. On that question. You’re right. Europe is very open to trade, has benefited greatly over the decades from trading with other nations. So as it responds to growing tensions around the world and fragmentation, it has to keep in mind the fact that it is benefiting. So we would indeed urge all countries, including Europe, to look for cooperative solutions, which are always the first best. When approaching, for example, the issue of subsidies in other countries for countries to come together, come out clean on what they are subsidizing and how much, and then find cooperative ways of reducing them.

Tariffs rarely help to solve the problem. They essentially make countries imposing tariffs less competitive, they raise costs, and they trigger retaliation, which would be something to take very seriously for any country that benefits greatly from trade.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks so much. We’re going to stay in this side of the room. The gentleman on the third row, white shirt, please.

QUESTION: Thank you. Hello. I had a question on the German economy outlook, which is still, which growth prospects are still very low. I was wondering if the IMF is fearing an effect of this low growth on a shift to political. I mean, on the political side, which would be a rise up the far right, for example, ahead of the next election, federal election next year. Thank you.

MS. CELASUN: Thank you. As you know, we don’t comment on elections. What we do is to engage with governments, to give them policy advice to strengthen growth and to make growth resilient over time. And on that, our advice hasn’t changed for quite some time. Germany is facing a sharp downturn in its working age population. Quite a sharp decline coming in the next five years. Productivity trends have been very weak. The remedies are to boost labor supply, help women have full time jobs with better childcare, elder care, reducing the marginal tax rates of second earners, and take a host of productivity enhancing reforms. Public investment should be higher in Germany. It’s among the countries with the lowest public investment rates among advanced economies. The other areas we have highlighted are the high level of red tape. Administrative burdens need to be reduced, which would help productivity as well. And Germany should be a champion of the single market, including for the capital markets union, to help its promising companies have better prospects for reaching scale and growing. Thank you.

MS. PEREZ: We’re going to take the lady in the middle of the room in the fourth row with the light jacket, please.

QUESTION: Thank you. My question is about the Turkish economy. Türkiye has significantly tightened its policy stance over the past year. How do you see the country’s current state of economy? And also what is the IMF’s approach to the potential timing of easing these policies?

MR. KAMMER: We, as you know, have been very favorably impressed by the policy pivot since last year in Türkiye. And what we see are two main results. One is the vulnerability to a crisis. Risk has been greatly reduced over this time. And second, inflation is now on a downward trajectory. And those are two huge achievements in this policy pivot that took place. When it comes to our policy advice, what is important now is the fight against inflation has not been won yet. That means that a tight monetary policy will need to be maintained, and it would be premature to reduce the restrictiveness on the monetary policy side. What we also continue to advise is a focus on incomes policies.

One of the problems in Türkiye and nexus to inflation was minimum wage increases which were based on backward looking inflation developments. We need to have these minimum wage agreements which are now, once a year, done in a forward-looking way in order to avoid the second round effect of these measures.

And finally, we could use more fiscal adjustment. Fiscal adjustment would help on the inflationary side and of course it always enhances the credibility of the adjustment effort. But overall, I should say to the economic team working in Türkiye, a job well done, that a job needs to continue, and these policies need to be sustained. This is a painful period to go through for the population of Türkiye and is a tough period for our policymakers, but it’s necessary toward crisis risk and bring inflation down.

MS. PEREZ: We’re running out of time. We’re going to try to get in a few more questions. Let’s go with the lady in the first row. Yellow jacket, please.

QUESTION: I was wondering, since the IMF is once again flagging Italy for its high debt, if it’s a fair conclusion that you do not agree with Fitch, who is saying that Italy’s fiscal credibility has recently increased, does the promotion of its outlook? And therefore, what is your suggestion for the debt reduction?

MS. PEREZ: Let’s see if there are any other questions on Italy. The gentleman on the third row. On this side. Over here. Yeah, third row here. Thank you.

QUESTION: Thank you. The outlook quotes the recent proposal by Mario Draghi to reform the EU. What are the most urgent reforms that you encourage Europe to undertake, based on that report?

MR. BERGER: So, on Italy, that’s indeed good news. If you look at the debt ratio and percent of GDP, it has come down notably since its peak in 2020. So, and I, everybody, including financial markets, will do well to recognize this, but it’s also true that the same debt ratio is still very high. And we think it’s going to end up this year around 130 — sorry, end of last year it was 134 percent. And you know, if you follow our baseline for the forecast going forward, we see it increasing slightly over the next five years or so. There’s still a fiscal task ahead for the government and we understand the government is ready to approach this. We think deficits are still higher than they should be.

We welcome, therefore, the expected adjustment that the European Commission and the Italian government have agreed on over time. I think the key for countries like Italy and others that have relatively high debt levels still is to be a bit more ambitious than just gradually reducing deficits. So we would encourage the government to look for ways of achieving this in a growth friendly way and at the same time. And that will help both credit rating agencies and the country itself. There are a lot of structural reforms the country can conduct that would help us sort of raise growth overall, which makes the fiscal situation also more promising.

MS. PEREZ: Thank you. We’re going to —

MR. KAMMER: Sorry, on the Draghi report quickly. Pretty much the same focus that we have in our REO on productivity and innovation. And the solution to that problem on enhancing productivity is the single market. So we need to get rid of the barriers in the single market. That’s Draghi, that’s us. That’s uniformly accepted policy recommendation. That’s where we need to make progress. Second point to make is Draghi identified an investment gap of 4.5 percent of GDP in order to move Europe up. That is mostly private investment. That private investment needs to come because of good investment opportunities, because capital is allocated efficiently. That needs capital market and banking union. So all of these reforms to be undertaken are enabler for the private sector then to make these investments in order to fill that investment gap. Mostly private sector, some part public investment.

MS. PEREZ: Thanks so much. We’re going to go with the lady on the second room in. Sorry, second row here in the middle of the room.

QUESTION: Hi, another one for the UK because of course we are your greatest fans. Just a clarification on the debt rule. On principle, is it right that the UK should be borrowing to invest given the debt trajectory that you yourselves outline in the fiscal monitor? And if I may, your colleague Era Dabla-Norris was sitting where you are, Alfred, yesterday and she said when it comes to tax rises, it’s important to build trust among populations that taxes collected are well spent. Our finance minister has indicated she does want to raise taxes in her budget next week and concentrate those tax rises on wealthy people and businesses. Is that fair? And can any economy tax its way to prosperity?

MS. PEREZ: Shall we see if there are any other questions on the UK? The gentleman.

QUESTION: Thank you. Just again, following up on UK sort of debt rules, do you have any particular view about what an appropriate measure is to target for a debt rule? Whether something like public sector net financial liabilities is a good measure, or whether sort of government should be focusing more on, say, general government debt, which is to know what the IMF mostly forecasts.

MR. BERGER: Thank you for this quick lightning round at the very end. I think it’s good public finance principles to accept the fact that it can at times be helpful for governments to borrow when it comes to financing investment. hat is a general principle that applies to many countries. The question is, what kind of public investment is being done? The question is, what do we expect, reasonably, credibly, this investment to do for growth going forward? And then, of course, any forward looking government will take into account these longer term effects of such investment. So this is something we would expect any fiscal framework for any country to consider as it is designed and implemented and or adjusted.

Taxation is highly relevant on the same high level of fiscal principles to finance ongoing spending in any country. If the government is supplying service to its citizens, you know, there are many governments do supply, then this needs to be financed and then, you know, taxes are part of fiscal revenues that will facilitate this. And that is what in the end supports and increases welfare of a country’s citizens. As to the treatment of assets, you know, these differ across countries. They come in different form, from railways to intangibles. And this is something that needs to be looked at very carefully in any of these circumstances, specifically in general, since assets come with revenue streams that can be uncertain. A certain degree of conservatism when looking at this is helpful. How all of these general principles apply to the UK, or any other country, is a matter of detail. In the case of the UK, let’s all stay tuned. Wait for the budget, wait for the details of the new fiscal rule, and we analyze this and we’ll take it from there.

MS. PEREZ: I’m afraid we’re going to have to wrap up, but please, your questions, send them to me and my colleagues in the media team, we’ll make sure we will get back to you. Just a reminder that the report has been released and it is available on IMF.org. Thanks very much everybody for joining. Apologies we couldn’t get to all of your questions. Please do reach out to us and thanks for colleagues joining online.

MR. KAMMER: Thank you.

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

PRESS OFFICER: Camila Perez

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

@IMFSpokesperson

MIL OSI Global Banks –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI China: Xi urges ‘BRICS Plus’ to pursue common security and development, harmony among civilizations

Source: China State Council Information Office

Chinese President Xi Jinping delivers an important speech titled “Combining the Great Strength of the Global South To Build Together a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind” at the “BRICS Plus” leaders’ dialogue in Kazan, Russia, Oct. 24, 2024. [Photo/Xinhua]

Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday called on “BRICS Plus” countries to strive for common security, common development and harmony among civilizations.

Xi made the remarks while addressing the “BRICS Plus” leaders’ dialogue.

Noting that the collective rise of the Global South is a distinctive feature of the great transformation across the world, Xi said that Global South countries marching together toward modernization is monumental in world history and unprecedented in human civilization.

Meanwhile, peace and development still faces severe challenges and the road to prosperity for the Global South will not be straight, he pointed out, urging “BRICS Plus” countries to use collective wisdom and strength and stand up to their responsibility for building a community with a shared future for mankind.

Xi said that “BRICS Plus” countries should uphold peace and strive for common security, come forward together to form a stabilizing force for peace, strengthen global security governance, and explore solutions to address both symptoms and roots of hotspot issues.

He said that many parties have warmly responded to the Global Security Initiative he proposed. “Under the Initiative, we have made prominent progress in maintaining regional stability and in many other areas,” he said, adding that China and Brazil jointly issued the six-point consensus and launched the group of Friends for Peace on the Ukraine crisis together with other Global South countries.

He also called on “BRICS Plus” countries to promote early deescalation to pave the way for political settlement.

Last July, Palestinian factions reconciled with each other in Beijing, marking a key step toward peace in the Middle East, he noted. “We should continue to promote comprehensive ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and revive the two-State solution. We must stop the flames of war from spreading in Lebanon and end the miserable sufferings in Palestine and Lebanon,” Xi stressed.

Noting that the Global South emerges for development and prospers through development, Xi said that “BRICS Plus” countries should reinvigorate development and strive for common prosperity, be the main driving force for common development, play an active and leading role in the global economic governance reform, and make development the core of international economic and trade agenda.

He said that the Global Development Initiative, since its introduction three years ago, has helped make available nearly 20 billion U.S. dollars of development fund and launch more than 1,100 projects. And recently the Global Alliance on Artificial Intelligence for Industry and Manufacturing Center of Excellence has been established in Shanghai.

China will build a World Smart Customs Community Portal and a BRICS Customs Center of Excellence, he noted, adding that China welcomes active participation by all countries.

Stressing that diversity of civilization is the innate quality of the world, Xi called on “BRICS Plus” countries to promote together development of all civilizations and strive for harmony among them, be advocates for exchanges among civilizations, enhance communication and dialogue, and support each other in taking the path to modernization suited to their respective national conditions.

He noted that the Global Civilization Initiative he proposed is exactly for the purpose of building a garden of world civilizations “in which we can share and admire the beauty of each civilization,” he said, adding that China will coordinate with others to form a Global South Think Tanks Alliance to promote people-to-people exchanges and experience-sharing in governance.

Xi stressed that the Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China made systemic plans for further deepening reform comprehensively to advance Chinese modernization, which will provide more opportunities for the world.

“Last month, we held in Beijing a successful summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation and announced ten partnership actions for China and Africa to jointly advance modernization. This will instill new energy for the Global South on its way toward modernization,” he said.

Xi also said that no matter how the international landscape evolves, “we in China will always keep the Global South in our heart, and maintain our roots in the Global South.”

China supports more Global South countries in joining the cause of BRICS as full members, partner countries or in the “BRICS Plus” format “so that we can combine the great strength of the Global South to build together a community with a shared future for mankind,” he said.

MIL OSI China News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Russia poses a growing threat to global stability and international principles: UK statement to the OSCE

Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

Ambassador Holland condemns Russia’s growing threat to global stability, food security and maritime safety as it thickens ties with North Korea, steps up attacks in the Black Sea and seeks to circumvent sanctions.

Location:: Vienna
Delivered on:: 24 October 2024 (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered)

Thank you, Madam Chair. It is with deep concern that I draw colleagues’ attention to reports of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) sending combat troops to Russia. Our assessment is that it is highly likely that the transfer of these troops has begun. Russia has already procured significant munitions and arms from DPRK, in direct violation of multiple UN resolutions. The DPRK will surely extract a heavy price for its support. This has security implications for the OSCE region and should be of concern to us all.

Madam Chair, at the beginning of its full-scale invasion, Russia attempted to blockade Ukrainian ports in a cynical attempt to choke Ukraine’s economy. Under the July 2022 Black Sea Grain Initiative, Ukrainian grain was again able to reach those who needed it most across the world. Regrettably, Russia unilaterally withdrew from the Initiative after one year and began missile strikes on Ukrainian ports and grain storage facilities. 300,000 tonnes of grain were destroyed between August and October 2023.

Since then, Russia has repeatedly demonstrated its disregard for global food security and international principles, including freedom of navigation, the bedrock of global trade. Between 5 and 14 October, Russian missiles struck four civilian ships in deliberate attacks on export infrastructure in Odesa, killing at least 10 innocent civilians and injuring many more.

To obscure its illegal actions, last week Russia made false claims about the cargo these ships were carrying and threatened to continue targeting civilian ships using Ukrainian ports. It is unacceptable to target ships engaged only in the transportation of grain.

Russia’s actions deliberately harm global food security. Hindering exports of wheat, maize and barley from one of the world’s top grain exporters hurts everyone, but especially the world’s most vulnerable. The UK condemns Russia’s strikes. They have impacted shipments destined for the World Food Programme in Palestine and southern Africa. They also undermine the stability of the entire Black Sea region, affecting many others around this table.

Russia also threatens maritime safety and security through a 600 vessel ‘shadow fleet’, used to circumvent international sanctions and provide funding for Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine. Many of these vessels are unsafe, lack adequate insurance and engage in dangerous and deceptive shipping practices, including turning off radio transponders in violation of international regulations. These vessels break maritime law and pose significant risks to the environment, and maritime safety and security.

The UK will continue to take action against this illegal and dangerous ‘shadow fleet’. 43 of its oil tankers have been barred from UK ports and from accessing British maritime services. My Prime Minister launched a ‘Call to Action’ against the fleet in July, and we want to thank the 45 partners in this room who signed up to this.

We cannot and will not ignore Russia’s violations of the laws and principles that underpin global trade and food security. They contravene its Decalogue obligations, including Article 10 on the fulfilment in good faith of obligations under international law. We call on the Russian authorities to end this unjustifiable war and return to conformity with the OSCE’s foundational principles. Thank you.

Published 24 October 2024

Invasion of Ukraine

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Ukraine cannot defeat Russia – the best the west can do is help Kyiv plan for a secure post-war future

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Frank Ledwidge, Senior Lecturer in Military Strategy and Law, University of Portsmouth

A friend of mine, usually an intensely optimistic pro-Ukraine analyst, returned from Ukraine last week and told me: “It’s like the German Army in January 1945.” The Ukrainians are being driven back on all fronts – including in the Kursk province of Russia, which they had opened with much hope and fanfare in August. More importantly, they are running out of soldiers.

For most of 2024, Ukraine has been losing ground. This week, the town of Selidove in the western Donetsk region is being surrounded and, like Vuhledar earlier this month, is likely to fall in the next week or so – the only variable being how many Ukrainians will be lost in the process. Over the winter, the terrible prospect of a major battle to hold the strategically significant industrial town of Pokrovsk beckons.

Ukrainian forces are steadily losing ground close to the strategically vital town of Pokrovsk, western Donetsk region.
Institute for the Study of War

Ultimately, this is not a war of territory but of attrition. The only resource that counts is soldiers – and here the calculus for Ukraine is not positive.

Ukraine claims to have “liquidated” nearly 700,000 Russian soldiers – with more than 120,000 killed and upwards of 500,000 injured. Its president, Volodymyr Zelensky, admitted in February this year to 31,000 Ukrainian fatalities, with no figure given for injured.

The problem is these Ukrainian totals are apparently believed by western officials, when the reality is likely to be very different. US sources say the war has seen 1 million people killed and wounded on both sides. Crucially, this includes a growing number of Ukrainian civilians.

Low morale and desertion, as well as draft-dodging, are now significant problems for Ukraine. These factors are exacerbating already serious recruitment issues, making it hard to supply the front lines with fresh troops.

A dreadful debate is taking place in Ukraine. The question revolves around whether to mobilise – and risk serious casualties to – the 18-25 age group. Due to economic pressures in the early 2000s, Ukraine suffered a major drop in its birth rate, leaving relatively few people now aged between 15 and 25. Mobilisation and serious attrition of this group may be something Ukraine simply can’t afford, given the already serious demographic crisis the country faces.

And even if this mobilisation does go ahead, by the time the necessary politics, legislation, bureaucracy and training have run their course, the war may be over.

Victory look impossible

History knows of no example where taking on Russia in an attritional contest has proved successful. Let’s be clear: this means there is a real possibility of defeat – there is no sugar-coating this.

Zelensky’s maximalist war aims of restoring Ukraine’s pre-2014 borders, along with other unlikely conditions – which were unchallenged and encouraged by a confused but self-aggrandising west – will not be achieved, and the west’s leaders are partly to blame. Ill-advised wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East left western armed forces hollow, poorly armed, and entirely unprepared for a serious and prolonged conflict, with ammunition stocks likely to last weeks at best.

European promises of millions of artillery rounds have failed to materialise – only 650,000 have been supplied to Kyiv this year, whereas the North Koreans have supplied at least twice that to Russia.

Only the US has significant stocks of weaponry in the form of thousands of armoured vehicles, tanks and artillery pieces in reserve – and it is unlikely to change its policy of drip-feeding weapons to Ukraine now. Even if such a decision is made, the lead-time for delivery will be years, not months.

In a confidential briefing I attended recently given by western defence officials, the atmosphere was downbeat. The situation is “perilous” and “as bad as it has ever been” for Ukraine. Western powers cannot afford another strategic disaster like Afghanistan which, in the words of Ernest Hemingway (aptly quoted by the strategist Lawrence Freedman), happened “gradually, then suddenly”.

There will be no decisive breakthrough by Russia’s army when they take this town or that (say, Pokrovsk). They haven’t the capability to do it. So, there won’t be a collapse – no “Kyiv as Kabul” moment.

However, there are limits to the losses Ukraine can take. We do not know where that limit lies, but we’ll know when it happens. Crucially, there will be no victory for Ukraine. Unforgivably, there is not, and never has been, a western strategy except to bleed Russia as long as possible.

More fundamentally, two ancient ethical questions governing whether a war is just must now be asked and answered: whether there is a reasonable prospect of success, and whether the potential gain is proportionate to the cost.

The problem, as so often before, is that the west has not defined what it considers a success. The cost, meanwhile, is becoming all-too clear.

To have clearly defined its goals and limits would have constituted the beginnings of a strategy – and the west isn’t good at that. Nato’s leaders now need to move quickly beyond meaningless rhetoric or anything that smacks of “as long as it takes”. We saw where that led in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

We need a realistic answer to what something like a “win”, or at least an acceptable settlement, now looks like – as well as the extent to which it is achievable, and whether the west is really going to pursue it. And then for western leaders to act accordingly.

A starting point could be accepting that Crimea, Donetsk and Luhansk are lost – something an increasing number of Ukrainians are beginning to say openly. Then we need to start planning seriously for a post-war Ukraine that will need the west’s suppport more than ever.

Russia cannot possibly take all, or even the bulk of, Ukraine’s territory. Even if it could, it could not possibly hold it. It is amply clear there will be a compromise settlement.

So, it is time for Nato – and the US in particular – to articulate a viable end to this nightmarish ordeal, and to develop a pragmatic strategy to deal with Russia in the coming decade. More importantly, the west must plan how to support a heroic, shattered – but still independent – Ukraine.

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

– ref. Ukraine cannot defeat Russia – the best the west can do is help Kyiv plan for a secure post-war future – https://theconversation.com/ukraine-cannot-defeat-russia-the-best-the-west-can-do-is-help-kyiv-plan-for-a-secure-post-war-future-242010

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: ‘We try not to think about the future or the past’

Source: European Investment Bank

Vadym Chursin’s mother died long before the war. His father, Dmytro, has been his parent and best friend since he was very young. The two have grown even closer since their town near Ukraine’s southern border was occupied by Russian soldiers.

“There is barely anything left of our house today and not a single building still standing in our old town,” says Vadym, who is 16 years old and had lived in Oleshky, a city near Kherson, where his father ran a business building trendy tiny homes on wheels. For the past two years, father and son have been renting half a house about 220 kilometres to the west in Odesa, near Vadym’s new school. “We’re what people call displaced persons. There are many of us here and all of us are helping each other.”

Vadym attends Odesa School No. 41, one of the first schools repaired in 2021 under the European Investment Bank’s first Ukraine recovery programme. The Bank has helped modernise a group of Odesa schools since then and a city hospital.

Schools are a focus for the dozens of engineers, economists, loan officers and advisory specialists at the European Investment Bank who are trying to meet the urgent needs of Ukraine. Other critical work involves electricity lines, heating, water, roads, hospitals, community centres and bomb shelters. These types of projects allow people to go to work, drive to the doctor, buy groceries, get an education and stay safe during bomb attacks.

The Russian invasion has caused widespread devastation and created a humanitarian crisis in Ukraine and surrounding countries. Roads, bridges, hospitals, schools and residential buildings need repair in Ukraine, particularly in areas of intense fighting such as Kharkiv and the Donbas region. One study estimates economic damage in Ukraine at more than $150 billion since Russia invaded in February 2022. The cost of recovery over the next decade is estimated at about $500 billion.

The European Investment Bank is helping to renovate more than 300 schools, kindergartens, hospitals and social housing facilities in about 150 Ukrainian cities. It has improved electricity, gas, water, sanitation and solid waste management in more than a dozen regions, and has finished more than 100 projects. It receives new requests for help every week.

Pavel Novak, a public sector engineer at the European Investment Bank who is from Kyiv, where his parents still live, says a friend who was disabled in the war reminded him that soldiers are fighting to beat Russia, but also to see that other Ukrainians can continue to live normal lives in their home cities and communities today.

“My friend said to me, ‘Look, Pavel, we are doing this to keep life going on, bakeries and restaurants open, keep kids going to school and ensure that something beyond war still exists in this country.’”

In September 2024, the European Union’s financing arm proposed a €600 million energy rescue plan to help Ukraine as winter approaches, ensuring that businesses and homes have electricity and heat. Shelters will be built to protect electricity substations from bombings. The European Investment Bank is in regular discussions with Ukrhydroenergo, Ukraine’s largest hydropower company, and Ukrenergo, the national electricity transmission operator, to repair damaged power networks. It’s common for some parts of Ukraine to lose electricity for half of every day.

MIL OSI Europe News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – INTA Delegation to the UK to exchange on EU-UK economic and trade relations – Committee on International Trade

Source: European Parliament

A delegation of six Members of the Committee on International Trade (INTA), accompanied by the Chair of the Delegation to the EU-UK Parliamentary Partnership Assembly, will travel to London (UK) from 28 to 30 October 2024. The delegation, led by the INTA Chair, Bernd Lange (S&D, DE), will exchange with the UK government, parliamentarians and stakeholders on the trade aspects of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement, including the Windsor Framework, and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement.

The context of this visit is the ‘reset’ of the EU-UK relations announced recently by the UK Prime Minister, the first review of the TCA due in 2026 and the upcoming democratic consent vote of the Northern Ireland Legislative Assembly on the continuation of the application of major provisions of the Windsor Framework in December 2024.

The UK and the EU are also faced with the same challenges at global level regarding international trade. In the past decade, geopolitical and geoeconomic tensions have heightened, in part due to the strategic competition between the United States and China. In the last few years the situation has deteriorated further, notably due to the supply chain disruptions from the Covid-19 pandemic and to the impact of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, as well as recently the major crisis in the Middle East, bringing both competitiveness and economic security to the forefront.

MIL OSI Europe News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: The Terminator at 40: this sci-fi ‘B-movie’ still shapes how we view the threat of AI

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Tom F.A Watts, Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Politics, International Relations and Philosophy, Royal Holloway University of London

October 26, 2024 marks the 40th anniversary of director James Cameron’s science fiction classic, The Terminator – a film that popularised society’s fear of machines that can’t be reasoned with, and that “absolutely will not stop … until you are dead”, as one character memorably puts it.

The plot concerns a super-intelligent AI system called Skynet which has taken over the world by initiating nuclear war. Amid the resulting devastation, human survivors stage a successful fightback under the leadership of the charismatic John Connor.

In response, Skynet sends a cyborg assassin (played by Arnold Schwarzenegger) back in time to 1984 – before Connor’s birth – to kill his future mother, Sarah. Such is John Connor’s importance to the war that Skynet banks on erasing him from history to preserve its existence.

Today, public interest in artificial intelligence has arguably never been greater. The companies developing AI typically promise their technologies will perform tasks faster and more accurately than people. They claim AI can spot patterns in data that are not obvious, enhancing human decision-making. There is a widespread perception that AI is poised to transform everything from warfare to the economy.

Immediate risks include introducing biases into algorithms for screening job applications and the threat of generative AI displacing humans from certain types of work, such as software programming.

But it is the existential danger that often dominates public discussion – and the six Terminator films have exerted an outsize influence on how these arguments are framed. Indeed, according to some, the films’ portrayal of the threat posed by AI-controlled machines distracts from the substantial benefits offered by the technology.

Official trailer for The Terminator (1984)

The Terminator was not the first film to tackle AI’s potential dangers. There are parallels between Skynet and the HAL 9000 supercomputer in Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 film, 2001: A Space Odyssey.

It also draws from Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel, Frankenstein, and Karel Čapek’s 1921 play, R.U.R.. Both stories concern inventors losing control over their creations.

On release, it was described in a review by the New York Times as a “B-movie with flair”. In the intervening years, it has been recognised as one of the greatest science fiction movies of all time. At the box office, it made more than 12 times its modest budget of US$6.4 million (£4.9 million at today’s exchange rate).

What was arguably most novel about The Terminator is how it re-imagined longstanding fears of a machine uprising through the cultural prism of 1980s America. Much like the 1983 film WarGames, where a teenager nearly triggers World War 3 by hacking into a military supercomputer, Skynet highlights cold war fears of nuclear annihilation coupled with anxiety about rapid technological change.

Forty years on, Elon Musk is among the technology leaders who have helped keep a focus on the supposed existential risk of AI to humanity. The owner of X (formerly Twitter) has repeatedly referenced the Terminator franchise while expressing concerns about the hypothetical development of superintelligent AI.

But such comparisons often irritate the technology’s advocates. As the former UK technology minister Paul Scully said at a London conference in 2023: “If you’re only talking about the end of humanity because of some rogue, Terminator-style scenario, you’re going to miss out on all of the good that AI [can do].”

That’s not to say there aren’t genuine concerns about military uses of AI – ones that may even seem to parallel the film franchise.

AI-controlled weapons systems

To the relief of many, US officials have said that AI will never take a decision on deploying nuclear weapons. But combining AI with autonomous weapons systems is a possibility.

These weapons have existed for decades and don’t necessarily require AI. Once activated, they can select and attack targets without being directly operated by a human. In 2016, US Air Force general Paul Selva coined the term “Terminator conundrum” to describe the ethical and legal challenges posed by these weapons.

The Terminator’s director James Cameron says ‘the weaponisation of AI is the biggest danger’.

Stuart Russell, a leading UK computer scientist, has argued for a ban on all lethal, fully autonomous weapons, including those with AI. The main risk, he argues, is not from a sentient Skynet-style system going rogue, but how well autonomous weapons might follow our instructions, killing with superhuman accuracy.

Russell envisages a scenario where tiny quadcopters equipped with AI and explosive charges could be mass-produced. These “slaughterbots” could then be deployed in swarms as “cheap, selective weapons of mass destruction”.

Countries including the US specify the need for human operators to “exercise appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force” when operating autonomous weapon systems. In some instances, operators can visually verify targets before authorising strikes, and can “wave off” attacks if situations change.

AI is already being used to support military targeting. According to some, it’s even a responsible use of the technology, since it could reduce collateral damage. This idea evokes Schwarzenegger’s role reversal as the benevolent “machine guardian” in the original film’s sequel, Terminator 2: Judgment Day.

However, AI could also undermine the role human drone operators play in challenging recommendations by machines. Some researchers think that humans have a tendency to trust whatever computers say.

‘Loitering munitions’

Militaries engaged in conflicts are increasingly making use of small, cheap aerial drones that can detect and crash into targets. These “loitering munitions” (so named because they are designed to hover over a battlefield) feature varying degrees of autonomy.

As I’ve argued in research co-authored with security researcher Ingvild Bode, the dynamics of the Ukraine war and other recent conflicts in which these munitions have been widely used raises concerns about the quality of control exerted by human operators.

Ground-based military robots armed with weapons and designed for use on the battlefield might call to mind the relentless Terminators, and weaponised aerial drones may, in time, come to resemble the franchise’s airborne “hunter-killers”. But these technologies don’t hate us as Skynet does, and neither are they “super-intelligent”.

However, it’s crucially important that human operators continue to exercise agency and meaningful control over machine systems.

Arguably, The Terminator’s greatest legacy has been to distort how we collectively think and speak about AI. This matters now more than ever, because of how central these technologies have become to the strategic competition for global power and influence between the US, China and Russia.

The entire international community, from superpowers such as China and the US to smaller countries, needs to find the political will to cooperate – and to manage the ethical and legal challenges posed by the military applications of AI during this time of geopolitical upheaval. How nations navigate these challenges will determine whether we can avoid the dystopian future so vividly imagined in The Terminator – even if we don’t see time travelling cyborgs any time soon.

Tom F.A Watts receives funding from the Leverhulme Trust Early Career Research Fellowship scheme.

– ref. The Terminator at 40: this sci-fi ‘B-movie’ still shapes how we view the threat of AI – https://theconversation.com/the-terminator-at-40-this-sci-fi-b-movie-still-shapes-how-we-view-the-threat-of-ai-236564

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Nations: Secretary-General’s remarks to the 16th BRICS Summit [as delivered]

Source: United Nations secretary general

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

I am grateful to participate in the 16th BRICS Summit.

Collectively, your countries represent nearly half of the world’s population.

And I salute your valuable commitment and support for international problem-solving as clearly reflected in your theme this year.

But no single group and no single country can act alone or in isolation.

It takes a community of nations, working as one global family, to address global challenges.

Challenges like the rising number of conflicts.

The devastation of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss…

Rising inequalities and lingering poverty and hunger…

A debt crisis that threatens to smother plans for the future of many vulnerable countries…

The fact that fewer than one-fifth of the Sustainable Development Goals are on-track…

A growing digital divide, and a lack of guardrails for artificial intelligence and other frontier technologies…

And a lack of representation and voice for developing countries at global decision-making tables. From the Security Council to the Bretton-Woods institution and beyond. This must change.

September’s Summit of the Future offered a roadmap for strengthening multilateralism, and advancing peace, sustainable development and human rights.

I see four areas for action.

First — finance.

Today’s international financial system is not offering many vulnerable countries the safety net or level of support they need.

The Pact for the Future calls for accelerating reform of the international financial architecture that is outdated, ineffective and unfair.

And it includes a commitment to move forward with an SDG Stimulus to change the business model to substantially increase the lending capacity of Multilateral Development Banks to developing countries.

To recycle more Special Drawing Rights…

To restructure loans for countries drowning in debt…

And to mobilize more international and domestic resources, public and private, for vital investments in developing countries.

Next year’s Conference on Financing for Development and the Summit on Social Development are two milestones to carry these efforts forward.

We must also recognize the importance of South-South cooperation.

It doesn’t replace the commitments and obligations of developed countries.

But it is providing a growing contribution to supporting developing countries in overcoming obstacles to reaching the SDGs.

Second — climate.

Every country has committed to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

That requires dramatic action to reduce emissions now — with the G20 in the lead.

COP29 is just weeks away.

That starts the clock for countries to produce new Nationally Determined Contributions plans with 2035 targets that are aligned with the 1.5 degree goal.

COP29 must deliver an ambitious and credible outcome on the new climate finance goal.

Developed countries must also keep promises to double adaptation finance, and ensure meaningful contributions to the Loss and Damage Fund, which was not the case when it was created.

Third — technology.

Every country must be able to access the benefits of technology.

The Global Digital Compact commits to enhanced global cooperation and capacity-building.

It includes the first truly universal agreement on the international governance of Artificial Intelligence to give every country a seat at the AI table.

It calls for an independent international Scientific Panel on AI and initiating a global dialogue on its governance within the United Nations with the participations of all countries.

And it requests options for innovative financing for AI capacity-building in developing countries.

And fourth — peace.

We must strengthen and update the machinery of peace.

This includes reforms to make the United Nations Security Council reflective of today’s world.

The Pact for the Future includes important steps on disarmament — including the first multilateral agreement on nuclear disarmament in more than a decade — and steps that address the weaponization of outer space and the use of lethal autonomous weapons.

Across the board, we need peace.

We need peace in Gaza with an immediate cease-fire, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, the effective delivery of humanitarian aid without obstacles, and we need to make irreversible progress to end the occupation and establish the two state solution, as it was recently reaffirmed once again by a UN General Assembly resolution.

We need peace in Lebanon with an immediate cessation of hostilities, moving to the full implementation of Security Council resolution 1701.

We need peace in Ukraine. A just peace in line with the UN Charter, international law and General Assembly resolutions.

We need peace in Sudan, with all parties silencing their guns and committing to a path towards sustainable peace.

Those were the messages I have delivered to the High-Level segment of the General Assembly in September in New York. Unfortunately, they remain valid here and now.

Everywhere, we must uphold the values of the UN Charter, the rule of law, and the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all States.

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

The Summit of the Future charted a course to strengthen multilateralism for global development and security.

Now we must turn words into deeds and we believe BRICS can play a very important role in this direction.

Thank you.

MIL OSI United Nations News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Africa: Secretary-General’s remarks to the 16th BRICS Summit [as delivered]

Source: United Nations – English

xcellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

I am grateful to participate in the 16th BRICS Summit.

Collectively, your countries represent nearly half of the world’s population.

And I salute your valuable commitment and support for international problem-solving as clearly reflected in your theme this year.

But no single group and no single country can act alone or in isolation.

It takes a community of nations, working as one global family, to address global challenges.

Challenges like the rising number of conflicts.

The devastation of climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss…

Rising inequalities and lingering poverty and hunger…

A debt crisis that threatens to smother plans for the future of many vulnerable countries…

The fact that fewer than one-fifth of the Sustainable Development Goals are on-track…

A growing digital divide, and a lack of guardrails for artificial intelligence and other frontier technologies…

And a lack of representation and voice for developing countries at global decision-making tables. From the Security Council to the Bretton-Woods institution and beyond. This must change.

September’s Summit of the Future offered a roadmap for strengthening multilateralism, and advancing peace, sustainable development and human rights.

I see four areas for action.

First — finance.

Today’s international financial system is not offering many vulnerable countries the safety net or level of support they need.

The Pact for the Future calls for accelerating reform of the international financial architecture that is outdated, ineffective and unfair.

And it includes a commitment to move forward with an SDG Stimulus to change the business model to substantially increase the lending capacity of Multilateral Development Banks to developing countries.

To recycle more Special Drawing Rights…

To restructure loans for countries drowning in debt…

And to mobilize more international and domestic resources, public and private, for vital investments in developing countries.

Next year’s Conference on Financing for Development and the Summit on Social Development are two milestones to carry these efforts forward.

We must also recognize the importance of South-South cooperation.

It doesn’t replace the commitments and obligations of developed countries.

But it is providing a growing contribution to supporting developing countries in overcoming obstacles to reaching the SDGs.

Second — climate.

Every country has committed to limit temperature rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

That requires dramatic action to reduce emissions now — with the G20 in the lead.

COP29 is just weeks away.

That starts the clock for countries to produce new Nationally Determined Contributions plans with 2035 targets that are aligned with the 1.5 degree goal.

COP29 must deliver an ambitious and credible outcome on the new climate finance goal.

Developed countries must also keep promises to double adaptation finance, and ensure meaningful contributions to the Loss and Damage Fund, which was not the case when it was created.

Third — technology.

Every country must be able to access the benefits of technology.

The Global Digital Compact commits to enhanced global cooperation and capacity-building.

It includes the first truly universal agreement on the international governance of Artificial Intelligence to give every country a seat at the AI table.

It calls for an independent international Scientific Panel on AI and initiating a global dialogue on its governance within the United Nations with the participations of all countries.

And it requests options for innovative financing for AI capacity-building in developing countries.

And fourth — peace.

We must strengthen and update the machinery of peace.

This includes reforms to make the United Nations Security Council reflective of today’s world.

The Pact for the Future includes important steps on disarmament — including the first multilateral agreement on nuclear disarmament in more than a decade — and steps that address the weaponization of outer space and the use of lethal autonomous weapons.

Across the board, we need peace.

We need peace in Gaza with an immediate cease-fire, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, the effective delivery of humanitarian aid without obstacles, and we need to make irreversible progress to end the occupation and establish the two state solution, as it was recently reaffirmed once again by a UN General Assembly resolution.

We need peace in Lebanon with an immediate cessation of hostilities, moving to the full implementation of Security Council resolution 1701.

We need peace in Ukraine. A just peace in line with the UN Charter, international law and General Assembly resolutions.

We need peace in Sudan, with all parties silencing their guns and committing to a path towards sustainable peace.

Those were the messages I have delivered to the High-Level segment of the General Assembly in September in New York. Unfortunately, they remain valid here and now.

Everywhere, we must uphold the values of the UN Charter, the rule of law, and the principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of all States.

Excellencies, ladies and gentlemen,

The Summit of the Future charted a course to strengthen multilateralism for global development and security.

Now we must turn words into deeds and we believe BRICS can play a very important role in this direction.

Thank you.

MIL OSI Africa –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: West Bancorporation, Inc. Announces Third Quarter 2024 Financial Results and Declares Quarterly Dividend

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

WEST DES MOINES, Iowa, Oct. 24, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — West Bancorporation, Inc. (Nasdaq: WTBA; the “Company”), parent company of West Bank, today reported third quarter 2024 net income of $6.0 million, or $0.35 per diluted common share, compared to second quarter 2024 net income of $5.2 million, or $0.31 per diluted common share, and third quarter 2023 net income of $5.9 million, or $0.35 per diluted common share. On October 23, 2024, the Company’s Board of Directors declared a regular quarterly dividend of $0.25 per common share. The dividend is payable on November 20, 2024, to stockholders of record on November 6, 2024.

David Nelson, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, commented, “Our third quarter results include moderate growth in loans and core deposits along with an increase in quarterly net interest income and net interest margin. Our credit quality remains pristine as a result of our disciplined loan growth and credit risk management practices. The ratio of nonperforming assets to total assets remains negligible at 0.01%.”

David Nelson added, “West Bank is focused on initiatives that will drive sustained core profitability. Those initiatives are centered around our culture of building strong relationships and providing exceptional personal service to drive growth in both commercial and consumer banking services.”

Third Quarter 2024 Financial Highlights

	Quarter Ended September 30, 2024		Nine Months Ended September 30, 2024
Net income (in thousands)	$5,952		$16,953
Return on average equity		10.41%		10.18%
Return on average assets		0.60%		0.59%
Efficiency ratio (a non-GAAP measure)		63.28%		64.16%
Nonperforming assets to total assets		0.01%		0.01%

Third Quarter 2024 Compared to Second Quarter 2024 Overview

Loans increased $22.4 million in the third quarter of 2024, or 3.0 percent annualized. The increase is primarily due to the funding of previously committed construction loans.
A provision for credit losses on loans of $1.0 million was recorded in the third quarter of 2024, compared to no provision in the second quarter of 2024. A negative provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments of $1.0 million was recorded in the third quarter of 2024, compared to no provision in the second quarter of 2024. The provision for loans in the third quarter of 2024 was primarily due to changes in the forecasted loss rates due to increases in forecasted unemployment rates. The negative provision for unfunded commitments was primarily due to the decline in unfunded commitments resulting primarily from the funding of construction loans.
The allowance for credit losses to total loans was 0.97 percent and 0.95 percent at September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024, respectively. Nonaccrual loans at September 30, 2024 consisted of two loans with a total balance of $233 thousand, compared to three loans with a balance of $521 thousand at June 30, 2024.
Deposits increased $97.6 million, or 3.1 percent, in the third quarter of 2024. Brokered deposits totaled $425.9 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $370.3 million at June 30, 2024, an increase of $55.6 million. Excluding brokered deposits, deposits increased $42.0 million during the third quarter of 2024. As of September 30, 2024, estimated uninsured deposits, which exclude deposits in the IntraFi^® reciprocal network, brokered deposits and public funds protected by state programs, accounted for approximately 27.8 percent of total deposits.
Borrowed funds decreased to $438.8 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $525.5 million at June 30, 2024. The decrease was primarily due to the balance of federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings decreasing to $0 as of September 30, 2024, from $85.5 million as of June 30, 2024 as a result of growth in deposits.
The efficiency ratio (a non-GAAP measure) was 63.28 percent for the third quarter of 2024, compared to 67.14 percent for the second quarter of 2024. The improvement in the efficiency ratio was primarily due to the increase in net interest income. In the third quarter of 2024, the increase in interest income on loans outpaced the increase in interest expense on deposits and borrowed funds.
Net interest margin, on a fully tax-equivalent basis (a non-GAAP measure), was 1.91 percent for the third quarter of 2024, compared to 1.86 percent for the second quarter of 2024. Net interest income for the third quarter of 2024 was $18.0 million, compared to $17.2 million for the second quarter of 2024.
The tangible common equity ratio was 5.90 percent as of September 30, 2024, compared to 5.65 percent as of June 30, 2024. The increase in the tangible common equity ratio was driven by retained net income and the decrease in accumulated other comprehensive loss, which was primarily the result of the increase in the market value of our available for sale investment portfolio.

Third Quarter 2024 Compared to Third Quarter 2023 Overview

Loans increased $171.4 million at September 30, 2024, or 6.0 percent, compared to September 30, 2023. The increase is primarily due to increases in commercial real estate loans and the funding of previously committed construction loans.
Deposits increased to $3.3 billion at September 30, 2024, compared to $2.8 billion at September 30, 2023. Included in deposits were brokered deposits totaling $425.9 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $237.0 million at September 30, 2023. Brokered deposits were used to reduce short-term borrowed funds and to fund loan growth. Excluding brokered deposits, deposits increased $334.2 million, or 13.3 percent, as of September 30, 2024, compared to September 30, 2023. Deposit growth included a mix of public funds and commercial and consumer deposits.
Borrowed funds decreased to $438.8 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $705.1 million at September 30, 2023. The decrease was primarily attributable to a decrease of $261.5 million in federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings as a result of growth in deposits.
The efficiency ratio (a non-GAAP measure) was 63.28 percent for the third quarter of 2024, compared to 60.83 percent for the third quarter of 2023. The increase in the efficiency ratio in the third quarter of 2024 compared to the third quarter of 2023 was primarily due to the increase in noninterest expense, partially offset by an increase in net interest income. Occupancy and equipment expense increased primarily due to the occupancy costs associated with the Company’s newly constructed headquarters.
Net interest margin, on a fully tax-equivalent basis (a non-GAAP measure), was 1.91 percent for both the third quarter of 2024 and the third quarter of 2023. Net interest income for the third quarter of 2024 was $18.0 million, compared to $16.6 million for the third quarter of 2023.

The Company filed its report on Form 10-Q with the Securities and Exchange Commission today. Please refer to that document for a more in-depth discussion of the Company’s financial results. The Form 10-Q is available on the Investor Relations section of West Bank’s website at www.westbankstrong.com.

The Company will discuss its results in a conference call scheduled for 2:00 p.m. Central Time on Thursday, October 24, 2024. The telephone number for the conference call is 800-715-9871. The conference ID for the conference call is 7846129. A recording of the call will be available until November 7, 2024, by dialing 800-770-2030. The conference ID for the replay call is 7846129, followed by the # key.

About West Bancorporation, Inc. (Nasdaq: WTBA)

West Bancorporation, Inc. is headquartered in West Des Moines, Iowa. Serving customers since 1893, West Bank, a wholly-owned subsidiary of West Bancorporation, Inc., is a community bank that focuses on lending, deposit services, and trust services for small- to medium-sized businesses and consumers. West Bank has six offices in the Des Moines, Iowa metropolitan area, one office in Coralville, Iowa, and four offices in Minnesota in the cities of Rochester, Owatonna, Mankato and St. Cloud.

Certain statements in this report, other than purely historical information, including estimates, projections, statements relating to the Company’s business plans, objectives and expected operating results, and the assumptions upon which those statements are based, are “forward-looking statements” within the meanings of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements may appear throughout this report. These forward-looking statements are generally identified by the words “believes,” “expects,” “intends,” “anticipates,” “projects,” “future,” “confident,” “may,” “should,” “will,” “strategy,” “plan,” “opportunity,” “will be,” “will likely result,” “will continue” or similar references, or references to estimates, predictions or future events. Such forward-looking statements are based upon certain underlying assumptions, risks and uncertainties. Because of the possibility that the underlying assumptions are incorrect or do not materialize as expected in the future, actual results could differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Risks and uncertainties that may affect future results include: interest rate risk, including the effects of changes in interest rates; fluctuations in the values of the securities held in our investment portfolio, including as a result of changes in interest rates; competitive pressures, including from non-bank competitors such as credit unions, “fintech” companies and digital asset service providers; pricing pressures on loans and deposits; our ability to successfully manage liquidity risk; changes in credit and other risks posed by the Company’s loan portfolio, including declines in commercial or residential real estate values or changes in the allowance for credit losses dictated by new market conditions, accounting standards or regulatory requirements; the concentration of large deposits from certain clients, including those who have balances above current FDIC insurance limits; changes in local, national and international economic conditions, including the level and impact of inflation and possible recession; the effects of recent developments and events in the financial services industry, including the large-scale deposit withdrawals over a short period of time that resulted in recent bank failures; changes in legal and regulatory requirements, limitations and costs including in response to the recent bank failures; changes in customers’ acceptance of the Company’s products and services; the occurrence of fraudulent activity, breaches or failures of our or our third-party partners’ information security controls or cyber-security related incidents, including as a result of sophisticated attacks using artificial intelligence and similar tools; unexpected outcomes of existing or new litigation involving the Company; the monetary, trade and other regulatory policies of the U.S. government; acts of war or terrorism, including the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, widespread disease or pandemics, or other adverse external events; risks related to climate change and the negative impact it may have on our customers and their businesses; changes to U.S. tax laws, regulations and guidance; potential changes in federal policy and at regulatory agencies as a result of the upcoming 2024 presidential election; talent and labor shortages; and any other risks described in the “Risk Factors” sections of reports filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update such forward-looking statements to reflect current or future events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

For more information contact:
Jane Funk, Executive Vice President, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer (515) 222-5766


WEST BANCORPORATION, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Financial Information (unaudited)
(in thousands)
	As of
CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023
Assets
Cash and due from banks	$	34,157		$	27,994		$	27,071		$	33,245		$	18,819
Interest-bearing deposits		123,646			121,825			120,946			32,112			1,802
Securities available for sale, at fair value		597,745			588,452			605,735			623,919			609,365
Federal Home Loan Bank stock, at cost		17,195			21,065			26,181			22,957			26,691
Loans		3,021,221			2,998,774			2,980,133			2,927,535			2,849,777
Allowance for credit losses		(29,419	)		(28,422	)		(28,373	)		(28,342	)		(28,147	)
Loans, net		2,991,802			2,970,352			2,951,760			2,899,193			2,821,630
Premises and equipment, net		106,771			101,965			95,880			86,399			75,675
Bank-owned life insurance		44,703			44,416			44,138			43,864			43,589
Other assets		72,547			89,046			90,981			84,069			104,329
Total assets	$	3,988,566		$	3,965,115		$	3,962,692		$	3,825,758		$	3,701,900

Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Deposits	$	3,278,553		$	3,180,922		$	3,065,030		$	2,973,779		$	2,755,529
Federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings		—			85,500			198,500			150,270			261,510
Other borrowings		438,814			439,998			441,183			442,367			443,552
Other liabilities		35,846			34,812			34,223			34,299			37,376
Stockholders’ equity		235,353			223,883			223,756			225,043			203,933
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	3,988,566		$	3,965,115		$	3,962,692		$	3,825,758		$	3,701,900

	For the Quarter Ended
AVERAGE BALANCES	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023
Assets	$	3,973,824		$	3,964,109		$	3,812,199		$	3,706,497		$	3,679,541
Loans		2,991,272			2,994,492			2,949,672			2,857,594			2,813,213
Deposits		3,258,669			3,123,282			2,956,635			2,878,676			2,764,184
Stockholders’ equity		227,513			219,771			219,835			201,920			215,230


WEST BANCORPORATION, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Financial Information (unaudited)
(in thousands)
	As of
LOANS	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023
Commercial	$	512,884		$	526,589		$	544,293		$	531,594		$	529,293
Real estate:
Construction, land and land development		520,516			496,864			465,247			413,477			399,253
1-4 family residential first mortgages		89,749			92,230			108,065			106,688			89,713
Home equity		17,140			15,264			14,020			14,618			12,429
Commercial		1,870,132			1,856,301			1,839,580			1,854,510			1,812,816
Consumer and other		14,261			15,234			12,844			10,930			10,123
		3,024,682			3,002,482			2,984,049			2,931,817			2,853,627
Net unamortized fees and costs		(3,461	)		(3,708	)		(3,916	)		(4,282	)		(3,850	)
Total loans	$	3,021,221		$	2,998,774		$	2,980,133		$	2,927,535		$	2,849,777
Less: allowance for credit losses		(29,419	)		(28,422	)		(28,373	)		(28,342	)		(28,147	)
Net loans	$	2,991,802		$	2,970,352		$	2,951,760		$	2,899,193		$	2,821,630

CREDIT QUALITY
Pass	$	3,016,493		$	2,994,310		$	2,983,618		$	2,931,377		$	2,853,100
Watch		7,956			7,651			142			144			184
Substandard		233			521			289			296			343
Doubtful		—			—			—			—			—
Total loans	$	3,024,682		$	3,002,482		$	2,984,049		$	2,931,817		$	2,853,627

DEPOSITS
Noninterest-bearing demand	$	525,332		$	530,441		$	521,377		$	548,726		$	551,688
Interest-bearing demand		438,402			443,658			449,946			481,207			417,802
Savings and money market – non-brokered		1,481,840			1,483,264			1,315,698			1,315,741			1,249,309
Money market – brokered		123,780			97,259			119,840			124,335			99,282
Total nonmaturity deposits		2,569,354			2,554,622			2,406,861			2,470,009			2,318,081
Time – non-brokered		407,109			353,269			381,646			322,694			299,683
Time – brokered		302,090			273,031			276,523			181,076			137,765
Total time deposits		709,199			626,300			658,169			503,770			437,448
Total deposits	$	3,278,553		$	3,180,922		$	3,065,030		$	2,973,779		$	2,755,529

BORROWINGS
Federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings	$	—		$	85,500		$	198,500		$	150,270		$	261,510
Subordinated notes, net		79,828			79,762			79,697			79,631			79,566
Federal Home Loan Bank advances		315,000			315,000			315,000			315,000			315,000
Long-term debt		43,986			45,236			46,486			47,736			48,986
Total borrowings	$	438,814		$	525,498		$	639,683		$	592,637		$	705,062

STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Preferred stock	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
Common stock		3,000			3,000			3,000			3,000			3,000
Additional paid-in capital		34,960			34,322			33,685			34,197			33,487
Retained earnings		275,724			273,981			272,997			271,369			271,025
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(78,331	)		(87,420	)		(85,926	)		(83,523	)		(103,579	)
Total stockholders’ equity	$	235,353		$	223,883		$	223,756		$	225,043		$	203,933


WEST BANCORPORATION, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Financial Information (unaudited)
(in thousands)
	For the Quarter Ended
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME	September 30, 2024		June 30, 2024		March 31, 2024		December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023
Interest income:
Loans, including fees	$	42,504	$	41,700	$	40,196	$	38,208		$	36,756
Securities:
Taxable		3,261		3,394		3,416		3,521			3,427
Tax-exempt		806		808		810		869			880
Interest-bearing deposits		2,041		1,666		148		85			29
Total interest income		48,612		47,568		44,570		42,683			41,092
Interest expense:
Deposits		26,076		23,943		21,559		20,024			17,156
Federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings		115		1,950		2,183		2,024			3,165
Subordinated notes		1,112		1,105		1,108		1,114			1,113
Federal Home Loan Bank advances		2,748		2,718		2,325		2,482			2,329
Long-term debt		601		622		645		678			695
Total interest expense		30,652		30,338		27,820		26,322			24,458
Net interest income		17,960		17,230		16,750		16,361			16,634
Credit loss expense		—		—		—		500			200
Net interest income after credit loss expense		17,960		17,230		16,750		15,861			16,434
Noninterest income:
Service charges on deposit accounts		459		462		460		476			463
Debit card usage fees		500		490		458		488			495
Trust services		828		794		776		782			831
Increase in cash value of bank-owned life insurance		287		278		274		275			262
Loan swap fees		—		—		—		—			431
Realized securities losses, net		—		—		—		(431	)		—
Other income		285		322		331		308			340
Total noninterest income		2,359		2,346		2,299		1,898			2,822
Noninterest expense:
Salaries and employee benefits		6,823		7,169		6,489		6,468			6,696
Occupancy and equipment		1,926		1,852		1,447		1,499			1,359
Data processing		771		754		714		723			703
Technology and software		722		731		700		676			573
FDIC insurance		711		631		519		475			439
Professional fees		239		244		257		235			254
Director fees		223		236		199		240			196
Other expenses		1,477		1,577		1,543		1,845			1,685
Total noninterest expense		12,892		13,194		11,868		12,161			11,905
Income before income taxes		7,427		6,382		7,181		5,598			7,351
Income taxes		1,475		1,190		1,372		1,073			1,445
Net income	$	5,952	$	5,192	$	5,809	$	4,525		$	5,906

Basic earnings per common share	$	0.35	$	0.31	$	0.35	$	0.27		$	0.35
Diluted earnings per common share	$	0.35	$	0.31	$	0.35	$	0.27		$	0.35


WEST BANCORPORATION, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Financial Information (unaudited)
(in thousands)
	For the Nine Months Ended
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME	September 30, 2024		September 30, 2023
Interest income:
Loans, including fees	$	124,400	$	104,715
Securities:
Taxable		10,071		10,175
Tax-exempt		2,424		2,648
Interest-bearing deposits		3,855		84
Total interest income		140,750		117,622
Interest expense:
Deposits		71,578		46,772
Federal funds purchased and other short-term borrowings		4,248		7,508
Subordinated notes		3,325		3,328
Federal Home Loan Bank advances		7,791		5,212
Long-term debt		1,868		2,132
Total interest expense		88,810		64,952
Net interest income		51,940		52,670
Credit loss expense		—		200
Net interest income after credit loss expense		51,940		52,470
Noninterest income:
Service charges on deposit accounts		1,381		1,383
Debit card usage fees		1,448		1,492
Trust services		2,398		2,286
Increase in cash value of bank-owned life insurance		839		769
Loan swap fees		—		431
Gain from bank-owned life insurance		—		691
Other income		938		1,116
Total noninterest income		7,004		8,168
Noninterest expense:
Salaries and employee benefits		20,481		20,592
Occupancy and equipment		5,225		4,008
Data processing		2,239		2,067
Technology and software		2,153		1,665
FDIC insurance		1,861		1,275
Professional fees		740		791
Director fees		658		652
Other expenses		4,597		5,400
Total noninterest expense		37,954		36,450
Income before income taxes		20,990		24,188
Income taxes		4,037		4,576
Net income	$	16,953	$	19,612

Basic earnings per common share	$	1.01	$	1.17
Diluted earnings per common share	$	1.00	$	1.17


WEST BANCORPORATION, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
Financial Information (unaudited)

	As of and for the Quarter Ended															For the Nine Months Ended
COMMON SHARE DATA	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023			September 30, 2024			September 30, 2023
Earnings per common share (basic)	$	0.35		$	0.31		$	0.35		$	0.27		$	0.35		$	1.01		$	1.17
Earnings per common share (diluted)		0.35			0.31			0.35			0.27			0.35			1.00			1.17
Dividends per common share		0.25			0.25			0.25			0.25			0.25			0.75			0.75
Book value per common share⁽¹⁾		13.98			13.30			13.31			13.46			12.19
Closing stock price		19.01			17.90			17.83			21.20			16.31
Market price/book value⁽²⁾		135.98	%		134.59	%		133.96	%		157.50	%		133.80	%
Price earnings ratio⁽³⁾		13.65			14.36			12.77			19.79			11.75
Annualized dividend yield⁽⁴⁾		5.26	%		5.59	%		5.61	%		4.72	%		6.13	%

REGULATORY CAPITAL RATIOS
Consolidated:
Total risk-based capital ratio		11.95	%		11.85	%		11.78	%		11.88	%		11.96	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio		9.39			9.30			9.23			9.30			9.37
Tier 1 leverage capital ratio		8.15			8.08			8.36			8.50			8.58
Common equity tier 1 ratio		8.83			8.74			8.67			8.74			8.80
West Bank:
Total risk-based capital ratio		12.73	%		12.66	%		12.63	%		12.76	%		12.89	%
Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio		11.86			11.79			11.76			11.89			12.01
Tier 1 leverage capital ratio		10.29			10.25			10.65			10.86			11.00
Common equity tier 1 ratio		11.86			11.79			11.76			11.89			12.01

KEY PERFORMANCE RATIOS AND OTHER METRICS
Return on average assets⁽⁵⁾		0.60	%		0.53	%		0.61	%		0.48	%		0.64	%		0.59	%		0.72	%
Return on average equity⁽⁶⁾		10.41			9.50			10.63			8.89			10.89			10.18			12.22
Net interest margin^(7)(13)		1.91			1.86			1.88			1.87			1.91			1.88			2.05
Yield on interest-earning assets^(8)(13)		5.16			5.13			4.99			4.87			4.70			5.10			4.56
Cost of interest-bearing liabilities		3.84			3.83			3.70			3.60			3.38			3.79			3.09
Efficiency ratio^(9)(13)		63.28			67.14			62.04			64.66			60.83			64.16			59.52
Nonperforming assets to total assets⁽¹⁰⁾		0.01			0.01			0.01			0.01			0.01
ACL ratio⁽¹¹⁾		0.97			0.95			0.95			0.97			0.99
Loans/total assets		75.75			75.63			75.20			76.52			76.98
Loans/total deposits		92.15			94.27			97.23			98.44			103.42
Tangible common equity ratio⁽¹²⁾		5.90			5.65			5.65			5.88			5.51

(1)	Includes accumulated other comprehensive loss.
(2)	Closing stock price divided by book value per common share.
(3)	Closing stock price divided by annualized earnings per common share (basic).
(4)	Annualized dividend divided by period end closing stock price.
(5)	Annualized net income divided by average assets.
(6)	Annualized net income divided by average stockholders’ equity.
(7)	Annualized tax-equivalent net interest income divided by average interest-earning assets.
(8)	Annualized tax-equivalent interest income on interest-earning assets divided by average interest-earning assets.
(9)	Noninterest expense (excluding other real estate owned expense and write-down of premises) divided by noninterest income (excluding net securities gains/losses and gains/losses on disposition of premises and equipment) plus tax-equivalent net interest income.
(10)	Total nonperforming assets divided by total assets.
(11)	Allowance for credit losses on loans divided by total loans.
(12)	Common equity less intangible assets (none held) divided by tangible assets.
(13)	A non-GAAP measure.

NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES

This report contains references to financial measures that are not defined in GAAP. Such non-GAAP financial measures include the Company’s presentation of net interest income and net interest margin on a fully taxable equivalent (FTE) basis and the presentation of the efficiency ratio on an adjusted and FTE basis, excluding certain income and expenses. Management believes these non-GAAP financial measures provide useful information to both management and investors to analyze and evaluate the Company’s financial performance. These measures are considered standard measures of comparison within the banking industry. Additionally, management believes providing measures on a FTE basis enhances the comparability of income arising from taxable and nontaxable sources. Limitations associated with non-GAAP financial measures include the risks that persons might disagree as to the appropriateness of items included in these measures and that different companies might calculate these measures differently. These non-GAAP disclosures should not be considered an alternative to the Company’s GAAP results. The following table reconciles the non-GAAP financial measures of net interest income and net interest margin on a fully taxable equivalent basis and efficiency ratio on an adjusted and FTE basis.


(in thousands)	For the Quarter Ended															For the Nine Months Ended
	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023			September 30, 2024			September 30, 2023
Reconciliation of net interest income and net interest margin on a FTE basis to GAAP:
Net interest income (GAAP)	$	17,960		$	17,230		$	16,750		$	16,361		$	16,634		$	51,940		$	52,670
Tax-equivalent adjustment ⁽¹⁾		29			55			82			95			113			166			396
Net interest income on a FTE basis (non-GAAP)		17,989			17,285			16,832			16,456			16,747			52,106			53,066
Average interest-earning assets		3,749,688			3,731,674			3,595,954			3,487,799			3,478,053			3,692,647			3,458,606
Net interest margin on a FTE basis (non-GAAP)		1.91	%		1.86	%		1.88	%		1.87	%		1.91	%		1.88	%		2.05	%

Reconciliation of efficiency ratio on an adjusted and FTE basis to GAAP:
Net interest income on a FTE basis (non-GAAP)	$	17,989		$	17,285		$	16,832		$	16,456		$	16,747		$	52,106		$	53,066
Noninterest income		2,359			2,346			2,299			1,898			2,822			7,004			8,168
Adjustment for realized securities losses, net		—			—			—			431			—			—			—
Adjustment for losses on disposal of premises and equipment, net		26			21			—			24			3			47			5
Adjusted income		20,374			19,652			19,131			18,809			19,572			59,157			61,239
Noninterest expense		12,892			13,194			11,868			12,161			11,905			37,954			36,450
Efficiency ratio on an adjusted and FTE basis (non-GAAP) ⁽²⁾		63.28	%		67.14	%		62.04	%		64.66	%		60.83	%		64.16	%		59.52	%

(1)

Computed on a tax-equivalent basis using a federal income tax rate of 21 percent, adjusted to reflect the effect of the nondeductible interest expense associated with owning tax-exempt securities and loans. Management believes the presentation of this non-GAAP measure provides supplemental useful information for proper understanding of the financial results, as it enhances the comparability of income arising from taxable and nontaxable sources.

(2)

The efficiency ratio expresses noninterest expense as a percent of fully taxable equivalent net interest income and noninterest income, excluding specific noninterest income and expenses. Management believes the presentation of this non-GAAP measure provides supplemental useful information for proper understanding of the Company’s financial performance. It is a standard measure of comparison within the banking industry. A lower ratio is more desirable.

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Marex Group plc Announces Pricing of the Public Offering

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

NEW YORK, Oct. 24, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Marex Group plc (“Marex”) (Nasdaq: MRX), the diversified global financial services platform, today announces the pricing of the public offering (the “Offering”) of 8,472,333 ordinary shares by certain selling shareholders (the “Selling Shareholders”) at $24.00 per share. In connection with the Offering, the Selling Shareholders have granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 1,270,849 ordinary shares.

Marex is not selling any ordinary shares in the Offering and will not receive any proceeds from any sale of shares by the Selling Shareholders. The Offering is expected to close on October 25, 2024, subject to customary closing conditions.

Barclays, Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC, Jefferies and Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, a Stifel Company, are acting as joint lead book-running managers and as representatives of the underwriters for the proposed Offering. Citigroup, UBS Investment Bank, Piper Sandler & Co. and Berenberg are acting as bookrunners for the Offering. Drexel Hamilton and Loop Capital Markets are acting as co-managers for the Offering.

The proposed Offering is being made only by means of a prospectus. Copies of the prospectus relating to the proposed Offering may be obtained from:

Barclays Capital Inc., c/o Broadridge Financial Solutions, 1155 Long Island Avenue, Edgewood, NY 11717, by telephone at 1-888-603-5847, or by email at barclaysprospectus@broadridge.com;
Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC, Attention: Prospectus Department, 200 West Street, New York, New York 10282, via telephone: 1-866-471-2526, or via email: prospectus-ny@ny.email.gs.com;
Jefferies LLC, Attention: Equity Syndicate Prospectus Department, 520 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10022, by phone at (877) 821-7388, or by email at Prospectus_Department@Jefferies.com; or
Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Inc., 787 Seventh Avenue, Fourth Floor, New York, NY 10019, attention: Equity Capital Markets, or by calling toll free at (800) 966-1559 or emailing USCapitalMarkets@kbw.com.

A registration statement on Form F-1 relating to the Offering has been filed with, and was declared effective by, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).This press release does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, and shall not constitute an offer, solicitation or sale in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the securities laws of that jurisdiction.

Forward-Looking Statements

This release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained in this release that do not relate to matters of historical fact should be considered forward-looking statements, including the expected closing date of the Offering. In some cases, these forward-looking statements can be identified by words or phrases such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “aim,” “estimate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “potential,” “continue,” “is/are likely to” or other similar expressions. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions, some of which are beyond our control. In addition, these forward-looking statements reflect our current views with respect to future events and are not a guarantee of future performance. Actual outcomes may differ materially from the information contained in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors, including, without limitation: subdued commodity market activity or pricing levels; the effects of geopolitical events, terrorism and wars, such as the effect of Russia’s military action in Ukraine, on market volatility, global macroeconomic conditions and commodity prices; changes in interest rate levels; the risk of our clients and their related financial institutions defaulting on their obligations to us; regulatory, reputational and financial risks as a result of our international operations; software or systems failure, loss or disruption of data or data security failures; an inability to adequately hedge our positions and limitations on our ability to modify contracts and the contractual protections that may be available to us in OTC derivatives transactions; market volatility, reputational risk and regulatory uncertainty related to commodity markets, equities, fixed income, foreign exchange and cryptocurrency; the impact of climate change and the transition to a lower carbon economy on supply chains and the size of the market for certain of our energy products; the impact of changes in judgments, estimates and assumptions made by management in the application of our accounting policies on our reported financial condition and results of operations; lack of sufficient financial liquidity; if we fail to comply with applicable law and regulation, we may be subject to enforcement or other action, forced to cease providing certain services or obliged to change the scope or nature of our operations; significant costs, including adverse impacts on our business, financial condition and results of operations, and expenses associated with compliance with relevant regulations; and if we fail to remediate the material weaknesses we identified in our internal control over financial reporting or prevent material weaknesses in the future, the accuracy and timing of our financial statements may be impacted, which could result in material misstatements in our financial statements or failure to meet our reporting obligations and subject us to potential delisting, regulatory investments or civil or criminal sanctions, and other risks discussed under the caption “Risk Factors” in our Registration Statement filed on Form F-1 with the SEC on October 21, 2024 and our other reports filed with the SEC.

The forward-looking statements made in this release relate only to events or information as of the date on which the statements are made in this release. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to update or revise publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, after the date on which the statements are made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Sheffield could see more events hosted in the city and more benefits for local people Sheffield could play host to more major events and events that have a greater impact on the city and its residents, if plans are approved to develop a new city-wide events strategy. 24 October 2024

Source: City of Sheffield

Sheffield it already go to Tramlines, one of the UK’s longest running, city-based music festivals

Sheffield could play host to more major events and events that have a greater impact on the city and its residents, if plans are approved to develop a new city-wide events strategy.

Sheffield already has an excellent reputation as a city of major events, festivals and conferences.

The city has played host to some of the UK’s biggest events in recent years, from Women’s Euros 2022 and the Rugby League World Cup, to the 2024 MOBO Awards, and most recently, the third leg of the Tour of Britain. Sheffield was also shortlisted to host the 2023 Eurovision Song Contest in solidarity with Ukraine.

Alongside successfully bidding for some of the most high-profile and internationally significant events, Sheffield is also home of network of its own home-grown festivals.

From DocFest, which has been in the city for over 30 years, to Tramlines, one of the UK’s longest running, city-based music festivals. Sheffield is also home of Off the Shelf and No Bounds, which was recently described by the Guardian as ‘dizzingly daring’ and ‘impressive’.

Earlier this year, a brand-new podcast festival, Crossed Wires, was also launched in the city, attracting talent from across the UK and beyond, to Sheffield.

The city also has a strong track-record for bidding for and hosting a range of world-leading conferences, including the International Coeliac Disease Symposium and the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons.

Esther Britten, Deputy Director and Head of Events at UK Sport, said:

“Sheffield has been a supportive partner and host to UK Sport funded major events over the last decade.

“Their commitment to not only staging the very best events but maximising their impact on the local community has enhanced the city’s reputation through the UK as a recognised host of the very best major international sporting events, we see them as a key host city looking into the future.”

A new proposal from Sheffield City Council to develop a city-wide major events strategy would seek to take things a step further – attracting more events to the city, better events and by creating a framework to ensure events hosted have a lasting, positive impact on local people, local businesses, communities and the Sheffield economy.

If given the go ahead, a new major events plan will be developed, aiming to provide a clearer ambition for events in the city and an action plan to transform Sheffield into a recognised destination for home-grown, curated, commissioned, and nomadic events.

Councillor Martin Smith, Chair of the Economic Development and Skills Committee at Sheffield City Council, said:

“Events are big business, not just in Sheffield, but across the UK.

“Not only is the economic impact of events significant for the city, but events help us build our reputation and allow others to see and experience Sheffield on a different scale. Events bring people together, they celebrate our diversity and all of our local communities, helping to make Sheffield the vibrant place it is to live in and visit.

“Hosting more events, and more diverse events will help us attract more visitors to the city, generate more income, they will bring investment and help us to grow our economy.”

The idea behind the proposed plan is to create an approach that helps decision-makers identify the very best and most beneficial events for Sheffield and its people.

The plan would focus on ensuring events being held in the city are of a real benefit, with things like economic impact, community benefits and ensuring inclusivity and diversity, always considered when bidding for and putting on events.

It will look to identify opportunities across sport, business and culture and find events that Sheffield is not only a good fit for, but that are also a good fit for Sheffield and the city’s ambitions.

Councillors will be asked to approve proposals to begin development of the Major Events Plan for Sheffield at an Economic Development and Skills Committee meeting on Thursday 31^st of October 2024.

If agreed, the first phase of development will involve engaging with experts in the field and local partners to help identify future opportunities for Sheffield.

This will be vital in ensuring the pipeline of events is right for the city and well positioned to attract wider investment.

You can read the full report on the Sheffield City Council website.

You can watch the full committee meeting at 10am on Thursday 31^st of October 2024 via the webcast.

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI China: Full Text: Address by Chinese President Xi Jinping at ‘BRICS Plus’ leaders’ dialogue

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

Full Text: Address by Chinese President Xi Jinping at ‘BRICS Plus’ leaders’ dialogue

KAZAN, Russia, Oct. 24 — Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday delivered an important speech at the “BRICS Plus” leaders’ dialogue in Kazan, Russia.

The following is the full text of the speech:

Combining the Great Strength of the Global South To Build Together a Community with a Shared Future for Mankind

Remarks by H.E. Xi Jinping

President of the People’s Republic of China

At the “BRICS Plus” leaders’ dialogue

Kazan, October 24, 2024

Your Excellency President Vladimir Putin,

Colleagues,

I would like to thank President Putin and the Russian government for putting together this “BRICS Plus” leaders’ dialogue, and warmly welcome all the leaders joining us today. It is a great pleasure to see old and new friends in Kazan.

The collective rise of the Global South is a distinctive feature of the great transformation across the world. Global South countries marching together toward modernization is monumental in world history and unprecedented in human civilization. At the same time, peace and development still faces severe challenges, and the road to prosperity for the Global South will not be straight. Standing at the forefront of the Global South, we should use our collective wisdom and strength, and stand up to our responsibility for building a community with a shared future for mankind.

— We should uphold peace and strive for common security. We should come forward together to form a stabilizing force for peace. We should strengthen global security governance, and explore solutions to address both symptoms and roots of hotspot issues. Many parties have warmly responded to my Global Security Initiative. Under the Initiative, we have made prominent progress in maintaining regional stability and in many other areas. China and Brazil jointly issued the six-point consensus, and launched the group of Friends for Peace on the Ukraine crisis together with other Global South countries. We should promote early deescalation to pave the way for political settlement. Last July, Palestinian factions reconciled with each other in Beijing, marking a key step toward peace in the Middle East. We should continue to promote comprehensive ceasefire in the Gaza Strip and revive the two-State solution. We must stop the flames of war from spreading in Lebanon and end the miserable sufferings in Palestine and Lebanon.

— We should reinvigorate development and strive for common prosperity. The Global South emerges for development and prospers through development. We should make ourselves the main driving force for common development. We should play an active and leading role in the global economic governance reform, and make development the core of international economic and trade agenda. Since its introduction three years ago, the Global Development Initiative has helped make available nearly US$20 billion of development fund and launch more than 1,100 projects. And recently the Global Alliance on Artificial Intelligence for Industry and Manufacturing Center of Excellence has been established in Shanghai. China will also build a World Smart Customs Community Portal and a BRICS Customs Center of Excellence. We welcome active participation by all countries.

— We should promote together development of all civilizations and strive for harmony among them. Diversity of civilization is the innate quality of the world. We should be advocates for exchanges among civilizations. We should enhance communication and dialogue, and support each other in taking the path to modernization suited to our respective national conditions. The Global Civilization Initiative I proposed is exactly for the purpose of building a garden of world civilizations in which we can share and admire the beauty of each civilization. China will coordinate with others to form a Global South Think Tanks Alliance to promote people-to-people exchanges and experience-sharing in governance.

Colleagues,

The Third Plenary Session of the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China made systemic plans for further deepening reform comprehensively to advance Chinese modernization. This will provide more opportunities for the world. Last month, we held in Beijing a successful summit of the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation and announced ten partnership actions for China and Africa to jointly advance modernization. This will instill new energy for the Global South on its way toward modernization.

No matter how the international landscape evolves, we in China will always keep the Global South in our heart, and maintain our roots in the Global South. We support more Global South countries in joining the cause of BRICS as full members, partner countries or in the “BRICS Plus” format so that we can combine the great strength of the Global South to build together a community with a shared future for mankind.

Thank you!

MIL OSI China News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Presses Domain Registrars Providing Support to Russian Influence Efforts

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for Commonwealth of Virginia Mark R Warner

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Mark R. Warner (D-VA), Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, today wrote to American domain registrars NameCheap, GoDaddy, Cloudflare, NewFold Digital, NameSilo, and Versign – which were identified in a Department of Justice affidavit as providing domain services to the “Doppelganger” Russian covert influence network – pressing them to take immediate steps to address the continued abuse of their services for foreign covert influence, particularly in the period preceding and following Election Day.

Through the maintenance of both inauthentic social media accounts and websites, the hallmark of the Russian government-directed foreign malign influence campaigns known as “Doppelganger” has been the impersonation of Western media institutions online, including outlets like the Washington Post, Fox News, and Forward. Russian influence operatives have been attributed impersonating dozens of legitimate organizations online as early as September 2022, when researchers at the nonprofit EU Disinfo Lab first identified the network’s campaigns, using misleading domains (such as www.washingtonpost.pm, www.washingtonpost.ltd, www.fox-news.in, www.fox-news.top and www.forward.pw) to covertly spread Russian government propaganda with the aim of reducing international support for Ukraine, bolstering pro-Russian policies and interests, and influencing voters in U.S. and foreign elections, including the 2024 presidential election.

Citing research conducted by Meta in 2023, Warner noted several ways in which the global domain name industry has enabled Russian malign influence activity, including withholding vital domain name registration information from good-faith researchers and digital forensic investigators, ignoring inaccurate registration information submitted by registrants, and failing to identify repeated instances of intentional and malicious domain name squatting used to impersonate legitimate organizations.

Wrote Warner today, “Information included in the affidavit supporting recent seizure of a number of these domains provides further indication of your industry’s apparent inattention to abuses by foreign actors engaged in covert influence. Specifically, Russian influence actors utilized a number of tactics, techniques, and procedures that – against the backdrop of extensive open source literature on Doppelganger’s practices – should have alerted your company to abuse of its services, including the use of cryptocurrency to purchase domains, heavy reliance on anonymizing infrastructure to access your registration services (including the use of IPs widely associated with cybercriminal obfuscation network activity), the use of credit cards issued to a U.S. company “that has significant ties to, and employees based in, Russia,” use of fictitious and poorly-backstopped identities for registrants, and in at least one instance the use of a Russian address.”

Noted Warner, “While foreign covert influence represents one of the most egregious abuses of the domain name system, the industry’s inattention to abuse has been well-documented for years, enabling malicious activity such as phishing campaigns, drive-by malware, and online scams – all possible because of malicious actors using your services… Given the continued lapses of your industry to address these abuses, I believe Congress may need to evaluate legislative remedies that promote greater diligence across the global domain name ecosystem.”

“In the interim, your company must take immediate steps to address the continued abuse of your services for foreign covert influence – particularly in the days preceding, and weeks immediately following, Election Day. With the prospect of a close election – and declassified intelligence demonstrating the past practice of foreign adversaries in spreading narratives that undermine confidence in election processes– Americans will be particularly reliant on media organizations and state and local government websites to provide authoritative and accurate election information. It is imperative that your company work to diminish the risk that foreign adversaries use impersonated domains to promote false narratives in this context,” Warner concluded.

As Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Warner has been consistently warning about the threat posed by foreign covert influence networks ahead of the 2024 elections. Last month, he convened a public hearing with representatives from Alphabet, Meta and Microsoft examining the roles and responsibilities of U.S. platforms to prevent the spread of foreign propaganda and misinformation on their networks.

A copy of the letters are available here.

MIL OSI USA News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Europe: Immobilised assets: Council greenlights up to €35 billion in macro-financial assistance to Ukraine and new loan mechanism implementing G7 commitment

Source: Council of the European Union

The Council today adopted a financial assistance package to Ukraine, including an exceptional macro-financial assistance (MFA) loan of up to €35 billion and a loan cooperation mechanism that will support Ukraine in repaying loans for up to €45 billion provided by the EU and G7 partners.

The financial assistance package aims at supporting Ukraine in covering its urgent financing needs that have increased due to Russia’s intensified aggression against Ukraine. The exceptional MFA will contribute to covering Ukraine´s financing gap, thereby supporting macro-financial stability in Ukraine and easing Ukraine´s external financial constraints.

The exceptional MFA loan and eligible bilateral loans from G7 partners under the ‘Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration (ERA) Loans for Ukraine’ initiative will be repaid by future flows of extraordinary profits accruing to central securities depositories in the EU as a result of the implementation of the immobilisation of Russian sovereign assets.

The Ukraine loan cooperation mechanism will disburse these funds – as well as possible amounts received as voluntary contributions from Member States and third countries or other sources – in the form of financial support to Ukraine, to assist it in servicing and repaying all G7 loans.

The up to €35 billion MFA loan is the EU’s contribution to the G7 loan of up to €45 billion. The new MFA operation will be linked to policy conditions that are consistent with the Ukraine Facility, in particular the Ukraine Plan. The management and control systems proposed under the Ukraine Plan and specific provisions on the prevention of fraud and other irregularities will also apply to the MFA loan.

EU borrowing to fund the extraordinary MFA loan to Ukraine will be guaranteed by the EU budget headroom.

The MFA loan is expected to be made available to Ukraine before the end of 2024 and have a maximum duration of 45 years.

According to new rules also adopted today, 95% of the proceeds that have been generated by central securities depositories (CSDs) in the EU as a result of their implementation of the immobilisation of Russian sovereign assets and that have been transferred to the Union will be allocated to the EU budget and will now be used for the Ukraine Loan Cooperation Mechanism (ULCM), which will disburse these funds in the form of financial support to Ukraine, to assist it in servicing and repaying the loans. The remaining 5% will continue to be allocated to the European Peace Facility.

The new allocation will start applying from the second half of 2025 (to the second biannual payment of the financial contribution made in 2025 and to all payments thereafter).

Next steps

The legal acts adopted today will enter into force on the day after its publication in the Official Journal of the EU.

Background

On 19 September 2024 the Commission presented a proposal for a regulation on an exceptional macro-financial assistance (MFA) loan and a Ukraine loan cooperation mechanism. At the same time, the High representative presented a proposal for a Council implementing decision on restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine and, together with the Commission, a joint proposal for a Council implementing regulation concerning restrictive measures in view of Russia’s actions destabilising the situation in Ukraine.

Subject to EU law, Russia’s assets should remain immobilised until Russia ceases its war of aggression against Ukraine and compensates it for the damage caused by this war.

In view of a speedy adoption and ensuring that the macro-financial assistance reaches Ukraine as soon as possible, the European Parliament and the Council adopted the Commission’s proposal for a regulation without changes. The European Parliament voted on the text in first reading on 22 October 2024 and the Council by written procedure, which ended today. The two implementing acts were also adopted by the Council by written procedure today.

G7 Leaders announced in June 2024 the launch of the “Extraordinary Revenue Acceleration” loans for Ukraine, to make available approximately $ 50 billion (€45 billion) for Ukraine that will be serviced and repaid by future flows of extraordinary revenues stemming from the immobilisation of Russian sovereign assets held in the European Union and other relevant jurisdictions. In its conclusions, the European Council on 27 June 2024 invited the Commission, the High Representative and the Council to take work forward. The financial package adopted today implements these commitments.

Until now, extraordinary profits stemming from the immobilisation of Russian sovereign assets and available to the EU have been channelled principally through the European Peace Facility to support Ukraine’s military capabilities, and to a lesser extent through the Ukraine Facility to support the country’s reconstruction and modernisation. On 26 July 2024, a first instalment of €1.5 billion was made available by the EU in support of Ukraine.

MIL OSI Europe News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Origin Bancorp, Inc. Reports Earnings For Third Quarter 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

RUSTON, La., Oct. 23, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Origin Bancorp, Inc. (NYSE: OBK) (“Origin,” “we,” “our” or the “Company”), the holding company for Origin Bank (the “Bank”), today announced net income of $18.6 million, or $0.60 diluted earnings per share for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to net income of $21.0 million, or $0.67 diluted earnings per share, for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. Pre-tax, pre-provision (“PTPP”)⁽¹⁾ earnings was $28.3 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to $32.0 million for the linked quarter.

“I am pleased with the balance sheet trends we showed in the third quarter,” said Drake Mills, chairman, president and CEO of Origin Bancorp, Inc. “I am confident these trends will continue and our bankers will capitalize on opportunities throughout our markets.”

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

Financial Highlights

Total loans held for investment (“LHFI”) were $7.96 billion at both September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024. LHFI, excluding mortgage warehouse lines of credit (“MW LOC”), were $7.46 billion at September 30, 2024, reflecting an increase of $8.9 million, or 0.12%, compared to June 30, 2024.
Noninterest-bearing deposits were $1.89 billion at September 30, 2024, reflecting an increase of $27.1 million, or 1.5%, compared to June 30, 2024.
Net interest income was $74.8 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, reflecting an increase of $914,000, or 1.2%, compared to the linked quarter.
Our book value per common share was $36.76 as of September 30, 2024, reflecting an increase of $1.53, or 4.3%, compared to June 30, 2024. Tangible book value per common share⁽¹⁾ was $31.37 at September 30, 2024, reflecting an increase of $1.60, or 5.4%, compared to June 30, 2024.
Stockholders’ equity was $1.15 billion at September 30, 2024, reflecting an increase of $49.8 million, or 4.5%, compared to June 30, 2024.
At September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024, the ratio of Company-level common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets was 12.46%, and 12.15%, respectively, the Tier 1 leverage ratio was 10.93% and 10.70%, respectively, and the total capital ratio was 15.45% and 15.16%, respectively. The ratio of tangible common equity to tangible assets⁽¹⁾ was 9.98% at September 30, 2024, compared to 9.47% at June 30, 2024.

⁽¹⁾ Tangible book value per common share and tangible common equity to tangible assets are non-GAAP financial measures. Please see the last few pages of this document for a reconciliation of these alternative financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.

Results of Operations for the Three Months Ended September 30, 2024

Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

Net interest income for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, was $74.8 million, an increase of $914,000, or 1.2%, compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2024, $813,000 of which was driven by one additional day in the current quarter. Higher interest rates drove a net increase of $147,000 in net interest income, which was reflected in a $1.2 million increase in interest income earned on interest-earnings assets offset by a $1.1 million increase in interest expense paid on interest-bearing liabilities.

Higher interest rates on LHFI drove a $2.0 million increase in the yield for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2024, $1.5 million of which was driven by real estate-based loans. The average rate on LHFI increased to 6.67% for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to 6.58% for the quarter ended June 30, 2024. Higher interest rates on savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts drove a $1.1 million increase in interest expense, compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2024. The average rate on interest-bearing deposits increased to 4.01% for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to 3.95% for the quarter ended June 30, 2024.

The Federal Reserve Board sets various benchmark rates, including the federal funds rate, and thereby influences the general market rates of interest, including the loan and deposit rates offered by financial institutions. The federal funds target rate range was reduced by 50 basis points on September 18, 2024, to a range of 4.75% to 5.00%, the first rate reduction since early 2020.

The NIM-FTE was 3.18% for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, representing a one- and a four-basis-point increase compared to the linked quarter and the prior year same quarter, respectively. The yield earned on interest-earning assets for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, was 6.09%, an increase of five and 40 basis points compared to the linked quarter and the prior year same quarter, respectively. The average rate paid on total interest-bearing liabilities for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, was 4.04%, representing a six- and 45-basis point increase compared to the linked quarter and the prior year same quarter, respectively.

As discussed in our June 30, 2024, Origin Bancorp, Inc. Earnings Release, we reversed $1.2 million of accrued loan interest during the quarter ended June 30, 2024, due to certain questioned activity involving a single banker, who has since been terminated, in our East Texas market. This reversal of accrued loan interest income negatively impacted the fully tax equivalent net interest margin (“NIM-FTE”) by five basis points for the linked quarter. Had we not experienced the reversal of the $1.2 million of accrued interest income during the quarter ended June 30, 2024, our NIM-FTE would have been 3.22% for the linked quarter, and we would have experienced a four-basis point decrease in our current NIM-FTE compared to the linked quarter. There was no equivalent interest income reversal during the current quarter and these loans remain on non-accrual.

Credit Quality

The table below includes key credit quality information:

	At and For the Three Months Ended									Change			% Change
(Dollars in thousands, unaudited)	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			September 30, 2023			Linked Quarter			Linked Quarter
Past due LHFI	$	38,838		$	66,276		$	20,347		$	(27,438	)	(41.4)%
Allowance for loan credit losses (“ALCL”)		95,989			100,865			95,177			(4,876	)	(4.8	)
Classified loans		107,486			118,254			64,021			(10,768	)	(9.1	)
Total nonperforming LHFI		64,273			75,812			31,608			(11,539	)	(15.2	)
Provision for credit losses		4,603			5,231			3,515			(628	)	(12.0	)
Net charge-offs		9,520			2,946			2,686			6,574		223.2
Credit quality ratios⁽¹⁾:
ALCL to nonperforming LHFI		149.35	%		133.05	%		301.12	%		16.30	%	N/A
ALCL to total LHFI		1.21			1.27			1.26			(0.06	)	N/A
ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted⁽²⁾		1.28			1.34			1.30			(0.06	)	N/A
Classified loans to total LHFI		1.35			1.49			0.85			(0.14	)	N/A
Nonperforming LHFI to LHFI		0.81			0.95			0.42			(0.14	)	N/A
Net charge-offs to total average LHFI (annualized)		0.48			0.15			0.14			0.33		N/A

___________________________

⁽¹⁾	Please see the Loan Data schedule at the back of this document for additional information.
⁽²⁾	The ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted, is calculated by excluding the ALCL for MW LOC loans from the total LHFI ALCL in the numerator and excluding the MW LOC loans from the LHFI in the denominator. Due to their low-risk profile, MW LOC loans require a disproportionately low allocation of the ALCL.

As discussed in our June 30, 2024, Origin Bancorp, Inc. Earnings Release, our credit metrics were negatively impacted by certain questioned activity involving a single banker, who has since been terminated, in our East Texas market. Our investigation of this activity remains ongoing and is not final; however, as a result of a forbearance agreement with one of our impacted customer relationships, our past due LHFI declined $26.4 million when compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2024. There was no material change in the level of our nonperforming or classified LHFI principal balances between the current quarter and the linked quarter as a result of the questioned activity. We continue to work with an outside forensic accounting firm to confirm the bank’s identification and reconciliation of the activity, targeting a conclusion of this analysis by the end of this year. At this time, we believe that any ultimate loss arising from the situation will not be material to our financial position.

Past due LHFI were $38.8 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to $66.3 million at June 30, 2024. Of the $27.4 million decrease, $26.4 million were impacted by or related to the questioned activity. The remaining net decrease in past due LHFI was primarily due to charge-offs or payoffs in commercial and industrial past due loans during the quarter ended September 30, 2024.

Nonperforming LHFI decreased $11.5 million for the quarter reflecting a decrease in the percentage of nonperforming LHFI to LHFI to 0.81% compared to 0.95% for the linked quarter. The decrease in nonperforming loans was primarily driven by three commercial and industrial loan relationships totaling $14.6 million at June 30, 2024, $10.4 million of which were charged-off and $4.2 million were paid down during the current quarter.

Classified loans decreased $10.8 million to $107.5 million at September 30, 2024, reflecting 1.35% as a percentage of total LHFI, down 14 basis points from the linked quarter. The decrease in classified loans was primarily driven by the same three commercial and industrial loan relationships mentioned in the nonperforming loan paragraph directly above.

Noninterest Income

Noninterest income for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, was $16.0 million, a decrease of $6.5 million, or 28.8%, from the linked quarter. The decrease from the linked quarter was primarily driven by decreases of $5.2 million, $725,000 and $621,000 in the change in fair value of equity investments, mortgage banking revenue and other income, respectively.

The decrease in change in fair value of equity investments was due to a $5.2 million positive valuation adjustment on a non-marketable equity security recognized during the linked quarter with no comparable amount recognized during the current quarter.

The decrease in mortgage banking revenue was primarily due to an $833,000 combined decrease in the pipeline and interest rate lock commitment fair values during the current quarter compared to the linked quarter.

The decrease in other income was primarily due to an $818,000 gain on sale of bank property recognized in the linked quarter with no comparable amount recognized in the current quarter.

Noninterest Expense

Noninterest expense for the quarter ended September 30, 2024, was $62.5 million, a decrease of $1.9 million, or 2.9% from the linked quarter. The decrease was primarily driven by a decrease of $1.6 million and in other noninterest expense.

The decrease in other expenses resulted from recognizing contingent liabilities totaling approximately $1.2 million related to certain questioned activity involving a single banker, who has since been terminated, in our East Texas market, as described previously, in the linked quarter with no comparable liability incurred in the current quarter. Also, contributing to the quarter over quarter decline was a $357,000 decrease in corporate membership fees.

Financial Condition

Loans

Total LHFI were $7.96 billion at both September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024, and reflected an increase of $388.7 million, or 5.1%, compared to September 30, 2023.
Total LHFI, excluding MW LOC, were $7.46 billion at September 30, 2024, representing an increase of $8.9 million, or 0.1%, from June 30, 2024, and an increase of $179.8 million, or 2.5%, from September 30, 2023.
During the quarter ended September 30, 2024, compared to the linked quarter, we experienced declines in construction/land/land development loans and MW LOC of $25.8 million and $11.3 million, respectively, partially offset by growth in multi-family real estate loans of $36.1 million.

Securities

Total securities were $1.18 billion at both September 30, 2024, and June 30, 2024, and reflected a decrease of $129.8 million, or 9.9%, compared to September 30, 2023.
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of taxes, primarily associated with the available for sale (“AFS”) portfolio, was $94.2 million at September 30, 2024, an improvement of $32.9 million, or 25.9%, from the linked quarter.
The weighted average effective duration for the total securities portfolio was 4.21 years as of September 30, 2024, compared to 4.28 years as of June 30, 2024.

Deposits

Total deposits at September 30, 2024, were $8.49 billion, a decrease of $24.3 million, or 0.3%, compared to the linked quarter, and represented an increase of $112.1 million, or 1.3%, from September 30, 2023. The decrease in the current quarter compared to the linked quarter was primarily due to a decrease of $205.2 million in brokered (which includes both brokered time and brokered interest-bearing demand) deposits. The decrease in brokered deposits was primarily replaced with customer deposits.
Excluding brokered deposits, total deposit increased $180.9 million, or 2.3%, to $8.05 billion, primarily due to increases of $87.0 million, $64.4 million and $27.1 million in money market deposits, interest-bearing demand deposits and noninterest-bearing demand deposits, respectively.
At September 30, 2024, noninterest-bearing deposits as a percentage of total deposits were 22.3%, compared to 21.9% and 24.0% at June 30, 2024, and September 30, 2023, respectively. Excluding brokered deposits, noninterest-bearing deposits as a percentage of total deposits were 23.5%, compared to 23.7% and 26.1% at June 30, 2024, and September 30, 2023, respectively.

Borrowings

FHLB advances and other borrowings at September 30, 2024, were $30.4 million, a decrease of $10.3 million, or 25.3%, compared to the linked quarter and represented an increase of $18.2 million, or 149.3%, from September 30, 2023.

Stockholders’ Equity

Stockholders’ equity was $1.15 billion at September 30, 2024, an increase of $49.8 million, or 4.5%, compared to $1.10 billion at June 30, 2024, and an increase of $146.7 million, or 14.7%, compared to September 30, 2023.
The increase in stockholders’ equity from the linked quarter is primarily due to a decrease in accumulated other comprehensive loss of $32.9 million and net income of $18.6 million, partially offset by dividends declared of $4.8 million during the current quarter.

Conference Call

Origin will hold a conference call to discuss its third quarter 2024 results on Thursday, October 24, 2024, at 8:00 a.m. Central Time (9:00 a.m. Eastern Time). To participate in the live conference call, please dial +1 (929) 272-1574 (U.S. Local / International 1); +1 (857) 999-3259 (U.S. Local / International 2); +1 (800) 528-1066 (U.S. Toll Free), enter Conference ID: 84865 and request to be joined into the Origin Bancorp, Inc. (OBK) call. A simultaneous audio-only webcast may be accessed via Origin’s website at www.origin.bank under the investor relations, News & Events, Events & Presentations link or directly by visiting https://dealroadshow.com/e/ORIGINQ324.

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

About Origin

Origin Bancorp, Inc. is a financial holding company headquartered in Ruston, Louisiana. Origin’s wholly owned bank subsidiary, Origin Bank, was founded in 1912 in Choudrant, Louisiana. Deeply rooted in Origin’s history is a culture committed to providing personalized relationship banking to businesses, municipalities, and personal clients to enrich the lives of the people in the communities it serves. Origin provides a broad range of financial services and currently operates more than 60 locations from Dallas/Fort Worth, East Texas, Houston, North Louisiana, Mississippi, South Alabama and the Florida Panhandle. For more information, visit www.origin.bank.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

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

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

Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements include information regarding Origin’s future financial performance, business and growth strategies, projected plans and objectives, and any expected purchases of its outstanding common stock, and related transactions and other projections based on macroeconomic and industry trends, including changes to interest rates by the Federal Reserve and the resulting impact on Origin’s results of operations, estimated forbearance amounts and expectations regarding the Company’s liquidity, including in connection with advances obtained from the FHLB, which are all subject to change and may be inherently unreliable due to the multiple factors that impact broader economic and industry trends, and any such changes may be material. Such forward-looking statements are based on various facts and derived utilizing important assumptions and current expectations, estimates and projections about Origin and its subsidiaries, any of which may change over time and some of which may be beyond Origin’s control. Statements or statistics preceded by, followed by or that otherwise include the words “assumes,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “expects,” “foresees,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “could,” “may,” “might,” “should,” “will,” and “would” and variations of such terms are generally forward-looking in nature and not historical facts, although not all forward-looking statements include the foregoing words. Further, certain factors that could affect Origin’s future results and cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: the impact of current and future economic conditions generally and in the financial services industry, nationally and within Origin’s primary market areas, including the effects of declines in the real estate market, high-profile bank failures, high unemployment rates, inflationary pressures, elevated interest rates and slowdowns in economic growth, as well as the financial stress on borrowers and changes to customer and client behavior as a result of the foregoing; changes in benchmark interest rates and the resulting impacts on net interest income; deterioration of Origin’s asset quality; factors that can impact the performance of Origin’s loan portfolio, including real estate values and liquidity in Origin’s primary market areas; the financial health of Origin’s commercial borrowers and the success of construction projects that Origin finances; changes in the value of collateral securing Origin’s loans; developments in our mortgage banking business, including loan modifications, general demand, and the effects of judicial or regulatory requirements or guidance; Origin’s ability to anticipate interest rate changes and manage interest rate risk (including the impact of higher interest rates on macroeconomic conditions, competition, and the cost of doing business and the impact of prolonged elevated interest rates on our financial projections, models and guidance); the effectiveness of Origin’s risk management framework and quantitative models; Origin’s inability to receive dividends from Origin Bank and to service debt, pay dividends to Origin’s common stockholders, repurchase Origin’s shares of common stock and satisfy obligations as they become due; the impact of labor pressures; changes in Origin’s operation or expansion strategy or Origin’s ability to prudently manage its growth and execute its strategy; changes in management personnel; Origin’s ability to maintain important customer relationships, reputation or otherwise avoid liquidity risks; increasing costs as Origin grows deposits; operational risks associated with Origin’s business; significant turbulence or a disruption in the capital or financial markets and the effect of market disruption and interest rate volatility on our investment securities; increased competition in the financial services industry, particularly from regional and national institutions, as well as from fintech companies; difficult market conditions and unfavorable economic trends in the United States generally, and particularly in the market areas in which Origin operates and in which its loans are concentrated; Origin’s level of nonperforming assets and the costs associated with resolving any problem loans including litigation and other costs; the credit risk associated with the substantial amount of commercial real estate, construction and land development, and commercial loans in Origin’s loan portfolio; changes in laws, rules, regulations, interpretations or policies relating to financial institutions, and potential expenses associated with complying with such regulations; periodic changes to the extensive body of accounting rules and best practices; further government intervention in the U.S. financial system; a deterioration of the credit rating for U.S. long-term sovereign debt or actions that the U.S. government may take to avoid exceeding the debt ceiling; a potential U.S. federal government shutdown and the resulting impacts; compliance with governmental and regulatory requirements, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and others relating to banking, consumer protection, securities, and tax matters; Origin’s ability to comply with applicable capital and liquidity requirements, including its ability to generate liquidity internally or raise capital on favorable terms, including continued access to the debt and equity capital markets; changes in the utility of Origin’s non-GAAP liquidity measurements and its underlying assumptions or estimates; possible changes in trade, monetary and fiscal policies, laws and regulations and other activities of governments, agencies and similar organizations; natural disasters and adverse weather events, acts of terrorism, an outbreak of hostilities (including the impacts related to or resulting from Russia’s military action in Ukraine or the conflict in Israel and surrounding areas, including the imposition of additional sanctions and export controls, as well as the broader impacts to financial markets and the global macroeconomic and geopolitical environments), regional or national protests and civil unrest (including any resulting branch closures or property damage), widespread illness or public health outbreaks or other international or domestic calamities, and other matters beyond Origin’s control; the impact of generative artificial intelligence; fraud or misconduct by internal or external actors (including Origin employees) which Origin may not be able to prevent, detect or mitigate, system failures, cybersecurity threats or security breaches and the cost of defending against them; Origin’s ability to maintain adequate internal controls over financial and non-financial reporting; and potential claims, damages, penalties, fines, costs and reputational damage resulting from pending or future litigation, regulatory proceedings and enforcement actions. For a discussion of these and other risks that may cause actual results to differ from expectations, please refer to the sections titled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “Risk Factors” in Origin’s most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and any updates to those sections set forth in Origin’s subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K. If one or more events related to these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if Origin’s underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may differ materially from what Origin anticipates. Accordingly, you should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made, and Origin does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.

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

Contact:

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

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

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Selected Quarterly Financial Data
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023

Income statement and share amounts	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Net interest income	$	74,804		$	73,890		$	73,323		$	72,989		$	74,130
Provision for credit losses		4,603			5,231			3,012			2,735			3,515
Noninterest income		15,989			22,465			17,255			8,196			18,119
Noninterest expense		62,521			64,388			58,707			60,906			58,663
Income before income tax expense		23,669			26,736			28,859			17,544			30,071
Income tax expense		5,068			5,747			6,227			4,119			5,758
Net income	$	18,601		$	20,989		$	22,632		$	13,425		$	24,313
PTPP earnings⁽¹⁾	$	28,272		$	31,967		$	31,871		$	20,279		$	33,586
Basic earnings per common share		0.60			0.68			0.73			0.43			0.79
Diluted earnings per common share		0.60			0.67			0.73			0.43			0.79
Dividends declared per common share		0.15			0.15			0.15			0.15			0.15
Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic		31,130,293			31,042,527			30,981,333			30,898,941			30,856,649
Weighted average common shares outstanding – diluted		31,239,877			31,131,829			31,078,910			30,995,354			30,943,860

Balance sheet data
Total LHFI	$	7,956,790		$	7,959,171		$	7,900,027		$	7,660,944		$	7,568,063
Total LHFI excluding MW LOC		7,461,602			7,452,666			7,499,032			7,330,978			7,281,770
Total assets		9,965,986			9,947,182			9,892,379			9,722,584			9,733,303
Total deposits		8,486,568			8,510,842			8,505,464			8,251,125			8,374,488
Total stockholders’ equity		1,145,673			1,095,894			1,078,853			1,062,905			998,945

Performance metrics and capital ratios
Yield on LHFI		6.67	%		6.58	%		6.58	%		6.46	%		6.35	%
Yield on interest-earnings assets		6.09			6.04			5.99			5.86			5.69
Cost of interest-bearing deposits		4.01			3.95			3.85			3.71			3.47
Cost of total deposits		3.14			3.08			2.99			2.84			2.61
NIM – fully tax equivalent (“FTE”)		3.18			3.17			3.19			3.19			3.14
Return on average assets (annualized) (“ROAA”)		0.74			0.84			0.92			0.55			0.96
PTPP ROAA (annualized)⁽¹⁾		1.13			1.28			1.30			0.82			1.33
Return on average stockholders’ equity (annualized) (“ROAE”)		6.57			7.79			8.57			5.26			9.52
Book value per common share	$	36.76		$	35.23		$	34.79		$	34.30		$	32.32
Tangible book value per common share⁽¹⁾		31.37			29.77			29.24			28.68			26.78
Adjusted tangible book value per common share⁽¹⁾		34.39			33.86			33.27			32.59			32.37
Return on average tangible common equity (annualized) (“ROATCE”)⁽¹⁾		7.74	%		9.25	%		10.24	%		6.36	%		11.48	%
Efficiency ratio⁽²⁾		68.86			66.82			64.81			75.02			63.59
Core efficiency ratio⁽¹⁾		67.48			65.55			65.24			70.55			60.49
Common equity tier 1 to risk-weighted assets⁽³⁾		12.46			12.15			11.97			11.83			11.46
Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets⁽³⁾		12.64			12.33			12.15			12.01			11.64
Total capital to risk-weighted assets⁽³⁾		15.45			15.16			14.98			15.02			14.61
Tier 1 leverage ratio⁽³⁾		10.93			10.70			10.66			10.50			10.00

__________________________

⁽¹⁾	PTPP earnings, PTPP ROAA, tangible book value per common share, adjusted tangible book value per common share, ROATCE, and core efficiency ratio are either non-GAAP financial measures or use a non-GAAP contributor in the formula. For a reconciliation of these alternative financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures, please see the last few pages of this release.
⁽²⁾	Calculated by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest income plus noninterest income.
⁽³⁾	September 30, 2024, ratios are estimated and calculated at the Company level, which is subject to the capital adequacy requirements of the Federal Reserve Board.

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Selected Year-To-Date Financial Data
(Unaudited)

	Nine Months Ended September 30,
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)		2024			2023

Income statement and share amounts
Net interest income	$	222,017		$	226,568
Provision for credit losses		12,846			14,018
Noninterest income		55,709			50,139
Noninterest expense		185,616			174,310
Income before income tax expense		79,264			88,379
Income tax expense		17,042			18,004
Net income	$	62,222		$	70,375
PTPP earnings⁽¹⁾	$	92,110		$	102,397
Basic earnings per common share		2.00			2.29
Diluted earnings per common share		2.00			2.28
Dividends declared per common share		0.45			0.45
Weighted average common shares outstanding – basic		31,051,672			30,797,399
Weighted average common shares outstanding – diluted		31,160,867			30,903,222

Performance metrics
Yield on LHFI		6.61	%		6.19	%
Yield on interest-earning assets		6.04			5.50
Cost of interest-bearing deposits		3.94			3.03
Cost of total deposits		3.07			2.22
NIM-FTE		3.18			3.24
Adjusted NIM-FTE⁽²⁾		3.18			3.21
ROAA (annualized)		0.84			0.94
PTPP ROAA (annualized)⁽¹⁾		1.24			1.37
ROAE (annualized)		7.62			9.45
ROATCE (annualized)⁽¹⁾		9.04			11.47
Efficiency ratio⁽³⁾		66.83			62.99
Core efficiency ratio⁽¹⁾		66.09			59.94

____________________________

⁽¹⁾	PTPP earnings, PTPP ROAA, ROATCE, and core efficiency ratio are either non-GAAP financial measures or use a non-GAAP contributor in the formula. For a reconciliation of these alternative financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures, please see the last few pages of this release.
⁽²⁾	Adjusted NIM-FTE is a non-GAAP financial measure and is calculated for nine months ended September 30, 2024, by removing the $20,000 net purchase accounting amortization from net interest income. And, for the nine months ended September 30, 2023, by removing the $2.2 million net purchase accounting accretion from net interest income.
⁽³⁾	Calculated by dividing noninterest expense by the sum of net interest income plus noninterest income.

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Consolidated Quarterly Statements of Income
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024		June 30, 2024		March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023

Interest and dividend income	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Interest and fees on loans	$	133,195	$	129,879	$	127,186		$	123,673		$	121,204
Investment securities-taxable		6,536		6,606		6,849			7,024			8,194
Investment securities-nontaxable		905		893		910			1,124			1,281
Interest and dividend income on assets held in other financial institutions		3,621		4,416		3,756			3,664			4,772
Total interest and dividend income		144,257		141,794		138,701			135,485			135,451
Interest expense
Interest-bearing deposits		67,051		65,469		62,842			59,771			55,599
FHLB advances and other borrowings		482		514		518			220			3,207
Subordinated indebtedness		1,920		1,921		2,018			2,505			2,515
Total interest expense		69,453		67,904		65,378			62,496			61,321
Net interest income		74,804		73,890		73,323			72,989			74,130
Provision for credit losses		4,603		5,231		3,012			2,735			3,515
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		70,201		68,659		70,311			70,254			70,615
Noninterest income
Insurance commission and fee income		6,928		6,665		7,725			5,446			6,443
Service charges and fees		4,664		4,862		4,688			4,889			4,621
Other fee income		2,114		2,404		2,247			2,118			2,006
Mortgage banking revenue (loss)		1,153		1,878		2,398			(719	)		892
Swap fee income		106		44		57			196			366
Gain (loss) on sales of securities, net		221		—		(403	)		(4,606	)		(7,173	)
Change in fair value of equity investments		—		5,188		—			—			10,096
Other income		803		1,424		543			872			868
Total noninterest income		15,989		22,465		17,255			8,196			18,119
Noninterest expense
Salaries and employee benefits		38,491		38,109		35,818			35,931			34,624
Occupancy and equipment, net		6,298		7,009		6,645			6,912			6,790
Data processing		3,470		3,468		3,145			3,062			2,775
Office and operations		2,984		3,072		2,502			2,947			2,868
Intangible asset amortization		1,905		2,137		2,137			2,259			2,264
Regulatory assessments		1,791		1,842		1,734			1,860			1,913
Advertising and marketing		1,449		1,328		1,444			1,690			1,371
Professional services		2,012		1,303		1,231			1,440			1,409
Loan-related expenses		751		1,077		905			1,094			1,220
Electronic banking		1,308		1,238		1,239			1,103			1,384
Franchise tax expense		721		815		477			942			520
Other expenses		1,341		2,990		1,430			1,666			1,525
Total noninterest expense		62,521		64,388		58,707			60,906			58,663
Income before income tax expense		23,669		26,736		28,859			17,544			30,071
Income tax expense		5,068		5,747		6,227			4,119			5,758
Net income	$	18,601	$	20,989	$	22,632		$	13,425		$	24,313
Basic earnings per common share	$	0.60	$	0.68	$	0.73		$	0.43		$	0.79
Diluted earnings per common share		0.60		0.67		0.73			0.43			0.79

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)

(Dollars in thousands)	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023
Assets
Cash and due from banks	$	159,337		$	137,615		$	98,147		$	127,278		$	141,705
Interest-bearing deposits in banks		161,854			150,435			193,365			153,163			163,573
Total cash and cash equivalents		321,191			288,050			291,512			280,441			305,278
Securities:
AFS		1,160,965			1,160,048			1,190,922			1,253,631			1,290,839
Held to maturity, net of allowance for credit losses		11,096			11,616			11,651			11,615			10,790
Securities carried at fair value through income		6,533			6,499			6,755			6,808			6,772
Total securities		1,178,594			1,178,163			1,209,328			1,272,054			1,308,401
Non-marketable equity securities held in other financial institutions		67,068			64,010			53,870			55,190			63,842
Loans held for sale		7,631			18,291			14,975			16,852			14,944
Loans		7,956,790			7,959,171			7,900,027			7,660,944			7,568,063
Less: ALCL		95,989			100,865			98,375			96,868			95,177
Loans, net of ALCL		7,860,801			7,858,306			7,801,652			7,564,076			7,472,886
Premises and equipment, net		126,751			121,562			120,931			118,978			111,700
Mortgage servicing rights		—			—			—			15,637			19,189
Cash surrender value of bank-owned life insurance		40,602			40,365			40,134			39,905			39,688
Goodwill		128,679			128,679			128,679			128,679			128,679
Other intangible assets, net		39,272			41,177			43,314			45,452			42,460
Accrued interest receivable and other assets		195,397			208,579			187,984			185,320			226,236
Total assets	$	9,965,986		$	9,947,182		$	9,892,379		$	9,722,584		$	9,733,303
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Noninterest-bearing deposits	$	1,893,767		$	1,866,622		$	1,887,066		$	1,919,638		$	2,008,671
Interest-bearing deposits excluding brokered interest-bearing deposits		5,137,940			4,984,817			4,990,632			4,918,597			4,728,263
Time deposits		1,023,252			1,022,589			1,030,656			967,901			968,352
Brokered deposits		431,609			636,814			597,110			444,989			669,202
Total deposits		8,486,568			8,510,842			8,505,464			8,251,125			8,374,488
FHLB advances and other borrowings		30,446			40,737			13,158			83,598			12,213
Subordinated indebtedness		159,861			159,779			160,684			194,279			196,825
Accrued expenses and other liabilities		143,438			139,930			134,220			130,677			150,832
Total liabilities		8,820,313			8,851,288			8,813,526			8,659,679			8,734,358
Stockholders’ equity:
Common stock		155,837			155,543			155,057			154,931			154,534
Additional paid-in capital		535,662			532,950			530,380			528,578			525,434
Retained earnings		548,419			534,585			518,325			500,419			491,706
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(94,245	)		(127,184	)		(124,909	)		(121,023	)		(172,729	)
Total stockholders’ equity		1,145,673			1,095,894			1,078,853			1,062,905			998,945
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	9,965,986		$	9,947,182		$	9,892,379		$	9,722,584		$	9,733,303

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Loan Data
(Unaudited)

	At and For the Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023

LHFI	(Dollars in thousands)
Owner occupied commercial real estate	$	991,671		$	959,850		$	948,624		$	953,822		$	932,109
Non-owner occupied commercial real estate		1,533,093			1,563,152			1,472,164			1,488,912			1,503,782
Construction/land/land development		991,545			1,017,389			1,168,597			1,070,225			1,076,756
Residential real estate – single family		1,414,013			1,421,027			1,373,532			1,373,696			1,338,382
Multi-family real estate		434,317			398,202			359,765			361,239			349,787
Total real estate loans		5,364,639			5,359,620			5,322,682			5,247,894			5,200,816
Commercial and industrial		2,074,037			2,070,947			2,154,151			2,059,460			2,058,073
MW LOC		495,188			506,505			400,995			329,966			286,293
Consumer		22,926			22,099			22,199			23,624			22,881
Total LHFI		7,956,790			7,959,171			7,900,027			7,660,944			7,568,063
Less: ALCL		95,989			100,865			98,375			96,868			95,177
LHFI, net	$	7,860,801		$	7,858,306		$	7,801,652		$	7,564,076		$	7,472,886

Nonperforming assets⁽¹⁾
Nonperforming LHFI
Commercial real estate	$	2,776		$	2,196		$	4,474		$	786		$	942
Construction/land/land development		26,291			26,336			383			305			235
Residential real estate⁽²⁾		14,313			13,493			14,918			13,037			13,236
Commercial and industrial		20,486			33,608			20,560			15,897			17,072
Consumer		407			179			104			90			123
Total nonperforming loans		64,273			75,812			40,439			30,115			31,608
Repossessed assets		6,043			6,827			3,935			3,929			3,939
Total nonperforming assets	$	70,316		$	82,639		$	44,374		$	34,044		$	35,547
Classified assets	$	113,529		$	125,081		$	88,152		$	84,474		$	67,960
Past due LHFI⁽³⁾		38,838			66,276			32,835			26,043			20,347

Allowance for loan credit losses
Balance at beginning of period	$	100,865		$	98,375		$	96,868		$	95,177		$	94,353
Provision for loan credit losses		4,644			5,436			4,089			3,582			3,510
Loans charged off		11,226			3,706			6,683			3,803			3,202
Loan recoveries		1,706			760			4,101			1,912			516
Net charge-offs		9,520			2,946			2,582			1,891			2,686
Balance at end of period	$	95,989		$	100,865		$	98,375		$	96,868		$	95,177

Credit quality ratios
Total nonperforming assets to total assets		0.71	%		0.83	%		0.45	%		0.35	%		0.37	%
Nonperforming LHFI to LHFI		0.81			0.95			0.51			0.39			0.42
Past due LHFI to LHFI		0.49			0.83			0.42			0.34			0.27
ALCL to nonperforming LHFI		149.35			133.05			243.27			321.66			301.12
ALCL to total LHFI		1.21			1.27			1.25			1.26			1.26
ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted⁽⁴⁾		1.28			1.34			1.30			1.31			1.30
Net charge-offs to total average LHFI (annualized)		0.48			0.15			0.13			0.10			0.14

____________________________

⁽¹⁾	Nonperforming assets consist of nonperforming/nonaccrual loans and property acquired through foreclosures or repossession, as well as bank-owned property not in use and listed for sale.
⁽²⁾	Includes multi-family real estate.
⁽³⁾	Past due LHFI are defined as loans 30 days or more past due.
⁽⁴⁾	The ALCL to total LHFI, adjusted is calculated by excluding the ALCL for MW LOC loans from the total LHFI ALCL in the numerator and excluding the MW LOC loans from the LHFI in the denominator. Due to their low-risk profile, MW LOC loans require a disproportionately low allocation of the ALCL.

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Average Balances and Yields/Rates
(Unaudited)

	Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024				June 30, 2024				September 30, 2023
	Average Balance		Yield/Rate		Average Balance		Yield/Rate		Average Balance		Yield/Rate

Assets	(Dollars in thousands)
Commercial real estate	$	2,507,566	5.93	%	$	2,497,490	5.91	%	$	2,428,969	5.73	%
Construction/land/land development		1,019,302	7.37			1,058,972	6.98			1,044,180	7.04
Residential real estate⁽¹⁾		1,824,725	5.56			1,787,829	5.48			1,663,291	5.06
Commercial and industrial (“C&I”)		2,071,984	7.96			2,128,486	7.87			2,024,675	7.62
MW LOC		484,680	7.64			430,885	7.57			376,275	7.21
Consumer		22,739	7.93			22,396	8.06			23,704	7.74
LHFI		7,930,996	6.67			7,926,058	6.58			7,561,094	6.35
Loans held for sale		14,645	6.28			14,702	6.84			11,829	5.81
Loans receivable		7,945,641	6.67			7,940,760	6.58			7,572,923	6.35
Investment securities-taxable		1,038,634	2.50			1,046,301	2.54			1,310,459	2.48
Investment securities-nontaxable		146,619	2.46			143,232	2.51			216,700	2.35
Non-marketable equity securities held in other financial institutions		66,409	2.85			56,270	6.53			58,421	6.47
Interest-bearing balances due from banks		229,224	5.46			254,627	5.53			279,383	5.42
Total interest-earning assets		9,426,527	6.09			9,441,190	6.04			9,437,886	5.69
Noninterest-earning assets		559,309				567,035				597,678
Total assets	$	9,985,836			$	10,008,225			$	10,035,564

Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Liabilities
Interest-bearing liabilities
Savings and interest-bearing transaction accounts	$	5,177,522	3.88	%	$	5,130,224	3.80	%	$	4,728,211	3.28	%
Time deposits		1,469,849	4.47			1,534,679	4.46			1,626,935	4.04
Total interest-bearing deposits		6,647,371	4.01			6,664,903	3.95			6,355,146	3.47
FHLB advances and other borrowings		40,331	4.75			41,666	4.96			230,815	5.51
Subordinated indebtedness		159,826	4.78			159,973	4.83			196,792	5.07
Total interest-bearing liabilities		6,847,528	4.04			6,866,542	3.98			6,782,753	3.59
Noninterest-bearing liabilities
Noninterest-bearing deposits		1,850,046				1,894,141				2,088,183
Other liabilities		162,565				163,273				151,716
Total liabilities		8,860,139				8,923,956				9,022,652
Stockholders’ Equity		1,125,697				1,084,269				1,012,912
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	9,985,836			$	10,008,225			$	10,035,564
Net interest spread			2.05	%			2.06	%			2.10	%
NIM			3.16				3.15				3.12
NIM-FTE⁽²⁾			3.18				3.17				3.14

____________________________

⁽¹⁾	Includes multi-family real estate.
⁽²⁾	In order to present pre-tax income and resulting yields on tax-exempt investments comparable to those on taxable investments, a tax-equivalent adjustment has been computed. This adjustment also includes income tax credits received on Qualified School Construction Bonds.

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Notable Items
(Unaudited)

	At and For the Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024						June 30, 2024						March 31, 2024						December 31, 2023						September 30, 2023
	$ Impact			EPS Impact⁽¹⁾			$ Impact			EPS Impact⁽¹⁾			$ Impact			EPS Impact⁽¹⁾			$ Impact			EPS Impact⁽¹⁾			$ Impact			EPS Impact⁽¹⁾

	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Notable interest income items:
Interest income reversal on relationships impacted by questioned banker activity	$	—		$	—		$	(1,206	)	$	(0.03	)	$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
Notable provision expense items:
Provision expense related to questioned banker activity		—			—			(3,212	)		(0.08	)		—			—			—			—			—			—
Provision expense on relationships impacted by questioned banker activity		—			—			(4,131	)		(0.10	)		—			—			—			—			—			—
Notable noninterest income items:
MSR gain (impairment)		—			—			—			—			410			0.01			(1,769	)		(0.05	)		—			—
Gain (loss) on sales of securities, net		221			0.01			—			—			(403	)		(0.01	)		(4,606	)		(0.12	)		(7,173	)		(0.18	)
Gain on sub-debt repurchase		—			—			81			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Positive valuation adjustment on non-marketable equity securities		—			—			5,188			0.13			—			—			—			—			10,096			0.26
Gain on bank property sale		—			—			800			0.02			—			—			—			—			—			—
Notable noninterest expense items:
Operating expense related to questioned banker activity		(848	)		(0.02	)		(1,452	)		(0.04	)		—			—			—			—			—			—
Total notable items	$	(627	)		(0.02	)	$	(3,932	)		(0.10	)	$	7			—		$	(6,375	)		(0.16	)	$	2,923			0.07

____________________________

⁽¹⁾	The diluted EPS impact is calculated using a 21% effective tax rate. The total of the diluted EPS impact of each individual line item may not equal the calculated diluted EPS impact on the total notable items due to rounding.

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Notable Items – Continued
(Unaudited)

	Nine Months Ended September 30,
		2024						2023
	$ Impact			EPS Impact⁽¹⁾			$ Impact			EPS Impact⁽¹⁾

	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Notable interest income items:
Interest income reversal on relationships impacted by questioned banker activity	$	(1,206	)	$	(0.03	)	$	—		$	—
Notable provision expense items:
Provision expense related to questioned banker activity		(3,212	)		(0.08	)		—			—
Provision expense on relationships impacted by questioned banker activity		(4,131	)		(0.10	)		—			—
Notable noninterest income items:
MSR gain		410			0.01			—			—
Loss on sales of securities, net		(182	)		—			(7,029	)		(0.18	)
Gain on sub-debt repurchase		81			—			471			0.01
Positive valuation adjustment on non-marketable equity securities		5,188			0.13			10,096			0.26
Gain on bank property sale		800			0.02			—			—
Notable noninterest expense items:
Operating expense related to questioned banker activity		(2,300	)		(0.06	)		—			—
Total notable items	$	(4,552	)		(0.12	)	$	3,538			0.09

____________________________

⁽¹⁾	The diluted EPS impact is calculated using a 21% effective tax rate. The total of the diluted EPS impact of each individual line item may not equal the calculated diluted EPS impact on the total notable items due to rounding.

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
(Unaudited)

	At and For the Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024			March 31, 2024			December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023

	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Calculation of PTPP earnings:
Net income	$	18,601		$	20,989		$	22,632		$	13,425		$	24,313
Provision for credit losses		4,603			5,231			3,012			2,735			3,515
Income tax expense		5,068			5,747			6,227			4,119			5,758
PTPP earnings (non-GAAP)	$	28,272		$	31,967		$	31,871		$	20,279		$	33,586

Calculation of PTPP ROAA:
PTPP earnings	$	28,272		$	31,967		$	31,871		$	20,279		$	33,586
Divided by number of days in the quarter		92			91			91			92			92
Multiplied by the number of days in the year		366			366			366			365			365
PTPP earnings, annualized	$	112,473		$	128,571		$	128,184		$	80,455		$	133,249

Divided by total average assets	$	9,985,836		$	10,008,225		$	9,861,236		$	9,753,847		$	10,035,564
ROAA (annualized) (GAAP)		0.74	%		0.84	%		0.92	%		0.55	%		0.96	%
PTPP ROAA (annualized) (non-GAAP)		1.13			1.28			1.30			0.82			1.33

Calculation of tangible common equity to tangible common assets, book value per common share and adjusted tangible book value per common share:
Total assets	$	9,965,986		$	9,947,182		$	9,892,379		$	9,722,584		$	9,733,303
Goodwill		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)
Other intangible assets, net		(39,272	)		(41,177	)		(43,314	)		(45,452	)		(42,460	)
Tangible assets		9,798,035			9,777,326			9,720,386			9,548,453			9,562,164

Total common stockholders’ equity	$	1,145,673		$	1,095,894		$	1,078,853		$	1,062,905		$	998,945
Goodwill		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)
Other intangible assets, net		(39,272	)		(41,177	)		(43,314	)		(45,452	)		(42,460	)
Tangible common equity		977,722			926,038			906,860			888,774			827,806
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		94,245			127,184			124,909			121,023			172,729
Adjusted tangible common equity		1,071,967			1,053,222			1,031,769			1,009,797			1,000,535
Divided by common shares outstanding at the end of the period		31,167,410			31,108,667			31,011,304			30,986,109			30,906,716
Book value per common share (GAAP)	$	36.76		$	35.23		$	34.79		$	34.30		$	32.32
Tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP)		31.37			29.77			29.24			28.68			26.78
Adjusted tangible book value per common share (non-GAAP)		34.39			33.86			33.27			32.59			32.37
Tangible common equity to tangible assets (non-GAAP)		9.98	%		9.47	%		9.33	%		9.31	%		8.66	%

Calculation of ROATCE:
Net income	$	18,601		$	20,989		$	22,632		$	13,425		$	24,313
Divided by number of days in the quarter		92			91			91			92			92
Multiplied by number of days in the year		366			366			366			365			365
Annualized net income	$	74,000		$	84,417		$	91,025		$	53,262		$	96,459

Total average common stockholders’ equity	$	1,125,697		$	1,084,269		$	1,062,705		$	1,013,286		$	1,012,912
Average goodwill		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)		(128,679	)
Average other intangible assets, net		(40,487	)		(42,563	)		(44,700	)		(46,825	)		(43,901	)
Average tangible common equity		956,531			913,027			889,326			837,782			840,332

ROATCE (non-GAAP)		7.74	%		9.25	%		10.24	%		6.36	%		11.48	%

Calculation of core efficiency ratio:
Total noninterest expense	$	62,521		$	64,388		$	58,707		$	60,906		$	58,663
Insurance and mortgage noninterest expense		(8,448	)		(8,402	)		(8,045	)		(8,581	)		(8,579	)
Adjusted total noninterest expense		54,073			55,986			50,662			52,325			50,084

Net interest income	$	74,804		$	73,890		$	73,323		$	72,989		$	74,130
Insurance and mortgage net interest income		(2,578	)		(2,407	)		(2,795	)		(2,294	)		(2,120	)
Total noninterest income		15,989			22,465			17,255			8,196			18,119
Insurance and mortgage noninterest income		(8,081	)		(8,543	)		(10,123	)		(4,727	)		(7,335	)
Adjusted total revenue		80,134			85,405			77,660			74,164			82,794

Efficiency ratio (GAAP)		68.86	%		66.82	%		64.81	%		75.02	%		63.59	%
Core efficiency ratio (non-GAAP)		67.48			65.55			65.24			70.55			60.49

Origin Bancorp, Inc.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures – Continued
(Unaudited)

	Nine Months Ended September 30,
		2024			2023

	(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
Calculation of PTPP earnings:
Net income	$	62,222		$	70,375
Provision for credit losses		12,846			14,018
Income tax expense		17,042			18,004
PTPP earnings (non-GAAP)	$	92,110		$	102,397

Calculation of PTPP ROAA:
PTPP Earnings	$	92,110		$	102,397
Divided by the year-to-date number of days		274			273
Multiplied by number of days in the year		366			365
Annualized PTPP Earnings	$	123,037		$	136,904

Divided by total average assets	$	9,951,890		$	10,004,097
ROAA (annualized) (GAAP)		0.84	%		0.94	%
PTPP ROAA (annualized) (non-GAAP)		1.24			1.37

Calculation of ROATCE:
Net income	$	62,222		$	70,375
Divided by the year-to-date number of days		274			273
Multiplied by number of days in the year		366			365
Annualized net income	$	83,114		$	94,091

Total average common stockholders’ equity	$	1,091,018		$	995,395
Average goodwill		(128,679	)		(128,679	)
Average other intangible assets, net		(42,576	)		(46,391	)
Average tangible common equity		919,763			820,325

ROATCE		9.04	%		11.47	%

Calculation of core efficiency ratio:
Total noninterest expense	$	185,616		$	174,310
Insurance and mortgage noninterest expense		(24,895	)		(25,768	)
Adjusted total noninterest expense		160,721			148,542

Net interest income	$	222,017		$	226,568
Insurance and mortgage net interest income		(7,780	)		(5,187	)
Total noninterest income		55,709			50,139
Insurance and mortgage noninterest income		(26,747	)		(23,714	)
Adjusted total revenue		243,199			247,806

Efficiency ratio		66.83	%		62.99	%
Core efficiency ratio		66.09			59.94

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Human rights go hand in hand with sustainable development: UK Statement at the UN Third Committee

Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

Statement by Alex Berelowitz, Second Secretary Human Rights at the General Debate of the UN Third Committee.

Location:: United Nations, New York
Delivered on:: 23 October 2024 (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered)

Almost eighty years ago, the UN Charter established the three founding pillars of the UN system: peace and security, development and human rights.

As our Prime Minister said before the General Assembly, one of these – human rights – speaks to the very essence of what it is to be human.

We have made many advances in the years since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

But we cannot ignore the challenges we now face.

Widespread conflict and violence, misuse of new technologies, entrenched inequality, rollback of women and girls’ rights, climate vulnerability, and – all too often – downright impunity where power is abused.

In seeking solutions we must have human rights and the rule of law front and centre. As all member states agreed in the Pact for the Future, human rights are key to meeting the needs of everyone – especially the most vulnerable.

This includes women and children in the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Lebanon.

The humanitarian implications of the conflict are devastating and compounding an existing crisis in Lebanon.

We remain deeply concerned at the escalation of violence, the number of deaths and injuries, the displacement of families from their homes, and unacceptable attacks on UN Peacekeepers.

We call for an immediate ceasefire, and the release of all hostages in Gaza and the rapid provision of humanitarian aid into Gaza and Lebanon.

Diplomacy, not violence, is the way to achieve peace, stability and security across the region.

In Ukraine, Russia continues to disregard the UN Charter through its illegal invasion.

Many Russian atrocities amount to war crimes. Russia’s attacks on energy infrastructure, as well as the widespread and systematic use of torture against Ukrainian POWs are beyond reprehensible. We must hold perpetrators to account.

With conflict driving most of the world’s humanitarian needs, the UN’s role in independently monitoring and documenting human rights abuses and violations is more critical than ever.

We welcome the Human Rights Council’s recent renewal of the Fact-Finding Mission in Sudan. While international attention is on the Middle East and Ukraine, a brutal war has displaced over 10 million people, with atrocities carried out by both warring parties.

But in non conflict situations too, human rights are under threat.

Two years after the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Right’s Assessment on Xinjiang, China continues to persecute and arbitrarily detain Uyghurs and Tibetans, restricting civil society and independent media, and targeting human rights defenders and lawyers.

We again call upon China to implement its OHCHRs recommendations

The use of the death penalty in Iran has also reached a critical level – we cannot ignore politically motivated executions of protesters, dissidents, and juvenile offenders.

With so many global challenges we must recommit to collective action underpinned by responsible global leadership.

In 2025 the United Kingdom will stand for election to the Human Rights Council. We will do all we can to advert greater conflict, instability and injustice.

Realising human rights goes hand-in-hand with sustainable development. But that too is throttled in places like Afghanistan, where we have seen a wholesale regression of the rights of women and girls. Banned from education and employment, with numerous restrictions on their presence in public spaces.

And in Syria we have seen the targeting of girls, subjected to forced marriage, and forced to take on increased care-giving responsibilities.

We will not progress on sustainable development if women and girls are denied their human rights.

Let us recommit, together, to the UN Charter and Universal Declaration and continue to strive for a world where nobody is left behind.

Published 23 October 2024

MIL OSI United Kingdom –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre and National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby

US Senate News:

Source: The White House
James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
1:42 P.M. EDT
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Good afternoon, everyone.
Q    Good afternoon.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I have just one thing at the top, and then I’ll hand it over.
So, today, as part of the White House Initiative on Women’s Health Research, First Lady Jill Biden announced $110 million in awards from the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health — for Health, ARPA-H, to accelerate transformative research and development in women’s health care.
These new ARPA-H awardees will spur innovation and advance bold solutions to diseases and conditions that affect women uniquely, disproportionately, and differently.
In less than a year since the president and the first lady launched the effort, the White House Initiative on Women’s Health Research has galvanized nearly one — nearly a billion dollars in funding for women’s health research.
And now, I’m going to turn it over to my NSC colleague, Admiral John Kirby, who will talk to you more about the news of North Korea’s — Korean soldiers traveling to Russia, today’s historic announcement of the — of the use of frozen Russian sov- — sovereign assets to support Ukraine, and other foreign policy matters.
Admiral.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you very much, Karine.
Good afternoon, everybody.
Q    Good afternoon.
MR. KIRBY: So, just before I kick off on those issues, I do want to start off by extending our thoughts to the victims of the horrible terrorist attack in Ankara, Turkey, this morning.
Our prayers are with all of those affected and their families and, of course, also the people of Turkey during this difficult time.
Now, Turkish authorities, as they’ve said, are investigating this as a possible terrorist attack. And while we don’t yet know the motive or who is exactly behind it, we strong — strongly condemn this — this act of violence.
Now, I think, as you have all heard earlier this morning, we have seen the public reporting indicating that North Korean soldiers are traveling to Russia to fight against Ukraine. We’re working closely with our allies and partners to gain a full understanding of this situation, but today, I’m prepared to share what we know at this stage.
We assess that between early- to mid-October, North Korea moved at least 3,000 soldiers into eastern Russia. We assessed that these soldiers traveled by ship from the Wonsan area in North Korea to Vladivostok, Russia. These soldiers then traveled onward to multiple Russian military training sites in eastern Russia where they are currently undergoing training.
We do not yet know whether these soldiers will en- — enter into combat alongside the Russian military, but this is a certain — certainly a highly concerning probability.
After completing training, these soldiers could travel to western Russia and then engage in combat against the Ukrainian military. We have briefed the Ukrainian government on our understanding of this situation, and we’re certainly consulting closely with other allies, partners, and countries in the region on the implications of such a dramatic mov- — move and on how we might respond.
I expect to have more to share on all of that in the coming days.
For the time being, we will continue to monitor the situation closely. But let’s be clear, if North Korean soldiers do enter into combat, this development would demonstrate Russia’s growing desperation in its war against Ukraine.
Russia is suffering extraordinary casualties on the battlefield every single day, but President Putin appears intent on continuing this war. If Russia is indeed forced to turn to North Korea for manpower, this would be a sign of weakness, not strength, on the part of the Kremlin.
It would also demonstrate an unprecedented level of direct military cooperation between Russia and North Korea with security implications in Europe as well as the Indo-Pacific.
As we have said before, Russia’s cooperation with the North Korean military is in violation of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions which prohibit the procurement of arms from North Korea and military arms training. This move is likewise a violation.
At President Biden’s direction, the United States continues to surge security assistance to Ukraine. In just the past week, which I think you’ve seen, the United States has announced more than $800 million in security assistance to meet Ukraine’s urgent battlefield needs.
Now, looking ahead, the United States is on track to provide Ukraine with hundreds of additional air defense interceptors, dozens of tactical air defense systems, additional artillery, significant quantities of ammunition, hundreds of armored personnel can- — carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, and thousands of additional armored vehicles, all of which will help keep Ukraine effective on the battlefield.
And in coming days, the United States will announce a significant sanctions tranche targeting the enablers of Russia’s war in Ukraine located outside of Russia.
The Ukrainian military continues to fight bravely and effectively, and President Biden is determined to provide Ukraine with the support that it needs to prevail. To that end, the president announced today that of the $50 billion that the G7 committed to loan Ukraine back in June, the United States will provide a loan of $20 mil- — $20 billion. The other $30 billion in loans will come from a combination of our G7 partners, including the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Japan.
Now, this is unique. Never before has a multilateral coalition frozen the assets of an aggressor country and then harnessed the value of those assets to fund the defense of the aggrieved party, all while respecting the rule of law and maintaining solidarity.
These loans will support the people of Ukraine as they defend and rebuild their country, and it’s another example of how Mr. Putin’s war of aggression has only unified and strengthened the resolve of G7 countries and our partners to defend shared values.
And — yep, that’s it. Thank you. (Laughter.) Sorry. I had an extra page in there, and I wasn’t sure where it was going. So —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Aamer.
Q    Does the pre- — is the assessment that the presence of North Korean troops can have a meaningful trajectory on thou- — the war?
And then, secondly, you’ve said earlier even that it shows a sign of desperation on the Russians, but does it also demonstrate North Korea’s commitment to this burgeoning alliance with Russia? And is that, in of itself, a broadening and discouraging concern for America?
MR. KIRBY: So, on your first question, too soon to tell, Aamer, what kind of an impact these troops can have on the battlefield, because we just don’t know enough about what the intention is in terms of using them. So, I — I think that’s why I said at the top, we’re going to monitor this and watch it closely.
To your second question: yeah, absolutely. As we’ve also said, yes, I’ve called this a sign of desperation and a sign of weakness. It’s not like Mr. Putin is being very honest with the Russian people about what he doing here. I mean, Mr. Peskov, his spokesman, just the other day dec- — denied knowing anything about it.
But — but we’ve also talked many, many times about the burgeoning and growing defense relationship between North Korea and Russia and how reckless and dangerous we think that is, not only for the people of Ukraine — and clearly we’ll watch to see what this development means for them — but also for the Indo-Pacific region.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Nadia.
Q    Thank you. With the U.S. diplomats in the region, Mr. Hochstein in Lebanon and the Secretary of State in Saudi Arabia now before Israel, do you be- — do you believe there is a chance now for the ceasefire to be back on the table?
And do you believe that with the demise of Mr. Sinwar and Hassan Nasrallah, you have better chances or worse chances for somebody to negotiate with?
MR. KIRBY: The ceasefire you’re talking about, I’m assuming, is with Gaza.
Q    Well, both. I mean, you have Lebanon and you have Gaza —
MR. KIRBY: Yeah.
Q    — implementation 1701 and in Gaza.
MR. KIRBY: I mean, look, the short answer to your question, Nadia, is — is yes. And we wouldn’t be s- — we wouldn’t be engaged in this — these diplomatic efforts if we didn’t think there was still an opportunity here to get a ceasefire — a ceasefire for Gaza that brings the hostages home and increases humanitarian assistance, and certainly a ceasefire between Israel and — and Hezbollah.
And as for the — the implication that the — the deaths of the two leaders, Nasrallah and Sinwar, as President Biden said last week, that does open up — we believe opens up, should open up an opportunity to try to get there.
But I don’t want to sound too sanguine here. I’ll let Secretary Blinken speak for his travels. He’s still on the road. He talked about it a little bit today that, you know, they had good, constructive conversations, specifically with respect to — to Gaza while he was in Israel. But there’s still a lot of work before us.
Q    Okay. And one more, quickly. The number of civilians killed in Gaza was 779 in the last 20 days, especially in Jabalia, and the total number is 100,000 between the dead and the wounded. Ninety percent of Gaza is destroyed. Does the U.S. still believe that Israel’s strategy in Gaza is working, and do you still support it?
MR. KIRBY: We still support Israel’s right and responsibility to defend itself against these threats, including the continued threat of Hamas. And we still urge Israel to be mindful — ever mindful of civilian casualties and the damage to civilian infrastructure, and we’re going to continue to work with them to that end.
Q    Has the U.S. made an assessment about the type of weapons training or what type of training the North Korean soldiers are undergoing in Russia that could potentially be used in Ukraine?
And does this represent a new type of an — an agreement, in terms of an information-sharing agreement between the North Koreans and the Russians?
MR. KIRBY: I don’t believe we have a very specific assessment at this time of the exact nature of all the training. There’s — there’s three sites that we assess right now that the — this first tranche of about 3,000 are being trained.
I — I think I could go so far as to say that, at least in general terms, it’s — it’s basic kind of combat training and familiarization. I think I’ll go — I could go as far as that and no further.
But, as I also said, we’re going to monitor this and watch this closely. And obviously, if we have more information that we can share with you, we certainly will.
To your second question about information-sharing, as I’ve said before, in answer to — to Aamer, we have been watching this relationship grow and deepen now for many, many months. And the — the question that we’re asking ourselves — and we don’t have an answer for right now — is: What does Kim Jong Un think he’s getting out of this?
And so, you talked about information-sharing. I mean, they’re — maybe that’s part of this. Maybe it’s technology. Maybe it’s capabilities.
We don’t have a good sense of that. But that’s what’s so concerning to us, is — is not only the concern for the impact on the war in Ukraine but the impact that this could have in the Indo-Pacific, with Kim Jong Un benefiting to some degree.
Q    Can you talk about that just briefly? Like, how significant is this for U.S. allies in the region and the U.S. as a whole?
MR. KIRBY: It could be significant. Again, we don’t know enough right now.
So, when you say “region,” I think you mean Indo-Pacific. Until we have a better sense of what the North Koreans at least believe they’re getting out of this, as opposed to what they actually get, it’s hard to know and to put a metric on exactly what the impact is in the Indo-Pacific.
But it is concerning. It’s been concerning. Certainly, this development — this — this willingness of — of Kim to literally put skin in the game here, soldiers in Russia for the potential deployment — and we haven’t seen them deployed, but for the potential deployment — certainly would connote an expectation that he thinks he’s getting something out of this.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Selina.
Q    You mentioned that the U.S. is discussing how we would possibly respond. What are the possibilities for how the U.S. could respond to this?
MR. KIRBY: Well, for one thing, we’re going to continue to surge security assistance, as I just mentioned in my — my topper. And you’re going to continue to see — the president has made it clear that we’re going to continue to provide security assistance all the way up to the end of his administration, for sure. So, you’re going to see that continue to flow, and we’re talking to allies and partners about what the right next steps ought to be.
I’m not at liberty today to go through any specific options, but — but we’re going to — we’re going to have those conversations, and — and we have been.
Q    And China is a critical trading partner to North Korea. What’s the U.S. assessment for how China is looking at all of this?
MR. KIRBY: We don’t know how President Xi and the Chinese are looking at this. One would think that — if you take their comments at face value about desiring stability and security in the region, particularly on the Korean Peninsula, one would think that they’re also deeply concerned by this development.
But you can expect that we’ll be — we’ll be communicating with the — with the Chinese about this and certainly sharing our perspectives to the degree we can and — and gleaning theirs.
Q    And local South Korean press is reporting that, according to intelligence, these troops — North Korean troops lack understanding of modern warfare, such as drone attacks, and it’s anticipated there will be a high number of casualties when deployed to the front lines.
MR. KIRBY: I — too soon to know. I mean, we — we don’t really know what they’re going to be used for or where they’re going to — if they’re going to — if they’re going to deploy, where they’re going to deploy and to what purpose.
I can tell you one thing, though. If they do deploy to fight against Ukraine, they’re fair game. They’re fair targets. And the Ukrainian military will defend themselves against North Korean soldiers the same way they’re defending themselves against Russian soldiers.
And so, the — the possibility that there could be dead and wounded North Korean soldiers fighting against Ukraine is — is absolutely real if they get deployed.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, M.J.
Q    Just to clarify something you said earlier about what Kim Jong Un possibly gets out of this. As far as you know, has he gotten anything in return?
MR. KIRBY: Well, I mean, from this particular move, I can’t speak to that, M.J. I — I don’t think we have seen any specific, you know, quid — quid pro quo with respect to this provision of troops.
But we know that — that he and Mr. Putin have, again, been growing in their defense relationship. And we know Mr. Putin is — has been able to purchase North Korean artillery. He’s been able to get North Korean ballistic missiles, which he has used against Ukraine. And in return, we have seen, at the very least, some technology sharing with North Korea.
But what this particular development means going forward, we just don’t know. We’re going to have to watch that.
Q    And do you know if this came about because Putin specifically first asked for help, or whether it’s that Kim Jong Un offered the help first?
MR. KIRBY: Don’t know. Don’t know what precipitated it, but I think it’s important to remember that in the three-plus years that he’s been fighting in — in and around Ukraine, Mr. Putin and — and his military has suffered 530,000 casualties. And as we’re speaking today, he’s losing, casualties alone — and that’s killed and wounded — 1,200 — 1,000 to 1,200 per day.
Now, 530,000 is a lot. I mean, there were — in the American Civil War, there were, like, 620,000 killed, just to put this into some perspective. This is three years fighting in Ukraine. Five hundred and thirty [thousand] casualties is — is a lot.
And he hasn’t been fully transparent with the Russian people about this. And he hasn’t been transparent at all with the Russian people about this particular move, about br- — bringing in North Korean soldiers. So, that he has to farm out the fighting to a foreign country, I think, speaks volumes about how much his military is suffering and — and how uncertain he believes, how untenable he believes his — his situation is.
Q    And I guess, just if you had to guess, how would the training — what would the training even look like, given the language barrier? And once these North Korean soldiers are deployed, like, what would the command structure even look like, given —
MR. KIRBY: It’s a great question. I — I wish we had an answer to it. You’re — you’re not wrong to highlight the language barrier. I mean, these are — these aren’t even similar languages. They’re — and they are going to have to overcome that. It’s not like they have a long, productive history of working together as two militaries, even at all. So, that’s going to be a challenge.
Command and control is going to be a challenge. And this is not a challenge that the Russians have even solved amongst themselves. They’re still having command and control challenges: logistics and sustainment, getting things to the battlefield, keeping their troops in the field. They haven’t solved that for their own soldiers. So, they’re going to have to figure that out here too, if, in fact, they deploy. We haven’t seen that.
So, there are — there are some pretty big challenges they’re — they’re going to have to overcome.
Q    And I have a non-Ukraine question. Do you think that Donald Trump meets the definition of a fas- — fascist?
MR. KIRBY: That — I’m going to —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: We got to move on. (Laughs.)
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, I’m —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Michael.
MR. KIRBY: — I’m not going to talk about that stuff.
Q    John, there — there’s concern among Democrats on the Hill that Donald Trump’s team has not entered into these critical transition agreements with the White House that could potentially, in their words, endanger national security. Is that a concern of yours?
MR. KIRBY: Well, look, with a caveat that I’ll — I’m going to defer to Karine on anything to do with the election and — and the transition. That’s really for her.
All I’ll say is that no matter how things play out in the election, the National Security Council, under Mr. Sullivan’s leadership, is and will make sure we’re ready for proper transition handover.
Q    And there are intelligence officials who have warned that foreign adversaries might be looking to stoke violence in the next 13 days ahead of the election.
MR. KIRBY: I saw the DNI assessment, yeah.
Q    What are you doing in preparation?
MR. KIRBY: Well, we’re working hard across the interagency, as you might expect we would, to share information not only inside the — at the federal level but working very hard to make sure we’ve got good handshakes and — and information sharing at state and local levels as well.
That’s the last thing we want, of course, is to see any violence or protest activity that — that leads to intimidation and that kind of thing. So, we’re working hard, again, with local and state officials.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Need to start wrapping it up. Go ahead, sir. Yeah.
Q    Thank you. So, would North Korea’s possible engagement in combat in Ukraine trigger a bolder move from the White House, like decision to lift the restrictions on usage of American weapons?
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, again, number one, we’re monitoring this closely, and that’s where we are right now. I came and gave you a very honest assessment of exactly where we are, and we just don’t know if these troops are going to be deployed against Ukraine in combat and, if so, where, when, and how.
So, number one, we’re monitoring this closely. I don’t have any policy decisions or options to speak to today. I can tell you the last thing I’ll say is that there’s been no change to the president’s policy when it comes to what we’re providing Ukraine and — and how they’re using it.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Jacqui.
Q    Thank you, Karine. John, why not? Why not green-light the long-range missiles for Ukraine’s use, which is Zelenskyy’s number one ask, as you’re sounding the alarm about what could have far-reaching implications if North Korean soldiers go into Ukraine?
MR. KIRBY: Well, for one thing, Jacqui, we don’t exactly know what these guys are going to do.
Q    What else could they be there for?
MR. KIRBY: We don’t know what they’re going to do. We don’t know if they’re going to deploy into combat or not. We don’t know, if they do, in what strength. We certainly don’t have a sense of what capability they might be able to bring to the field with them. Now —
Q    Doesn’t this seem, though, like —
MR. KIRBY: Hang on, now. Just a second.
Q    — we were — a couple years ago, they were staged — you had Russian troops staged on the Ukrainian border, and this administration was saying, “We don’t know if they’re going to go in. We don’t want to impose any sanctions.” We didn’t do it ahead of time.
MR. KIRBY: No, no, no, no, no, no.
Q    Where — why is there not a consequence first?
MR. KIRBY: Well, first of all, let’s not rewrite history, Jacqui. We — we were the first country to go out publicly and say, “Here’s what we think the Russians are going to do. Here’s the timeline.”
Q    But didn’t do anything about it.
MR. KIRBY: That is not true, Jacqui.
Q    There was no preemptive sanction. Nothing.
MR. KIRBY: Jacqui, that is not true. It is true we didn’t levy sanctions originally because we were hoping that the threat of sanctions might deter or dissuade Mr. Putin. You lay sanctions on before the man makes a decision, then he might as well just go ahead and do it.
Q    Well, he did it anyway.
MR. KIRBY: And we — and we did levy sanctions on him — heavy sanctions — not just us but around the world.
Number two, we mobilized support for Ukraine even before Mr. Putin decided to step across that line. And no country — no country has done more than the United States to make sure Ukraine is ready. So —
Q    Well, why not do something —
MR. KIRBY: — let’s not —
Q    — to prevent —
MR. KIRBY: Wait, wait. Jac- —
Q    — this from happening?
MR. KIRBY: Jacqui, let me finish the second question, and then we’ll get your third one.
So, let’s not rewrite history. The United States didn’t sit idly by here. We’ve been Ukraine’s staunchest and most prolific supporter in terms of security assistance.
And as for the policy decision, the — the president remains and we all remain in direct contact with our Ukrainian counterparts. We’re talking to them over what the — what they need. As I said, we’ve just announced $800 million more, and there’ll be more coming in security assistance.
I just don’t have any policy changes to —
Q    But why —
MR. KIRBY: — to speak to today.
Q    Why would you not u- — put a restriction on the type of target that can be hit, rather than the distance from a border that obviously Russia doesn’t recognize? And you’ve got training happening with North Korean troops, I would assume, on the types of military installations that would be fair game if that decision was made.
MR. KIRBY: Yeah, we’ll see —
Q    That —
MR. KIRBY: We’ll see — we’ll see what the Russians and North Koreans decide to do here. As I said earlier, if these North Korean soldiers decide to join the fight against Ukraine, they will become legitimate military targets.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right, Jacqui. We got to go.
Aurelia.
Q    Yeah. Thank you. John, would you still describe the Israeli operation in Lebanon as targeted?
MR. KIRBY: I’m sorry, I do-
Q    Yeah. The Israeli strikes on Lebanon, would you still describe them as targeted?
MR. KIRBY: Again, I’m not going to get into scorecarding each and every strike that the Israelis take. I’ll just say a couple of things. They have a right to defend themselves. There are legitimate threats that Hezbollah still poses to the Israeli people. I mean, rockets and missiles are still being fired at Israeli cities.
So, let’s not forget what Hezbollah continues to be able to do. That’s number one.
Number two, we have said many, many times that we don’t support daily, you know, strikes into heavily populated areas, and that remains the case today. We still oppose, you know, daily strikes into densely populated areas —
Q    But they still are coming — the strikes.
MR. KIRBY: — and we have had those conversations. Secretary Blinken has had that exact conversation when he was in Israel for the last couple of days. We’ll continue to press the Israelis on that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q    Hi. So, the interest from the frozen assets, does it apply only to the European Union or also the U.S. assets?
MR. KIRBY: It is — it’s for all the frozen assets.
Q    Also in the U.S.?
MR. KIRBY: I believe so. I believe so.
Q    Because this morning, I heard Daleep Singh said just European Union, so I wasn’t sure.
MR. KIRBY: Okay. You know what? Let me take the question. When I — I can’t even balance my checkbook at home, so — (laughter).
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead.
Q    Thank you. I wanted to ask about Kursk specifically with the North Korean troops in Russia. Russia and North Korea have this mutual security pact. If they were to use North Korean troops against Ukrainians in Kursk, would it be legitimate to try to reclaim sovereign territory, or would that be seen as an escalation in the war against Ukraine?
MR. KIRBY: Again, I don’t want to get ahead of where we are right now and hypothesize what these troops may or may not be doing and, if the Russians are going to deploy them, where they’re going to deploy them, whether it’ll be inside Russia or inside Ukraine.
Let me just please go back to what I said before. If these North Korean troops are employed against Ukraine, they will become legitimate military targets.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Janne, you have the last one.
Q    Thank you very much. (Inaudible) questions.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, you’re about to jump out of your seat, so —
Q    Thank — thank you, John.
MR. KIRBY: This — this seems like a fair day for Janne.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: That’s true. Truly.
Q    On same — same topic, on North Korea. The chairman of the House Intelligence Committee recently sent a letter to President Biden requesting a briefing regarding the seriousness of North Korea’s troops deployment and the neglect of the Korean Peninsula issue. What is the White House’s response to this?
MR. KIRBY: Well, we’ll respond. We’ll respond as — as appropriate to the chairman, and we won’t do that from the podium here in the briefing room. We’ll do it appropriately with him and his staff.
I’ll just say — and hopefully my being here today and the — my statement at the top should reflect how seriously we’re taking this issue and how closely we’re going to monitor it. We recognize the potential danger here, and we’re going to be talking to allies and partners, including the Ukrainians, about what the proper next steps are going to be.
But as for our response to the chairman, I’ll let that stand in legislative channels.
Q    Last quick one. Your colleague said at the State Department briefing that the United States does not reflect other countries’ intelligence analyses. So, what is your assessment of intelligence cooperation with allies at this —
MR. KIRBY: What — what did my colleague at the State Department say?
Q    Said that — at the briefing that the United States does not reflect other countries’ intelligence analyses.
MR. KIRBY: About — about —
Q    About the —
MR. KIRBY: — the North Korean troops?
Q    Yeah, about the North Korean troops, so —
MR. KIRBY: I just shared with you — to- — today’s opening statement was a downgrade of U.S. intelligence of what — what we’re seeing. And I think you can see similarities between what I said today and what our South Korean counterparts have — have said. Ukrainian intelligence has — has released information very, very similar.
And again, we’re — you know, today isn’t the end of this conversation. It’s — it’s, quite frankly, the beginning of the conversation that we’re going to be having with allies and partners, including through the intelligence community.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: All right. Thank you so much, Admiral.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Go ahead, Toluse.
Q    Thanks, John.
MR. KIRBY: Thank you.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Thank you. Sorry, guys. Give me one second.
Let’s let Toluse take — I know he’s been waiting patiently on the sides- — sideline.
We don’t have much time because I have to be in the Oval in about 20 minutes, but go ahead.
Q    Can I ask about the McDonald’s outbreak, the E. coli outbreak?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q    And this follows a couple of big ones that we’ve seen over the summer, including Boar’s Head. I think there’s another nationwide one. Is the president tracking this? And more importantly, how confident should Americans feel about the food supply right now?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, what I would say is the administration’s top priority — its top priority is to make sure that Americans are safe. And so, we are taking this very seriously. We’re monitoring the situation.
CDC, as it relates to McDonald’s specifically, is working to determine the source of the outbreak, as we speak abou- — as you asked me about the E. cola — E. coli outbreak. And so, what I would suggest is that families, they need to and they must follow the latest CDC guidance.
Obviously, we’re aware. The president is — is also aware. And going back to this particular outbreak with McDonald’s, I understand that the company has halted sales of product to protect customers, and CDC is certainly in touch with — with local authorities to — to prevent infection.
So, look, we’re always concerned when we hear these types of — these types of situations — right? — poten- — outbreaks. And so — and the president wants to make sure that the American people are safe. So, it is a — it is certainly a priority for us, and CDC is on top of this and looking into it.
Q    And then just one more. Any reaction to Jill Stein asserting the U.S. and the UK have blocked a peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I have not seen those reporting. I’m not going to respond to a — a political candidate in — for this — for this —
Q    Well, it seems (inaudible) — it’s a factual thing that’s —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — I have not even seen the — the comments that —
Q    Okay.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — you are mentioning to me, so I — I can’t give you an honest response from here.
So, go ahead, M.J.
Q    Karine, what did the president mean when he said last night, about Donald Trump, “We got to lock him up”?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, and I — the president spoke to — about this very clearly as well in his statement, and he — and he said he meant, “lock him out” politically — politically lock him out. That’s what he said, and that’s what we have to do. That was the part of his quote that he said last night while he was in — in New Hampshire.
Look, let’s not forget, this is a president that has not –never shied away from being very clear and laying down what is at stake in this election.
I’m going to be really m- — mindful in not speaking about 2024 election that’s just a — less than two weeks away.
But this is just speaking to what the president said last night. He made clear — he made very clear yesterday that he was referring to defeating — to defeating Donald Trump. That is what he was talking about. He said, politically — politically, lock him — lock him out. That is what he was referring to.
Q    Well, he first said twice, “lock him up.” So, you’re saying —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: And then — and —
Q    — when he said “lock him up,” he meant, defeat Donald Trump?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, it’s not what saying. It’s what he said. He said —
Q    Well, when —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — to the au- —
Q    — he clarified.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Wa- — wait.
Q    But he initially said —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: He — he — right.
Q    — “lock him up.”
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Exactly, he clarified himself. He wanted to make sure that things were put into context. He wanted to make sure that it — while we are — you know, while not just New Hampshire folks that were there were going to see it but also the Americans who are watching and pay attention to what the president is saying. He wanted to put it into context. And he, himself — this is not me; this is the president himself going back to explain — to explain — to say that he was talking about politically — politically locking him out.
Q    Is the president aware of John Kelly’s assertion that Donald Trump meets the definition of a fascist and that Trump wanted the kinds of generals Hitler had?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, you have heard from this president over and over again about the threats to democracy, and the president has spoken about that. You’ve heard from the former president himself saying that he is going to be a dictator on day one. This is him, not us. This is him.
And it’s not just all — it’s not just us, the White House, saying this. You’ve heard it from officials — former officials that worked for the former president say this as well.
So, you know, do we agree — I know that the — the vice president just spoke about this. Do we agree about that determination? Yes, we do. We do.
Let’s not forget — I will point you to January 6th. What we saw on January 6th: 2,000 people were told to go to the Capitol to undo a free and fair election by the former president. It was a dark, dark day in our democracy and a dangerous one. We have people who died because of what happened on January 6th. And, you know, we cannot forget that. We cannot forget that.
And so — and I will add — I will add this, that — and I can’t believe I even have to say this — but our nation’s veterans are heroes. They are heroes. They’re not losers or suckers; they are heroes.
And to be praising Adolf Hitler is dangerous, and it’s also disgusting.
Q    So, just to be clear, when you said, “we do” agree, President Biden believes that Donald Trump is a fascist?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, yes, we have said — he said himself — the former president has said he is going to be a dictator on day one. We cannot ignore that. We cannot.
And we cannot ignore or forget what happened on January 6th, 2021. That is real. Real people were affected by this — law enforcement who were trying to protect — protect the Capitol, protect law — elected officials in the Capitol, congressional members, senators, House members. Their lives were ruined because of that day, because 2,000 people — again, 2,000 people were told by the former president to go there to find the former vice president to stop a free and fair election. That is what — that is what happened.
Some of you — some of your colleagues were there, reported it, and saw it for yourself.
We cannot forget that.
Go ahead.
Q    Karine, I mean, you talk about the context of the president’s comments yesterday. I want to put them in the fuller context as well. The president went to New Hampshire to make a policy argument against Republicans on the issue of prescription drugs, but the majority — more of his comments yesterday were really some of the most dire warnings we’ve heard from this president yet about a return to a Donald Trump presidency and what it would mean — could mean for this country. He talked about world leaders pulling him aside, saying, “He can’t win.” He talked about the concern — what it would mean for future generations of America.
How concerned is the president about — at this point, about the state of the race? Is he worried that Trump is on a path to victory at this point?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look, I’m not going to talk about the state of the race. You heard from the president. You just laid out very clearly about what the president talked about yesterday in New Hampshire. He laid out what his thoughts were. He laid out what the stakes are for this country, and this is somebody who cares, clearly, very deeply about the future of this country.
And so, I’m not going to get into what he thinks about this — the race in this current moment. That is not something that I’m here to do. I am not — I am no longer a political pundit. I am the White House press secretary. I speak for the president, but obviously I cannot speak to the 2024 election.
And you did talk about something else — right? — when you talked about what he went to do on the official side. And I would read you some quotes here — some headlines that we — that we saw in New Hampshire today from New Hampshire press, which I think is really important: “Biden, Sanders tout prescription drug cost-savings at New — New Hampshire event.” Another one, “Biden and Bernie Sanders highlight lower prescription drug costs in New Hampshire stop.” That is important.
The president wanted to go to New Hampshire to talk about what he and the vice president have been able to do in more than three and a half years: lowering prescription drugs, beating Big Pharma. He talked about the Inflation Reduction Act. By the way, no Republican voted for that. Now it is popular with Democrats and Republicans, and this is something that is going to change people’s lives.
And so, that’s what he was there for. He talked about — let’s not forget, what — what they’ve been — oth- — other things they’ve been able to do, whether it’s the bipartisan gun violence protection — being able to do that in a bipartisan way, and dealing with COVID that t- — put our economy in a downturn. And this president has been able to empower — powering the economy, and we are now leading as a country in the world when it comes to the economy.
So, I think he was able to do both things. I think he was able to speak his mind on — on the political, you know, nature of where we are right now, which he can — obviously, he spoke to. And I think people in New Hampshire got a sense of what the president is trying to do on behalf of them in talking about lowering costs. We saw that in — in the New Hampshire papers. So, it broke through, and I think that’s important.
Q    You were with the president last week in Germany —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yes.
Q    — when he says he had these conversations with world leaders expressing their dire concern about the election here. What has been his response to those world leaders about that?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — I’m not going to get into private diplomatic conversations, and I will just leave it there.
Q    And then, I’ll ask you — we — NBC News is reporting that the vice president is likely to spend election night here in Washington, perhaps at her alma mater of Howard University. Do we have an understanding yet of where the president will be —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: (Laughs.)
Q    — and when — how he plans to vote?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: As soon as — you all know, we certainly will share that with all of you.
I will say is that the president is certainly looking forward to casting his ballot in Delaware. And so, once we have the full information on what his day is going to look like or what the last couple of days leading up to November 5th will look like, we certainly will share that with all of you.
Go ahead.
Q    Since we’re talking about scheduling, it is traditional for the president to hold a press conference after —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh boy. I knew that was coming. (Laughter.)
Q    Can’t stop. Won’t stop.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: You were- — you weren’t here for the — the drop-by. Were you here for the drop-by?
Q    Yes, I was.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh. It was great.
Q    It was great. We’d love to see him again.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q    So, the — and —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: And you know what? He had a really good time. He enjoyed — he enjoyed it.
Q    So, just an —
Q    Come on back. (Laughter.)
Q    — open invitation for the president to follow tradition and do a press conference after the election, which I think —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I —
Q    — is standard and important.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — I totally hear that, Tam, and I know it is a tradition.
I — I don’t want to get ahead of what the schedule is going to look like. As we know, in less than two weeks, we will have an important election. Obviously, I’m not speaking about that election specifically, but we want to share — we will share more as we get closer. And we — we certainly are tracking that tradition, and we’ll certainly have more to share.
Q    Are we going to see him with the vice president much in the next couple of weeks?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, look, I — I know you all have asked this question of him. You’ve asked this question of me. They have, as you know, campaigned together. They’ve done official events together in the past just couple of weeks.
They speak regularly. And — and I would say the president — you’ve heard the president just, you know, tout how proud and how he thinks she will be a great leader on day one, which is –he also said in 2020, which is why he chose her as his running mate, and he has said as well, this was the best decision that he’s made. And understands that she’s going to cut her own path. Said this himself just last week when he was in — in Philadelphia.
Don’t have anything to share, again, on the schedule. I know this is all part of a scheduling question, and we certainly will have more to share as the days — as the days — as you know, I mean, one day is like an eternity in — in this space, as you know. (Laughs.) And so, less than two weeks is — feels like so far away. So, we will have more to share, for sure.
Go ahead, Selina.
Q    I just want to follow up on M.J.’s question.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q    So, did the president actually read former Marine General Kelly’s comments or listen to them? And did you —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So —
Q    — do you know how he reacted after doing so?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, look — I mean, look, I just gave a really good — I think a good sense of the — what the president has said about our reaction here from the White House. The president is aware of John Kelly’s comments. And I gave you a reaction as part of the — as — as the president’s White House press secretary. And what I’m saying to you today is something that the president has said over and over and over again and repeated.
And let’s not forget the words that we have heard from the former president. And it matters here, because we’re talking about our democracy. We’re talking about what’s at stake here with our democracy. And when you have a former president saying that they will be a dictator on day one, that is something that we cannot forget.
And so, you know, the president has spoke- — spoken about this and given speeches on this. And that’s why I continue to point to January 6th, 2020 — -21 — 2021, because it was — it’s something that we cannot forget, a dark day on our democracy — a dark day on our democracy, because of what was — what — what occurred — what occurred.
Q    Was the president surprised by any of the comments from Kelly?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: No, not at all. I mean, again, the president has made comments and spoken about this over and over again. So, no. I will say no.
Go ahead.
Q    Thanks, Karine. Elon Musk has been, you know, campaigning with former President Donald Trump, and he is offering $1 million to voters. I just was wondering: Has the president expressed any concern to, you know, this interference by Elon Musk? And I don’t know if he — you know, his — the administration maybe has any plans or has discussed maybe how to sort of maybe move forward with what’s El- — Elon Musk is doing with — with the $1 million.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: So, on — on this particular question, I’m going to have to refer you to the FEC. I just have to be — that one, I — I — that’s a place that I’m going to have to refer you. I can’t speak to it beyond that.
Q    But has the president mentioned it at all, Elon Musk or —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: He’s aware of it. He’s aware of it. That I can tell you. I just can’t speak to it beyond that. I have to refer you to the FEC.
Go ahead, Jared.
Q    You talk and you’ve taken questions today, and obviously throughout the — the presidency, President Biden has talked a lot about democratic institutions. I’m just curious if between now and Election Day, the president is going to speak sort of more broadly about the confidence in the votes being counted accurately.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Well, the president has talk — talked about this. He believes in our institution. He believes in — in — this will be a free and fair election. He’s talked about this. We have to give the American people, who some of them are voting right now — to make sure that they have the confidence in their vote and how important it is to cast their vote.
I’m not going to go beyond that, but I think the president has been very clear about that.
Q    But you don’t — should we talk about schedules or something? (Laughs.)
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q    Is there, like, a big sort of — because he’s done these types of addresses on issues like this before.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah, I —
Q    So, I’m just curious if, like, this is a time that he would do that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh, no, I hear you. And I hear you’re talking about the moment that we’re in and if the president is going to speak about it in a more formal way — in remarks, in a speech.
I don’t have anything to share with you, but he’s been very clear about having the confidence in our institutions, and so I’ll leave it there.
Go ahead.
Q    I just want to ask you briefly about congressional outreach for the $10 billion that would be military aid. Has the White House started that process, reaching out to members of Congress to get their buy-in to kind of help expedite this process?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, we’re in regular touch with congressional members about any type of initiative that we’re trying to push through, especially if it involves Congress, obviously.
I don’t have anything to read out to you at this time, but we are in regular conversation about a myriad of things when it comes to legislation, things that we’re trying to push forward. Again, certainly that is important to the American people. I just don’t have anything to share at this time.
Q    Just a quick —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q    — 2024 question. You said the president is going to vote. It’s a scheduling question.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah.
Q    Will he vote ear- —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: You guys are very into schedules today.
Q    Yeah, we’re — we’re into this. We’re into this.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Yeah, I know. Into th- —
Q    Will he vote early? Early voting —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — into the POTUS schedule.
Q    Early voting starts in Delaware, obviously, this week, and will he go early, before Election Day?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — as — as soon as we have something to share, I will certainly share that.
Q    Final try.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I — I appreciate the effort here. The president — I can say for sure the president is looking forward to casting his ballot. And when we have more to share about his schedule — I mean, we’re not — we’re — the president can’t not just go vote and not tel- — for you guys not to know, right? So, you guys follow him wherever he is, which is good —
Q    Thanks.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: — which is a good thing. (Laughs.)
Go ahead.
Q    Thanks, Karine. The former president described the vice president as “lazy as hell” yesterday. She had a day when she was not on the campaign trail. I was going to give you an opportunity to respond to that.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I would check the source. Pay real close attention to who’s saying that. That’s all I’ll say.
Q    Okay. Another question about the vice president’s interview with NBC. She talked — she was asked about whether there should be any concessions on the issue of abortion and the situation —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Wait, say that one more time.
Q    She was asked whether or not there should be concessions on the issue of abortion — the scenario being a potential divided government like we have now — whether or not she would be willing to offer concessions, things like religious freedom, on the issue of abortion. And I wanted to see if —
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Meaning like on- — once she’s in office?
Q    Yes.
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh, look, I’m not going to — I’m not going to get into hypotheticals. It’s not — that is something that certainly, you know, when she be — when she is in office and becomes pre- — and all of the things happen — I’m not going to get into hypotheticals — she’s going to make her own decisions and decide what’s best for the American people. I can’t speak to that at this time. Not going to get into hypotheticals.
What you know and what you have seen from this president and this vice president is their commitment to continue to fight for women’s rights and continue to call on Congress to — to — you know, to reinstate Roe v. Wade, make sure that legislation is put out there, voted on. And so, he would sign that, obviously, if that were to happen.
And so, that is what they — he — they both have asked for. That is what we’ve been saying during this administration. And she has been, obviously, a passionate fighter on that issue, understanding what this means to women, understanding what this means to people’s rights and freedoms, and so has this president.
And so that’s what we’re — you’re going to continue to see. You just — you just heard us — I forget all the days — all the days come together — recently talk about how we’re expanding in the ACA for contraception, because understanding how that — how important that is to women and families, or — or women and Americans who are trying to make decisions on their family or how to move forward, and they should have that right — and so — and that freedom.
And so, again, that action shows you the commitment from the — and I hope the American people — from the Biden-Harris administration.
What she’s going to do next, how she’s going to govern, that’s not for me to say.
Q    Another question from the interview. She was asked whether or not sexism would come into play in this election. She said, “I don’t think of it that way.” Obviously, the former president, Barack Obama, said that he did believe that sexism was coming into play in this election. What does the president think about (inaudible)?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: Oh, I’ll say this. Clearly, the vice president spoke to this, and this is her campaign, and she sees — she’s going to say how she sees things.
The president has always said and will continue to say that she is ready to lead on day one. And you don’t have to just look at her record with him as a critical partner over the last more than three and a half years as vice president, but as senator, as attorney general, as district attorney, she is someone that has always fought for Americans, fought for people, whether it is citizens in California or more broadly, obviously.
And I think that’s what the American people — I know that’s what the American people want to see. They want to see a fighter. And that’s what the president sees in her.
And, again, just look at what we’ve been able to do in the more than three and a half years when it comes to trying to beat back COVID and make sure that we all could come together in this room again without masks and make sure there was a strategy to deal with this pandemic; turn the economy around because of this pandemic; make sure that, you know, schools were open, businesses were open. Now we have a record number of people applying to open up small businesses.
They’re doing that because they believe that the economy is working for them. Nobody wants to open a small business if they don’t think the economy is working — is — is working for them.
Now, there’s always a lot more work to be done, and we’re going to continue to do that work. You saw what the president did with Senator Bernie Sanders in New Hampshire — in Concord, New Hampshire, answering and lay- — and laying out what the — what the Inflation Reduction Act has been able to do, saving people a billion dollars because of that Inflation Reduction Act — which, I may add, Republicans did not vote for. They did not vote for it.
I know I have to get — I’m getting the pull here.
Go ahead, Jon.
Q    Thanks a lot, Karine. What’s the level of concern that the administration has about election interference, specifically from Russia?
MS. JEAN-PIERRE: I mean, we spoke to that. We’ve laid out — we made an — an announcement on what we were seeing from Russia on election interference. We sent a very clear message on that just a couple of weeks ago. So, obviously, that is something that continues to be a concern. We will speak loud and clear about that, as we did just a couple of weeks ago.
But we also want Americans to know th- — to trust the institution, and that’s what the president is going to continue to say and — and — and also continue to lay out the stakes — what’s at stakes.
Okay. Thanks, everybody. Hopefully, see you on the road.
2:30 P.M. EDT

MIL OSI USA News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Global: Human rights advocate Alexander Lapshin: No place to go, but still fighting for global freedom

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Frederick John Packer, Associate Professor of Law and Director of the Human Rights Research and Education Centre, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

Global freedom has been in decline for nearly two decades, according to Freedom House, an American non-profit organization devoted to supporting democracy around the world.

That means the role of high-profile freedom activists, including activists in exile — people who are displaced from their countries of origin due to their activism but continue to affect change through various means — has become ever more crucial.

A recent incident involving Alexander Lapshin, a Soviet-born Israeli travel journalist turned human rights advocate, at Armenia’s Yerevan airport highlights the ongoing persecution faced by activists even in seemingly secure environments.

On Sept. 21, during Armenia’s Independence Day celebrations, Lapshin said he was detained at the request of Belarusian authorities, accused of insulting the honour and dignity of Belarusian President Aleksandr Lukashenko by highlighting the authoritarian nature of his regime in social media posts.

Though not formally expelled from any one country, Lapshin’s circumstances have effectively left him with no safe or stable place to settle. He says legal and political pressures in both Ukraine and Israel prevent him from returning.

Armenia ultimately refused to arrest him, but Lapshin and his family were forced to endure four hours of distressing uncertainty at the Yerevan police station before his release was formally registered by Armenia’s Prosecutor General’s Office.

This provocation underscored the persistent threats activists face even in countries offering relative safety.

Extradited to Azerbaijan

Just weeks before his arrest in Yerevan, we met with Lapshin in Ottawa to learn about his odyssey, and by extension, the suffering of his family resulting from his work as a travelling journalist.

It’s not the first time Lapshin had been targeted by authoritarians. In 2016, while in Minsk, the capital of Belarus, Lapshin was detained by the authorities at the request of the Azerbaijani government. He was subsequently extradited to Azerbaijan on charges related to his travel in 2012 to the disputed region of Nagorno-Karabakh/Artsakh — an area claimed by both Armenia and Azerbaijan.

The Azerbaijani government accused Lapshin of violating its laws by entering the enclave without permission and promoting its independence. However, at that point Lapshin had never been involved in politics nor called for the region’s independence. The Azerbaijani court dropped this charge, though convicted him of taking an unauthorized journalistic trip.

The story of Lapshin’s arrest and extradition drew widespread condemnation from human rights organizations and various governments, who viewed it as a blatant violation of his rights to freedom of movement and expression.

Lapshin was nevertheless found guilty and sentenced to three years in prison. However, following significant international pressure and diplomatic negotiations, he was pardoned and released in September 2017.

Lapshin’s Azerbaijani ordeal

In his subsequent testimony to the Centre for Truth and Justice, a U.S.-based non-profit organization, Lapshin detailed the severe abuse he endured during his imprisonment in Azerbaijan.

Upon arrival at Kurdakhani prison — known for holding political prisoners — Lapshin was subjected to humiliating strip searches and invasive medical checks. For seven months, he was confined to a small, windowless cell, kept under constant artificial light and allowed only one hour of exercise in a similarly confined yard. His diet was minimal and of poor quality, leading to significant physical and psychological distress.

Lapshin testifies about how he was treated in Azerbaijan. (The Centre for Truth and Justice YouTube channel)

The most harrowing part of his imprisonment came on Sept. 10, 2017, when four masked men brutally assaulted him in his cell. Lapshin described the attack in detail:

“I felt three of them holding my legs and chest while one strangled me. They punched my ribs, my head and my genitals. I lost consciousness within seconds.”

He sustained severe injuries, including broken ribs, a broken wrist and multiple broken teeth. Azerbaijani authorities maintained that he had attempted suicide.

Lapshin’s further testimony about how he was treated in Azerbaijan. (The Centre for Truth and Justice YouTube channel)

The European Court of Human Rights eventually examined his complaints and found a violation of his “right to life.” The United Nations Human Rights Committee found multiple violations of his rights (including freedom from torture) under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

According to Lapshin, Azerbaijan released him not because of the European Court’s decision, but due to his near death following an attempted murder in custody. He believes the president of Azerbaijan decided to release him without formalities to avoid international tension if he’d died in prison.

Broader implications

Lapshin’s recent detention in Armenia is part of a continued pattern of harassment against him as he’s morphed from a travel blogger to a human rights advocate.

Despite the ordeal, Lapshin sees these provocations as an opportunity to create greater public awareness. The media coverage generated from such incidents often works to his advantage, drawing more attention to the plight of political prisoners and the excesses of authoritarian regimes.

Lapshin sees his ordeals as helping to raise public awareness about authoritarians.
(WikiMedia), CC BY

Lapshin’s collaboration with Jivan Avetisyan, a prominent film director focusing on human rights issues, exemplifies his strategic approach to advocacy — turning personal trauma into powerful narratives that reach a global audience.

Such collaborations contribute significantly to keeping human rights abuses in the spotlight.

Activists like Lapshin are crucial figures in the global struggle against authoritarianism. Despite enduring harsh persecution, they persist in their advocacy efforts from the relative safety of democracies, and work to raise awareness among policymakers and the public.

Lapshin’s recent trip to Ottawa is one example of this. He met with Global Affairs Canada officials and presented them with a sanctions list targeting Azerbaijani officials he alleges are responsible for war crimes and abuses, including those involved in his prison mistreatment.

Impact and challenges

Activists like Lapshin employ diverse strategies to advance their causes, such as social media engagement and public mobilization, as well as partnerships with global human rights organizations.

These efforts often result in positive changes, including the release of detained activists and the imposition of sanctions on oppressive governments. Lapshin’s resilience, along with that of notable exiled activists like Chinese-born Chen Guangcheng and Belarus’ Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, demonstrates the power and influence that individuals can wield against repressive regimes from afar.

Activists, in particular those in exile, face numerous challenges, including transnational repression and a lack of resources. Authoritarian regimes employ measures like surveillance, intimidation, physical assaults and even murder to target activists beyond their borders. These activists must also navigate legal, financial and cultural barriers in foreign countries when they seek asylum, find work and try to integrate into new societies, all while continuing their advocacy.

Lapshin’s experiences illustrate these challenges. The ongoing threats and harassment against him continue even today. Nonetheless, his dedication to human rights advocacy remains unwavering.

I am a member of various professional / academic associations and some human rights NGOs including (pro bono) the Canada Committee of Human Rights Watch. None of these would be affected by this article nor would I gain any benefit as a result.

Philip Leech-Ngo does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

– ref. Human rights advocate Alexander Lapshin: No place to go, but still fighting for global freedom – https://theconversation.com/human-rights-advocate-alexander-lapshin-no-place-to-go-but-still-fighting-for-global-freedom-241550

MIL OSI – Global Reports –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI Security: Defense News: Secretary Del Toro As-Written Remarks at the Georgia Tech Research Institute

Source: United States Navy

Introduction/Thank You

Good afternoon, everyone!

It is wonderful to be with you at Georgia Tech Research Institute, the future of engineering, science, and technology.

President Cabrera, thank you for your leadership of the students here at Georgia Tech, the future scientists, engineers, innovators, and problem-solvers of our country.

Dr. Hudgens, thank you for your leadership and vision for the Georgia Tech Research Institute, and all that you are doing to advance our national security interests.

I thank the future Navy and Marine Corps Officers from the NROTC consortium here with us today.

Thank you for answering the call to service—for choosing a path both challenging and difficult. I look forward to you joining our Fleet and Force.

To all of our Georgia Tech faculty and students, distinguished visitors, and guests—welcome, and thank you for your time today.

World Today

As you have read in the news, we face challenges in every corner of the world—from the Indo-Pacific, to Europe, to the Red Sea.

In Europe, we are approaching the third anniversary of Russia’s full-scale and illegal invasion of Ukraine.

Ukraine is fighting not only for their own liberty and freedom—they are fighting to protect democracy in Europe and indeed around the world.

We proudly stand beside them in support for their just and noble cause.

For the first time since World War II, we face a comprehensive maritime power—our pacing challenge—in the Indo-Pacific.

The People’s Republic of China continues to exert its excessive maritime claims through their navy, coast guard, and maritime militia.

In the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, we have been working tirelessly alongside our NATO allies and Middle Eastern partners to protect innocent civilian mariners and commercial shipping from Iranian-aligned Houthi attacks.

Following the October 7th attacks in Israel one year ago, our Navy and Marine Corps were swiftly deployed to the region, forming an integrated force capable of responding to any threat.

Carrier Air Wing Three, our “Battle Axe,” played a pivotal role in protecting civilian mariners, deploying over sixty air-to-air missiles and over 420 air-to-surface weapons.

We mourn the loss of two trailblazing, combat-decorated naval aviators from Carrier Air Wing Three who passed away during a training event last week: Lieutenant Commander Lyndsay “Miley” Evans and Lieutenant Serena “Dug” Wileman.

Their sacrifice reminds us that what we ask of our Sailors and Marines is anything but routine.

And our hearts go out to the families and friends of these brave and selfless warfighters.

The Bataan Amphibious Ready Group, with the embarked 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit, made significant contributions in the region by deterring hostile Houthi attacks and preventing the conflict from escalating throughout the region.

Our warships—including the Carney, Mason, Gravely, Laboon, Eisenhower, and Thomas Hudner—have demonstrated exceptional performance under fire, successfully deterring and defeating missile and drone attacks targeting innocent maritime shipping.

Two of our highly capable destroyers, the USS Cole (DDG 67)—a warship which carries a proud legacy of standing tall to acts of terrorism—and the USS Bulkeley (DDG 84)—which will always have a special place in my naval carer as her first Commanding Officer—aided our Israeli allies in shooting down Iranian ballistic missiles.

I am incredibly proud of the professionalism, dedication, and resilience shown by our Cole and Bulkeley Sailors.

These brave young men and women illustrate the consistent excellence and effectiveness expected of our United States Navy.

Our Navy-Marine Corps Team remains at the center of global and national security—maintaining freedom of the seas, international security, and global stability.

DON Innovation Initiatives

To win the fight of the future, we must embrace and implement emerging technologies.

We stand on the shoulders of giants in innovation.

And delivering technology which changes the very nature of warfighting is in our DNA.

A little over a year ago, I stood in the courtyard of the Pentagon to celebrate the 100-year anniversary of the Naval Research Lab—the place that invented radar, GPS, and the first satellite tracking system—and a place I worked at as a young lieutenant commander.

At that time, I challenged the research, engineering, and technology developers of today to take their place in the company of those innovation giants.

I challenged my team to innovate at the speed of relevance to deliver concepts of operations and capabilities which bolster deterrence and expand our warfighting advantage.

I challenged my Chief of Naval Research to align the Office of Naval Research’s investment in science and technology research—including the research conducted here at Georgia Tech—with each effort aimed at addressing issues we face as a maritime nation.

Within three months of my challenge to the Chief of Naval Research, he delivered.

Our new Naval Science and Technology Strategy now drives our Navy and Marine Corps’ innovation investments in science and technology research during this decisive period.

This strategy is a global call to service for scientists, engineers, inventors, and innovators from academia, industry, and government to work with us in solving naval problems to ensure our freedom and way of life.

And the Georgia Tech Research Institute has answered this call.

During this past fiscal year, ONR completed 22 grants here at GTRI worth $23.6 million, and Georgia Tech currently has 72 active contracts and grants with the Navy worth $216 million.

These ONR grants support research and development of technology in cyber, AI and autonomy, materials and electronics, as well as ocean, atmosphere, and space—focus areas in our Naval S&T Strategy.

Service to our national security is indeed the engine of GTRI.

Another critical investment we have made as a result of our strategic change is the establishment of the Naval Innovation Center at the Naval Postgraduate School.

The NIC will enhance and accelerate the innovation process at NPS by driving “ideas to impact,” bringing research concepts out of the lab and into the field faster by empowering students and partners across the entire Naval Research and Development Establishment to work with the Naval innovation ecosystem and industry—in a whole-of-Navy approach—to speed the delivery of warfighting advantages to our Naval forces.

Furthermore, we are supporting the construction of a purposefully-designed facility to house the NIC at the Naval Postgraduate School, providing a space for collaboration, defense-focused experimentation, and demonstration of operational use cases to ensure the right technology is evolving.

S&T Board One Year Update

Last fall, I also announced the establishment of the Department of the Navy’s Science and Technology Board, with the intent that the board provide independent advice and counsel to the Department on matters and policies relating to scientific, technical, manufacturing, acquisition, logistics, medicine, and business management functions.

Our Science and Technology Board just completed its inaugural year.

Under the expert leadership of former Secretary of the Navy Richard Danzig, this impressive group of thought leaders with expertise in government, industry, and academia has completed an ambitious research agenda to identify new technologies for rapid adoption.

Since I signed out the Board’s initial tasking in February, they have achieved the impressive feat of undertaking and concluding six studies, delivering near term, practical recommendations, that the Department of the Navy can quickly implement.

I have accepted recommendation reports from the Board and issued implementation guidance related to the path forward on unmanned systems, improving sailor physical and mental health, mission assurance of digital infrastructure, and capitalizing on opportunities for additive manufacturing.

In fact, Georgia Tech’s own Chief Manufacturing Officer and Manufacturing Institute Executive Director Dr. Tom Kurfess, lent his breadth and depth of expertise in leading a study on additive manufacturing which I accepted last month.

It is a testament to the Board’s energy and dedication, that it is already embarking on additional projects to keep our Navy at the leading edge of technology and innovation.

Innovation Closer to the Fight

Similar to the focus of our S&T Board of Advisors, who are looking at today’s problems and ways that technology can provide new ways to tackle our operational challenges, I chartered a Disruptive Capabilities Office last January to look at already-available or emerging technology to address the Fleet’s capability gaps.

And they have delivered.

DCO identified meaty organizational, doctrinal, and technological advancements that the Navy has implemented, within six months, to close an emergent warfighting gap in Counter-UAS base defense for the CENTCOM area of responsibility.

DCO is also leading an effort to combine innovative commercial space-enabled capabilities in coordination with the National Reconnaissance Office, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, U.S. Coast Guard, and other governmental agencies to enhance Maritime Domain Awareness for the Department of the Navy along with our allies and partners.

Replicator and Capability-Based Delivery

My call to innovation has also put more “ready players on the field” as we look to grow force structure in the near term.

In the last twelve months, I have fielded varying sizes of unmanned surface vessels into the hands of our operators for use in experimentation, CONOP development, and for operation.

We are expanding our systems to include not only homogeneous but also heterogeneous collaborative autonomy.

I am extremely proud of my team’s leadership in this domain, to include our leadership in identifying and quickly procuring the capabilities that support Deputy Secretary of Defense Hicks’s “Replicator” initiative.

It is no accident that four of the five selected “Replicator” systems came out of the Department of the Navy’s innovation ecosystem.

And over the last year, our Department has expended more missiles than we have since the Second World War.

My Program Executive Office for Integrated Warfare Systems has been at the forefront of this fight.

Last year, I challenged that office to operate and field its systems as a “portfolio of capabilities”—and they have delivered.

The IWS RCO has been working hand-in-hand with our operators in the fight in the Red Sea to deliver innovations, in near-real time, as we continue to innovate—at speed.

Call to Action/Closing

I am extremely proud of everything our department has accomplished over the last three years, and I am excited for our Navy-Marine Corps team as we chart a course for the future—a future that will require us to respond and adapt to whatever geopolitical challenges our Nation may face.

To those Georgia Tech, Spellman, and Morehouse College students who are not affiliated with the NROTC program—if anything that I said today interests you, I encourage you to speak with me or a member of my staff to learn more about how you can join our team in the Navy or Marine Corps.

Service in the Navy and Marine Corps is more than just a job—it represents a chance to serve and become something much bigger than yourself.

And the Department of the Navy also provides numerous opportunities for public service beyond serving in uniform—we need engineers, scientists, and analysts in our Department.

As our Department continues to re-imagine and refocus our innovation efforts, I encourage all of you—our nation’s scientists, engineers, researchers, and inventors—to join us.

No matter how you serve, you’ll be part of a team working together toward a shared goal.

We are indeed in an innovation race—and it is one we must win.

Innovation must permeate every aspect of our Department’s approach to deliver technologies and capabilities at a speed and scale necessary for our Navy and Marine Corps to confront the challenges of today and the future.

Thank you all for your commitment to the Department of the Navy, the maritime services, and indeed our Nation.

May God continue to bless our Sailors, Marines, Civilians, and their families stationed around the globe with fair winds and following seas.

MIL Security OSI –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI USA: ICYMI: US Navy: Projecting Strength and Building the Fleet of Tomorrow

US Senate News:

Source: United States Senator for South Carolina Lindsey Graham

US Navy: Projecting Strength and Building the Fleet of Tomorrow

By Senator Lindsey Graham and Morgan Ortagus

Fox News

October 23, 2024

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/us-navy-projecting-strength-and-building-fleet-tomorrow

It’s time for all Americans to grasp a hard truth: in a world that may be on the brink of World War III, our military budgets are inconsistent with the threats we face. This is especially the case with the budget of the Department of the Navy.

The bad news: the current Navy budget will not make a stronger military or a larger U.S. fleet a reality. The good news: through American innovation and more agile products, we can build a bigger and more efficient Navy.

However, President Biden’s proposed FY2025 budget of $257.6 billion for the Department of the Navy is well below inflation and does not provide for a more lethal Navy.

As both President Biden and President Trump certified, the most direct challenge facing the U.S. Navy today is from the People’s Republic of China. Therefore, strong investments must be made now to ensure the Navy, and most importantly the United States, can meet this threat head-on.

It comes as no shock to the reader that America and its allies and partners are facing an unprecedented deluge of maritime threats by the People’s Republic of China. The Chinese Navy alone has provoked a U.S. destroyer in the Taiwan Strait with dangerous maneuvers, harassed Taiwan with aggressive military exercises, entered America’s Exclusive Economic Zone in the Bering Sea, developed a jam-resistant submarine torpedo, and injured several Filipino sailors at and around Second Thomas Shoal.

These developments incrementally set the conditions for a direct conflict on the open seas. Meanwhile, Washington has been lulled into complacency by decades of maritime supremacy. Most concerning, the United States lacks the political resolve to shed the Navy’s Soviet-era mentality and adapt to the new era of great power competition.

To meet the moment’s maritime threats, America must choose between tough and tougher: make significant investments in our fleet or face the costs of inaction.

Section One: Expanding U.S. Shipbuilding Capacity and Cooperation with Allies

Our shipbuilding industrial base is grappling with significant delays and challenges, affecting major programs like the Columbia-class submarines, Constellation-class frigates, and Ford-class carriers. These delays are not only impacting the procurement of new ships, they are also impacting the ability to maintain the current fleet.

A great first step to combating the maritime threats our nation faces is to expand the physical footprint of the U.S. shipbuilding industry.

The U.S. shipbuilding industry is first in its class and the men and women that come to work every day in our nation’s shipyards build the world’s most lethal and capable warships. In states like South Carolina, there are a wealth of maritime industry suppliers and shipbuilders diligently producing the necessary components to construct our nation’s ships.

But that alone is not enough. China’s Bohai Shipyard boasts an annual capacity exceeding the total number of ships our Navy has launched since 2014.

In addition, China is rapidly expanding its existing shipyards and according to experts “has been investing so much in shipbuilding over the past 18 years that it can now build more ships in a month than the United States can in a year.”

By comparison, America only has four public shipyards and these yards focus on maintenance of submarines and aircraft carriers and not the construction of new vessels.

The Department of the Navy should look at states like South Carolina to build new shipyards to maximize the U.S. shipbuilding capacity and our maritime industry.

In addition, the Navy must expand maintenance capacity here in the states as well as in the Pacific. The U.S. Navy has already decided to augment its capacity by placing a submarine maintenance facility in Guam. This should be replicated for other vessels elsewhere.

It is clear that the need for more shipbuilding capacity is great and immediate. Investing here at home will certainly help address the need. At the same time, our nation should also not discount opportunities to work with others when the opportunity presents itself.

The U.S. Navy cannot afford to leave any stone unturned when thinking of innovative ways to grow the fleet as quickly as possible.

Section Two: Fleet Requirements and Capabilities

A fundamental step toward a 21st-century U.S. Navy is improving both the size and modernity of our existing fleet. The fleet currently consists of carriers, surface combatants, submarines, amphibious warships, combat logistics ships, fleet support vessels and mine warfare assets.

Yet this fleet is hardly agile or scalable enough to meet a Chinese maritime threat that includes drones, hypersonic missiles and other high-tech tools of warcraft.

Persistent gaps also remain in amphibious warfare and in contested logistics. Amphibious combat vehicles, landing vessels, and light warships are all needed in higher quantities for rapid and effective landings.

Unmanned and underwater systems are especially relevant to modern naval operations. Often at a fraction of the cost of manned vessels, these vessels – both large and small – perform intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance missions, logistics and strike operations.

They also relieve pressure on our high-demand, low-density assets while augmenting the fleet. The proof is in their success in Ukraine, where naval drones have successfully countered Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, forcing them into safe harbors and destroying dozens of Russian vessels.

In addition to their combat roles, unmanned systems are revolutionizing naval logistics. Unmanned logistics platforms can autonomously deliver supplies, ammunition, and fuel to forward-deployed forces, significantly extending the operational reach of our fleet.

These systems reduce the need for manned resupply missions, which are often vulnerable to enemy attacks, thereby enhancing the safety and efficiency of our operations. By integrating unmanned logistics into our naval strategy, we can maintain sustained operations in contested environments, ensuring our forces remain equipped and ready for extended engagements.

A possible way to advance the construction of these unmanned vessels is through an international partnership. Such a partnership could be modeled after the trilateral security partnership between the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia (AUKUS) for submarine production in Australia. An AUKUS-like agreement for unmanned systems could create a new pathway for faster construction of these unmanned platforms and increase the integration between partners.

China’s naval power is growing at an alarming rate, with close to 400 ships currently in service and projections of 435 by 2030. The impact of this expansion is worsened by our diminishing technology gap, as China advances its naval technology while the U.S. Navy struggles to build ships.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy’s latest shipbuilding assessment calls for 381 battle force ships (carriers, destroyers, amphibious ships, submarines, etc.) and 134 unmanned vehicles, totaling 515 vessels.

While it is great to have a roadmap, the U.S. Navy’s own shipbuilding plan projects that we would not reach 381 battle force ships until 2043 under the best scenario. This delay poses an unacceptable risk to our national security and could force our sailors into a fight they are underequipped to win.

To avoid that scenario and reduce the exposure of manned ships to enemy attacks, we must expedite shipbuilding with a focus on unmanned surface and subsurface systems that are affordable and quick to produce. America does not have to win a shipbuilding foot race, but we must strategically invest in both the capabilities and capacities to counter China’s growing maritime capabilities and protect our interests.

Section Three: Funding the Department of the Navy

The U.S. military budget is woefully underfunded for the threats our nation faces today. The U.S. is on target to spend only 3.1% of total GDP on defense in Fiscal Year 2025 and that percentage is projected to fall to a paltry 2.4% in 2034 under the Biden-Harris budget plan.

Budgetary “business as usual” will only widen the gap between U.S. and Chinese naval capabilities. With China’s defense budget growing in both size and sophistication, it is imperative the United States make greater, and smarter, investments of our own.

Increasing funding for the Navy’s ship procurement, known as the Shipbuilding and Conversion account, alone will not be enough. In order to address the shipbuilding problem, Congress should consider a comprehensive approach that includes strong and consistent funding across procurement, operations and maintenance, research and development, personnel and military construction accounts.

In order to do this, Congress will need to think outside the box as the current budgetary restraints limit the needed investments. Congress should form a “Fleet Investment Fund” – codifying the Navy’s entire budget growth at least 5% above inflation and more than the department’s topline request – covering all aspects of naval development and readiness.

Most importantly, this account should not be subject to any caps or restrictions within the president’s budget request to Congress each fiscal year. The formation of this account must be seen as a national imperative.

Conclusion

There is no doubt that the costs of these investments are great and will require tradeoffs and significant political capital, but the costs of inaction will be far greater. History demonstrates that adversaries are emboldened by America’s hesitation and deterred by its resolve. History proves that the U.S. Navy can adapt to evolving defense needs.

Since 1945, America has served as the global guarantor of open seas and freedom of navigation in contested waterways and critical trade routes. President Theodore Roosevelt stated before Congress in 1902 that “a good Navy is not a provocation to war. It is the surest guaranty of peace.”

Morgan Ortagus is the founder of Polaris National Security and formerly served as the spokesperson for the U.S. State Department under President Trump.

Republican Lindsey Graham represents South Carolina in the United States Senate.

MIL OSI USA News –

January 25, 2025

MIL-OSI: Northrim BanCorp Earns $8.8 Million, or $1.57 Per Diluted Share, in Third Quarter 2024

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

ANCHORAGE, Alaska, Oct. 23, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Northrim BanCorp, Inc. (NASDAQ:NRIM) (“Northrim” or the “Company”) today reported net income of $8.8 million, or $1.57 per diluted share, in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $9.0 million, or $1.62 per diluted share, in the second quarter of 2024, and $8.4 million, or $1.48 per diluted share, in the third quarter a year ago. The increase in third quarter 2024 profitability as compared to the third quarter a year ago was primarily the result of an increase in mortgage banking income and higher net interest income, which was only partially offset by higher other operating expenses and a higher provision for credit losses.

Dividends per share in the third quarter of 2024 increased to $0.62 per share as compared to $0.61 per share in the second quarter of 2024 and $0.60 per share in the third quarter of 2023.

“We had strong deposit-funded loan growth in the third quarter,” said Mike Huston, Northrim’s President and Chief Executive Officer. “Deposits and loans both increased 7% from the end of the second quarter. Our deposit market share increased by 4% in the past year and by 42% in the past five years as our investments in people, expanded branch network, and differentiated service continue to attract new customers and strengthen existing relationships.”

Third Quarter 2024 Highlights:

Net interest income in the third quarter of 2024 increased 7% to $28.8 million compared to $27.1 million in the second quarter of 2024 and increased 9% compared to $26.4 million in the third quarter of 2023.

Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”)^* was 4.35% for the third quarter of 2024, up 5-basis points from the second quarter of 2024 and up 14-basis points from the third quarter a year ago.

Return on average assets (“ROAA”) was 1.22% and return on average equity (“ROAE”) was 13.69% for the third quarter of 2024.

Portfolio loans were $2.01 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from the preceding quarter and up 17% from a year ago, primarily due to new customer relationships, expanding market share, and to retaining certain mortgages originated by Residential Mortgage, a subsidiary of Northrim Bank (the “Bank”), in the loan portfolio.

Total deposits were $2.63 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from the preceding quarter, and up 8% from $2.43 billion a year ago. Non-interest bearing demand deposits increased 8% from the preceding quarter and decreased slightly year-over-year to $763.6 million at September 30, 2024 and represent 29% of total deposits.

The average cost of interest-bearing deposits was 2.24% at September 30, 2024, up from 2.21% at June 30, 2024 and 1.75% at September 30, 2023.

Mortgage loan originations increased to $248.0 million in the third quarter of 2024, up from $181.5 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $153.4 million in the third quarter a year ago. Mortgage loans funded for sale were $210.0 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $152.3 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $131.9 million in the third quarter of 2023.

Financial Highlights	Three Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	September 30, 2024			June 30, 2024		March 31, 2024					December 31, 2023			September 30, 2023
Total assets	$2,963,392			$2,821,668		$2,759,560					$2,807,497			$2,790,189
Total portfolio loans	$2,007,565			$1,875,907		$1,811,135					$1,789,497			$1,720,091
Total deposits	$2,625,567			$2,463,806		$2,434,083					$2,485,055			$2,427,930
Total shareholders’ equity	$260,050			$247,200		$239,327					$234,718			$225,259
Net income	$8,825			$9,020		$8,199					$6,613			$8,374
Diluted earnings per share	$1.57			$1.62		$1.48					$1.19			$1.48
Return on average assets		1.22	%		1.31		%		1.19	%		0.93	%		1.22	%
Return on average shareholders’ equity		13.69	%		14.84		%		13.84	%		11.36	%		14.67	%
NIM		4.29	%		4.24		%		4.16	%		4.06	%		4.15	%
NIMTE^*		4.35	%		4.30		%		4.22	%		4.12	%		4.21	%
Efficiency ratio		66.11	%		68.78		%		68.93	%		72.21	%		66.64	%
Total shareholders’ equity/total assets		8.78	%		8.76		%		8.67	%		8.36	%		8.07	%
Tangible common equity/tangible assets^*		8.28	%		8.24		%		8.14	%		7.84	%		7.54	%
Book value per share	$47.27			$44.93				$43.52			$42.57			$40.60
Tangible book value per share^*	$44.36			$42.03				$40.61			$39.68			$37.72
Dividends per share	$0.62			$0.61				$0.61			$0.60			$0.60
Common stock outstanding		5,501,943			5,501,562				5,499,578			5,513,459			5,548,436

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

Alaska Economic Update
(Note: sources for information included in this section are included on page 12.)

The Alaska Department of Labor (“DOL”) has reported Alaska’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in August of 2024 was 4.6% compared to the U.S. rate of 4.2%. The total number of payroll jobs in Alaska, not including uniformed military, increased 1.8% or 6,400 jobs between August of 2023 and August of 2024.

According to the DOL, the Construction sector had the largest growth in new jobs through August compared to the prior year. The Construction sector added 2,600 positions for a year over year growth rate of 12.9% between August of 2023 and 2024. The larger Health Care sector grew by 2,000 jobs for an annual growth rate of 4.9% over the same period. The Oil & Gas sector increased by 6.5% or 500 new direct jobs. Professional and Business Services added 1,000 jobs year over year through August of 2024, up 3.4%. The Government sector grew by 700 jobs for 0.9% growth, adding 500 Federal jobs and 200 Local government positions in Alaska. The only sectors to decline between August 2023 and August 2024 were Manufacturing (primarily seafood processing) shrinking 1,300 positions and Information, down 200 jobs.

Alaska’s Gross State Product (“GSP”) in the second quarter of 2024, was estimated to be $69.8 billion in current dollars, according to the Federal Bureau of Economic Analysis (“BEA”). Alaska’s inflation adjusted “real” GSP increased 6.5% in 2023, placing Alaska fifth best of all 50 states. However, in the second quarter of 2024 Alaska decreased at an annualized rate of 1.1%, compared to the average U.S. growth rate of 3%. Alaska’s real GSP decline in the second quarter of 2024 was primarily caused by a slowdown in the Mining, Oil & Gas; and Transportation and Warehousing sectors.

The BEA also calculated Alaska’s seasonally adjusted personal income at $55.4 billion in the second quarter of 2024. This was an annualized improvement of 4% for Alaska, compared to the national average of 5.3%.

The monthly average price of Alaska North Slope (“ANS”) crude oil was at an annual high of $89.05 in April of 2024 and averaged $74.06 in September of this year. The Alaska Department of Revenue (“DOR”) calculated ANS crude oil production was 479 thousand barrels per day (“bpd”) in Alaska’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2023 and declined to 461 thousand bpd in Alaska’s fiscal year 2024. Starting in fiscal year 2025 it is projected to grow to 477 thousand bpd. The DOR projects the number to grow rapidly and reach 640 thousand bpd by fiscal year 2033. This is primarily a result of new production coming on-line in and around the NPR-A region west of Prudhoe Bay.

According to the Alaska Multiple Listing Services, the average sales price of a single family home in Anchorage rose 5.2% in 2023 to $480,207, following a 7.6% increase in 2022. This was the sixth consecutive year of price increases. In the first nine months of 2024 the average price continues to increase 6.8% to an average sale of
$512,815.

The average sales price for single family homes in the Matanuska Susitna Borough rose 4% in 2023 to $397,589, after increasing 9.9% in 2022. This continues a trend of average price increases for more than a decade in the region. In the first nine months of 2024 the average sales price increased 4.6% in the Matanuska Susitna Borough to $415,709. These two markets represent where the vast majority of the Bank’s residential lending activity occurs.

The Alaska Multiple Listing Services reported a 1.2% decrease in the number of units sold in Anchorage when comparing January to September of 2023 and 2024. There were 5.4% less homes sold in the Matanuska Susitna Borough for the same nine month time period in 2024 compared to the prior year.

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

Review of Income Statement

Consolidated Income Statement

In the third quarter of 2024, Northrim generated a ROAA of 1.22% and a ROAE of 13.69%, compared to 1.31% and 14.84%, respectively, in the second quarter of 2024 and 1.22% and 14.67%, respectively, in the third quarter a year ago.

Net Interest Income/Net Interest Margin

Net interest income increased 7% to $28.8 million in the third quarter of 2024 compared to $27.1 million in the second quarter of 2024 and increased 9% compared to $26.4 million in the third quarter of 2023. Interest expense on deposits increased to $10.1 million in the third quarter of 2024 compared to $9.5 million in the second quarter and $7.1 million in the third quarter of 2023.

NIMTE^* was 4.35% in the third quarter of 2024 up from 4.30% in the preceding quarter and 4.21% in the third quarter a year ago. NIMTE^* increased 14 basis points in the third quarter of 2024 compared to the third quarter of 2023 primarily due to a favorable change in the mix of earning-assets towards higher loan balances as a percentage of total earning-assets, higher earning-assets, and higher yields on those assets which were only partially offset by an increase in costs on interest-bearing deposits. The weighted average interest rate for new loans booked in the third quarter of 2024 was 7.24% compared to 7.90% in the second quarter of 2024 and 7.44% in the third quarter a year ago. The yield on the investment portfolio in the third quarter of 2024 decreased slightly to 2.80% from 2.82% in the second quarter of 2024 and increased from 2.43% in the third quarter of 2023. “We continue to see the benefit of new loan volume and repricing outweigh the modest increase in deposit costs in the third quarter of 2024,” said Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer. Northrim’s NIMTE^* continues to remain above the peer average of 3.13% posted by the S&P U.S. Small Cap Bank Index with total market capitalization between $250 million and $1 billion as of June 30, 2024.

Provision for Credit Losses

Northrim recorded a provision for credit losses of $2.1 million in the third quarter of 2024, which was comprised of of a $325,000 provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments and a provision for credit losses on loans of $1.7 million. The provision for unfunded commitments was primarily due to an increase in unfunded commitments, as well as an increase in estimated loss rates due to changes in mix and management’s assessment of economic conditions. The increase to the provision for credit losses on loans was primarily a result of loan growth, as well as an increase in the provision for loans individually evaluated and an increase in estimated loss rates. This compares to a benefit to the provision for credit losses of $120,000 in the second quarter of 2024, and provision for credit losses of $1.2 million in the third quarter a year ago.

Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, increased slightly during the quarter to $5.0 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $4.8 million at June 30, 2024, and decreased from $5.1 million at September 30, 2023.

The allowance for credit losses on loans was 394% of nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, at the end of the third quarter of 2024, compared to 365% three months earlier and 326% a year ago.

Other Operating Income

In addition to home mortgage lending, Northrim has interests in other businesses that complement its core community banking activities, including purchased receivables financing and wealth management. Other operating income contributed $11.6 million, or 29% of total third quarter 2024 revenues, as compared to $9.6 million, or 26% of revenues in the second quarter of 2024, and $8.0 million, or 23% of revenues in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating income in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the preceding quarter and the third quarter of 2023 was primarily the result of an increase in mortgage banking income due to a higher volume of mortgage activity. See further discussion regarding mortgage activity during the second quarter contained under “Home Mortgage Lending” below. The fair market value of marketable equity securities increased $576,000 in the third quarter of 2024 compared to a decrease of $60,000 in the prior quarter and an increase of $12,000 in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating income in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter a year ago was due primarily to an increase in mortgage banking income as a result of higher volume of mortgage activity due to our expansion in Arizona, Colorado, and the Pacific Northwest markets, as well as an increase in fair value of marketable equity securities.

Other Operating Expenses

Operating expenses were $26.7 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $25.2 million in the second quarter of 2024, and $22.9 million in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating expenses in the third quarter of 2024 compared to the second quarter of 2024 was primarily due to an increase in salaries and other personnel expense, including $653,000 in mortgage commissions expense due to higher mortgage volume and a $979,000 increase in profit share expense, which was partially offset by a $836,000 decrease in medical claims expense. The increase in other operating expenses in the third quarter of 2024 compared to a year ago was primarily due to an increase in salaries and other personnel expense, as well as an increase in OREO expense due to a gain on sale recorded in the third quarter of 2023 for proceeds received related to a government guarantee on an OREO property sold in December 2022.

Income Tax Provision

In the third quarter of 2024, Northrim recorded $2.8 million in state and federal income tax expense for an effective tax rate of 24.2%, compared to $2.5 million, or 21.9% in the second quarter of 2024 and $1.9 million, or 18.4% in the third quarter a year ago. The increase in the tax rate in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter of 2023 is primarily the result of a decrease in tax credits and tax exempt interest income as a percentage of pre-tax income in 2024 as compared to 2023.

Community Banking

In the most recent deposit market share data from the FDIC, Northrim’s deposit market share in Alaska increased to 15.66% of Alaska’s total deposits as of June 30, 2024 compared to 15.04% of Alaska’s total deposits as of June 30, 2023. This represents 62 basis points of growth in market share percentage for Northrim during that period while, according to the FDIC, the total deposits in Alaska were up 2.3% during the same period. Northrim opened a branch in Kodiak in the first quarter of 2023, a loan production office in Homer in the second quarter of 2023, a permanent branch in Nome in the third quarter of 2023, and a branch in Homer in the first quarter of 2024. See below for further discussion regarding the Company’s deposit movement for the quarter.

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

Net interest income in the Community Banking segment totaled $25.9 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $24.3 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $24.1 million in the third quarter of 2023. Net interest income increased 7% in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the second quarter of 2024 mostly due to higher interest income on loans. This increase was only partially offset by higher interest expense on deposits and borrowings and lower interest income on portfolio investments.

Other operating expenses in the Community Banking segment totaled $19.1 million in the third quarter of 2024, up $588,000 or 3% from $18.5 million in the second quarter of 2024, and up $2.1 million or 13% from $16.9 million in the third quarter a year ago. The increase in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the prior quarter was mostly due to an increases in salaries and other personnel expense, marketing expense, and professional fees. The increase in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter a year ago was primarily due to an increase in OREO expense due to a gain on sale recorded in the third quarter of 2023 for proceeds received related to a government guarantee on an OREO property sold in December 2022, as well as increases in salaries and other personnel expense and marketing expense.

The following tables provide highlights of the Community Banking segment of Northrim:

	Three Months Ended
	September		March 31,		December		September
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	30, 2024	June 30, 2024		2024		31, 2023		30, 2023
Net interest income	$25,901	$24,278	$24,215		$24,456		$24,050
(Benefit) provision for credit losses	1,492	(184)		197		885		1,190
Other operating income	4,540	3,693		3,813		4,048		3,597
Other operating expense	19,085	18,497		17,552		18,516		16,946
Income before provision for income taxes	9,864	9,658		10,279		9,103		9,511
Provision for income taxes	2,316	2,004		2,242		1,941		1,709
Net income	$7,548	$7,654	$8,037		$7,162		$7,802
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted	5,583,055	5,558,580		5,554,930		5,578,491		5,624,906
Diluted earnings per share	$1.34	$1.37	$1.45		$1.29		$1.39

	Year-to-date
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	September 30, 2024		September 30, 2023
Net interest income	$	74,394	$	71,502
Provision for credit losses		1,505		2,957
Other operating income		12,046		9,564
Other operating expense		55,134		52,168
Income before provision for income taxes		29,801		25,941
Provision for income taxes		6,562		5,216
Net income Community Banking segment	$	23,239	$	20,725
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted		5,574,135		5,688,687
Diluted earnings per share	$	4.16	$	3.64

Home Mortgage Lending

During the third quarter of 2024, mortgage loans funded for sale increased to $210.0 million, compared to $152.3 million in the second quarter of 2024, and $131.9 million in the third quarter of 2023.

During the third quarter of 2024, the Bank purchased Residential Mortgage-originated loans of $38.1 million of which roughly two-thirds were jumbos and one-third were mortgages for second homes, with a weighted average interest rate of 6.59%, up from $29.2 million and 6.82% in the second quarter of 2024, and up from $21.6 million and 6.60% in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in mortgage loans funded for investment has increased net interest income in the Home Mortgage Lending segment. Net interest income contributed $2.9 million to total revenue in the third quarter of 2024, up from $2.8 million in the prior quarter, and up from $2.3 million in the third quarter a year ago.

The Arizona, Colorado, and the Pacific Northwest mortgage expansion markets were responsible for 20% of Residential Mortgage’s $248 million total production in the third quarter of 2024, 22% of $182 million total production in the second quarter of 2024, and 8% of $153 million total production in the third quarter of 2023.

The net change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights decreased mortgage banking income by $968,000 during the third quarter of 2024 compared to a decrease of $81,000 for the second quarter of 2024 and a decrease of $310,000 for the third quarter of 2023. Mortgage servicing revenue increased to $2.6 million in the third quarter of 2024 from $2.2 million in the prior quarter and from $2.4 million in the third quarter of 2023 due to an increase in production of Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) mortgages, which contribute to servicing revenues at origination. In the third quarter of 2024, the Company’s servicing portfolio increased $64.8 million, which included $87.3 million in new mortgage loans, net of amortization and payoffs of $22.5 million as compared to a net increase of $41.8 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $58.2 million in the third quarter of 2023.

As of September 30, 2024, Northrim serviced 4,187 loans in its $1.17 billion home-mortgage-servicing portfolio, a 6% increase compared to the $1.10 billion serviced as of the end of the second quarter of 2024, and a 19% increase from the $982.1 million serviced a year ago.

The following tables provide highlights of the Home Mortgage Lending segment of Northrim:

	Three Months Ended
		September						March 31,			December			September
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)		30, 2024		June 30, 2024				2024			31, 2023			30, 2023
Mortgage commitments	$77,591			$88,006			$56,208			$22,926			$50,128
Mortgage loans funded for sale	$209,960			$152,339			$84,324			$79,742			$131,863
Mortgage loans funded for investment		38,087			29,175			17,403			27,114			21,585
Total mortgage loans funded	$248,047			$181,514			$101,727			$106,856			$153,448
Mortgage loan refinances to total fundings		6	%		6	%		4	%		4	%		5	%
Mortgage loans serviced for others	$1,166,585			$1,101,800			$1,060,007			$1,044,516			$982,098
Net realized gains on mortgage loans sold	$5,079			$3,188			$1,980			$1,462			$2,491
Change in fair value of mortgage loan commitments, net		60			391			386			(296	)		(289	)
Total production revenue		5,139			3,579			2,366			1,166			2,202
Mortgage servicing revenue		2,583			2,164			1,561			2,180			2,396
Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights:
Due to changes in model inputs of assumptions¹		(566	)		239			289			(707	)		—
Other²		(402	)		(320	)		(314	)		(301	)		(310	)
Total mortgage servicing revenue, net		1,615			2,083			1,536			1,172			2,086
Other mortgage banking revenue		293			222			129			99			117
Total mortgage banking income	$7,047			$5,884			$4,031			$2,437			$4,405

Net interest income	$2,941			$2,775			$2,232			$2,276			$2,300
Provision (benefit) for credit losses		571			64			(48	)		—			—
Mortgage banking income		7,047			5,884			4,031			2,437			4,405
Other operating expense		7,643			6,697			6,086			5,477			5,951
Income (loss) before provision for income taxes		1,774			1,898			225			(764	)		754
Provision (benefit) for income taxes		497			532			63			(215	)		182
Net income (loss)	$1,277			$1,366			$162				($549	)	$572
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted		5,583,055			5,558,580			5,554,930			5,578,491			5,624,906
Diluted earnings per share	$0.23			$0.25			$0.03				($0.10	)	$0.09

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

	Year-to-date
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	September 30, 2024			September 30, 2023
Mortgage loans funded for sale	$446,623			$296,412
Mortgage loans funded for investment		84,665			119,144
Total mortgage loans funded	$531,288			$415,556
Mortgage loan refinances to total fundings		6	%		5	%

Net realized gains on mortgage loans sold	$10,247			$6,366
Change in fair value of mortgage loan commitments, net		837			194
Total production revenue		11,084			6,560
Mortgage servicing revenue		6,308			5,188
Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights:
Due to changes in model inputs of assumptions¹		(38	)		(215	)
Other²		(1,036	)		(1,464	)
Total mortgage servicing revenue, net		5,234			3,509
Other mortgage banking revenue		644			257
Total mortgage banking income	$16,962			$10,326
Net interest income	$7,948			$5,022
Provision for credit losses		587			—
Mortgage banking income		16,962			10,326
Other operating expense		20,426			18,020
Income before provision for income taxes		3,897			(2,672	)
Provision for income taxes		1,092			(728	)
Net (loss) income Home Mortgage Lending segment	$2,805				($1,944	)
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted		5,574,135			5,688,687
Diluted (loss) earnings per share	$0.51				($0.34	)

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

Balance Sheet Review

Northrim’s total assets were $2.96 billion at September 30, 2024, up 5% from the preceding quarter and up 6% from a year ago. Northrim’s loan-to-deposit ratio was 76% at September 30, 2024, consistent with 76% at June 30, 2024,
and up from 71% at September 30, 2023.

At September 30, 2024, our liquid assets, investments, and loans maturing within one year were $1.07 billion and our funds available for borrowing under our existing lines of credit were $641.7 million. Given these sources of liquidity and our expectations for customer demands for cash and for our operating cash needs, we believe our sources of liquidity to be sufficient for the foreseeable future.

Average interest-earning assets were $2.67 billion in the third quarter of 2024, up 4% from $2.57 billion in the second quarter of 2024 and up 6% from $2.52 billion in the third quarter a year ago. The average yield on interest- earning assets was 5.92% in the third quarter of 2024, up from 5.83% in the preceding quarter and 5.48% in the third quarter a year ago.

Average investment securities decreased to $619.0 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $640.0 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $715.8 million in the third quarter a year ago. The average net tax equivalent yield on the securities portfolio was 2.80% for the third quarter of 2024, down from 2.82% in the preceding quarter

and up from 2.43% in the year ago quarter. The average estimated duration of the investment portfolio at September 30, 2024, was approximately 2.3 years compared to approximately 2.8 years at September 30, 2023. As of September 30, 2024, $105.1 million of available for sale securities with a weighted average yield of 0.61% are scheduled to mature in the next six months, $73.0 million with a weighted average yield of 2.48% are scheduled to mature in six months to one year, and $177.8 million with a weighted average yield of 1.31% are scheduled to mature in the following year, representing a total of $355.9 million or 13% of earning assets that are scheduled to mature in the next 24 months.

Total unrealized losses, net of tax, on available for sale securities decreased by $7.6 million in the third quarter of 2024 resulting in total unrealized loss, net of tax, of $7.6 million compared to $15.2 million at June 30, 2024, and $26.5 million a year ago. The average maturity of the available for sale securities with the majority of the unrealized loss is 1.3 years. Total unrealized losses on held to maturity securities were $2.1 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $3.0 million at June 30, 2024, and $4.5 million a year ago.

Average interest bearing deposits in other banks increased to $28.4 million in the third quarter of 2024 from $17.4 million in the second quarter of 2024 and decreased from $42.3 million in the third quarter of 2023, as deposit balances increased and cash was used to fund the loan growth and provide liquidity.

Portfolio loans were $2.01 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from the preceding quarter and up 17% from a year ago. Portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, were $1.76 billion at September 30, 2024, up $105.2 million or 6% from the preceding quarter and up 14% from a year ago. This increase was diversified throughout the loan portfolio including commercial real estate nonowner-occupied and multi-family loans increasing by $33.2 million, construction loans increasing by $31.4 million, and commercial real estate owner-occupied loans increasing $29.0 million from the preceding quarter. Average portfolio loans in the third quarter of 2024 were $1.93 billion, which was up 5% from the preceding quarter and up 14% from a year ago. Yields on average portfolio loans in the third quarter of 2024 increased to 6.91% from 6.87% in the second quarter and from 6.61% in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in the yield on portfolio loans in the third quarter of 2024 compared to the second quarter of 2024 and the third quarter a year ago is primarily due to loan repricing due to the increases in interest rates and new loans booked at higher rates due to changes in the interest rate environment. The yield on new portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, was 7.43% in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to 8.26% in the second quarter of 2024 and 7.75% in the third quarter of 2023. The drop in yields on new loan production was largely related to the large volume of new commercial real estate versus commercial loans, as noted above, as well as slightly better credit quality of the loans originated in the third quarter of 2024.

Alaskans continue to account for substantially all of Northrim’s deposit base. Total deposits were $2.63 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from $2.46 billion at June 30, 2024, and up 8% from $2.43 billion a year ago. “The increase in deposits in the third quarter of 2024 were consistent with our customers’ business cycles and a result of continued acquisition of new relationships,” said Ballard. At September 30, 2024, 73% of total deposits were held in business accounts and 27% of deposit balances were held in consumer accounts. Northrim had approximately 34,000 deposit customers with an average balance of $48,000 as of September 30, 2024. Northrim had 22 customers with balances over $10 million as of September 30, 2024, which accounted for $978.4 million, or 38%, of total deposits. Demand deposits increased by 8% from the prior quarter and decreased slightly year-over-year to
$763.6 million at September 30, 2024. Demand deposits remained consistent at 29% of total deposits at both September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024 down from 31% of total deposits at September 30, 2023. Average interest- bearing deposits were up 4% to $1.80 billion with an average cost of 2.24% in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $1.73 billion and an average cost of 2.21% in the second quarter of 2024, and up 11% compared to $1.62 billion and an average cost of 1.75% in the third quarter of 2023. Uninsured deposits totaled $1.12 billion or 43% of total deposits as of September 30, 2024 compared to $1.1 billion or 46% of total deposits as of December 31, 2022. Since interest rates began increasing in 2022, Northrim has taken a proactive, targeted approach to increase deposit rates.

Shareholders’ equity was $260.1 million, or $47.27 book value per share, at September 30, 2024, compared to $247.2 million, or $44.93 book value per share, at June 30, 2024 and $225.3 million, or $40.60 book value per share, a year ago. Tangible book value per share^* was $44.36 at September 30, 2024, compared to $42.03 at June

30, 2024, and $37.72 per share a year ago. The increase in shareholders’ equity in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the second quarter of 2024 was largely the result of earnings of $8.8 million and an increase in the fair value of the available for sale securities portfolio, which increased $7.6 million, net of tax, which were only partially offset by dividends paid of $3.4 million. The Company did not repurchase any shares of common stock in the third quarter of 2024 and has 110,000 shares remaining under the current share repurchase program as of September 30, 2024. Tangible common equity to tangible assets^* was 8.28% as of September 30, 2024, compared to 8.24% as of June 30, 2024 and 7.54% as of September 30, 2023. Northrim continues to maintain capital levels in excess of the requirements to be categorized as “well-capitalized” with Tier 1 Capital to Risk Adjusted Assets of 11.53% at September 30, 2024, compared to 11.68% at June 30, 2024, and 11.67% at September 30, 2023.

Asset Quality

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

Nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) net of government guarantees were $5.3 million at September 30, 2024, up from $5.1 million at June 30, 2024 and $5.2 million a year ago. Of the NPAs at September 30, 2024, $3.0 million, or 61%, are nonaccrual loans related to three commercial relationships.

Net adversely classified loans were $6.5 million at September 30, 2024, as compared to $7.1 million at June 30, 2024, and $7.3 million a year ago. Adversely classified loans are loans that Northrim has classified as substandard, doubtful, and loss, net of government guarantees. Net loan recoveries were $96,000 in the third quarter of 2024, compared to net loan recoveries of $26,000 in the second quarter of 2024, and net loan recoveries of $96,000 in the third quarter of 2023. Additionally, Northrim had 11 loan modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty totaling $3.1 million, net of government guarantees in the third quarter of 2024.

Northrim had $127.4 million, or 6% of portfolio loans, in the Healthcare sector, $110.4 million, or 5% of portfolio loans, in the Tourism sector, $96.6 million, or 5% of portfolio loans, in the Accommodations sector, $83.6 million, or 4% of portfolio loans, in the Fishing sector, $70.6 million, or 3% of portfolio loans, in the Aviation (non-tourism) sector, $67.7 million, or 3% of portfolio loans, in the Retail sector, and $53.1 million, or 3% in the Restaurants and Breweries sector as of September 30, 2024.

Northrim estimates that $82.0 million, or approximately 4% of portfolio loans, had direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, as of September 30, 2024, and $1.6 million of these loans are adversely classified. As of September 30, 2024, Northrim has an additional $29.7 million in unfunded commitments to companies with direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, and no unfunded commitments on adversely classified loans. Northrim defines direct exposure to the oil and gas sector as loans to borrowers that provide oilfield services and other companies that have been identified as significantly reliant upon activity in Alaska related to the oil and gas industry, such as lodging, equipment rental, transportation and other logistics services specific to this industry.

About Northrim BanCorp

Northrim BanCorp, Inc. is the parent company of Northrim Bank, an Alaska-based community bank with 20 branches in Anchorage, Eagle River, the Matanuska Valley, the Kenai Peninsula, Juneau, Fairbanks, Nome, Kodiak, Ketchikan, and Sitka, serving 90% of Alaska’s population; and an asset-based lending division in Washington; and a wholly-owned mortgage brokerage company, Residential Mortgage Holding Company, LLC. The Bank differentiates itself with its detailed knowledge of Alaska’s economy and its “Customer First Service” philosophy. Pacific Wealth Advisors, LLC is an affiliated company of Northrim BanCorp.

www.northrim.com

Forward-Looking Statement

This release may contain “forward-looking statements” as that term is defined for purposes of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements are, in effect, management’s attempt to predict future events, and thus are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect management’s views only as of the date hereof. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, regarding our financial position, business strategy, management’s plans and objectives for future operations are forward-looking statements. When used in this report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” and “intend” and words or phrases of similar meaning, as they relate to Northrim and its management are intended to help identify forward-looking statements. Although we believe that management’s expectations as reflected in forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure readers that those expectations will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements, are subject to various risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially and adversely from our expectations as indicated in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include: potential further increases in interest rates; the value of securities held in our investment portfolio; the impact of the results of government initiatives on the regulatory landscape, natural resource extraction industries, and capital markets; the impact of declines in the value of commercial and residential real estate markets, high unemployment rates, inflationary pressures and slowdowns in economic growth; changes in banking regulation or actions by bank regulators; inflation, supply-chain constraints, and potential geopolitical instability, including the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East; financial stress on borrowers (consumers and businesses) as a result of higher rates or an uncertain economic environment; the general condition of, and changes in, the Alaska economy; our ability to maintain or expand our market share or net interest margin; the sufficiency of our provision for credit losses and the accuracy of the assumptions or estimates used in preparing our financial statements, including those related to current expected credit losses accounting guidance; our ability to maintain asset quality; our ability to implement our marketing and growth strategies; our ability to identify and address cyber-security risks, including security breaches, “denial of service attacks,” “hacking,” and identity theft; disease outbreaks; and our ability to execute our business plan. Further, actual results may be affected by competition on price and other factors with other financial institutions; customer acceptance of new products and services; the regulatory environment in which we operate; and general trends in the local, regional and national banking industry and economy. In addition, there are risks inherent in the banking industry relating to collectability of loans and changes in interest rates. Many of these risks, as well as other risks that may have a material adverse impact on our operations and business, are identified in the “Risk Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, and from time to time are disclosed in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. However, you should be aware that these factors are not an exhaustive list, and you should not assume these are the only factors that may cause our actual results to differ from our expectations. These forward- looking statements are made only as of the date of this release, and Northrim does not undertake any obligation to release revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or conditions after the date of this release.

References:

https://www.bea.gov/

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

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

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

www.mba.org

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

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

Income Statement

(Dollars in thousands, except per share data)	Three Months Ended								Year-t			o-date
(Unaudited)	September 30,		June 30,			September 30,			September 30,			September 30,
		2024		2024			2023			2024			2023
Interest Income:
Interest and fees on loans	$34,863		$32,367			$29,097			$97,680			$79,104
Interest on portfolio investments		4,164		4,310			4,727			12,994			14,018
Interest on deposits in banks		389		232			584			1,459			2,901
Total interest income		39,416		36,909			34,408			112,133			96,023
Interest Expense:
Interest expense on deposits		10,123		9,476			7,138			28,779			17,835
Interest expense on borrowings		451		380			920			1,012			1,664
Total interest expense		10,574		9,856			8,058			29,791			19,499
Net interest income		28,842		27,053			26,350			82,342			76,524
(Benefit) provision for credit losses		2,063		(120	)		1,190			2,092			2,957
Net interest income after provision for credit losses		26,779		27,173			25,160			80,250			73,567
Other Operating Income:
Mortgage banking income		7,047		5,884			4,405			16,962			10,326
Bankcard fees		1,196		1,105			1,022			3,218			2,916
Purchased receivable income		1,033		1,242			1,180			3,620			3,175
Service charges on deposit accounts		605		572			550			1,726			1,512
Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable equity securities		576		(60	)		12			830			(445	)
Other income		1,130		834			833			2,652			2,406
Total other operating income		11,587		9,577			8,002			29,008			19,890
Other Operating Expense:
Salaries and other personnel expense		17,549		16,627			15,657			49,593			46,324
Data processing expense		2,618		2,601			2,589			7,878			7,321
Occupancy expense		1,911		1,843			1,857			5,716			5,611
Professional and outside services		903		726			803			2,384			2,326
Marketing expense		860		690			499			2,063			1,996
Insurance expense		596		692			640			2,067			1,844
OREO expense, net rental income and gains on sale		2		2			(784	)		(387	)		(766	)
Intangible asset amortization expense		—		—			4			—			11
Other operating expense		2,289		2,013			1,631			6,246			5,521
Total other operating expense		26,728		25,194			22,896			75,560			70,188

Income before provision for income taxes		11,638		11,556			10,266			33,698			23,269
Provision for income taxes		2,813		2,536			1,892			7,654			4,488
Net income	$8,825		$9,020			$8,374			$26,044			$18,781
Basic EPS	$1.60		$1.64			$1.50			$4.73			$3.34
Diluted EPS	$1.57		$1.62			$1.48			$4.67			$3.30
Weighted average shares outstanding, basic		5,501,943		5,500,588			5,569,238			5,500,703			5,630,948
Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted		5,583,055		5,558,580			5,624,906			5,574,135			5,688,687

Balance Sheet (Dollars in thousands) (Unaudited)	September 30,			June 30,			September 30,
		2024			2024			2023
Assets:
Cash and due from banks	$42,805			$33,364			$31,276
Interest bearing deposits in other banks		60,071			21,058			79,952
Investment securities available for sale, at fair value		545,210			584,964			652,150
Investment securities held to maturity		36,750			36,750			36,750
Marketable equity securities, at fair value		12,957			12,381			10,615
Investment in Federal Home Loan Bank stock		4,318			4,929			6,334
Loans held for sale		97,937			85,926			63,151

Portfolio loans		2,007,565			1,875,907			1,720,091
Allowance for credit losses, loans		(19,528	)		(17,694	)		(16,491	)
Net portfolio loans		1,988,037			1,858,213			1,703,600
Purchased receivables, net		23,564			25,722			34,578
Mortgage servicing rights, at fair value		21,570			21,077			19,396
Other real estate owned, net		—			—			150
Premises and equipment, net		39,625			40,393			40,920
Lease right of use asset		7,616			8,244			9,673
Goodwill and intangible assets		15,967			15,967			15,973
Other assets		66,965			72,680			85,671
Total assets	$2,963,392			$2,821,668			$2,790,189
Liabilities:
Demand deposits	$763,595			$704,471			$764,647
Interest-bearing demand		979,238			906,010			875,814
Savings deposits		245,043			238,156			265,799
Money market deposits		201,821			195,159			230,814
Time deposits		435,870			420,010			290,856
Total deposits		2,625,567			2,463,806			2,427,930
Other borrowings		13,354			43,961			63,781
Junior subordinated debentures		10,310			10,310			10,310
Lease liability		7,635			8,269			9,673
Other liabilities		46,476			48,122			53,236
Total liabilities		2,703,342			2,574,468			2,564,930
Shareholders’ Equity:
Total shareholders’ equity		260,050			247,200			225,259
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$2,963,392			$2,821,668			$2,790,189

Additional Financial Information
(Dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)

Composition of Portfolio Loans

		September 30, 2024				June 30, 2024					March 31, 2024					December 31, 2023					September 30, 2023
	Balance			% of total		Balance			% of total		Balance			% of total		Balance			% of total		Balance			% of total
Commercial loans	$492,414			24	%	$495,781			26	%	$475,220			26	%	$486,057			27	%	$492,145			28	%
Commercial real estate:
Owner occupied properties		412,827		20	%		383,832		20	%		372,507		20	%		368,357		20	%		359,019		21	%
Nonowner occupied and
multifamily properties		584,302		31	%		551,130		30	%		529,904		30	%		519,115		30	%		509,939		30	%
Residential real estate:
1-4 family properties
secured by first liens		248,514		12	%		222,026		12	%		218,552		12	%		203,534		11	%		180,719		10	%
1-4 family properties
secured by junior liens &
revolving secured by first liens		45,262		2	%		41,258		2	%		35,460		2	%		33,783		2	%		27,342		2	%
1-4 family construction		39,794		2	%		29,510		2	%		27,751		2	%		31,239		2	%		32,374		2	%
Construction loans		185,362		9	%		154,009		8	%		153,537		8	%		149,788		8	%		120,909		7	%
Consumer loans		7,836		—	%		6,679		—	%		6,444		—	%		6,180		—	%		5,930		—	%
Subtotal		2,016,311					1,884,225					1,819,375					1,798,053					1,728,377
Unearned loan fees, net		(8,746	)				(8,318	)				(8,240	)				(8,556	)				(8,286	)
Total portfolio loans	$2,007,565					$1,875,907					$1,811,135					$1,789,497					$1,720,091

Composition of Deposits

	September 30, 2024				June 30, 2024				March 31, 2024				December 31, 2023				September 30, 2023
	Balance		% of total		Balance		% of total		Balance		% of total		Balance		% of total		Balance		% of total
Demand deposits	$763,595		29	%	$704,471		29	%	$714,244		29	%	$749,683		31	%	$764,647		31	%
Interest-bearing demand		979,238	37	%		906,010	36	%		889,581	37	%		927,291	37	%		875,814	36	%
Savings deposits		245,043	9	%		238,156	10	%		246,902	10	%		255,338	10	%		265,799	11	%
Money market deposits		201,821	8	%		195,159	8	%		209,785	9	%		221,492	9	%		230,814	10	%
Time deposits		435,870	17	%		420,010	17	%		373,571	15	%		331,251	13	%		290,856	12	%
Total deposits	$2,625,567				$2,463,806				$2,434,083				$2,485,055				$2,427,930

Additional Financial Information
(Dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)

Asset Quality

		September 30, 2024		June 30, 2024		September 30, 2023
Nonaccrual loans	$4,944			$4,830		$6,492
Loans 90 days past due and accruing		17		17		28
Total nonperforming loans		4,961		4,847		6,520
Nonperforming loans guaranteed by government		—		—		(1,455)
Net nonperforming loans		4,961		4,847		5,065
Other real estate owned	—			—		150
Repossessed assets	297			297		—
Net nonperforming assets	$5,258			$5,144		$5,215
Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans		0.25	%	0.26	%	0.29	%
Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees		0.26	%	0.28	%	0.31	%
Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets		0.18	%	0.18	%	0.19	%
Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets net of government guarantees		0.19	%	0.19	%	0.19	%
Adversely classified loans, net of government guarantees	$6,503			$7,068		$7,250
Special mention loans, net of government guarantees	$9,641			$8,902		$5,457
Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans		0.08	%	0.03	%	—	%
Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees		0.09	%	0.04	%	—	%
Allowance for credit losses / portfolio loans		0.97	%	0.94	%	0.96	%
Allowance for credit losses / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees		1.04	%	1.01	%	1.02	%
Allowance for credit losses / nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees		394	%	365	%	326	%
Gross loan charge-offs for the quarter	$15			$—		$91
Gross loan recoveries for the quarter		($111)		($26)		($187)
Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs for the quarter		($96)		($26)		($96)
Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) year-to-date		($164)		($68)		($134)
Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) for the quarter / average loans, for the quarter		—	%	—	%	(0.01)	%
Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) year-to-date / average loans, year-to-date annualized		(0.01)	%	(0.01)	%	(0.01)	%

Additional Financial Information
(Dollars in thousands)
(Unaudited)

Average Balances, Yields, and Rates

	Three Months Ended
	September 30, 2024					June 30, 2024					September 30, 2023
	Average Balance			Average Tax Equivalent Yield/Rate		Average Balance			Average Tax Equivalent Yield/Rate		Average Balance			Average Tax Equivalent Yield/Rate
Assets
Interest bearing deposits in other banks	$	28,409		5.28	%	$	17,352		5.27	%	$	42,273		5.39	%
Portfolio investments		619,012		2.80	%		639,980		2.82	%		715,767		2.43	%
Loans held for sale		93,689		6.20	%		65,102		6.08	%		62,350		6.34	%
Portfolio loans		1,933,181		6.91	%		1,845,832		6.87	%		1,695,736		6.61	%
Total interest-earning assets		2,674,291		5.92	%		2,568,266		5.83	%		2,516,126		5.48	%
Nonearning assets		196,266					204,509					205,770
Total assets	$	2,870,557				$	2,772,775				$	2,721,896
Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
Interest-bearing deposits	$	1,796,107		2.24	%	$	1,725,013		2.21	%	$	1,619,478		1.75	%
Borrowings		43,555		4.07	%		38,390		3.92	%		76,681		4.73	%
Total interest-bearing liabilities		1,839,662		2.29	%		1,763,403		2.25	%		1,696,159		1.88	%
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits		722,000					706,339					747,147
Other liabilities		52,387					58,549					52,078
Shareholders’ equity		256,508					244,484					226,512
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	2,870,557				$	2,772,775				$	2,721,896
Net spread				3.63	%				3.58	%				3.60	%
NIM				4.29	%				4.24	%				4.15	%
NIMTE^*				4.35	%				4.30	%				4.21	%
Cost of funds				1.64	%				1.60	%				1.31	%
Average portfolio loans to average
interest-earning assets		72.29	%				71.87	%				67.39	%
Average portfolio loans to average total deposits		76.77	%				75.92	%				71.65	%
Average non-interest deposits to average
total deposits		28.67	%				29.05	%				31.57	%
Average interest-earning assets to average
interest-bearing liabilities		145.37	%				145.64	%				148.34	%

Additional Financial Information
(Dollars in thousands) (Unaudited)

Average Balances, Yields, and Rates

	Year-to-date
	September 30, 2024					September 30, 2023
	Average			Average Tax Equivalent		Average			Average Tax Equivalent
	Balance			Yield/Rate		Balance			Yield/Rate
Assets
Interest bearing deposits in other banks	$35,747			5.34	%	$79,362			4.82	%
Portfolio investments		643,221		2.82	%		723,693		2.41	%
Loans held for sale		63,917		6.14	%		40,433		6.06	%
Portfolio loans		1,857,756		6.85	%		1,608,293		6.46	%
Total interest-earning assets		2,600,641		5.81	%		2,451,781		5.30	%
Nonearning assets		200,619					192,430
Total assets	$2,801,260					$2,644,211
Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
Interest-bearing deposits	$1,751,179			2.20	%	$1,577,308			1.51	%
Borrowings		35,327		3.76	%		52,075		4.23	%
Total interest-bearing liabilities		1,786,506		2.23	%		1,629,383		1.60	%
Noninterest-bearing demand deposits		711,197					746,251
Other liabilities		57,097					42,596
Shareholders’ equity		246,460					225,981
Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$2,801,260					$2,644,211
Net spread				3.58	%				3.70	%
NIM				4.23	%				4.17	%
NIMTE^*				4.29	%				4.24	%
Cost of funds				1.59	%				1.10	%
Average portfolio loans to average interest-earning assets		71.43	%				65.60	%
Average portfolio loans to average total deposits		75.45	%				69.22	%
Average non-interest deposits to average total deposits		28.88	%				32.12	%
Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities		145.57	%				150.47	%

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

Capital Data (At quarter end)


			September 30, 2024		June 30, 2024		September 30, 2023
Book value per share			$47.27		$44.93		$40.60
Tangible book value per share^*			$44.36		$42.03		$37.72
Total shareholders’ equity/total assets			8.78	%	8.76	%		8.07		%
Tangible Common Equity/Tangible Assets^*			8.28	%	8.24	%		7.54		%
Tier 1 Capital / Risk Adjusted Assets			11.53	%	11.68	%		11.67		%
Total Capital / Risk Adjusted Assets			12.50	%	12.58	%		12.58		%
Tier 1 Capital / Average Assets			9.08	%	9.17	%		9.02		%
Shares outstanding			5,501,943		5,501,562			5,548,436
Total unrealized loss on AFS debt securities, net of income taxes			($7,617)		($15,197)			($26,526		)
Total unrealized gain on derivatives and hedging activities, net of income taxes			$863		$1,212		$1,485

Profitability Ratios
	September 30, 2024	June 30, 2024	March 31, 2024		December 31, 2023		September 30, 2023
For the quarter:
NIM	4.29%	4.24%	4.16%		4.06%				4.15%
NIMTE^*	4.35%	4.30%	4.22%		4.12%				4.21%
Efficiency ratio	66.11%	68.78%	68.93%		72.21%				66.64%
Return on average assets	1.22%	1.31%	1.19%		0.93%				1.22%
Return on average equity	13.69%	14.84%	13.84%		11.36%				14.67%

	September 30,		September 30,
	2024		2023
Year-to-date:
NIM	4.23	%	4.17	%
NIMTE^*	4.29	%	4.24	%
Efficiency ratio	67.86	%	72.79	%
Return on average assets	1.24	%	0.95	%
Return on average equity	14.12	%	11.11	%

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

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

Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis

Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”) is a non-GAAP performance measurement in which interest income on non-taxable investments and loans is presented on a tax equivalent basis using a combined federal and state statutory rate of 28.43% in both 2024 and 2023. The most comparable GAAP measure is net interest margin and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of NIMTE to net interest margin for the periods indicated.

	Three Months Ended
		September 30,						March 31,			December			September 30,
		2024		June 30, 2024				2024			31, 2023			2023
Net interest income	$28,842			$27,053			$26,447			$26,732			$26,350
Divided by average interest-bearing assets		2,674,291			2,568,266			2,558,558			2,612,297			2,516,126
Net interest margin (“NIM”)²		4.29	%		4.24	%		4.16	%		4.06	%		4.15	%

Net interest income	$28,842			$27,053			$26,447			$26,732			$26,350
Plus: reduction in tax expense related to tax-exempt interest income		385			378			379			374			373
		$29,227			$27,431			$26,826			$27,106			$26,723
Divided by average interest-bearing assets NIMTE²		2,674,291			2,568,266			2,558,558			2,612,297			2,516,126
		4.35	%		4.30	%		4.22	%		4.12	%		4.21	%

	Year-to-date
	September 30,			September 30,
		2024			2023
Net interest income	$82,342			$76,524
Divided by average interest-bearing assets		2,600,641			2,451,781
Net interest margin (“NIM”)³		4.23	%		4.17	%
Net interest income Plus: reduction in tax expense related to	$82,342			$76,524
tax-exempt interest income		1,142			1,202
	$83,484			$77,726
Divided by average interest-bearing assets		2,600,641			2,451,781
NIMTE³		4.29	%		4.24	%

²Calculated using actual days in the quarter divided by 366 for the quarters ended in 2024 and 365 for the quarters ended in 2023, respectively.

³Calculated using actual days in the year divided by 366 for year-to-date period in 2024 and 365 for year-to-date period in 2023, respectively.

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

Tangible Book Value Per Share

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

		September 30, 2024		June 30, 2024		March 31, 2024		December 31, 2023		September 30, 2023
Total shareholders’ equity	$260,050		$247,200		$239,327		$234,718		$225,259
Divided by shares outstanding		5,502		5,502		5,500		5,513		5,548
Book value per share	$47.27		$44.93		$43.52		$42.57		$40.60

		September 30, 2024		June 30, 2024		March 31, 2024		December 31, 2023		September 30, 2023
Total shareholders’ equity	$260,050		$247,200		$239,327		$234,718		$225,259
Less: goodwill and intangible assets		15,967		15,967		15,967		15,967		15,973
	$244,083		$231,233		$223,360		$218,751		$209,286
Divided by shares outstanding		5,502		5,502		5,500		5,513		5,548
Tangible book value per share	$44.36		$42.03		$40.61		$39.68		$37.72

Tangible Common Equity to Tangible Assets

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

Northrim BanCorp, Inc.	September 30,			March 31,		December			September 30,
	2024	June 30, 2024		2024			31, 2023			2023
Total shareholders’ equity	$260,050	$247,200	$239,327			$234,718			$225,259
Total assets	2,963,392	2,821,668		2,759,560			2,807,497			2,790,189
Total shareholders’ equity to total assets	8.78 %	8.76 %		8.67	%		8.36	%		8.07	%
Northrim BanCorp, Inc.	September 30,		March 31,			December			September 30,
	2024	June 30, 2024		2024			31, 2023			2023
Total shareholders’ equity	$260,050	$247,200	$239,327			$234,718			$225,259
Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net	15,967	15,967		15,967			15,967			15,973
Tangible common shareholders’ equity	$244,083	$231,233	$223,360			$218,751			$209,286
Total assets	$2,963,392	$2,821,668	$2,759,560			$2,807,497			$2,790,189
Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net	15,967	15,967		15,967			15,967			15,973
Tangible assets	$2,947,425	$2,805,701	$2,743,593			$2,791,530			$2,774,216
Tangible common equity ratio	8.28 %	8.24 %		8.14	%		7.84	%		7.54	%

Note Transmitted on GlobeNewswire on October 23, 2024, at 2:30 pm Alaska Standard Time.


Contact:	Mike Huston, President, CEO, and COO
	(907) 261-8750
	Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer
	(907) 261-3539

The MIL Network –

January 25, 2025

Category: Ukraine

Meetings on the margins

Lacking a coherent agenda

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

IMF Communications Department

MEDIA RELATIONS

Updates to this page

Invasion of Ukraine

Victory look impossible

AI-controlled weapons systems

‘Loitering munitions’

Esther Britten, Deputy Director and Head of Events at UK Sport, said:

Councillor Martin Smith, Chair of the Economic Development and Skills Committee at Sheffield City Council, said:

Next steps

Background

Updates to this page

Extradited to Azerbaijan

Lapshin’s Azerbaijani ordeal

Broader implications

Impact and challenges