В понедельник вашингтонский Центр двухпартийной политики (BPC) сообщил о крайне высоком риске дефолта в начале сентября. Министр финансов Стивен Мнучин предупреждал об этом сенаторов еще в мае. Как американская финансовая система окончательно зашла в тупик и есть ли у США шансы избежать долгового кр...
Стартовавшие на предыдущей неделе с отметок ниже $62 за баррель к ее концу нефтяные цены превысили уровень $66 на позитиве от ограничения предложения в рамках сделки ОПЕК+ и надежд на увеличение спроса вследствие возможности достижения торгового соглашения между США и КНР. На таком фоне в понедельни...
Еще в самом начале своего президентского срока Дональд Трамп обещал объявить Китай валютным манипулятором. Но...
Руководители нескольких комитетов Палаты представителей Конгресса США потребовали от Министерства финансов предоставить документы, связанные с решением об отмене санкций в отношении компаний, которые контролирует бизнесмен Олег Дерипаска. Демократы также заявили, что готовы представить законопроект,...
Глава Белого дома Дональд Трамп накануне подписал распоряжение, согласно которому начинают действовать санкции против крупнейшего государственного концерна по добыче и переработке углеводородов PDVSA. Кроме того, в санкционный список попал ряд других компаний, заявивших о своей лояльности нынешнему ...
Санкции против олигарха Олега Дерипаски и российского алюминиевого гиганта «Русал» вызывают всё более ожесточённые споры в США. Снятие санкций на выгодных для Вашингтона условиях натолкнулось на ожесточённое сопротивление демократов и уже раскололо Конгресс. Как и почему Дерипаска поссорил американс...
Единственной проблемой американской экономики является ФРС, считает президент США Дональд Трамп. Об этом сообщает UBR. Он в очередной раз раскритиковал денежно-кредитную политику центробанка, точнее его руководителей, которые совсем недавно приняли решение о повышении базовых ставок […] Сообщение Трамп атакует ФРС и требует удешевления доллара появились сначала на ХВИЛЯ.
Президент США Дональд Трамп рассматривает возможность увольнения министра финансов Стивена Мнучина. Об этом сообщает РБК-Украина со ссылкой на Bloomberg. По данным источников Bloomberg, на сегодня Трамп взвешивает все за и против возможного увольнения Мнучина. В […] Сообщение Трамп рассматривает увольнение министра финансов США — Bloomberg появились сначала на ХВИЛЯ.
BUENOS AIRES — The White House has yet to release a list of officials who will accompany President Donald Trump at the highly anticipated dinner meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping here on Saturday night — but Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross is conspicuously absent from the U.S. delegation at the G-20 summit. Trump's decision to leave Ross back in Washington appears to be another sign of the Commerce chief's diminished role in trade negotiations, after he had taken the lead over the trade portfolio early in the administration. The Commerce Department did not respond to a request for an explanation of why Ross was not at the summit. POLITICO previously reported that Ross could be part of an expected exodus of Trump Cabinet officials. Ross attended an aerospace industry event in the U.S. on Thursday. In April 2017 Trump tapped both Ross and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to lead a short-lived Comprehensive Economic Dialogue with Beijing, which collapsed after it failed to produce significant results. Ross, who turned 81 this week, led a big U.S. business delegation to Beijing last year, when Trump stopped at the Chinese capital on his way to the 2107 APEC leaders meeting. Additionally, the Commerce secretary has been part of high-level trade talks this year that involved a number of U.S. and Chinese officials and also were unsuccessful in resolving trade frictions. The Trump-Xi dinner is seen as a critical juncture in the U.S.-China trade relationship. Mnuchin, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, chief White House economic adviser Larry Kudlow and White House trade adviser Peter Navarro are expected to be at the table on Saturday night.Lighthizer has spearheaded the effort that prompted Trump to impose tariffs on around $250 billion worth of Chinese goods, actions that led Beijing to strike back with duties against $110 billion in U.S. exports. Trump's trade chief said Friday that he expected the Trump-Xi dinner would be a "success," but stopped short of predicting the two sides would reach a deal.Article originally published on POLITICO Magazine]]>
As the White House spars with a rising China, it can look to the United States’ postwar dealings with the Soviet Union for guidance.
As we have repeatedly documented in these pages, Goldman Sachs's relationship with the Federal Reserve isn't limited to one between a regulator and regulatee. In fact, for decades, Goldman Sachs, more than any other bank, enjoyed an influence over the Federal Reserve - and particularly the New York Fed, the "first among equals" of the Federal Reserve system - that flips the conventional wisdom on its head: To put it succinctly, it was Goldman that dictates the rules to the Fed, not the other way around. Any doubters can familiarize themselves with the story of Carmen Segarra, who - at personal risk to any future career in banking or government - came forward several years ago with a cache of secret recordings the revealed the pervasiveness of "regulatory capture" at the New York Fed, which included evidence that her superiors repeatedly brushing aside her insistence that Goldman's regulatory rating be downgraded because of the "conflict-ridden" nature of some of its deals (note: Segarra was making her recordings exposing the central bank's unwillingness to challenge Goldman around the same time that the storied "Vampire Squid" was underwriting the $6 billion in 1MDB bonds, despite evidence that the bank ignored its own compliance department's warnings about the deal). And let's not forget the incident that unfolded five years ago where a junior Goldman banker received insider information directly from a "source" inside the NY Fed - offering unmitigated evidence of collusion between the two organizations. That banker, though fired from Goldman, was later let off with a slap on the wrist. This renders last week's "leak" that the Fed had asked Goldman to tighten oversight of its investment committees to better protect against conflict of interest as self-serving. That's because the NY Fed knows that, so long as the DOJ's spotlight lingers on Goldman's malpractice, it's only a matter of time before the regulator itself comes under scrutiny. But the Fed's tacit campaign to show the public (and, more importantly, certain Fed skeptics in Washington) that it is "doing something" to change this toxic culture of complicity before Goldman helps another gang of plutocrats siphon off billions of dollars in public money continued on Thursday, when Bloomberg published a "leaked" report alleging that the Fed is ramping up its investigation into how Goldman managed to evade both its internal compliance controls, as well as the Fed's controls, while pursuing the 1MDB deal (though we imagine the endorsement by Goldman's then-CEO had something to do with it). The Federal Reserve is ramping up its investigation into how Goldman Sachs Group Inc. executives dodged the bank’s internal controls while helping Malaysian authorities raise billions of dollars that later went missing, according to people briefed on the matter. The probe examines the actions of the New York-based investment bank as well as individuals and has been gaining momentum in recent weeks, the people said, asking not to be identified because the inquiry is confidential. The Fed doesn’t have the powers of a criminal prosecutor, but it can and often does sanction people involved in banking scandals. The Fed has previously interviewed current and former employees at the firm, prying into how easy it is to short-circuit compliance systems, the people said. In recent weeks, representatives from Goldman Sachs met with the Fed and defended the bank’s controls, according to a person with knowledge of the matter. As Goldman Sachs’s main regulator, the Fed has broad authority to penalize the bank or impose other changes. Earlier this year, it capped Wells Fargo & Co.’s size until the lender shores up internal controls. "It is the Federal Reserve’s policy not to confirm or deny the existence of investigations," the central bank said in an emailed statement. "We refer criminal violations to the Department of Justice as necessary and exercise our enforcement and safety and soundness authorities if the facts are warranted." If the New York Fed has been so bamboozled by Goldman's ability to evade oversight, they should look no further than the fact that former Goldmanites have been running the US financial system for decade. Former NY Fed Governor Bill Dudley worked at Goldman. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin also worked there, and former Trump economic advisor Gary Cohn once helped run the bank. But most importantly, many of the central bank's employees yearn for the opportunity to walk through the "revolving door" leading from the doldrums of government hackery to the untold riches of the private sector. Need more evidence that 1MDB was the result of a systemic problem? Look no further than Tim Leissner, the former head of Goldman's Southeast Asia operation who recently pleaded guilty to knowingly abetting money laundering and violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, alleged in his plea agreement that his actions were the result of a "culture of corruption" Goldman. In a statement to the court, Leissner said his behavior was "very much in line of its culture of Goldman Sachs to conceal facts from certain compliance and legal employees." The Justice Department has also said in filings that the business culture at Goldman Sachs, particularly in Southeast Asia, prioritized consummating deals ahead of the proper operation of its compliance functions. Still, the DOJ filings said individual bankers knowingly circumvented controls the bank had in place and hid certain details about the deal to prevent compliance officers from seeking to block the firm’s involvement in the transactions. While we're sure the people of Malaysia appreciate Goldman CEO David Solomon's feigned "outrage" over Goldman's behavior, the bank's attempts to paint Leissner as a rogue employee have been seriously undermined by reports about the involvement of its senior leadership in the deal. Because 1MDB is just the latest in a long line of Goldman's regulator enabled disregard for the wellbeing of its client and, well, anybody who isn't Goldman. But maybe this time, the public backlash against the bank, and the decision of at least two high-profile clients to sue over 1MDB, will force Goldman to reconsider such "short-term" thinking by jeopardizing the only thing that matters to Goldman: Its client book.
Стало известно, кто в администрации Дональда Трампа самый богатый. Министры правительства США опубликовали данные о своих доходах – они должны это делать по закону. Самым богатым министром в Америке, по данным издания Politico, стала министр образования Бетси Девос. Она получила за год более 60 миллионов долларов. На втором месте – министр торговли Уилбур Росс, заработавший 47 миллионов. Замыкает тройку богачей министр финансов Стивен Мнучин с 41,6 миллионами долларов. Главной причиной сверхдоходов ряда министров в США эксперты называют необходимость продажи активов чиновниками. Это сделано для того, чтобы государственный служащий не имел конфликта интересов в связи с наличием у него бизнеса. Ранее «СП» писала о том, что в России зарегистрировано уже 27 тысяч долларовых миллионеров. Новости по теме: Зюганов о росте долларовых миллионеров в РФ: это отвратительно
В США министры образования, финансов и торговли - самые богатые чиновники, согласно сведениям в налоговых декларациях этих чиновников, правительства президента США Дональда Трампа.
Суммарный доход трех самых богатых министров кабинета президента США Дональда Трампа в 2017 году составил почти 150 миллионов долларов. Об этом пишет газета Politico.
Authored by Thierry Meyssan via Voltaire Network, The new unilateral sanctions by the United States against Iran, Russia and Syria add to the previous actions concerning the same three targets. They now form the most unforgiving embargo in History. The way in which they have been organised is illegal according to the definition of the Charter of the United Nations – these are weapons of war, designed for killing. For his visit to Moscow on 8 November, ambassador James Jeffrey was tasked with explaining the current US obsession with the expansion of Persian influence in the Arab world (Saudi Arabia, Bahrein, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen). Washington now wishes to formulate this question in geo-strategic rather than religious terms (Chiites/Sunni), while Teheran is organising its national defence around forward posts composed of Chiite Arabs. Moscow then considered the possibility of negotiating on Teheran’s behalf for the easing of unilateral US sanctions, in exchange for its military withdrawal from Syria. President Vladimir Putin confirmed his proposition, not only for his US opposite number, but also for the Israëli Prime Minister, during their meeting in Paris on 11 November for the celebrations marking the centenary of the end of the First World War . He attempted to convince the Westerners that Russia alone in Syria was preferable to the Irano-Russian tandem. However, he could not guarantee that Iran would have sufficient authority over Hezbollah – as both Washington and Tel-Aviv pretend – to be able to order it to withdraw also. Washington’s only answer, nine days later, was to announce the eleventh series of unilateral sanctions against Russia since the beginning of August. This was accompanied by a ridiculous speech according to which Russia and Iran had together organised a vast plot aimed at maintaining President Assad in power and expanding Persian control in the Arab world. This rhetoric, which we believed had been abandoned, assimilates three states (the Russian Federation, the Syrian Arab Republic and the Islamic Republic of Iran) as machines in the service of three men (Bachar el-Assad, Ali Khamenei and Vladimir Putin) who are united by the same hatred of their respective peoples. It ignores the massive popular support they enjoy, while the United States are profoundly torn apart. We can leave aside the stupid assertion that Russia is aiding and abetting the conquest of the Arab world by Persia. According to the US Secretary of the Treasury, Steven Mnuchin, who presented the unilateral US sanctions on 20 November, they do not form the economic section of the present war, but are intended to punish the « atrocities » committed by these three « régimes ». However, on the verge of winter, they mostly concern the supply of refined petroleum to the Syrian people so that they may light their homes and keep warm. It is not necessary to specify that the three states targeted deny the « atrocities » of which they are accused, while the United States pursue the wars that they started in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria. The US sanctions were not decided by the United Nations Security Council, but by the United States alone. They are illegal in international law because in order to make them lethal, Washington is attempting to force third-party states to associate themselves with the motion, which constitutes a threat to the states targeted and therefore a violation of the United Nations Charter. The United States have the sovereign right to refuse to enter into commerce with other states, but not to exercise pressure on third-party states in order to harm their targets. At one time, the Pentagon claimed that inflicting damaging treatment on a particular nation would lead its people to overthrow its government. That was also the theoretical justification for the bombing of Dresden during the Second World War and the endless embargo against Cuba during the Cold War. However, in the space of 75 years, this theory has never, absolutely never, been verified by the facts. Now the Pentagon is considering using detrimental treatment against a nation as a weapon of war like any other. Embargoes are designed to kill civilians. The ensemble of systems currently used against Iran, Russia and Syria constitute the most gigantic siege system in History. These are not economic measures, but – without any possible doubt – military actions implemented in the economic sector. In time, they will probably lead to a division of the world into two parts, just as in the period of USA-USSR rivalry. Secretary Mnuchin insisted at length on the fact that these sanctions were aimed above all at the interruption of the sale of hydro-carbons, meaning depriving these countries – mostly exporters— of their main financial resources. The mechanism described by Steven Mnuchin is as follows: Syria is presently unable to refine petrol since its installations were destroyed either by Daesh or by the international Coalition’s bombing raids against Daesh. For the last four years, Iran has been supplying refined petrol to Syria in violation of previous unilateral US sanctions. This petrol is transported by Western companies working for the Russian public company Promsyrioimport. This company is paid by the private Syrian company Global Vision Group, which is itself financed by the Iranian company Tabir Kish Medical and Pharmaceutical. Finally the Global Vision Group transfers a part of the money it receives to Hezbollah and Hamas. This a cock and bull story : The international Coalition has the official objective of fighting Daesh. However, numerous testimonies over the last four years attest that it had alternatively bombed the Islamic state whenever it exceeded the zone which had been allocated to it by the Pentagon (the Wright plan), and that, on the contrary, it had parachuted weapons to Daesh in order to maintain its position in the specified area. The two entities worked together to destroy Syrian refineries. What is the purpose of implicating the Russian government in the transfer of petroleum from Iranian refineries towards Syrian ports? Why would Iran suddenly need Syria to transfer money to Hezbollah and Hamas? Why would Syria transfer Iranian money to Hamas while the Palestinian organisation – whose leaders are members of the Muslim Brotherhood – is at war with them? US Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin Steven Mnuchin doesn’t bother with long explanations. As far as he is concerned, Syria is criminal state and Russia is its accomplice, while Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas are all « terrorists ». This is the most important point, the word that cancels out thought. A French proverb assures that « When you want to drown your dog, you claim it has rabies ». So there’s no point expecting logic in Secretary Mnuchin’s answer to President Putin’s proposition of mediation. Progressively, the United States are withdrawing their troops from the conflicts in which they were engaged, and replacing them with mercenaries on the ground (the jihadists) and economic sanctions, the modern version of the medieval siege.
Министр финансов Стивен Мнучин заработал свыше $41,6 млн
President Donald Trump’s three wealthiest Cabinet members took in tens of millions of dollars last year, including from divesting holdings to avoid conflicts of interest, according to disclosure filings released by the administration.Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and her husband took in at least $59.4 million in 2017, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin reported income of more than $41.6 million, and Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross tallied $47 million that year, according to annual financial disclosures each made to their agencies. A substantial chunk of the trio’s income came from the sale of assets. They also reported bringing in money from dividends, capital gains and interest on accounts, the filings show.Government officials had until May 15 to file their annual disclosures for 2017, and most officials’ forms were posted online by the Office of Government Ethics earlier this year. The ethics office has yet to formally sign off on and publish the three officials’ disclosures. The departments released them at POLITICO’s request this week.Critics of the administration have scrutinized DeVos’, Mnuchin’s and Ross’ holdings and were watching to see if they divested assets that could pose conflicts of interest with their current jobs. President Donald Trump has defended hiring wealthy and connected people for powerful positions in his administration, saying they don’t want the jobs for the money and that “these are people that are great, brilliant business minds.”Mnuchin’s disclosures show that in 2017, he sold holdings in Seritage Growth Properties, which leases stores to Sears and ESL Partners, a hedge fund run by Sears Chairman Eddie Lampert, a longtime friend of the Treasury secretary’s. With Sears in bankruptcy and its pension at risk, Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee earlier this year asked Mnuchin to recuse himself from matters before the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. involving the company. The Treasury secretary is one of three PBGC board members who will have a say in the future of Sears pensions. Mnuchin has completed the divestitures required by career ethics officers, a Treasury spokeswoman said. He grossed $2 million to $10 million on his Seritage holdings, according to his filing. Mnuchin received $65,000 to $150,000 on the sale of his interest in ESL Partners.His June 2017 marriage to Scottish actress Louise Linton brought new assets into the family, including more than $2.2 million in real estate in Edinburgh, Scotland, the disclosures show.“The secretary submitted his annual financial disclosure on time, and Treasury is working with OGE to have it promptly certified,” the spokeswoman said.DeVos agreed to divest 102 separate assets when Trump nominated her to be his education secretary. She made three new investments last year, according to her disclosure, including a stake in a Michigan distillery valued at $500,001 to $1 million.The DeVos disclosure, filed May 14, was amended a dozen times before being certified by Education Department ethics officials on Sept. 19. Ross faced scrutiny from government ethics officials and watchdog groups for maintaining stakes in a range of companies that had business before his agency. A year ago, he incorrectly reported that he made all the required divestitures. He said this summer that he would sell all of his equity holdings and buy Treasury securities with the proceeds. Ross pocketed $6.1 million in 2017 for giving up stock options at his former employer, Invesco, and sold stock in the company valued at more than $5 million, the annual disclosure shows. Ross also earned a $970,530 departing bonus.The nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center has asked the Commerce Department’s inspector general to investigate whether Ross violated laws banning false statements and omissions in his earlier financial disclosures.“Ross’s financial disclosure is probably the most complicated one that has ever existed,” said Delaney Marsco, a Campaign Legal Center ethics lawyer. “For you or me, these financial disclosure documents would give a complete picture of our finances. But for people who are super wealthy, this doesn’t tell us everything we would want to know.”Some reported holdings are difficult or impossible to decipher. DeVos, Ross and Mnuchin all reported millions of dollars in holdings in limited partnerships and trusts, for example. In August and September 2017, Mnuchin spent $1.1 million to $5.1 million to acquire an asset called North Park I LLC. A Treasury spokeswoman declined to explain the transactions.“His filings are so opaque,” said Jeff Hauser, director of the Revolving Door Project at the progressive Center for Economic and Policy Research. “He’s the Treasury secretary, he gets so much market-moving information. This is not a guy who should be investing. He should be divesting everything.”Democrats won control of the House earlier this month in part by emphasizing public integrity, and they have said they’ll make campaign finance and government ethics a priority in the next Congress. In the Senate, Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) has introduced legislation that would force high-ranking agency officials to put their money in mutual funds or other conflict-free investments.Article originally published on POLITICO Magazine]]>
President Donald Trump is keeping the world guessing on how he will approach trade talks with Chinese President Xi Jinping later this week at the G-20 summit in Argentina.“I think we’re very close to doing something with China, but I don’t know that I want to do it because what we have right now is billions and billions of dollars coming into the United States in the form of tariffs and taxes,” Trump told reporters Thursday before departing for the meeting in Buenos Aires. “I really don’t know. I think China wants to make a deal. I’m open to making a deal, but, frankly, I like the deal we have right now.“The administration has imposed tariffs on more than $250 billion worth of Chinese imports. More than $50 billion of that total is subject to a 25 percent duty. Another $200 billion has been hit with a 10 percent tariff with plans to increase that to 25 percent on Jan. 1. Trump has also repeatedly threatened to impose tariffs on all remaining imports from China.Ahead of the meeting, Beijing has submitted a list of U.S. concerns it is willing to address. White House National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow said on Tuesday that China must address U.S. concerns with intellectual property, forced technology transfers, ownership issues and significant tariff and nontariff barriers.Chances for a deal, or at least a détente in the tariff fight, remain uncertain. U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer released an updated report last week detailing how China has done little to improve intellectual property and tech transfer policies that the Trump administration has used to justify many of its tariff actions. On Wednesday, Lighthizer threatened to raise the U.S. tariff on Chinese cars to 40 percent, which is an equivalent level to what China charges U.S. auto imports. He also said China has not made any "meaningful" offers to address broader U.S. trade concerns.“As the president has repeatedly noted, China’s aggressive, state-directed industrial policies are causing severe harm to U.S. workers and manufacturers," Lighthizer said in a statement. "We are continuing to raise these issues with China. As of yet, China has not come to the table with proposals for meaningful reform."In another sign that Trump's China hard-liners will have influence over the meeting, Peter Navarro, the most hawkish of Trump’s trade advisers, is expected to attend the dinner meeting scheduled with Xi, according to a report from the South China Morning Post.However, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday morning that American and Chinese officials have been speaking via telephone over the last several weeks to explore a deal in which Washington would hold off on escalating tariffs to get Beijing to agree to talks that would lead to major changes in China’s economic policies. Officials in China are planning to travel to Washington in mid-December if there is such a deal, the Journal added.Those new talks could focus on a new trade “architecture” that could include addressing U.S. concerns over intellectual property protections, forced technology transfer, subsidies to state-owned enterprises, and possibly cyber-espionage, the newspaper reported. Article originally published on POLITICO Magazine]]>
В должность 45 президента США вступает Дональд Трамп, часто сравниваемый с Рональдом Рейганом Давайте взглянем на его кабинет и на него самого более пристально WASP,пресвитерианец, изоляционист, консерватор (в хорошем смысле этого слова) и натоящий мужик!