Connect with us

Finance

EU weighs using Russian assets or borrowing to finance Kyiv

Published

on

EU weighs using Russian assets or borrowing to finance Kyiv
  • Russian assets most likely option, EU official says
  • Belgium seeks assurances against Russian lawsuits
  • Borrowing less appealing for indebted EU states
BRUSSELS, Nov 10 (Reuters) – The European Union will on Thursday discuss two main ways to raise financial support for Ukraine – borrowing the money, or the more likely option of using frozen Russian assets, a senior EU official said.
EU finance ministers are meeting in Brussels after the bloc’s leaders pledged on October 23 to cover Ukraine’s needs for 2026-2027, and asked the European Commission to prepare options on how to do that.

Sign up here.

The EU official close to the talks said the Commission’s options paper was not ready yet, but there were only two realistic ways to provide the 130-140 billion euros ($152-163 billion) Ukraine is likely to need.

One was to use the frozen Russian assets, as proposed by the Commission. Russia said last month any such move would be illegal and threatened to deliver a “painful response”.

The other was for EU governments to borrow the funds on the market, but this would involve paying interest.

Most of the Russian assets frozen in Europe are on the accounts of Belgian securities depository Euroclear. Since Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, almost all of the securities have matured and become cash.

The option involving frozen assets would mean the EU would replace the Russian cash on Euroclear accounts with zero-coupon AAA bonds issued by the European Commission.

Advertisement

The cash would then go to Kyiv, which would only repay the loan if it eventually gets war reparations from Russia, effectively making the loan a grant and making Russian reparations available before the war ends. The option is called the Reparations Loan, because it would be linked to Russia paying reparations.

PREFERENCE FOR USE OF RUSSIAN FROZEN ASSETS

Under that arrangement, the only financial contribution on the part of European Union governments would be to guarantee the Commission loans issued for Euroclear. The risk that the guarantees would be called upon is very small because EU governments themselves decide when to release the frozen Russian assets.

“In my mind EU leaders will opt for the reparations loan model,” the senior EU official said.

But Belgium, which is home to Euroclear, believes it would be liable in case of a successful Russian lawsuit against the company. It wants EU governments to pledge they would come up with the necessary cash to repay Moscow within three days if a court ever decided that the assets must be returned.

EU government officials say that, even though it was unlikely ever to be needed, mobilising potentially more than 100 billion euros in three days would be a big challenge for the EU.

Advertisement

Belgium also wants the Commission to produce a solid legal base for the whole operation to minimise the risk of a lost lawsuit and has asked other EU countries that hold frozen Russian assets to join the scheme to spread responsibility.

The Commission is now in talks with Belgium to address its demands with a view to securing support of EU leaders for the plan in December.

The other option would be for EU governments to borrow on the market and pass the cash on to Ukraine.

This is for them a far less appealing option because it would increase debt levels of many already highly indebted EU countries and entail paying annual interest for the duration of the loan, either by Ukraine, which can ill afford it, or by the EU.
($1 = 0.8575 euros)

Reporting by Jan Strupczewski; Editing by Andrew Heavens

Advertisement

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Finance

Exclusive: U.S. bank regulators ramp up scrutiny of AI use at financial companies

Published

on

Exclusive: U.S. bank regulators ramp up scrutiny of AI use at financial companies
U.S. banking regulators are stepping up scrutiny of how lenders deploy artificial intelligence as the developing technology sweeps through the industry, pressing firms on everything from data access and governance controls ​to risks posed by third-party vendors, according to people familiar with the situation.
Continue Reading

Finance

Crime Stoppers of Michigan could shut down while in dire financial straits

Published

on

Crime Stoppers of Michigan could shut down while in dire financial straits

Crime Stoppers of Michigan is in jeopardy. The anonymous crime tipline, responsible for helping solve countless cases, needs a financial fix and fast.

Big picture view:

Advertisement

FOX 2 got a pretty frantic call from Detroit police brass Thursday morning to explain what was going on with Crime Stoppers, and essentially they told us the nonprofit is in dire financial straits.

Since then, we have learned that if Crime Stoppers of Michigan doesn’t raise upwards of $250,000 by July 1, they’re going to cut almost all of their services, specifically, 90% of their services.

The only thing that would remain is the anonymous tip line you know it: 1-800-SPEAK-UP.

Advertisement

By the numbers:

They generate 5,000 anonymous tips a year, but a bulk of their work is elsewhere. This cut would mean no additional services for victims of crimes.

Advertisement

No press conferences. No posters. No community events.

“Sometimes I think people see the press conferences, the posters or the social media, and they forget there’s a mother, there’s a father, there’s a child. They have no clue what’s going on, and they’re seeking help from us, saying, ‘Please help us, please do something,’” said Dan DiBardino, President & CEO of Crime Stoppers.

A huge chunk of those 5,000 tips goes to Detroit police. They could be seriously affected by this if Crime Stoppers folds.

Advertisement

Watch FOX 2 Detroit LIVE:

Crime and Public SafetyDetroit
Continue Reading

Finance

Political committee backing Ken Welch misses campaign finance reporting deadline

Published

on

Political committee backing Ken Welch misses campaign finance reporting deadline

The political committee backing St. Petersburg Mayor Ken Welch’s reelection campaign missed the latest campaign finance reporting deadline, adding another wrinkle to a fundraising operation that has already faced scrutiny this cycle.

St. Petersburg Progress, the political committee supporting Welch, missed its latest finance report deadline due to a family emergency, PC Chair Adrienne Bogen told Florida Politics.

“Due to a family medical emergency we will be filing a day late,” Bogen said.

The missed deadline comes as Welch works to build support for a second term in a race that includes former Gov. Charlie Crist — the fundraising leader with $1.6 million raised for the race — City Council Member Brandi Gabbard, former St. Petersburg Fire Chief Jim Large, Maria Scruggs, Kevin Batdorf and Paul Congemi.

The late report follows previous campaign finance issues tied to political committees supporting Welch. Florida Politics previously reported that Welch launched St. Petersburg Progress in January after his previous committee, The Pelican Political Action Committee, became mired in allegations that a former treasurer stole more than $200,000.

Advertisement

That took place after Welch’s first committee, Pelican PAC, had its registration revoked by the state in late 2024 after warnings and fines tied to missed, late or improper filings.

Welch trails Crist’s political operation in fundraising, and tension between the two candidates was palpable during the first St. Petersburg mayoral debate this week. 

In the first quarter, Welch raised just under $220,000 between his campaign account and St. Petersburg Progress — though $85,000 of that came from a transfer connected to a prior committee. Without the transfer, Welch raised about $135,000 in new money during the quarter.

Crist’s affiliated political committee, St. Pete Shines, raised nearly $500,000 in the first quarter and entered April with about $1.1 million on hand. The committee recently announced it had reached $1.6 million.

The election is August 18. If no candidate receives more than 50% of the vote, a likelihood given the number of candidates running, the top two finishers will advance to a November runoff.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending