Clauses & Controversies

Mitu Gulati & Mark Weidemaier

Clauses and Controversies: A Podcast about International Finance, Contract Clauses and the Controversies Surrounding These Clauses

  1. há 5 dias

    Ep 178 - $240 Billion?!

    $240 Billion?! Venezuela's debt is purportedly $240 billion, larger than previous estimates by far. What gives? Is this a way to signal to investors that they should be prepared to take larger-than-expected haircuts? Or, maybe more likely, a signal that favored creditors — insiders? oil majors? — will have their claims inflated and thus can expect outsized recoveries? We probably won't know until the IMF completes its usual rigorous assessment of the country's debt and debt sustainability. Oh, wait... Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 178 - $240 Billion?!

  2. 15 de jun.

    Ep 177 - Is it Finally Time to Restructure Venezuela’s Debt?

    Is it Finally Time to Restructure Venezuela’s Debt? Ever since Venezuela was allowed to hire advisors on its debt restructuring, rumors have been swirling about whether the restructuring might be attempted even before an IMF Debt Sustainability Analysis. Such a scenario is plausible, given the current context. But is it good for the Venezuelan people? Hell no. This is potentially going to be the most complicated debt restructuring in history. And it is going to be done without the involvement of the only competent institution (despite our frequent criticisms of it) in this space? In prior eras, we’d count on the US Treasury Department to insist on IMF oversight and active involvement. But can we count on that today? Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 177 - Is it Finally Time to Restructure Venezuela’s Debt?

  3. 1 de jun.

    Ep 176 - 1917 Tsarist Bonds

    1917 Tsarist Bonds We know we promised to talk about Venezuela. But we got distracted by a filing in the district courts in DC. A claim for payment on Tsarist bonds from 1917, being made in 2026. How could we pass that up? We also confess to being intrigued that the lawyers for Russia have asked that the judge in DC — Judge Friedrich — give Rule 11 sanctions against the plaintiffs. There are clear potential barriers to this claim on the merits but asking for Rule 11 sanctions on this basis seems a bit rich. Plus, we love the resuscitation of old Tsarist or Imperial bonds. Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 176 - 1917 Tsarist Bonds

  4. 18 de mai.

    Ep 175 - The Most Amazing Revolution

    The Most Amazing Revolution In spring 1917, the United States government lent money to the new Provisional Government in Russia, which had promised both domestic reform and to maintain the fight against Germany. Within a few short months, the Bolsheviks took over and repudiated all prior international debt. Still unpaid, the loans have now been in default nearly 150 times longer than they were current. We have talked about these loans before, but not about the repeated attempts (in the 1930s and 1990s) to reach a settlement. Some of the loan proceeds went to efforts to keep the Bolsheviks from power? Did the succeeding governments have to repay those debts? Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 175 - The Most Amazing Revolution

  5. 11 de mai.

    Ep 174 - Something Black in the Lentils

    Something Black in the Lentils: We are back with our favorite type of podcast — speculation about legal implications built around facts that are constructed entirely from rumor and innuendo. Weird stuff is going on with the Senegalese yield curve. And we wonder whether the weirdness might relate to Senegal’s desire to avoid triggering margin calls on its TRS contracts (which we'd really like to see). If there is some jiggery pokery going on - perhaps with respect to auctions of the three-year maturity - is that bad faith? Possibly, maybe, kinda sorta. We aren't English lawyers. We're barely even lawyers. But maybe there is something strange afoot. Surely it will all soon be disclosed, especially if Senegal defaults and all these contracts go . . . well . . . Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 174 - Something Black in the Lentils

  6. 27 de abr.

    Ep 173 - Foreign Civil War Entanglements

    Foreign Civil War Entanglements Over the years, the U.S. has supported the losing side in numerous foreign civil wars. It has emerged from these entanglements as both a debtor and a creditor. In each case, the U.S. government's formal position has been clear: the post-civil war government succeeds to the rights and obligations of the prior government. That is, the winning side must pay debts incurred by the prior government, and it may enforce rights that accrued to that government. The U.S. has consistently taken this position even when the rights and obligations at issue relate to its attempt to keep the winning side from attaining power (e.g., debts accrued in the context of arms sales to the U.S.-supported side). But pragmatically, the U.S. government's position has been more fluid, ranging from benign neglect (i.e., simply not asserting a claim to payment) to finding technical legal arguments to justify writing off a debt (e.g., deeming the debt uncollectible). Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 173 - Foreign Civil War Entanglements

  7. 13 de abr.

    Ep 172 - If Only YPF’s Bylaws Had Been Governed by Texas Law

    If Only YPF’s Bylaws Had Been Governed by Texas Law And… poof! The sound of a $16 billion judgment going up in smoke. We talk about the Second Circuit’s decision in the YPF case, which we read largely as a way to make an excessively large judgment disappear without ruling on any difficult (and recurring) issues of US law. YPF’s shareholders got screwed, but then again their rights were governed by Argentine law. Even in foreign courts, it is hard to win when the sovereign gets to set the rules. We also talk about those fun-lovin’ Texas legislators. Pardner, everything’s bigger in Texas. Except the pre-judgment interest rate. That there is just a whole lot smaller. Has been for 30 some years. Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 172 - If Only YPF’s Bylaws Had Been Governed by Texas Law

  8. 9 de mar.

    Ep 171 - The $500 Million American “Financial Aid” to China

    The $500 Million American “Financial Aid” to China In 1942, the Americans provided $500 million in financial aid to Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government in China. Described as a “financial counterpart” to Lend-Lease aid, the credit — intended to help stabilize the Chinese economy and support its war effort — did not provide for principal repayment, interest payments, or state a maturity. The apparent intent was to negotiate terms in a post-war settlement of accounts, when the parties could agree on the “benefits to be rendered the United States in return” for the credit. That agreement never happened and, as best we can tell, the status of the credit remains unclear. (Was it a loan? A conditional grant? If the latter, were the conditions fulfilled?) The US doesn’t seem to have ever asserted a right to collect, but we also haven’t seen anything formally relinquishing the potential claim or formally acknowledging the credit as a grant. Producer: Leanna Doty

    Ep 171 - The $500 Million American “Financial Aid” to China
Ver tudo (178)

Sobre

Clauses and Controversies: A Podcast about International Finance, Contract Clauses and the Controversies Surrounding These Clauses

Informações

  • Criado por
    Mitu Gulati & Mark Weidemaier
  • Anos de atividade
    2020 - 2026
  • Episódios
    178
  • Classificação
    Explícito
  • Copyright
    © All rights reserved
  • Site do podcast
    Clauses & Controversies

Você também pode gostar de