Connect with us

Business

Support Grows to Have Russia Pay for Ukraine’s Rebuilding

Published

on

Support Grows to Have Russia Pay for Ukraine’s Rebuilding

When the World Financial institution launched its newest harm evaluation of war-torn Ukraine this week, it introduced that the worth of restoration and rebuilding had grown to $411 billion. What it didn’t say, although, was who would pay for it.

To Ukraine, the reply appears apparent: Confiscate the roughly $300 billion in Russian Central Financial institution property that Western banks have frozen because the invasion final yr. Because the battle grinds on, the concept has gained supporters.

The European Union has already declared its need to make use of the Kremlin’s bankroll to pay for reconstruction in Ukraine. On the urging of a handful of Japanese European and Baltic nations, the bloc convened a working group final month to evaluate the potential for grabbing that cash in addition to frozen property owned by non-public people who’ve run afoul of European sanctions.

“In precept, it’s clear-cut: Russia should pay for the reconstruction of Ukraine,” mentioned Sweden’s prime minister, Ulf Kristersson, who holds the presidency of the Council of the European Union.

On the identical time, he famous, turning that precept into follow is fraught. “This should be carried out in accordance with E.U. and worldwide regulation, and there may be at present no direct mannequin for this,” Mr. Kristersson mentioned.

Advertisement

The working group, which has a two-year mandate, is scheduled to fulfill in Brussels subsequent week.

Different high officers, in america and elsewhere, have sounded extra skeptical. After visiting Kyiv final month, Treasury Secretary Janet L. Yellen reiterated her warnings of formidable authorized obstacles. The Swiss authorities declared that confiscating non-public Russian property from banks would violate Switzerland’s Structure in addition to worldwide agreements.

The authorized debate is only one skein within the tangle of ethical, political and financial considerations that the potential seizure of Russia’s reserves poses.

Ms. Yellen and others have argued that seizing Russia’s accounts may undermine religion within the greenback, essentially the most extensively used forex for the world’s commerce and transactions. Overseas nations could be extra reluctant to maintain cash in U.S. banks or make investments, fearing that it could possibly be seized. On the identical time, consultants fear that such a transfer may put American and European property held in different nations at increased danger of expropriation sooner or later if there may be a global dispute.

There are additionally considerations that seizure would erode religion within the system of worldwide legal guidelines and agreements that Western governments have championed most vocally.

Advertisement

However Russia’s pummeling of Ukraine’s infrastructure, costs of battle crimes towards President Vladimir V. Putin, and the problem of compacting Russia economically when demand for its power and different exports stays excessive have helped the concept achieve floor.

Additionally, there may be the uncomfortable realization that the price of rebuilding Ukraine as soon as the battle is over will far outstrip the quantity that even rich allies like america and Europe could also be prepared to provide.

America, the European Union, Britain and different allies have funneled billions of {dollars} into Ukraine’s battle effort, in addition to tanks, missiles, ammunition, drones and different navy gear. And this week the Worldwide Financial Fund permitted its largest mortgage but — $15.6 billion — simply to maintain Ukraine’s battered economic system afloat.

However public assist for continued funding just isn’t inexhaustible.

“If it’s troublesome to get funding now for sustaining the infrastructure or housing, why is it going to be simpler to get funding later?” requested Tymofiy Mylovanov, the president of the Kyiv Faculty of Economics and a former authorities minister.

Advertisement

It’s laborious sufficient for Ukraine to get cash and gear “whereas we’re being killed,” Mr. Mylovanov mentioned. “As soon as we’re not being killed, we’ll have problem getting something.”

Laurence Tribe, a college professor of constitutional regulation at Harvard, has argued {that a} 1977 regulation, the Worldwide Emergency Financial Powers Act, provides the U.S. president the authority to confiscate sovereign Russian property and repurpose them for Ukraine.

The U.S. authorities beforehand seized Iraqi and Iranian property and redirected them to compensate victims of violence, settle lawsuits or present monetary help.

Mr. Tribe concedes that calculations in regards to the ripple impact on the greenback or invested property will finally matter extra to policymakers than authorized ones. However he finds these broader political considerations unpersuasive.

“It’s loopy to argue that it’s extra destabilizing to have property seized than to have wars of aggression,” Mr. Tribe mentioned in an interview on Friday. “The survival of the worldwide economic system is much extra threatened by the way in which Russia behaved” than by any monetary retaliation.

Advertisement

And, he added, taking billions of {dollars} is far more significant both as a deterrent or punishment than bringing battle crime costs.

Different distinguished voices in america have endorsed the notion. Lawrence H. Summers, a former Treasury secretary; Robert B. Zoellick, a former president of the World Financial institution and U.S. commerce consultant; and Philip D. Zelikow, a historian at College of Virginia and a former State Division counselor, made their case this week in an opinion piece in The Washington Put up.

“Transferring frozen Russian reserves can be morally proper, strategically sensible and politically expedient,” they wrote.

Just a few nations along with Ukraine have taken steps to pry free international property owned by Russian people and entities and use the cash for reconstruction. In December, the Canadian authorities started the method of seizing $26 million owned by the Russian oligarch Roman Abramovich after passing a regulation easing the forfeiture of personal Russian property from people who’re beneath sanctions.

A federal decide in Manhattan gave the go-ahead final month to confiscate $5.4 million from one other Russian businessman dealing with sanctions, Konstantin Malofeev. And Estonia can also be in search of to go laws that might give the federal government there related powers.

Advertisement

However Mr. Tribe, Mr. Summers and others argue that the primary focus ought to be not on seizing non-public property, which might be legally far more sophisticated and time-consuming, however on the tons of of billions owned by Russia’s central financial institution.

Wherever the cash comes from, the invoice retains rising. Over the previous yr, Ukraine’s economic system has shrunk by a 3rd. The battle has pushed greater than seven million folks into poverty, the World Financial institution reported, and reversed 15 years of growth progress.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

Netflix beefs up film ranks, hiring 'Bad Boys for Life' producer

Published

on

Netflix beefs up film ranks, hiring 'Bad Boys for Life' producer

“Bad Boys for Life” producer Doug Belgrad will join Netflix as its vice president of film as the streaming giant continues to beef up its movie ranks following a major shakeup.

A longtime Sony Pictures executive, Belgrad was involved in nearly all the movie studio’s live-action intellectual property, including the “Spider-Man” franchise, “Ghostbusters” and “Jumanji.” In 2016, after leaving Sony, he founded his own film and TV production and financing company called 2.0.

The Culver City-based firm has co-financed such movies as “Peter Rabbit,” “Peter Rabbit 2: The Runaway” and “Zombieland: Double Tap,” all of which had Belgrad attached as an executive producer.

“As an executive and producer, I’ve been fortunate to work with many of the world’s most talented filmmakers and performers,” Belgrad said in a statement. “There is no better place to continue that work than Netflix, whose global reach and resources are unmatched.”

The move comes just months after Netflix hired producer Dan Lin to run the company’s film division, which has seen tremendous growth in production and release of original movies. Lin replaced Scott Stuber, the former Universal Pictures executive who guided Netflix’s movie slate for years, resulting in tent poles including “Red Notice” and Oscar winners such as “Roma.”

Advertisement

In a statement, Lin praised Belgrad’s years of experience.

“We will be leaning on Doug’s great creative instincts, his eye for talent, and his deep relationships across the filmmaking and talent community,” he said.

After Belgrad moves to Netflix, his 2.0 production and financing company will be led by current chief financial officer Zack Conroy and Sophie Cassidy, executive vice president of production.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Erewhon sues city to stop Sportsmen's Lodge development in Studio City

Published

on

Erewhon sues city to stop Sportsmen's Lodge development in Studio City

The owners of Erewhon have filed an environmental lawsuit against the city of Los Angeles, the latest attempt by the upscale supermarket chain to stop the planned demolition of Sportsmen’s Lodge hotel in Studio City to make way for a new apartment complex.

Erewhon operates a store next to the defunct hotel and previously joined with local residents, union officials and others in opposition to a 520-unit residential mixed use development planned to replace the inn that was known to generations of San Fernando Valley residents.

Plans for the new development took a leap forward last month when the City Council voted 13 to 1 to deny an appeal of the project filed by Erewon’s owners and others, clearing the way for Midwood Investment & Development to demolish the aged hotel at Ventura Boulevard and Coldwater Canyon Avenue.

Midwood is Erewhon’s landlord, having built in 2021 the Shops at Sportsmen’s Lodge, an outdoor mall where Erewhon is the anchor tenant among other stores, restaurants and an Equinox gym. The mall replaced a banquet facility that served as a local social center where couples got married and families shared big occasions such as bar mitzvahs.

The event center and a restaurant opened in 1946 and the hotel in 1962. The hotel permanently closed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Advertisement

The landlord got city permission to knock down the 190-room hotel and build the Residences at Sportsmen’s Lodge, which would have 520 apartments, including 78 units of subsidized affordable housing. It would include ground-floor stores and restaurants intended to meld with the Shops at Sportsmen’s Lodge.

Prior to the recent City Council vote, Erewhon, the Studio City Residents Assn. and Unite Here Local 11, which represents hotel workers, sought to stop the project by appealing aspects of the city’s review and approval process.

Some opponents argued that the hotel should be preserved. It was one of the first to unionize in the San Fernando Valley and one of the first union hotels in Los Angeles. Others were concerned about the project’s 97-foot height, the construction noise and the environmental impact.

After the appeals were rejected, Erewhon’s parent company last week filed a lawsuit in Superior Court demanding that the project approvals be rescinded because the city allegedly failed to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act as well as other state and local laws. The environmental law in part is intended to increase the public’s awareness of the potential environmental effects of proposed developments and other projects.

The city violated the act by forgoing an exhaustive Environmental Impact Report, or EIR, in favor of a less rigorous assessment, the lawsuit said.

Advertisement

Proponents of the development say it would bring housing to this section of Studio City, which is being targeted for a flurry of new development. Across the river, private school Harvard-Westlake is planning to build an extensive athletic facility.

Representatives of Erewhon and Midwood didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

Continue Reading

Business

Where every cent of $1 goes at one L.A. restaurant, explained

Published

on

Where every cent of $1 goes at one L.A. restaurant, explained

My industry has always been as difficult as it is magical. In the post-pandemic era, challenges are categorically higher.

The threat to restaurants during the pandemic was obvious; it was a given that many wouldn’t come out the other side. In 2024, restaurants are back! No, restaurants are dying! No, restaurants are (sometimes) busy! It is whiplash, day to day.

For many, including my restaurant, Botanica, solvency is more elusive than ever due to the elevated cost of doing business. Since opening Botanica nearly seven years ago, our labor costs have risen 40% for hourly workers and 25% for salaried management, the result of minimum-wage increases and market-rate pay increases. Our rent has risen 17%. Our sales, on the other hand, have grown only 2.3%.

Advertisement

Obviously, this creates a near-impossible status quo. In our industry, there are no mechanisms for alleviating costs other than trimming spending on goods and labor.

In other words: There is no way to balance the books without compromising the quality, vision and values that define a business like ours. There are no tax breaks on costly insurance policies or credit card processing fees. And if we were to pass the costs on to our customers, we’d be compromising the vision and values that make us what we are. It’s an absolute conundrum.

Our way of doing business is under threat. From frequent conversations with restaurateur friends (including my co-founders of Regarding Her, a nonprofit focused on female food-industry leaders), I know that what Botanica is navigating at the moment is far from unique.

Botanica co-owner Heather Sperling lean against a wall, holding a glass of wine, at her restaurant

Botanica co-owner Heather Sperling at her restaurant in Silver Lake. For many restaurants, “Solvency is more elusive than ever due to the elevated cost of doing business.”

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Why does this matter? Neighborhood-oriented restaurants are vital to communities and economies. They are meaningful gathering spots and dependable local employers. They support numerous other businesses: cleaners, farmers, coffee roasters, winemakers, equipment technicians, etc. They’re small and personal, and thus are approachable and accountable in ways that larger businesses aren’t. They’re often run by owners and managers who care deeply about their people, their neighborhood and their impact — even more than they care about their bottom line.

I know this because Emily Fiffer (Botanica’s co-owner) and I are among these people. And, moreover, we’re friends with dozens of like-minded owners across L.A. and beyond.

Eating at a place like Botanica might feel indulgent. Dishes on the spring menu range in price from $14 for marinated bean toast $36 for Baja striped bass. But from our perspective, the purpose of our business is not just to provide a nice evening of beautifully prepared, local, sustainable produce and natural wine. Our goal is to run a business with the most positive possible impact on our community, economy and environment — a business that embodies what we call “nourishing hospitality.”

There’s an economic concept called “the multiplier effect,” which describes how the effect of spending is greater than the original money spent. While every dollar you spend ripples through the economy in some way, restaurants surely must provide among the best bang for your buck, so to speak.

So one day I sat down to try to calculate exactly how this works with our model, and I landed on a startling figure.

Advertisement

Of every $1 spent by a customer at Botanica in 2023, $1.005 went back out the door.

Of that, 86.7 cents went toward “the good stuff” — meaning people, businesses and causes that it feels good to be supporting; 53.2 cents pays for the livelihoods of 50 staff members (including insurance, benefits and hefty payroll taxes); 26.2 cents buys products from a sensational web of farmers, purveyors and makers doing ethical, sustainability-focused work, who themselves employ countless passionate individuals; and 7.3 cents pays for a cadre of small businesses in supporting roles: our cleaning crew, florist, laundry services, a cavalcade of local equipment repair people, the family-run supplier of our recyclable and compostable to-go and market packaging, and so on.

A spread of food on a wooden table.

Two diners share a spread during tinned-fish happy hour at Botanica restaurant in Silver Lake.

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

The colorful tinned fish boxes at Botanica restaurant's marketplace.

The tinned fish display at Botanica. The restaurant also has a market stocked with house-made goods and products from local, largely women-owned businesses.

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

And then 13.8 cents goes to occupancy costs (rent, utilities and trash/recycling/compost pickup); administrative costs (office supplies, our accountant, various apps and tools essential to operations, phone and internet, etc.); and the cost of credit card processing — 3.1 cents I really wish we could spend elsewhere!

The national average profit margin for independent restaurants is regularly cited to be in the zone of 3% to 5% (sometimes higher, often lower). This profit is necessary for retaining staff (raises), reinvesting in infrastructure (endless property and equipment repairs), navigating snafus (a power outage can result in thousands of dollars in losses), and repaying the investors, often friends and family, who funded the venture in the first place.

Botanica closed out 2023 with a 1.19% profit — but not from restaurant operations; those were just slightly less than break-even. Our revenue was boosted by a handful of commercial photo shoots held at the restaurant on days when we were closed.

Granted, Botanica is a more labor-heavy model than many in our cohort. We are open for breakfast, lunch and dinner; we have a robust coffee/tea/bakery program, and the front of our space is a market stocked with natural wine, house-made goods and products from local, largely women-owned businesses. These are laborious undertakings that require substantially more staff (with specialized training, no less) than a dinner-only joint. But these elements of our business, costly as they may be, are the ones that make us an especially useful, multifaceted neighborhood spot.

Advertisement
Co-owner Heather Sperling chats with two diners at Botanica in Los Angeles.

Botanica is open for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Sperling drops by a table to chat with customers Zal Batmanglij, center, and Blake Holland, right.

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

All this is to say that a restaurant like Botanica — like so many other independent, owner-operated neighborhood restaurants across the country — exists, first and foremost, to nourish its people. Hospitality is innately altruistic, and the neighborhood restaurant is especially, preciously, precariously so.

I don’t have any grand solutions to propose, though I do believe that low-margin, financially uncertain businesses like ours will need structural support to continue to exist. That 3.11% of revenue that goes to credit card processing fees ($98,725 last year, paid to our point-of-sale system, Toast) would be a transformational addition to our bottom line. And I’d vastly prefer to reinvest some of the 4.89% that went to payroll taxes ($155,000 in 2023) into our team.

In the absence of legislated solutions, it comes down to the diners. Nearly 20 years ago, right as I was starting out in the food world, Michael Pollan introduced the concept of “voting with your fork” via his seminal book “The Omnivore’s Dilemma”; it’s his way of succinctly expressing the importance and power that your daily food choices can have.

Advertisement
A selection of wines on display at Botanica in Silver Lake.

Botanica’s marketplace also sells natural wines, along with its selection of house-made goods and local products.

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

A waiter behind a counter, reaching for a straw to put in a drink he is holding.

A server prepares a drink at Botanica. Co-owner Sperling says that since opening the restaurant almost seven years ago, labor costs have risen 40% for hourly workers and 25% for salaried management.

(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)

I’ve been trying to come up with a corollary that relates to the restaurant world — “dining with your values” doesn’t have the same ring to it; my suggestion box is wide open! — as a way to convey what it means to support restaurants not just for the creative/buzzy/exciting food they serve but for the broader philosophy that informs their work and exponentially impacts their small corners of the world.

Advertisement

Because for us to keep doing what we do, we need your support — and your understanding of the positive ripple effect that your support has. I hope this encourages you to feel good about your next brunch/dinner/coffee/cocktail outing at a thoughtful, community-minded restaurant near you.

It means more than you may know.

Heather Sperling is the co-founder and co-owner of Botanica, a restaurant and market in Silver Lake, Los Angeles.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending