FT : Germany’s pivot on China trade is a long time coming for other EU capitals

Converted
Four years after Germany’s Zeitenwende on foreign and defence policy, Berlin has made another “turning point” on trade, with a call to raise barriers against China. Many of its EU allies think it’s not a moment too soon, writes Andy Bounds.

Context: Germany’s manufacturers were until recently as reliant on China’s consumers as they were on cheap Russian gas. Germany has long opposed tougher action against Beijing, even as its trade deficit has ballooned.

But yesterday Chancellor Friedrich Merz demanded strong action to save Europe from Chinese exports. In a letter to European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen with French President Emmanuel Macron, Merz called for tougher trade measures and a new instrument to quickly close the EU market to countries that do not play by the rules.

No country was mentioned but with trade commissioner Maroš Šefčovič off to Beijing on Thursday the target was clear. Šefčovič has called the EU’s roughly €1bn a day trade deficit with China “unsustainable” and a threat to the European social model.

The two leaders say that “a massive industrial shock is affecting sectors at the heart of the European industrial model and of systemic relevance”, referring to pharmaceuticals, aerospace, automotive, machine tools and chemicals industries.

It comes just two years after Germany declined to back the imposition of anti-subsidy duties on Chinese electric vehicles — a fact remarked upon by member states who have been calling for tougher action against Beijing for years. 

“Germany is pragmatic,” said one EU diplomat. “As long as China was buying its cars and machinery it didn’t want to pick a fight. Now it is damaging the economy, that has changed.”

“Germany has long been the most reluctant EU member state, but Berlin finally seems to have seen the light,” said a second.

Officially Berlin still tries to comply with WTO rules and refrains from naming China as the main culprit. The problem, German officials say, is “unfair practices” and “distorted competition”.

A German official acknowledged that the combination of falling German exports to China and surging Chinese imports had triggered a shift.

“Industry has moved and political parties especially, the [ruling centre-right] CDU as well,” they said.

WSJ : Barbie-Maker Mattel Faces Growing Shareholder Pressure to Consider a Sale

Barbie-Maker Mattel Faces Growing Shareholder Pressure to Consider a Sale
Ariel Investments, which has a 5.4% stake in the toy maker, said it believes the company’s shares remain significantly undervalued

  • Ariel Investments, which holds a 5.4% stake in Mattel, is calling for the toymaker to explore strategic alternatives, including a potential sale.
  • Ariel Investments stated that Mattel shares are significantly undervalued and that a strategic buyer would pay a significant premium.
  • The push comes as Mattel faces a sliding stock, a chief-executive transition and recent takeover interest from Authentic Brands Group.

A major Mattel MAT 5.11%increase; up pointing triangle shareholder is calling for the toymaker to explore strategic alternatives, as the company deals with a sliding stock and now a chief-executive transition.

Ariel Investments, which has a 5.4% stake in Mattel, said Monday it believes the company’s shares remain significantly undervalued with its current structure as a public company.

“By our estimates, a strategic buyer would pay a significant premium to your current share price,” Chairman and Co-CEO John Rogers said in a letter to Mattel’s board of directors reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Ariel said it believes Mattel should retain an independent financial advisory firm to explore strategic alternatives, which could include a divestiture of significant assets, a merger or an outright sale of the company.

“We appreciate Ariel Investments’ longstanding investment in Mattel and their continued engagement,” a Mattel spokesperson said. “Our Board of Directors and management team are committed to acting in the best interests of all shareholders and will consider the views expressed in Ariel Investments’ letter, as well as the views of Mattel’s other shareholders.”

Mattel has already garnered takeover interest. The Journal reported last week that Authentic Brands Group has made an approach and been privately discussing an offer that could value the company at more than $20 a share.

The takeover report came on the heels of a surprise succession announcement. Mattel named Condé Nast Chief Executive Roger Lynch its next CEO, succeeding Ynon Kreiz, who is leaving to become co-CEO of Paramount.

Shares of Mattel jumped 19%, to $15.04, last Thursday, after the Journal reported on Authentic’s approach. The stock was recently trading hands at $15.50, having lost more than a fifth of its value year to date.

Mattel’s valuation is strikingly low, analysts said, considering the transformation of the business over the past several years and the potential equity of brands such as Barbie and Hot Wheels.

The maker of American Girl dolls and Uno playing cards successfully stabilized its core toy business under Kreiz, analysts said, but the company has struggled to expand beyond toys into entertainment. Mounting investments to drive its media push have squeezed margins, prompting shareholders to argue that a buyout could insulate Mattel from volatile quarterly earnings releases, or immediately connect its brands to an established distribution flywheel.

Southeastern Asset Management earlier this year called for a sale of the toy company, arguing its brands would be better off in the hands of a private-equity firm, competitor or large media company.

Ariel expressed confidence in Lynch, the incoming CEO, to do what is right for shareholders. Still, the asset-management firm said the timing for a potential deal is ripe, as Wall Street continues to undervalue Mattel and the current regulatory climate is open to major transactions.

“This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for the company to really look at strategic alternatives seriously,” Rogers said in an interview.

WSJ : Electronic Arts Bondholders Allege Default Following Largest LBO Investors

Electronic Arts Bondholders Allege Default Following Largest LBO
Investors holding $1.4 billion in bonds want put rights honored; the company instead has pursued setting aside Treasurys to cover future payments

Electronic Arts bondholders alleged a $1.4 billion debt default, escalating a dispute over whether the videogame maker must pay them off at a premium after going private in the largest leveraged buyout of all time.

An investor group notified the company of the alleged default following the completion of EA’s take-private by a consortium including Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, private-equity firm Silver Lake and Jared Kushner’s Affinity Partners. Bondholders asserted they must be repaid at 101 cents on the dollar, a common redemption premium after a corporate borrower undergoes a change in control, according to a bondholder communication sent last week and reviewed by WSJ Pro.

EA didn’t pay the change-in-control premium after its buyout closed in August, instead attempting to defease the bonds by setting aside U.S. Treasurys to cover future interest and principal payments.

Representatives for EA and its owners didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. A representative for JPMorgan Chase, which has advised EA’s buyers and committed $20 billion in debt financing for the buyout, declined to comment.

Change-of-control premiums are designed to protect investors from credit quality deterioration when a new owner buys the business and levers up its capital structure. In EA’s case, the obligation to pay the premium takes effect after a change in control if the bonds also lose their investment-grade credit ratings.

Rather than paying the 101-cent put, EA pursued a defeasance strategy for a pair of $750 million bonds it previously issued, one due in 2031 and the other in 2051. The company took steps to back the bonds with Treasurys and keep an investment-grade rating that reflected those risk-free government securities.

Bondholders revolted, signing a cooperation agreement pledging to act in unison and retaining law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld and financial adviser Houlihan Lokey. A small portion of the outstanding securities were tendered to the company under an offer it rolled out in February. But the company had trouble obtaining an investment-grade rating on the $1.4 billion that remained outstanding. Moody’s withdrew its rating on the bonds, and S&P indicated it would rate them high-yield, reflecting the additional debt on EA’s balance sheet following its buyout.

EA also sought a score from Fitch Ratings, which initially said it expected a high-quality grade for the bonds before saying in June that it wouldn’t deliver a final rating.

The Treasurys set aside for the bonds could cover future scheduled payments of interest and principal, but would likely be insufficient by several hundred million dollars to repay investors if EA were to default on its payment obligations and the bonds were accelerated, according to people familiar with the matter.

EA recently indicated that it obtained an investment-grade rating on the bonds from another credit-ratings firm, Egan-Jones, the people said. An Egan-Jones representative declined to comment.

WSJ : L’Oréal Taps Advisers to Explore Unloading Chemical-Related Liabilities Th

L’Oréal Taps Advisers to Explore Unloading Chemical-Related Liabilities
The cosmetics company’s U.S. subsidiary is working with Weil Gotshal and Ducera to address talc-related lawsuits

  • L’Oréal has engaged restructuring advisers to explore options for mounting U.S. legal liabilities stemming from its use of talc and other chemicals.
  • L’Oréal’s U.S. subsidiary is working with Weil Gotshal & Manges and Ducera Partners to address mass lawsuits alleging its products caused illness.
  • The company is considering moving tort liabilities into a separate corporate entity to unload them through a sale to an outside investor.

L’Oréal has engaged restructuring advisers to explore options for mounting U.S. legal liabilities stemming from its use of talc and other chemical ingredients in some of its cosmetic products, according to people familiar with the matter.

L’Oréal’s U.S. subsidiary is working with restructuring counsel Weil Gotshal & Manges and investment bank Ducera Partners to address mass lawsuits from individuals alleging that the talc products have caused illness, the people said. L’Oréal is also among a group of beauty-products companies facing allegations that hair-relaxing products caused users to develop cancer.

The company is considering moving tort liabilities into a separate corporate entity for the purpose of unloading them through a sale to an outside investor, the people said. The strategy would allow L’Oréal to separate its tort exposure from its operating businesses and transfer responsibility for the claims to a new owner, the people said. For an investor to take on the liabilities, the attraction would be receiving a price that reflects at least the expected value of the claims, they said.

Representatives for L’Oréal, Weil and Ducera didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Mass talc litigation in recent years has pushed companies to explore restructuring options to resolve claims. Consumer-goods manufacturers, including Avon Products and Johnson & Johnson, have turned to bankruptcy court in recent years to deal with an avalanche of lawsuits alleging that cosmetic talc caused cancer. Talc suppliers such as Whittaker Clark & Daniels, Imerys Talc America and Barrett Minerals have also used chapter 11 to stem mass litigation.

Honeywell last year transferred its legacy Bendix business unit and certain other asbestos liabilities to Delticus, a financial institution that specializes in acquiring legacy corporate liabilities. Honeywell contributed about $1.68 billion in cash and insurance assets, while Delticus assumed responsibility for all current and future claims.

L’Oréal’s advisers are exploring a sale transaction akin to Honeywell’s as an option that could address the tort claims outside of chapter 11, the people said. Any such deal would depend on the company’s willingness to pay another party to take on the risk of covering current and future tort claims of an uncertain value.

WSJ : The Surge in Rates Is Blowing Up Commercial Real-Estate Deals Property buy

The Surge in Rates Is Blowing Up Commercial Real-Estate Deals
Property buyers are demanding sellers renegotiate terms because of higher mortgage rates, signaling broader market distress

  • Commercial real-estate buyers are demanding price cuts and better terms before closing due to rapidly rising interest rates.
  • The demands for renegotiation are an early sign of broader market distress that is weighing on property values and slowing development.
  • In August, 11.42% of mortgages packaged into commercial mortgage-backed securities were in special servicing, the highest rate since February 2013.

A growing number of commercial real-estate buyers are threatening to walk away from recent transactions unless the seller offers better terms.

Rapidly rising interest rates are to blame.

Investors who agreed to a purchase price earlier this year when financing was cheaper are now demanding price cuts or other concessions before closing.

That insistence on retrading deals began when bond yields started to rise in late summer. It intensified last month after the Federal Reserve raised its benchmark rate by a quarter percentage point and signaled more to come.

“Rates went up, what, just a few days ago and I’m already getting calls where they’re talking retrade,” Jeff Powers, a Cushman & Wakefield managing director, said last month.

The typical six to 12 months between when a buyer signs a contract and when the sale is completed can make a substantial difference in financing costs when borrowing rates are rising as rapidly as they are now.

Eastham Capital agreed to pay about $20 million for a roughly 200-unit apartment property in the Midwest. Before it put down a deposit, borrowing costs jumped by more than six-tenths of a percentage point, said Matt Rosenthal, the Boca Raton, Fla.-based firm’s founder and managing director.

Rosenthal was able to convince the seller to cut the price by $600,000, after threatening to walk away. “It’s certainly a different deal now,” he said.

These retrades are an early sign of broader market distress weighing on property values, slowing development and making maturing loans harder to refinance.

“We are working harder to close deals now than we ever have before,” said Bobby Werhane, a managing director of Marcus & Millichap’s IPA Capital Markets division.

Commercial real estate—from offices in certain cities to shopping malls and hotels—had been enjoying a budding recovery. Reduced new supply, a pickup in workers returning to the office and a leveling off in interest rates in recent years helped boost property values.

Now, the sudden surge in interest rates is derailing that period of progress.

The fallout extends beyond property owners. Falling real-estate values and fewer sales squeeze property-tax and transfer-tax collections. Higher rates also make it harder for developers to earn their targeted returns. That cuts demand for construction workers, architects and building materials.

“The hurdle is simply higher,” said Alfonso Munk, co-head of investment management at Houston-based Hines, one of the country’s largest developers.

Few industries are as sensitive to interest rates as commercial real estate. Buyers typically put up only a fraction of a property’s purchase price and borrow the rest, boosting the return on their invested money.

More than $5 trillion of commercial and multifamily real-estate mortgages are outstanding. That is far more than Americans owe on credit cards or auto loans combined.

Earlier this year, commercial real-estate investors were expecting the Fed to cut rates. Property values were increasing because debt was costing less and yields on competing investments such as bonds were dropping, making commercial real estate more attractive.

Now the mood has soured as rising rates have driven values down. From late August, when rates began rising more sharply, through Friday, the FTSE Nareit All Equity REITs Index fell more than 8%, while the S&P 500 gained 1%, according to real-estate analytics firm Green Street.

Higher rates are also adding to landlord distress because mortgages made when borrowing costs were lower come due. Owners that can’t refinance or repay the loans at maturity are falling behind or being pushed into special servicing.

Data firm Trepp reported that in August, 11.42% of mortgages packaged into commercial mortgage-backed securities were being handled by special servicers, a sign that those loans were facing problems such as missed payments or difficulty refinancing at maturity. That is the highest special-servicing rate since February 2013.


One bright spot is that lenders and investment funds still have ample capital to put to work. Debt and equity investors have raised money faster than the market has produced deals, intensifying competition among lenders for the strongest projects.

Northwind Group, a New York-based lender, recently provided a $208 million first mortgage to convert much of a 355,000-square-foot office tower in Brooklyn into apartments. Ran Eliasaf, Northwind’s founder and managing partner, said banks and private lenders competed heavily to make the loan.

Eliasaf agreed that higher rates have increased loan pricing and prompted more conservative property valuations. But the increase “hasn’t changed the ability for borrowers to obtain loans,” he said. “It’s a very deep, liquid market right now.”

Still, on the front lines, fights over price and retrade attempts are becoming more common.

In June, real-estate firm Medalist Diversified agreed to sell a 65,000-square-foot retail property in Greenville, S.C., for about $10.2 million. As rates rose during the summer, the buyer sought a price cut.

After a period of wrangling, Medalist agreed to reduce the price by $100,000, and the deal closed in September “due to the potential impact of the interest rate environment,” said Chief Financial Officer C. Brent Winn Jr.

And some lenders are backing out. A bank participating in a $45 million construction loan for a more than 90%-leased retail center in North Carolina pulled out because of market conditions. Marcus & Millichap was able to find a replacement lender.

“There’s just much more friction in the market,” said Werhane, of Marcus & Millichap.

WSJ : France’s Appetite for ‘Magic Money’ Has Turned Into a Debt Bomb

France’s Appetite for ‘Magic Money’ Has Turned Into a Debt Bomb
After years of overspending, the country has emerged as one of Europe’s weakest links. Investors are bracing for things to get worse.

France is on the precipice of a dangerous financial spiral.

The global surge in interest rates has exposed the country, once considered an oasis of relative stability in Europe’s financial markets, as one of the continent’s weakest links. France now pays more to borrow than former crisis hot spots like Greece and Italy. Its government is running a budget deficit surpassed only by the United States among its peers.

Last week, a slow-burning selloff in France’s government bond market took an alarming turn as it spread across the continent, reviving memories of the eurozone debt crisis last decade. France’s 10-year borrowing cost has risen toward 5%, the highest level since 2002.

Investors are bracing for things to get worse. The rise in rates is saddling the government with higher costs just as it needs to refinance a mountain of debt borrowed during the era of ultralow interest rates. France has more than $1 trillion in debt coming due by 2030, and next year is set to sell a record of about $380 billion in debt into a market where once-reliable sources of demand have evaporated.


France’s central bank is no longer buying government bonds and is instead letting its portfolio shrink as bonds mature. Once-steady investors like Japanese asset managers have also stepped back. Hedge funds that have stepped into the void have been burned by the recent volatility.

“France has been this free rider in Europe for years, if not decades. It has gotten away with fiscal murder,” said Kevin Thozet, a portfolio adviser at the French asset manager Carmignac. “It worked as long as people were not noticing. Now people have started to notice.”

The cost of servicing France’s debt is expected to climb 59% by 2030, according to a recent study commissioned by the French finance ministry. Debt payments are now one of the French government’s largest line items and could dwarf military spending by the end of the decade. France’s debt, now worth nearly 120% of gross domestic product, risks putting the economy in what its central-bank chief recently called a “gradual stranglehold.”

The selloff is fueled by concerns that France has become so ungovernable that its political system can no longer take corrective action. In recent years, lawmakers in the fractious National Assembly have ousted one prime minister after another who attempted to restore fiscal order with spending cuts. With presidential elections approaching in the spring, leading candidates to replace President Emmanuel Macron, who is term limited, are showering voters with promises to expand government spending.

Marine Le Pen, the far-right candidate who is leading in the polls, has vowed to push France’s age of retirement as low as 60 years old, a measure she says would cost the state an extra 9 billion euros (about $10.1 billion) a year.

Her closest rival in the polls, far-left leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon, wants the European Central Bank to freeze or wipe away the French bond holdings of the Bank of France, a sum worth 488 billion euros.

“Throw it in the fire,” Mélenchon quipped.

The rhetoric, some economists say, is symptomatic of a country that has lost touch with fiscal reality. France’s debt woes are rooted in decades of overspending to fund a sprawling welfare system that conditioned the public to expect coddling from the state, particularly in times of crisis. The country hasn’t balanced its budget since 1974.

“In France we have this reflex of always asking the state for a bit of magic money—to pay, pay, pay,” said Sylvain Maillard, a lawmaker in Macron’s centrist party.


Macron, a former investment banker and technocrat, billed himself as a leader prepared to shock the country back to its senses. He loosened labor-market rules, cut corporate taxes and abolished the country’s wealth tax, measures his camp says helped drive growth and bring the deficit below the EU’s mandatory threshold of 3% of GDP in the early years of his presidency.

Over the years, however, Macron turned to public spending to solve one crisis after another. The shift began with Macron’s unleashing at least 10 billion euros to mollify the violent yellow-vest protest movement, and escalated sharply as France coped with the Covid-19 pandemic and the energy crisis sparked by the Ukraine war.

Macron responded with massive spending programs to shield companies and households from the fallout. Macron coined a slogan for the approach: Quoi qu’il en coûte, or “whatever it costs.”

Some measures added financial burdens that would weigh on state coffers well beyond the pandemic, such as an additional 10 billion euro annual cut in corporate taxes and higher wages for workers across France’s public healthcare system.

Even temporary measures created lasting strain. France launched one of Europe’s biggest paid-leave programs, funding the payrolls of scores of companies, from bistros to large corporations. The subsidies were initially conceived as life support that would end once the pandemic lockdowns were over, but many companies continued to draw on the program for years.

Macron also poured tens of billions of euros into a program that capped energy prices after Russia invaded Ukraine—subsidies that persisted even as Europe’s supplies of natural gas stabilized.

“There was an infusion of public money, and no one in the government had the courage to pull the plug,” said Senator Jean-François Husson, a conservative who oversaw a Senate investigation into the spending.

The unprecedented mix of stimulus, inflation and swings in postpandemic demand threw off economic forecasting models that the finance ministry used for annual budgeting. The scale of distortion started coming into focus in 2023 as Macron was weaning the country off the programs.

On Dec. 7, 2023, Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire received a confidential memo from treasury officials warning of a shortfall in tax receipts, according to a copy reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. A windfall tax the government had recently imposed on energy producers—to help recoup some of its spending on the price cap—was only delivering a fraction of the 3 billion euros in tax revenue that had been forecast. Value-added taxes were also missing their targets, the memo said, while the cost of government spending had been underestimated by 3 billion euros.

The treasury officials estimated the errors might widen the 2023 budget deficit to 5.2% from the initial forecast of 4.9%, potentially opening a 9.2 billion-euro hole in public accounts. The memo advised Le Maire not to disclose the findings to the public, because the estimates were still clouded with uncertainty. Corporate tax receipts were still unclear from companies that had yet to report their 2023 results.

The timing of the memo was delicate. The National Assembly had just given final approval to the 2023 accounts, casting votes based on figures that now appeared erroneous. The mistakes risked bleeding into budgets for years to come. Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne, meanwhile, was on a tight deadline to push the 2024 budget through the assembly by the end of the year.

Le Maire wrote to Borne on Dec. 13, recommending the government inform the public and make 300 million euros in immediate cuts to the 2024 budget before pushing it through parliament, according to a copy of the letter reviewed by the Journal. He also advised Borne to follow that up with 10 billion euros more in cuts at the start of the year.

Borne was broadsided—and didn’t inform the public. She was in the middle of passing a highly contentious immigration bill that was testing her support in the National Assembly. To get the 2024 budget through parliament, she planned to invoke a special clause of the constitution allowing her government to circumvent a vote on the matter.

“We could no longer change anything in the budget,” Borne said in an interview. “We were in the home stretch.”

Borne resigned in early January shortly after the budget passed. Macron appointed 34-year-old Gabriel Attal as prime minister, making him the youngest person to ever hold the post in France’s modern republic. Under Attal, Le Maire moved to cut billions in spending through executive orders, a regulatory power that doesn’t require parliamentary approval.

The state’s finances, however, were deteriorating fast. Corporate tax receipts were coming in far below forecasts. Many companies that once relied on paid-leave subsidies and pandemic-era tax benefits were struggling or going out of business. In February, another treasury memo, which was reviewed by the Journal, informed Le Maire that the 2023 deficit could reach 5.6% while the 2024 budget gap might widen to 5.7%, compared with the 4.4% forecast contained in the recently passed budget bill.

Le Maire suddenly had a 40 billion-euro hole to plug, a sum that he argued exceeded the government’s power to make cuts without the National Assembly’s approval. He began pushing Macron and Attal for new legislation that would correct the 2024 budget with up to 20 billion euros in cuts—in addition to those he had already made. Macron had relied on a fragile alliance with establishment conservatives in the National Assembly to pass previous legislation, and Le Maire contended that conservative lawmakers would ultimately fall in line with his plans.

Attal opposed Le Maire’s approach, preferring to continue using the government’s regulatory power to make cuts, according to Rayan Nezzar, Attal’s economic adviser at the time. Engaging parliament risked a drawn-out debate with opposition lawmakers who would push for tax increases that could hurt growth, he said, adding that the country at large was in a different mindset.

“‘Whatever it costs’ was still on everyone’s mind, and everyone was still living in a world where money was cheap. Debt was not an issue,” he said.

Macron had other considerations. European Parliament elections were around the corner in early June. Macron had made Attal the fresh face of the campaign. If the government went before Parliament seeking approval for a massive correction in the 2024 budget, Macron’s conservative allies might revolt. Attal risked being ousted from office in a no-confidence vote as voters headed to the polls.

In early April, Macron invited a small group of lawmakers to dinner in the gilded Élysée Palace. Over plates of seafood, the president delivered his verdict, according to Maillard who was in attendance.


“I hear people talking about a corrective budget. I don’t see the point of it,” Macron said, adding: “Our problem isn’t excessive spending. The problem is lower tax revenue.”

Instead Attal prepared to exercise his regulatory powers again, lining up about 10 billion euros in additional cuts that he had yet to implement as voters went to the polls in June.

Marine Le Pen’s far-right party ended up trouncing Macron’s forces in the European elections. The same day the results came in, Macron summoned his ministers and told them he planned to dissolve the National Assembly and call snap elections. Attal was stone-faced, his arms folded across his chest as Macron spoke.

For Le Maire, any chance of fixing France’s finances was now gone. He told the room they were risking a “crise de regime.”

A strong showing in the snap elections would have strengthened Macron’s hand in the National Assembly, clearing the way for him to make significant cuts. Instead Macron’s party bled seats, depriving him of a majority. Attal resigned, freezing billions in spending on his way out for his successor to handle.

“People didn’t realize at the time that 2024 was perhaps the last, or one of the last times that we were still able to reduce our deficit in a proper way,” said Nezzar, Attal’s economic adviser.

The National Assembly was now divided between three blocs—Le Pen’s, Macron allies and a rowdy leftist coalition including Mélenchon—that promised gridlock.

The decision to dissolve parliament shocked many investors and laid bare the mounting dysfunction in France.

“It felt like things perhaps are worse below the surface than they appear…we’ve got to the point where nothing can happen here,” said Ales Koutny, head of international rates at American asset manager Vanguard, who sold French bonds in the following months. “It was somewhat of a turning point for us.”


The annual process of passing a budget turned to chaos, toppling successive prime ministers who had proposed big spending cuts and rattling markets. France’s budget deficit has been stuck above 5% for the past three years, and could reach 6.8% of GDP by 2030, according to the recent report commissioned by the finance ministry.

What appeared to be a slow-moving fiscal erosion turned urgent in recent months. The rise in interest rates sparked in part by the war in Iran has hit France especially hard, with investors taking aim at countries with high debt loads.

Thozet, of Carmignac, points to a simple equation that underscores France’s increasingly impossible debt math. In a reversal from the low-rates era, the interest rate on France’s total stock of debt is expected to surpass its level of economic growth in the coming years, guaranteeing the debt load will continue rising without drastic spending cuts.

“You start to have a snowball effect,” he said.

France’s debt level could reach 200% by 2050 if it doesn’t cut spending, the OECD recently estimated.

While the turmoil last week drew references to the early days of the eurozone debt crisis, a French bond meltdown isn’t yet inevitable, investors say. The region is better equipped to handle market fallout these days, backstopped by the European Central Bank. The latest selloff was amplified by the sudden unwind of risky hedge-fund trades that had grown popular in recent months.

Muddling along would come at an economic cost, with the rising cost of repaying debt eroding the government’s room for more productive investments.

The wild card that could push France to the edge is the upcoming presidential election. Investors fear neither Mélenchon or Le Pen are taking France’s financial problems seriously.

“Everybody is talking about further ways to spend money,” said Koutny of Vanguard. “The fiscal situation in France is already not amazing. If you then incorporate policies these parties are talking about, it looks even worse. “

Investors often describe bond markets as enforcers of financial discipline, citing countries like Greece that transformed their finances after painful debt crises. Charles Rodwell, a centrist lawmaker who sits on the finance committee of the National Assembly, said he hopes market pressure will help focus minds across the political spectrum, adding: “We need shock therapy.”

FT : German far-right set to secure its first ever regional parliament president

German far-right set to secure its first ever regional parliament president
Tobias Rausch hoping to become the AfD’s figurehead in the Saxony-Anhalt assembly

The far-right Alternative for Germany is set to secure its first-ever president of a regional parliament on Tuesday after its landslide election victory in the state of Saxony-Anhalt.

The AfD has nominated Tobias Rausch, a 35-year-old real estate manager who was at the centre of a recent nepotism scandal, as its candidate for the role as the parliament convenes for the first time since elections last month. 

Rausch is expected to be elected as president — a role akin to that of speaker in Britain’s House of Commons — with the help of the hard-left Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW).

The BSW, founded just under three years ago, is the only political party that is openly willing to work with the far right.

All other parties have ruled out co-operating with the AfD, which has been officially designated as rightwing extremist by Germany’s domestic intelligence service. 

The AfD won almost 44 per cent of the vote in regional elections in Saxony-Anhalt on September 6 after campaigning on a hardline platform that railed against “culturally incompatible” foreigners and promised to deepen ties with Russia.

The record result for the anti-immigration AfD was hailed as a triumph by the party’s national leadership and sent shockwaves through Germany’s political establishment. 

But with 39 seats in the Landtag, or regional parliament, the AfD fell just short of the 42 needed for a working majority. 

The AfD’s lead candidate in Saxony-Anhalt, the former room-fragrance salesman Ulrich Siegmund, is now seeking to secure the votes needed to become the party’s first ever premier of a German state. That would give him real power over education, policing and some aspects of migration policy.

Siegmund and other AfD officials have been holding talks with the BSW, which has said it would be willing to co-operate on some issues — but would not be prepared to elect him as state premier.

Instead, the BSW has said it would abstain in the critical third round of voting on the choice of premier, when a simple majority would be enough to elect Siegmund.

But Siegmund, 35, said last week that he was confident that he would be elected in the first round of voting “with a significant majority”, adding that he planned to hold the vote in December.

He declined to provide details about how he would achieve that, and his comments fuelled speculation that he could secure votes from the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU), led by Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

That would pile further pressure on the deeply unpopular Merz, who is contending with growing discontent within CDU ranks following setbacks in several regional elections. These include the small north-eastern state of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, where the CDU last month recorded its worst result in a state poll in postwar German history.

Tuesday’s convening of the Saxony-Anhalt parliament for the first time since September’s vote will be a hugely symbolic moment for the AfD.

Founded in 2013, the party has surged from being a fringe movement to an insurgent force that is now leading national opinion polls.

In the Saxony-Anhalt regional assembly, the AfD will sit for the first time in the centre of the semicircular seating arrangement — reflecting its newfound position as the largest party.

Police said that they were expecting demonstrations against the prospect of the AfD holding the parliament’s presidency, including protests organised by the centre-left Social Democrats, the anti-capitalist Die Linke and the Greens.

Rausch, the AfD nominee for president, will be the state’s highest-ranking representative in protocol terms, representing it externally at ceremonies and events. 

He will also be in charge of running plenary sittings in the parliament, calling speakers and enforcing rules. 

He himself is a contentious figure. He was caught up in the nepotism scandal that involved a string of senior AfD officials in Saxony-Anhalt using an elaborate system to employ each other’s relatives using public funds.

Three of his siblings were employed in the Bundestag office of an AfD member of parliament from the region — an arrangement that he said he had no involvement in.

It emerged in February that Rausch’s office in the Saxony-Anhalt parliament employed at least four members of a local football club that he chaired.

He defended their part-time contracts, saying that the players helped with distributing AfD newsletters and other promotional material, adding: “These people are motivated, athletic and can reach as many households as possible.”

FT : The fate of GE’s offshoots

The fate of GE’s offshoots

The break-up of the General Electric empire, one of the largest corporate divorces in history, was widely hailed on Wall Street as a slam-dunk success.

But the performance of its offshoots has not been uniformly positive — as revealed by the deals struck by GE Aerospace and its smaller sibling GE HealthCare over the past month — and the re-emergence of Nelson Peltz’s Trian Fund Management on the latter’s shareholder register.

GE HealthCare, which was first spun off in early 2023, on Monday announced a nearly $1bn deal to buy radiopharmaceutical company Sofie Biosciences from mid-market private equity group Trilantic Partners, confirming a DD scoop from last month. Bank of America, Consello and Solomon Partners advised on the acquisition.

The deal, the healthcare group’s second largest, comes as the group considers offloading its patient care solutions division and stares down Trian, which has boosted its stake to a $200mn position. Trian played an instrumental role in GE’s three-way split.

While GE’s healthcare offshoot is focused on tuck-in deals, GE Aerospace, led by chief executive Larry Culp, the mastermind behind the original break-up, is taking bolder swings, striking an $11.75bn deal in September to buy Warburg Pincus-backed Consolidated Precision Products.

The acquisition of CPP is a classic vertical integration, with GE Aerospace buying a supplier of coatings used in turbine production, as the wider industrial sector faces a squeeze on the supply of critical parts.

Shares in GE Aerospace have roughly doubled since the break-up, giving it a market value of $321bn, while power company GE Vernova has seen its market capitalisation increase sevenfold to $264bn as it rides the AI power boom. By contrast, GE HealthCare is up just 14 per cent since its first trading day.

For some of the GE offshoots, they are in full dealmaking mode. For others, the break-up continues.