So why don’t we take theirs:
3 Likes
I do not know if this source is worth anything.
Tensions have surfaced between France and the UK over whether $350bn of frozen Russian assets
So that is where TIG gets that $350B figure he is always crying about. We know the US has not appropriated anywhere near that amount for Ukraine. He’s crying about the assets his buddy Putin has lost control of.
Steve
11 Likes
Those discussions have been around for a while. Didn’t we impound the yachts of Russian oligarks? Do we still have them? Did we sell them? Also many frozen bank accounts.
Many companies with operations in Russia shut them down at the start of the war. Russian companies took them over. Were the owners paid? McDonalds for one. In the Yelsen era many western companies saw Russia as a growth opportunity and invested. Many probably got caught.
IIRC, the assets have been impounded (frozen) but not seized.
DB2
Yes, and we are probably paying for their storage, security, etc. I wonder about who pays for insurance. We should sell them!!
The U.S. and its allies immediately froze $300 billion in Russian foreign holdings at the start of Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine. That money has been sitting untapped — most of it in European Union nations — as the war grinds on. But roughly $5 billion of it is located in the U.S.
The frozen assets are immobilized and can’t be accessed by Moscow — but they still belong to Russia. While governments can generally freeze property without difficulty, turning that property into forfeited assets that can be sold for the benefit of Ukraine requires an extra layer of judicial procedure, including a legal basis and adjudication in a court.
For more than a year, officials from multiple countries have debated the legality of confiscating the money and sending it to Ukraine.
The new U.S. law requires the president and Treasury Department to start locating Russian assets in the U.S. within 90 days and to report back to Congress within 180 days. A month after that period, the president will be allowed to “seize, confiscate, transfer, or vest” any Russian state sovereign assets, including any interest, within U.S. jurisdictions. The U.S. wants to keep consulting with global allies and act together, which is likely to slow down the process.
DB2
3 Likes
I am pretty sure the US government is large enough to “self insure.” We are not “paying for insurance.”
4 Likes
When the CSM returns the assets to Putin post haste, everyone will know why. We should then return him to Putin with the same speed and alacrity, for the same reason.
NOTE: The term I have been using (S-iC) is banned here.
Sure enough. I tried it. The “cancel culture” has banned that term.
“CSM” could be confusing. Could be the “cigarette smoking man”.
Steve
1 Like
Since this has become [yet another] political board, you can probably use the name.
1 Like
"Head buried up to his shoulders in his nether regions "
That throws a spotlight on the roughly $300 billion of Russian central bank assets frozen by the West…the bulk of which is held in Europe - mainly as government bonds, the profits from which are used to guarantee loans to Ukraine.
While seizing those assets outright may be very tempting, such actions have a long and legally fraught history, and could scare off other central banks looking to park assets in Europe…
Participants at Thursday’s summit on boosting European defence spending said no decisions on Russian asset seizures were taken in the talks, with one EU diplomat confirming that Germany, France and Belgium - home to the Euroclear securities depository where many of the assets are parked - had restated their opposition.
DB2