Blog

  • King Charles hopes Amazon Prime nature documentary will ‘inspire’ viewers

    King Charles hopes Amazon Prime nature documentary will ‘inspire’ viewers

    Sean CoughlanRoyal correspondent

    Millie Pilkington/ King's Foundation King Charles head and shoulders in photo taken at Highgrove in July 2025Millie Pilkington/ King’s Foundation

    King Charles held a “harmony summit” at Highgrove in the summer, where this photograph was taken

    King Charles says he wants to inspire a “sense of determination” to protect the…

    Continue Reading

  • COVID Vaccines Still Effective Against Severe Outcomes, VA Study Suggests

    COVID Vaccines Still Effective Against Severe Outcomes, VA Study Suggests


    • The severity of SARS-CoV-2 infections has waned since…

    Continue Reading

  • Finalised Inland Revenue guidance on share cancellations: a further chapter in the “dividend integrity” journey | Tax Alert – October 2025

    Finalised Inland Revenue guidance on share cancellations: a further chapter in the “dividend integrity” journey | Tax Alert – October 2025

    By Campbell Rose, Greg Mitchell & Anna Roche

     

    In September 2025 Inland Revenue published Interpretation Statement 25/19 Whether an off-market share cancellation is made in lieu of the payment of a dividend (IS 25/19), which finalised the draft interpretation statement (IS) issued for public consultation earlier this year and replaces previous guidance from 1999.

    As we discussed in our May 2025 Tax Alert article the draft IS was, generally, welcome updated guidance on whether a share cancellation is in lieu of a dividend. However, it was not without some potential fish-hooks, which were raised with officials as part of the consultation process. We summarise below how some of those submissions fared.

    Submission areas

    Some suggestions raised in submissions included that:

    • The IS should establish clearer boundaries as to where Inland Revenue considers there is a risk that the redemption of non-participating redeemable shares (NPRS) is in lieu of a dividend;

    • Where part of an amount is treated as in lieu of a dividend, tainting the entire amount paid could capture legitimate returns of available subscribed capital (ASC); equally, the IS should clarify that an actual dividend portion of an overall payout upon share cancellation should not taint the entire amount;

    • The scope of the IS should be refined in relation to non-pro-rata buy-backs, including acknowledging the commercial drivers for such buy-backs, appropriately recognising what is an “unusual event”, clarifying the implications of contemporaneously issuing shares to other shareholders, and addressing the position of investment companies; and

    • An example in the draft IS (example 4) should be clarified so that the inability of a company to pay a dividend (e.g., due to annual losses since incorporation) should be a factor that indicates a redemption is not in lieu of a dividend – rather than being only a “neutral” factor as described in the draft IS.

    Updates in the final published IS 25/19

    The finalised IS 25/19 included the usual minor ‘tidy ups’ and clarifications that arise through the consultation process, as well as some notable changes, including:

    • A new example (example 10) that illustrates a scenario when a redemption of NPRS would not be considered in lieu of a dividend. Although example 10 supports the starting point that a redemption of NPRS should only be in lieu of a dividend in extreme cases, in our view more value could have been derived from an example clarifying the limited circumstances in which a redemption of NPRS would be in lieu of a dividend. In particular, IS 25/19 does not reference relevant extrinsic material (published by Inland Revenue in August 1994) confirming that, illustratively, the “in lieu of dividend” test should be triggered in an NPRS context where a company ceases a regular dividend flow to shareholders and ensures those shareholders receive an equivalent amount by redeeming NPRS. The example does, however, demonstrate that a commercial reason for cancelling shares is to facilitate a shareholder exit. It also clarifies that it is not only the first ever share cancellation or redemption that may be considered a “one-off” unusual transaction.

    • An additional example supports that issuing shares after a cancellation does not necessarily indicate that the cancellation is in lieu of a dividend; as the cancellation and reissue can have a legitimate commercial rationale without any suggestion that the reissue is to circumvent the bright-line tests.

    • Clarifying that a cancellation payment comprising both ASC (capable of being returned tax-free) and an additional (excess) dividend component is not, without a purpose of avoidance, intended to be captured by the ‘tainting’ which can occur when part of such a payment is “in lieu of” a dividend.

    • Updates have been made to what was example 4 (now 5), to confirm that a company with no retained earnings and ongoing tax losses is not in a dividend-paying position, and therefore the cancellation in the example should not be in lieu of a dividend. This is sensible, as it re-confirms that a company needs to be in a dividend paying position for a share cancellation to be considered in lieu of a dividend.

    Areas not updated in IS 25/19

    Inland Revenue did not address all of the key concerns that were raised in submissions.

    IS 29/15 does not acknowledge that non pro-rata buy-backs generally should not be considered to be in lieu of a dividend (other than in rare circumstances). This point is of fundamental importance to investment companies, as their business model is often to redeem or cancel the shares of some shareholders while contemporaneously issuing new equity to other shareholders. A clear statement providing guidance in this context would have been a welcome addition to provide certainty; instead it appears that the tax implications will need to be firmly grounded in the commercial drivers specific to the business model and particular redemption(s)/re-issuance(s).

    Inland Revenue did not consider there was scope to apply a purposive approach to interpreting the “all or nothing” nature of the tainting language in the in lieu of dividend rule, based on the legislation as drafted and its intended scope. This issue has been referred to policy officials for further consideration.

    Where to from here?

    “Dividend avoidance/integrity” is currently, and we expect will continue to be, a key focus area for Inland Revenue. It represents an area of avoidance-related investigation where Inland Revenue’s enquiries can be assumed to commence from a sceptical starting point – and potentially in scenarios where the statutory time bar may not apply.

    Accordingly, in defending a share cancellation as being genuine, it will be critical to retain objective evidence that compellingly supports the commercial reasons underpinning the cancellation. This needs to then be appropriately weighted with the other statutory factors in section CD 22(7) of the Income Tax Act 2007 to support a position that none of the amount paid is in lieu of a dividend.

    As IS 25/19 has been updated to include reference to “inexplicable accumulation of earnings”, “examin[ing] the source of (…) funds” for “objective evidence that they represent genuine surplus capital and not simply accumulated profits”. In the context of examples the analysis also uses new terminology of dividends being “effectively deferred”, and “utilis[ing] a bank account of accumulated profits”.

    It is therefore imperative that companies tread carefully in this area, given heightened Inland Revenue scrutiny of the capital/revenue (dividend) boundary. As we noted in our May 2025 article, obtaining appropriate specialist tax advice and achieving valuable certainty through a binding ruling before undertaking a share cancellation, warrant serious consideration.

    If you have any questions on IS 25/19 or the tax implications more generally of share cancellations, please contact your usual Deloitte advisor.

    Continue Reading

  • Starc commits to post-Ashes splash in the Big Bash

    Starc commits to post-Ashes splash in the Big Bash

    Having retired from T20Is, white-ball spearhead Mitchell Starc is aiming to end his decade-long drought in the BBL

    Mitchell Starc is aiming to end his 11-year Big Bash…

    Continue Reading

  • Published, pending, and on hold: Inland Revenue’s public guidance work programme | Tax Alert – October 2025

    Published, pending, and on hold: Inland Revenue’s public guidance work programme | Tax Alert – October 2025

    By Joe Sothcott & Robyn Walker

     

    The Public Guidance Work Programme is a frequently overlooked yet invaluable publication produced by the Inland Revenue’s Tax Counsel Office. The Tax Counsel Office (TCO) is responsible for determining the Commissioner of Inland Revenue’s view on the tax laws and provides advice on tax technical matters, as well has having some oversight as to how tax laws are implemented within in the Inland Revenue.

    The Work Programme tracks the status of priority interpretation items under development. With the latest update published on 1 October 2025 we take a look at what’s currently included, what’s missing, how it’s compiled, and what new items have been added.

    What Is the Public Guidance Work Programme?

    The Work Programme currently includes only items issued by the TCO, specifically:

    • Interpretation statements – These set out the Commissioner’s view on how tax law applies to broader areas of tax.  (Items finalised in year to September 2025: 22)

    • Questions we’ve been asked (QWBAs) – Short-form guidance responding to specific, practical questions raised by taxpayers or advisors. (Items finalised in year to September 2025: 20)

    While both are non-binding, they are considered authoritative and are widely relied upon by taxpayers and advisors.

    The Work Programme does not include items produced by the Technical Standards team, such as:

    • Standard practice statements (Items finalised in year to September 2025: 0)

    • Operational statements (Items finalised in year to September 2025: 5)

    • Commissioner’s statements (Items finalised in year to September 2025: 0)

    • Kilometre rates for motor vehicle expenses (annually published)

    • Determinations (Items finalised in year to September 2025: 17)

    For example, the Draft Standard Practice Statement on Mutual Transactions of Associations (ED0265) is not listed in the Work Programme. Deloitte understands that, after public consultation over the draft guidance, the item is now on hold pending referral to Inland Revenue’s Policy team for a potential policy change.

    Deloitte’s view is that all public guidance items, whether from the TCO Office or the Technical Standards team, should be published in a single consolidated work programme. This would improve transparency and make it easier to identify when items are on hold pending policy consideration.

    How Is the Work Programme compiled?

    The Work Programme includes:

    • Consultation items—including those scheduled to begin consultation, currently under consultation, or where consultation has recently closed.

    • Pre-consultation items in development or not yet started

    • Items currently on hold

    Transparency is the underlying principle of the Public Guidance Work Programme. TCO refreshes the Work Programme annually, and prior to each refresh, it invites public submissions on technical issues, gaps in existing guidance, and emerging areas of uncertainty. Submissions generally can be made via email or via an Inland Revenue form. Keep an eye out around mid-2026 for the next opportunity to contribute submissions for the Work Programme.

    Once submissions are received, the TCO evaluates them based on:

    • Importance of the issue

    • Level of uncertainty or ambiguity

    • Number of taxpayers affected

    • Need to resolve existing issues

    • Potential revenue implications

    A draft Work Programme is then prepared and circulated to key stakeholders for feedback (including on relative priority) before the final version is published.

    What’s new in the 2025–26 Work Programme?

    The refreshed Work Programme includes a long list of new items:

    1. PUB00523: Income tax and GST – associated persons

    2. PUB00524: GST – B2B loyalty schemes

    3. PUB00525: GST – Compulsory zero-rating of land – update of IS 17/08

    4. PUB00526: GST – Concurrent land use

    5. PUB00527: GST – Financial services – custodian, supervisor and trustee fees

    6. PUB00528: GST – Financial services – planning fees – refresh of IS0052

    7. PUB00529: GST – Goods and services acquired for $10,000 or less

    8. PUB00530: GST – Types of unincorporated bodies

    9. PUB00531: Income tax – B2B loyalty schemes

    10. PUB00532: Income tax – deductions – financial planning fees – refresh of IS0044

    11. PUB00533: Income tax – Depreciation – low value assets

    12. PUB00534: Income tax – Intra-group dividends – s CD 27

    13. PUB00535: Income tax – Losses – business continuity and part year losses

    14. PUB00536: Income tax – NZ custodians’ ‘top-up’ amount of RWT

    15. PUB00537: Income tax – Retention money and performance bonds under construction contracts – update of QB 13/04

    16. PUB00538: Income tax – Schedular payments – withholding obligations under Sch 4, Part F

    17. PUB00539: Income tax – Share lending issues

    18. PUB00540: Income tax – Transferable development rights

    19. PUB00541: Income tax – Trusts – interest deductibility

    20. PUB00543: Income Ttax – FIFs – whether cost and CV methods can be used concurrently

    21. PUB00544: Income tax – When is a trustee a bare trustee

    22. PUB00545: GST – Fees of board members appointed by the Governor-General or Governor-General in Council

    Some taxpayers may understandably have trepidations about a few of the items and whether they may open a pandora’s box where interpretation doesn’t match reality, in light of the open-loop gift cards debate that arose from the publication of QB 25/07: What is the income tax treatment of gift cards and products provided as trade rebates or promotions? Other items, such as guidance on often misunderstood areas, like how taxpayers can apply the 100% depreciation rate for low value assets under section EE 38, will be more welcome.

    Want to suggest an Item?

    We understand that raising issues for inclusion in the Work Programme can feel daunting—especially if there’s concern it might attract unwanted scrutiny. For those may feel uneasy about contact the TCO direct, Deloitte is always happy to raise issues on behalf of clients. If you have questions or would like to discuss a potential submission, please reach out to your usual Deloitte advisor.

    Continue Reading

  • Millions left behind: The push to simplify unclaimed money claims | Tax Alert – October 2025

    Millions left behind: The push to simplify unclaimed money claims | Tax Alert – October 2025

    By Amy Sexton & Robyn Walker

     

    The prospect of a significant sum of money lying dormant and unclaimed will motivate many to search the Inland Revenue’s unclaimed money database, especially when media coverage draws attention to its existence. The recent Taxation (Annual Rates for 2025–26, Compliance Simplification, and Remedial Measures) Bill (the Bill) proposes changes aimed at simplifying the management of unclaimed money by Inland Revenue, with the intention of making it easier for rightful owners to make claims.

    What is ‘unclaimed money’

    Unclaimed money are funds held by an individual or organisation (such as bank, solicitor, utility company, life insurer, employer, other business) where the rightful owner cannot be located. After a specified period of time passes without contact, these funds are classified as “unclaimed” and transferred to an administrator. The required time period varies depending on the type of funds involved.

    While Inland Revenue is widely recognised for administering unclaimed money, not all categories of unclaimed funds fall under its responsibility, a raft of options are outlined on The Treasury website.

    What are the proposed changes?

    Additional information

    Currently the Unclaimed Money Act 1971 puts the following obligations on holders of unclaimed money:

    1. A holder must make reasonable efforts to locate the owner of money that is, or will soon become, unclaimed money and to communicate with the owner concerning the money.

    2. A holder of money that pays the money to the Commissioner as unclaimed money must provide to the Commissioner, with or before the payment and in a form acceptable to the Commissioner, the information relating to the owner and the money that is in the possession or control of the holder and is readily available to the holder, including—

    a. the source, and history of the accrual, of the amount

    b. the identity and whereabouts of the owner

    c. the source of the owner’s entitlement to payment of the money.

    Under the Bill. when transferring unclaimed money, holders will be required to provide Inland Revenue with more detailed information to assist in identifying the rightful owner. The new legislation will read as follows:

    1. A holder must make reasonable efforts to locate the owner of money that is, or will soon become, unclaimed money and to communicate with the owner concerning the money.

    2. A holder of money that pays the money to the Commissioner as unclaimed money must provide to the Commissioner, with or before the payment and in a form acceptable to the Commissioner, the information relating to the owner and the money that is in the possession or control of the holder and is readily available to the holder, including—

    a. the source, and history of the accrual, of the amount

    i. the full name, date of birth, and tax file number of the owner

    ii. the address and contact details of the owner

    b. the whereabouts of the owner

    c. the source of the owner’s entitlement to payment of the money

    d. where applicable, the number of the account where the money is held, the date the account was opened, and the date of the owner’s last interaction with the account.

    It is important to note that under both the current and proposed legislation, the information needs to be in the “possession or control” and “readily available” to the holder. With more data points being required upfront there will be a need for businesses dealing with unclaimed money to give thought to whether new systems and processes are required to efficiently extract information, particularly if it is spread across different information sources.

    20 year time bar

    In 2021 a 25 year time bar was introduced for unclaimed money administered  by Inland Revenue. The proposal is to reduce this time bar to 20 years (which is still a very long time!). If money remains unclaimed after the time bar, it will be removed from the unclaimed money list and transferred to the Crown. 

    Why make changes?

    Currently, claimants often face challenges in proving ownership of unclaimed money, leading to considerable correspondence with Inland Revenue. These proposed changes are intended to streamline the process for all parties involved. For context, in the 2023/24 year Inland Revenue received 23,000 claims for unclaimed money but approved only 4,300 claims, amounting to $36.5m, with over $0.5b remaining unclaimed.

    These proposed changes are scheduled to take effect from 1 April 2026.

    If you believe you may have a claim to unclaimed money and are unsure how to establish ownership, please contact your usual Deloitte advisor for assistance.

    Continue Reading

  • Red Light, green light – Transfer pricing issues for intercompany loans | Tax Alert – October 2025

    Red Light, green light – Transfer pricing issues for intercompany loans | Tax Alert – October 2025

    By Young Jin Kim & Bart de Gouw

     

    It is widely accepted that cross-border related-party debt can be used by multinational enterprises (MNEs) to shift profits out of a country. In the New Zealand context this led to the introduction of the Restricted Transfer Pricing (RTP) rules and the requirement to disclose inbound cross-border intercompany loans with a value of more than NZD10M to Inland Revenue in the BEPS Disclosure Form (this disclosure requirement has since been amended effective from the 2025 income year with taxpayers just required to hold a copy of the necessary information).

    In recent years, the International Revenue Strategy (IRS) team at Inland Revenue has observed considerable behavioural change by foreign-owned MNEs with the introduction of additional equity and/or reducing related-party debt financing. This behavioural change has been attributed to the introduction of the RTP rules and a greater focus on financing by the Inland Revenue (via targeted campaigns, risk reviews and audits).

    The past five years has seen a highly volatile interest rate environment, with historic lows in the Official Cash Rate in the 2020 and 2021 years, a rapid increase in 2022 and 2023, and a declining rate since the middle of 2024.  This level of volatility has meant that taxpayers should have been regularly reviewing intercompany financing arrangements to ensure that the behaviour of the parties to the loans, the terms and conditions of loans, and the interest rate have all remained arm’s length.  With the increases in the interest rates applying to the most recently filed 2023 and 2024 tax returns coupled with the Inland Revenue stepping up its audit activity more generally, we are expecting intercompany loans and financing to become a key area of focus for Inland Revenue.  This is starting to come to fruition with the number of risk reviews and audits focusing on intercompany financing increasing.

    Risk assessment – Are you a green light or red light?

    Now is an opportune time for taxpayers to reflect on their intercompany loans and key risk areas that could be challenged by Inland Revenue. To help with this, we have summarised 9 risk factors when it comes to intercompany loans.

    1. The loan is over NZD10m at any time during the income year. RTP rules will apply to the loan and an analysis of the rules will be necessary, which can lead to material denial of interest deductibility as the borrowers’ credit rating may be adjusted and certain loan terms and conditions disregarded.

    2. No documented loan terms. Loan agreements are important – this will be the starting point for any Inland Revenue review. In the absence of a valid agreement, Inland Revenue may seek to imply (unfavourable) terms and any pricing analysis conducted to support the interest rate will not have strong basis.

    3. Loan agreements that do not clearly state what the arrangement is and what the key purpose of the funds advanced is.

    4. The arrangement is non-commercial or contains ‘exotic’ features such as subordination, interest deferral of more than 12 months, or has a term of more than five years. Under the RTP rules, certain exotic terms cannot be priced into the interest rate.

    5. Using a fixed interest rate for a revolving credit facility loan (that can be drawn down and repaid by the borrower) or a floating interest rate for a fixed term loan (the reset of an interest rate on a fixed term loan is likely a trigger point requiring a retesting the application of the RTP rules).

    6. The loan has been extended, renegotiated, or renewed in the past year. This could make a big difference to the deductible level of interest as the interest rate environments change very quickly and these events also require retesting of the application of the RTP rules.

    7. Has the loan been reset at a higher interest rate?  Is this what a third-party borrower would do, i.e. is the behaviour of the parties demonstrably arm’s length?

    8. Does the borrower have a high debt percentage?  Greater than 40% is considered high risk for borrowers with a cross border related party borrowing of more than NZD10m.  Similarly, borrowing from related parties in low tax jurisdictions (<15% tax rate) is also a risk factor as set out in the RTP rules.

    9. Be mindful of interest gross up clauses – any additional interest paid under a gross-up clause also needs to be arm’s length.

    Update to Inland Revenue’s administrative guidance on small value loans

    Inland Revenue annually publishes an administrative guidance for small value loans (i.e., for cross-border associated party loans for up to NZD10M principal). This administrative guidance may be applied to cross-border associated party loans.

    Inland Revenue has historically provided an interest rate margin (over a relevant base indicator) that it considers to be broadly indicative of an arm’s length rate, in the absence of a readily available market rate for a debt instrument with similar terms and risk characteristics.  The most recent change to the interest margin has also introduced (without explanation or consultation) a change in approach to make the interest rate margin backward looking only and in our view, reduces the practical application of this otherwise widely used administrative guidance.  The current interest rate margin in the guidance is 250 basis points over the relevant base rate and applies for the period 1 July 2024 to 30 June 2025. There is now no equivalent guidance for interest rates for the year to 30 June 2026.  We will continue to provide updates on any developments on the administrative guidance.

    Next steps

    If any of the above risk factors concern you please contact your usual Deloitte advisor or one of our award winning transfer pricing team to help navigate the issues.

    Continue Reading

  • Building the future of healthcare in LATAM

    Building the future of healthcare in LATAM

    Latin America’s (LATAM) healthcare landscape is vibrant and complex. It’s woven from diverse populations, economic shifts, and a powerful drive for innovation. The region’s health systems are navigating a period of profound transformation, demanding smarter, more connected solutions.

    Transformational trends shaping healthcare in the region

    Across Latin America, several powerful trends are reshaping the delivery of care. Three forces in particular stand out as critical drivers of change.

    1. Telehealth 2.0: from pandemic response to integrated care

    The adoption of telehealth across Latin America has been remarkable. What began as a necessary response to the pandemic is now evolving into a permanent and integrated part of the healthcare ecosystem. The telehealth market in the region is projected to exceed US $22 billion by 2030, signalling a permanent shift in how patients and providers interact.

    This move toward “Telehealth 2.0” creates hybrid workflows that blend virtual and in-person services. Brazil is at the forefront, with a strong legal framework supporting telemedicine and e-prescriptions. However, rapid growth presents a challenge: how do we ensure the quality and consistency of care when it’s delivered virtually, across countless individual encounters? Preventing errors across settings is a top priority for health leaders.

    2. Workforce disequilibrium: the clinician shortage and burnout crisis

    It is no secret that Latin America faces a significant shortage of healthcare workers. The World Health Organization projects a 10 million worker shortfall globally by 2030, a gap that is felt acutely in our region. In countries like Brazil, Argentina, and Colombia, the nurse-to-physician ratio is well below the OECD average, placing great strain on existing staff.

    This disequilibrium is not just about numbers; it’s about skill distribution and burnout. Experienced specialists are often concentrated in urban centers, leaving primary care and rural facilities to rely on less experienced staff. For clinicians everywhere, the cognitive load is immense, leading to high rates of burnout and staff turnover—a costly problem for any health system.

    3. Chronic diseases and antimicrobial resistance

    Like many regions, Latin America is grappling with a rising tide of non-communicable diseases (NCDs). Chronic conditions like diabetes and hypertension now represent a major challenge, accounting for a significant portion of healthcare expenditure. And antimicrobial resistance (AMR) has become a critical public health threat, with resistance rates for certain bacteria climbing to alarming levels in countries like Brazil.

    This dual pressure is forcing hospital leaders to find new ways to manage resources effectively. With budgets under strain, there is a clear need for data-driven stewardship. The challenge is to optimize treatment and control costs without compromising patient outcomes, a goal that requires deep insight into clinical practice patterns.

    Introducing UpToDate Enterprise Edition

    We’re delighted to officially launch UpToDate® Enterprise Edition in Latin America to help address these challenges. UpToDate Enterprise Edition is more than an information resource; it’s a strategic tool designed to help healthcare organizations navigate these complex trends. It empowers both clinical and non-clinical users with the evidence and insights needed to build a more efficient, effective, and sustainable health system.

    1. AI-enhanced search for faster, more confident decisions

    For clinicians working in fast-paced environments getting to the right answer quickly is critical. UpToDate Enterprise Edition features a powerful, AI-enhanced search that understands natural language. A doctor can ask a multi-faceted question and receive a precise, evidence-based answer in seconds.

    This capability helps standardize care quality across all settings by giving every clinician access to the same trusted expertise. By reducing the time spent searching for information, it also helps to lessen the cognitive burden on our clinical workforce, improving confidence and reducing the risk of burnout.

    2. Advanced analytics for data-driven leadership

    While clinicians need answers, hospital executives need data to make strategic decisions. The analytics portal in UpToDate Enterprise Edition provides leaders with a system-wide view of clinical activity. You can identify trends in drug and condition searches, spot knowledge gaps among staff, and benchmark your organization’s patterns against others.

    For example, a hospital director can use the portal to see which antibiotics are most frequently researched, providing data to support an antimicrobial stewardship program. Or identify areas where junior staff are seeking guidance most often, allowing for targeted training and mentorship. These insights turn clinical usage data into actionable intelligence for improving operational efficiency, managing costs, and supporting quality and compliance initiatives.

    3. A trusted partner in a new era of healthcare

    For over 30 years, UpToDate has been a trusted partner to the global medical community. UpToDate Enterprise Edition extends this legacy with tools designed for the interconnected nature of modern healthcare, including our new generative AI functionality UpToDate Expert AI. Organizations with Enterprise Edition can test our GenAI interface through our AI Labs (limited to 5 users and non-point of care use).

    With UpToDate Enterprise Edition, health systems gain a partner that helps them deliver better care today while building a sustainable and data-driven foundation for the future.

    See UpToDate Enterprise Edition in action

    UpToDate Enterprise Edition offers capabilities that address our region’s most pressing challenges. It’s a solution designed to connect care teams, optimize operations, and elevate the quality of care across the diverse environments that define Latin America.

    If you’d like to see how UpToDate Enterprise Edition can support your organization, we invite you to contact us to schedule a demo.

    Continue Reading

  • William Kentridge opera to have its New York premiere at Powerhouse Arts in Brooklyn – The Art Newspaper

    William Kentridge opera to have its New York premiere at Powerhouse Arts in Brooklyn – The Art Newspaper

    William Kentridge’s award-winning chamber opera Waiting for the Sibyl (2019) makes its New York premiere this week in Brooklyn (until 11 October). The debut comes as part of the inaugural Powerhouse: International arts festival at Powerhouse…

    Continue Reading

  • APA Corporation Provides Third-Quarter 2025 Supplemental Information and Schedules Results Conference Call for Nov. 6 at 10 a.m. Central Time – APA Corporation

    1. APA Corporation Provides Third-Quarter 2025 Supplemental Information and Schedules Results Conference Call for Nov. 6 at 10 a.m. Central Time  APA Corporation
    2. APA Corp (APA) Reports Q2 2025: Improved Permian Efficiency and Steady Dividend Payouts  Yahoo Finance
    3. APA Corporation Provides Third-Quarter 2025 Supplemental  GlobeNewswire
    4. Are APA’s (APA) Rig Reductions a Sign of Efficiency or a Shift in Growth Priorities?  simplywall.st
    5. Analysts Cite Return-of-Capital and Egyptian Gas Growth as Catalysts for APA (APA)  Insider Monkey

    Continue Reading