Federal Executive Branch
Here's a look at documents from the U.S. Executive Branch
Featured Stories
Treasury, IRS Issue Proposed Regulations on Employer Contributions to Trump Accounts Under the Working Families Tax Cuts
WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The U.S. Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service issued the following news on Aug. 11, 2026:
* * *
Treasury, IRS issue proposed regulations on employer contributions to Trump Accounts under the Working Families Tax Cuts
The Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service today issued proposed regulations providing guidance to employers that choose to make contributions to Trump Accounts for employees or their dependents. The proposed regulations also clarify nondiscrimination requirements for employers offering Trump Account contribution programs ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The U.S. Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service issued the following news on Aug. 11, 2026: * * * Treasury, IRS issue proposed regulations on employer contributions to Trump Accounts under the Working Families Tax Cuts The Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service today issued proposed regulations providing guidance to employers that choose to make contributions to Trump Accounts for employees or their dependents. The proposed regulations also clarify nondiscrimination requirements for employers offering Trump Account contribution programsand dependent care assistance programs.
"Today's guidance will help employers that want to make a tax-free contribution of up to $2,500 per year to the Trump Account of an employee or their dependents," said IRS Chief Executive Officer Frank J. Bisignano. "The proposed regulations will provide a framework for businesses establishing a Trump Account contribution program, a new benefit for American working families."
The proposed regulations outline requirements for employers that wish to maintain a Trump Account contribution program. A Trump Account contribution program generally must:
* Be a separate written plan of an employer for the exclusive benefit of employees;
* Provide for contributions to the Trump Accounts of employees or their dependents;
* Satisfy various requirements, including nondiscrimination requirements.
The proposed regulations also clarify how the nondiscrimination requirements apply to Trump Account contribution programs and dependent care assistance programs. In general, eligibility to participate in these programs and contributions and benefits under these programs must not discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees or their dependents.
A public hearing on the proposed regulations has been scheduled for Oct. 15, 2026. Requests to speak and outlines of topics to be discussed at the hearing must be received by Oct. 13, 2026. Treasury and the IRS also request comments on all aspects of the proposed regulations by Sept. 25, 2026. Complete instructions on submitting comments and hearing requests are included in the proposed regulations.
Sign up for a Trump Account and the pilot program
Parents, guardians, and other authorized individuals can use IRS Individual Online Account to complete Form 4547, Trump Account Election(s) PDF to open a Trump Account for a child with a Social Security number if the election is made before the calendar year in which the child turns age 18.
If that child is a U.S. citizen born in 2025 through 2028, the parent or other individual who qualifies to make the election can check a box on Form 4547 to elect a $1,000 pilot program contribution for the child's Trump Account.
Visit trumpaccounts.gov for more information on Trump Accounts. For more information on the provisions of the new legislation, see Working Families Tax Cuts Provisions on IRS.gov.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/treasury-irs-issue-proposed-regulations-on-employer-contributions-to-trump-accounts-under-the-working-families-tax-cuts
* * *
Treasury, IRS issue proposed regulations on employer contributions to Trump Accounts under the Working Families Tax Cuts
The Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service today issued proposed regulations providing guidance to employers that choose to make contributions to Trump Accounts for employees or their dependents. The proposed regulations also clarify nondiscrimination requirements for employers offering Trump Account contribution programs ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The U.S. Department of the Treasury Internal Revenue Service issued the following news on Aug. 11, 2026: * * * Treasury, IRS issue proposed regulations on employer contributions to Trump Accounts under the Working Families Tax Cuts The Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service today issued proposed regulations providing guidance to employers that choose to make contributions to Trump Accounts for employees or their dependents. The proposed regulations also clarify nondiscrimination requirements for employers offering Trump Account contribution programsand dependent care assistance programs.
"Today's guidance will help employers that want to make a tax-free contribution of up to $2,500 per year to the Trump Account of an employee or their dependents," said IRS Chief Executive Officer Frank J. Bisignano. "The proposed regulations will provide a framework for businesses establishing a Trump Account contribution program, a new benefit for American working families."
The proposed regulations outline requirements for employers that wish to maintain a Trump Account contribution program. A Trump Account contribution program generally must:
* Be a separate written plan of an employer for the exclusive benefit of employees;
* Provide for contributions to the Trump Accounts of employees or their dependents;
* Satisfy various requirements, including nondiscrimination requirements.
The proposed regulations also clarify how the nondiscrimination requirements apply to Trump Account contribution programs and dependent care assistance programs. In general, eligibility to participate in these programs and contributions and benefits under these programs must not discriminate in favor of highly compensated employees or their dependents.
A public hearing on the proposed regulations has been scheduled for Oct. 15, 2026. Requests to speak and outlines of topics to be discussed at the hearing must be received by Oct. 13, 2026. Treasury and the IRS also request comments on all aspects of the proposed regulations by Sept. 25, 2026. Complete instructions on submitting comments and hearing requests are included in the proposed regulations.
Sign up for a Trump Account and the pilot program
Parents, guardians, and other authorized individuals can use IRS Individual Online Account to complete Form 4547, Trump Account Election(s) PDF to open a Trump Account for a child with a Social Security number if the election is made before the calendar year in which the child turns age 18.
If that child is a U.S. citizen born in 2025 through 2028, the parent or other individual who qualifies to make the election can check a box on Form 4547 to elect a $1,000 pilot program contribution for the child's Trump Account.
Visit trumpaccounts.gov for more information on Trump Accounts. For more information on the provisions of the new legislation, see Working Families Tax Cuts Provisions on IRS.gov.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/treasury-irs-issue-proposed-regulations-on-employer-contributions-to-trump-accounts-under-the-working-families-tax-cuts
SEC Charges Company and Its CEO in Alleged $425 Million Ponzi Scheme
WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release:
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher A. Delgado, No. 26-cv-01741 (M.D. Fla. filed Aug. 11, 2026)
On August 11, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against Goliath Ventures, Inc. and its founder and CEO, Christopher A. Delgado, for raising at least $425 million from over 1,300 investors through an alleged multi-year Ponzi scheme. Delgado has agreed to a bifurcated settlement in connection with this civil enforcement action. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release: * * * Securities and Exchange Commission v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher A. Delgado, No. 26-cv-01741 (M.D. Fla. filed Aug. 11, 2026) On August 11, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against Goliath Ventures, Inc. and its founder and CEO, Christopher A. Delgado, for raising at least $425 million from over 1,300 investors through an alleged multi-year Ponzi scheme. Delgado has agreed to a bifurcated settlement in connection with this civil enforcement action.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, from at least January 2023 through January 2026, Defendants operated the Ponzi scheme through an unregistered securities offering in which investors would "partner" with Goliath to invest in purported crypto asset liquidity pools managed by Goliath. The complaint alleges that Defendants promised investors monthly profit distributions of 3% to 10% generated from the fees buyers and sellers paid to trade the crypto assets within those liquidity pools, and guaranteed the return of investors' principal. According to the SEC's complaint, however, Defendants did not invest any investor funds or crypto assets into any crypto asset liquidity pool, and Delgado misappropriated at least $51 million of investor funds for personal use, including the purchase of homes, luxury vehicles, a yacht, and travel. Defendants also allegedly used money and crypto assets from new and existing investors to pay promised returns to earlier investors in Ponzi-like fashion. All the while, as the complaint alleges, Defendants hired sales agents to recruit additional investors and compensated those agents with commissions drawn from investor funds, while fabricating account balance and investment performance metrics to make it appear that investors were earning profits and that their assets were invested in crypto asset liquidity pools. The complaint further alleges that by November 2025, Goliath could no longer raise new investor money quickly enough to repay existing investors, it halted monthly distributions, and the scheme collapsed.
The SEC's complaint charges Goliath and Delgado with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Delgado with violating Section 15(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Delgado consented to the entry of a judgment, subject to court approval, that would permanently enjoin him from violating the charged provisions of the federal securities laws, from participating in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security except for certain transactions in his personal accounts, and from acting or being associated with a broker or dealer. In addition, Delgado agreed that the Court shall order disgorgement with prejudgment interest and a civil penalty in amounts that shall be determined by the Court upon motion by the SEC. Against Goliath, the SEC seeks injunctions and disgorgement with prejudgment interest.
The SEC's continuing investigation is being conducted by Jordan A. Cortez with the assistance of Crytal Ivory and supervised by Sean M. O'Neill, Fernando Torres, and Stephanie N. Moot of the SEC's Miami Regional Office. The litigation will be led by Alice Sum and Mr. Cortez and supervised by Russell Koonin.
* * *
Resources
* SEC Complaint (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2026/comp26608.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26608
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher A. Delgado, No. 26-cv-01741 (M.D. Fla. filed Aug. 11, 2026)
On August 11, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against Goliath Ventures, Inc. and its founder and CEO, Christopher A. Delgado, for raising at least $425 million from over 1,300 investors through an alleged multi-year Ponzi scheme. Delgado has agreed to a bifurcated settlement in connection with this civil enforcement action. ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release: * * * Securities and Exchange Commission v. Goliath Ventures, Inc. and Christopher A. Delgado, No. 26-cv-01741 (M.D. Fla. filed Aug. 11, 2026) On August 11, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission filed charges against Goliath Ventures, Inc. and its founder and CEO, Christopher A. Delgado, for raising at least $425 million from over 1,300 investors through an alleged multi-year Ponzi scheme. Delgado has agreed to a bifurcated settlement in connection with this civil enforcement action.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, from at least January 2023 through January 2026, Defendants operated the Ponzi scheme through an unregistered securities offering in which investors would "partner" with Goliath to invest in purported crypto asset liquidity pools managed by Goliath. The complaint alleges that Defendants promised investors monthly profit distributions of 3% to 10% generated from the fees buyers and sellers paid to trade the crypto assets within those liquidity pools, and guaranteed the return of investors' principal. According to the SEC's complaint, however, Defendants did not invest any investor funds or crypto assets into any crypto asset liquidity pool, and Delgado misappropriated at least $51 million of investor funds for personal use, including the purchase of homes, luxury vehicles, a yacht, and travel. Defendants also allegedly used money and crypto assets from new and existing investors to pay promised returns to earlier investors in Ponzi-like fashion. All the while, as the complaint alleges, Defendants hired sales agents to recruit additional investors and compensated those agents with commissions drawn from investor funds, while fabricating account balance and investment performance metrics to make it appear that investors were earning profits and that their assets were invested in crypto asset liquidity pools. The complaint further alleges that by November 2025, Goliath could no longer raise new investor money quickly enough to repay existing investors, it halted monthly distributions, and the scheme collapsed.
The SEC's complaint charges Goliath and Delgado with violating Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder, and Delgado with violating Section 15(a)(1) of the Exchange Act. Delgado consented to the entry of a judgment, subject to court approval, that would permanently enjoin him from violating the charged provisions of the federal securities laws, from participating in the issuance, purchase, offer, or sale of any security except for certain transactions in his personal accounts, and from acting or being associated with a broker or dealer. In addition, Delgado agreed that the Court shall order disgorgement with prejudgment interest and a civil penalty in amounts that shall be determined by the Court upon motion by the SEC. Against Goliath, the SEC seeks injunctions and disgorgement with prejudgment interest.
The SEC's continuing investigation is being conducted by Jordan A. Cortez with the assistance of Crytal Ivory and supervised by Sean M. O'Neill, Fernando Torres, and Stephanie N. Moot of the SEC's Miami Regional Office. The litigation will be led by Alice Sum and Mr. Cortez and supervised by Russell Koonin.
* * *
Resources
* SEC Complaint (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2026/comp26608.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26608
SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins Letter to Robert Walley, Chair, CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee
WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following letter on Aug. 10, 2026:
* * *
Chairman Paul S. Atkins Letter to Robert Walley, Chair, CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee
Mr. Robert Walley
Chair
CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee
c/o Mr. Andre Owens
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20037
Dear Mr. Walley:
During my tenure, the Commission has achieved significant reductions in the annual operating costs of the Consolidated Audit Trail ("CAT") and eliminated reporting of personally identifiable information ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following letter on Aug. 10, 2026: * * * Chairman Paul S. Atkins Letter to Robert Walley, Chair, CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee Mr. Robert Walley Chair CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee c/o Mr. Andre Owens Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20037 Dear Mr. Walley: During my tenure, the Commission has achieved significant reductions in the annual operating costs of the Consolidated Audit Trail ("CAT") and eliminated reporting of personally identifiable informationto the CAT. We made this progress by issuing targeted exemptive relief and approving amendments to the CAT NMS Plan.[1] I thank the Participants for their collaboration on these important reforms, which have reduced the costs and scope of the CAT, thereby creating a more efficient and cost-effective system. Nevertheless, further changes are needed to address the costs, governance, and funding of the CAT. To address these issues, I directed staff to initiate a comprehensive review of the CAT.
Accordingly, on April 16, 2026, the Commission issued a concept release soliciting public comment in support of a comprehensive review of the CAT and other audit trails and related data sources currently used in the regulation of the U.S. securities markets (the "Concept Release").[2] The Commission has received, and staff have reviewed, hundreds of comments in response to the Concept Release. One theme emerges from the comment file: investors and market participants want the Commission to take more responsibility for managing and funding this project.
Now that the comment period has concluded, I have requested that staff provide detailed recommendations on fundamental changes that should be made to the CAT. Based on my experience with the operation of the CAT, I believe that it is critical for the Commission to move quickly and lay the groundwork necessary to restructure the CAT to address persistent cost, governance, and funding issues.
Pursuant to this aim, I have instructed staff to:
1. explore ways to fund the CAT, including through the use of appropriated funds and Section 31 transaction fees;
2. draft for Commission consideration a rulemaking that, if adopted, would rescind Rule 613 and require the exchanges, FINRA and broker-dealers to report CAT data to the Commission or its designee while utilizing current CAT infrastructure and reporting specifications;
3. assess SEC resources for purposes of assuming responsibility of the CAT and identify needs related to SEC governance of the CAT.
These measures would provide a significant, positive change to the structure of the CAT and address fundamental issues with its current costs, governance, and funding. Because many of these actions would need to occur in tandem, the transition would likely not be complete until late 2027. It is therefore important to communicate our approach now, so that market participants and investors can understand the substantial reforms that we plan to make.
As staff consider the restructuring of the CAT, we will make it a priority to ensure that market participants are given a voice in the process, both now, and after we have assumed responsibility of the CAT, to the extent the Commission adopts rules to restructure the CAT. We remain mindful that such changes should be implemented as seamlessly as possible. Additionally, we will continue to update the public regularly on notable developments as the Commission seeks to reform the CAT to a fit-for-purpose regulatory resource that is appropriately governed and operated at reasonable cost.
I look forward to further engagement with you, and other stakeholders, on this critical initiative.
Sincerely,
Paul S. Atkins Chairman
* * *
[1] See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 104586 (Jan. 13, 2026), 91 FR 2164 (Jan. 16, 2026); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 105107 (Mar. 27, 2026), 91 FR 16284, 16307 (Apr. 1, 2026).
[2] See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 105251 (Apr. 16, 2026), 91 FR 20945 (Apr. 20, 2026).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-letter-robert-walley-regarding-consolidated-audit-trail-081026
* * *
Chairman Paul S. Atkins Letter to Robert Walley, Chair, CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee
Mr. Robert Walley
Chair
CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee
c/o Mr. Andre Owens
Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP
2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20037
Dear Mr. Walley:
During my tenure, the Commission has achieved significant reductions in the annual operating costs of the Consolidated Audit Trail ("CAT") and eliminated reporting of personally identifiable information ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following letter on Aug. 10, 2026: * * * Chairman Paul S. Atkins Letter to Robert Walley, Chair, CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee Mr. Robert Walley Chair CAT NMS Plan Operating Committee c/o Mr. Andre Owens Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP 2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20037 Dear Mr. Walley: During my tenure, the Commission has achieved significant reductions in the annual operating costs of the Consolidated Audit Trail ("CAT") and eliminated reporting of personally identifiable informationto the CAT. We made this progress by issuing targeted exemptive relief and approving amendments to the CAT NMS Plan.[1] I thank the Participants for their collaboration on these important reforms, which have reduced the costs and scope of the CAT, thereby creating a more efficient and cost-effective system. Nevertheless, further changes are needed to address the costs, governance, and funding of the CAT. To address these issues, I directed staff to initiate a comprehensive review of the CAT.
Accordingly, on April 16, 2026, the Commission issued a concept release soliciting public comment in support of a comprehensive review of the CAT and other audit trails and related data sources currently used in the regulation of the U.S. securities markets (the "Concept Release").[2] The Commission has received, and staff have reviewed, hundreds of comments in response to the Concept Release. One theme emerges from the comment file: investors and market participants want the Commission to take more responsibility for managing and funding this project.
Now that the comment period has concluded, I have requested that staff provide detailed recommendations on fundamental changes that should be made to the CAT. Based on my experience with the operation of the CAT, I believe that it is critical for the Commission to move quickly and lay the groundwork necessary to restructure the CAT to address persistent cost, governance, and funding issues.
Pursuant to this aim, I have instructed staff to:
1. explore ways to fund the CAT, including through the use of appropriated funds and Section 31 transaction fees;
2. draft for Commission consideration a rulemaking that, if adopted, would rescind Rule 613 and require the exchanges, FINRA and broker-dealers to report CAT data to the Commission or its designee while utilizing current CAT infrastructure and reporting specifications;
3. assess SEC resources for purposes of assuming responsibility of the CAT and identify needs related to SEC governance of the CAT.
These measures would provide a significant, positive change to the structure of the CAT and address fundamental issues with its current costs, governance, and funding. Because many of these actions would need to occur in tandem, the transition would likely not be complete until late 2027. It is therefore important to communicate our approach now, so that market participants and investors can understand the substantial reforms that we plan to make.
As staff consider the restructuring of the CAT, we will make it a priority to ensure that market participants are given a voice in the process, both now, and after we have assumed responsibility of the CAT, to the extent the Commission adopts rules to restructure the CAT. We remain mindful that such changes should be implemented as seamlessly as possible. Additionally, we will continue to update the public regularly on notable developments as the Commission seeks to reform the CAT to a fit-for-purpose regulatory resource that is appropriately governed and operated at reasonable cost.
I look forward to further engagement with you, and other stakeholders, on this critical initiative.
Sincerely,
Paul S. Atkins Chairman
* * *
[1] See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release No. 104586 (Jan. 13, 2026), 91 FR 2164 (Jan. 16, 2026); Securities Exchange Act Release No. 105107 (Mar. 27, 2026), 91 FR 16284, 16307 (Apr. 1, 2026).
[2] See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 105251 (Apr. 16, 2026), 91 FR 20945 (Apr. 20, 2026).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-letter-robert-walley-regarding-consolidated-audit-trail-081026
OCC Commends FDIC Reform, Advances Priority to Reinvigorate De Novo Chartering
WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued the following news release:
* * *
OCC Commends FDIC Reform, Advances Priority to Reinvigorate De Novo Chartering
New FDIC process to review deposit insurance applications aligns with OCC efforts
-
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency continues to prioritize reinvigorating de novo chartering to build a robust, diverse banking system that supports the U.S. economy and commends the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for its recent efforts to do the same.
"De novo chartering ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued the following news release: * * * OCC Commends FDIC Reform, Advances Priority to Reinvigorate De Novo Chartering New FDIC process to review deposit insurance applications aligns with OCC efforts - The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency continues to prioritize reinvigorating de novo chartering to build a robust, diverse banking system that supports the U.S. economy and commends the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for its recent efforts to do the same. "De novo charteringis a sign of a healthy banking system," said Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan V. Gould. "The FDIC's new process to review deposit insurance applications aligns with the OCC's efforts to reverse the decline in de novo chartering by providing a clear and transparent application process that encourages new entrants to the banking system - which drive innovation and expand consumer choice."
Over the past 15 years, de novo chartering declined significantly, contributing to a less dynamic and competitive banking industry. From 2011 through 2014, for example, the OCC received an average of less than four charter applications per year. In some years, the OCC received no charter applications.
"For more than a decade, regulators signaled that those seeking a federal bank charter and federal deposit insurance need not apply," added Comptroller Gould. "Entities that engage in legally permissible activities, including those involving digital assets and other novel technologies, should have a path to becoming a national bank. America and the OCC are once again open for business."
In the last 18 months, the OCC has received 40 de novo applications, including applications for national trust banks, which the OCC has chartered for decades. In many cases, the OCC has made decisions on charter applications within 120 days of receipt of the complete application. As a result, for the first time in five years, a full-service national bank has already received the OCC's final approval and opened its doors.
The OCC will continue to encourage the formation of new banks and strengthen the resilience of the federal banking system.
* * *
Original text here: https://occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2026/nr-occ-2026-67.html
* * *
OCC Commends FDIC Reform, Advances Priority to Reinvigorate De Novo Chartering
New FDIC process to review deposit insurance applications aligns with OCC efforts
-
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency continues to prioritize reinvigorating de novo chartering to build a robust, diverse banking system that supports the U.S. economy and commends the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for its recent efforts to do the same.
"De novo chartering ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 -- The U.S. Department of the Treasury Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued the following news release: * * * OCC Commends FDIC Reform, Advances Priority to Reinvigorate De Novo Chartering New FDIC process to review deposit insurance applications aligns with OCC efforts - The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency continues to prioritize reinvigorating de novo chartering to build a robust, diverse banking system that supports the U.S. economy and commends the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for its recent efforts to do the same. "De novo charteringis a sign of a healthy banking system," said Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan V. Gould. "The FDIC's new process to review deposit insurance applications aligns with the OCC's efforts to reverse the decline in de novo chartering by providing a clear and transparent application process that encourages new entrants to the banking system - which drive innovation and expand consumer choice."
Over the past 15 years, de novo chartering declined significantly, contributing to a less dynamic and competitive banking industry. From 2011 through 2014, for example, the OCC received an average of less than four charter applications per year. In some years, the OCC received no charter applications.
"For more than a decade, regulators signaled that those seeking a federal bank charter and federal deposit insurance need not apply," added Comptroller Gould. "Entities that engage in legally permissible activities, including those involving digital assets and other novel technologies, should have a path to becoming a national bank. America and the OCC are once again open for business."
In the last 18 months, the OCC has received 40 de novo applications, including applications for national trust banks, which the OCC has chartered for decades. In many cases, the OCC has made decisions on charter applications within 120 days of receipt of the complete application. As a result, for the first time in five years, a full-service national bank has already received the OCC's final approval and opened its doors.
The OCC will continue to encourage the formation of new banks and strengthen the resilience of the federal banking system.
* * *
Original text here: https://occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2026/nr-occ-2026-67.html
Justice Dept. Issues Findings Letter to Latham & Watkins About Duke University School of Law
WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 (TNSletter) -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following findings letter to Latham and Watkins LLP about the Duke University School of Law:
* * *
Note: Read the Department's Findings Letter here.
Here is the text of the letter:
August 6, 2026
Marc P. Berger
Latham & Watkins LLP
1271 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020-1401
Re: United States' April 18, 2025 Title VI Inquiry Findings
Dear Mr. Berger:
We write to notify you of the findings of the U.S. Department of Justice (the Department) after its compliance review to determine whether the admissions ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 (TNSletter) -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following findings letter to Latham and Watkins LLP about the Duke University School of Law: * * * Note: Read the Department's Findings Letter here. Here is the text of the letter: August 6, 2026 Marc P. Berger Latham & Watkins LLP 1271 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020-1401 Re: United States' April 18, 2025 Title VI Inquiry Findings Dear Mr. Berger: We write to notify you of the findings of the U.S. Department of Justice (the Department) after its compliance review to determine whether the admissionspractices of the Duke University School of Law ("Duke Law") are in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000d et seq. ("Title VI"), as interpreted by the Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023) ("SFFA"). Based on our review, we have found that Duke Law has violated this standard by discriminating on the basis of race in the incoming classes of 2023, 2024, and 2025. Based on its review of Duke Law's documents and data, the Department finds that Duke Law continues to intentionally discriminate against applicants based on their race after the Supreme Court's decision in SFFA by granting and denying admission on the basis of race.
Procedural Background
The Department enforces federal civil rights laws that protect students from discrimination, including Title VI, which prohibits recipients of federal financial assistance from discrimination based on race and ethnicity.
Title VI authorizes the Department to conduct periodic compliance reviews and investigations of the practices and policies of the recipients of federal funding. 28 C.F.R. Sec. 42.107. Should the Department find that a recipient fails to comply with Title VI, it is authorized to pursue legal action to secure compliance. See 28 C.F.R. Sec. 42.105 & 108.
The Department currently provides direct federal financial assistance to Duke Law. 1 Enforcement under Title VI requires funding agencies to advise recipients of their failure to comply, and to determine that compliance cannot be obtained by voluntary means before initiating judicial proceedings to compel compliance. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000d-1. If the Department determines that the noncompliance with Title VI cannot be corrected by voluntary means, the Department may seek to compel compliance through enforcement. See 28 C.F.R. Sec. 42.108.
The Department's April 18th notice of investigation letter included a request for information. On December 23, 2025, the Department sent a Supplemental Request for Information. Duke Law responded to these requests with documents. The Department has carefully reviewed the documents Duke Law produced and collected other information in its investigation of Duke Law, which forms the basis of the Department's findings.
Intent to Discriminate
"I'd prefer not to say that we will have to work harder to enroll a diverse class. This is true, but I don't want folks to think we didn't work harder if when the class is not as diverse as we would like. "- Duke Law Associate Dean, Admissions and Student Affairs, William Hoye2
Duke Law's internal communications and policy documents reflect a sustained, determinative emphasis on racial diversity in admissions and a deliberate effort to preserve racial outcomes before and after SFFA.
In a proposed 2021-2022 report, Duke Law identified as an accomplishment that the law school "[i]ncreased the diversity ... of the incoming class" and that the incoming class "would be 43% students of color," contrasted with the previous four-year average of 34%.3 The same report explained that the school would reassess admissions policies in anticipation of Supreme Court limitations on race-based review while "continuing to meet the Law School's goals for a broadly diverse student body."4
In 2023, memoranda to the Admissions Committee urged revisions to the law school's mission statement or other official documents so that diversity would be "taken into consideration in our admissions decisions."5 Faculty praised the memoranda, with one faculty member noting that "what [he] likes" is that the approach "leaves lots of room for faculty to emphasize racial/ethnic diversity as well as diversity along other salient dimensions of difference, including nationality, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and ideology."6 Law school administrators discussed a post-SFF A strategy to adopt admissions policies that "give preference for those applicants who demonstrate that commitment" to "advancing the rule of law and the protection of democratic institutions," thereby "possibly helping our diversity goals."7
In a document that serves as a guide for application reviewers, the Duke Law School Mission Statement is placed prominently at the top and underscores a commitment to diversity:
The mission of Duke Law School is to advance knowledge and the rule of law through open, rigorous, and collaborative education and scholarly inquiry and to help build and sustain a dynamic legal profession that embodies commitment to equal justice, ethical leadership, diversity of perspective and experience, public service, and the highest standards of client representation.8
Post-SFFA guidance states that Duke Law "may consider applicants' discussion of how race affected their life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise."9 Reviewer templates instruct tagging short-answer content (including "Diversity/Services") to assess how candidates may "further [Duke Law's] mission," and explicitly direct contextualization of weaker academic records using background factors such as first-generation status.10 Duke Law's published policies assert that reviewers do not see racial demographic data and that the school "will not analyze or monitor the racial or ethnic composition" during decision-making; yet the structure of prompts and review tags elevates personal background variables commonly correlated with race (first-generation, Pell, etc.).11 Duke Law states that it values "students with a wide range of experiences, backgrounds, and interests that may not be directly related to their legal ambitions" and encourages applicants to "highlight different elements" of themselves "so that we get a full picture of who you are."12 The record shows those variables were used to advance racial diversity goals and thereby operated as material race-related proxies in admissions outcomes.
Internal communications in late 2023 reveal that Duke Law emphasized that "DEI" "is one of our most important values," pledged to "work even harder" to admit and recruit "a racially diverse class," and later refined public language to avoid implying diminished effort if racial diversity declined.13
In the May 2024 Annual Review Memorandum from the Associate Dean of Admissions and Student Affairs. To Duke Law Dean, the admissions dean highlighted the composition and performance of the fall 2023 entering class, emphasizing the class's "broad diversity," specifying that it included "27 Latin[o] students, 23 [b]lack students, and 67 Asian/Asian American students." 14 Looking ahead, the admissions dean outlined an objective for the coming year: "Continue to focus on developing effective race-neutral admissions policies."15
In the May 2025 Annual Review Memorandum, the Admissions Dean characterizes the Law School's "race-neutral admissions policies" as successful. The Admissions Dean also suggests that casually assessing the student body during campus visits can help audit student body diversity without collecting formal statistics. 16
Taken together, the 2021-2022 planning materials, the 2023 committee memoranda and reviewer templates, and the 2024-2025 annual reviews support the inference that Duke Law intended to influence admissions with race or closely related proxies despite formal disclaimers of race-based decision-making. While public policies state that racial composition is not monitored, internal reporting highlighted specific racial counts and evaluation practices that elevate background variables commonly correlated with race. In effect, the record shows that pre- and post-SFFA admissions strategies were structured to advance racial diversity objectives through ostensibly race-neutral tools.
Statistical Evidence of Intentional Discrimination
Applicant-level data (2018-2019 through 2024--2025) also indicates substantial and persistent racial preferences in admission. 17 In 2024, admitted median LSA T for black applicants was 164 (84.2nd percentile) and 170 for Hispanic applicants (95.lst), while the admitted median LSA T for Asian applicants was 173 (97 .9th) and the admitted median LSAT for white applicants was 172 (97.lst). 18 And in 2025, the admitted median for black and Hispanic applicants was 166 (88.7th) and 171 (96.2nd) respectively, while the admitted median for Asian students was 173 (97.9th) and the admitted median for white applicants was 173 (97.9th). 19 Notably, median LSATs of denied Asian and white applicants (Asian: 168, 169; white: 167, 168) in 2024-2025 exceeded the median LSATs of admitted black applicants (164, 166).
The Department also found that when accounting for LSAT, Undergraduate GPA, and race, the admissions models strongly predict outcomes and show highly statistically significant racial preferences in 2025. Based on our review of the 2025 applicant-level data, Duke Law's use of race gave a black applicant a roughly 3.Sx higher probability of admission than an equally strong Asian applicant with similar academic credentials. Earlier cycles show even larger preferences, with preferences declining after SFFA but remaining practically and statistically significant. Even after Duke Law increased weight on additional background factors (e.g., first-generation status), those preferences persisted and cannot not be explained by race-neutral considerations.
The applicant-level data produced by Duke Law indicate that a black or Hispanic student has a substantially higher likelihood of being offered admission than a white or Asian student with the same academic credentials. This consistent difference in the test scores between students of different racial groups is substantial and cannot be explained by a coincidence. The magnitude and durability of these preferences across multiple cycles (including post-SFFA) confirm intentional discrimination.
Findings
The Department finds that after SFFA, Duke Law discriminated against other applicants to benefit applicants of preferred race classes (black and Hispanic). This discrimination is apparent from the documents expressing an intent to discriminate, plus the significant disparity in objective academic metrics between black and Hispanic applicants compared with applicants from other racial categories. Duke Law's internal documents, including policies, and communications confirm the Department's findings that Duke Law intended to discriminate against all racial groups except black and Hispanic applicants, to accept more black and Hispanic applicants. As a result of these practices, highly qualified white, Asian, and other students were denied admission on the basis of their race.
For these reasons, the Department concludes that Duke Law discriminated on the basis of race for the incoming classes of 2023 through 2025, in violation of Title VI as interpreted by SFFA. Based on its review of Duke Law's documents and data, the Department believes that this discrimination is ongoing.
Resolution
Having determined that Duke Law deliberately discriminated on the basis of race in its decisions to admit and deny applicants, the Department seeks to enter into a voluntary resolution agreement with the University to ensure that admissions practices are brought into legal compliance.
If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Morrison at jeffrey.morrison@usdoj.gov or (202) 353-1845.
Thank you in advance for your attention and cooperation.
Harmeet K. Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, United States Department of Justice
* * *
Original text and footnotes here: https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1456491/dl
News Release here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-finds-duke-law-school-discriminates-based-race-admissions
* * *
Note: Read the Department's Findings Letter here.
Here is the text of the letter:
August 6, 2026
Marc P. Berger
Latham & Watkins LLP
1271 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020-1401
Re: United States' April 18, 2025 Title VI Inquiry Findings
Dear Mr. Berger:
We write to notify you of the findings of the U.S. Department of Justice (the Department) after its compliance review to determine whether the admissions ... Show Full Article WASHINGTON, Aug. 12 (TNSletter) -- The U.S. Department of Justice issued the following findings letter to Latham and Watkins LLP about the Duke University School of Law: * * * Note: Read the Department's Findings Letter here. Here is the text of the letter: August 6, 2026 Marc P. Berger Latham & Watkins LLP 1271 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020-1401 Re: United States' April 18, 2025 Title VI Inquiry Findings Dear Mr. Berger: We write to notify you of the findings of the U.S. Department of Justice (the Department) after its compliance review to determine whether the admissionspractices of the Duke University School of Law ("Duke Law") are in compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000d et seq. ("Title VI"), as interpreted by the Supreme Court's decision in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College, 600 U.S. 181 (2023) ("SFFA"). Based on our review, we have found that Duke Law has violated this standard by discriminating on the basis of race in the incoming classes of 2023, 2024, and 2025. Based on its review of Duke Law's documents and data, the Department finds that Duke Law continues to intentionally discriminate against applicants based on their race after the Supreme Court's decision in SFFA by granting and denying admission on the basis of race.
Procedural Background
The Department enforces federal civil rights laws that protect students from discrimination, including Title VI, which prohibits recipients of federal financial assistance from discrimination based on race and ethnicity.
Title VI authorizes the Department to conduct periodic compliance reviews and investigations of the practices and policies of the recipients of federal funding. 28 C.F.R. Sec. 42.107. Should the Department find that a recipient fails to comply with Title VI, it is authorized to pursue legal action to secure compliance. See 28 C.F.R. Sec. 42.105 & 108.
The Department currently provides direct federal financial assistance to Duke Law. 1 Enforcement under Title VI requires funding agencies to advise recipients of their failure to comply, and to determine that compliance cannot be obtained by voluntary means before initiating judicial proceedings to compel compliance. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 2000d-1. If the Department determines that the noncompliance with Title VI cannot be corrected by voluntary means, the Department may seek to compel compliance through enforcement. See 28 C.F.R. Sec. 42.108.
The Department's April 18th notice of investigation letter included a request for information. On December 23, 2025, the Department sent a Supplemental Request for Information. Duke Law responded to these requests with documents. The Department has carefully reviewed the documents Duke Law produced and collected other information in its investigation of Duke Law, which forms the basis of the Department's findings.
Intent to Discriminate
"I'd prefer not to say that we will have to work harder to enroll a diverse class. This is true, but I don't want folks to think we didn't work harder if when the class is not as diverse as we would like. "- Duke Law Associate Dean, Admissions and Student Affairs, William Hoye2
Duke Law's internal communications and policy documents reflect a sustained, determinative emphasis on racial diversity in admissions and a deliberate effort to preserve racial outcomes before and after SFFA.
In a proposed 2021-2022 report, Duke Law identified as an accomplishment that the law school "[i]ncreased the diversity ... of the incoming class" and that the incoming class "would be 43% students of color," contrasted with the previous four-year average of 34%.3 The same report explained that the school would reassess admissions policies in anticipation of Supreme Court limitations on race-based review while "continuing to meet the Law School's goals for a broadly diverse student body."4
In 2023, memoranda to the Admissions Committee urged revisions to the law school's mission statement or other official documents so that diversity would be "taken into consideration in our admissions decisions."5 Faculty praised the memoranda, with one faculty member noting that "what [he] likes" is that the approach "leaves lots of room for faculty to emphasize racial/ethnic diversity as well as diversity along other salient dimensions of difference, including nationality, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, and ideology."6 Law school administrators discussed a post-SFF A strategy to adopt admissions policies that "give preference for those applicants who demonstrate that commitment" to "advancing the rule of law and the protection of democratic institutions," thereby "possibly helping our diversity goals."7
In a document that serves as a guide for application reviewers, the Duke Law School Mission Statement is placed prominently at the top and underscores a commitment to diversity:
The mission of Duke Law School is to advance knowledge and the rule of law through open, rigorous, and collaborative education and scholarly inquiry and to help build and sustain a dynamic legal profession that embodies commitment to equal justice, ethical leadership, diversity of perspective and experience, public service, and the highest standards of client representation.8
Post-SFFA guidance states that Duke Law "may consider applicants' discussion of how race affected their life, be it through discrimination, inspiration, or otherwise."9 Reviewer templates instruct tagging short-answer content (including "Diversity/Services") to assess how candidates may "further [Duke Law's] mission," and explicitly direct contextualization of weaker academic records using background factors such as first-generation status.10 Duke Law's published policies assert that reviewers do not see racial demographic data and that the school "will not analyze or monitor the racial or ethnic composition" during decision-making; yet the structure of prompts and review tags elevates personal background variables commonly correlated with race (first-generation, Pell, etc.).11 Duke Law states that it values "students with a wide range of experiences, backgrounds, and interests that may not be directly related to their legal ambitions" and encourages applicants to "highlight different elements" of themselves "so that we get a full picture of who you are."12 The record shows those variables were used to advance racial diversity goals and thereby operated as material race-related proxies in admissions outcomes.
Internal communications in late 2023 reveal that Duke Law emphasized that "DEI" "is one of our most important values," pledged to "work even harder" to admit and recruit "a racially diverse class," and later refined public language to avoid implying diminished effort if racial diversity declined.13
In the May 2024 Annual Review Memorandum from the Associate Dean of Admissions and Student Affairs. To Duke Law Dean, the admissions dean highlighted the composition and performance of the fall 2023 entering class, emphasizing the class's "broad diversity," specifying that it included "27 Latin[o] students, 23 [b]lack students, and 67 Asian/Asian American students." 14 Looking ahead, the admissions dean outlined an objective for the coming year: "Continue to focus on developing effective race-neutral admissions policies."15
In the May 2025 Annual Review Memorandum, the Admissions Dean characterizes the Law School's "race-neutral admissions policies" as successful. The Admissions Dean also suggests that casually assessing the student body during campus visits can help audit student body diversity without collecting formal statistics. 16
Taken together, the 2021-2022 planning materials, the 2023 committee memoranda and reviewer templates, and the 2024-2025 annual reviews support the inference that Duke Law intended to influence admissions with race or closely related proxies despite formal disclaimers of race-based decision-making. While public policies state that racial composition is not monitored, internal reporting highlighted specific racial counts and evaluation practices that elevate background variables commonly correlated with race. In effect, the record shows that pre- and post-SFFA admissions strategies were structured to advance racial diversity objectives through ostensibly race-neutral tools.
Statistical Evidence of Intentional Discrimination
Applicant-level data (2018-2019 through 2024--2025) also indicates substantial and persistent racial preferences in admission. 17 In 2024, admitted median LSA T for black applicants was 164 (84.2nd percentile) and 170 for Hispanic applicants (95.lst), while the admitted median LSA T for Asian applicants was 173 (97 .9th) and the admitted median LSAT for white applicants was 172 (97.lst). 18 And in 2025, the admitted median for black and Hispanic applicants was 166 (88.7th) and 171 (96.2nd) respectively, while the admitted median for Asian students was 173 (97.9th) and the admitted median for white applicants was 173 (97.9th). 19 Notably, median LSATs of denied Asian and white applicants (Asian: 168, 169; white: 167, 168) in 2024-2025 exceeded the median LSATs of admitted black applicants (164, 166).
The Department also found that when accounting for LSAT, Undergraduate GPA, and race, the admissions models strongly predict outcomes and show highly statistically significant racial preferences in 2025. Based on our review of the 2025 applicant-level data, Duke Law's use of race gave a black applicant a roughly 3.Sx higher probability of admission than an equally strong Asian applicant with similar academic credentials. Earlier cycles show even larger preferences, with preferences declining after SFFA but remaining practically and statistically significant. Even after Duke Law increased weight on additional background factors (e.g., first-generation status), those preferences persisted and cannot not be explained by race-neutral considerations.
The applicant-level data produced by Duke Law indicate that a black or Hispanic student has a substantially higher likelihood of being offered admission than a white or Asian student with the same academic credentials. This consistent difference in the test scores between students of different racial groups is substantial and cannot be explained by a coincidence. The magnitude and durability of these preferences across multiple cycles (including post-SFFA) confirm intentional discrimination.
Findings
The Department finds that after SFFA, Duke Law discriminated against other applicants to benefit applicants of preferred race classes (black and Hispanic). This discrimination is apparent from the documents expressing an intent to discriminate, plus the significant disparity in objective academic metrics between black and Hispanic applicants compared with applicants from other racial categories. Duke Law's internal documents, including policies, and communications confirm the Department's findings that Duke Law intended to discriminate against all racial groups except black and Hispanic applicants, to accept more black and Hispanic applicants. As a result of these practices, highly qualified white, Asian, and other students were denied admission on the basis of their race.
For these reasons, the Department concludes that Duke Law discriminated on the basis of race for the incoming classes of 2023 through 2025, in violation of Title VI as interpreted by SFFA. Based on its review of Duke Law's documents and data, the Department believes that this discrimination is ongoing.
Resolution
Having determined that Duke Law deliberately discriminated on the basis of race in its decisions to admit and deny applicants, the Department seeks to enter into a voluntary resolution agreement with the University to ensure that admissions practices are brought into legal compliance.
If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Morrison at jeffrey.morrison@usdoj.gov or (202) 353-1845.
Thank you in advance for your attention and cooperation.
Harmeet K. Dhillon, Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division, United States Department of Justice
* * *
Original text and footnotes here: https://www.justice.gov/crt/media/1456491/dl
News Release here: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-finds-duke-law-school-discriminates-based-race-admissions
BLS Southwest Region Issues Report on Occupational Employment and Wages in Alexandria May 2025
DALLAS, Texas, Aug. 12 (TNSLrpt) -- Occupational Employment and Wages in Alexandria May 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Southwest Region - Aug. 11, 2026
* * *
Workers in the Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $24.82 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($52.83), legal ($48.67), and healthcare practitioners and technical ... Show Full Article DALLAS, Texas, Aug. 12 (TNSLrpt) -- Occupational Employment and Wages in Alexandria May 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Southwest Region - Aug. 11, 2026 * * * Workers in the Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $24.82 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($52.83), legal ($48.67), and healthcare practitioners and technical($41.12). Lower paying occupations included food preparation and serving related ($12.08), personal care and service ($13.96), and healthcare support ($13.98). (See table A.)
Occupational groups with the highest employment shares in the Alexandria area included office and administrative support (11.7 percent), healthcare practitioners and technical (10.2 percent), and transportation and material moving (9.3 percent). Major occupational groups on the lower end of local employment included arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media (0.6 percent); life, physical, and social science (0.7 percent); and legal (0.7 percent).
* * *
Table A. Occupational employment and wages by major occupational group, United States and the Alexandria metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
One occupational group--healthcare practitioners and technical--was chosen to illustrate the diversity of data available for any of the 22 major occupational categories. Alexandria had 6,130 jobs in healthcare practitioners and technical, accounting for 10.2 percent of local area employment, compared to the 6.3-percent share nationally. The average hourly wage for this occupational group locally was $41.12, compared to the national wage of $52.26.
Some of the larger detailed occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group included registered nurses (2,170), licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses (690), and pharmacy technicians (320). Among the higher paying jobs in this group were pharmacists ($63.81) and physician assistants ($63.12). At the lower end of the wage scale were psychiatric technicians ($14.60) and dispensing opticians ($16.26). (Detailed data for the healthcare practitioners and technical occupations are presented in table 1; for a complete listing of detailed occupations available go to data.bls.gov/oes/#/area/0010780/2025.)
Location quotients allow us to explore the occupational make-up of a metropolitan area by comparing the composition of jobs in an area relative to the national average. (See table 1.) For example, a location quotient of 2.00 indicates that an occupation accounts for twice the share of employment in the area than it does nationally. In the Alexandria area, above-average concentrations of employment were found in many of the occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group. For instance, psychiatric technicians were employed at 3.63 times the national rate in Alexandria, and licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses, at 2.76 times the U.S. average. Veterinarians had a location quotient of 1.02 in Alexandria, indicating that this particular occupation's local and national employment shares were similar.
The statistics in this release are from the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey, a cooperative effort between BLS and the State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). BLS funds the survey and provides the procedures and technical support. State Workforce Agencies collect most of the data: in this case, Louisiana Works.
* * *
Federal Government Shutdown
Because of the lapse in federal appropriations from October 1 through November 12, 2025, additional collection and processing time were required for the May 2025 OEWS survey panel once appropriations resumed. The response rate for the May 2025 survey panel was within the normal range and no additional modifications to the OEWS methodology and procedures were necessary as a result of the shutdown.
* * *
Technical Note
The Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey is a semiannual survey measuring occupational employment and wage rates for wage and salary workers in nonfarm establishments in the United States. The OEWS data available from BLS include cross-industry occupational employment and wage estimates for the nation; over 530 areas, including states and the District of Columbia, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), nonmetropolitan areas, and territories; national industry-specific estimates at the NAICS sector, 3-digit, most 4-digit, and selected 5- and 6-digit industry levels; and national estimates by ownership across all industries and for schools and hospitals. Full OEWS data tables (https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm) are available online.
Additional information about the OEWS estimates and methodology is available in the national Technical Notes (https://www.bls.gov/oes/2025/may/oes_tec.htm). The overall national response rate for the six panels, based on the 50 states and the District of Columbia, is 66.2 percent based on establishments and 67.2 percent based on weighted sampled employment. Sample sizes and response rates by metropolitan and nonmetropolitan area are available on the Additional OEWS data sets (https://www.bls.gov/oes/additional.htm) page.
Metropolitan area definitions
The substate area data published in this release reflect the standards and definitions established by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
The Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area includes Grant Parish and Rapides Parish.
For more information
Answers to frequently asked questions (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_ques.htm) about the OEWS data, as well as general program documentation (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_doc.htm), are available on the OEWS website (https://www.bls.gov/oes/).
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.
* * *
Table 1. Employment and wage data for healthcare practitioners and technical occupations, Alexandria metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/regions/southwest/news-release/2026/occupationalemploymentandwages_alexandria_20260811.htm
* * *
Workers in the Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $24.82 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($52.83), legal ($48.67), and healthcare practitioners and technical ... Show Full Article DALLAS, Texas, Aug. 12 (TNSLrpt) -- Occupational Employment and Wages in Alexandria May 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Southwest Region - Aug. 11, 2026 * * * Workers in the Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $24.82 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($52.83), legal ($48.67), and healthcare practitioners and technical($41.12). Lower paying occupations included food preparation and serving related ($12.08), personal care and service ($13.96), and healthcare support ($13.98). (See table A.)
Occupational groups with the highest employment shares in the Alexandria area included office and administrative support (11.7 percent), healthcare practitioners and technical (10.2 percent), and transportation and material moving (9.3 percent). Major occupational groups on the lower end of local employment included arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media (0.6 percent); life, physical, and social science (0.7 percent); and legal (0.7 percent).
* * *
Table A. Occupational employment and wages by major occupational group, United States and the Alexandria metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
One occupational group--healthcare practitioners and technical--was chosen to illustrate the diversity of data available for any of the 22 major occupational categories. Alexandria had 6,130 jobs in healthcare practitioners and technical, accounting for 10.2 percent of local area employment, compared to the 6.3-percent share nationally. The average hourly wage for this occupational group locally was $41.12, compared to the national wage of $52.26.
Some of the larger detailed occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group included registered nurses (2,170), licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses (690), and pharmacy technicians (320). Among the higher paying jobs in this group were pharmacists ($63.81) and physician assistants ($63.12). At the lower end of the wage scale were psychiatric technicians ($14.60) and dispensing opticians ($16.26). (Detailed data for the healthcare practitioners and technical occupations are presented in table 1; for a complete listing of detailed occupations available go to data.bls.gov/oes/#/area/0010780/2025.)
Location quotients allow us to explore the occupational make-up of a metropolitan area by comparing the composition of jobs in an area relative to the national average. (See table 1.) For example, a location quotient of 2.00 indicates that an occupation accounts for twice the share of employment in the area than it does nationally. In the Alexandria area, above-average concentrations of employment were found in many of the occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group. For instance, psychiatric technicians were employed at 3.63 times the national rate in Alexandria, and licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses, at 2.76 times the U.S. average. Veterinarians had a location quotient of 1.02 in Alexandria, indicating that this particular occupation's local and national employment shares were similar.
The statistics in this release are from the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey, a cooperative effort between BLS and the State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). BLS funds the survey and provides the procedures and technical support. State Workforce Agencies collect most of the data: in this case, Louisiana Works.
* * *
Federal Government Shutdown
Because of the lapse in federal appropriations from October 1 through November 12, 2025, additional collection and processing time were required for the May 2025 OEWS survey panel once appropriations resumed. The response rate for the May 2025 survey panel was within the normal range and no additional modifications to the OEWS methodology and procedures were necessary as a result of the shutdown.
* * *
Technical Note
The Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey is a semiannual survey measuring occupational employment and wage rates for wage and salary workers in nonfarm establishments in the United States. The OEWS data available from BLS include cross-industry occupational employment and wage estimates for the nation; over 530 areas, including states and the District of Columbia, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), nonmetropolitan areas, and territories; national industry-specific estimates at the NAICS sector, 3-digit, most 4-digit, and selected 5- and 6-digit industry levels; and national estimates by ownership across all industries and for schools and hospitals. Full OEWS data tables (https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm) are available online.
Additional information about the OEWS estimates and methodology is available in the national Technical Notes (https://www.bls.gov/oes/2025/may/oes_tec.htm). The overall national response rate for the six panels, based on the 50 states and the District of Columbia, is 66.2 percent based on establishments and 67.2 percent based on weighted sampled employment. Sample sizes and response rates by metropolitan and nonmetropolitan area are available on the Additional OEWS data sets (https://www.bls.gov/oes/additional.htm) page.
Metropolitan area definitions
The substate area data published in this release reflect the standards and definitions established by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
The Alexandria, LA Metropolitan Statistical Area includes Grant Parish and Rapides Parish.
For more information
Answers to frequently asked questions (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_ques.htm) about the OEWS data, as well as general program documentation (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_doc.htm), are available on the OEWS website (https://www.bls.gov/oes/).
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.
* * *
Table 1. Employment and wage data for healthcare practitioners and technical occupations, Alexandria metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/regions/southwest/news-release/2026/occupationalemploymentandwages_alexandria_20260811.htm
BLS Mountain-Plains Region Issues Report on Occupational Employment and Wages in Cape Girardeau May 2025
KANSAS CITY, Missouri, Aug. 12 (TNSLrpt) -- Occupational Employment and Wages in Cape Girardeau May 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Mountain-Plains Region - Aug. 11, 2026
* * *
Workers in the Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $27.23 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($49.74), healthcare practitioners and technical ... Show Full Article KANSAS CITY, Missouri, Aug. 12 (TNSLrpt) -- Occupational Employment and Wages in Cape Girardeau May 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Mountain-Plains Region - Aug. 11, 2026 * * * Workers in the Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $27.23 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($49.74), healthcare practitioners and technical($47.04), and architecture and engineering ($42.52). Lower paying occupations included food preparation and serving related ($16.14), building and grounds cleaning and maintenance ($17.50), and healthcare support ($17.81). (See table A.)
Occupational groups with the highest employment shares in the Cape Girardeau area included office and administrative support (11.2 percent), food preparation and serving related (10.1 percent), and healthcare practitioners and technical (9.7 percent). Major occupational groups on the lower end of local employment included life, physical, and social science (0.4 percent); legal (0.5 percent); and architecture and engineering (0.8 percent).
* * *
Table A. Occupational employment and wages by major occupational group, United States and the Cape Girardeau metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
One occupational group--healthcare practitioners and technical--was chosen to illustrate the diversity of data available for any of the 22 major occupational categories. Cape Girardeau had 4,330 jobs in healthcare practitioners and technical, accounting for 9.7 percent of local area employment, compared to the 6.3-percent share nationally. The average hourly wage for this occupational group locally was $47.04, compared to the national wage of $52.26.
Some of the larger detailed occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group included registered nurses (1,470), licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses (410), and pharmacy technicians (230). Among the higher paying jobs in this group were pharmacists ($69.46) and physician assistants ($67.68). At the lower end of the wage scale were emergency medical technicians ($17.94) and dispensing opticians ($18.40). (Detailed data for the healthcare practitioners and technical occupations are presented in table 1; for a complete listing of detailed occupations available go to data.bls.gov/oes/#/area/0016020/2025.)
Location quotients allow us to explore the occupational make-up of a metropolitan area by comparing the composition of jobs in an area relative to the national average. (See table 1.) For example, a location quotient of 2.00 indicates that an occupation accounts for twice the share of employment in the area than it does nationally. In the Cape Girardeau area, above-average concentrations of employment were found in many of the occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group. For instance, licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses were employed at 2.21 times the national rate in Cape Girardeau, and nurse practitioners, at 2.20 times the U.S. average. Emergency medical technicians had a location quotient of 0.99 in Cape Girardeau, indicating that this particular occupation's local and national employment shares were similar.
The statistics in this release are from the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey, a cooperative effort between BLS and the State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). BLS funds the survey and provides the procedures and technical support. State Workforce Agencies collect most of the data: in this case, the Missouri Economic Research and Information Center, and the Illinois Department of Employment Security.
* * *
Federal Government Shutdown
Because of the lapse in federal appropriations from October 1 through November 12, 2025, additional collection and processing time were required for the May 2025 OEWS survey panel once appropriations resumed. The response rate for the May 2025 survey panel was within the normal range and no additional modifications to the OEWS methodology and procedures were necessary as a result of the shutdown.
* * *
Technical Note
The Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey is a semiannual survey measuring occupational employment and wage rates for wage and salary workers in nonfarm establishments in the United States. The OEWS data available from BLS include cross-industry occupational employment and wage estimates for the nation; over 530 areas, including states and the District of Columbia, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), nonmetropolitan areas, and territories; national industry-specific estimates at the NAICS sector, 3-digit, most 4-digit, and selected 5- and 6-digit industry levels; and national estimates by ownership across all industries and for schools and hospitals. Full OEWS data tables (https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm) are available online.
Additional information about the OEWS estimates and methodology is available in the national Technical Notes (https://www.bls.gov/oes/2025/may/oes_tec.htm). The overall national response rate for the six panels, based on the 50 states and the District of Columbia, is 66.2 percent based on establishments and 67.2 percent based on weighted sampled employment. Sample sizes and response rates by metropolitan and nonmetropolitan area are available onthe Additional OEWS data sets (https://www.bls.gov/oes/additional.htm) page.
Metropolitan area definitions
The substate area data published in this release reflect the standards and definitions established by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
The Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area includes Alexander County, IL; Bollinger County, MO; and Cape Girardeau County, MO.
For more information
Answers to frequently asked questions (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_ques.htm) about the OEWS data, as well as general program documentation (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_doc.htm), are available on the OEWS website (https://www.bls.gov/oes/).
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.
* * *
Table 1. Employment and wage data for healthcare practitioners and technical occupations, Cape Girardeau metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/regions/mountain-plains/news-release/2026/occupationalemploymentandwages_capegirardeau_20260811.htm
* * *
Workers in the Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $27.23 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($49.74), healthcare practitioners and technical ... Show Full Article KANSAS CITY, Missouri, Aug. 12 (TNSLrpt) -- Occupational Employment and Wages in Cape Girardeau May 2025 - A report from U.S. Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Mountain-Plains Region - Aug. 11, 2026 * * * Workers in the Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area had an average (mean) hourly wage of $27.23 in May 2025, compared to the nationwide average of $33.54, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Acting Regional Commissioner Jerome Watters noted that higher paying major occupational groups included management ($49.74), healthcare practitioners and technical($47.04), and architecture and engineering ($42.52). Lower paying occupations included food preparation and serving related ($16.14), building and grounds cleaning and maintenance ($17.50), and healthcare support ($17.81). (See table A.)
Occupational groups with the highest employment shares in the Cape Girardeau area included office and administrative support (11.2 percent), food preparation and serving related (10.1 percent), and healthcare practitioners and technical (9.7 percent). Major occupational groups on the lower end of local employment included life, physical, and social science (0.4 percent); legal (0.5 percent); and architecture and engineering (0.8 percent).
* * *
Table A. Occupational employment and wages by major occupational group, United States and the Cape Girardeau metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
One occupational group--healthcare practitioners and technical--was chosen to illustrate the diversity of data available for any of the 22 major occupational categories. Cape Girardeau had 4,330 jobs in healthcare practitioners and technical, accounting for 9.7 percent of local area employment, compared to the 6.3-percent share nationally. The average hourly wage for this occupational group locally was $47.04, compared to the national wage of $52.26.
Some of the larger detailed occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group included registered nurses (1,470), licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses (410), and pharmacy technicians (230). Among the higher paying jobs in this group were pharmacists ($69.46) and physician assistants ($67.68). At the lower end of the wage scale were emergency medical technicians ($17.94) and dispensing opticians ($18.40). (Detailed data for the healthcare practitioners and technical occupations are presented in table 1; for a complete listing of detailed occupations available go to data.bls.gov/oes/#/area/0016020/2025.)
Location quotients allow us to explore the occupational make-up of a metropolitan area by comparing the composition of jobs in an area relative to the national average. (See table 1.) For example, a location quotient of 2.00 indicates that an occupation accounts for twice the share of employment in the area than it does nationally. In the Cape Girardeau area, above-average concentrations of employment were found in many of the occupations within the healthcare practitioners and technical group. For instance, licensed practical and licensed vocational nurses were employed at 2.21 times the national rate in Cape Girardeau, and nurse practitioners, at 2.20 times the U.S. average. Emergency medical technicians had a location quotient of 0.99 in Cape Girardeau, indicating that this particular occupation's local and national employment shares were similar.
The statistics in this release are from the Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey, a cooperative effort between BLS and the State Workforce Agencies (SWAs). BLS funds the survey and provides the procedures and technical support. State Workforce Agencies collect most of the data: in this case, the Missouri Economic Research and Information Center, and the Illinois Department of Employment Security.
* * *
Federal Government Shutdown
Because of the lapse in federal appropriations from October 1 through November 12, 2025, additional collection and processing time were required for the May 2025 OEWS survey panel once appropriations resumed. The response rate for the May 2025 survey panel was within the normal range and no additional modifications to the OEWS methodology and procedures were necessary as a result of the shutdown.
* * *
Technical Note
The Occupational Employment and Wage Statistics (OEWS) survey is a semiannual survey measuring occupational employment and wage rates for wage and salary workers in nonfarm establishments in the United States. The OEWS data available from BLS include cross-industry occupational employment and wage estimates for the nation; over 530 areas, including states and the District of Columbia, metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs), nonmetropolitan areas, and territories; national industry-specific estimates at the NAICS sector, 3-digit, most 4-digit, and selected 5- and 6-digit industry levels; and national estimates by ownership across all industries and for schools and hospitals. Full OEWS data tables (https://www.bls.gov/oes/tables.htm) are available online.
Additional information about the OEWS estimates and methodology is available in the national Technical Notes (https://www.bls.gov/oes/2025/may/oes_tec.htm). The overall national response rate for the six panels, based on the 50 states and the District of Columbia, is 66.2 percent based on establishments and 67.2 percent based on weighted sampled employment. Sample sizes and response rates by metropolitan and nonmetropolitan area are available onthe Additional OEWS data sets (https://www.bls.gov/oes/additional.htm) page.
Metropolitan area definitions
The substate area data published in this release reflect the standards and definitions established by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget.
The Cape Girardeau, MO-IL Metropolitan Statistical Area includes Alexander County, IL; Bollinger County, MO; and Cape Girardeau County, MO.
For more information
Answers to frequently asked questions (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_ques.htm) about the OEWS data, as well as general program documentation (https://www.bls.gov/oes/oes_doc.htm), are available on the OEWS website (https://www.bls.gov/oes/).
If you are deaf, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability, please dial 7-1-1 to access telecommunications relay services.
* * *
Table 1. Employment and wage data for healthcare practitioners and technical occupations, Cape Girardeau metropolitan area, May 2025
* * *
View original text plus charts and tables here: https://www.bls.gov/regions/mountain-plains/news-release/2026/occupationalemploymentandwages_capegirardeau_20260811.htm