MODERNIZING RUSSIA PROJECT Part I: Society’S View of Doing Business in Russia

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

MODERNIZING RUSSIA PROJECT Part I: Society’S View of Doing Business in Russia Center for European Policy Analysis MODERNIZING RUSSIA PROJECT Part I: Society’s View of Doing Business in Russia Denis Volkov Stepan Goncharov Maria Snegovaya 2 April 2020 CEPA BRIEF CEPA Center for European Policy Analysis All opinions are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the position or views of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. About CEPA The Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) is a 501(c)(3), non-profit, non-partisan, public policy research institute. Our mission is to promote an economically vibrant, strategically secure, and politically free Europe with close and enduring ties to the United States. Our analytical team consists of the world’s leading experts on Central-East Europe, Russia, and its neighbors. Through cutting- edge research, analysis, and programs we provide fresh insight on energy, security, and defense to government officials and agencies; we help transatlantic businesses navigate changing strategic landscapes; and we build networks of future Atlanticist leaders. © 2020 by the Center for European Policy Analysis, Washington, DC. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without permission in writing from the Center for European Policy Analysis, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in news articles, critical articles, or reviews. Center for European Policy Analysis 1275 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20004 E-mail: [email protected] www.cepa.org Cover image: “Moscow, Russia” by Artem Beliaikin via Pexels. 2 Center for European Policy Analysis MODERNIZING RUSSIA PROJECT Part I: Society’s View of Doing Business in Russia Denis Volkov Stepan Goncharov Maria Snegovaya April 2020 2 Center for European Policy Analysis The Issue From the Editor: The Russian political system has several distinctive features: it is patrimonial (power and money/property are thoroughly mixed); the rule of law is so weak that it cannot, as in the West, separate power and property; property rights are weak and unstable; and informal, personal politics often trump formal politics since institutions are also weak. The distribution and redistribution of property among elites — often more than differences over issues — is thus a central dynamic of the system. On the one hand, these characteristics make the emergence of state-dominated oligarchic business almost inevitable. On the other hand, strengthening property rights may help foster the development of a middle class where small and medium businesses are the foundation of a more pluralistic political system. In this CEPA/Levada brief, the authors explore popular attitudes toward business and how they may be changing. he end of the Soviet Union brought increased opportunity for private business, which had only operated in limited capacity Tbefore 1991. But for private enterprise to flourish in Russia, market-based reforms — including the rule of law and reliable property rights — were needed. Boris Yeltsin introduced some of them, but many businesses in the 1990s were still forced to depend on protection rackets and relationships with criminals and security services in order to operate. Under Vladimir Putin, conditions temporarily improved but the business environment has largely deteriorated as unjustified criminal prosecution of entrepreneurs spread in the country followed by the 2008 financial crisis. What are the implications for Russians wanting to do business today? 2 Center for European Policy Analysis Contents Key Takeaways 1 Introduction 2 Methodology 3 Attitudes Toward Entrepreneurs 4 Entrepreneurial Experience and Desire to Open a Business 7 Business Conditions in Russia 10 Pressure on Business 12 Questions for Further Study 14 Acknowledgements 14 Endnotes 15 Cyberwarfare and Critical92 Infrastructure, 4 Center for European Policy Analysis KEY TAKEAWAYS Only 14% of Russians have experience running their own business and that number has Overall, the findings indicate modernizing declined over the years. About a quarter of attitudes of Russians toward private enterprise. the population (27%) would like to open their Most respondents think highly of businessmen own business. This group of respondents and their contributions to the development includes the youngest Russians, respondents of the country. These views are particularly with previous business experience, and more pronounced among younger, better educated, educated and economically better-off citizens. and economically better off respondents. This Those who want to start their own business contrasts sharply with Putin’s own beliefs that think that it will provide unique opportunities most businessmen are crooks, as well as the for self-realization and the formation of a state’s ongoing policies of prosecution and sense of independence from the state, and seizure of private enterprises in Russia.1 The even open the possibility of moving to another results indicate the deepening divide between country. the attitudes of the authorities and those of the Russian population more broadly. Almost three-quarters of those polled found it difficult to open a new business in Russia. And Contrary to general belief, Russians’ attitudes only a fifth of the population thought that the toward entrepreneurs are positive and have business environment in Russia was improving. improved in recent years. Today they are at their highest point (over 80% of respondents A majority of respondents thought start-up believed that small and medium-sized capital, connections to the authorities, and businesses benefited the country) in the 16 state support were key preconditions to years since the Levada Center began measuring creating a successful business. Most named responses to that question. In addition, many economic problems (high taxes, corruption, Russians believe that some of the most lack of start-up capital and high loan rates) as intelligent, talented, and capable people in key impediments to doing so. Russia work in business. Respondents see the main contribution of Russian entrepreneurs to While respondents did not mention the the development of the country as the creation wide prevalence of illegal “raider” seizures of jobs and the contribution of taxes to Russia’s of business in Russia as a key obstacle to budget. success, over a third of our respondents were aware of such practices. In addition, 40% At the same time, trust in the business sector mentioned unjustified criminal prosecution is much lower than that in other public and of entrepreneurs as impediments. Half of political institutions — the army, president, the respondents reported a prevalence of security services, and the church. This is unlawful pressure on businesses from various probably due to the widespread belief that inspection bodies. The majority thought the entrepreneurs evade taxes. Also, among attacks of security officials on entrepreneurs the most respected Russian businessmen, are driven by the self-interest of state officials respondents primarily named state-linked rather than desire to enforce the law. However, oligarchs rather than entrepreneurs who only 6% of Russians were able to name specific developed their own business from scratch. cases of unlawful pressure on entrepreneurs. Society’s View of Doing92 Business in Russia, 1 Center for European Policy Analysis INTRODUCTION forced to leave the country or put in jail. Over time, attacks on businessmen by state Russia’s experience with entrepreneurship authorities or state-linked businessmen spread is relatively short-lived. Throughout most of to smaller companies. This has been coupled the Soviet era, private business activity was with a process of deprivatization in which banned. By the end of the Soviet Union in 1991, the state increasingly nationalized formerly the state allowed a limited number of market- private enterprises. The Federal Antimonopoly based small businesses. Still, the conditions Service of Russia estimated that the share of needed for private enterprise to develop, such the state and state-owned companies to GDP as the rule of law and durable property rights, doubled from 2005 to 2015 from 35% to 70%.3 were absent. The environment improved At least in part, these actions by the Russian under Boris Yeltsin, the first president of the authorities were intentionally designed to Russian Federation, who launched multiple increase Russian citizens’ dependence on the free-market reforms, including privatization state.4 and trade liberalization. A society emerged in which private business and entrepreneurs Originally these developments were offset were a significant and necessary component. by a booming economy. However, following the 2008 financial crisis, economic growth Doing business in the 1990s was challenging. in Russia slowed down dramatically. This has The absence of law enforcement forced contributed to more interventionist policies by many business people to seek out protection the state at the expense of economic reforms. rackets from criminals and security services. These trends further undermined the business Violent clashes between business competitors climate and the country’s long-term growth and illegal business practices spread.2 Yet the prospects. The economic situation further 1990s featured a rapid rise in the number of deteriorated after Western countries imposed enterprises — briefly interrupted by the 1998 sanctions on Russia following the illegal financial crisis — mainly due to lower levels of annexation of
Recommended publications
  • Russian M&A Review 2017
    Russian M&A review 2017 March 2018 KPMG in Russia and the CIS kpmg.ru 2 Russian M&A review 2017 Contents page 3 page 6 page 10 page 13 page 28 page 29 KEY M&A 2017 OUTLOOK DRIVERS OVERVIEW IN REVIEW FOR 2018 IN 2017 METHODOLOGY APPENDICES — Oil and gas — Macro trends and medium-term — Financing – forecasts sanctions-related implications — Appetite and capacity for M&A — Debt sales market — Cross-border M&A highlights — Sector highlights © 2018 KPMG. All rights reserved. Russian M&A review 2017 3 Overview Although deal activity increased by 13% in 2017, the value of Russian M&A Deal was 12% lower than the previous activity 13% year, at USD66.9 billion, mainly due to an absence of larger deals. This was in particular reflected in the oil and gas sector, which in 2016 was characterised by three large deals with a combined value exceeding USD28 billion. The good news is that investors have adjusted to the realities of sanctions and lower oil prices, and sought opportunities brought by both the economic recovery and governmental efforts to create a new industrial strategy. 2017 saw a significant rise in the number and value of deals outside the Deal more traditional extractive industries value 37% and utility sectors, which have historically driven Russian M&A. Oil and gas sector is excluded If the oil and gas sector is excluded, then the value of deals rose by 37%, from USD35.5 billion in 2016 to USD48.5 billion in 2017. USD48.5bln USD35.5bln 2016 2017 © 2018 KPMG.
    [Show full text]
  • Overlap Issues Consent Order
    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE CHANCERY DIVISION The Honourable Mrs Justice Gloster DBE 12 October 2012 BETWEEN:- HCO8C03549 BORIS BEREZOVSICY Claimant - and - INNA GUDAVADZE & OTHERS Defendants HCO9C00494 BORIS BEREZOVSKY Claimant - and - VASILY ANISIMOV & OTHERS Defendants HCO9C00711 BORIS BEREZOVSICY Claimant - and - SALFORD CAPITAL PARTNERS INC & OTHERS Defendants 1),D 1147 (f) MEEK ORDER UPON the Order of Mr Justice Mann and Mrs Justice Gloster DBE dated 16 August 2010, ordering the trial of the issues set out in paragraph 1 of that Order (the Overlap Issues) as preliminary issues in proceedings number HC08C03549 (the Main Action), HC09C00494 (the Metalloinvest Action) and HCO9C00711 (the Salford Action); AND UPON the trial of the Overlap Issues (as amended by subsequent Orders) together with the trial of the Claimant's claims in Commercial Court proceedings number 2007 Folio 942 (the Joint Trial); AND UPON the Court having heard oral evidence and having read the written evidence filed; AND UPON hearing Leading Counsel for the Claimant, Counsel for the Second to Fifth Defendants in the Main Action (the Family Defendants), Leading Counsel for the Third to Fifth and Tenth Defendants in the Metalloinvest Action (the Anisimov Defendants), and Counsel for the Fourth to Ninth and Eleventh Defendants in the Salford Action (the Salford Defendants); AND UPON the Court having given judgment on the Overlap Issues on 31 August 2012; AND UPON the parties having agreed the orders as to costs set out in paragraphs 2 to 5 of this Order below; IT IS ORDERED THAT:- Determination of the Overlap Issues 1. The Overlap Issues are determined as follows:- (1) The Claimant did not acquire any interest in any Russian aluminium industry assets prior to the alleged meeting at the Dorchester Hotel in March 2000 (other than as a result of the alleged overarching joint venture agreement alleged by the Claimant in the Main Action, in relation to which no findings are made).
    [Show full text]
  • November 1-30, 2020
    UZBEKISATN– NOVEMBER 1-30, 2020 UZBEKISATN– NOVEMBER 1-30, 2020 ....................................................................................................................................... 1 TOP NEWS OF THE PERIOD ................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Government intends to increase excise tax rates on petrol and diesel 2 Leading trade partners of Uzbekistan 2 POLITICS AND LAW ................................................................................................................................................................................. 3 Namangan plans to build an international business center: Alisher Usmanov to contribute to the implementation of the project 3 Uzbekistan rises in the Legatum Prosperity Index 3 Worldwide Cost of Living 2020 report: Tashkent among cheapest cities to live in 4 International Organization of Migration to open its office in Uzbekistan 4 Central Asia, EU reaffirm their commitment to build strong relations 5 Facilitating Uzbekistan's Accession to the WTO 7 Economy AND FINANCE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Uzbekistan takes first place in the world in terms of gold sold in the third quarter 8 The National Venture Fund UzVC is being created 8 Diesel fuel production of Euro-4 and Euro-5 standards starts in Ferghana region 9 Food
    [Show full text]
  • Censorship Among Russian Media Personalities and Reporters in the 2010S Elisabeth Schimpfossl the University of Liverpool Ilya Yablokov the University of Manchester
    COERCION OR CONFORMISM? CENSORSHIP AND SELF- CENSORSHIP AMONG RUSSIAN MEDIA PERSONALITIES AND REPORTERS IN THE 2010S ELISABETH SCHIMPFOSSL THE UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL ILYA YABLOKOV THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER Abstract: This article examines questions of censorship, self-censorship and conformism on Russia’s federal television networks during Putin’s third presidential term. It challenges the idea that the political views and images broadcast by federal television are imposed coercively upon reporters, presenters and anchors. Based on an analysis of interviews with famous media personalities as well as rank-and-file reporters, this article argues that media governance in contemporary Russia does not need to resort to coercive methods, or the exertion of self-censorship among its staff, to support government views. Quite the contrary: reporters enjoy relatively large leeway to develop their creativity, which is crucial for state-aligned television networks to keep audience ratings up. Those pundits, anchors and reporters who are involved in the direct promotion of Kremlin positions usually have consciously and deliberately chosen to do so. The more famous they are, the more they partake in the production of political discourses. Elisabeth Schimpfossl, Ph.D., teaches history at The University of Liverpool, 12 Abercromby Square, Liverpool, L69 7WZ, UK, email: [email protected]; Ilya Yablokov is a Ph.D. candidate in Russian and East European Studies, School of Arts, Languages and Cultures, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester,
    [Show full text]
  • Treisman Silovarchs 9 10 06
    Putin’s Silovarchs Daniel Treisman October 2006, Forthcoming in Orbis, Winter 2007 In the late 1990s, many Russians believed their government had been captured by a small group of business magnates known as “the oligarchs”. The most flamboyant, Boris Berezovsky, claimed in 1996 that seven bankers controlled fifty percent of the Russian economy. Having acquired massive oil and metals enterprises in rigged privatizations, these tycoons exploited Yeltsin’s ill-health to meddle in politics and lobby their interests. Two served briefly in government. Another, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, summed up the conventional wisdom of the time in a 1997 interview: “Politics is the most lucrative field of business in Russia. And it will be that way forever.”1 A decade later, most of the original oligarchs have been tripping over each other in their haste to leave the political stage, jettisoning properties as they go. From exile in London, Berezovsky announced in February he was liquidating his last Russian assets. A 1 Quoted in Andrei Piontkovsky, “Modern-Day Rasputin,” The Moscow Times, 12 November, 1997. fellow media magnate, Vladimir Gusinsky, long ago surrendered his television station to the state-controlled gas company Gazprom and now divides his time between Israel and the US. Khodorkovsky is in a Siberian jail, serving an eight-year sentence for fraud and tax evasion. Roman Abramovich, Berezovsky’s former partner, spends much of his time in London, where he bought the Chelsea soccer club in 2003. Rather than exile him to Siberia, the Kremlin merely insists he serve as governor of the depressed Arctic outpost of Chukotka—a sign Russia’s leaders have a sense of humor, albeit of a dark kind.
    [Show full text]
  • RUSSIA INTELLIGENCE Politics & Government
    N°66 - November 22 2007 Published every two weeks / International Edition CONTENTS KREMLIN P. 1-4 Politics & Government c KREMLIN The highly-orchestrated launching into orbit cThe highly-orchestrated launching into orbit of of the «national leader» the «national leader» Only a few days away from the legislative elections, the political climate in Russia grew particu- STORCHAK AFFAIR larly heavy with the announcement of the arrest of the assistant to the Finance minister Alexey Ku- c Kudrin in the line of fire of drin (read page 2). Sergey Storchak is accused of attempting to divert several dozen million dol- the Patrushev-Sechin clan lars in connection with the settlement of the Algerian debt to Russia. The clan wars in the close DUMA guard of Vladimir Putin which confront the Igor Sechin/Nikolay Patrushev duo against a compet- cUnited Russia, electoral ing «Petersburg» group based around Viktor Cherkesov, overflows the limits of the «power struc- home for Russia’s big ture» where it was contained up until now to affect the entire Russian political power complex. business WAR OF THE SERVICES The electoral campaign itself is unfolding without too much tension, involving men, parties, fac- cThe KGB old guard appeals for calm tions that support President Putin. They are no longer legislative elections but a sort of plebicite campaign, to which the Russian president lends himself without excessive good humour. The objec- PROFILE cValentina Matvienko, the tive is not even to know if the presidential party United Russia will be victorious, but if the final score “czarina” of Saint Petersburg passes the 60% threshhold.
    [Show full text]
  • William R. Spiegelberger the Foreign Policy Research Institute Thanks the Carnegie Corporation for Its Support of the Russia Political Economy Project
    Russia Political Economy Project William R. Spiegelberger The Foreign Policy Research Institute thanks the Carnegie Corporation for its support of the Russia Political Economy Project. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Author: William R. Spiegelberger Eurasia Program Leadership Director: Chris Miller Deputy Director: Maia Otarashvili Edited by: Thomas J. Shattuck Designed by: Natalia Kopytnik © 2019 by the Foreign Policy Research Institute April 2019 COVER: Designed by Natalia Kopytnik. Photography: Oleg Deripaska (World Economic Forum); St. Basil’s Cathedral (Adob Stock); Ruble (Adobe Stock); Vladimir Putin (kremlin.ru); Rusal logo (rusal.ru); United States Capitol (Adobe Stock; Viktor Vekselberg (Aleshru/Wikimedia Commons); Alumnium rolls (Adobe Stock); Trade War (Adobe Stock). Our Mission The Foreign Policy Research Institute is dedicated to bringing the insights of scholarship to bear on the foreign policy and national security challenges facing the United States. It seeks to educate the public, teach teachers, train students, and offer ideas to advance U.S. national interests based on a nonpartisan, geopolitical perspective that illuminates contemporary international affairs through the lens of history, geography, and culture. Offering Ideas In an increasingly polarized world, we pride ourselves on our tradition of nonpartisan scholarship. We count among our ranks over 100 affiliated scholars located throughout the nation and the world who appear regularly in national and international media, testify on Capitol Hill, and are consulted by U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • M. Korostikov / Russian State and Economy
    ’Ifri ’Ifri _____________________________________________________________________ Leaving to Come Back: Russian Senior Officials and the State-Owned Companies _____________________________________________________________________ Mikhail Korostikov August 2015 . Russia/NIS Center Ifri is a research center and a forum for debate on major international political and economic issues. Headed by Thierry de Montbrial since its founding in 1979, Ifri is a non-governmental and a non-profit organization. As an independent think tank, Ifri sets its own research agenda, publishing its findings regularly for a global audience. With offices in Paris and Brussels, Ifri stands out as one of the rare French think tanks to have positioned itself at the very heart of European debate. Using an interdisciplinary approach, Ifri brings together political and economic decision-makers, researchers and internationally renowned experts to animate its debates and research activities. The opinions expressed in this article are the authors’ alone and do not reflect the official views of their institutions. ISBN: 978-2-36567-435-5 © All rights reserved, Ifri, 2015 Ifri Ifri-Bruxelles 27, rue de la Procession Rue Marie-Thérèse, 21 75740 Paris Cedex 15 – FRANCE 1000 – Bruxelles – BELGIQUE Tél. : +33 (0)1 40 61 60 00 Tél. : +32 (0)2 238 51 10 Fax : +33 (0)1 40 61 60 60 Fax : +32 (0)2 238 51 15 Email : [email protected] Email : [email protected] Website : Ifri.org Russie.Nei.Visions Russie.Nei.Visions is an online collection dedicated to Russia and the other new independent states (Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan). Written by leading experts, these policy- oriented papers deal with strategic, political and economic issues.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Governs the Russian Economy? a Cross-Section of Russia's Largest Corporations
    Kari Liuhto & Peeter Vahtra Who governs the Russian economy? A cross-section of Russia's largest corporations Electronic Publications of Pan-European Institute 12/2009 ISSN 1795 - 5076 Who governs the Russian economy? A cross-section of Russia's largest corporations 1 Kari Liuhto2 and Peeter Vahtra3 12/2009 Electronic Publications of Pan-European Institute http://www.tse.fi/pei 1 We wish to thank the following Finnish research foundations which have made it possible to conduct this report and numerous earlier studies linked with the theme; Emil Aaltonen Foundation, Foundation for Economic Education, Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation, The Marcus Wallenberg Economic Foundation and The Paulo Foundation. 2 Kari Liuhto is Professor in International Business and Director of the Pan-European Institute at the Turku School of Economics. His research interests include EU-Russia economic relations, energy relations in particular, foreign investments into Russia and the investments of Russian firms abroad, and economic policy measures of strategic significance. Liuhto has worked as an expert in several Russia-related projects funded by both Finnish institutions and foreign ones, such as the European Commission, the European Parliament, the United Nations, and the World Bank. 3 Peeter Vahtra is a Research Fellow at the Pan-European Institute at the Turku School of Economics. His areas of research expertise include Russia’s energy policy, FDI to and from Russia and Russia’s economic policy. Kari Liuhto and Peeter Vahtra PEI Electronic Publications 12/2009 www.tse.fi/pei __________________________________________________________________________________________ Contents 1. The state has increased its ownership in big business, but left small and medium-sized companies untouched 2 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Transcultural Express: American and Russian Arts Today Presents a Night of Contemporary Russian Arts at BAM on June 5
    TransCultural Express: American and Russian Arts Today presents a night of contemporary Russian arts at BAM on June 5 Visual artist Irina Korina to unveil her first art installation in the US; Authors/journalists Masha Gessen and Keith Gessen to discuss their work at Eat, Drink & Be Literary Brooklyn, NY/May 28, 2013—A site-specific installation by Moscow-based artist Irina Korina and a literary program featuring Masha Gessen and Keith Gessen will bring contemporary Russian culture to Brooklyn Academy of Music (BAM) on June 5, as part of the initial programming of TransCultural Express: American and Russian Arts Today—a collaborative venture between BAM and the Mikhail Prokhorov Fund. Acclaimed Russian literary siblings Masha Gessen (The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin) and Keith Gessen (contributor to The New Yorker, The Atlantic, The New York Review of Books) will discuss their work and lives within two cultures with famed author Phillip Lopate on June 5. This is part of BAM’s popular Eat, Drink & Be Literary series, where audiences wine and dine while hearing leading authors read from their work. Tickets for this program can be purchased by calling BAM Ticket Services at 718.636.4100 or by visiting BAM.org. Tickets also may be purchased in person at the BAM Box Office, Peter Jay Sharp Building, 30 Lafayette Avenue from 10am to 6pm Monday—Friday and 12pm—6pm on Saturday. The evening begins with the work of Russian visual artist Irina Korina, who was selected to represent Russia at the Venice Biennale in 2009. BAM will unveil Korina’s original sculptural installation, created for the lobby of the Peter Jay Sharp Building, and hold a public reception for the artist.
    [Show full text]
  • Money Laundering Cases Involving Russian Individuals and Their Effect on the Eu”
    29-01-2019 1 SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL CRIMES, TAX EVASION AND TAX AVOIDANCE (TAX3) TUESDAY 29 JANUARY 2019 * * * PUBLIC HEARING “MONEY LAUNDERING CASES INVOLVING RUSSIAN INDIVIDUALS AND THEIR EFFECT ON THE EU” * * * Panel I: Effects in the EU of the money laundering cases involving Russian linkages Anders Åslund, Senior Fellow, Atlantic Council; Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University Joshua Kirschenbaum, Senior fellow at German Marshall Fund’s Alliance for Securing Democracy Richard Brooks, Financial investigative journalist for The Guardian and Private Eye magazine Panel II: The Magnitsky case Bill Browder, CEO and co-founder of Hermitage Capital Management Günter Schirmer, Head of the Secretariat of the Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe 2 29-01-2019 1-002-0000 IN THE CHAIR: PETR JEŽEK Chair of the Special Committee on Financial Crimes, Tax Evasion and Tax Avoidance (The meeting opened at 14.38) Panel I: Effects in the EU of money laundering cases involving Russian linkages 1-004-0000 Chair. – Good afternoon dear colleagues, dear guests, Ladies and Gentlemen. Let us start the public hearing of the Special Committee on Financial Crimes, Tax Evasion and Tax Avoidance (TAX3) on money-laundering cases involving Russian individuals and their effects on the EU. We will deal with the issue in two panels. On the first panel we are going to discuss the effects on the EU of money-laundering cases involving Russian linkages. Let me now introduce the speakers for the first panel. We welcome Mr Anders Åslund, who is a Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council and Adjunct Professor, Georgetown University.
    [Show full text]
  • Company News SECURITIES MARKET NEWS LETTER Weekly
    SSEECCUURRIIITTIIIEESS MMAARRKKEETT NNEEWWSSLLEETTTTEERR weekly Presented by: VTB Bank, Custody March 29, 2018 Issue No. 2018/11 Company News Russian antitrust allows Onexim Group to buy 100% in IFC Bank On March 23, 2018 it was reported that Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service allowed Mikhail Prokhorov’s Onexim Group to acquire a 100% voting stake in International Financial Club (IFC Bank). According to the central bank, Prokhorov owns 27.74% in IFC Bank through Cyprus-based Onexim Holdings Ltd. Winterlux of Viktor Vekselberg owns 19.71%, businessman Alexander Abramov holds 39.42% and Yekaterina Ignatova 13.14%. Central bank orders Asian-Pacific Bank to change owners, up capital On March 23, 2018 it was announced that the central bank asked Asian-Pacific Bank, Russia’s 60th largest bank by assets as of February 1, to change shareholders, the largest of which is former owner of retailer Azbuka Vkusa Andrei Vdovin, and to raise its shareholder equity before April. Previously, the central bank allowed Asian-Pacific Bank to delay provision of reserves against a loan provided to defunct subsidiary M2M Private Bank to the beginning of 2018, but the bank created reserves only against 80% of the loan. Asian- Pacific Bank asked for more time, and the regulator set the deadline for March 31. The reserves will also force the bank to raise capital in line with the central bank’s orders. After the failure of M2M Private Bank, the regulator ordered owners of Asian-Pacific Bank to cut their stakes in the bank to no more than 10%. Previously, Vdovin, Alexei Maslovsky, and Peter Hambro owned 22.5% in the bank each, but in December 2017 they cut their stakes to a combined stake of 8.24% controlled through company PPFIN Region, while British Virgin Islands registered company Shelmer Holding Ltd acquired 31.8% in the bank.
    [Show full text]