Connect with us

News

Italy’s biggest refinery in crisis three years after sale by Russia’s Lukoil

Published

on

Italy’s biggest refinery in crisis three years after sale by Russia’s Lukoil

Italy’s largest refinery, which was sold by Moscow-based Lukoil after EU sanctions cut it off from Russian oil, is in crisis as the Greek billionaire who is now its majority investor and commodity giant Trafigura clash over the terms of a crude supply arrangement.

GOI Energy bought the ISAB plant in the Sicilian town of Priolo in 2023 with support from Trafigura in a last-minute deal that Franco-Israeli mining tycoon Beny Steinmetz helped arrange. The sale was approved by the Italian government but shrouded in mystery, with neither the buyer nor Rome disclosing the identity of its shareholders.

Documents seen by the Financial Times show that the largest investor in GOI’s controlling fund, Argus, at the time of the transaction was George Economou, a tycoon whose TMS Tankers was one of the biggest seaborne transporters of Russian oil following the 2022 full-blown invasion of Ukraine.

GOI and Trafigura gazumped a bid by rival trading house Vitol and US private equity group Crossbridge Energy Partners, and secured the deal despite opposition from the US government.

Economou invested in the refinery alongside Steinmetz and former Trafigura executive Michael Bobrov, according to the documents. Relations between the three men have since soured over money and the terms of a 10-year oil supply and marketing agreement signed with Trafigura, according to six people familiar with the situation.

Advertisement

Economou has argued that Trafigura is to blame for the refinery’s problems, complaining in meetings that the supply and offtake deal is overly favourable to the trading group, allowing it to protect its profits while the facility operates at a loss. Trafigura has said the refinery requires more investment to upgrade operations amid difficult market conditions.

Increased refinery operating costs resulting from higher prices of gas and carbon offsets are weighing on margins across Europe, making it difficult for all but the most efficient refineries to break even.

Moscow-based Lukoil sold the refinery in Sicily after EU sanctions cut it off from Russian oil © Natalia Kolesnikova/AFP/Getty Images

The infighting could threaten the survival of a facility that provides a fifth of Italy’s refining capacity, employs about 1,000 people directly and supports another 8,500 jobs in the local area.

It has also led to criticism of the Italian government, which approved the sale to GOI even though its largest investors had no experience of owning or operating refineries.

“These capital-intensive businesses require heavy investments, but they suffer volatile cash flow so the financial soundness of the buyer is a key element,” said Alan Gelder, vice-president of refining, chemicals and oil markets at Wood Mackenzie.

Advertisement

“In hindsight one could say the Italian government should have chosen another alternative than selling to [GOI Energy].”

Under the terms of the deal, GOI acquired the refinery while Trafigura agreed to provide working capital to fund its operations and, according to two people familiar with the agreement, paid GOI an upfront €30mn fee to supply the plant with crude oil and sell the refined product it produces for 10 years.

“Trafigura’s commercial arrangements with ISAB are at arm’s length and on market-based terms, in line with similar commercial agreements around the world,” Trafigura said in a statement to the FT.

“In difficult market conditions, the Priolo refinery needs substantial performance improvements and further investment to remain competitive. We have offered our assistance to ISAB and the Italian government to help secure a sustainable future for this important asset.”

ISAB lodged an application this year with Sicilian authorities to restructure the business through an out-of-court “negotiated settlement of a business crisis”.

Advertisement

Economou hopes to use the process to force a renegotiation or cancellation of the contract with Trafigura, according to two people familiar with the matter. Economou has also considered selling the refinery but the supply agreement has proved a major sticking point in conversations with prospective buyers, according to people familiar with the conversations.

At the time of the acquisition, Economou was presented to the Italian government as the ultimate beneficial owner of a Cypriot entity that held 52 per cent of the Argus Fund subunit, which controlled 70 per cent of GOI, according to the documents seen by the FT.

The rest of Argus Fund subunit was owned by an entity controlled by two foundations whose beneficiaries included Steinmetz’s children, the documents show.

Steinmetz’s connection to the refinery and his role in negotiating the deal with Italian authorities was revealed by the FT in 2023. 

In 2023 Economou decided to loan money to GOI Energy so it could repay an outstanding debt with Lukoil. In January last year, after GOI failed to repay the loan, he opted to convert it into equity and dilute the other shareholders, the documents show. The 71-year-old now controls 99 per cent of GOI’s shares through a complex fund structure.

Advertisement

GOI paid about €180mn for the plant, significantly outbidding Vitol and Crossbridge, which had offered roughly €55mn, according to two people familiar with the terms of the bids. They estimate that it also paid several hundred million euros for the oil on site at the time of the acquisition.

The Italian government approved the investment under the so-called gold power rule, which gives it the right to veto deals or impose requirements over the purchase of strategic assets.

At the time, Italian officials said they were reassured by the involvement of Trafigura and Bobrov, who is also an investor, alongside Steinmetz’s son-in-law, in Israel’s largest refinery. GOI had also offered reassurances about maintaining jobs and production levels, they said at the time.

News

California Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell

Published

on

California Candidates to Appear in First Major Debate After Swalwell

Candidates in California’s volatile race for governor will meet Wednesday night for the first televised debate since Eric Swalwell dropped out, each looking to seize momentum in the tight contest.

The debate, being held at the television studio of KRON4 in San Francisco, will include four Democrats and two Republicans who are tightly bunched in recent polls, with many voters still undecided less than six weeks before the June 2 primary.

Mr. Swalwell, a Democrat, had just begun to emerge as a Democratic front-runner when his campaign swiftly collapsed after he was accused of sexual assault in news reports on April 10.

Candidates have taken relatively few risks so far in debates around the state, but every candidate is now eyeing a chance to jump to the front of the pack.

“Even though we have seen some movement in the last couple of weeks, it continues to be a fairly crowded, fractured field,” said Sara Sadhwani, an assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. “So candidates need to be able to grab attention in a debate like this.”

Advertisement

The debate comes as Xavier Becerra, a Democrat and former California attorney general, has enjoyed a surge of support in polls since Mr. Swalwell dropped out of the race.

Mr. Becerra and Matt Mahan, the mayor of San Jose, did not originally meet the threshold to participate in Wednesday’s debate when Mr. Swalwell was running. But they both qualified after receiving enough support in a follow-up poll that debate organizers commissioned once Mr. Swalwell had dropped out.

The other Democrats scheduled to participate are Tom Steyer, a former hedge fund manager, and Katie Porter, a former congresswoman, each of whom have been polling near the top of the Democratic field for several weeks. The Republicans in the debate are Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host who has been endorsed by President Trump, and Chad Bianco, the sheriff of Riverside County.

All candidates run on the same ballot in California’s nonpartisan primary, with the two who receive the most votes advancing to the general election, regardless of their party affiliation. The large number of Democratic candidates has created fear among state party leaders that their voters could splinter, potentially allowing two Republicans to sweep the primary in this heavily Democratic state.

The odds of that happening have decreased since Mr. Swalwell dropped out and another Democrat, Betty Yee, withdrew on Monday. But Rusty Hicks, the chairman of the California Democratic Party, still believes there are too many Democrats in the race and has urged those lagging in polls to end their campaigns. (The actual ballot will include 61 candidates for governor, most of whom are completely unknown to voters.)

Advertisement

The messy race to succeed Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for re-election because of term limits, has played out as the most unpredictable contest California has seen in a generation. It has attracted a sprawling field but no one with the star power of former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger or the political might of Mr. Newsom or former Gov. Jerry Brown.

Much of California’s Democratic establishment is still figuring out whom to back in the turbulent race.

Mr. Newsom has not endorsed anyone, saying he trusts voters to elect someone “who reflects the values and direction Californians believe in.” Representative Nancy Pelosi, the influential former House speaker from San Francisco, and Senator Alex Padilla also have not announced their favorites. Senator Adam Schiff endorsed Mr. Swalwell earlier this year but quickly withdrew his support after the accusations against him were published.

On Tuesday, Ms. Yee endorsed Mr. Steyer, praising his work to fight climate change and engage young voters. Mr. Steyer has swamped his competitors with a raft of advertising by pouring $134 million from his personal fortune into his campaign.

Also on Tuesday, Mr. Becerra, whose campaign had appeared to be flailing until Mr. Swalwell dropped out, received the endorsement of Robert Rivas, the Democratic speaker of the California State Assembly. Mr. Rivas said he had encouraged Mr. Becerra to run for governor because he was impressed by his work as California’s attorney general during President Trump’s first term.

Advertisement

“He understands both the policy and the politics,” Mr. Rivas said in an interview. “And he has a track record, in my opinion, of delivering results under pressure.”

The 90-minute debate on Wednesday begins at 7 p.m. PT and will be broadcast and streamed by KRON and other California stations.

Continue Reading

News

Here’s What the New Virginia House Map Looks Like

Published

on

Here’s What the New Virginia House Map Looks Like

Virginians approved a new congressional map on Tuesday that would aggressively gerrymander the state in the Democrats’ favor, giving the party as many as four more U.S. House seats.

The new map draws eight safely Democratic districts and two competitive districts that lean Democratic, according to a New York Times analysis of 2024 presidential results. It leaves just one safe Republican seat, compared with the five seats the G.O.P. holds on the current map.

The proposed map was drawn by Democratic state legislators and approved by Gov. Abigail Spanberger, a Democrat. It eliminates three Republican-held seats in part by slicing the densely populated suburbs in Arlington and Fairfax Counties and reallocating their overwhelmingly Democratic voters into five congressional districts, some stretching more than a hundred miles into Republican areas.

Perhaps the most extreme new district is the Seventh, which begins at the Potomac River and stretches to the west and south in a manner that resembles a pair of lobster claws. Several well-known Virginia Democrats have already announced their candidacies and begun campaigning in the district.

Reid J. Epstein contributed reporting.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges

Published

on

Southern Poverty Law Center indicted on federal fraud charges

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche speaks as FBI Director Kash Patel listens during a news conference at the Justice Department on Tuesday in Washington.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Jacquelyn Martin/AP

WASHINGTON — The Southern Poverty Law Center was indicted Tuesday on federal fraud charges alleging it improperly raised millions of dollars to pay informants to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan and other extremist groups, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said.

The Justice Department alleges the civil rights group defrauded donors by using their money to fund the very extremism it claimed to be fighting, with payments of at least $3 million between 2014 and 2023 to people affiliated with the Ku Klux Klan, the United Klans of America, the National Socialist Party of America and other extremist groups.

“The SPLC was not dismantling these groups. It was instead manufacturing the extremism it purports to oppose by paying sources to stoke racial hatred,” Blanche said.

Advertisement

The civil rights group faces charges including wire fraud, bank fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering in the case brought by the Justice Department in Alabama, where the organization is based.

The indictment came shortly after SPLC revealed the existence of a criminal investigation into its program to pay informants to infiltrate extremist groups and gather information on their activities. The group said the program was used to monitor threats of violence and the information was often shared with local and federal law enforcement.

SPLC CEO Bryan Fair said the organization “will vigorously defend ourselves, our staff, and our work.”

Blanche said the money was passed from the center through two different bank accounts before being loaded onto prepaid cards to give to the members of the extremist groups, which also included the National Socialist Movement and the Aryan Nations-affiliated Sadistic Souls Motorcycle Club. The group never disclosed to donors details of the informant program, he said.

“They’re required to under the laws associated with a nonprofit to have certain transparency and honesty in what they’re telling donors they’re going to spend money on and what their mission statement is and what they’re raising money doing,” he said.

Advertisement

The indictment includes details on at least nine unnamed informants were paid by the SPLC through a secret program that prosecutors say began in the 1980s. Within the SPLC, they were known as field sources or “the Fs,” according to the indictment. One informant was paid more than $1 million between 2014 and 2023 while affiliated with the neo-Nazi National Alliance, the indictment said. Another was the Imperial Wizard of the United Klans of America.

The SPLC said the program was kept quiet to protect the safety of informants.

“When we began working with informants, we were living in the shadow of the height of the Civil Rights Movement, which had seen bombings at churches, state-sponsored violence against demonstrators, and the murders of activists that went unanswered by the justice system,” Fair said. “There is no question that what we learned from informants saved lives.”

The center has been targeted by Republicans

The SPLC, which is based in Montgomery, Alabama, was founded in 1971 and used civil litigation to fight white supremacist groups. The nonprofit has become a popular target among Republicans who see it as overly leftist and partisan.

The investigation could add to concerns that Trump’s Republican administration is using the Justice Department to go after conservative opponents and his critics. It follows a number of other investigations into Trump foes that have raised questions about whether the law enforcement agency has been turned into a political weapon.

Advertisement

The SPLC has faced intense criticism from conservatives, who have accused it of unfairly maligning right-wing organizations as extremist groups because of their viewpoints. The center regularly condemns Trump’s rhetoric and policies around voting rights, immigration and other issues.

The center came under fresh scrutiny after the assassination last year of conservative activist Charlie Kirk brought renewed attention to its characterization of the group that Kirk founded and led. The center included a section on that group, Turning Point USA, in a report titled “The Year in Hate and Extremism 2024” that described the group as “A Case Study of the Hard Right in 2024.”

FBI Director Kash Patel said last year that the agency was severing its relationship with the center, which had long provided law enforcement with research on hate crime and domestic extremism. Patel said the center had been turned into a “partisan smear machine,” and he accused it of defaming “mainstream Americans” with its “hate map” that documents alleged anti-government and hate groups inside the United States.

House Republicans hosted a hearing centered on the SPLC in December, saying it coordinated efforts with President Joe Biden’s Democratic administration “to target Christian and conservative Americans and deprive them of their constitutional rights to free speech and free association.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending