April 20, 2024

Moscow on the Mediterranean

But the Russians, though badly bruised, are now in a position to get something that has previously eluded even Moscow’s most audacious oligarchs: control of a so-called systemic financial institution in the European Union.

“They wanted to throw out the Russians but in the end, they delivered our main bank to the Russians,” said the Cypriot president, Nicos Anastasiades, in a June interview.

The March bailout hammered bank creditors and depositors in an early test of what has since become the official European Union policy of “bailing-in” banks. The policy is intended to force creditors and depositors to pay for a bank’s mistakes and to spare taxpayers from picking up the entire bill.

The strategy, however, has generated unintended consequences in the case of Cyprus. The exercise was meant to banish what Germany and other Northern European nations viewed as dirty Russian money from Cyprus’s bloated banks. Instead, it has pulled Russia even deeper into Europe’s financial system by giving its plutocrats majority ownership, at least on paper, of the Bank of Cyprus, the country’s oldest, biggest and most important financial institution.

“Whoever controls the Bank of Cyprus controls the island,” said Andreas Marangos, a Limassol lawyer whose clients include many Russians.

The biggest single chunk of shares — around 18 percent — is supposed to go to depositors who lost money in Cyprus’s now-defunct Laiki Bank, but this stake is likely to be controlled by Cyprus’s central bank. As a result of a forced conversion of Bank of Cyprus deposits into shares, however, a diverse and so far unorganized group of depositors, most of them Russians, will end up with a controlling stake.

Whether they want such a bank is another matter. Owning the Bank of Cyprus, which has been saddled with $11.7 billion in liabilities racked up by Laiki Bank, “is like owning cancer,” said Irakli Bukhashvili, the head of a financial services company serving Russians here in Limassol, the business capital of Cyprus.

Despite its wobbly condition, the Bank of Cyprus still holds a uniquely influential position in the economic and political affairs of a sun-swept nation that sits on potentially large reserves of natural gas and straddles strategic fault lines between East and West.

President Anastasiades, in a June letter to the European Central Bank that pleaded for help to keep the Bank of Cyprus afloat, described it as a “mega-systemic bank” that, if it failed, could bring down the entire Cypriot economy. With 5,700 employees and around half of all the island’s deposits, it dwarfs its rivals and reaches into every corner of the country through a vast network of branches, which now also includes the former offices of Laiki Bank.

Moscow, though furious over the billions lost by Russians in Cypriot banks, still sees Cyprus as a prize worth courting. The Russian government has pushed for access for its military aircraft to an air base in Paphos and for its warships to Cypriot ports.

When Cyprus first appealed for help from the so-called troika of international creditors — the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank — the main problem was Laiki, the country’s second-biggest bank and one that was already effectively insolvent. Instead of just throwing Cyprus a financial lifeline, as it had done with Ireland after a banking crisis that led the government to guarantee all the banks, the troika demanded that Laiki and the Bank of Cyprus share the burden of any rescue deal.

Depositors with large accounts in Laiki Bank were initially left with just 100,000 euros each, about $130,000, and the rest of their money was confiscated as the bank shut down. Those with more than 100,000 euros in the Bank of Cyprus lost access to 90 percent of their cash, although they have since been promised future access to some of their frozen funds. But, under final terms announced on July 30 by the Central Bank of Cyprus, large depositors in the Bank of Cyprus will have 47.5 percent of their money forcibly converted into shares, up from 37.5 percent in an original plan.

Dimitris Bounias contributed reporting from Nicosia, and Andrew E. Kramer from Moscow.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/world/europe/russians-still-ride-high-in-cyprus-after-bailout.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Cyprus Bank’s Bailout Hands Ownership to Russian Plutocrats

But the Russians, though badly bruised, are now in a position to get something that has previously eluded even Moscow’s most audacious oligarchs: control of a so-called systemic financial institution in the European Union.

“They wanted to throw out the Russians but in the end, they delivered our main bank to the Russians,” said the Cypriot president, Nicos Anastasiades, in a June interview.

The March bailout hammered bank creditors and depositors in an early test of what has since become the official European Union policy of “bailing-in” banks. The policy is intended to force creditors and depositors to pay for a bank’s mistakes and to spare taxpayers from picking up the entire bill.

The strategy, however, has generated unintended consequences in the case of Cyprus. The exercise was meant to banish what Germany and other Northern European nations viewed as dirty Russian money from Cyprus’s bloated banks. Instead, it has pulled Russia even deeper into Europe’s financial system by giving its plutocrats majority ownership, at least on paper, of the Bank of Cyprus, the country’s oldest, biggest and most important financial institution.

“Whoever controls the Bank of Cyprus controls the island,” said Andreas Marangos, a Limassol lawyer whose clients include many Russians.

The biggest single chunk of shares — around 18 percent — is supposed to go to depositors who lost money in Cyprus’s now-defunct Laiki Bank, but this stake is likely to be controlled by Cyprus’s central bank. As a result of a forced conversion of Bank of Cyprus deposits into shares, however, a diverse and so far unorganized group of depositors, most of them Russians, will end up with a controlling stake.

Whether they want such a bank is another matter. Owning the Bank of Cyprus, which has been saddled with $11.7 billion in liabilities racked up by Laiki Bank, “is like owning cancer,” said Irakli Bukhashvili, the head of a financial services company serving Russians here in Limassol, the business capital of Cyprus.

Despite its wobbly condition, the Bank of Cyprus still holds a uniquely influential position in the economic and political affairs of a sun-swept nation that sits on potentially large reserves of natural gas and straddles strategic fault lines between East and West.

President Anastasiades, in a June letter to the European Central Bank that pleaded for help to keep the Bank of Cyprus afloat, described it as a “mega-systemic bank” that, if it failed, could bring down the entire Cypriot economy. With 5,700 employees and around half of all the island’s deposits, it dwarfs its rivals and reaches into every corner of the country through a vast network of branches, which now also includes the former offices of Laiki Bank.

Moscow, though furious over the billions lost by Russians in Cypriot banks, still sees Cyprus as a prize worth courting. The Russian government has pushed for access for its military aircraft to an air base in Paphos and for its warships to Cypriot ports.

When Cyprus first appealed for help from the so-called troika of international creditors — the European Commission, the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank — the main problem was Laiki, the country’s second-biggest bank and one that was already effectively insolvent. Instead of just throwing Cyprus a financial lifeline, as it had done with Ireland after a banking crisis that led the government to guarantee all the banks, the troika demanded that Laiki and the Bank of Cyprus share the burden of any rescue deal.

Depositors with large accounts in Laiki Bank were initially left with just 100,000 euros each, about $130,000, and the rest of their money was confiscated as the bank shut down. Those with more than 100,000 euros in the Bank of Cyprus lost access to 90 percent of their cash, although they have since been promised future access to some of their frozen funds. But, under final terms announced on July 30 by the Central Bank of Cyprus, large depositors in the Bank of Cyprus will have 47.5 percent of their money forcibly converted into shares, up from 37.5 percent in an original plan.

Dimitris Bounias contributed reporting from Nicosia, and Andrew E. Kramer from Moscow.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/world/europe/russians-still-ride-high-in-cyprus-after-bailout.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Bucks: Tactics for Getting the I.R.S. on the Phone

If you need help with a federal tax question, the Internal Revenue Service offers free, live assistance by telephone. But you’ll probably need to be patient when you call.

Wait times when calling the agency have been growing, according to a recent report from the Government Accountability Office.

Millions of people call the IRS each year. Last tax season, the average wait time to speak to a live representative was 17 minutes, up from 12 minutes in 2011, the G.A.O. found.

And the percentage of callers seeking live assistance who actually received it was 68 percent, down from 72 percent the year before. The number of abandoned calls, which means the caller hangs up before speaking to someone, rose 20 percent.

The agency also has been slower to respond to mail. Of the 21 million pieces of paper correspondence the agency received in 2012, about 40 percent were considered “overage,” meaning that the I.R.S. did not respond within 45 days of receipt.

The dwindling service is the result of inadequate funding, according to a report by the National Taxpayer Advocate, the office charged with representing the interest of tax payers in dealing with the I.R.S. “The decline in these key measures is deeply disturbing,” the advocate’s annual report said, noting that telephone calls and correspondence are the two main ways taxpayers communicate with the I.R.S..

“Few government agencies or businesses would be satisfied if their customer service departments were unable to answer three out of every 10 calls,” the report added, “nor would they be content if nearly half of all correspondence took more than 6 1/2 weeks to answer.”

I called the toll-free number on Wednesday afternoon, on the first official tax filing day of the year, to see how long it would take to talk to someone. An operator answered the call quickly, but transferred me to another line, where a recorded voice told me my estimated wait time would be 10 to 15 minutes. I waited 14 minutes, according to the clock on my computer, before I was connected to a representative. That’s better than average, but still a fair bit of time spent on hold.

It’s not clear if there’s any best day of the week, or time of day, to call the toll-free number. The line, (800) 829-1040, is staffed from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., in all time zones in the United States.

Before I ended the call, I asked the I.R.S. representative if she could recommend the best time of day to telephone the agency, to get the shortest wait time. She suggested calling early in the morning.

An I.R.S. media spokesman didn’t respond to requests for suggestions about the best time to call, although he e-mailed some links to the agency’s Web site that provided a list of walk-in offices where you can go in person to get help.

Bonnie Speedy, vice president of the AARP Foundation Tax-Aide and a former member of the I.R.S. Advisory Council, suggests avoiding Mondays,  particularly first thing in the morning, when call volumes are typically heavy. Calls are routed depending on the complexity of the question, so a call seeking help with a technical tax matter will likely take longer than a simple inquiry about, say, when you can expect your refund check. (The foundation offers free tax preparation for low-to moderate-income taxpayers, especially those 60 and older, at nearly 6,000 locations.)

The tax-filing Web site Taxbrain advises that people call the I.R.S.  Tuesday through Thursday and suggests avoiding 8 a.m. to 9 a.m., and 4 p.m. to 5 p.m., in all time zones. It also helps to be polite and have any relevant documents handy when you call.

Have you sought tax help from the I.R.S.’s toll-free number? What was your experience?

Article source: http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/04/tactics-for-getting-the-i-r-s-on-the-phone/?partner=rss&emc=rss

UBS Ordered to Provide Records to U.S.

Wegelin pleaded guilty in a New York court on Jan. 3 to charges of helping wealthy Americans evade taxes through secret accounts, then said it would close down as a result.

Judge William H. Pauley III granted the I.R.S.’s request to issue to UBS a “John Doe” summons, which seeks information about possible tax fraud committed by individuals whose identities are not known, for the names of taxpayers who may have hidden income at Wegelin and other Swiss banks.

A UBS spokesman said the bank would follow the court’s ruling, which demands U.S. records, not Swiss ones, and does not involve any data on UBS clients.

UBS ended its own U.S. investigation in 2009 by admitting it had provided tax-evasion services to rich Americans. It turned over 4,450 client names and paid a $780 million fine.

UBS was later ensnared in the Wegelin case when the government indicted the smaller bank nearly a year ago. The government alleged that Wegelin had used a U.S. correspondent account at UBS to handle funds for U.S. clients, a standard industry practice for foreign banks.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/business/global/ubs-ordered-to-provide-records-to-us.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Harrisburg’s Bankruptcy Filing Is Rejected by Judge

The ruling, by Judge Mary D. France, was a blow to the Council. A majority of its members had fought Harrisburg’s mayor, Linda D. Thompson, for months, saying she was seeking too little from creditors. A failed trash incinerator project has saddled the city with about $310 million in debt, more than quadruple its annual budget.

Brad Koplinski, a Council member who had voted to file for bankruptcy, said he and his colleagues were trying to decide whether to appeal Wednesday’s decision.

“We’re disappointed,” Mr. Koplinski said by telephone from Harrisburg. “Bankruptcy is the only thing that would guarantee a solution with shared pain.”

The City Council had tried to muscle in on the process of fixing the city’s chaotic finances, which had been run by Mayor Thompson, who is backed by the state and Gov. Tom Corbett. The Council had argued that filing for bankruptcy would be fairer to the city’s taxpayers, as it would give the city more control over how it pays off its creditors.

Council members said that creditors should have to write down part of their debts, in addition to the city’s selling off its assets to pay creditors. The highly unusual filing ran against the plan the state had enacted, which essentially designates the city as financially distressed and places its finances under state control. On Wednesday, the Council lost that fight.

The ruling in federal bankruptcy court in Harrisburg paved the way for Gov. Tom Corbett to move ahead with plans to take over the city’s finances by placing it in the hands of a state-appointed financial receiver.

Harrisburg is one of several municipalities that have filed for bankruptcy protection this year, along with Jefferson County, Ala., and Central Falls, R.I.

The state filed a petition on Nov. 18 in the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania laying out its arguments for why the city meets the criteria for receivership. A hearing in that case is scheduled for Dec. 1. David Unkovic, a Pennsylvania lawyer, was named in the petition as the receiver.

Kelli Roberts, a spokeswoman for Governor Corbett, said the state welcomed the ruling. She said Judge France affirmed the position of state officials that the city did not get the state or the mayor to sign off on the bankruptcy filing.

The ruling on Wednesday had little effect on the city’s current financial situation. It dismissed a stay against claims from creditors, but creditors had not been actively pursuing those claims in court, so there was no immediate effect.

“Most people predicted the judge would rule this way,” said William W. Kannel, a partner at Mintz Levin in Boston, who is an expert on bankruptcy law. “It’s very clear, states are entitled to control their municipalities’ access into Chapter 9 bankruptcy.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=626acc7bca5fff8bd9d5dc2bd43ad7db

Spain Examines Long Hidden Swiss Account

Yet, there is one not-so-small matter that Mr. Botín (pronounced bo-TEEN) has failed to keep tabs on: a Swiss bank account secretly opened long ago by his father that grew to such a size that when Spanish authorities discovered its existence last year, Mr. Botín and other family members paid 200 million euros (about $273 million currently) in taxes to avoid tax evasion charges.

At the request of tax fraud inspectors, a Spanish national court is investigating whether the payment is enough, given the amount that was stashed abroad; tax experts in Spain say that the account could reach two billion euros. The court has also said that officials need more time to sift through the blizzard of documents that the family submitted and will consider whether a criminal charge of document fraud should be brought.

A lawyer for the Botíns, Jesús Remón, said the family was cooperating with the investigation and was “fully in compliance with its tax obligations following their voluntary filing” last year. He added that no family member had been charged with wrongdoing.

Mr. Botín’s tax problems come as debate intensifies over whether struggling governments should demand more tax revenue from the rich. On Monday, President Obama called to end some tax breaks for the wealthiest taxpayers in the United States.

Last Friday, the Spanish government reintroduced a wealth tax that it had abolished three years earlier, hoping to collect an estimated 1.08 billion euros from taxpayers with more than 700,000 euros in declared assets. Spain’s wealthiest have so far not publicly endorsed calls for higher taxes, and Mr. Botín on Friday told reporters that “it seems to me very bad to reintroduce” the wealth tax.

More so than in other European countries, where bankers are largely anonymous figures, Mr. Botín holds sway in Spain. Although he avoids social events and his public utterances are few, his influence is seen as wide-ranging. And he has been able to retain control of Santander despite his family’s controlling just 2 percent of its shares.

Neither the judiciary nor the family has provided details about how much money the Swiss bank account contained or how the amount grew over time. Nor would Mr. Remón, the lawyer, comment on whether Mr. Botín had been aware of the account.

What is known is that Mr. Botín’s father, also called Emilio, left Spain with part of his wealth in late 1936, after the start of the Spanish Civil War, fearing, like many other Spaniards, what might come.

The elder Mr. Botín spent a few months in London before moving to Basel, Switzerland, and eventually returning to Spain to resume leadership of the bank that he had run since 1933. But while he returned to Spain, the money he salted away in Switzerland did not. The senior Botín died in 1993. Last year, the French government passed on to Spain data that it had obtained from Hervé Falciani, a former employee in HSBC’s Swiss subsidiary, naming almost 600 Spanish holders of secret bank accounts. Among those was one belonging to the estate of Mr. Botín’s father.

In his opening summary, the judge in charge of the case, Fernando Andreu, highlighted “the complexity of the hereditary structures” of trusts, foundations and other companies set up to oversee the account. The closest he came to explaining what was in the account was to say that it also included a 12 percent stake in Bankinter, a midsize bank in which Jaime Botín, Emilio’s brother, is a leading shareholder. That holding, at current stock market value, would be worth about $310 million.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=8d5576060b2ed736fa889614b62124d3

Economix: Answering Questions on the Mortgage Crisis

4:04 p.m. | Updated
Gretchen Morgenson, the Fair Game columnist for Sunday Business, answered questions posed online today about her new book on the mortgage crisis, “Reckless Endangerment,” written with Joshua Rosner. The session was held on Quora, a site devoted to curating knowledge collaboratively by compiling questions and answers. It is the second of three weekly question-and-answer sessions on Quora featuring Times reporters.

Here are a few of the questions that she answered:

What did “too big to fail” mean, in the context of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? In the aftermath of the 2008 housing crisis, have we solved that problem now with new rules or systems?

Is the Dodd-Frank Act a good law? What impact will it have on the economy?

How much did we pay to bail out Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae? Are taxpayers getting that money back?

You can also read answers from last week’s session with Diana B. Henriques, a Times reporter and author of “The Wizard of Lies: Bernie Madoff and the Death of Trust.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=b9641f981c342fa3005cb1052661cc09

G.M. Is Still Hopeful for Payback to Government

The executive, Daniel F. Akerson, said that G.M. was working to maximize its payback to taxpayers, but that the government did not make a bad investment even if it did not recover the full amount given to the company.

“At some level, the government’s got to decide: are they an investor or were they trying to save the industry?” Mr. Akerson told reporters ahead of G.M.’s first annual stockholder meeting since its 2009 government-financed bankruptcy.

A report last week by the White House National Economic Council concluded that the government would probably have to write off about $14 billion of the $80 billion spent rescuing the auto industry by the Bush and Obama administrations.

Mr. Akerson said that a G.M. liquidation would have saddled taxpayers with more than $17 billion in pension liabilities. G.M. has cut its pension shortfall in half since 2009, he said, adding that he wanted the plan to be fully financed during his tenure as chief executive.

Because most of the $50 billion G.M. received was converted to an equity stake held by the Treasury Department, Mr. Akerson said G.M. had “technically” repaid its debt to the government, but he added that executives were “doing our level best” to help taxpayers recoup the remaining amount. The Treasury, which still owns 26 percent of G.M., has recovered about half of its investment in G.M.

Shares of G.M. fell Tuesday morning to $28.39, their lowest point since the initial public offering in November, when they sold for $33. To break even, the Treasury needs to sell its remaining shares at an average price of about $53.

The Treasury is expected to begin selling more of its G.M. stake as soon as August, but it can wait longer if the shares remain below their original price. G.M. has no say in the matter, Mr. Akerson said.

He said the recent decline in G.M.’s share value mirrored what had happened to competitors’ stocks and said economic instability was to blame.

“There’s a lot of uncertainty about a jobless recovery,” he said.

He said G.M.’s performance was tied to the economy and that the government needed to pay down its deficit to calm the markets and avoid “playing chicken” with its credit rating.

G.M.’s stockholder meeting, held in Detroit for the first time since 1990, was sparsely attended and contained none of the tension that had been common before its bankruptcy. The company has posted five consecutive quarterly profits, earning $4.7 billion last year. Mr. Akerson opened the meeting by contrasting G.M.’s progress since bankruptcy with its bleak outlook before that.

“General Motors almost made history by not making any more future histories,” he said.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=9d0e78b29454f71abbbc7d0e55e3b86e

Portugal Rating Gets Cut Again by Moody’s

Opinion »

Op-Ed: Unfair to Immigrants, Costly for Taxpayers

New York City jails should stop transfers to federal immigration detention programs.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=9f40247eff633f5dec79b04449172a7c