Sanctions on Russia

Cutting back on oil production means they aren't making a dime on those five hundred thousand barrels they're leaving in the ground. Now, they’re basically gambling on whether a daily global shortage of that size will actually be enough to drive prices up.
I don't see it happening.

William Cooper11 said:Cutting back on oil production means they aren't making a dime on those five hundred thousand barrels they're leaving in the ground. Now, they’re basically gambling on whether a daily global shortage of that size will actually be enough to drive prices up.
I don't see it happening.

Instead of taxing based on actual market rates, Russia is planning to hit oil companies with taxes pegged to Brent—up by $20 per barrel according to Reuters. They're trying to patch up that $24.8 billion January deficit, though it looks like selling off bonds isn't cutting it anymore.

So, it’s officially happening. They’ve pegged the price of Urals to Brent at a fixed $20 discount. With Brent sitting at $86 and riding a clear upward trend, expect the Russians to start pushing Urals above the European Union price cap.

On top of that, the supply crunch is driving up global prices. For now, OPEC isn't stepping in to offset the production cuts coming out of Russia.

Oil prices climbed to $86 on Friday in international markets following Russia's announcement to scale back production in March.

They’re still gonna sell at market rates. That Brent minus 20 thing? It's just a tax loophole. Basically, they take a barrel sold at $52.33—which is what they're getting for Urals right now—and tax it as if it actually brought in $86.39 based on current Brent prices.

If they actually had the power to dictate prices, they wouldn't bother cutting production just to try and jack them up.

William Cooper11 said:Cutting back on oil production means they aren't making a dime on those five hundred thousand barrels they're leaving in the ground. Now, they’re basically gambling on whether a daily global shortage of that size will actually be enough to drive prices up.
I don't see it happening.

See, I don't really view this as some big gamble; it feels more like they just physically can't move those 500k barrels if they tried. I mean, with China finally reopening, everyone is expecting demand to jump by something like 2 million barrels a day, so I'm struggling to see why these guys would even need to tighten the taps—unless, of course, they've already hit their absolute limit on what they can actually export.

Did the West actually succeed in backing Russia into a corner with sanctions? Putin's 'rainy day fund' has nearly been cut in half in just one year

Preliminary data from the Russian government shows that their budget deficit surged to $24.78 billion in January, driven by a massive drop in revenue—specifically from energy sales—combined with a sharp spike in spending.

I’ll be the first to admit I don't claim to be an expert on macroeconomics, but honestly? It’s incredibly satisfying to see that even someone like me could have predicted exactly how this Russian aggression would wreck their economy.
lp

Bryan Booth82 said:PUTIN IN A PANIC
A top-tier trader just dropped this bombshell: ‘This recent oil move proves Russia has officially lost the energy war!’

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy-war-oil-impact-15304847

"Now that Europe is finally adjusting to life without Russian gas, why on earth would they ever go back?"

Written by: Gojko Drljača Ebote 🤔 😵 😁
Seriously, what are we even looking at here? One of Putin's biggest propaganda "journalists" in America has suddenly decided to flip the script.
I honestly can't believe my eyes. What happened? Did the checks from the Kremlin finally stop clearing? I guess even the most biased hacks have to pay their bills eventually... right?
Don't sell out now, Gojko... 😁

lp

Maybe it’s just a matter of insufficient payment, or maybe he's been rebranded as a sleeper agent who will now function more or less as a Putin critic and an ideologically moderate voice. I don't think Russia & Co. could even imagine losing (this) war, so they're likely already securing their assets and setting up future sleeper cells that will blend into the background, waiting for a better historical moment while lobbying for Russia in a much more subtle, hidden way.

Thomas Walker84 said:Maybe it’s just a matter of insufficient payment, or maybe he's been rebranded as a sleeper agent who will now function more or less as a Putin critic and an ideologically moderate voice. I don't think Russia & Co. could even imagine losing (this) war, so they're likely already securing their assets and setting up future sleeper cells that will blend into the background, waiting for a better historical moment while lobbying for Russia in a much more subtle, hidden way.

I’ve noticed that this guy has been pumping out either anti-West pamphlets or reeks of blatant pro-Russian propaganda for years now. So, the theory that he’s simply adapting to new conditions and receiving fresh instructions from the White House... well, it seems entirely plausible.

lp

Looking at the long-term outlook, the budget is definitely taking a hit, which isn't great. But honestly, since I’m not seeing those chaotic street videos coming out of Moscow, I’m guessing they can probably limp along and patch things up for another couple of years. 😁

Nathan Evans78 said:Looking at the long-term outlook, the budget is definitely taking a hit, which isn't great. But honestly, since I’m not seeing those chaotic street videos coming out of Moscow, I’m guessing they can probably limp along and patch things up for another couple of years. 😁

Based on the data we have regarding the reserves held by Russia, predictions suggest they could hit zero as early as late 2023... provided they keep burning through cash at this exact rate while trying to maintain social stability and funding a war...
Supposedly, once that happens, combined with the sanctions already in place, their inability to take on new debt, and the fact that they can't sell resources like they used to before the war... we're talking total bankruptcy.
I honestly think Russia 2024 is going to be a make-or-break year, though obviously, that all hinges on how things play out on the battlefield...

Best,

State assets, such as central bank reserves, present a whole host of complicated headaches because they fall under this concept of "sovereign immunity." Essentially, it’s the legal principle that one nation isn't going to just swoop in and seize another nation's property.

In an overview of current legislation published last June in the Capital Markets Law Journal, Paul B. Stephen noted that "under customary international law, sovereign immunity generally protects state assets from seizure."

Well, damn...

Nathan Evans78 said:

State assets, such as central bank reserves, present a whole host of complicated headaches because they fall under this concept of "sovereign immunity." Essentially, it’s the legal principle that one nation isn't going to just swoop in and seize another nation's property.

In an overview of current legislation published last June in the Capital Markets Law Journal, Paul B. Stephen noted that "under customary international law, sovereign immunity generally protects state assets from seizure."

Well, damn...

It’s not quite as black and white as the headlines make it out to be. There are some pretty wild legal loopholes that could potentially allow them to seize that cash—though personally, I doubt they'll pull the trigger on it, mostly because messing with those assets would start raising some serious questions about how safe capital actually is in the West.

For instance, over in the US, foreign sovereign immunity laws actually leave the door open to seizing assets from entities that have violated international law (like crossing Ukraine's borders). Plus, there's the anti-terrorism legislation that allows for asset seizure if a country gets flagged as a state sponsor of terrorism.

In Europe, though, it all really depends on which specific country holds the assets and whether those local courts lean toward absolute or restrictive immunity when dealing with foreign states.

https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/...79938696359941

Apparently, "the wealthy" need to start footing the bill for the government. The logic is that it’s just not right for some folks to be sitting on piles of cash while the national budget is struggling—though, hey, luckily for them, those sanctions aren't actually doing anything anyway.

If you haven't heard about Uravnilovka 2023 yet (maybe because you aren't deep enough in the loop or you're on the wrong side of the powers that be), buckle up. Here we come.

hollowdriver13 said:https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/...79938696359941

Apparently, "the wealthy" need to start footing the bill for the government. The logic is that it’s just not right for some folks to be sitting on piles of cash while the national budget is struggling—though, hey, luckily for them, those sanctions aren't actually doing anything anyway.

If you haven't heard about Uravnilovka 2023 yet (maybe because you aren't deep enough in the loop or you're on the wrong side of the powers that be), buckle up. Here we come.

Uravnilovka serves its purpose... strictly on paper. Those positioned closer to power—and in higher ranks—always possess far more than they require. To facilitate this, everyone else is squeezed until there is enough left over for "those at the top." Then you have the endless line of system enforcers who also cannot afford to lack. Over time, it accumulates.

hollowdriver13 said:https://twitter.com/Gerashchenko_en/...79938696359941

Apparently, "the wealthy" need to start footing the bill for the government. The logic is that it’s just not right for some folks to be sitting on piles of cash while the national budget is struggling—though, hey, luckily for them, those sanctions aren't actually doing anything anyway.

If you haven't heard about Uravnilovka 2023 yet (maybe because you aren't deep enough in the loop or you're on the wrong side of the powers that be), buckle up. Here we come.

Did I catch that correctly? So, "prosperity" in Russia is supposed to be shared on a voluntary basis rather than through forced tax policy like they do in the West?

It reminds me of those old-school socialist volunteer drives, where people would supposedly work for the good of society out of pure altruism.

Take the most famous volunteer from the former America—when Alija Izetbegović asked him what he wanted as a reward, he simply replied: "just one more shovel, Comrade Marshall."

Bangladesh has officially barred Russian vessels from entering its ports.

https://twitter.com/NOELreports/stat...42195753066496

hollowdriver13 said:It’s not quite as black and white as the headlines make it out to be. There are some pretty wild legal loopholes that could potentially allow them to seize that cash—though personally, I doubt they'll pull the trigger on it, mostly because messing with those assets would start raising some serious questions about how safe capital actually is in the West.

For instance, over in the US, foreign sovereign immunity laws actually leave the door open to seizing assets from entities that have violated international law (like crossing Ukraine's borders). Plus, there's the anti-terrorism legislation that allows for asset seizure if a country gets flagged as a state sponsor of terrorism.

In Europe, though, it all really depends on which specific country holds the assets and whether those local courts lean toward absolute or restrictive immunity when dealing with foreign states.

As it stands, Russian reserves can only truly be seized and redistributed—say, to Ukraine—if a formal state of war is declared against Russia.

What they actually had the opportunity to do at the onset of the conflict was simply refuse to pay for Russian oil and gas directly; instead, they could have diverted those payments into escrow accounts, holding them in limbo until Russia ceases its violations of international law and stops the illegal invasion of Ukraine. But, alas, that path wasn't taken.

rowdybadger22 said:As it stands, Russian reserves can only truly be seized and redistributed—say, to Ukraine—if a formal state of war is declared against Russia.

What they actually had the opportunity to do at the onset of the conflict was simply refuse to pay for Russian oil and gas directly; instead, they could have diverted those payments into escrow accounts, holding them in limbo until Russia ceases its violations of international law and stops the illegal invasion of Ukraine. But, alas, that path wasn't taken.

Russian reserves could be snatched away from them like it’s nothing, whenever the time is right.
When you're dealing with a bully, you've gotta play rough—they don't understand any other language. ☕

Nathan Thomas12 said:Russian reserves could be snatched away from them like it’s nothing, whenever the time is right.
When you're dealing with a bully, you've gotta play rough—they don't understand any other language. ☕

That's the truth right there. Honestly, the simplest move would be to officially designate Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism—in most countries, that alone would be more than enough legal ground to freeze and seize all their assets.

The Swiss aren't exactly thrilled about this whole seizure idea.

The Swiss government says seizing Russian assets would be unconstitutional.

...
"Seizing frozen private property isn't in line with our federal constitution or the current legal framework, and frankly, it violates Switzerland's international obligations," the Swiss Ministry of Justice stated on Wednesday.

"Other nations have similar constitutional protections and guarantees."

Swiss banks are pushing back too. "There just isn't a legal basis for confiscation right now," the Swiss Bankers Association noted last month.
...