Afleveringen
-
Some Questions, Now That it's About 3 Years Since Russia’s Default
It has now been around 3 years since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which prompted EU and US sanctions and a default on Russia’s external bonds. The prescription clause in these bonds says that Russia’s obligations become void unless investors make claims within three years of the date payment is due. What does it mean to “make” a “claim”? Filing a lawsuit would do the trick. What about an email requesting payment? An automated message, which the depository sends out every payment date? Should bondholders have sought an agreement tolling the prescription period? Since they didn't, does Russia now have what amounts to an option to pay past due amounts? And what about interest on unpaid amounts? Does Russia owe interest on payments that were impossible to make due to sanctions?
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Sovereign Debt Odd & Ends
An odds and ends podcast about unrelated sovereign debt topics. First up, Venezuela. Most investors have been sitting around waiting for an eventual restructuring and lifting of US sanctions. But a handful of funds sued early, got judgments, and have spent years trying unsuccessfully to collect. If they had succeeded, they would have recovered much more than similarly-situated creditors who waited around for a restructuring deal. But they failed and, in a bizarre twist, have asked the court to vacate their judgments, effectively returning them to the creditor queue. We cry foul. Next up, another fiscally-irresponsible and increasingly author ... well, it's the United States. We discuss the crazy (and terrifying) idea that the US might unilaterally extend the maturities of government debt.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Zijn er afleveringen die ontbreken?
-
Is There Any Law of State Succession? Syria, Ukraine and Greenland.
The law of state succession to obligations comes mostly from a different era, when war and conquest were legal and borders changed with some frequency. Today, we are faced with multiple situations where borders might change due to war. Does the law tell us what happens to the debts attributable to the acquired territory? And how do we translate legal rules that evolved in the 18th and 19th centuries into the modern era? Paul Stephan (Virginia), one of the foremost international law experts, joins us to discuss.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
What if Trump Discovers that Unpaid UK (and French) Debt From WWI?
The current administration has tossed concepts such as “special relationships” with allies out the window. The administration seems willing to apply just about any leverage it has to obtain concessions from allies, including concessions that might reduce the US debt. Seen in that light, what will happen when Trump and the Musketeers discover that the UK and France have hundred-year old unpaid debts? With interest, that unpaid debt would now amount to a few trillion dollars. Enforcing these debts would be near impossible, except that the UK and France own a whole bunch of US Treasuries. Could the administration try to force a swap of those Treasuries into longer term obligations? Or try to use the US government's claims against the UK and France as a setoff, reducing payments on US debt held by those governments? Seems loony. But loony is normal these days.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
What Might a Syrian Debt Restructuring (Eventually) Look Like?
There is little doubt that Syria needs to restructure its debt, among other reasons to pave the way for rebuilding after a long and brutal civil war. It strikes us as too early to envision what that process will look like, but we can identify some of the key issues. The country owes a lot to official creditors, especially Iran and Russia. Much of this was off-books and was used for the military or otherwise to support former President Bashar al-Assad's repressive regime. Not surprisingly, we are already hearing the term "odious debt" raised to suggest these debts need not be repaid; there may be a separate doctrine allowing repudiation of certain war-related debts. We talk about whether these (arguable) doctrines of international law have any relevance here and about the potential role of the U.S. in a debt restructuring.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
User Fees on the US Treasury Strategic Gold Crypto Reserve
Trump plans to reduce the US debt. We are missing some of the steps, but here are the ones we have identified so far:
1. Golden passports
2. Tariffs
3. Maybe not tariffs
4. Okay, tariffs
5. Something about gold
6. User fee on treasuries
7. Crypto
8. ???
We speculate about what we are missing. Maybe it’s a red Tesla?
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Why Do We Care Who is Behind HRB’s Sri Lankan Lawsuit?
The Hamilton Bank litigation against Sri Lanka appears to be reaching the end. Or is it? The stays that were granted during restructuring talks have implications for future sovereign debt restructurings, we think. Especially Venezuela’s restructuring, which is going to be a huge undertaking. And then, there may be more drama to come in the HRB lawsuit itself. Sri Lanka says it needs more discovery, apparently to dig into whoever might be behind the lawsuit. Why?
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Greece’s (Ratings) Rise From the Ashes – Wow, but also How?
We study sovereign restructurings, which means we primarily study countries going into and struggling to get out of crisis. Serial defaulters such as Argentina and Ecuador are frequent topics on our podcasts. And given how bad things were a decade ago, and its history of frequent defaults before that, we might have expected that Greece would join Argentina and Ecuador as among our more frequent podcast topics. And, indeed, Greece is back. But not because it is back in crisis. Instead, it is because it has had a remarkable rise from the ashes to almost investment grade. To discuss this rise, our two good friends from Moodys Ratings, Sarah Carlson and Elena Duggar, join us.
Check out an overview of Moodys Sovereign Methodology here: https://ratings.moodys.io/sovereign-methodology
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Getting "J. Screwed" Sounds Better than Getting "Argentina'd"
In the world of corporate debt, everyone seems to be talking about "Liability Management Exercises," where a borrower, with a subset of creditors, exploits loose loan covenants in ways that leave other creditors screaming mad. Even better, these LME techniques have clever names: "trap doors," getting "J. Screwed," etc. And while the worlds of sovereign and corporate debt don't overlap all that much, we wonder if litigation over LMEs can tell us anything about sovereign debt restructurings. Alas, we don't know much about corporate debt. Thankfully, Andrew Kissner (Morrison Foerster) joins us to dispel our confusion.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Is Sri Lanka’s Loss Reinstatement Provision a Penalty?
Two of our favorite things to talk about are innovative contract clauses and ancient illogical contract doctrines that unexpectedly bite in the ass. A few weeks ago, we walked through the Loss Reinstatement provisions for Ghana and Zambia. We asked the question of whether those provisions might run afoul of the antiquated and bizarre (to us) anti-penalty doctrines under English and New York law. English law having recently become more permissive with regards to permitting penalty type clauses – if they have a legitimate business purpose -- we speculated about whether the Zambia/Ghana clauses might pass muster. Maybe. But Sri Lanka’s version of the clauses is under New York law. And New York law on this matter is still stuck in the dark ages, best we can tell. So, does the Loss Reinstatement provision for Sri Lanka run afoul of the penalty doctrine?
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Sri Lanka's New MFC Clause — Have "Contorts" Arrived in Sovereign Debt?
The doctrine of tortious interference with contracts is one of several that sits at the intersection of tort and contract law. These "contorts" confuse law students — lawyers and law professors too! — but can be important in practice. If not anticipated, they can create problems for unsuspecting parties and lawyers. Has Sri Lanka’s novel Most Favored Creditor clause created problems for creditors who participated in the country's restructuring? The MFC clause is confusing in places. It simultaneously seems to contemplate Sri Lanka striking a deal with holdouts (after litigation ends) and to quite aggressively try to prevent such a deal from happening. We discuss whether this creates risks for restructuring creditors and wonder why such an aggressive clause was viewed as necessary.
Producer: Leanna Doty
"Shades of Spring" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ -
YPF and Argentina’s Contributions to International Law
Argentina owes over $16 billion in connection with its nationalization of state oil company YPF. A federal judge in the Southern District of New York is considering whether to order Argentina to hand over its shares in YPF — technically located outside the United States — to pay part of the judgment. Can it do that? Paul Stephan (Virginia) joins to talk about how foreign state property located outside the United States is (and is not) protected by the law of foreign sovereign immunity, residual common law protections, and doctrines like comity.
Producer: Leanna Doty
"Shades of Spring" Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ -
The Penalty Doctrine in Contract Law
We've never been fans of the contract law rule against penalties. Why can't parties (sophisticated ones at least) agree to suffer a penalty in the event of breach? We’d ordinarily avoid this topic, because the doctrine makes little sense and the issue doesn’t come up much in the sovereign debt world. But recently, a couple of sovereign restructurings (Ghana and Zambia) have used “Loss Reinstatement Provisions.” At least on their face, these provisions seem vulnerable to challenge under the penalty doctrine, since, if the sovereign defaults on the restructured deal, they impose a loss that seems untethered to the injury creditors have suffered. Would these new clauses be enforced if challenged? The contracts in question are both under English law, which we don't know much about. But that does not stop us from speculating and arguing.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
A New Competition For Law (and Jurisdiction)?
Jurisdictions famously compete for businesses to use their corporate law. Less discussed is the competition for having one’s law chosen to govern contracts. But it happens. Sovereign debt lawyers in England and New York can, if they have a few drinks in them, can be quite entertaining in their sniping at each other about whether English or New York law is better for sovereign issuers. And the sovereigns for their part, seem to only care about what they have done in the past, regardless of what the lawyers say or what court decisions come down (remember pari passu and Judge Griesa in New York – nothing changed). But recently, as a result of the attempts of a few members of the New York legislature to try and mess with sovereign restructuring framework (“improve”, some would say – but not us), a couple of issuers have put in place provisions that allow them to choose to switch governing law (but not jurisdiction?) mid stream, in the event that New York actually passes some daft legislation. We think this is all great fun to talk about. Angry emails about how we should take these matters more seriously should all be sent to the address of Hamilton Bank in Nevis.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
An Execution Sale is Not a Receivership. (Right?)
Creditors of Venezuela and PDVSA, its state oil company, have forced an execution sale of PDVSA's only US asset – which happens to be the ultimate parent company of CITGO. The federal judge overseeing the process has tried to keep things orderly, but the inter-creditor fighting is getting juicy. Some lower priority creditors have filed new lawsuits in an apparent attempt to jump the queue. Now the special master overseeing the execution sale process wants the court to enjoin these lawsuits. Which strikes as us a reach – almost as if the execution sale process is some kind of receivership. So we asked Nate Oman, who has written about the potential use of receiverships to solve sovereign debt problems, to help us figure out what is going on.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Hamilton Bank v. Sri Lanka: What the $@#$ ?
Accusations that Hamilton Bank is a giant fraudster stealing depositor funds, bizarro requests from Hamilton to the court that other creditors be constrained in using their contract rights against it, an amicus intervention in the case to say nothing at all . . . and on and on. This case gets more and more bizarre, which makes us suspect that whatever is going on under the surface is even weirder than the (already weird) stuff that is visible to outsiders like us. What no one is discussing, though, is the “unconditional rights” provision in the trust indenture document that arguably gives minority bondholders protection against any attempt to do a cram down.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
Zambia’s Restructuring: A Post-Mortem
Zambia’s recently concluded restructuring seemed to drag on forever, debilitated by conflicts among the various creditor groups. Why did these different groups think the others were being unreasonable in their demands? And what can we learn from what happened? Our guest is one of the keenest observers in the sovereign debt world, who followed this restructuring at the ground level, Theo Maret.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
The Champerty Show
Ah, Champerty. Perpetual runner-up, to the doctrine of consideration, in the Stupidest Legal Rule pageant. Why do directly (e.g., via the abuse of process claim) what you can do clumsily and indirectly (by limiting an injured party’s access to finance)? But what do we know? Actually, not much. We do know that Venezuela/PDVSA won a very interesting Champerty case in the Southern District of New York. And while we know very little about Champerty, we know enough to know we don’t like the doctrine very much, even if the outcome seems defensible.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
IMF Rescues Pakistan From the Brink of Default (Again)
Pakistan looks to be in the process of finalizing yet another IMF program. Yet again, it has been rescued from the brink of default with a bailout justified by some heroic assumptions about how a state of sustainability will magically materialize. Why? Our guest, Zohra Ahmed, of Boston University Law School, has a theory: that these bailouts (that ultimately hurt Pakistan because true economic reform never happens) are the price of consent. Specifically, consent by Pakistan to cooperate with US military interests. We discuss with Zohra both her theory and the evidence for it.
Producer: Leanna Doty -
A Better Way to Freeze (and Seize?) Russian Assets?
Ever since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022, there has been talk of what international law doctrines might be utilized to induce Russia to back off. One of those doctrines that has been whispered about is now, thanks to a wonderful new article by our guest, international law guru and Yale Law professor, Oona Hathaway, is that of Countermeasures. Oona and her co authors not only explain the law of countermeasures, but argue that these legal principles naturally extend into a doctrine of “collective countermeasures”. We ask Oona about these doctrines and their scope, particularly in the context of Russia and Ukraine. She argues that the doctrine, properly understood and applied, is (and should be) narrow. To quote Spider Man (maybe), “With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility”.
Producer: Leanna Doty - Laat meer zien
