Europeans: Uncle Sam is shaking us down

[Trajan]

European multinationals that break the rules have paid out over $40bn in fines to the US authorities in recent years. Rather than just use the law to clean up business, does the US want to be global enforcer?

‘We’re facing an extremely dense wall of US legislation specifically intended to serve the ends of the economic and political empire with a view to gaining economic and strategic advantages,’ Pierre Lellouche, a deputy member of parliament for Les Républicains, told the foreign affairs and finance committee of France’s Assemblée Nationale last October. He was presenting the report of a fact-finding mission on the extraterritoriality of US law, which was ‘chilling’ to read, according to Socialist deputy Christophe Premat.

Only after colossal fines were imposed on BNP Paribas ($8.9bn) and Alstom ($772m) in 2014 did France’s politicians and media take notice of the US’s intention to impose its legal model and laws on other countries, even its closest allies.

This ‘judicial foreign policy’ is well resourced. It starts with intelligence: the CIA, NSA and FBI and their agents in embassies feed information back, using paid sources if necessary, and NGOs. The data is processed by the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Treasury, the SEC, the Federal Reserve and the Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC), which monitors international compliance with US sanctions. Local and state prosecutors, such as New York’s, often get involved in proceedings against large foreign companies.

The DOJ and other bodies behave like prosecutors, with the sole objective of getting a guilty plea from transgressors, and the longer these take to admit culpability and accept a judgment, the heftier the penalty will be.

....

All it takes is for a contested transaction to be denominated in dollars or an email exchange to have gone via an American server for US courts to decide they have authority

If it’s in dollars, it’s ours

 

[Trajan]

Strategic considerations also play a part. In a corruption case in Indonesia, Alstom was in partnership with a Japanese company, Marubeni, which did a deal with the DOJ in 2012 and was fined just $88m. The 2014 penalty for Alstom was nine times higher. Marubeni was of no interest to the US heavyweights in this sector, whereas Alstom was already a General Electric target; GE took over its energy division, 75% of its business, in 2015.

French telecoms company Alcatel was also unpopular in the US. It had supplied Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and had better technology than its US competitors, especially Lucent. In 2005 the DOJ took on a corruption case against Alcatel over its activities in Costa Rica and Honduras, and it was ordered to pay a $137m fine in 2010. It had had to merge in 2006 with Lucent (which was fined just $2.5m for similar infringements in China), and Lucent gradually took over Alcatel. (The scenario was similar when Alstom’s energy division, which represented three-quarters of its activities, was acquired by General Electric.) Fines considerably weaken targeted companies, not just with the aim of ensuring justice is done.

What a fukking racket

America is built on gangsterism

 

[hashmander]

a bawse gonna bawse.

 

[Trajan]

European businesses have paid almost $25bn to various US authorities: more than $8bn under the FCPA, and $16bn for breaching economic sanctions. France’s share is over $12bn, which has an impact on its balance of payments. When fines levied under other procedures are included — especially those paid by banks — the total far exceeds $40bn. This sum does not take into account fines to be imposed on Volkswagen, accused of having cheated in emissions tests on its diesel engines in the US, which are likely to be tens of billions of dollars, nor fines for Deutsche Bank over involvement in subprime lending, which may be between $5bn and $10bn.

All this money goes to whichever agency conducted the investigation, launched proceedings and negotiated the settlement. The booty is shared between the DOJ, the SEC, OFAC, the Fed, the New York State Department of Financial Services and the New York DA. In cases brought under FATCA, the tax authorities directly receive the sums reclaimed from Americans living abroad. This explains why prosecutors are so motivated: the more successful the cases they bring, the more their budget swells, ensuring generous salaries and more staff.

The flow of money generated by these cases also feeds law firms, not only with fees throughout the process, but after the fine is paid, when businesses have to agree to an in-house monitor for three to five years to guarantee they are acting in accordance with the terms of the settlement. This must be paid for by the host company, as must many additional staff. For good measure, Iweins said, ‘the “sinner” is directed to a few highly specialist Washington law firms able to oversee activities during surveillance,’ in particular to make sure they conform with US law. So the cost can be two or thee times that of the original fine.

 

[hashmander]

damn, that's truly some bawse shyt. no shame in our game. trump ain't know america been on that america first shyt. we just did it on the quiet and didn't have to broadcast that shyt so only the affected parties knew how we roll.

 

[Trajan]

damn, that's truly some bawse shyt. no shame in our game. trump ain't know america been on that america first shyt. we just did it on the quiet and didn't have to broadcast that shyt so only the affected parties knew how we roll.

If Trumpset are complaining about America's position and being ''cucks'' then who the fukk is winning

Imagine America was getting leaned on like that. And motherfukkers in Washington are enriching themselves lol.

 

[Trajan]

Aggressive US litigation is now crippling European companies and banks, forcing them to review their business networks and adapt to Anglo-Saxon standards. They favour large US law firms, although they seemingly have failed to see that those firms are obliged to communicate to US authorities any operation contrary to the national interest. They are cautious about doing business with countries of interest to the US, especially Iran. Even after the nuclear agreement in 2015, French banks do not want to risk lending companies money to trade with Iran. They are also reluctant to fund investment in Russia (Airbus had to go to Chinese banks). Companies are seeking other sources of finance that are not dollar-denominated — almost impossible for small and medium firms — or abandoning their plans, which is what the US wants since it can then keep the Iranian market for itself. On 30 September 2016 the US corporation Xerox told its French customers and suppliers not to do business with Iran if they wanted to retain good relations with Xerox.

 

[Trajan]

Euros might fight back:

Or Europe could tackle the multinationals’ tax optimisation mechanisms, starting with Google, Amazon, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft. Cases adjudicated by Brussels are beginning to stack up: Starbucks in the UK, Google in France, Apple in Ireland. Underpayments run to tens of billions of euros, which EU countries stand to gain. Or Europe could take anti-trust action against the quasi-monopoly of the Internet giants.

 

[Menelik II]

i dont know about Alstom, but BNP and HSBC were doing major shyt though. You'd have to compare how much american companies were getting fined or not for the same offences. There might be something to the article though.

 

[Trajan]

US anthem: When I'm not G Leaning on dem boy, Got that leng link for that leng boy



Jerk man for that Gourmet
I'll rob man it's my Forte
ASAP with no foreplay
Man will take down the whole door frame
Man get right up in your biz
I'll be right up for that liz

 

[ORDER_66]

The fracture is coming, just you wait...

 

[Trajan]

i dont know about Alstom, but BNP and HSBC were doing major shyt though. You'd have to compare how much american companies were getting fined or not for the same offences. There might be something to the article though.

These companies were not blameless, and European jurisdictions, especially that of France, were not well prepared for tackling such crimes. The US offensive was effective because it was ready to act where Europe wasn’t. The penny has dropped in Europe.

Also they're at a disadvantage. It's a foreign legal system. Continental Europeans use Civil Law as opposed to the US/UK Common Law. US companies know the routine.

US firms, used to this kind of action, negotiate a settlement quickly; foreign ones, such as Siemens and Alstom, have been slow to realise their risk.

But because everything is done in Dollars and most business in English and through US servers = US jurisdiction. They then have to fight on an unfamiliar turf. It's like US companies jumping through hoops in a foreign jurisdiction.

 

[606onit]

Damn. I started a bank account with LaCaixa back in 2013 with a US passport. I wonder how hard that shyt would be now

 

[Red Shield]

The USA is THE EMPIRE. And will do what empire's do. Also Uncle Sam has been shaking them down a bunch of times since WW1.

The cost of empire and the empire's protection isn't cheap

 

[Red Shield]

The fracture is coming, just you wait...

You know it

The groundwork is done being laid for it too..