Category: Money

Business Insider 

Getty Images

Student-loan borrowers are facing a year of uncertainty in 2023.
Broad student-debt relief is up in the air as the Supreme Court will make a decision on its legality.
The student-loan payment resumption is also dependent on how the legal challenges play out.

Todd, a Washington-based student-loan borrower, was “super excited” when President Joe Biden announced up to $20,000 in loan forgiveness at the end of August.

His excitement didn’t only stem from the fact that the relief would wipe out his entire student-loan balance. Todd — who requested his last name be withheld for privacy — was looking forward to nearly every federal borrower experiencing the relief Biden promised them on the campaign trail.

“I didn’t think his campaign promises were ever going to amount to anything, but even after getting the details that it was only $10,000 to $20,000, that was still a nice thing because it gets the ball rolling,” Todd said. “I had no hope whatsoever of anything changing, so when this announcement was made, it was a gamechanger.”

But his mood quickly shifted when lawsuits began to mount, with two so far blocking the relief from being implemented for now as it heads to the Supreme Court. As a result of the legal challenges, the application for debt relief has been paused since October, and the Education Department is prohibited from moving forward with processing the relief until the nation’s highest court rules on the legality of the policy.

“I was really surprised when the lawsuits succeeded,” Todd said. “I’m upset with the administration about the way they handled it, because they could have just made the relief universal. So now I’m back to this point I was before where it’s like, nothing’s ever going to happen.”

Todd isn’t the only borrower concerned with the future of student debt — going into the new year, millions of Americans don’t know whether they will see a reduction to their student-loan balances, when they will have to resume payments on their loans, and how other recently announced reforms to targeted forgiveness programs will be implemented. Here’s what’s in store. 

Broad student-debt relief

February 28 is the day the Supreme Court will take on the two lawsuits that have blocked Biden’s student-debt relief. One lawsuit, filed by six Republican-led states, argued the debt relief would hurt their states’ tax revenues, and that of Missouri-based student-loan company MOHELA. In October, the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals paused the implementation of the debt relief in response to that lawsuit, and in November, it ruled the pause will stay in place as the Supreme Court takes on the case.

The other lawsuit was filed by two student-loan borrowers who sued because they did not qualify for the full $20,000 amount of debt relief. A Texas judge ruled the debt relief plan is illegal in response to the lawsuit, and the Supreme Court will take up the case alongside the one filed by the six GOP states.

The Supreme Court will consider these two questions for the GOP states: Whether they standing, and whether Biden’s plan to cancel student debt exceeds the Education Secretary’s authority or is “arbitrary and capricious.”

For the lawsuit filed by the two student-loan borrowers, the Supreme Court will address whether the plaintiffs in the case have standing, and whether Biden’s debt relief was implemented in a “procedurally proper manner.”

Student-loan payment resumption

When federal borrowers resume payments is entirely dependent on how the legal challenges play out. Right before Thanksgiving, Biden announced an extension of the student-loan payment pause through June 30, or 60 days after the lawsuits seeking to block the relief are resolved — whichever comes first.

“If the program has not been implemented and the litigation has not been resolved by June 30, 2023 – payments will resume 60 days after that,” the press release said. 

Payments were previously scheduled to resume after December 31, 2022, but Biden noted in his announcement that it “isn’t fair that tens of millions of borrowers that are eligible for relief to resume their student debt payments while the courts consider the lawsuit.”

The Education Department will notify borrowers when it is time to resume payments, and those with federal loans eligible for relief will not be required to pay off their debt in the meantime.

Reforms to targeted loan forgiveness programs

The summer of 2023 should bring borrowers some changes to specific student-loan forgiveness programs. When Biden announced broad debt relief, he also announced changes to income-driven repayment plans, which calculate a borrowers’ monthly payment based on income with the promise of loan forgiveness after at least 20 years.

But paperwork errors and administrative hurdles have plagued the plans, keeping borrowers in repayment for much longer than anticipated. That’s why Biden announced reforms to fix the repayment plans by requiring borrowers to pay no more than 5% their discretionary income monthly on their undergraduate student loans — down from the current 10%. 

It would also forgive remaining student debt for borrowers with original balances under $12,000 after 10 years of payments, instead of 20 years, and prevent unpaid monthly interest from adding onto a borrower’s principal balance as long as they’re making monthly payments.

Biden’s Education Department also announced new regulations for targeted programs set to go into effect in the summer. Those include permanent changes to the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program and the Total and  Permanent Disability discharge program, along with rules to prevent interest from capitalizing on a borrower’s original balance.

While Democratic lawmakers have welcomed these changes, some Republican lawmakers have argued they are too expansive and should not be permitted. With Republicans taking the House majority next year, it’s a possibility that they may try to pursue legal action to block the implementation of those reforms.

Read More 

Business Insider 

Elon Musk completed his takeover of Twitter in late October.

Carina Johansen/Getty Images

One of Twitter’s landlords has sued the company over unpaid rent for an office in San Francisco.
The landlord is claiming $136,260 in unpaid rent, plus costs.
The lawsuit relates to Twitter’s office at the Hartford Building, near Chinatown.

One of Twitter’s landlords is suing the social-media company, saying it owes $136,260 in unpaid rent for an office in San Francisco.

The lawsuit, filed Thursday, relates to Twitter’s office at the Hartford Building, rather than its headquarters on San Francisco’s Market Street. It says Twitter has breached its lease for its premises on the 30th floor of the Hartford Building “by failing to pay rent due.”

The landlord of the Hartford Building, which is at 650 California Street, served Twitter a default notice on December 16, telling the company it had five days to pay the rent it owed or it would break the terms of the lease, according to a copy of the notice attached to the lawsuit, which was first reported by Bloomberg.

If Twitter refused to pay, the landlord, Columbia Reit – 650 California, could take legal action, such as starting eviction proceedings and seeking damages from Twitter for breach of contract, the notice says.

Twitter’s office at the Hartford Building comprises the entire 30th floor of the 34-story tower and covers about 15,500 square feet, per court documents. Twitter has sublet the office to Dentsu International Americas, a Japanese marketing and public relations company, since October 2022, according to the lawsuit.

Twitter, Columbia Reit – 650 California, and Dentsu didn’t immediately respond to Insider’s requests for comment, made outside normal working hours.

Since taking ownership of Twitter in late October, Elon Musk has embarked on wide-ranging cost-cutting, including laying off more than half of the company’s staff. He’s also cut down on staff perks like free food and work trips.

The New York Times reported in mid-December that Twitter was weeks behind on rent payments for its San Francisco headquarters on Market Street and other global offices.

Other companies with offices at the Hartford Building include Credit Suisse, Affirm, and WeWork.

Musk is the world’s second-richest person, worth an estimated $137 billion.

Read More 

Business Insider 

New York Congressman-Elect George Santos speaks during the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC) annual leadership meeting.

David Becker for the Washington Post/via Getty Images

Rep.-elect George Santos has admitted to fabricating major parts of his life story.
His ex-boyfriend told The New York Times that he feels gullible for believing some of the lies.
Santos’ ex accused Santos of stealing his phone and rarely paying bills, per The Times.

George Santos is scheduled to due to take the floor of the House of Representatives on Tuesday, but an ever-growing list of scandals and calls to resign look set to overshadow his swearing-in.

The congressman-elect has admitted that he fabricated significant parts of his life story after an investigation by The New York Times revealed that his résumé consisted of lies.

And a new article by The New York Times, published on Monday, shows that former friends and colleagues say Santos, 34, has been weaving a fictional narrative about his life for years. 

Pedro Vilarva, who met Santos in 2014, dated the embattled politician for a few months before they moved in together, per The Times. 

Vilarva said that Santos, elected in November to represent a Long Island district, who he found “charming and sweet,” rarely contributed to bills. 

“He used to say he would get money from Citigroup, he was an investor,” said Vilarva, per The Times. “One day it’s one thing, one day it’s another thing. He never ever actually went to work.”

Citigroup told The Times it had no record of Santos ever working there. Goldman Sachs, which Santos also listed as a former workplace, told the newspaper it had no record of his employment.

In 2015, Vilarva said that Santos surprised him with plane tickets to Hawaii. However, the tickets did not exist, The Times said. The newspaper reported that at a similar time, Vilarva noticed that his cell phone had gone missing.

He said he believed that Santos stole it and pawned it, per The Times.

After these incidents, Vilarva told the newspaper that he searched Santos’ name online and discovered that Brazilian police wanted him. 

In 2008, The Times reported that Santos, then 19, was accused of stealing a checkbook of the man his mother was caring for.

Citing Brazilian court records, the newspaper said that Santos used the checkbook to make fraudulent purchases. Two years later, The Times said, he confessed to the crime and was charged, but the case remains unresolved.

This revelation was the breaking point for Santos’ ex-boyfriend, he told the newspaper. “I woke up in the morning, and I packed my stuff all in trash bags, and I called my father, and I left,” he said.

Vilarva told The Times he was gullible for believing Santos, who was elected in November, and added that he is worried about the impact the politician’s apparent propensity for lying could have if he becomes — and remains — an elected official.

“I would be scared to have someone like that in charge — having so much power in his hands,” he said, per The Times.

Insider was unable to reach Santos for comment.

Prosecutors in New York said Wednesday they are investigating Santos.

“The numerous fabrications and inconsistencies associated with Congressman-Elect Santos are nothing short of stunning,” said Anne T. Donnelly, a Republican and district attorney in Nassau County, according to The Associated Press. 

“The residents of Nassau County and other parts of the third district must have an honest and accountable representative in Congress,” Donnelly said, adding: “If a crime was committed in this county, we will prosecute it.”

Read More 

TheStreet 

A hearing for the fallen king of crypto is scheduled for January 3 in Manhattan federal court.

Sam Bankman-Fried will start 2023 as he ended 2022: in court. 

The fallen former king of crypto is at the heart of one of the biggest scandals the young blockchain-powered financial services industry has ever seen.

The regulators filed a series of criminal and civil charges against Bankman-Fried, whom they accuse of alleged fraud, on December 13.

Justice Department prosecutors filed eight criminal counts against the former trader. Four of the charges, including conspiracy to commit wire fraud on customers and lenders and wire fraud, indicate that the alleged acts began as early as 2019. This is the year FTX was founded.

“Bankman-Fried was orchestrating a massive, yearslong fraud, diverting billions of dollars of the trading platform’s customer funds for his own personal benefit and to help grow his crypto empire,” the SEC alleges in its civil complaint.

Bankman-Fried’s crypto empire imploded within days on November 11 after being at the center of the crypto industry. This empire was made up of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange and its sister company Alameda Research, a hedge fund that also served as a trading platform for institutional investors.

The regulators are trying to piece together what happened, and especially how  FTX, which was valued at $32 billion in February, could implode overnight. 

Not Guilty

A hearing is scheduled for January 3 in federal court in Manhattan. During this hearing, Bankman-Fried should plead not guilty to the eight offenses, according to several media including the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg News. 

If there’s no last-minute flip-flop, this line of defense wouldn’t be a real surprise, and doesn’t mean Bankman-Fried couldn’t later change position. A no guilty plea should lead to the start of the discovery process, which would allow Bankman-Fried and his lawyers to have access to certain evidence that the government has collected against him. 

Some of this evidence is the testimony of two former lieutenants of Bankman-Fried, who agreed to cooperate in exchange for the leniency from the regulators.

Zixiao (Gary) Wang, 29, FTX co-founder and former Chief Technology Officer, and Caroline Ellison, 28, the former CEO of Alameda Research, pled guilty, on Dec. 19, to multiple federal fraud charges and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.

“I knew that it was wrong,” Ellison said about her actions, according to a transcript of her plea hearing released on Dec. 23. This is what she told a federal judge in Manhattan on Monday in entering her guilty plea, according to a transcript of the hearing that was unsealed.

“I knew what I was doing was wrong,” Wang also said, according to the transcript of his guilty plea.

As a crypto exchange, FTX executed orders for clients, taking their cash and buying cryptocurrencies on their behalf. FTX acted as a custodian, holding the clients’ crypto.

A $250 Million Bail Package 

FTX then used its clients’ crypto assets, through its sister company’s Alameda Research trading arm, to generate cash through borrowing or market-making. The cash FTX borrowed was used to bail out other crypto institutions in summer 2022.

At the same time, FTX was using the cryptocurrency it was issuing, FTT, as collateral on its balance sheet. This was a significant exposure, due to the concentration risk and the volatility of FTT.

The insolvency of FTX stemmed from a liquidity shortfall when clients attempted to withdraw funds from the platform. The shortfall appears to have been the result of Bankman-Fried allegedly transferring $10 billion of customer funds from FTX to Alameda Research.

“I made a lot of mistakes,” Bankman-Fried said during his first interview with the New York Times/DealBook on Nov. 30. “There are things I would give anything to be able to do over again. I didn’t ever try to commit fraud on anyone.”

SBF was extradited to the United States on Dec. 21 by the authorities of the Bahamas, where he lived and where FTX is headquartered. He was released after his parents, both law professors at Stanford, signed a $250 million recognizance bond pledging their California home as collateral. Two other friends with significant assets also signed, according to news reports.

Read More 

Business Insider 

Michael Burry.

Jim Spellman/Getty Images

Michael Burry said he expects the US to slump into recession in 2023 and inflation to spike again.
The “Big Short” investor predicted inflation would decline overall in 2023 as the economy weakened.
The Fed and US government would respond with stimulatory policy, causing inflation to jump again, he said.

The US economy is poised to suffer a recession in 2023 as well as another inflation spike, Michael Burry has said.

The investor of “The Big Short” fame, known for his dire but often accurate predictions, issued the gloomy forecast in a tweet posted Sunday.

“Inflation peaked. But it is not the last peak of this cycle,” he said. “We are likely to see CPI lower, possibly negative in 2H 2023, and the US in recession by any definition.”

He added: “Fed will cut and government will stimulate. And we will have another inflation spike. It’s not hard.”

Inflation surged to a 40-year high of 9.1% in June and remained above 7% in November, well ahead of the US Federal Reserve’s 2% target. The central bank reacted by hiking its base interest rate from near-zero to more than 4% and has signaled it will peak above 5% in 2023.

Higher interest rates aim to dampen upward pressure on prices by discouraging spending, investing, and hiring. However, they can simultaneously erode corporate profits and sap economic growth, leading to declines in asset prices and ultimately, recession.

Burry’s view appears to be that inflation will cool and the economy will weaken in 2023, prompting the Fed to cut rates and the government to boost spending in an effort to spur growth — which, in turn, will drive up demand and prompt inflation to rise again.

The Scion Asset Management chief warned back in April 2020 that the post-pandemic reopening of the economy could spark higher inflation. He also flagged last year that American households were putting away less money each month, racking up debt, and were on track to virtually exhaust their savings by December — raising the prospect of a slump in consumer spending and a prolonged recession.

Burry is best known for his billion-dollar wager against the mid-2000s housing bubble, which was immortalized in the book and movie “The Big Short.” He also bet against Elon Musk’s Tesla and Cathie Wood’s flagship Ark Innovation fund last year, and inadvertently laid the groundwork for the meme-stock craze by investing in GameStop before the stock skyrocketed at the start of 2021.

Moreover, the Scion chief last summer sounded the alarm on the “greatest speculative bubble of all time in all things,” warning buyers of meme stocks and cryptocurrencies that they were barreling towards the “mother of all crashes.”

Here’s a screenshot of Burry’s latest tweet:

Twitter/@michaeljburry

Read more: A Michael Burry expert breaks down what makes the ‘Big Short’ investor special. He also revisits Burry’s iconic bet against the housing bubble, and his GameStop, Tesla, and Ark wagers.

Read More 

Business Insider 

Former President Donald Trump, left, Mary Trump, right, in a composite image.

Chet Strange/Getty Images

Donald Trump’s niece, Mary, told a podcast that she grew up listening to racism in her family.
She said that her mother and her father, Donald’s brother, didn’t have any Black friends.
Mary has previously accused the Trump family of using the N-Word and antisemitic slurs.

Mary Trump, the niece of former President Donald Trump, said Friday that she grew up listening to her family making racist remarks, Newsweek was the first to report.

“I would listen to the racism in my family, “she said while appearing on “The Karen Hunter Show” podcast. “I didn’t know what the hell they were talking about.”

The author and psychologist added that “demeaning this entire class of people” was worlds apart from her own experience.

Mary didn’t specify any of the demeaning racist remarks. However, she told The Washington Post in July 2020 that the Trump family often used racist and antisemitic slurs when she was a child. “Growing up, it was sort of normal to hear them use the N-word or use antisemitic expressions,” she said.

Speaking to Rachel Maddow on MSNBC that month, Mary also claimed that she’d heard the former president personally use the N-word and antisemitic slurs — which he refuted at the time.

“I didn’t share their ideas about race and Judaism at all,” she told Maddow, per USA Today. “But you know, when you grow up with that being perfectly normal, you don’t really think twice about it.”

In the podcast interview with Karen Hunter, Mary spoke of how her relatives interacted far less than she did with other races.

Her parents “didn’t have any Black friends,” she said. Mary’s father, Fred Trump Jr., was the younger brother of the former president.

And Mary said her grandparents, real estate developer and businessman Fred Trump Sr. and Mary Anne Trump, the parents of the former president, lived in a predominantly upper-middle-class neighborhood — Jamaica Estates — that was scandalized when “the first Italian family moved in.”

Of her childhood, however, she told the podcast: “I walked to the subway every day to go to school, and I walked home, and I passed by shops that were Black-owned. Most of the people I interacted with in stores and stuff were Black.”

Mary added that she “grew up with this unformed notion that racism was just absolute nonsense and anybody who subscribed to it was an idiot at best.”

Trump’s niece has become a fierce critic of the former president in recent years.

She has accused him of being a “fascist” and a “loser.” The former president, in turn, referred to her as a “seldom-seen niece” and a “mess.”

Read More 

Business Insider 

Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen and Elon Musk.

Kimberly White/Michael Gonzalez via Getty Images

Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen has discussed Elon Musk’s plans for Twitter.
Musk has previously discussed making Twitter a “town square” where vital matters could be debated.
Haugen said he should open source its algorithms to facilitate that goal, per NBC News.

Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen said if Elon Musk wants Twitter to be a public square, he should make its algorithm open source.

Musk had previously discussed making Twitter a digital town square “where matters vital to the future of humanity are debated.”

Haugen discussed Musk’s views in a special edition of NBC News’ Meet the Press on how social media is shaping politics on Sunday morning. She said to journalist Chuck Todd: “One of the most important things Elon Musk could do to prove that he wants to have the public square is he could publish the algorithms.”

“Open source it,” she added. “He’d have more help – it’d be cheaper for him. It’d be more profitable.”

Musk has been outspoken about one of the reasons he bought Twitter: giving “power to the people.” He also explained in a memo shortly after sealing the $44 billion deal that he acquired it to promote dialogue, which he believed had been lost.

Musk wants Twitter to also be the “most accurate source of information about the world.” In the weeks following the acquisition, however, he reduced the number of people who were primarily in charge of dealing with content moderation.

Haugen is a former product manager on Facebook’s civic integrity team. She went public in 2021 and leaked masses of internal documents illuminating decisions, which she told Congress had led to “more division, more harm, more lies, more threats, and more combat.”

In the interview with NBC News, Haugen also said social-media companies were generally opposed to government intervention since it could decrease profits by at least 20%. 

“Facebook is scared,” Haugen said. “If we actually had transparency, if we actually had accountability, they would not be a company with 35% profit margins. They’d be a company with 15% profit margins.” 

In a subsequent multi-part investigation, known as The Facebook Files, The Wall Street Journal reported that Instagram worsens body image issues for teens; Facebook saw pre-teens as an untapped market; and it has a secret system to allow 5.8 million users, including politicians and celebrities, to skirt some of its content rules.

The whistleblower previously said the company wouldn’t be able to recover until CEO Mark Zuckerberg stepped down. 

Meta and Twitter didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment by Insider, made outside normal working hours. 

Read More 

Business Insider 

Plan your exit.

Yuri_Arcurs/Getty Images

Quiet quitting can mean doing your job without caring much about it.
Rage quitting involves leaving suddenly after frustrations have built up.
Choose an approach based on factors like your performance and your mental health.

There was an era when quitting your job meant having an awkward conversation with your boss and giving your two weeks’ notice.

But times have changed. “Quitting” has taken on many new (and confusing, if you’re over 30 like I am) connotations, including quiet quitting, rage quitting, and good old-fashioned leaving to pursue another opportunity.

So if you’re feeling trapped at work, you have options. And knowing you have options — beyond staying miserable or risking your livelihood by leaving — can be freeing.

Below you’ll find the case for quiet quitting, rage quitting, and finding a new job. To be sure, everyone’s career is unique and the following advice might not apply perfectly to you. Consider this a general guide to getting unstuck.

Before you begin, figure out why you’re unhappy

Figure out why you hate your job. Is your boss rude? Your assignments dull? Your schedule unpredictable?

When I interviewed Gretchen Rubin, the best-selling author of “The Happiness Project,” she said, “Once you actually pinpoint the precise nature of what’s driving you crazy, it’s often a lot easier to fix it than you think.” A rude boss and boring assignments are arguably easier to tackle than a nebulous blob of misery.

You’ll also have a better sense of which type of quitting (if any) makes the most sense.

Consider quiet quitting if … you have other pressing priorities in your life right now

In 2022, I published a book to help professionals who feel stuck in their careers but can’t realistically make a big change. Several people told me their relationship to work had changed over the course of their careers — and they were more willing to invest in their careers during different life stages.

One man with a toddler said he used to be more professionally “ambitious” and interested in networking opportunities that would help him advance in his career. Now he’s more inclined to spend time with his family outside work hours, even if that means missing out on some of those opportunities.

This man does what’s required of him at his job, which he’s held for more than a decade and which has generous PTO and remote-work policies, but rarely more than that. By some definitions, that bare-minimum approach epitomizes quiet quitting.

Consider rage quitting if … your job is hurting your mental health

It’s considered professional to give your employer at least some notice before you leave. But if this job is causing or exacerbating issues such as anxiety or depression, it might not be worth adhering to those norms.

Rahkim Sabree, an entrepreneur, wrote for Insider that he quit his job as a banking program manager on the spot when “it started to take a toll on my mental health — I was angry, anxious, unfulfilled, and unhappy.”

Likewise, if you’re working in a toxic environment where leadership tolerates disrespect, unethical decisions, and exclusionary behaviors, you might be better off elsewhere.

Consider finding a new job if … you’re resentful and performing poorly

How is your frustration manifesting?

As Toni Thompson, the vice president of people strategy and operations at Etsy and the former senior vice president of people and talent at The Muse, told me in an Insider interview, you shouldn’t stay in your current role if “you’re suddenly not doing a good job, and you’ve become a bad teammate and a bad employee because you’re so frustrated.” 

That way, Thompson said, you’ll still leave a positive impression on your employer in case you ever want to work there again or ask them for a recommendation.

Whichever option you choose, remember that you can eventually make a different decision. Find the approach that works for now and reevaluate in a few months to see what you’ve learned about your job — and yourself.

Read More 

TheStreet 

The Securities Commission of The Bahamas says it is holding these assets pending transfer to clients and creditors.

This is news that will no doubt please the customers and creditors of Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto empire. 

The authorities of the Bahamas, where the disgraced former emperor of the crypto space lived and where FTX was headquartered, have just announced that they have seized significant assets from the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange.

The Securities Commission of The Bahamas says it seized these assets as soon as Bankman-Fried, known by the initials SBF in the crypto industry, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy for his empire on November 11.

The regulator explains having seized the assets of FTX for security reasons so that they do not disappear mysteriously. 

Based on information provided by Sam Bankman-Fried to the regulator concerning the cyberattacks that took place on the systems of FTX, “the Commission determined that there was a significant risk of imminent dissipation as to the digital assets under the custody or control of FTXDM to the prejudice of its customers and creditors,” the authority said in a press release.

$3.5 Billion

“As a result, in the exercise of its regulatory powers, the Commission requested and obtained a Court order to safeguard the digital assets owned by or under the custody or control of FTXDM or its principals by transferring them to secure digital wallets under the exclusive control the Commission.”

On 12 November, the regulator said it, therefore, took the action of directing the transfer of all digital assets of under the custody or control of FTX valued at more than US$3.5 billion, based on market pricing at the time of transfer, to digital wallets controlled by the Commission for safekeeping. 

“The digital assets transferred on 12 November 2022 to digital wallets under the exclusive control the Commission are being held by the Commission on a temporary basis, until such time as The Bahamas,” the regulator says.

It added that: “Supreme Court directs the Commission to deliver them to the customers and creditors who own them.”

The regulator, however, warned that “while certain token protocols may require the burning of old tokens and the simultaneous minting of new replacement tokens to effect transfer, in no case, did the process involve the creation of any additional tokens.”

The Bahamian regulator’s announcements are good for FTX’s customers and creditors, but it is not certain that they will recover this money immediately because FTX’s bankruptcy is managed in the United States according to American law, while there is a liquidation of the company in the Bahamas. 

In addition, the regulators have made it known that there was comingling of FTX’s customers’ funds with those of FTX and its sister company Alameda Research, a hedge fund that also acts as a trading platform for institutional investors. Alameda was also part of Bankman-Fried’s empire.

Allegations

FTX, which was founded in May 2019, was unable to meet withdrawal requests from worried and panicked customers. Bankman-Fried is accused of loaning $10 billion in funds from FTX clients to Alameda Research when the two companies were supposed to be independent.

The former trader is facing a series of criminal and civil charges from regulators. SBF was extradited to the United States on Dec. 21 by the authorities of the Bahamas.

He was released after his parents, both law professors at Stanford, signed a $250 million recognizance bond pledging their California home as collateral. Two other friends with significant assets also signed, according to news reports.

“Bankman-Fried was orchestrating a massive, yearslong fraud, diverting billions of dollars of the trading platform’s customer funds for his own personal benefit and to help grow his crypto empire,” the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) alleges in its civil complaint.

Read More 

Business Insider 

EU sanctions on Russian oil products are set to take effect on February 5.

Jason Kozlowski / EyeEm

Oil markets may face headwinds in 2023 as fresh Western sanctions and a price cap on Russian oil come into effect. 
Analysts expect a slump in Russian crude output to squeeze global supplies, putting upward pressure on oil prices.
Demand from China is expected to pick up as zero-COVID restrictions ease, adding to the tightness in energy markets. 

Brace for a drop in Russian oil output and a spike in global crude prices next year as fresh Western sanctions against Moscow take hold and with China’s energy demand set to rebound, three industry analysts told Insider. 

The next round of European Union sanctions on Russian oil products are due to take effect on February 5. It comes in response to the country’s invasion of Ukraine, and will affect refined petroleum products such as diesel.

It follows an EU embargo on seaborne imports of Russian crude effective December 5 and a G7 move to cap the country’s oil at $60 a barrel. Both measures aim to blunt Moscow’s export revenue while still keeping Russian crude flowing through global markets to prevent a supply shock.

According to analysts, the next round of sanctions — combined with a rebound in Chinese demand as zero-Covid restrictions ease — will likely squeeze oil markets and push prices higher. 

Russian crude output could fall by 1 million barrels a day

“We expect the European ban on seaborne Russian crude and refined products (to come into force on February 5) to result in a drop of Russian production of at least 1 million barrels per day in 2023, with Russia having difficulties in finding alternative markets,” said Giovanni Staunovo, a commodity analyst at UBS Global Wealth Management.

Indeed, Russia has threatened it would slash production by up to 700,000 barrels a day in retaliation to the G7 price cap, suggesting another potential hit to the country’s oil output. 

The nation has been rerouting increasing volumes of its oil to India and China amid rising political tensions with Europe, one of its biggest markets, due to the war in Ukraine. In the week leading up to December 9, Moscow sent 89% of its crude, amounting to about 3 million barrels a day, to Asia.

But shipments to Asia are now proving more difficult as European sanctions make it tougher for traders to find enough insured vessels to transport Russian crude.

According to Rystad Energy, however, the risk of a sharp decline in Russian crude production was more acute in mid-2022, when global supplies were tighter.

“As long as US shale performs and delivers growth, we see the market moving towards a more normal equilibrium,” Louise Dickson, a senior analyst at Rystad Energy told Insider.

Crude prices could climb past $100 a barrel 

With global supplies expected to get squeezed, crude prices will likely soar past $100 a barrel next year, according to Saxo Bank’s Ole Hansen and UBS Global Wealth’s Staunovo. 

“The embargo on seaborne crude from now and fuel products from February will likely have a price-supportive impact on markets,” said Hansen, head of commodity strategy at Saxo. The supply disruptions should add to the “expected tightness when demand picks up in China following the current virus surge,” he added.

Those risks raise the likelihood of oil prices topping $100 a barrel, according to Hansen.

“Following a soft first quarter, I see the price of Brent returning to a $90-100 dollar range. What happens later will depend on the strength of an incoming economic slowdown,” he added. UBS’s Staunovo echoed his view. 

Oil prices have trended upward since mid-December after months of declines as supply comes under pressure following EU sanctions on seaborne Russian crude and threats by Moscow that it will slash production in retaliation to the G7-imposed price cap. 

Brent crude, the international benchmark, has risen by more than 10% from this year’s lows reached earlier in December, standing at around $83 a barrel at last check on Friday.

“The real test will come on 5 February with the implementation of a products ban,” Rystad’s Dickson said. “A loss of Russian refined products in Europe will pull extra on US products at a time when refinery dynamics are still quite tight, as evidenced by last summer’s gasoline price surge in the US and diesel crunch in Europe,” she added.

Read More