Latest news with #USAID-related
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
TTEK Q1 Earnings Call: Revenue Outperforms, Margins Impacted by Client Shift and One-Time Charges
Environmental engineering firm Tetra Tech (NASDAQ:TTEK) announced better-than-expected revenue in Q1 CY2025, with sales up 4.9% year on year to $1.1 billion. On top of that, next quarter's revenue guidance ($1.15 billion at the midpoint) was surprisingly good and 4.2% above what analysts were expecting. Its GAAP profit of $0.02 per share was 93.3% below analysts' consensus estimates. Is now the time to buy TTEK? Find out in our full research report (it's free). Revenue: $1.1 billion vs analyst estimates of $1.04 billion (4.9% year-on-year growth, 6.6% beat) EPS (GAAP): $0.02 vs analyst expectations of $0.30 (93.3% miss) The company lifted its revenue guidance for the full year to $4.77 billion at the midpoint from $4.57 billion, a 4.4% increase EPS (GAAP) guidance for Q2 CY2025 is $0.38 at the midpoint, beating analyst estimates by 11.1% Operating Margin: 3.6%, down from 11.2% in the same quarter last year Market Capitalization: $9.34 billion Tetra Tech's first quarter results were heavily shaped by a sharp shift in its client portfolio, most notably the loss of its largest revenue source, USAID, within a single quarter. CEO Dan Batrack described this event as unprecedented, but credited the company's broad diversification across clients, services, and geographies for helping offset the impact. Growth in state and local government work, particularly in water and disaster response, and resilience in commercial and international segments helped drive overall revenue gains. Management noted that non-reimbursable costs related to closing out USAID projects and holding staff during the transition period weighed on operating margins, while offsetting strength came from disaster response work and higher-margin municipal programs. Looking ahead, Tetra Tech's raised guidance is underpinned by expanded contract capacity in defense and water infrastructure, as well as the integration of new digital and automation capabilities acquired through recent deals. Management emphasized a sizable pipeline in high-margin areas like data centers and digital systems, with Chief Innovation Officer Leslie Shoemaker highlighting over $5 billion in new Department of Defense contract capacity. CEO Dan Batrack cautioned that while the company expects margin improvement as USAID-related costs roll off, ongoing volatility in international markets and the variable nature of projects in regions such as Ukraine may continue to pose short-term risks. Batrack stated, 'The primary tailwinds that are driving Tetra Tech are not changing—coastal flooding, water supply issues, and digital infrastructure remain key priorities for clients.' Tetra Tech's management attributed quarterly growth to strong state and local government demand, continued expansion in defense and water infrastructure, and the company's ability to quickly reallocate resources after the loss of its largest federal client. State and local surge: State and local government revenues rose 44% year-over-year, with more than half of that growth stemming from episodic disaster response activities. The remainder was driven by ongoing municipal water programs, which management noted were up 19%, reflecting strong demand for infrastructure resilience and water quality projects. Defense contract expansion: Tetra Tech secured $5 billion in new contract capacity with U.S. Department of Defense agencies, including projects supporting military infrastructure worldwide. Management emphasized that recent wins are closely aligned with national security and infrastructure priorities, such as water supply and flood control for military bases. Disaster response offsets: The company was able to redeploy staff to high-utilization disaster response projects, particularly in areas affected by fires and hurricanes, helping to mitigate underutilization from USAID project terminations. CEO Dan Batrack stated this shift ensured continued high overall workforce utilization despite the abrupt change in client mix. Margin dynamics and one-offs: Operating margins were negatively affected by non-reimbursable costs associated with closing out USAID work and the decision to retain staff during the transition. CFO Steve Burdick noted that, excluding these effects, core margin performance would have been 30 to 50 basis points higher. International mixed picture: While Tetra Tech's UK and Irish water businesses delivered double-digit growth, Australian operations saw revenue declines due to delayed infrastructure funding around national elections. Management flagged that international growth rates remain sensitive to changes in trade policy and project funding clarity. Management expects future results to be shaped by accelerating demand for water and digital infrastructure, margin recovery as one-time costs fade, and a growing contribution from recent acquisitions. High-margin business mix shift: With the exit of USAID work, management believes the company's baseline margin profile will improve as more profitable projects in water, environmental, and digital systems become a larger share of revenue. CEO Dan Batrack said, 'Our underlying business has about a 50 basis point increase in overall margin without AID, and growth could be slightly faster going forward.' Digital systems and data center growth: The addition of SAGE Group and ongoing investments in digital automation and high-performance building design are expected to drive double-digit growth in the data center and smart infrastructure markets. Chief Innovation Officer Leslie Shoemaker projected the digital systems practice could reach $500 million in annual revenue by 2030. Backlog rebuilding and project funding: Management highlighted a solid book-to-bill ratio outside of USAID and a growing pipeline in defense and water. However, they cautioned that certain international and federally funded projects remain subject to political and funding volatility, especially in regions such as Ukraine and Australia. In the coming quarters, the StockStory team will monitor (1) the pace at which Tetra Tech rebuilds its backlog outside of USAID, (2) progress in integrating SAGE Group and scaling digital automation offerings, and (3) the sustainability of state and local government demand for water and disaster response projects. Shifts in international funding environments and the impact of new defense contracts on margins will also be important to track. Tetra Tech currently trades at a forward P/E ratio of 24.7×. Should you double down or take your chips? Find out in our full research report (it's free). Market indices reached historic highs following Donald Trump's presidential victory in November 2024, but the outlook for 2025 is clouded by new trade policies that could impact business confidence and growth. While this has caused many investors to adopt a "fearful" wait-and-see approach, we're leaning into our best ideas that can grow regardless of the political or macroeconomic climate. Take advantage of Mr. Market by checking out our Top 5 Growth Stocks for this month. This is a curated list of our High Quality stocks that have generated a market-beating return of 183% over the last five years (as of March 31st 2025). Stocks that made our list in 2020 include now familiar names such as Nvidia (+1,545% between March 2020 and March 2025) as well as under-the-radar businesses like the once-small-cap company Exlservice (+354% five-year return). Find your next big winner with StockStory today. Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen.
NBC News
14-04-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
Trump gives campaign-style speech at Justice Department; Senate passes bill to avert government shutdown
Judge Carl Nichols today denied a temporary restraining order that would have stopped USAID from destroying vital documents. Nichols says, in his order, the documents that were being destroyed were either old, or existed somewhere else. 'USAID is only destroying duplicated, aged documents that are preserved either by other agencies or in an electronic format, in a manner that USAID represents is consistent with the Federal Records Act,' Nichols writes, citing a declaration from a USAID official. 'Permitting that process to continue will not harm the PSCA or the public, but interfering with it could hinder the agency's decommissioning process.' USAID's acting executive secretary, Erica Carr, earlier this week ordered staff to shred or burn classified and personnel documents remaining in USAID's offices in the Ronald Reagan building. Another group of plaintiffs who are already in USAID-related litigation also asked for a temporary restraining order to prevent the destruction of pertinent records. But those plaintiffs withdrew their motion yesterday, citing representations made by Carr.
Al Jazeera
19-03-2025
- Business
- Al Jazeera
Judge says Musk and DOGE ‘likely violated' constitution in USAID shutdown
A federal district judge in Maryland has found that Elon Musk and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) appear to have breached the United States Constitution through their efforts to dismantle an agency dedicated to distributing foreign aid. Judge Theodore Chuang issued the preliminary ruling on Tuesday, in response to a complaint filed by 26 employees and contractors for the US Agency for International Development (USAID). 'The Court finds that Defendants' actions taken to shut down USAID on an accelerated basis, including its apparent decision to permanently close USAID headquarters without the approval of a duly appointed USAID Officer, likely violated the United States Constitution in multiple ways,' Chuang wrote in his decision. Not only were the plaintiffs harmed, he added, but the 'public interest' was also. DOGE and Musk 'deprived the public's elected representatives in Congress of their constitutional authority to decide whether, when and how to close down an agency created by Congress', Chuang said. As a result of that finding, the judge approved a temporary injunction that would prevent DOGE and Musk from continuing with USAID-related staff cuts, contract cancellations, building closures and the destruction of USAID materials. 'The restrictions will assist in maintaining the status quo so as to delay a premature, final shutdown of USAID,' Chuang wrote. It was a significant blow to Musk, whose role in the government has been ambiguous – but who has wielded significant power due to his close relationship with US President Donald Trump. A tech billionaire and one of the wealthiest men in the world, Musk is considered a 'special government employee', a temporary role often given to outside advisers. In that role, however, he has led DOGE in a vast campaign to restructure the federal government, through downsizing its workforce, ending contracts and attempting to shutter entire agencies. USAID was one of the first in DOGE's crosshairs. Upon taking office for a second term on January 20, Trump issued a presidential order calling for a 90-day freeze on all foreign aid – a central part of USAID's work. Established in 1961 by an act of Congress, USAID had become the US's primary arm for distributing foreign assistance abroad. But under Trump's order, only aid that aligned with the president's foreign policy would be allowed to continue. Musk became the face of the campaign to close USAID entirely. 'USAID is a criminal organization,' he wrote on his social media platform X on February 2, without offering proof. 'Time for it to die.' Later that day, Musk posted another message on X: 'We spent the weekend feeding USAID into the wood chipper. Could [have] gone to some great parties. Did that instead.' By the end of February, the agency's headquarters in Washington, DC, was effectively closed, with employees given only 15 minutes to collect their belongings. An estimated 1,600 workers were fired, and another 4,700 were put on leave. Secretary of State Marco Rubio eventually announced that 83 percent of all USAID contracts had been cancelled. To justify the cuts across government, Musk and Trump have repeatedly accused departments and agencies of having perpetrated 'waste' and 'fraud', without offering proof. Given that USAID was established as an independent agency under Congress's Foreign Assistance Act, Judge Chuang ruled that Musk's actions 'likely violates the constitutional principle of Separation of Powers'. As part of Tuesday's injunction, Chuang required DOGE to restore USAID employees' access to electronic systems and called for the department to restore any deleted emails. Trump allies, however, quickly slammed Chuang – an appointee of former President Barack Obama – for his temporary injunction. wrote in a one-word reply.
Yahoo
12-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
This obscure law is one reason Trump's agenda keeps losing in court
WASHINGTON — Lawyers challenging President Donald Trump's aggressive use of executive power in the courts are turning to a familiar weapon in their armory: an obscure but routinely invoked federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act. While lawsuits challenging such provocative plans as ending birthright citizenship and dismantling federal agencies raise weighty constitutional issues, they also claim Trump failed to follow the correct procedures as required under the wonky 1946 statute. Trump fell afoul of the law in some high-profile cases that reached the Supreme Court during his first term, raising the possibility he could suffer the same fate this time around. Known in abbreviated form as the APA, the law allows judges to throw out federal agency actions that are "arbitrary and capricious" on various grounds, including failing to articulate why the agencies are changing policy. Much to the anger of Trump and his officials, judges have been issuing a series of orders putting administration plans on hold, including freezes on federal funding and drastic reductions in staffing. The rulings are at a preliminary stage and often do not include detailed legal reasoning. In fact, one of Trump's first losses in court in his second term — over an Office of Management and Budget memo ordering across-the-board funding freezes — was based in part on a claim brought under the APA. The administration quickly rescinded the memo, although litigation continues. "What we're seeing from the Trump administration is they are moving so fast, and they're trying to do so much with so little reasoning, and they're trying to disrupt as much as possible, as fast as possible, that these actions are inherently arbitrary and capricious" under the APA, a lawyer involved in one of the lawsuits said. One example of plaintiffs' citing the law is a case about Trump's effort to reduce biomedical research funding, which a coalition of states said "violates the Administrative Procedure Act in multiple ways." It fails to "articulate the bases" for the change and shows "disregard for the factual findings" that set the current rate, the lawsuit said. A judge blocked the policy Monday. On Tuesday, a judge cited the APA in finding that the administration most likely violated the law in removing webpages featuring medical data that health care professionals rely on. A lawsuit workers at the U.S. Agency for International Development filed last week seeking to prevent hundreds of staff members' being put on leave also raised APA claims. 'The dissolution of USAID is arbitrary and capricious in multiple respects,' the unions' lawyers argued. A judge partially granted the unions' request Friday. In another USAID-related lawsuit filed Tuesday, contractors whose funding has been cut made similar arguments. The government did not "explain why a comprehensive, undifferentiated freeze was necessary" or explain why a "more orderly and targeted approach" could not have been taken, the lawsuit said. The APA haunted Trump during his first term. In 2019, the Supreme Court found that the administration had not revealed its true reason for wanting to add a citizenship question to the census. "Reasoned decision-making under the Administrative Procedure Act calls for an explanation for agency action. What was provided here was more of a distraction," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote then. A year later, the court ruled that the administration had failed to consider various factors when it sought to unwind the Obama administration policy that protects "Dreamers" from deportation. Its actions were "arbitrary and capricious" under the APA, Roberts wrote. On both issues, Trump administration officials "were sloppy, and the court did not like that," said Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law. He noted, however, that at this early stage, the administration could still fix at least some of its errors. In Trump's first term, for example, the Supreme Court ultimately upheld a revised version of a travel ban on people entering the country from mostly Muslim-majority countries after a more sweeping policy was pared back. "The fact they're sloppy out of the gate, I don't think that tells us how the courts will ultimately resolve it," Adler said. Trump is by no means the only president to have fallen afoul of the APA, which judges routinely cite in striking down federal agency actions on a wide variety of issues, including environmental and consumer regulations that agencies sometimes spend years reviewing. In a high-profile case during the Biden administration, a federal judge in Texas threw out an immigration enforcement policy that would have prioritized deporting violent criminals. Among other things, District Judge Drew Tipton found that the administration had failed to take into account evidence about the dangers of recidivism and abscondment among immigrants with criminal records that undermined its policy conclusions. The government, he added, was required "to show its work. It either failed or refused to do so. This was arbitrary and capricious." (The Supreme Court in 2023 ultimately ruled in favor of President Joe Biden, saying the states that sued did not have legal standing.) Despite the long history of courts' faulting presidents under the APA, various Trump allies, including billionaire Elon Musk, have harshly criticized judges for ruling against the administration, as Trump himself has in the past, raising concerns in some quarters that officials could defy court orders. 'These unlawful injunctions are a continuation of the weaponization of justice against President Trump," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement Tuesday. But, she added, the White House "will continue to fight those battles in court, and we expect to be vindicated." This article was originally published on
NBC News
12-02-2025
- Politics
- NBC News
This obscure law is one reason Trump's agenda keeps losing in court
WASHINGTON — Lawyers challenging President Donald Trump's aggressive use of executive power in the courts are turning to a familiar weapon in their armory: an obscure but routinely invoked federal law called the Administrative Procedure Act. While lawsuits challenging such provocative plans as ending birthright citizenship and dismantling federal agencies raise weighty constitutional issues, they also claim Trump failed to follow the correct procedures as required under the wonky 1946 statute. Trump fell afoul of the law in some high-profile cases that reached the Supreme Court during his first term, raising the possibility he could suffer the same fate this time around. Known in abbreviated form as the APA, the law allows judges to throw out federal agency actions that are "arbitrary and capricious" on various grounds, including failing to articulate why the agencies are changing policy. Much to the anger of Trump and his officials, judges have been issuing a series of orders putting administration plans on hold, including freezes on federal funding and drastic reductions in staffing. The rulings are at a preliminary stage and often do not include detailed legal reasoning. In fact, one of Trump's first losses in court in his second term — over an Office of Management and Budget memo ordering across-the-board funding freezes — was based in part on a claim brought under the APA. The administration quickly rescinded the memo, although litigation continues. "What we're seeing from the Trump administration is they are moving so fast, and they're trying to do so much with so little reasoning, and they're trying to disrupt as much as possible, as fast as possible, that these actions are inherently arbitrary and capricious" under the APA, a lawyer involved in one of the lawsuits said. One example of plaintiffs' citing the law is a case about Trump's effort to reduce biomedical research funding, which a coalition of states said"violates the Administrative Procedure Act in multiple ways." It fails to "articulate the bases" for the change and shows "disregard for the factual findings" that set the current rate, the lawsuit said. A judge blocked the policy Monday. On Tuesday, a judge cited the APA in finding that the administration most likely violated the law in removing webpages featuring medical data that health care professionals rely on. A lawsuit workers at the U.S. Agency for International Development filed last week seeking to prevent hundreds of staff members' being put on leave also raised APA claims. 'The dissolution of USAID is arbitrary and capricious in multiple respects,' the unions' lawyers argued. A judge partially granted the unions' request Friday. In another USAID-related lawsuit filed Tuesday, contractors whose funding has been cut made similar arguments. The government did not "explain why a comprehensive, undifferentiated freeze was necessary" or explain why a "more orderly and targeted approach" could not have been taken, the lawsuit said. The APA haunted Trump during his first term. In 2019, the Supreme Court found that the administration had not revealed its true reason for wanting to add a citizenship question to the census. "Reasoned decision-making under the Administrative Procedure Act calls for an explanation for agency action. What was provided here was more of a distraction," Chief Justice John Roberts wrote then. A year later, the court ruled that the administration had failed to consider various factors when it sought to unwind the Obama administration policy that protects "Dreamers" from deportation. Its actions were "arbitrary and capricious" under the APA, Roberts wrote. On both issues, Trump administration officials "were sloppy, and the court did not like that," said Jonathan Adler, a professor at Case Western Reserve University School of Law. He noted, however, that at this early stage, the administration could still fix at least some of its errors. In Trump's first term, for example, the Supreme Court ultimately upheld a revised version of a travel ban on people entering the country from mostly Muslim-majority countries after a more sweeping policy was pared back. "The fact they're sloppy out of the gate, I don't think that tells us how the courts will ultimately resolve it," Adler said. Trump is by no means the only president to have fallen afoul of the APA, which judges routinely cite in striking down federal agency actions on a wide variety of issues, including environmental and consumer regulations that agencies sometimes spend years reviewing. In a high-profile case during the Biden administration, a federal judge in Texas threw out an immigration enforcement policy that would have prioritized deporting violent criminals. Among other things, District Judge Drew Tipton found that the administration had failed to take into account evidence about the dangers of recidivism and abscondment among immigrants with criminal records that undermined its policy conclusions. The government, he added, was required "to show its work. It either failed or refused to do so. This was arbitrary and capricious." (The Supreme Court in 2023 ultimately ruled in favor of President Joe Biden, saying the states that sued did not have legal standing.) Despite the long history of courts' faulting presidents under the APA, various Trump allies, including billionaire Elon Musk, have harshly criticized judges for ruling against the administration, as Trump himself has in the past, raising concerns in some quarters that officials could defy court orders. 'These unlawful injunctions are a continuation of the weaponization of justice against President Trump," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement Tuesday.
