Deutsche Bank verkauft Cosmopolitan-Casino

Deutsche Bank built and operated a casino in Las Vegas, but now they’ve sold it.

Originally, Deutsche Bank said, they only wanted to finance the construction of the casino. But the construction company ran into difficulties and DeuBa took over the project to complete it. The hotel and gambling complex is said to have originally cost $3.9 billion, and the bank sold it to a real estate fund of a financial investor Blackstone for $1.26 billion. Deutsche Bank emphasized that they didn’t lose much money on the project because their casino earned so well.

(DOY tcha   BONK   fair COW fft   caw SEE no.)

Den Schluss schmeissen

Foreigner German for “banging the close.”

Banging the close was one of two unethical things several currency market traders said they could do to game exchange rates because a handful of large banks controlled half the market, according to a June 2013 article in FAZ.net. Traders at the big banks could input trades before and after a huge trade’s 60-second window and have an effect on the rate, despite the fact that “The benchmark exchange rates are based on actual transactions and not on banks’ estimates like the L.I.B.O.R. reference rate is.” The second thing was to arrange their day’s work around a pending large trade; they would get a poorer exchange rate for the client in order to buy back her sold currency more cheaply than would have been the case.

The June 2013 article also said authorities were investigating benchmark manipulation in crude oil and swap markets.

(Dane   SHLOOSS   shmigh sen.)

Der breuer’sche Barolo

“Mr. Breuer’s Barolo,” in this case not a decent Italian red wine but possibly a secret project at Deutsche Bank in 2002 to deliberately bankrupt media magnate Leo Kirch’s empire and profit from breaking up and selling off his businesses. Leo Kirch claimed this happened until he died. Now supposedly an email has turned up containing evidence of at least some perjury. “Project Barolo” would have been the name of the secret undertaking, which took place when Rolf E. Breuer was the head of Deutsche Bank. The found email from a London investment division was cc’d to Mr. Breuer and dated January 2002.

ZDF heute journal’s Sina Mainitz said the Süddeutsche Zeitung reported prosecutors are now investigating whether four former members of Deutsche Bank’s management board [Vorstand] and the C.E.O. Jürgen Fitschen lied in the Kirch trial when they said they never made plans to break up the media empire. Mr. Kirch’s conglomerate collapsed after Mr. Breuer accidentally let slip in a February 2002 interview that Deutsche Bank thought the conglomerate, a Deutsche Bank client, might no longer be solvent. Mr. Kirch’s ability to obtain new loans was curtailed and his companies began filing for bankruptcy in April 2002.

(Dare   BROY ahsh eh   bar OH lo.)

L.I.B.O.R.-Klagen

L.I.B.O.R. lawsuits.

The U.S. company Fannie Mae has filed complaints seeking about half a billion euros in damages from multiple banks around the world for L.I.B.O.R. benchmark interest rate manipulation. Deutsche Bank is one of the defendants.

Update on 01 Nov 2013: ZDF heute journal financial correspondent Frank Bethmann said the many banks found to have participated in L.I.B.O.R. manipulation have been fined about 2.7 billion euros total by the world’s bank oversight authorities alone so far. Now more and more company lawsuits keep “fluttering in,” making them possibly the costlier threat. He said Deutsche Bank had now set aside 4.1 billion euros for legal fees. “But that shirt could prove too short as well, particularly in the U.S.A.”

Update on 06 Nov 2013: FAZ.net reported that insiders told Reuters news agency that before 2014 the E.U. competition commissioner wants to fine six banks a total of 1.5 billion euros for L.I.B.O.R. benchmark manipulation, including Barclays, Royal Bank of Scotland (R.B.S.), the Dutch Rabobank (“genossenschaftlich” bank meaning it started life as a mutual?), and the “broker” I.C.A.P. The Swiss bank U.B.S. will be excused from this fine—said to be the largest bank fine in E.U. history—because they were the first to testify. These six banks admitted this particular wrongdoing and as a result the E.U. said it will reduce those fines by 10%.

This set of fines is for the yen L.I.B.O.R. manipulation subscandal of the L.I.B.O.R. manipulation scandal. Deutsche Bank may be facing additional U.K. and U.S. fines for U.S. dollar L.I.B.O.R. manipulation.

Financial regulators around the world are also investigating more than a dozen banks for Eur.I.B.O.R. benchmark manipulation. On 06 Nov 2013 FAZ.net reported that insiders said the E.U. Commission was negotiating fines to half a dozen banks for that as well, including Deutsche Bank and possibly Royal Bank of Scotland and Société Générale. FAZ.net reported the U.K.’s Financial Times reported each of these six will have to pay up to 800 million euros for that set of fines. And that Bloomberg.com reported the British bank H.B.S.C. had withdrawn from those fine negotiations, giving up the proffered 10% fine rebate for admitting wrongdoing.

German Wikipedia said the Eur.I.B.O.R. is set on the basis of data submitted by 32 European “credit institutions,” minus the top 15% and bottom 15% outliers, to the “information agency” Thomson Reuters. The Eur.I.B.O.R. is then published by Reuters.

English Wikipedia said the Eur.I.B.O.R. was created by combining “domestic” benchmark rates, such as from Paris, Frankfurt and Helsinki, in 1999. It said there is still a separate Euro L.I.B.O.R. set in London, based on data from 16 banks.

(LEE boar CLOG en.)

Goldpreis, Silberpreis

Price of gold, price of silver.

In March 2013 the U.S.A.’s Commodity Futures Trading Commission was looking into, but not formally investigating, possible gold and silver price manipulations in London, the world’s largest gold market. The F.A.Z. mentioned they were especially interested in the “too-intransparent” way the spot price for a troy ounce of gold is set in London twice a day by five banks: Barclays, Deutsche Bank, HSBC Holdings, PLC, Bank of Nova Scotia and Société Générale S.A. The silver price in London is set once per day, at noon, by Bank of Nova Scotia, Deutsche Bank and HSBC. A March 2013 article in Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal mentioned that the market prices for these metals were important also for the estimated ~$198 million in derivative contracts held by commercial banks in the U.S.A. in September 2012, according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (O.C.C.).

The C.F.T.C. started investigating whether the price of silver had been gamed in 2008 after the silver price fell sharply. No results were ever announced from that investigation, nor was it ever officially closed.

Update on 25 Sep 2013: The C.F.T.C. officially closed its five-year investigation into gaming of silver market prices “without bringing any enforcement actions” reported Bloomberg.com.

Update on 27 Nov 2013: Germany’s BaFin financial regulator announced they would be investigating possible manipulation of gold and silver prices, which Handelsblatt.com said would be called das Goldfixing and das Silberfixing in German. BaFin said that they could not comment on the ongoing investigation but that they were interested in benchmark manipulation in Europe, including benchmarks for the so-called noble metals, currencies and interest rates. Gold and silver prices had been being set by benchmarks controlled by only a handfull of European banks, the Handelsblatt said Wall Street Journal Deutschland said, and alleged that British financial authorities were looking into gold and silver price gaming as well.

Update on 09 May 2014: A wave of U.S. lawsuits is said to be rolling toward the five banks that set the gold price twice each day in London.
The Frankfurter Allgemeine reported on the findings of one analyst, who will be testifying for the plaintiffs, from examining publicly available gold price data from 2010 to 2013. The banks’ twice-daily phone conferences to set the price could take two minutes or two hours, but averaged 15 minutes. During that time, there were bigger fluctuations in the gold price than during the rest of the day when the phone conferences weren’t taking place. The price moved up and down but mostly downward. After the teleconference, the price settled back to where it was before the meeting. During the phone conferences, the banks had access to information their customers did not: the volume of gold being traded, and the prices at which they were trading. That information wasn’t supposed to be shared, but. The U.S. plaintiffs say, look at L.I.B.O.R.

Deutsche Bank is now withdrawing from the five banks, leaving four banks: Barclays, HSBC, Bank of Nova Scotia and Société Générale.

Update on 16 Aug 2014: The price of silver will now be set electronically by auction, in a service offered by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and Thomson Reuters.

(GOALED prize,   ZILLLL beh prize)

Außerbörslicher Schattenhandel

“Off-market shadow trading,” which der Spiegel says is also known as over-the-counter trading, done directly between speculators such as bank traders. May exceed trading in the (regulated) markets.

E.U. and U.S.A. regulators agree that they want to regulate O.T.C. trading. An F.A.Z. op-ed discussing recent U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (F.E.R.C.) fines mentioned that other U.S. financial authorities that could impose fines on international financial companies such as banks include the S.E.C. (Securities and Exchange Commission) and C.F.T.C. (Commodity Futures Trading Commission). It cited a quite-large Financial Times estimate of the size of global O.T.C. trading amounting to well over half a quadrillion dollars.

Regarding shadow-sector speculation in electricity: on 24 Jul 2013 the F.E.R.C.’s fine was upheld to London-based Barclays bank of nearly half a billion dollars to the bank (and $15 million to one manager and $1 million each to three traders) for benchmark manipulation affecting U.S. electricity markets between 2006 and 2008, including taking on-market losses in order to increase the value of off-market O.T.C. bets. Barclays intended to keep fighting the fine, however, and if the bank doesn’t pay it within the 30-day deadline the case could go to a U.S. federal court which could reset the fine. In January 2013 Deutsche Bank negotiated a settlement with the F.E.R.C. for the same electricity market gaming and received a fine of ~$1.5 million. On 24 Jul 2013 JP Morgan Chase was still negotiating with the F.E.R.C. about their fine for manipulating electricity prices in California and the Midwest; originally the settlement was said to be at nearly a billion but Chase succeeded in negotiating it down to less than one billion dollars though so far still more than Barclays’s ~$480 million.

Update on 30 Jul 2013: JP Morgan Chase’s F.E.R.C. fine for allegedly manipulating U.S. electricity markets was negotiated down to $410 million.

Regarding shadow-sector speculation in food commodities: The day before announcing its largest capital collection in its history as a mutual savings bank, on ~28 May 2013 Germany’s fourth-largest bank at the time published an open letter to the consumer advocacy organization Foodwatch.org saying their bank was joining their country’s second-largest bank and several smaller banks in pledging that they will no longer trade in or sell financial products based on agricultural commodities (such as grains). They recommended other banks also cease doing so in order to keep from driving up world food prices, remarking that investors’ demand to participate in food-based funds is low anyway. D.Z. bank said they have been and will continue to work closely with university academics to study and monitor world agricultural economics and the effects of food speculation. They requested government reregulation of both markets and of off-market trading to re-introduce “position limits” on the amount one entity, such as a hedge fund in the shadow financial sector, could wager on food-based financial products. After deregulation in the early 2000’s, “the speculators’ share in international commodity markets increased from 30% to 80%.”

At the time this D.Z. Bank letter was published, E.U. leaders intended to meet in late June 2013 to agree on regulations imposing these food-trading position limits but, said the head of the bank in question, “the financial sector” had already managed to introduce many loopholes into the drafts— “practically neutralizing the limitations on speculators,” said Foodwatch head Thilo Bode.

(Ow! ss ah BƏZZ lichh ah   SHOTTEN hond ell.)

 

Neue Auflagen für inländische und ausländische Banken

“New requirements for domestic and for foreign banks.” A week after the EU passed a new package of bank reforms on 16 Apr 2013 intended to force European banks to operate on a more stable basis, an EU commissioner sent a letter to the USA’s Federal Reserve criticizing the Fed’s intention to impose similar terms not just on US banks within the US but on foreign banks in the US as well.

The key points in the Fed’s proposal would be to require large foreign banks to create North American holding companies for their activities there and to meet the standards US banks must fulfill for capital reserves and liquidity buffers in order to make the banks less vulnerable to failure. The Fed said in addition that the new rules were intended to mitigate risk from foreign banks’ recent tendencies in the USA to bet more strongly in capital markets, on short-term capital. The proposed provisos would apply for “large” foreign banks in the US, defined as having >$50 billion internationally and >$10 billion in the USA. Such as Barclays and the embroiled-in-scandal Deutsche Bank, “both of which have attempted to use modifications under corporate law to avoid stricter constraints in America” and both of which have received large bailouts from US taxpayers despite being foreign, the F.A.Z. pointed out.

This seems like a smart initiative taken by the US government and apparently before other governments such as the EU’s. There are dystopian science fiction novels about future earths in which only domestic banks are regulated and foreign banks go a-raiding abroad until they don’t much resemble banks any more.

(NOY ah   OW! f log en   foor   in LEND ish en   oond   ow! SLEND ish en   BONK en.)

Kapitalverschleierung über Steueroasen

“Using tax oases to veil capital.” Methods for doing this were disclosed by financial data about 130,000 people, in 170 countries, >120,000 “mailbox companies,” >260 GB in >2 million documents from a time range of ~30 years sent anonymously to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists over a year ago. The story hit the world press on 04 Apr 2013. Greek and Filipino tax authorities announced that they will be investigating. The vice president of Mongolia‘s parliament will probably have to resign. Some of the still-legal methods to create tax opacity to be gleaned from the data were shown to have been used by the Deutsche Bank in Singapore, which had an intermediary agent (Trustverwaltungsfirma, “trust administrator company”) create >300 companies in so-called tax paradises (Steuerparadise).

In response: Gerhard Schick (Green Party) suggested Germany follow France’s example of levying an additional tax on all transactions with low-tax countries, disincentivizing tax flight (Steuerflucht) by neutralizing the advantages. Joachim Poß (SPD) proposed “an international anonymous NGO and a comprehensive information exchange, starting here in Europe.” The Leftists party proposed following the USA’s example of linking tax obligations to citizenship, so that every German residing abroad would be obligated to report “their total income every year, how much property they owned in total and what taxes they had had to pay for that in the Seychelles that year. And the difference between that and their German tax obligation” would then have to be paid in Germany, said Gregor Gysi (Die Linken).

The Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that they and NDR were the two German media outlets given access to the data (of “the biggest leak in world history”), and furthermore that a representative of Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble requested access to the data on Thursday, 04 Apr 2013, but the SZ would not grant that request. The data were protected under freedom of the press (Pressefreiheit), which includes protecting one’s sources, the Süddeutsche wrote. Sharing the data with government authorities might endanger those sources and obstruct the SZ’s ongoing research. NDR also refused the request to share the data. Now Focus magazine seems to have acquired the data somehow.

Update on 06 Apr 2013: “I have a certain degree of pleasure from the fact that this public scandalization in all countries has very much increased the pressure,” said German finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble with quiet satisfaction on 05 Apr 2013. “And now we have better chances to make progress faster than was possible in the past.”

Critics say the German finance minister has to be kidding because everyone’s known about this for years. If Schäuble were serious, they say, his office would be drafting new legislation. Income tax is regulated state-by-state in Germany, for example, and some people are calling for it to be centralized, made into a uniform federal-level taxation system with fewer “tax bait” niches. The OECD seems to be the locus for international negotiations in response to the new information; that group wants to issue a list of proposed actions in response to the “Offshore Leaks” data trove by July 2013.

(Cop ee TALL fer SHLY er oong   üüüberrr   SHTOY er oh OZ en.)

Kapitalpolster, Kapitaldecke

“Capital cushion,” “capital blanket.” The former is an informal and the latter a formal way of referring to the money a bank holds in reserve to cover its wagers, reserves which tended to fall dangerously low during deregulation but are now recovering. Deutsche Bank for example moved from <6% to 8% “core” capitalization in the past year. A bank with insufficient capital held in reserve is apparently said to have “thin capitalization” in English, whereas in German you would say its capital blanket is too short.

(Cop ee TALL pollster,   cop ee TALL deck eh.)

DeuBa

Syllabbreviation for the Deutsche Bank. Whose co-chief, Jürgen Fitschen, has apologized for phoning Hessian governor Volker Bouffier (CDU) after the Frankfurt district attorney’s 500-man razzia on 12/12 (but before the Munich district attorney’s 10-man razzia on 12/20, the latest Leo Kirch-related search of DeuBa premises) to complain that the Frankfurt district attorney’s 500-man razzia may have damaged the Deutsche Bank’s image. Fitschen’s phone call has been roundly condemned by German politicians in a [2011 Anglicism of the Year].

One expert has speculated that Fitschen fell on his sword so that duarch Anshu Jain can remain unfired. I’m wondering how the press learned about the phone call.

Süddeutsche Zeitung journalist Klaus Ott said the Deutsche Bank was warned by the Frankfurt D.A. last summer. “There was a sort of yellow card, a dark-yellow card, half a year ago, and the Deutsche Bank knew that if they didn’t cooperate there would be a search.”

Update on 03 Apr 2014: A blogger reviewing Michael Lewis’s new book on high-frequency trading mentioned an interesting relationship between the Securities and Exchange Commission, Deutsche Bank and the global financial crisis of 2008:

“The SEC’s head of enforcement, Robert Khuzami, was general counsel for the Americas for Deutsche Bank from 2004 to 2009. And who did Lewis reveal to be one of the biggest instigators of the subprime short and related CDO sales? Gregg Lippmann of Deutsche Bank, patient zero of this strategy. Any serious investigation of CDO malfeasance would implicate Khuzami.”
—Yves Smith

(Doy! Bah!)

Unternehmensstrafrecht

“Corporate penal code.” Green party member Jürgen Trittin has called for Germany to create laws punishing companies rather than their individual employees who can be shown to have broken the law. Trittin said the USA has such a code and therefore the Deutsche Bank, Germany’s largest bank, will be punished more in the USA than it will in Germany. His is not the first voice or political party to call for a German penal code for companies. Meanwhile, in the USA, people are furious about the slap on the wrist HSBC received in a settlement, not a prosecution, for alleged terror financing and drug money laundering so severe the boxes of cash were too large to fit through tellers’ windows, with ~50,000 accounts alone at one Cayman Islands branch that executed “virtually no oversight.”

An 11 Dec 2012 Spiegel op-ed noted that three major British banks have been required to pay large fines in the USA this year: Barclays, Standard Chartered and now HSBC. “All three of these large banks are based in London. That is no coincidence. Although in the past few years the American justiciary has taken aim at institutions from other countries, such as Credit Suisse, ING and JP Morgan, the British banks play a special role. They are traditionally set up more globally than their competition and have had business ties, sometimes for decades, in countries that are classified as ‘rogue states’ today.” Spiegel’s Carsten Volkery added that HSBC’s stock price has gone up by 14% since the summer, and Standard Chartered’s by 20%.

(OON ter NAY men’s SHTROFF rect.)

Umsatzsteuer-Karussell

“Value-added tax carousel.” On 12 Dec 2012 there was a razzia at the Deutsche Bank in which 500 finance police searched its offices and employees’ apartments in several cities for evidence of German Umsatzsteuer tax fraud for CO2 pollution permits sold abroad. Again, the scheme seems to have been to pass the paper back and forth across borders until it was unclear whether the tax due in Germany had been paid, after which the bank printed receipts saying it had and asked the German I.R.S. to refund, in this case, the 19% V.A.T. for the supposedly foreign transaction. Süddeutsche Zeitung described it as the government’s advance payment of V.A.T. to dummy companies that never paid it back and then evaporated. Trade in CO2 pollution permits shot up between 2008 and 2010, and the German fiscus refunded billions of euros to such schemes, according to the Bundeskriminalamt.

The Frankfurt general district attorney, who has been investigating this since 2010, voiced concern that Deutsche Bank employees, among other things, did not report suspected money laundering as they were required to. Germany’s largest bank, DeuBa garnered at least 230 million euros via the scheme.

The first razzia looking for evidence in this carbon emissions trading carousel scheme was carried out in April 2010 (and an unknown person warned the bank the day before). In December 2011 a decision by the Frankfurt District Court [Landgericht] listed instances in which the Deutsche Bank apparently did not care to ask questions about its business partners. Journalist Klaus Ott described some of them in an article in the Süddeutsche Zeitung dated 30 April 2012: “A business account for a furniture store that wants to engage in emissions trading? A business account for a company that doesn’t have any offices yet? A C.E.O. who doesn’t speak German but signs German-language bank papers with no prior translation? No problem! And what about the risk management documents of the company bringing in the new partner? The bank isn’t interested, even though it is well known that something stinks in this industry.” Spiegel-Online reported that in one case a ten-minute conversation sufficed to set up this million-euro deal. People behind the scheme appear to have been located in London.

Update on 20 Dec 2013: Europe’s carbon emissions market is merely ~100 billion euros, Süddeutsche.de wrote, but the continent’s “more vulnerable” “scarcely monitored”  electricity and gas market is about nine times as large. It looks like the carousel tax scheme has been used there too, by Germany’s third-largest utility company EnBW but they’re not the only ones. Europol said that “criminals” used the carousel to avoid ~5 billion euros in value-added taxes in the carbon emissions market, but that the tax fraud may have been correspondingly higher in the bigger market.

The alleged electricity trading carousel was set up quickly, growing very large very fast. At EnBW, for example, tax auditors either found or made an in-house note that in 2011 “tax-free sales increased from circa one billion euros to ten billion euros within one year.” Germany’s F.B.I., the Bundeskriminalamt, was quoted as saying setting up the scheme required specialist expertise and in fact looked rather “organized.”

Süddeutsche.de indicated they learned these details from internal confidential papers from e.g. tax auditors in Karlsruhe and a central corporate I.R.S.-type office in Stuttgart [Zentrales Konzernprüfungsamt Stuttgart]. Europol, German prosecutors from multiple cities and German tax officials from multiple states are said to be investigating.

(OOM zots SHTOY err   car OO! sell.)

Dividendenstripping

Dividend stripping.” A tax avoidance scheme the HypoVereinsBank is accused of, wherein they allegedly transferred customers’ stocks back and forth between German and foreign banks until it was unclear whether the Kapitalertragssteuer had been paid and then claimed more capital gains tax credits than were owed. Reuters and the Süddeutsche Zeitung reported that a single Frankfurt investor working with HVB and other banks was told he owed 124 million euros in tax for 2006–08 after the IRS-equivalent refused to accept his capital gains tax break from the scheme; he has been fighting in court since 2011 to get HVB to pay the tax bill. HVB and this investor split the profits 65% HVB, 35% investor. Wikipedia says dividend stripping lost its tax-law basis in 2000, Spiegel says it hasn’t been accepted by German tax authorities since 2007, and Süddeutsche Zeitung says since 2012.

Weird story about the HypoVereinsBank in Spiegel-Online on 30 Nov 2012: A guy accused his ex-wife and other HVB employees of large-scale tax avoidance schemes that moved money to Switzerland, was declared non compos mentis by the Bavarian justice system and has been locked up in a mental institution ever since (2006). The man probably was violent, but he may have been correct about the tax avoidance. He cited names and numbers when he blew the whistle to the Bavarian tax authority, but a judge who was not involved in that case called the tax office and told them not to investigate the bank because the whistleblower was crazy. The institutionalized whistleblower’s case was re-opened in 2013. He was set free  in the summer of 2013, after seven years of confinement. Laws committing people to mental institutions and keeping them there are going to be reformed as a result of his case. This started with an 05 Sep 2013 decision by the supreme court in Karlsruhe, the Bundesverfassungsgericht, which prioritized a review of the whistleblower’s case and announced failures of the various state courts and criteria that need to be met in future.

The Frankfurt district attorney’s HVB razzia last week found a trail leading to “a Swiss private bank.” Süddeutsche Zeitung says it is thought that Swiss banks will be a very fruitful place to investigate this German tax scandal. Deutsche Bank and UBS are now implicated as well.

Update on 16 Dec 2013: HSH Nordbank has been accused of dividend stripping.

(Dee veed END en shtrrrip pink.)

Blog at WordPress.com.