April 20, 2024

Putin Puts Pensions at Risk in $43 Billion Bid to Jolt Economy

Mr. Putin’s proposal to dip into the country’s pension reserves for loans of up to $43.5 billion for three big infrastructure projects provoked an immediate debate among some of Russia’s top financial minds. It also brought warnings from financial experts who said that it might produce a burst of inflation, and that what the Russian economy needed most was deep structural change, to diversify from oil and gas and to build investor confidence.

Mr. Putin, now in his 13th year as Russia’s political leader, made the stimulus plan the centerpiece of his speech at an annual economic forum here that serves as a gathering of the country’s top financial officials, business leaders and foreign investors. Slowing growth has been the obsessive topic this year.

In his speech, Mr. Putin said Russia would distribute the reserves as loans to modernize the storied Trans-Siberian Railway, which runs between Moscow and Vladivostok in the Far East; to construct a 500-mile high-speed rail line between Moscow and Kazan, the capital of the Tatarstan region; and to build a superhighway ringing Moscow.

“Our key challenge in the coming years is to remove many infrastructure constraints that literally stifle our country and prevent unlocking the potential of entire regions,” Mr. Putin said. “Investors are hugely interested in infrastructure projects, especially if the state is ready to provide guarantees, minimize the risks and act as a co-investor.”

The Russian economy has been strong in recent years, functioning almost at full capacity, largely because of high energy prices, which helped build up the country’s reserve funds. But with nearly full employment, new government spending is more likely to cause wage inflation than to create new jobs, experts say. Instead, they add, Russia needs to review manufacturing, create new industries and attract foreign capital.

While not the headline measure in Mr. Putin’s plan, the amnesty proposal was by far the most surprising item. It was the brainchild of Mr. Putin’s business ombudsman, Boris Titov, who has championed it as a means to improve the business climate.

“The period that just passed was not the best for defenders of property rights,” Mr. Titov said last week in an interview.

In 2000, when Mr. Putin came to power, the government re-examined many of the early post-Soviet privatizations, which were widely regarded as fraudulent, and later imprisoned the richest man in Russia at the time, Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky, on charges of tax evasion and fraud that many critics said were trumped up.

Taking a cue, police and Federal Security Service officers set about seizing businesses large and small throughout Russia from unpopular or unlucky businessmen, and often, in an Orwellian manner, emerging as the owners themselves.

In fact, police officers who seize businesses are common enough in Russia to have earned the nickname “werewolves in epaulets.”

The intention of the amnesty plan is to free thousands of run-of-the-mill businessmen caught up in this turmoil, while avoiding the high-profile and politically tinged cases, like those of Mr. Khodorkovsky, who is not expected to be freed.

Mr. Titov said that 110,000 people were serving prison time for economic crimes, and that 2,500 others were in pretrial detention. The draft of the amnesty bill, Mr. Titov said, covers 13,000 of them.

“This initiative will on the whole strengthen the trust of citizens” in the business community, Mr. Putin said in his speech. “I am certain the development of the state is possible only under conditions of respect for private property, to the values of economic freedom and the work and success of entrepreneurs.”

More broadly, though, the intention of Mr. Putin’s amnesty, Mr. Titov said, is to signal to the business community an easing police pressure. It is, he said, “a very positive, a very good signal for Russia, and that is important as in Russia. We don’t often have good signals.”

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/22/world/europe/russia-to-tap-reserve-funds-for-infrastructure-projects.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Calling Bankers’ Bluff, Merkel Won Europe a Debt Plan

It was approaching 2 a.m. Thursday, not long before the Asian markets would open, and the two leaders were desperately trying to nail down the last component of a complex deal to save the euro: forcing the banks to pay a greater share of Greece’s effective default.

For hours, negotiators had been trying to persuade the banks to accede to a “voluntary” 50 percent loss in the face value of their Greek bond holdings. The banks, which had already agreed to a 21 percent write-down, had dug in their heels.

They knew how badly the European leaders needed a deal, and how much financial experts feared a disorderly, involuntary default. That could set off a “credit event,” throwing world financial markets into turmoil, much as the collapse of Lehman Brothers did in the fall of 2008.

But Mrs. Merkel called the bankers’ bluff, said officials present at the discussions. Accept the 50 percent write-down, she told the bankers, or bear the consequences of default. In effect, she was willing to risk a credit event, and to place the blame for any fallout on them.

The European success sent the markets soaring and laid out the path to a more comprehensive solution to the euro crisis, though the plan faces hurdles.

It includes an order to weak banks to raise more capital to protect against bad loans, and an effort — still very vague — to increase the firepower of the $625 billion bailout fund, the European Financial Stability Facility, to better protect large and vulnerable economies like Spain and Italy.

But the very process of achieving those steps underscored the many problems that lie ahead for the euro zone. While the rescue package has been hailed as an important step, it was achieved only under enormous pressure from the financial markets and with a steely, last-minute stand by Mrs. Merkel.

Foremost among those problems is Italy, which is too big to bail out, owing a total of $2.7 trillion, or 120 percent of its gross domestic product. While Italy runs a relatively small budget deficit, Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s government seems paralyzed, vowing structural changes to produce growth and to further shrink public spending, but it is so far too weak and divided to deliver on most of its promises.

Italian news outlets reported on Thursday that a number of lawmakers from Mr. Berlusconi’s coalition had signed a letter asking him to stand down to allow for the creation of a government that could pass the measures that would tranquilize jittery financial markets.

Market skepticism about Italy has led to high interest rates on its bonds, which if unchecked could rip huge holes into its budget and possibly provoke a full-blown credit crisis. With Mr. Berlusconi hanging on by a thread, and his coalition partner, Umberto Bossi of the Northern League, working to block fundamental change, Italy remains a major vulnerability in restoring market confidence to the euro.

European leaders Thursday welcomed new promises made by Mr. Berlusconi, including a weak pledge to increase the age for pensions to 67 from 65 by the year 2026, but said sternly that carrying them out was the key.

Along with the European Central Bank, they have demanded such changes in return for buying up Italian bonds at cheaper than market rates and helping to create the bailout fund, and now to expand it to about $1.4 trillion, because at $625 billion it is far too small to protect Italy or Spain, and nearly half of that is already committed.

But the leaders were vague about how to enlarge the fund, and reluctant to put up more of their own nations’ capital. They said they hoped to create another special fund open to investment by China, Russia and Japan — which all expressed a willingness to help in principle — as well as by other wealthy nations with surplus cash. But how such a fund would work, and what guarantees it would provide to investors, remain to be determined next month, European officials said. Until the details are clear, there is likely to be little investment.

Also left unclear are the details of how to leverage the existing fund, by guaranteeing a percentage of potential losses by bondholders. While Mr. Sarkozy said the aim was to leverage the fund up to $1.4 trillion, there was no agreement on the specific percentage the fund would guarantee. More should become clear by the time of the Group of 20 summit meeting on Nov. 3 and 4 in Cannes, France.

Even the Greek deal is considered not sufficient. By 2020, Greece, if all goes to plan — which so far it has not — will still have a debt of 120 percent of gross domestic product, the same figure that has everyone so worried about Italy. So Greek pain will continue as it tries to restart growth while balancing its budget and paying even this amount of accumulated debt. Even the write-down in the face value of Greek debt is problematic because it does not cover all of the country’s outstanding public debt, with the rest controlled by institutions that will not take part in the restructuring.

Liz Alderman contributed reporting from Paris, and Elisabetta Povoledo from Rome.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=2e83ff742e7787cf71096e27395848d8