• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Страны / Регионы1870
      • Показать ещё
      Разное887
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации96
      • Показать ещё
      Компании782
      • Показать ещё
      Люди337
      • Показать ещё
      Издания143
      • Показать ещё
      Показатели110
      • Показать ещё
      Формат31
      Сферы1
Каймановы острова
22 февраля, 19:32

В Казани открылся новый отель Center Hotel Kazan Kremlin на месте закрывшегося «Марриотт»

Сегодня в Казани официально открылся новый гостиничный проект — отель Center Hotel Kazan Kremlin на месте прекратившего работу в конце прошлого года отеля «Кортъярд Марриотт Казань Кремль» на ул. Карла Маркса.

22 февраля, 00:00

"Транснефть" получит долю в Каспийском трубопроводном консорциуме.

Президент Владимир Путин распорядился внести в капитал "Транснефти" акции компаний-владельцев акций Каспийского трубопроводного консорциума (КТК). Указом также закрепляется право "Транснефти" на проведение допэмиссии привилегированных акций. Монополия пока не планирует выпуск "префов", но разместит их при решении РФ и согласии частных акционеров. РФ оплатит дополнительную эмиссию обыкновенных акций "Транснефти" через внесение в ее капитал акций структур, близких к Каспийскому трубопроводному консорциуму (КТК). Речь идет, в частности, о "КТК Компани" (владеет 7% акций КТК) и "КТК Инвестментс Компани". Обе компании зарегистрированы на Каймановых островах. Соответствующий указ президента размещен в понедельник на портале правовой информации. 100% обыкновенных акций "Транснефти" принадлежат государству, большая часть привилегированных акций (более 70%) принадлежит фонду UCP Ильи Щербовича. "Принять предложение правительства РФ о внесении в уставный капитал ПАО "Транснефть"… находящихся в федеральной собственности 10 тыс. обыкновенных акций компании "КТК Компани", составляющих 100% ее капитала, и 10 тыс. обыкновенных акций компании "КТК Инвестментс Компани", составляющих 100% ее уставного капитала",- говорится в указе. Правительство РФ должно обеспечить проведение допэмиссии за шесть месяцев. КТК владеет нефтепроводом Тенгиз-Новороссийск длиной 1511 км. Нефтепроводная система соединяет месторождения запада Казахстана с российским побережьем Черного моря. Акционеры от РФ вЂ” "Транснефть" (24%) и "КТК Компани" (7%). Также в СП входят Казахстан (20,75%), Chevron Caspian Pipeline Consortium Company (15%), структура ЛУКОЙЛа LukArco B.V. (12,5%), Mobil Caspian Pipeline Company (7,5%), Rosneft-Shell Caspian Ventures Ltd (7,5%), BG Overseas Holding Ltd (2%), ENI International N.A. N.V. (2%) и Oryx Caspian Pipeline LLC (1,75%). После размещения обыкновенных акций "Транснефть" может провести допэмиссию привилегированных акций и реализовать их при сохранении доли РФ в уставном капитале компании на уровне не менее 75% плюс одна акция, а также сохранения в федеральной собственности 100% обыкновенных акций компании, говорится в документе. Как сообщил "Интерфаксу" советник президента "Транснефти" Игорь Демин, дополнительный выпуск привилегированных акций не входит в планы компании. Но в случае принятия собственником такого решения оно будет реализовано, если владельцы "префов" не заблокируют дополнительный выпуск. Татьяна Дятел Источник — kommersant.ru

20 февраля, 10:22

Путин поручил передать "Транснефти" долю в КТК

Россия оплатит дополнительную эмиссию обыкновенных акций "Транснефти" путем внесения в капитал компании 100% акций двух компаний, одна из которых владеет долей в Каспийском трубопроводном консорциуме (КТК).

20 февраля, 10:22

Путин поручил передать "Транснефти" долю в КТК

Россия оплатит дополнительную эмиссию обыкновенных акций "Транснефти" путем внесения в капитал компании 100% акций двух компаний, одна из которых владеет долей в Каспийском трубопроводном консорциуме (КТК).

20 февраля, 10:07

Путин поручил оплатить допэмиссию «Транснефти» акциями компаний, связанных с КТК

Россия оплатит дополнительную эмиссию обыкновенных акций «Транснефти» через внесение в ее капитал 100 акций двух фирм, одна из которых имеет долю в Каспийском трубопроводном консорциуме.

20 февраля, 08:50

Битва Дональда Трампа с собственными спецслужбами

Д. Трамп еще в ходе избирательной кампании понял, что американские разведчики и контрразведчики работают в интересах штаба Х. Клинтон и используют при этом грязные методы. Уже тогда он давал понять, что время «разбора полетов» с ними ещё придёт.

19 февраля, 16:26

Битва Дональда Трампа с собственными спецслужбами

«Самая большая война Трампа – это война с разведывательным сообществом», – сообщает агентство NBC в своем материале от 16 февраля с.г. Агентство считает, что наступление полчищ неолиберальных СМИ на нового президента ведется с подачи и при участии американских спецслужб.  Это не удивительно. Д. Трамп еще в ходе избирательной кампании понял, что американские разведчики и контрразведчики работают в интересах штаба Х....

14 февраля, 16:21

For America's Sake, We Need Answers About Russia. Now.

(Note: I hardly had finished writing the following piece when Michael Flynn resigned, requiring a small revision. With this new development, the plot thickens, and getting to the truth about Russia and the Trump White House becomes even more important. And it raises the famous questions that so bedeviled Richard Nixon: What did Donald Trump know and when did he know it? mw) These first weeks of the Trump White House have felt like one of those tennis ball machines run amok, volley after volley shooting at us in such rapid fire that often the only reaction is to grimace and duck. Outrage after outrage, imperial pronouncement after pronouncement, lie after lie; it's just one damned, fast and furious, flawed thing after another. All of this is confusing and distracting and of course, that's precisely what they want. As the old saying goes, if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullshit. It easily distracts us from the real issues, diverting our eyes from those important things that have to be closely examined and resolved if we're to continue trying, at least, to behave like a free nation. One of those burning issues is Russia, which largely seemed to go off the scope in the days immediately before and after Trump's mini-inauguration, even though around the election and in the weeks after we heard a great deal about Russia's hacking of the Democratic National Committee and the release of emails aimed at defeating Hillary Clinton -- allegations that were backed by the U.S. intelligence community. With the FBI, those spy agencies also have been investigating intercepted communications from Russian intelligence. And then there's that infamous "dossier," compiled by ex-British spy Christopher Steele, filled with thus far unverified allegations about President Trump's business dealings with Russia as well as certain salacious tales of his purported extracurricular activities there. But with the resignation of Trump national security advisor Michael Flynn, in the wake of news reports about his December phone calls with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and word that U.S. intelligence has confirmed some of the information in the Steele dossier, interest in Russia has rekindled, and a good thing, too. On Thursday night, The Washington Post released the story that Flynn "privately discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country's ambassador to the United States during the month before President Trump took office, contrary to public assertions by Trump officials, current and former U.S. officials said." This was followed by Monday night's breaking news from the Post: "The acting attorney general informed the Trump White House late last month that she believed Michael Flynn had misled senior administration officials about the nature of his communications with the Russian ambassador to the United States, and warned that the national security adviser was potentially vulnerable to Russian blackmail, current and former U.S. officials said." Within hours, Flynn was out. What's more, at week's end, as the Flynn story was beginning to unfold, CNN reported that investigators have now corroborated some of the less personal information in the Steele dossier, conversations among Russian officials: "The corroboration," the network reported, "has given U.S. intelligence and law enforcement 'greater confidence' in the credibility of some aspects of the dossier... Some of the individuals involved in the intercepted communications were known to the U.S. intelligence community as 'heavily involved' in collecting information damaging to Hillary Clinton and helpful to Donald Trump, two of the officials tell CNN." These latest developments came on the heels of Trump's astonishing remarks to Bill O'Reilly, in an interview pre-taped for Super Bowl Sunday, when Trump said he respected Putin and O'Reilly noted that the Russian leader is a killer: "There are a lot of killers," Trump replied, sounding more like a two-bit Al Capone than the leader of the free world. "We have a lot of killers. You think our country is so innocent?" This is way beyond troubling, so it merits noting some of the other news about Russia that has transpired in the last few weeks, news that might have flown under your radar while Trump's fusillade of executive orders and tantrums was bombarding your every waking moment. All of it is serious business, specifically when it comes to figuring out just why Trump is so deeply enamored of Vladimir Putin and how much Russia interfered with our election, and more broadly for what it says about Trump and his chief strategist Stephen Bannon's vision, God help us, of a world divided and dominated by white nationalists. For one, and speaking of killers, there's the matter of the missing Russian intelligence men, all of whom may be connected to the Trump affair. Amy Knight, former Woodrow Wilson Fellow and author of Orders From Above: The Putin Regime and Political Murder, writes in The New York Review of Books, "... Since the U.S. election, there has been an unprecedented, and perhaps still continuing shakeup of top officials in Putin's main security agency, the FSB, and that a top former intelligence official in Putin's entourage died recently in suspicious circumstances." She's worth quoting at length: "It appears that the Kremlin has been conducting an intensive hunt for moles within its security apparatus who might have leaked information about Russian efforts to influence the US presidential election. In mid-December 2016, following public assertions by leading US intelligence officials that Russia had intervened in the election, two high-level FSB officers, Sergei Mikhailov, deputy chief of the FSB's Center for Information Security, which oversees cyberintelligence, and his subordinate, Dmitry Dokuchayev, were arrested. (Russian authorities reportedly took Mikhailov away from a meeting of the FSB top brass after placing a black bag on his head.) The two men -- along with Ruslan Stoyanov, who headed the Kaspersky Lab, a private company that assists the FSB in internet security -- were charged with state treason. Russian independent media reported that the men had been responsible for leaks to Western sources, including US intelligence, about Russian cyber attacks against the US and also about Russian covert efforts to blackmail Donald Trump... "Also, the authoritative independent Russian business daily Kommersant reported two weeks ago that Andrei Gerasimov, chief of the FSB's cyberintelligence department, and Mikhailov's boss, would be fired, although Gerasimov's dismissal has yet to be officially confirmed. According to Russian security expert Andrei Soldatov, the upheaval in the FSB amounts to a purge of the entire Russian state security team dealing with cyberintelligence and cybersecurity." Then there's a former KGB and FSB general, Oleg Erovinkin, found dead in the back of his car in Moscow on Dec. 26, officially from a heart attack, but as Agatha Christie would say, foul play is suspected. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reports: "Erovinkin was a key aide to Igor Sechin, a former deputy prime minister. He has been described as a key liaison between Sechin and Russian President Vladimir Putin. Now head of the state-owned oil company Rosneft, Sechin is repeatedly named in the so-called Trump dossier... [Christopher] Steele wrote in the dossier, which was dated July 19, 2016, that much of the information it contained was provided by a source close to Sechin. That source was Erovinkin, according to Russia expert Christo Grozev of Risk Management Lab, a think-tank based in Bulgaria." Through their mutual love of petrochemicals and profits, Igor Sechin and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, former CEO of ExxonMobil are pals, and in fact Sechin complained that US sanctions against Russia kept him from coming to America to "ride the roads... on motorcycles with Tillerson." In December, Russia announced the sale of a 19.5 percent share of Rosneft, that massive government oil company run by Igor Sechin. He and Putin appeared on television to announce the deal, and Reuters reported that Putin "called it a sign of international faith in Russia, despite US and EU financial sanctions on Russian firms including Rosneft." Supposedly the transaction is a fairly straightforward joint venture between Qatar and Glencore, a Swiss firm, but as Reuters noted, "Like many large deals, the Rosneft privatization uses a structure of shell companies owning shell companies, commonly referred to in Russia as a 'matryoshka,' after the wooden nesting dolls that open to reveal a smaller doll inside. Following the trail of ownership leads to a Glencore UK subsidiary and a company that shares addresses with the Qatari Investment Authority, but also to a firm registered in the Cayman Islands, which does not require companies to record publicly who owns them." So who's really behind the deal? Its convolutions may have the potential for a John Le Carre novel or Bourne movie. Some have even noted, as Amy Knight does, that coincidentally, "The Steele dossier... mentions that Carter Page, a member of Trump's foreign policy team during his campaign, had a secret meeting with Sechin in Moscow in July 2016, in which the two reportedly discussed the possible lifting [of] US sanctions against Russia, in exchange for a 19 percent stake in Rosneft (It is not clear from the memo who would get the stake, but apparently it would have been the Trump campaign)" [Italics mine. mw]. She speculates that this, too, may have been another leak by the now-deceased Oleg Erovinkin. A 19 percent stake in Rosneft, versus a 19.5 percent stake... admittedly, it's a stretch, and probably nothing more than an odd coincidence, yet stranger things have happened, especially given the Bizarro World we now inhabit. But what's not a stretch is that beyond the particulars, beyond whatever reasons, blackmail or otherwise, that Trump is so under Vladimir Putin's spell, there is a global agenda both men share that's the real danger. Urged on by his American Rasputin, the ineffable Bannon, for all intents and purposes Trump is promoting white nationalism and what many call "traditionalism," a worldview shared by Putin. It's no coincidence that the Russian kleptocrat and his government also are supporting and being embraced by far-right political parties and leaders throughout Europe, including Marine LePen's National Front in France, Germany's Alternative for Germany (AfD), Golden Dawn in Greece, the Ataka Party in Bulgaria and Hungary's Jobbik Party. In a 2013 speech at the Valdai conference in Russia, Putin warned, "We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilization. They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious and even sexual. They are implementing policies that equate large families with same-sex partnerships, belief in God with the belief in Satan." And here's Trump consigliere Steve Bannon on the dangers of what he calls "jihadist Islamic fascism." In 2014 he told a conference at the Vatican: "I believe the world, and particularly the Judeo-Christian West, is in a crisis... There is a major war brewing, a war that's already global... Every day that we refuse to look at this as what it is, and the scale of it, and really the viciousness of it, will be a day where you will rue that we didn't act." Asked about support for Putin and Russia from France's National Front and Britain's United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP), Bannon replied, "One of the reasons is that they believe that at least Putin is standing up for traditional institutions, and he's trying to do it in a form of nationalism -- and I think that people, particularly in certain countries, want to see the sovereignty for their country, they want to see nationalism for their country. They don't believe in this kind of pan-European Union or they don't believe in the centralized government in the United States." Putin's motives are pragmatic as well as ideological; distracting his people as he cracks down dissent at home while seeking destabilization in the West and hoping to prevent further expansion of the European Union and NATO. Bannon's motives seem more messianic and, the greater the influence he exerts on Trump's thinking (such as it is), dangerous. In the current issue of The Atlantic, journalist Franklin Foer concludes: "There is little empirical basis for the charge of civilizational rot. It speaks to an emotional state, one we should do our best to understand and even empathize with. But we know from history that premonitions of imminent barbarism serve to justify extreme countermeasures. These are the anxieties from which dictators rise. Admiring strongmen from a distance is the window-shopping that can end in the purchase of authoritarianism." And so it may go here in America. From a window-shopping distance, Trump admires Putin and his authoritarianism. This blind love, plus the lust that drove Trump to want the White House -- and yes, perhaps extortion as well -- may have allowed Russia not only to subvert our election but also to infiltrate Trump's administration and erode if not destroy American democracy. John R. Schindler at the Observer (the newspaper until recently owned by Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner) writes, "Our Intelligence Community is so worried by the unprecedented problems of the Trump administration -- not only do senior officials possess troubling ties to the Kremlin, there are nagging questions about basic competence regarding Team Trump -- that it is beginning to withhold intelligence from a White House which our spies do not trust." Democrats and even some Republicans are demanding answers, several congressional committees have announced probes, individual members like New York's Jerry Nadler are searching for various maneuvers that will force Trump and the evidence of Russian intrusions into our government and politics out into the open. But the crisis still cries out for a bipartisan independent investigation. The bottom line is that Putin is far shrewder than Trump and capable of playing him like a balalaika. And despite the departure of security risk Michael Flynn, with the likes of foolhardy Bannon, dangerous professional twerp and presidential advisor Stephen Miller and others still egging Trump on -- obsessed with a nightmarish hallucination about America and the world's future -- we live at one of the most dangerous moment in our republic's history. Unlike those days 50 years ago when Russia posed a different kind of ideological threat, one that had us building fallout shelters and teaching kids to duck and cover, this is not a drill. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 февраля, 12:00

Набиуллина: «Мы надеемся прийти к ситуации, когда отзывы лицензий будут измеряться единицами в год»

Главными инструментами стабилизации банковского сектора стали отзыв лицензий и ужесточение наказания для банкиров. Об этом пишет агенство «Росбалт», подробно разбирающее реформу банковского надзора Банка России

14 февраля, 03:41

Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin Is No Joe Kennedy

There are plenty of signs that Steve Mnuchin is not a good guy, even by the lax standards of today’s banking industry. OneWest, a bank he established with partners and ran from 2009 to 2015, mounted a record of ruthless foreclosures (in one case over a 27-cent error). A memo from top prosecutors in California’s state attorney general’s office saw evidence of its “widespread misconduct” and repeated violations of law, according to The Intercept. Mnuchin misled the Senate (accidentally, he says) on his banking history, his personal finances and his role in running a Cayman Islands tax-haven account. Nevertheless, Senate Republicans just managed to confirm Mnuchin as the next Secretary of the Treasury. Republican senators like Rob Portman of Indiana used contorted logic in an attempt to convince voters that Mnuchin did not mislead them, while Mnuchin attributed his failure to list $100 million of his own assets in his disclosure forms to “oversight.” (If you’re rich enough to overlook $100 million, it’s safe to say you’re very rich.) Mnuchin will run a department that once reprimanded him and OneWest, requiring them to work with an independent monitor. His areas of responsibility will include “supervising national banks and thrift institutions” and “enforcing Federal finance and tax laws.” ‘It Takes One to Catch One’ Aggressive bankers have held high office before, and it hasn’t always ended badly. Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. had a reputation for playing rough and cutting corners, at a time when banks were largely unregulated and unsupervised. Kennedy was also said to have smuggled moonshine during Prohibition, but no evidence of that has ever come to light. (Kennedy, like Mnuchin, invested heavily in show business and did well.) When Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Kennedy to serve the first chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), FDR was reportedly asked why he had appointed such a crook. “Takes one to catch one,” Roosevelt is said to have replied. By all accounts, Kennedy did an excellent job. But there was a major difference between Joe Kennedy’s outlook and Steve Mnuchin’s. Kennedy understood that Wall Streeters were rascals who needed strict oversight. Mnuchin wants to go easy on them. ‘Way Too Complicated’ Mnuchin wants to loosen regulations on the bankers whose misbehavior and massive fraud cost the economy trillions of dollars in lost income in the 2008 financial crisis. He used the same phrase to describe both the Dodd-Frank law, which took some needed first steps toward reining in predatory bankers, and the “Volcker rule” limiting banks’ ability to gamble with federally insured deposits. “Way too complicated,” he complained. To paraphrase what Sen. Lloyd Bentsen told Dan Quayle when he faced him in a vice presidential debate: Steve Mnuchin, you’re no Joe Kennedy. During his confirmation hearing, Mnuchin said he now supported the Volcker rule, although he said it needed to be “improved” in ways he did not describe. He also said he supported some version of a “21st century Glass-Steagall Act” to separate commercial banking from the speculative and often high-risk world of investment banking. But again, Mnuchin offered no specifics. Mnuchin is part of a wave of former Goldman Sachs bankers joining the Trump administration, just a few short months after a campaign in which Trump vilified Goldman Sachs as representing the worst aspects of American finance. Assuming that his confirmation proceeds as expected, Mnuchin and Trump — together with Mnuchin’s ex-Goldman Sachs colleagues — will work with a Republican-led House and Senate that shares a basic antipathy to banking regulation and has increasingly diverted Wall Street campaign contributions from the Democrats. A Resistance Roadmap How can Americans resist Wall Street’s influence over the government with Trump in the White House, Mnuchin at Treasury and Republicans controlling both houses of Congress? There will be many strategy discussions in the weeks and months to follow, but some basic principles seem clear: Remind voters that this is a government of the wealthy, by the wealthy and for the wealthy: Trump managed to convince a number of (mostly white) working-class voters that he had their interests at heart. Then he packed his administration with self-interested billionaires. Many of their economic moves are likely to benefit their own portfolios, while hurting the wallets of working Americans. Voters must understand that the GOP’s billionaire-packed cabinet has turned the government into a tool and plaything for the rich. Defend Social Security: The Treasury secretary serves as the managing trustee for Social Security’s trust funds, which held more than $2.8 trillion in reserves at the end of last year. Trump promised during his presidential bid that he would not cut Social Security. That made him stand out from the Republican field and helped him win the presidency. Voters must demand that Trump keep that promise, and that Mnuchin use his position to defend the program from direct cuts to its benefits — or the indirect cuts that would result if Medicare’s benefits were reduced and seniors had to pay more out of pocket. Hold senators accountable for confirming Mnuchin: If Mnuchin is confirmed, it will he because Republicans ignored both the evidence of his misdeeds and his “oversights” before the Senate. Voters must hold the GOP accountable for every misstep Mnuchin makes in office. Press them to keep their promises: Trump repeatedly promised to invest in American infrastructure. If he and Mnuchin offer only tax breaks for corporations or private “partnerships” that strip the American people of their own resources, they must be challenged on it. If Mnuchin reverses his support for the Volcker Rule and Glass/Steagall, he must face a grilling on Capitol Hill. If Congress fails to do its job, voters should press lawmakers to get it done. The Dodd-Frank law was a useful first step toward reining in bank criminality, but it didn’t nearly go far enough. The Obama administration’s failure to prosecute crooked bank executives gave a green light to ongoing fraud. If Mnuchin and Trump repeal or roll back some of the regulations now in place, as seems likely, brace for more fraud in the future. That will increase the risk of another financial crisis, at a time when inequality is growing and the middle class is disappearing. Altogether, it’s a recipe for disaster. Only one Democrat voted in favor of Mnuchin’s confirmation. No Republicans voted against it. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

14 февраля, 03:41

Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin Is No Joe Kennedy

There are plenty of signs that Steve Mnuchin is not a good guy, even by the lax standards of today’s banking industry. OneWest, a bank he established with partners and ran from 2009 to 2015, mounted a record of ruthless foreclosures (in one case over a 27-cent error). A memo from top prosecutors in California’s state attorney general’s office saw evidence of its “widespread misconduct” and repeated violations of law, according to The Intercept. Mnuchin misled the Senate (accidentally, he says) on his banking history, his personal finances and his role in running a Cayman Islands tax-haven account. Nevertheless, Senate Republicans just managed to confirm Mnuchin as the next Secretary of the Treasury. Republican senators like Rob Portman of Indiana used contorted logic in an attempt to convince voters that Mnuchin did not mislead them, while Mnuchin attributed his failure to list $100 million of his own assets in his disclosure forms to “oversight.” (If you’re rich enough to overlook $100 million, it’s safe to say you’re very rich.) Mnuchin will run a department that once reprimanded him and OneWest, requiring them to work with an independent monitor. His areas of responsibility will include “supervising national banks and thrift institutions” and “enforcing Federal finance and tax laws.” ‘It Takes One to Catch One’ Aggressive bankers have held high office before, and it hasn’t always ended badly. Joseph P. Kennedy Sr. had a reputation for playing rough and cutting corners, at a time when banks were largely unregulated and unsupervised. Kennedy was also said to have smuggled moonshine during Prohibition, but no evidence of that has ever come to light. (Kennedy, like Mnuchin, invested heavily in show business and did well.) When Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Kennedy to serve the first chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), FDR was reportedly asked why he had appointed such a crook. “Takes one to catch one,” Roosevelt is said to have replied. By all accounts, Kennedy did an excellent job. But there was a major difference between Joe Kennedy’s outlook and Steve Mnuchin’s. Kennedy understood that Wall Streeters were rascals who needed strict oversight. Mnuchin wants to go easy on them. ‘Way Too Complicated’ Mnuchin wants to loosen regulations on the bankers whose misbehavior and massive fraud cost the economy trillions of dollars in lost income in the 2008 financial crisis. He used the same phrase to describe both the Dodd-Frank law, which took some needed first steps toward reining in predatory bankers, and the “Volcker rule” limiting banks’ ability to gamble with federally insured deposits. “Way too complicated,” he complained. To paraphrase what Sen. Lloyd Bentsen told Dan Quayle when he faced him in a vice presidential debate: Steve Mnuchin, you’re no Joe Kennedy. During his confirmation hearing, Mnuchin said he now supported the Volcker rule, although he said it needed to be “improved” in ways he did not describe. He also said he supported some version of a “21st century Glass-Steagall Act” to separate commercial banking from the speculative and often high-risk world of investment banking. But again, Mnuchin offered no specifics. Mnuchin is part of a wave of former Goldman Sachs bankers joining the Trump administration, just a few short months after a campaign in which Trump vilified Goldman Sachs as representing the worst aspects of American finance. Assuming that his confirmation proceeds as expected, Mnuchin and Trump — together with Mnuchin’s ex-Goldman Sachs colleagues — will work with a Republican-led House and Senate that shares a basic antipathy to banking regulation and has increasingly diverted Wall Street campaign contributions from the Democrats. A Resistance Roadmap How can Americans resist Wall Street’s influence over the government with Trump in the White House, Mnuchin at Treasury and Republicans controlling both houses of Congress? There will be many strategy discussions in the weeks and months to follow, but some basic principles seem clear: Remind voters that this is a government of the wealthy, by the wealthy and for the wealthy: Trump managed to convince a number of (mostly white) working-class voters that he had their interests at heart. Then he packed his administration with self-interested billionaires. Many of their economic moves are likely to benefit their own portfolios, while hurting the wallets of working Americans. Voters must understand that the GOP’s billionaire-packed cabinet has turned the government into a tool and plaything for the rich. Defend Social Security: The Treasury secretary serves as the managing trustee for Social Security’s trust funds, which held more than $2.8 trillion in reserves at the end of last year. Trump promised during his presidential bid that he would not cut Social Security. That made him stand out from the Republican field and helped him win the presidency. Voters must demand that Trump keep that promise, and that Mnuchin use his position to defend the program from direct cuts to its benefits — or the indirect cuts that would result if Medicare’s benefits were reduced and seniors had to pay more out of pocket. Hold senators accountable for confirming Mnuchin: If Mnuchin is confirmed, it will he because Republicans ignored both the evidence of his misdeeds and his “oversights” before the Senate. Voters must hold the GOP accountable for every misstep Mnuchin makes in office. Press them to keep their promises: Trump repeatedly promised to invest in American infrastructure. If he and Mnuchin offer only tax breaks for corporations or private “partnerships” that strip the American people of their own resources, they must be challenged on it. If Mnuchin reverses his support for the Volcker Rule and Glass/Steagall, he must face a grilling on Capitol Hill. If Congress fails to do its job, voters should press lawmakers to get it done. The Dodd-Frank law was a useful first step toward reining in bank criminality, but it didn’t nearly go far enough. The Obama administration’s failure to prosecute crooked bank executives gave a green light to ongoing fraud. If Mnuchin and Trump repeal or roll back some of the regulations now in place, as seems likely, brace for more fraud in the future. That will increase the risk of another financial crisis, at a time when inequality is growing and the middle class is disappearing. Altogether, it’s a recipe for disaster. Only one Democrat voted in favor of Mnuchin’s confirmation. No Republicans voted against it. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

13 февраля, 17:46

Many questions linger over privatization of Russia's largest oil company

Rosneft’s privatization was one of the most important global business events in 2016, but the intensity with which experts criticized the deal for a lack of transparency has seemed to die down. Now there is a new development - European banks are asking questions about Rosneft's new owners. The focus of attention is Italy’s Banca Intesa, which lent Glencore, a Swiss commodity trading company, and the Qatar Investment Authority (QIA), 5.2 billion euros to buy the stake in Rosneft. The bank wants to syndicate the loan with other banks, but this is possible only if the deal is fully transparent. The banks that might share the credit risks with Banca Intesa want to know the identities of the final beneficiaries of the privatized shares. The "know your customer" principle will prevent most banks from participating in loan syndication if Banca Intesa does not present them with as much information as possible. It’s likely, however, that some Russian financial institutions will be able to share the credit risks with the Italian bank. What's the crux of the matter? The Russian economy depends on income from oil exports. The public, however, does not know the names of the new owners of the country's largest oil company, whose output is approximately 1 million out of the 11 million barrels of oil produced in Russia daily. Why did the government decide to privatize Rosneft? The government decided to sell 19.5 percent of state-controlled Rosneft in order to replenish the government’s budget, which faces a deficit due to weak economic growth and low oil prices, the main source of Russia's export revenues. Why did Russia’s economy minister ask Rosneft for a $2-million bribe? On Dec. 7, Rosneft's head, Igor Sechin, met with President Putin in the Kremlin and announced that a deal was made with Glencore and the Qatari sovereign fund. By the end of 2016 Rosneft accomplished a double privatization deal - first buying a controlling stake in Bashneft from the government, and then selling 19.5 percent of its own shares. Thanks to privatization, in 2016 the company paid more than 3 trillion rubles (about $50 billion) to the state budget, said Sechin. President Putin remarked that this was the largest privatization deal in Russian history and the largest deal in the global oil and gas industry in 2016. Why do many consider Rosneft’s privatization opaque? According to a report (in Russian) by RBC, it’s impossible to understand who are this deal’s final beneficiaries. Officially, the owner of Rosneft's 19.5 percent stake is Singapore-based Shares QHG Pte Ltd., which is fully owned by the British-based QHG Investment LLP, which in turn is controlled by the Qatari fund and QHG Holding. The latter is the consortium's so-called "mother company," and includes three companies - Glencore, QIA, and QHG Cayman Limited that is registered on the Cayman Islands, which guarantees confidentiality and certain fiscal advantages. QHG Cayman Limited's role in the deal and its future role in the company’s management are not clear. How is Rosneft’s privatization related to the arrest of the Economics Minister? On Nov. 15, Russia’s Economic Development Minister, Alexei Ulyukaev, who oversaw Rosneft's privatization, was detained in Rosneft's headquarters and arrested. The oil company’s management accused the minister of extorting a bribe to help with Bashneft’s privatization. The Russian media linked the arrest to Rosneft’s privatization. Political analysts Kirill Rogov, Alexander Kynev and Vladimir Milov discussed (in Russian) on Radio Liberty the possibility of a clash of two different approaches towards privatization - Ulyukaev tried to have the assets sold on the open market, while Sechin wanted to control everything himself. One theory proposed (in Russian) by Rosbalt news agency says that Ulyukaev demanded money for speeding up bureaucratic work for the deal. These are all theories, however, and the official investigation of the Ulyukaev case is still not finished. For now we can only be certain that 2016 witnessed a clash between various clans in the Russian political elite. Read more: Russia eyes $12.6 billion windfall from privatization of state companies>>>

Выбор редакции
13 февраля, 17:12

Wilbur Ross, Trump's Commerce Dept Pick, To Keep 11 Investments Including Chinese Govt-Backed Company

In the hint that members of Trump's administration may be "compromised" by conflicts of interest, the WSJ reports that Trump's pick for Commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross Jr, plans to keep millions of dollars invested in offshore entities "whose values could be affected by policies that he implements as commerce secretary." Ross, the 79-year-old private-equity billionaire has said that if he is confirmed, he will sell at least 80 business assets and investment funds over the next several months. But he plans to hold on to investments in an oil-tanker company and 10 other entities that invest in shipping and real-estate financing, according to federal financial-disclosure and ethics filings. It isn’t clear why Mr. Ross is retaining these 11 assets. One particular assets which will raise eyebrows is a co-investment with the Chinese government’s sovereign- wealth fund in Diamond S Shipping Group Inc., one of the world’s largest owners and operators of medium-range oil tankers, according to its website. Ross’s private-equity firm in 2011 led a group of investors, including state-owned China Investment Corp., which injected a total of about $1 billion into the company. The Chinese fund was still a co-investor in 2014, according to a filing for an intended public offering that was later canceled.   Diamond S Shipping Group, which is registered offshore but based in Greenwich, Conn., is private and doesn’t publicly list all its shareholders. The company, which has 33 tankers, didn’t respond to requests for comment.   Negotiating with and responding to China will be one of Mr. Ross’s responsibilities as commerce secretary. His role will include a seat on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S., an agency that vets global deals on national-security grounds and has scotched a number of Chinese takeovers. In all, according to the WSJ, Ross is retaining stakes valued at between $8.7 million and $41.5 million, according to a financial-disclosure form he filed with the Office of Government Ethics. The interests are mostly in private companies registered in the Cayman Islands, according to corporate filings. The entities are linked to investments his private-equity firm, W.L. Ross & Co., made in shipping and real-estate financing, including the U.S. and Irish property markets. A spokesman said Mr. Ross has committed that, if confirmed as commerce secretary, “he will faithfully execute the law and the commitments in his ethics agreement, and will follow the advice of the department’s ethics officials.” However, there appears to be a loophole: in a letter to the Commerce Department last month, Mr. Ross said six of the entities in which he is retaining stakes are no longer acquiring new assets. In three other companies, he will be a passive investor, “without prior knowledge of or influence over investment decisions made by the funds’ managers,” he wrote. Naturally, the values of Ross’s investments could rise or fall depending on policies set by the Commerce Department, which oversees oil-spill regulations and trade negotiations, among other things. The Ross disclosure will provide Democrats more ammo for attacks on yet another Trump candidate, especially now that his National Security Advisor Mike Flynn appears to be on very thin ice. Maria Cantwell of Washington, a Democratic member of the Senate panel that last month scrutinized Mr. Ross’s nomination, said in a later written question there is “clearly” a conflict of interest between his retained stake in a tanker company and his new job. “Your decisions could impact the regulatory environment for both your own and your [competitors’] shipping companies. You would also have authority to determine the financial liability facing tanker companies that pollute our waters,” the question, reviewed by The Wall Street Journal, said. In a troubling lack of transparency, little public information is available about the entities in which Mr. Ross is retaining investments. That means it will be hard for outside groups to monitor what effect if any Commerce Department actions would have on Ross’s finances. For example, WLR Mezzanine Associates LLC is described on Mr. Ross’s financial disclosure form as the general partner of “various underlying funds.” The funds aren’t identified. The Cayman Islands corporate registry entry for WLR Mezzanine Associates LLC gives little detail beyond a Grand Cayman office address, saying: “information regarding the corporate records and registers are not available for public inspection.” Company records in Delaware, where the company is also registered, don’t disclose its finances, owners or related funds.   “If these entities are essentially black boxes, how will the officials advising Mr. Ross be able to flag that a specific matter before him affects his financial interests and requires recusal?” said Kathleen Clark, a professor and expert in government ethics law at Washington University in St. Louis. A spokesman for Mr. Ross said the commerce department’s ethics officials “are career staff with extensive experience, and together with Mr. Ross are committed to serving the public and faithfully executing the law.” Then again, for an administration in which even Trump is concerned about the material number of "Goldman Guys", and which is about to add Bear Stearns' chief economist at the time of the bank's failure as Trump's international Treasury advisor, concerns about Ross' black box investments seem like a relatively minor thing to be concerned about in the grand scheme of what Trump's Wall Street based advisors are about to advise him.

13 февраля, 16:04

Brexit вызвал протест Шотландии и 10 заморских территорий

Мини-государства недовольны планами Великобритании покинуть Евросоюз. Они грозят Лондону тем, что сами выйдут из-под юрисдикции Соединенного Королевства

09 февраля, 18:40

Shareholder democracy is ailing

DEMOCRACY is in decline around the world, according to Freedom House, a think-tank. Only 45% of countries are considered free today, and their number is slipping. Liberty is in retreat in the world of business, too. The idea that firms should be controlled by diverse shareholders who exercise one vote per share is increasingly viewed as redundant or even dangerous. Consider the initial public offering (IPO) of Silicon Valley’s latest social-media star, Snap. It plans to raise $3-4bn and secure a valuation of $20bn-25bn. The securities being sold have no voting rights, so all the power will stay with Evan Spiegel and Bobby Murphy, its co-founders. Snap’s IPO has echoes of that of Alibaba, a Chinese internet giant. It listed itself in New York in 2014, in the world’s largest-ever IPO, raising $25bn. It is worth $252bn today and is controlled by an opaque partnership using legal vehicles in the Cayman Islands. Its ordinary shareholders are supine. Optimists may dismiss the two IPOs as isolated events, but there is a deeper trend towards autocracy. Eight of the world’s 20 most valuable firms are not controlled by outside shareholders....

08 февраля, 09:00

08.02.2017 09:00 : Зарубежные банки требуют от кредиторов сделки по покупке акций «Роснефти» раскрыть данные о конечных бенефициарах

Без такой ясности, сообщает издание Global Capital, разделить с главным кредитором международного консорциума финансирование займа, они не согласны. У итальянской банковской группы Intesa, которая выдала в конце прошлого года кредит консорциуму Glencore с Катарским инвестиционным фондом для приобретения 19,5% акций «Роснефти» могут возникнуть трудности. Банки-партнеры не готовы участвовать в кредитовании до того, пока сделка не станет прозрачной. Intesa хочет разделить кредит на 5,2 миллиарда евро, а те, кто потенциально мог бы войти в этот синдикат, настаивают на раскрытии информации о структуре владения долями в консорциуме. Как пишет Global Capital, на сегодня о структуре владения проданными акциями «Роснефти» банкиры знают не больше, чем в запутанных заявлениях накануне сделки. Сразу пять источников в различных крупных банках сообщили изданию, что не будут софинансировать кредит, выданный Intesa, пока не идентифицируют конечных владельцев приватизированных акций российской нефтяной компании. Их вложения означали бы «покупку риска». Дело в том, что в международной банковской практике работает принцип «знай своего клиента», а в цепочке с Glencore и Qatar Holding есть непубличное звено – некий офшор, зарегистрированный на Каймановых островах и непрозрачным образом связанный с приобретателями пакета акций российской компании. Регистрация на Каймановых островах обеспечивает владельцам компании максимальную конфиденциальность. При этом ранее источники, близкие к участникам сделки подчеркивали – появление офшора в схеме по приватизации носило «технический характер».

03 февраля, 08:01

Сэндвич и виски: как Трампу бороться с вредными привычками американского бизнеса

Вопрос о налогах на американский бизнес становится сейчас лейтмотивом новой администрации Трампа, но тема налоговых убежищ поднималась и при Обаме почти ежегодно

31 января, 09:15

Конец американской гегемонии

Все семьдесят лет после окончания Второй мировой Соединённые Штаты Америки сохраняли мировое господство. Их могущество держалось на лидерстве в технологии и экономике, военном превосходстве, ставшем беспрецедентным с момента распада СССР, а также — на сети союзников, охватывающей весь мир. Власть Америки можно смело называть гегемонией, потому что её союзники и многие опасавшиеся США страны приняли принципы мироустройства, которые провозглашали Штаты, а это: (1) неустанные попытки по устранению барьеров для свободного движения мирового капитала; (2) деколонизация и уважение границ суверенных государств (не для всех избранных правительств и диктаторов); (3) свобода передвижения на море и в воздушном пространстве — наше общее достояние, которое будут охранять американские военные. Попытки США не допустить создания союзов, не возглавляемых Америкой, или подорвать уже существующие союзы увенчались успехом в 1989 году с распадом Советского Союза и роспуском Варшавского договора. В последние десятилетия способность США отстаивать лидерство ослабла сразу в нескольких сферах, несмотря на отсутствие серьёзных врагов. Имея внушительное военное превосходство, Соединённые Штаты потерпели поражение во Вьетнаме и Ираке. Американская военная мощь носит в основном разрушительный характер. Американцы могут бомбить другие страны, но трагедии в Афганистане и Ливии показали, что США неспособны использовать своих военных для насаждения желаемого для них режима. Американские военные, а также работающие под покровительством Министерства обороны политики и дипломаты всё чаще реагируют ситуативно, вместо того чтобы разработать новую стратегию, в рамках которой можно было бы установить ограничения для применения американской военной силы. Выдвигаются явные и неявные угрозы. Предлагается защита от реальных и воображаемых врагов (для Азии это всё чаще Китай, для Восточной Европы — Россия), даже если ни те, кто даёт гарантии, ни те, кто эти гарантии получает, не имеют реализуемого плана на случай, если от слов придётся перейти к делу и обеспечить защиту, избежав военной катастрофы. Экономическая власть США начала ослабевать ещё в 1970-е годы. Технологическое лидерство Америки сейчас сводится в основном к программному обеспечению. Промышленное производство давно выведено за пределы страны и зависит от производственных цепей, охватывающих множество стран. Финансовое благополучие США зиждется на возможности привлекать избыточный капитал со всего мира и спекулировать им. Пока доллар считается самой стабильной валютой, а ценные бумаги американского правительства — надёжными, деньги будут по-прежнему стекаться в США со всего мира. США конкурирует за финансовый капитал с зонами льготного налогообложения, большая часть которых расположена в британских заморских территориях и владениях британской короны. Этот "налоговый рай" — юридическая фикция. Богатство скрыто не в сейфах под Каймановыми островами. Деньги, оказавшиеся в фискальном оазисе, моментально депонируются на счета в реальных банках с реальными активами в США или Великобритании. Пока США являются крупнейшей экономикой, а также крупнейшим источником безопасного государственного долга и имеют самую сильную юридическую защиту, Америка останется главным получателем долгосрочных вложений таких средств. Избрание Трампа президентом поставило под вопрос некоторые предпосылки, которые обусловливают прочность союзов США и надёжность страны для инвестиций. Пока рано судить, насколько хаотичной и непредсказуемой будет политика нового президента, но, судя по назначениям в его кабинете и первым указам, он намерен пересмотреть торговые соглашения (США уже вышли из Транстихоокеанского партнёрства), отменить регулирование финансовых компаний и переформатировать долгосрочные союзнические отношения в Европе, Азии и Латинской Америке. План Трампа по снижению налогов и увеличению бюджета на оборону, как и у Рейгана, не будет сопровождаться сокращением внутренних расходов и приведёт к существенному росту бюджетного дефицита. Нынешний республиканский Конгресс последует примеру законодателей 1980-х годов, которые после снижения налогов администрацией Рейгана принимали решение об их увеличении, чтобы несколько снизить бюджетный дефицит. При Трампе дефицит будет расти, пока не разразится очередной финансовый кризис или пока к власти не придут демократы, которые, как Обама и Клинтон, будут вновь наводить порядок после республиканцев, старательно изображающих тревогу по поводу долга, который "достанется нашим потомкам". Какой будет реакция правительств и инвесторов на администрацию Трампа? Они будут пытаться защитить себя от беспорядка. Они будут объединяться в региональные блоки, укреплять договоры о совместной обороне и создавать зоны свободной торговли. Такие решения по меньшей мере частично помогут оградить их экономику и территории от хаотичной и опасной американской политики. Это укрепит региональные державы, которые способны гарантировать военную защиту и имеют достаточно развитую экономику, чтобы принимать товарные потоки и обеспечить стабильность валют. Немногие страны могут предложить и то, и другое. И ни одна страна или даже объединение стран не могут импортировать столько товаров, сколько США, которые в последние десятилетия были "последней надеждой" всех экспортёров. В любом случае Трамп сможет лишь отчасти сократить американский импорт. Тем временем другие страны будут создавать альтернативные рынки и пытаться перейти от экспортно-ориентированного экономического роста к росту внутреннего потребления. Переход может занять десятилетия, но по его завершении США больше не смогут управлять мировой экономикой. США не будут диктовать условия мировых торговых соглашений, руководить МВФ или ВТО. Когда инвесторы потеряют уверенность в том, что США способны поддерживать глобальный спрос или стабильный доллар, они перейдут к страхованию рисков, размещению капитала в других странах и валютах, ни одна из которых не будет мировой резервной валютой. С точки зрения геополитики страны перестанут рассчитывать на военную защиту США. Региональные блоки начнут укреплять контроль над окружающим водным и воздушным пространством, скорее всего, под руководством страны, которая по примеру американцев вряд ли станет пытаться расширить контроль, распространяющийся за пределы её территории. Когда-нибудь президентом США станет более выдержанный и рациональный человек, ориентирующийся на международное сообщество. Хотя уже ясно: если американцы однажды выбрали такого человека, как Трамп, они могут в будущем избрать ещё одного эксцентричного президента. Уверенность в рациональности американских избирателей безвозвратно исчезла, и основа американской гегемонии подорвана навсегда.

31 января, 07:40

По примеру Сергея Пугачева: в ответе ли Роберт Мусин и бюджет Татарстана за долги ТФБ?

На прошлой неделе правительство Татарстана официально стало контролирующим собственником Татфондбанка — ЦБ зарегистрировал допэмиссию акций, в результате которой госдоля выросла до 51%. Таким образом, отзыв лицензии у ТФБ стал бы первым в России прецедентом, когда под нож идет госбанк. Это лишний аргумент в пользу санации, но что будет, если ее все-таки не случится? В вопросе разбирались аналитики и эксперты «БИЗНЕС Online».

30 января, 18:56

Will the Senate's "Good Republicans" Reject a Dishonest Nominee?

There's compelling evidence to show that Steve Mnuchin, Donald Trump's pick for Secretary of the Treasury, lied to the Senate in both written and verbal testimony. Senate Republicans seem to be taking these offenses in stride. None of the GOP's "independents" and "mavericks" have indicated that they will oppose his nomination. If they don't speak up, these Republicans are placing partisan politics over the rule of law and the integrity of their own institution. False Witness Mnuchin received a written question from Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) about the practice of 'robo-signing' at OneWest, the mortgage firm he ran as CEO. 'Robo-signing' is a form of perjury that occurs when a bank's employees submit foreclosure documents without reviewing them for accuracy, but falsely state that they have performed those reviews. In this way, banks can quickly foreclose on large numbers of homeowners without going through the processes required by law. Mnuchin replied, "OneWest Bank did not 'robo-sign' documents ..." Note that Mnuchin didn't equivocate, or use qualifying statements like "to the best of my knowledge" or "as far as I can recall." He flatly stated that OneWest never engaged in the practice. But an investigation by the Columbus (Ohio) Dispatch found that OneWest "frequently used robo-signers." David Dayen noted that a 2011 consent order from the Office of Thrift Supervision included extensive evidence of OneWest's robo-signing activity, and that an employee of OneWest admitted to robo-signing documents in a 2009 deposition. That wasn't Mnuchin's only 'misstatement.' He also failed to report more than $100 million in assets when he submitted his initial financial disclosure form, and did not disclose that he is the director of an investment fund headquartered in the Cayman Islands. (It turns out that Mnuchin is registered to vote in two different states, California and New York. Neither is within commuting distance of the Cayman Islands.) The nominee also neglected to mention that he plays a management role in seven other investment funds. Mnuchin called the mistakes "an oversight," adding: "I think as you all can appreciate, filling out these government forms is quite complicated." Sen. Robert Menendez replied, "It doesn't take a rocket scientist to understand the words 'list all positions.'" Advise and Submit The applicable statute on Congressional testimony says that "whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the United States, knowingly and willfully" falsifies or conceals information has committed a crime punishable by fine or imprisonment. Sen. Susan Collins waxed eloquent about the Senate's responsibility last year, when a Democratic president was slated to appoint a Supreme Court nominee. "Our role in the Senate is to evaluate the nominee's temperament, intellect, experience, integrity and respect for the Constitution and the rule of law," Collins wrote. Maine's other Republican Senator, Olympia Snowe, also said that one of the factors she uses to assess an Obama Supreme Court nominee was "respect for the rule of law." Will either of these senators apply the same standard - "respect for the rule of law" - to Trump's Treasury nominee? Then there's Sen. Lindsey Graham. Graham served as a military lawyer for six and a half years as an officer in the US Air Force JAG Corps, eventually rising to the rank of colonel. He had the common sense to say, "ISIL loves Donald Trump because he is giving them an opportunity to bring people their way." Graham's been burning up Twitter lately with scathing anti-Trump tweets like this one: "Ultimately, I fear this executive order will become a self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism." Will "respect for the rule of law" lead attorney Graham to vote "no" on Mnuchin? What about the Senate's much-vaunted Republican "maverick," John McCain? Or Alaska Senator Linda Murkowski, a Republican who won as a write-in candidate and once defied her party while saying, "Politics be damned"? Somebody? Anybody? The Silent Majority If any Republican Senators are disturbed by Mnuchin's behavior, they seem to laying pretty low. After Mnuchin testified, in fact, most reports suggested that Republicans were happy with his testimony. We've heard a lot over the years about "good Republicans" who "reach across the aisle," who respect the legislative process and place patriotism above politics. Where are they now? Have the "good Republicans" become so partisan that they're no longer willing to speak up against dishonesty, apparent lawbreaking, or contempt toward the Senate itself? So far they've been silent about Steve Mnuchin. Mnuchin's nomination comes up for a vote by the Senate Finance Committee on Monday night, where it is all but certain to pass. It will then go to the entire Senate for confirmation. No surprises are expected there, either.       -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

01 марта 2014, 18:07

Россия сократила объемы вложений в гособлигации минфина США

В нынешнем году Россия оказалась на 22 месте среди основных держателей американских ценных бумагМатериал из 1 страницыРоссия за год сократила объемы вложений в гособлигации министерства финансов США. Об этом говорится в распространенном в пятницу докладе американского финансового ведомства.Документ носит предварительный характер, его окончательная версия будет опубликована в конце апреля. В докладе приводятся данные на 30 июня 2013 года с учетом владений иностранных государств в акциях и долговых обязательствах.Указывается, что к этому сроку российский портфель оценивался в 139 млрд долларов, причем все они приходились на долю долгосрочных долговых обязательств. Годом ранее этот показатель составлял 164 млрд долларов, из которых 158 млрд долларов - долгосрочные, а еще около 6 млрд долларов - краткосрочные долговые обязательства.В нынешнем году Россия оказалась на 22 месте среди основных держателей американских ценных бумаг. Лидирует же Япония, чей пакет составляет 1,76 трлн долларов, а на втором месте идет Китай - 1,73 трлн долларов. Третью позицию занимают Каймановы острова с 1,16 трлн долларов.В целом объем иностранных инвестиций в американские акции, долгосрочные и краткосрочные долговые обязательства выросли за год почти на 9 процентов. В конце июня 2013 года они составили 14,4 трлн долларов. http://itar-tass.com/ekonomika/1012854

05 ноября 2012, 11:10

HSBC заплатит штраф в $1,5 млрд

Крупнейший европейский банк HSBC Holdings Plc должен будет выплатить штраф в $1,5 млрд из-за недостаточного контроля за отмыванием денег. Ранее руководство банка уже признало свою вину и принесло свои извинения перед сенатом США.Столь крупный штраф банк готов выплатить, чтобы избежать официального расследования. Причем сумма более чем в 2 раза превосходит объем резервируемого объема средств для подобных ситуаций. Ранее аналитики прогнозировали, что штрафы за подобную халатность могут составить до $1 млрд.Еще в июле этого месяца банк был уличен в обслуживании многочисленных преступных группировок, включая наркосиндикаты. По результатам анализа 1,4 млн внутренних документов банка и опроса 75 сотрудников стало ясно, что недостаточный контроль со стороны банка позволил преступным группировкам направлять свои средства в финансовую систему США. Более того, согласно публикациям ряда СМИ HSBC участвовал в крайне сомнительных операциях в различных регионах и странах мира, включая Каймановы острова, Иран, Саудовскую Аравию, Мексику и Сирию."Наши меры предотвращения и противодействия легализации доходов, полученных преступным путем, в период между 2004 и 2010 годами должны были быть более надежными и эффективными, и мы не смогли выявить случаи неприемлемого поведения и предотвратить их", - заявил глава банка Стюарт Гулливер.Однако ситуация выглядит гораздо серьезнее, если вспомнить, что еще в 2003 г. американские регуляторы предупреждали банк и просили ужесточить контроль за отмыванием денег. Получается, что за 9 лет HSBC даже не постарался исправить ситуацию. Ранее в аналогичную ситуацию попал нидерландский банк ING. Банк признался в том, что с начала 1990-х гг. по 2007 г. незаконно провел через американские банки $1,6 млрд, скрывая характер сделок. Компания также помогала свои клиентам лучше спрятать информацию, которой могли бы заинтересоваться власти. Таким образом, граждане Кубы и Ирана могли вести дела с американскими компаниями в обход закона. Штраф стал рекордным для такого рода нарушений - $619 млрд. ING стал четвертой организацией, заплатившей за помощь своим клиентам обходить американские законы. В 2009 г. Credit Suisse выплатил $536 млн, Lloyds TSB - $350 млн. В 2010 г. Barclays был оштрафован на $298 млн.