FT : Germany to provide €100bn in loans to energy groups hit by Ukraine war

Germany to provide €100bn in loans to energy groups hit by Ukraine war
‘Shock absorber’ measures will offer some relief to companies struggling with higher costs

The German government has announced an aid package to support companies hit by the fallout of the Ukraine war and the sanctions against Russia, the leading energy supplier to the eurozone’s biggest economy.

The measures include a new €100bn programme of short-term loans from state-owned KfW development bank for energy companies struggling to cover the vastly increased cost of insuring themselves against higher oil and gas prices.

The package will also provide an estimated €7bn of loans from KfW to boost liquidity at companies whose operations have been hit by the war and provide further government guarantees for bank loans to businesses with funding problems.

The aid package, described by finance minister Christian Lindner as an “economic shock absorber”, is similar but on a smaller scale to the one launched by Berlin to support companies hit by the coronavirus pandemic in 2020.

German companies have warned of dire consequences if the war in Ukraine leads to a severing of energy supplies from Russia. Some carmakers and steel producers have already had to close production due to surging energy costs and shortages of parts made in Ukraine.

The support plan, announced by Lindner and economy minister Robert Habeck on Friday, will provide “a time-limited and narrowly defined cost subsidy” for companies whose electricity costs have at least doubled since last year.

The ministers said Berlin was also planning to inject capital directly into companies via equity or hybrid investments, initially through KfW and subsequently through a separate fund. They did not say how much it could invest.

“We will cushion hardship and prevent structural breaks,” said Lindner, adding that the plan was “precisely targeted” to avoid discouraging the transition away from fossil fuels.

The new €100bn loan facility at KfW will provide some relief for German utilities, which have been warning that energy markets could seize up due to the heavy cost of insuring against higher prices through financial derivative markets.

A group representing Europe’s largest energy traders — including Shell and BP and big German utilities — made an unsuccessful appeal to central banks last month for help with extra “margin calls” required to cover their exposure to higher energy prices.

Uniper, the German utility, had to raise €10bn of extra financing this year, partly from KfW, to avoid a cash crunch after gas prices surged in the build-up to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

Brussels agreed this week to ban coal imports from Russia, which provides 70 per cent of the thermal coal imported by the bloc. However, the ban will only come into force in August, due to a German demand for more time to adjust to other sources.

Some EU countries are pushing for sanctions to be expanded to include a full embargo on Russian oil and gas imports, a move resisted so far by German chancellor Olaf Scholz, who has said the country needs two years to wean itself off Russian hydrocarbons completely.

Before the war began half of German gas and thermal coal imports come from Russia, which also supplies a third of the country’s oil imports.

(ZH) Why Won't The Fed Be Able To Shrink Its Balance Sheet?

Why Won't The Fed Be Able To Shrink Its Balance Sheet?

Earlier this week, Federal Reserve governor and vice-chair nominee Lael Brainard indicated the central bank will shrink its balance sheet at a “considerably” more rapid pace than it did during the previous cycle. I, Peter Schiff and a few others outside the mainstream have said the Fed won’t be able to do this.
Why not?
The Fed first expanded its balance sheet in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. Through three rounds of quantitative easing (QE), the Fed expanded its balance sheet from under $1 trillion to $4.5 trillion. When the central bank started QE, then-Fed Chair Ben Bernanke swore the central bank wasn’t monetizing federal government debt. He said the balance sheet expansion was an emergency measure and that the Fed would eventually sell the bonds it was buying.
The Fed didn’t get around to balance sheet reduction until 2018, and it did so at a relatively slow pace. By the time it ended tightening in August 2019, the balance sheet was just below $3.8 trillion. In all, the Fed shed about $700 billion from its balance sheet in a little more than 18 months.
Why did the Fed abandon tightening in 2019?
Because in the fall of 2018, the stock market tanked and the economy went wobbly. The markets and the economy couldn’t handle even the modest monetary tightening the Fed managed to implement.
It’s important to remember that the Fed resumed QE months before the pandemic — although it didn’t call it QE. By the time the Fed launched QE 4 in 2020, the balance sheet had already expanded back to just over $4 trillion.
Over the last two years, the Fed has added another $5 trillion to the balance sheet expanding it to nearly $9 trillion.
Brainard indicated that the upcoming balance sheet runoff will be “considerably” faster than last time. She did not say what that actually means, but the Fed minutes from the March meeting shed a little bit of light on the nuts and bolts of the plan.
According to the minutes, the plan is to reduce the balance sheet by about $3 trillion over a three-year period. This would leave the balance sheet at $6 trillion – up by $2 trillion from its pre-pandemic level and more than $5 trillion above the pre-2008 financial crisis level. So much for Bernanke’s promise.
Looking at the big picture, the Fed’s plan is relatively modest. If it sticks to this plan, it will shrink the balance sheet by about $1 trillion per year.
But I don’t even think it can accomplish this.
If the central bank couldn’t run off $700 billion in 2018 without popping the bubbles and shaking up the economy, what makes anybody think it can decrease its balance sheet holdings by $3 trillion this time around with even bigger bubbles and more debt in the economy?
THE MECHANISM
I’m not basing my skepticism purely on speculation. The process of balance sheet reduction makes it extremely unlikely that the Fed can accomplish its goal.
First, you have to understand how and why the Fed expanded its balance sheet to begin with.
Through quantitative easing, the Fed buys US Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities with money created out of thin air on the open market. For our purposes, we’ll focus on US Treasuries.
QE accomplishes two important things for the US government. First, it injects currency and liquidity to juice the economy. (By that I mean inflate bubbles.) Second, it reduces the supply of bonds on the market and holds bond prices artificially high. Bond yields are inversely correlated with bond prices. When the price of a bond rises, the yield falls. Propping bond prices up through its artificial demand keeps interest rates low.
So, QE benefits the federal government in two ways. It allows the US Treasury to sell more bonds to finance its deficits because the Fed is absorbing some of the supply and keeping demand higher than it otherwise would be. And it keeps the government’s borrowing costs low by artificially suppressing interest rates.
Balance sheet reduction, or quantitative tightening (QT), reverses this process.
The Fed can shrink its balance sheet in two ways.
  1. Typically, the Fed rolls over the bonds on its balance sheet as they mature. In other words, it takes the money the government pays for the mature bond and buys a new one to replace it. The Fed can shrink its balance sheet simply by letting the old bonds roll off the books without replacing them. This is a relatively slow way to shrink the balance sheet.
  2. The Fed can decrease its bond holding more quickly by selling them on the open market.
Either way, it creates a big problem for the federal government. If the Fed sheds $1 trillion in bonds from its balance sheet over the next year, the US Treasury will have to find buyers for $1 trillion in additional bonds, on top of the $1 trillion or so in new bonds it will have to sell to finance the annual deficit. And it will also have to sell new bonds to replace maturing bonds that are currently out there in the market. That’s how the government Ponzi scheme works. It pays off old debt with money borrowed from new lenders.
We’re talking about $3 to $4 trillion in bonds that will need buyers over the next year.
This raises a very important question: who is going to buy all of these bonds?
The Fed ranks as the second-largest holder of US debt behind US individuals and institutions. If the Fed is out of the market, and shedding some of its holdings, who is going to fill that gap? Where will the Fed find buyers for an additional $1 trillion in Treasuries every year for the next three years, on top of all the new bonds it needs to sell to finance its massive deficits? The Fed was in the QE game to prop up the bond market. What happens when it pulls out those props?
Supply and demand dictate that as the Fed dumps bonds onto the market, supply will rise and the price will fall. That means yields will rise.
This creates another big problem for the US government.
Rising interest rates mean Uncle Sam’s borrowing costs rise. It’s the same problem you would have if the bank started rising your mortgage rate, or your credit card company raised your interest rate. The US government will have to pay more to finance its debt. That means it will have to borrow more. And that means even more bonds on the market.
This will ripple through the entire financial system and the broader economy. We saw the impacts of tightening in 2018. There is no reason to think it will be any different this time around.
The Fed can talk about balance sheet reduction all it wants. But talking and doing are two different things.

>>> US Research Calls

Research Calls

  • Upgrades:
    • AppFolio (APPF) upgraded to Overweight from Sector Weight at KeyBanc Capital Markets; tgt $143
    • Afya (AFYA) upgraded to Outperform from Neutral at Credit Suisse; tgt raised to $19
    • C.H. Robinson (CHRW) upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at JP Morgan; tgt raised to $117
    • Coupang (CPNG) upgraded to Conviction Buy from Buy at Goldman; tgt lowered to 37
    • Eurofins Scientific (ERFSF) upgraded to Hold from Reduce at HSBC Securities
    • Gatos Silver (GATO) upgraded to Sector Perform from Underperform at RBC Capital Mkts; tgt $4
    • ITT (ITT) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at UBS; tgt lowered to $95
    • Kroger (KR) upgraded to Buy from Neutral at BofA Securities; tgt raised to $75
    • Sodexo (SDXAY) upgraded to Outperform from Sector Perform at RBC Capital Mkts
    • Target (TGT) upgraded to Buy from Hold at Gordon Haskett; tgt raised to $300
    • WD-40 (WDFC) upgraded to Neutral from Underperform at DA Davidson
  • Downgrades:
    • Alcoa (AA) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Credit Suisse; tgt raised to $82
    • ArcBest (ARCB) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $76
    • Astec Industries (ASTE) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Robert W. Baird; tgt $40
    • AvidXchange (AVDX) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Goldman; tgt lowered to $10
    • Canadian Pacific (CP) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $81
    • Credit Agricole SA (CRARY) downgraded to Hold from Buy at Jefferies
    • Dover (DOV) downgraded to Equal Weight from Overweight at Barclays; tgt lowered to $160
    • Essential Utilities (WTRG) downgraded to Hold from Buy at HSBC Securities; tgt $53
    • FTC Solar (FTCI) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Sandler; tgt lowered to $4
    • HP (HPQ) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at UBS; tgt $40
    • Intertek Group (IKTSY) downgraded to Hold from Buy at HSBC Securities
    • Manitowoc (MTW) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Robert W. Baird; tgt $16
    • Mercury (MRCY) downgraded to Hold from Buy at Jefferies; tgt raised to $65
    • Oshkosh (OSK) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Robert W. Baird; tgt $92
    • Rackspace Technology (RXT) downgraded to Perform from Outperform at Oppenheimer
    • REV Group (REVG) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Robert W. Baird; tgt $14
    • Robinhood Markets (HOOD) downgraded to Sell from Neutral at Goldman; tgt lowered to $13
    • Saia (SAIA) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $222
    • Schneider National (SNDR) downgraded to Underperform from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $23
    • SGS SA (SGSOY) downgraded to Hold from Buy at HSBC Securities
    • Shoals Technologies (SHLS) downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Sandler; tgt lowered to $16
    • Societe Generale (SCGLY) downgraded to Hold from Buy at Jefferies
    • Terex (TEX) downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Robert W. Baird; tgt $44
    • TFI International (TFII) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $95
    • Triton International (TRTN) downgraded to Underperform from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $53
    • Union Pacific (UNP) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $258
    • UPS (UPS) downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities; tgt $204
    • Virtus Investment Partners (VRTS) downgraded to Underweight from Overweight at Morgan Stanley; tgt lowered to $240
    • Werner Enterprises (WERN) downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA Securities; tgt $38
  • Others:
    • 5E Advanced Materials (FEAM) initiated with a Buy at DA Davidson; tgt $30
    • Alcon (ALC) initiated with a Buy at Needham; tgt $95
    • Alpha Tau (DRTS) initiated with an Overweight at Piper Sandler; tgt $19
    • Colgate-Palmolive (CL) initiated with a Mkt Perform at Raymond James
    • Compass Diversified (CODI) initiated with a Buy at B. Riley Securities; tgt $33
    • Cooper (COO) initiated with a Hold at Needham
    • Crescent Energy Company (CRGY) initiated with a Buy at Truist; tgt $25
    • PagSeguro Digital (PAGS) initiated with an Overweight at Cantor Fitzgerald; tgt $25
    • Procter & Gamble (PG) initiated with an Outperform at Raymond James; tgt $175
    • Raytheon Technologies (RTX) initiated with an Outperform at RBC Capital Mkts; tgt $125
    • RxSight (RXST) initiated with a Buy at Needham; tgt $18
    • STAAR Surgical (STAA) initiated with a Buy at Needham; tgt $87
    • StoneCo (STNE) initiated with an Overweight at Cantor Fitzgerald; tgt $15
    • Terran Orbital (LLAP) initiated with a Buy at Canaccord Genuity; tgt $22

>>> US Gapping down

Gapping down
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • LXP -8.2%, NRIX -2% (also provides corporate update), IMOS -0.5%

Other news:

  • HARP -4.2% (CMO departs)
  • ULCC -2.8% (Spirit Airlines to begin discussions with JetBlue Airways)
  • CWT -2.2% (to acquire Stroh's Water Company)
  • BTAI -2.1% (enters into commercial supply agreement with Arx)
  • BIIB -1.7% (Medicare releases national policy that limits coverage for aducanumab)
  • ANSS -1.1% (wins NASA contract worth up to $39.1 mln)

Analyst comments:

  • HOOD -3.4% (downgraded to Sell from Neutral at Goldman)
  • CP -2.4% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities)
  • FTCI -2.4% (downgraded to Neutral from Overweight at Piper Sandler)
  • AVDX -1.8% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Goldman)
  • HPQ -1.7% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at UBS)
  • ARCB -1.6% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA Securities)
  • AA -0.8% (downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Credit Suisse)

>>> US Gapping up

Gapping up
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • WDFC +9.1%, PSFE +4.7% (reaffirms guidance for Q1 and FY22; also names new CEO), UMC +2.2%, DBI +2.2%, QDEL +1.6%, TSM +0.8%, PSMT +0.7%, .

Other news:

  • GATO +5.6% (names new CEO; also announces record quarterly production)
  • CRWD +3.8% (secures Provisional Authorization to Operate at Impact Level 4; says it expects to achieve $5 bln in annual recurring revenue)
  • WOW +3.7% (co is exploring options including a sale according to Bloomberg)
  • IIPR +2.8% (announces quarterly operating activity)
  • MNOV +2.4% (announces secondary analysis of Phase 2 Trial of MN-166 (ibudilast) in Alcohol Use Disorder Published in Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research)
  • WAL +1.7% (extends contract for CEO)
  • TRQ +1.7% (provides update on review of acquisition proposal RIO)
  • SAVE +1.6% (to begin discussions with JetBlue Airways)
  • GRPN +1.5% (10% owner (Pale Fire's Jan Barta) affirms increased holding and 7.8% active stake)
  • JBLU +1.3% (Spirit Airlines to begin discussions with JetBlue Airways)
  • BHP +1.1% (provides update on BHP Petroleum and Woodside merger and share distribution information)

Analyst comments:

  • CPNG +2.5% (upgraded to Conviction Buy from Buy at Goldman)
  • ITT +2.2% (upgraded to Buy from Neutral at UBS)
  • APPF +2% (upgraded to Overweight from Sector Weight at KeyBanc Capital Markets)
  • CHRW +1.2% (upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at JP Morgan)

>>> US Early premarket gappers

Early premarket gappers

  • Gapping up:
    • PSFE +8%, WDFC +7.2%, UMC +5.1%, CRWD +3.9%, WOW +3.7%, GATO +3.6%, IIPR +2.8%, MNOV +2.1%, WAL +1.7%, TRQ +1.7%, QDEL +1.6%, BHP +1.2%, JBLU +0.9%, BIIB +0.7%, SAVE +0.7%, PSMT +0.7%, TSM +0.5%
  • Gapping down:
    • HARP -9.7%, ULCC -2.8%, BTAI -2.4%, CWT -2.2%, CPT -2.2%, NRIX -2%, ACMR -1.8%, ANSS -1.1%

>>> US After Hours Summary: WDFC +10.6% up big on earnings; BIIB -1.7% as Medica

After Hours Summary: WDFC +10.6% up big on earnings; BIIB -1.7% as Medicare releases national policy on aducanumab

After Hours Gainers:

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: WDFC +10.6%, NRIX +4.8% (also provides corporate update), PSFE +4.2% (reaffirms guidance for Q1 and FY22; also names new CEO), PSMT +2.3%, QDEL +0.3%

Companies trading higher in after hours in reaction to news: WOW +3.6% (co is exploring options including a sale, according to Bloomberg), GATO +2.9% (names new CEO; also announces record quarterly production), CRWD +2.8% (secures Provisional Authorization to Operate at Impact Level 4), BTAI +2.6% (enters into commercial supply agreement with Arx), DOMA +0.5% (CFO to depart), IIPR +0.1% (announces quarterly operating activity)

After Hours Losers:

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to earnings/guidance: None

Companies trading lower in after hours in reaction to news: HARP -11.6% (CMO departs), CWT -2.3% (to acquire Stroh's Water Company), CPT -1.8% (stock offering), BIIB -1.7% (Medicare releases national policy that limits coverage for aducanumab), NDAQ -0.5% (reports March 2022 metrics), LMT -0.1% (awarded $260 mln Navy contract)

Oil.com : Does China’s Friendship With Russia Really Have ‘No Limits’?

Does China’s Friendship With Russia Really Have ‘No Limits’?

For several years, China and Russia have been building an alternative world order to that offered by the U.S. and its allies, as analysed in full in my new book on the global oil markets. This was expedited by the unilateral withdrawal of the U.S. in May 2018 from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, its withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, and its ‘end of combat mission’ in Iraq in December 2021, among other factors. China’s strategy to achieve this new world order is one based on incremental advances of power, based around money flowing from its ‘One Belt One Road’ (OBOR) program. However, Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov’s comments before his meeting last week with Chinese counterpart, Wang Yi, that Moscow and Beijing are paving the way “towards a multi-polar, just, democratic world order” are too much too soon as far as China is concerned. The widely-publicised remarks have left Beijing needing to be even more careful in how its dealings with Russia are interpreted by the U.S., especially in the energy sector in which high oil prices pose direct economic and political threats to Washington. China stated two weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine that “there is ‘no limit’ to how far Russian and Chinese friendship may go” and signed a swathe of huge oil and gas deals shortly thereafter that provided an additional layer of insulation to both from any U.S. sanctions in the future. However, signalling perhaps that Beijing did not believe that Russia would necessarily launch a full-scale invasion of Ukraine before it did so, only a day after the military conflict spread to Ukraine’s major cities, Chinese President Xi Jinping held urgent talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and advocated peaceful negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. “China was signifying its discomfort over Russia’s military actions, [and] has reiterated that it respects the ‘sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries’,” Eugenia Fabon Victorino, head of Asia Strategy for SEB, in Singapore, told OilPrice.com last week.

At the same time, though, she added, Beijing has refrained from calling Russia’s actions an ‘invasion’, and abstained to vote on a UN Security Council resolution that would have deplored Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. “In addition, so far, China has not indicated an intention to take direct action against Moscow, and has kept trading links with Russia open,” she said. A key reason for this, over and above any ideological aspirations of a new world order is that although Russia accounts for only 2.9 percent of China’s total imports, Moscow did resolutely step up to the plate in 2021 when China faced an energy crunch. “As a result, Russia now accounts for 20.1 percent of China’s total coal imports, and its share of China’s imported crude oil has steadily risen to 15.6 percent by end-2021 from 11 percent in 2014,” highlighted Victorino. Russia’s vital strategic importance to China was bolstered again with the 30-year contract for Russia to supply gas to China through its new Far Eastern pipeline - following the earlier installation of the Power of Siberia-1 pipeline which began pumping supplies in 2019 – as highlighted by OilPrice.com.

“Despite stronger ties between Beijing and Moscow in recent years, there are limits to China’s friendship,” Victorino underlined. “While Russia is an increasingly important source of energy, its total trade with China pales in comparison with China’s trade links with the United States and the European Union [EU],” she said. According to the latest figures, among China’s top trading partners, the EU accounts for 15.3 percent of China’s total trade, followed by the U.S. with 12.5 percent. “As sanctions against Russia mount, there are reports that some of China’s largest state-owned banks are already limiting financing for transactions of Russian commodities,” she told OilPrice.com. “Although sanctions have so far stopped short of Russia’s energy trading, Chinese banks may have already stopped issuing US$-denominated letters of credit related to Russian commodities,” she added. Having said this, she underlined, Chinese yuan-denominated financing for Russian commodities may still be available, albeit with a higher level of scrutiny. “Large Chinese banks would be reluctant to lose access to dollar transactions, in our view, and in the past, China’s big four banks have complied with U.S. sanctions against Iran and North Korea in a bid to maintain access to the dollar clearing system,” she concluded.

The precariousness of the position into which Russia has put China is further evidenced by the fact that increasing fears of U.S. retaliatory measures against Beijing added fuel to the sell-off in Chinese equities in the aftermath of the invasion on the 24th of February. “China will need to make a stronger gesture of neutrality if Beijing wishes to lower the risk of second order political and economic spillovers from the Russian invasion of Ukraine,” Rory Green, head of China and Asia research at TS Lombard, in London, told OilPrice.com last week. “Our view remains that China will comply with the existing sanctions regime and is prioritising three objectives in the current geopolitical turmoil: first, maintaining normal ties with Russia but avoiding aiding the war effort; second, non-alienation of the EU; and, third, avoiding secondary sanctions and economic damage.”

The relative importance of the first objective is now much lower, he said, as Beijing has made efforts to moderate its stance and move closer to European and Western positions. “Following intelligence leaks and U.S. accusations, Chinese officials have sought to clarify Beijing’s stance, with the Chinese Ambassador to the U.S., Qin Gang, writing a Washington Post editorial that underscored Ukraine’s sovereignty and played up China’s neutral position,” he told OilPrice.com. “Also, in a bilateral call, President Xi called on [U.S.] President [Joe] Biden and their respective countries to ‘work for world peace and tranquillity’,” Green underlined, “Additionally, earlier in the week, Xi described the conflict as a ‘war’ for the first time, and Chinese state media have also begun to report less favourably on Russia including coverage of civilian deaths,” he said. “Overall, despite the shared values and Beijing’s reluctance to succumb to Western pressure, we think strategic rationality will dominate,” highlighted Green. “China has indicated a strong preference for avoiding the economic consequences of Russia’s actions and, given the rising growth and market concerns in Beijing, we expect economics to dominate ideology,” he concluded.

Although being seen to comply with U.S. strictures on Russia is important to China, it remains the case that there are several legal and quasi-legal ways for it to continue to import Russian energy in significant volumes, so adding to the overall global supply and affecting oil prices. As analysed in depth by OilPrice.com recently, China has a long history of being able to work around sanctions – ranging across the gamut of legality and beyond – with basic factors working in its favour regarding Russia being the lack of exposure of China’s firms to the U.S. financial infrastructure and to the US dollar, and the direct oil and gas infrastructure between the two countries. It is apposite to note that around the same time as the two huge new oil and gas deals were signed between Russia and China, there were discussions between Gazprom and China National Petroleum Corporation that the contract would be settled in euros to diversify the payment from the U.S. currency.

“As the U.S. dollar becomes more weaponised, there is an incentive to convert more FX reserves into yuan,” underlined SEB’s Victorino. “In the case of Russia, earlier restrictions imposed following the annexation of Crimea in 2014 led to the significant diversification of Russia’s foreign reserves away from U.S. dollars: of the US$643 billion reserves, the share of U.S. dollars has fallen to 16.4 percent as of Q2 2021 from 44.4 percent in 2014, whilst over the same period Russia made cumulative purchases of almost US$78 billion worth of Chinese yuan, meaning that the yuan’s current share is at 13.1 percent,” she said.

By Simon Watkins for Oilprice.com

FT : Rishi Sunak brands attacks on wife’s UK tax status as ‘unpleasant smears’

Rishi Sunak brands attacks on wife’s UK tax status as ‘unpleasant smears’
Chancellor responds to criticism over Akshata Murty’s decision to acquire non-dom status

Rishi Sunak has branded criticism of his wife as “unpleasant smears” aimed at harming him, as the UK chancellor faced further criticism for her non-dom tax status.

Akshata Murty owns a stake in Indian technology company Infosys, which was founded by her father, that is thought to be worth more than £500mn. But the explanation that her non-dom status is based on her Indian citizenship was described as “disingenuous” by several tax experts.

They pointed out that Murty would have chosen to be a non-dom for tax purposes.

In an interview with The Sun on Thursday, Sunak hit back at the accusations, stating his wife “loves her country like I love mine” adding “to smear my wife to get at me is awful”.

The chancellor said Murty “had her own career” and was “100 per cent doing everything this country asks of her” in terms of following the law and paying taxes.

“It wouldn’t be reasonable or fair to ask her to sever ties with her country because she happens to be married to me. She loves her country. Like I love mine, I would never dream of giving up my British citizenship. And I imagine most people wouldn’t,” Sunak said.

“These are her choices, right? She’s a private citizen, and of course I support my wife’s choices. She’s not her husband’s possession. Yes, he’s in politics, and we get that but I think you know, we get that she can be someone independent of her husband in her own right.”

The dispute comes after Sunak’s political standing tumbled following the Spring Statement. His position on Murty’s tax status was criticised on Friday as “unsustainable” by ConservativeHome, a leading website representing the party’s grassroots.

The chancellor said that the attacks on Murty and her father Narayana Murthy, who founded Infosys, were focused on him. “To attempt to smear him, to smear my wife to get at me is awful.

“It’s different when people are trying to attack you by coming at your family and particularly your wife. It’s unpleasant, especially when she hasn’t done anything wrong.”

Sunak said that he thought people did not have an issue with “the fact that there’s an Indian woman living in Downing Street” although he acknowledged that “it is a confusing situation that she is from another country”.

Emily Thornberry, shadow attorney-general, rejected suggestions that the Labour party were attempting to “smear” the chancellor, arguing that they were simply “asking questions that the public want us to ask”.

Speaking to the BBC, she said: “In the end, we have somebody who’s been living here for eight years, raising her children here, living at No 10 Downing Street in accommodation provided by the taxpayer and aspiring to be the wife of the next prime minister, and yet she says that she isn’t a permanent resident of this country.”

Thornberry added that the public had a right to know “to what extent his family have benefited from” his wife’s financial decision.

Tobias Ellwood, a Conservative MP and chair of the House of Commons defence select committee, said the current rules relating to non-dom status were “out of date” and “needed to be reviewed”, but he argued that the country had other matters to focus on such as the conflict in Ukraine.

“There is nothing illegal about what has been done by the chancellor . . . If there are bigger, more fundamental questions about the existence of the non-dom status, that is something for us as a country — perhaps and indeed parliament — to debate,” he told Sky News on Friday.

“But the idea that we focus on this discussion about following the rules that actually exist at the moment, I think, is a distraction from what we need to be focusing on, which was the previous subject right now, of what Britain is going to do to help and lead other countries to support Ukraine.”