Category: 3. Business

FRANKLIN LAKES, N.J., Jan. 5, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — BD (Becton, Dickinson and Company) (NYSE: BDX), a leading global medical technology company, announced a significant milestone in its advanced tissue regeneration strategy: the first Phasix™ Mesh laparotomy reinforcement case performed in Greece following the product’s expanded indication for prophylactic use in Europe. This marks the first broad prophylactic indication of hernia mesh across open, high-risk procedures in the European Union.

The procedure was completed at George Papanikolaou General Hospital of Thessaloniki, one of the largest institutions in northern Greece, led by general surgeon and Associate Professor, Ioannidis Orestis. The patient, a 63-year-old male with multiple risk factors, underwent a sigmoidectomy, and a Phasix™ Mesh (08 x 30 cm) was placed prophylactically at the laparotomy incision site to reduce the likelihood of future hernia development.

Concurrently, BD’s PREVENT multicenter randomized controlled trial, conducted across sites in both Europe and the United States, has treated over 85% of its target population and is projected to complete enrollment in 2026. The study aims to provide robust clinical evidence supporting prophylactic bioabsorbable mesh placement to reduce the incidence of incisional hernias, while also supporting PMA submission for an incisional hernia prevention indication in the United States.

“Incisional hernias affect up to 30% of patients after abdominal surgery and cost health care systems billions annually,” said Rian Seger, worldwide president of the BD Surgery business. “With Phasix™ Mesh, we’re not just repairing hernias—we’re preventing them. This milestone reflects our commitment to improving long-term patient outcomes.”

According to recent U.K. data, patients who undergo incisional hernia repair incur an average cost of £23,148—nearly double that of patients who do not require repair. Prevention strategies have the potential to significantly reduce these costs and improve patient quality of life.

Phasix™ Mesh received CE marking approval for the prophylactic indication and launched three new sizes in 2025. The product is now registered in the U.K. and available across Europe for broad hernia prophylaxis indications, marking a pivotal step toward redefining surgical best practices, helping clinicians deliver safer outcomes and improve efficiency in every procedure. Phasix™ Mesh is not indicated for use for hernia prevention in the United States.

About BD

BD is one of the largest global medical technology companies in the world and is advancing the world of health by improving medical discovery, diagnostics and the delivery of care. The company supports the heroes on the frontlines of health care by developing innovative technology, services and solutions that help advance both clinical therapy for patients and clinical process for health care providers. BD and its more than 70,000 employees have a passion and commitment to help enhance the safety and efficiency of clinicians’ care delivery process, enable laboratory scientists to accurately detect disease and advance researchers’ capabilities to develop the next generation of diagnostics and therapeutics. BD has a presence in virtually every country and partners with organizations around the world to address some of the most challenging global health issues. By working in close collaboration with customers, BD can help enhance outcomes, lower costs, increase efficiencies, improve safety and expand access to health care. For more information on BD, please visit bd.com or connect with us on LinkedIn at www.linkedin.com/company/bd1/, X (formerly Twitter) @BDandCo or Instagram @becton_dickinson

 

SOURCE BD (Becton, Dickinson and Company)

HOUSTON and LONDON, Jan. 05, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — LyondellBasell (NYSE: LYB), a leader in the global chemical industry, will announce its fourth-quarter 2025 financial results before the U.S. market opens Friday, Jan. 30, followed by a webcast and teleconference to discuss the results at 11 a.m. EST.

Teleconference and webcast details
Friday, January 30, 2026
11 a.m. EST
Hosted by David Kinney, head of investor relations
Access the webcast 10 to 15 minutes prior to the start of the call at www.lyb.com/earnings.

Toll-free teleconference dial-in numbers
Participant/Guest toll-free: 877-407-8029
Participant/Guest toll: 201-689-8029
Participant/Guest: CallMe link

Presentation slides
Presentation slides will be available at the time of the teleconference and afterward at www.lyb.com/earnings.

Replay information
A replay of the call will be available from 1 p.m. EST Jan. 30 until March 2, 2026. The replay dial-in numbers are:
Toll-Free: 877-660-6853
Toll: 201-612-7415
Access ID: 13746215

About LyondellBasell 
We are LyondellBasell (NYSE: LYB) – a leader in the global chemical industry creating solutions for everyday sustainable living. Through advanced technology and focused investments, we are enabling a circular and low carbon economy. Across all we do, we aim to unlock value for our customers, investors and society. As one of the world’s largest producers of polymers and a leader in polyolefin technologies, we develop, manufacture and market high-quality and innovative products for applications ranging from sustainable transportation and food safety to clean water and quality healthcare. For more information, please visit www.lyondellbasell.com or follow @LyondellBasell on LinkedIn.

CONTACT: Nick Facchin
LyondellBasell
713-623-3643
nick.facchin@lyondellbasell.com

Global law firm White & Case LLP has advised BasePoint Capital on its approximately £543 million recommended cash acquisition of International Personal Finance plc (IPF), a leading provider of consumer credit products in international markets.

The transaction was announced pursuant to Rule 2.7 of the UK Takeover Code and will be implemented by way of a court-sanctioned scheme of arrangement. Completion of the acquisition remains subject to customary shareholder and regulatory approvals.

“This transaction represents a significant public M&A acquisition in the financial services sector, involving complex structuring, financing and regulatory considerations across multiple jurisdictions,” said White & Case partner Philip Broke, who co-led the Firm’s deal team. Partner Sonica Tolani, who also co-led the team said “Advising BasePoint Capital on this landmark transaction builds on our strong track record advising clients on high-profile UK public takeovers and financial services related M&A.”

The White & Case team in London which advised on the transaction was co-led by partners Philip Broke and Sonica Tolani and included associates Caoimhin Eastwood and Ciara Lamph. The team was also supported by colleagues across the Firm’s Financial Services Regulatory, Antitrust, Foreign Direct Investment, Incentives and Finance practices.

Press contact
For more information please speak to your local media contact.

DALLAS, Jan. 5, 2026 /PRNewswire/ – Jacobs (NYSE: J) and PA Consulting, a leading innovation and transformation consultancy, have reached an agreement for Jacobs to acquire the remaining stake in PA Consulting, which is primarily held by PA existing and former employees. Jacobs’ further investment in PA creates a global advisory powerhouse for clients – delivering solutions that enhance capital efficiency, accelerate innovation and drive lasting value.  

The total upfront consideration for the remaining stake will be approximately £1.216 billion ($1.6 billion), reflecting a valuation for 100% of the business of approximately £3.05 billion, or 13.0x expected calendar year 2025 adjusted EBITDA² before synergies, and 12.3x including estimated synergies. The transaction also includes £75 million in deferred consideration which is expected to be paid in Jacobs’ shares valued on the second anniversary of the transaction closing. The transaction has been unanimously approved by Jacobs’ Board of Directors and PA’s Stakeholder Representatives. PA’s Stakeholder Representatives and members of the key leadership team have given irrevocable undertakings to vote in favor of the transaction.

Jacobs Chair and CEO Bob Pragada said: “Since our strategic investment in March 2021, our collaboration with PA Consulting has accelerated profitable growth and reinforced Jacobs’ leadership as we redefine the asset lifecycle — embedding us earlier in client journeys and expanding our impact across strategy, transformation and advisory. Jacobs’ deep understanding of infrastructure delivery, capital asset cycles and highly technical program management complement PA Consulting’s strategic advisory, innovation and transformation capabilities – together enabling us to transform bold ideas into practical, optimized outcomes for our clients.”

“This is a key milestone for our business and underscores our disciplined approach for return-focused capital allocation and our priority to drive sustained value creation,” Pragada added. “Our partnership during the past 4+ years demonstrates we are positioned to enhance Jacobs’ margin profile even further and unlock synergies, including new cross-sell opportunities.”

PA Consulting CEO Christian Norris said: “By fully bringing together the expertise of PA and Jacobs, we can better empower clients to overcome today’s complexities and embrace tomorrow’s opportunities with confidence. We know that, together, we’re making a positive difference to businesses, economies and societies. Investing and extending PA’s valuable brand and positioning in innovation and transformation consulting will enable us to tackle the broadest range of client challenges. Looking ahead, I’m excited to build on what we’ve achieved for clients so far and deliver even greater impact as one global company.”

Strategic and Financial Rationale for the Combination 

The transaction represents the next step in the collaboration between Jacobs and PA Consulting and is expected to bring multiple strategic and financial benefits:

• Strengthen end-to-end asset lifecycle: Combined business enhances Jacobs’ ability to deliver full asset lifecycle from front-end strategy and design through build, operations and maintenance, positioning Jacobs as a more comprehensive partner to clients.
• Expand presence in high-growth, resilient sectors: Full ownership of PA strengthens Jacobs’ presence in high-growth and historically resilient sectors such asadvanced manufacturing, life sciences and critical infrastructure, including energy andtransportation. The transaction will also expand participation in advisory and AI/digital projects. Together, Jacobs and PA will accelerate AI business transformation across the enterprise, both internally and externally for clients.
• Enhance go-to-market value proposition: Full ownership will enable broader and more integrated collaboration in pursuit of joint bids which is expected to accelerate our current positive momentum in both the volume and win rates for joint business opportunities.
• Bring complementary capabilities to clients: PA’s strategic advisory and data analysis capabilities are highly complementary to Jacobs’ project management and technical engineering tool kit and together the combined company will be well-positioned to capture the increasing demand from clients who require a more comprehensive and consultative provider of solutions. The combined capabilities are particularly well-suited for the wave of investment in AI data centers, power generation, regionalized supply chains, advanced pharmaceutical facilities and critical infrastructure resilience.
• Streamlined governance and decision-making structure: The combined company will benefit from simpler governance and operations, streamlined decision-making, and realization of synergies. Integration process will be staged to build on successful collaboration to date, all while maintaining sales momentum.
• Drives higher margins, accretion to EPS and strong returns: Transaction is expected to increase Jacobs’ adjusted EBITDA margin³ post-close. For reference, had Jacobs fully owned PA Consulting for all of FY25, our adjusted EBITDA margin would have been 14.5% compared to our actual adjusted EBITDA margin³ of 13.9%. Expected cost synergies of £12-15 million are targeted to be realized within 24 months post close. The transaction is expected to be accretive to adjusted EPS in the first 12 months after closing.²

Transaction Terms and Financing

The transaction is structured with Jacobs acquiring the remaining stake of PA Consulting, which is primarily held by PA existing and former employees, for upfront consideration of approximately £1.216 billion, which is inclusive of expected adjustments up through the anticipated closing date. The upfront consideration, net of certain transaction expenses payable by the shareholders, will be paid 80% in cash and 20% in Jacobs’ shares. 

The transaction also includes deferred consideration of £75 million which is payable in Jacobs’ shares as valued on the two-year anniversary following closing, cash, or a combination thereof, at Jacobs’ election. Jacobs intends to fund the cash portion of the upfront consideration through a combination of cash-on-hand and existing and incremental debt facilities.

The transaction will primarily be implemented by way of a U.K. Scheme of Arrangement and is subject to the satisfaction of customary closing conditions, including the approval of the current shareholders of PA and the U.K. Court (pursuant to the Scheme). The transaction is expected to close by the end of Jacobs’ fiscal 2026 second quarter.

Advisors

Centerview Partners LLC and Perella Weinberg Partners LP are serving as financial advisors and Akin Gump LLP is serving as legal counsel to Jacobs. 

Goldman Sachs is serving as financial advisor and Milbank LLP is serving as legal counsel to PA Consulting. 

---

[1] Based on the currency exchange rate of 1.33 USD to GBP.

[2] Reconciliation of the expected accretion of the transaction to Jacobs adjusted EPS in the first 12 months after close and expectations for PA Consulting’s calendar year 2025 adjusted EBITDA before and including synergies to the most directly comparable GAAP measures are not available without unreasonable efforts because we cannot predict with sufficient certainty all the components required to provide such reconciliations.

[3] See Non-GAAP Financial Measures and GAAP Reconciliations at the end of the press release for additional detail. 

About Jacobs

At Jacobs, we’re challenging today to reinvent tomorrow – delivering outcomes and solutions for the world’s most complex challenges. With approximately $12 billion in annual revenue and a team of almost 43,000, we provide end-to-end services in advanced manufacturing, cities & places, energy, environmental, life sciences, transportation and water. From advisory and consulting, feasibility, planning, design, program and lifecycle management, we’re creating a more connected and sustainable world. See how at jacobs.com and connect with us on LinkedIn, Instagram, X and Facebook. 

About PA Consulting 

PA Consulting accelerates new growth ideas from concept, through design and development and to commercial success, and revitalizes organizations, building leadership, culture, systems and processes to make innovation a reality. PA Consulting’s global team of about 4,000, which includes strategists, innovators, designers, consultants, digital experts, scientists, engineers and technologists, work across seven sectors: consumer and manufacturing, defense and security, energy and utilities, financial services, government, health and life sciences, and transport to make a positive impact alongside the clients it supports, bringing ingenuity to life. PA Consulting operates globally from offices across the U.K., U.S., Europe, including in the Nordics and Netherlands.

Additional Information

Additional information regarding the transaction is available on our investor relations page at https://invest.jacobs.com. 

The new Jacobs shares to be issued in connection with the transaction have not been registered under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (U.S. Securities Act), and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration or an applicable exemption from the registration requirements of the U.S. Securities Act. The new Jacobs shares to be issued in connection with the transaction will be issued pursuant to one or more exemptions from registration under the U.S. Securities Act. 

Neither the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) nor any U.S. state securities commission has approved or disapproved of the new Jacobs shares to be issued in connection with the transaction or determined if this release is accurate or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offence in the United States.

This release is for information purposes only and is not intended to and does not constitute, or form any part of, an offer, invitation or the solicitation of an offer to purchase or subscribe, otherwise acquire, subscribe for, sell or otherwise dispose of any securities or the solicitation of any vote or approval in any jurisdiction in connection with the transaction or otherwise.

# # #

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements contained in this press release constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are statements that do not directly relate to any historical or current fact. When used herein, words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “seeks,” “estimates,” “plans,” “intends,” “future,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “can,” “may,” and similar words are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Examples of forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements we make concerning our plans to acquire the remaining stake in PA Consulting, the potential strategic and financial rationale for the proposed transaction, including the amount of expected synergies and the time period in which such synergies will be achieved, the future financial and operating results of the combined company, the growth opportunities and strategic benefits, the expected timing and structure of the proposed transaction, the expectation that the transaction will be accretive to adjusted earnings per share in 12 months, the ability of the parties to complete the proposed transaction, and any assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. We base these forward-looking statements on management’s current estimates and expectations, as well as currently available competitive, financial and economic data. Forward-looking statements, however, are inherently uncertain. There are a variety of factors that could cause business results to differ materially from our forward-looking statements including, but not limited to, uncertainties as to, the possibility that the closing conditions for the proposed transaction may not be satisfied or waived, on a timely basis or otherwise; the risks that any consents or approvals, including any regulatory approvals, required in connection with the proposed transaction may not be received; the risk that the proposed transaction may not be completed on the terms or in the time-frame expected by the parties; unexpected costs, liabilities, charges or expenses related to the proposed transaction and the actual terms of any financings that will be obtained for the transaction; our ability to successfully integrate PA Consulting into our business, our ability to realize the estimated synergies of the proposed transaction; our ability to retain and hire key personnel, customers or suppliers while the proposed transaction is pending or after it is completed; as well as other factors that may impact us, such as competition from existing and future competitors in our target markets, financial market risks to us, including by affecting our access to capital, timing of the award of projects and funding and potential changes to governmental priorities and reduction in governmental spending, changes in U.S. or foreign tax laws, including the tax legislation enacted in the U.S. in July 2025, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances, including the impact of, and changes to tariffs and retaliatory tariffs or trade policies, that may adversely impact our future financial positions or results of operations, as well as general economic conditions, including inflation and the actions taken by monetary authorities in response to inflation, changes in interest rates and foreign currency exchange rates, changes in capital markets, the possibility of a recession or economic downturn, and increased uncertainty and risks, including policy risks and potential civil unrest, relating to the outcome of elections across our key markets and elevated geopolitical tension and conflicts, among others. For a description of these and additional factors that may occur that could cause actual results to differ from our forward-looking statements, see our filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The company is not under any duty to update any of the forward-looking statements after the date of this press release to conform to actual results, except as required by applicable law.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures 

In this press release, Jacobs has included certain non-GAAP financial measures as defined in Regulation G promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These non-GAAP measures are described below. 

Adjusted net revenue is calculated by adjusting revenue from continuing operations to exclude amounts we bill to clients on projects where we are procuring subcontract labor or third-party materials and equipment on behalf of the client (referred to as “pass throughs”). These amounts are considered pass throughs because we receive no or only a minimal mark-up associated with the billed amounts. In 2023, we amended our name and convention for revenue, excluding pass-through costs from “net revenue” to “adjusted net revenue.” This name change is intended to make the non-GAAP nature of this measure more prominent and does not impact measurement. We sometimes refer to our GAAP revenue as “gross revenue”. 

Jacobs adjusted earnings from continuing operations before taxes, adjusted income tax expenses from continuing operations, adjusted net earnings from continuing operations and adjusted EPS from continuing operations are calculated by: 

1. Excluding items collectively referred to as Restructuring, Transaction and Other Charges, which include:
   1. transaction costs and other charges incurred in connection with mergers, acquisitions, strategic investments and divestitures, including advisor fees, change in control payments, and the impact of the quarterly adjustment to the estimated performance based payout of contingent consideration to certain sellers in connection with certain acquisitions and similar transaction costs and expenses (collectively referred to as “Transaction Costs”);
   2. recoveries, costs and other charges associated with (i) restructuring activities, (ii) cost reduction initiatives implemented in connection with mergers, acquisitions, strategic investments and divestitures, including the separation of the CMS/C&I business, such as advisor fees, involuntary terminations and related costs, costs associated with co-locating offices of acquired companies, separating physical locations of continuing operations, professional services and other personnel costs, (iii) involuntary termination programs and other related separations impacting management and employees, including related transition costs, and (iv) certain legal costs and expenses to the extent related to (i) – (iii) or determined to not be related to continuing operations (clauses (i) – (iv) collectively referred to as “Restructuring, integration, separation and other charges”).

 

2. Excluding items collectively referred to as “Other adjustments”, which include:
   1. intangible assets amortization and impairment charges;
   2. impact of certain subsidiary level contingent equity-based agreements in connection with the transaction structure of our PA Consulting investment;
   3. impacts related to tax rate increases in the UK in a prior period;
   4. revenue under the Company’s transition services agreement (TSA) included in other income for U.S. GAAP reporting purposes, and any SG&A costs associated with the provision of such services;
   5. pretax mark-to-market and other related gains or losses associated with the Company’s investment in Amentum stock recorded in connection with the Separation Transaction;
   6. discounts and expenses related to the one-time exchange of the Company’s investment in Amentum shares for a portion of the Company’s outstanding term loans, which term loans were canceled; and
   7. impacts resulting from the EPS numerator adjustment relating to the redeemable noncontrolling interests preference share repurchase and reissuance activities.

We eliminate the impact of “Restructuring, Transaction and Other Charges” and “Other Adjustments” because we do not consider these to be indicative of ongoing operating performance. Actions taken by the company to enhance efficiencies are subject to significant fluctuations from period to period. Jacobs’ management believes the exclusion of the amounts relating to the above-listed items improves the period-to-period comparability and analysis of the underlying financial performance of the business.

Adjustments to derive adjusted net earnings from continuing operations and adjusted EPS from continuing operations are calculated on an after-tax basis.

Adjusted EBITDA is calculated by adding income tax expense, depreciation expense and interest expense to, and deducting interest income from, adjusted net earnings attributable to Jacobs from continuing operations. 

We believe that the measures listed above are useful to management, investors and other users of our financial information in evaluating the announced transaction by excluding or adding back the effects of the items described above and below, the inclusion or exclusion of which can obscure underlying trends. Additionally, management uses such measures in its own evaluation of Jacobs’ performance, particularly when comparing performance to past periods, and believes these measures are useful for investors because they facilitate a comparison of our financial results from period to period.

This press release also contains certain financial and operating metrics which management believes are useful in evaluating the announced transaction. Adjusted EBITDA margin refers to a ratio of adjusted EBITDA to adjusted net revenue. 

Jacobs provides non-GAAP measures to supplement U.S. GAAP measures, as they provide additional insight into Jacobs’ financial results. However, non-GAAP measures have limitations as analytical tools and should not be considered in isolation and are not in accordance with, or a substitute for, U.S. GAAP measures. In addition, other companies may define non-GAAP measures differently, which limits the ability of investors to compare non-GAAP measures of Jacobs to those used by our peer companies.

The following tables reconcile the components and values of U.S. GAAP revenue from continuing operations to adjusted net revenue from continuing operations and Net Earnings Attributable to Jacobs from Continuing Operations to Adjusted EBITDA. For the comparable period presented below, such adjustments consist of amounts incurred in connection with the items described above. Amounts are shown in thousands.

 

Reconciliation of Revenue from Continuing Operations to Adjusted Net Revenue from Continuing Operations (in thousands): 

 

	Fiscal Year Ended September 26, 2025
Revenue from Continuing Operations	$           12,029,783
Pass Through Revenue	(3,334,818)
Adjusted Net Revenue from Continuing Operations	$             8,694,965

 

Reconciliation of Net Earnings Attributable to Jacobs from Continuing Operations to Adjusted EBITDA (in thousands):

 

	Fiscal Year Ended September 26, 2025
Net Earnings Attributable to Jacobs from Continuing Operations	$              313,302
After-tax effects of Restructuring, Transaction and Other Charges	43,956
After-tax effects of Other Adjustments	388,357
Adj. Net Earnings Attributable to Jacobs from Continuing Operations	745,615
Adj. Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations	268,885
Adj. Earnings from Continuing Operations attributable to Jacobs before Taxes	1,014,500
Depreciation expense	82,059
Interest income	(35,804)
Interest expense	145,788
Adjusted EBITDA	$            1,206,543
Adjusted EBITDA Margin	13.9%
Addback to Adjusted EBITDA to eliminate Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests attributable to PA	52,321
Adjusted EBITDA – adjusted to illustrate 100% ownership of PA for FY25	$           1,258,864
Adjusted EBITDA Margin	14.5%

 

Reconciliation of Earnings from Continuing Operations Before Taxes to Adjusted Earnings from Continuing Operations Attributable Before Taxes (in thousands):

 

	Fiscal Year Ended September 26, 2025
Earnings from Continuing Operations Before Taxes	$               543,477
Restructuring, Transaction and Other Charges(1):
Transaction costs	64
Restructuring, integration, separation and other charges	61,316
Other Adjustments(2):
Transition Services Agreement, net	(14,475)
Amortization of intangibles	155,517
Mark-to-market and other related (gains) losses on investment in Amentum stock	227,305
Other	97,060
Adjusted Earnings from Continuing Operations Before Taxes	1,070,264
Adjusted Earnings Attributable to Noncontrolling Interests from Continuing Operations	(55,764)
Adj. Earnings from Continuing Operations attributable to Jacobs before Taxes	$          1,014,500

 

 

(1) Includes pre-tax charges primarily relating to the Separation Transaction, as well as charges associated with various transaction costs and activity associated with Jacobs’ restructuring and integration programs.

(2) Includes pre-tax charges relating to amortization of intangible assets and the impact of certain subsidiary level compensation based agreements, pretax mark-to-market gains and losses associated with our investment in Amentum stock in connection with the Separation Transaction, income under Jacob’s TSA with Amentum in connection with the Separation Transaction and discounts and expenses associated with Jacobs’ non-cash equity for debt exchange transacted on March 13, 2025.

 

Reconciliation of Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations to Adjusted Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations (in thousands):

 

	Fiscal Year Ended September 26, 2025
Income Tax Expense for Continuing Operations	$               (215,555)
Tax Effects of Restructuring, Transaction and Other Charges(1)
Transaction costs	83
Restructuring, integration, separation and other charges	(16,949)
Tax Effects of Other Adjustments(2)
Transition Services Agreement, net	3,691
Amortization of intangibles	(39,776)
Other	(379)
Adjusted Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations	$               (268,885)

 

 

(1) Includes income tax impacts on restructuring activities primarily relating to the Separation Transaction as well as charges associated with various transaction costs and activity associated with Jacobs’ restructuring and integration programs.

(2) Includes income tax impacts on amortization of intangible assets, certain subsidiary level compensation-based agreements, income under Jacobs’ TSA with Amentum in connection with the Separation Transaction and discounts and expenses associated with Jacobs’ non-cash equity for debt exchange transacted on March 13, 2025.

If we want to make our energy supply affordable, sustainable, and resilient now and in the future, renewables really are the only right choice. They offer domestic value creation, often directly at the local level and help free us from dependencies created by energy politics. In addition, renewables leave other energy sources behind in terms of power generation costs. They are not only central to climate action but also help stabilise Germany economically and increase its resilience to external shocks.

How would you generally rate the performance of the coalition government of chancellor Friedrich Merz in energy and climate policy so far? Where do you see promising approaches – and where do you identify notable shortcomings?

The recently adopted Economic Promotion Act for Germany, which is supposed to steer investments into renewable energy, is a good signal in my opinion, much like the commitments to faster planning and licensing set out in the Infrastructure of the Future Act. Apart from that, I welcome the fact that policymakers have begun to understand that grids, storage systems, and energy generation must be thought of as one integrated system.

At the same time, a clear signal from the government that the current expansion path for renewables will be resolutely continued is still lacking. One example for this is the mobility sector, where we would wish to see a clearer commitment to decarbonisation. A transformation as profound as the one that the German auto industry is faced with needs a reliable political framework. In Germany, the focus is largely set on protecting the status quo. This consumes resources needed for the necessary investment in future-oriented structures, which in turn makes it hard to safeguard value creation, jobs, and technological leadership in the area of renewable propulsion technologies in the long term.

Which topics and developments would you say are going to become relevant in 2026? And what conclusions do you think the government should draw from them?

The first months of the new year will clearly be focussed on the upcoming reform of the Renewable Energy Act (EEG) and the Building Modernisation Act (GMG). We urgently need clarity on the future course of the heating sector’s transition. For the coming year it will be important for the government to act both quickly and in a way that is viable in the long term. We need speed and substance – in grid expansion, in reducing bureaucracy, in the smart meter roll-out, and in digitalisation. Our call for action is therefore clear: We need system-friendly investments instead of short-term cost reduction measures.

In its recent ruling of 11 December 2025 (Case C-485/24), the CJEU clarified how to determine the law applicable to an employment contract when the habitual place of work changes throughout the relationship. Employers must thus be particularly cautious when dealing with employees in cross-border employment relationships within the EU in order to ensure compliance in the right jurisdiction, as a change of the employee’s habitual place of work may result in a change of the applicable law and, consequently, of the employee protections afforded.

The Locatrans case
Locatrans, a Luxembourg-based transport firm, hired a French driver in 2002 under an employment contract governed by Luxembourg law. Initially, the driver worked across multiple EU countries. Over time, the driver increasingly performed his activities in France, prompting payment of social security contributions in France in 2014. Further to a dispute over reduced working hours, Locatrans terminated the employee. 

The latter brought a wrongful dismissal claim before the Dijon Labour Court (Conseil de prud’hommes de Dijon), which applied Luxembourg law as chosen by the parties in the employment contract and dismissed the claim. The Dijon Court of Appeal (Cour d’appel de Dijon) overturned the first instance decision, invoking the Rome Convention and ruling that French law applied due to employee’s habitual place of work being based in France. 

Locatrans then brought the case before the Supreme Court (Cour de Cassation), which referred the matter to the CJEU, asking the latter how to determine the applicable law in a situation where the employee’s habitual place of work has evolved during the employment relationship.

The CJEU ruling

TheCJEU replied that if an employee, in the course of the employment relationship, performs his work activities in a different place, which is intended to become the new habitual place of work, this new place should be factored in when determining the applicable law. 

The CJEU reminded that the Rome Convention limits the choice of law made by the parties, in that such a choice is not to have the result of depriving the employee of the protection afforded to him by the mandatory rules of the law which would be applicable in the absence of such a choice. To determine the applicable law in such scenario, the Rome Convention focuses on the employee’s habitual place of work, unless it appears from the circumstances that the contract is more closely connected with another country, in which case the law of that country shall apply.

In this respect, the CJEU indicated that the place where the employee has carried out his work during the most recent period of the performance of his contract of employment, which place is intended to become a new habitual place of work, constitutes a relevant factor to be taken into consideration when determining the country most closely tied to the employment relationship; the same applies to the obligation to pay social security contributions.

Implications for global employers
To stay compliant and minimise legal exposure, employers should regularly review employment arrangements for employees working either across several jurisdictions and/or whose habitual place of work is about to be changed in a lasting manner to ensure that mandatory rules of the country most closely connected to the employment relationship are being observed.

 

The Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) is introducing a new veterinary medicines packaging surveillance scheme from 2 February 2026.

This will change how the VMD assesses and monitors veterinary medicine packaging to ensure proportionate oversight whilst reducing regulatory burden on the animal health industry. By monitoring products already on the market, the regulator can ensure proportionate oversight without unnecessary administrative burden.

What will the scheme assess

Every three months, the VMD will select a group of products for packaging assessment. These products will be sourced from wholesalers, and all packaging components will be reviewed. The assessment will verify that the packaging complies with the approved product information text (QRD) and the principles set out in the Product Literature Standards.

How will assessment findings be reported

The VMD will share the assessment findings with the Market Authorisation Holder (MAH) for the product concerned within the three-month assessment period.

Where non-compliance is identified, the VMD will outline the necessary corrective actions to the MAH. These actions may range from requiring the MAH to update packaging at the next regulatory opportunity for low-severity issues, to requiring submission of a formal variation to correct mock-ups, and in the most severe cases, tracking the issue as a product defect. The timeframe for implementing these actions will depend on the severity of the specific issue(s) identified.

Mock-up assessment changes

As part of the new surveillance scheme supporting regulatory compliance in the market, the VMD has revised its requirements for submitting mock-ups.

From 2 February 2026 mock-ups will no longer be required for G.I.18 Variations Requiring Assessment (VRA) and during a new Marketing Authorisation (MA) procedure.

The VMD will continue to review and approve mock-ups in the following scenarios via a G.I.15.z VRA: 

• To introduce mock-ups for the first time prior to marketing

• To undertake joint assessment of mock-ups between VMD and HPRA following granting of a new MA 

• To assess significant changes to the design or layout of the mock-ups that are unrelated to the summary of product characteristics (SPC) 

Where mock-ups are required, only those for the smallest marketed pack size are to be submitted for assessment.

The VMD will not routinely assess or annotate mock-ups for other variation categories. However, these may be requested on a case-by-case basis where we consider that the overall design and readability could be significantly affected. 

Ongoing applications affected by these changes

For ongoing G.I.18 VRAs and new MA applications as of 2 February 2026, the VMD will continue to assess mock-ups already requested or received, reviewing all submitted pack sizes. Where an application has not reached mock-up assessment phase, the application will be issued without requiring mock-ups.

Contact

For any queries relating to this news item, please email postmaster@vmd.gov.uk.

Stay informed with free updates

Simply sign up to the European companies myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.

There are many different techniques of bank supervision. Historically, the North American approach emphasises on-site inspections, while Europeans make use of regular supervisory reports and validation of internal models and controls. Comparatively little use, however, has been made of “dystopian collaborative fiction writing workshops”. Until now!

The European Banking Authority carries out a full-dress stress test every other year to establish the banking system’s resilience to an economic downturn scenario. In the off-years, the ECB often does its own exercise, somewhat less demanding in scope and focused on a specific area of immediate concern. In 2024, for example, it was a climate risk scenario. Next year, the theme will be geopolitical risk.

And it’s going to be a “reverse stress test”. Rather than being given a scenario to deal with . . . 

. . . each bank will be asked to identify the most relevant geopolitical risk events that could lead to at least a 300-basis point depletion in its Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital. In addition to reporting on how the geopolitical risk scenario would affect their solvency positions, banks will also be asked to provide information about how it may affect their liquidity and funding conditions.

So it’s not quite “imagine the end of the world”, but rather “imagine something that would be quite bad, but not very bad, say about 300 basis points of capital ratio bad”. The ECB says that it will publish the main conclusions in summer of 2026.

Unfortunately for Alphaville we shouldn’t expect a compendium of horrific 28 Days Later fantasies. Banks will tend towards prosaic but nonetheless real possibilities, like “a big tariff war”, “escalation of the Ukraine conflict” or “Donald Trump might sue us”.

Hopefully there will be some wacky ones in there too though. The ECB plans to administer this reverse stress test to 110 banks, so surely there will be some of them that employ wannabe Tom Clancy types in the risk management department. It could kick off a new genre of fiction; in these stressful days, it might be nice to be able to pick up a low-stakes thriller where you know that the eventual outcome will only be three percentage points of Common Equity Tier One capital won or lost.

But, of course, in this case the published results are not actually the important thing. One of the great fallacies of scenario analysis is attempting to get the exact right result. (This is in many ways an original sin of the discipline; scenario analysis really caught on after Shell was able to prosper in the 1970s because its earlier exercise had included something like the 1973 oil shock. This cemented the use of scenarios in corporate planning, but left lots of people hoping they’d be able score a hole-in-one like that every time).

The real purpose of reverse stress testing (and all kinds of scenario analysis) is twofold. First, to instil flexibility and responsiveness in the management system and to choose strategies which are robust to a wide set of possibilities rather than super-optimised for current conditions. And second, to test reporting and information systems, to be sure that they are capable of representing the variety of possible outcomes.

It’s this second function that the ECB is probably most interested in. As well as writing their nightmare journal, each banks is going to have to show how it produces a 300bp hit to capital. Which is not necessarily a trivial task. All the banks which are significant enough to be directly supervised by the ECB are meant to have “risk data aggregation and risk reporting” (RDARR) systems that are capable of carrying out scenario analysis, but this is the first time they’ve all been asked to prove it.

Of course, delegating the task to the banks also conveniently means that the ECB itself gets out of having to design a “geopolitical risk” scenario, which is more or less by definition a piece of work that’s going to annoy somebody powerful. And it acts as a distributed brainstorming session across the industry, potentially identifying geopolitical problems that hadn’t reached Frankfurt.

Most importantly, it might give us all something fun to read over the summer. More supervisors should do this!