Ukraine

8205 readers

759 users here now

News and discussion related to Ukraine

*Sympathy for enemy combatants is prohibited.

*No content depicting extreme violence or gore.

*Posts containing combat footage should include [Combat] in title

*Combat videos containing any footage of a visible human must be flagged NSFW

Donate to support Ukraine's Defense

Donate to support Humanitarian Aid

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

249

G7 agrees on transfer of $50 billion in profits from frozen Russian assets to Ukraine (kyivindependent.com)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

14 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 24 points 4 months ago (4 children)

While Western countries have frozen $300 billion in Russian assets, they can only access the income generated by these funds, approximately $3.2 billion, annually.

By setting up a fund with loans to be repaid using this income, countries can offer immediate support to Ukraine beyond this amount.

I wonder why they cant liquidate a percentage of any of the currently held assets? I guess most are intangible? Or some other international law preventing direct asset control

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

They probably can, but it's a further escalation in sanctions and would set a precedent that investments in another country aren't safe.

By holding them, it also gives an incentive to end the war. Stop the war and get 300 billion back!

Edit: someone else referred to it as the carrot (held money) and the stick (donated weapons). Carrot and stick is better than stick and stick. Better up to a point anyway...

[–] monomon 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I mean didn't Russia already seize foreign companies, so the precedent is set?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The precedent that that is setting, is that it is not safe to invest in Russia. If the EU does this, the precedent is that the EU is not safe to invest in.

Russia's economy is a dwarf compared to the EU or USA.

[–] monomon 1 points 4 months ago

Good point

[–] [email protected] 14 points 4 months ago

Another article said it was mostly the IMF objecting worried about trust in the international banking system and the precedent it would set

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago

Because rich people don't want the precedent that their money can be taken if they do bad things.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

i assume its an estimation on how much they can liquidate 50b assets. its an insane amount of money, my neighbor is selling their house and its still up years later.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

For bank interest, stock dividends, matured bonds, those are cash, so those are easy.

For stock, real estate, and other non-liquid assets appreciation, probably not so easy.