united states – Flight 93 http://flight93.org/ Tue, 15 Mar 2022 18:50:40 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.9.3 https://flight93.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/icon-5-150x150.png united states – Flight 93 http://flight93.org/ 32 32 Explanation: Can Russia pay its creditors, and what if not? https://flight93.org/explanation-can-russia-pay-its-creditors-and-what-if-not/ Tue, 15 Mar 2022 18:31:00 +0000 https://flight93.org/explanation-can-russia-pay-its-creditors-and-what-if-not/ Russian ruble banknote sits on top of US dollar banknotes in this illustration taken February 24, 2022. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration Join now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com Register March 15 (Reuters) – Russia is due to pay $117 million in interest on two dollar-denominated sovereign bonds on Wednesday – the first such payments since its […]]]>

Russian ruble banknote sits on top of US dollar banknotes in this illustration taken February 24, 2022. REUTERS/Dado Ruvic/Illustration

Join now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

March 15 (Reuters) – Russia is due to pay $117 million in interest on two dollar-denominated sovereign bonds on Wednesday – the first such payments since its invasion of Ukraine that triggered a series of sanctions from Western capitals and countermeasures from Moscow.

Russia’s Finance Ministry said on Monday it had sent an order to a correspondent bank for the payment of coupons on $117.2 million Eurobonds that are due on Wednesday. Read more

The diplomatic stalemate and economic brakes have raised questions about if and how Russia will make the payment, raising the specter of its first major foreign debt default since 1917, when the Bolsheviks failed to acknowledge the Tsarist debt to the aftermath of the revolution.

Join now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Here’s what we know and don’t know about Russian debt and its repayment:

HOW MUCH DOES RUSSIA OWER IN HARD CURRENCY BONDS?

Russia has 15 international bonds with a face value of about $40 billion outstanding, about half of which are held by international investors.

The March 16 coupons are the first of several, with another $615 million due over the rest of the month. The first principal payment is due on April 4 when a $2 billion bond matures.

The bonds themselves were issued with a mixture of terms and deeds. Bonds sold after Russia was sanctioned for its 2014 annexation of Crimea contain a provision for payments in alternative currencies. For bonds listed after 2018, the ruble is listed as an alternative currency option.

The Wednesday coupon payment bonds were listed in 2013 and are to be paid in US dollars, with Citi as paying agent. According to the prospectus of the bonds, the payment in another currency would only be effective after the beneficiaries had exchanged this dollar amount for dollars, and at the dollar amount recoverable on the open market.

Citi did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

WILL MOSCOW PAY?

Sanctions have been severe, in particular the freezing of central bank foreign exchange reserves, with Moscow initially balking at the prospect of sending scarce hard currency to foreign investors.

A March 5 presidential decree announced that Russian debtors had the right to pay foreign creditors in rubles and by placing their funds in a Type C account with the national depositary. However, the central bank and the Ministry of Finance can make exceptions.

Later statements have been more nuanced and apparently allow hard currency payments. The Ministry of Finance said in a report on Monday that she had approved a temporary procedure for making foreign currency payments and that Russia would fulfill its obligations “in due time and in full”.

However, if the foreign banks do not execute the payments, Russia could withdraw the funds and pay them in rubles to an account with the national depositary.

WILL INVESTORS BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THE MONEY?

Sanctions on both sides mean it has become more complicated for Russia to transfer the funds, but also for foreign investors to receive them.

The United States Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has released general license 9A of March 2 which authorizes transactions for U.S. persons regarding “the receipt of interest, dividends, or payments when due in connection with debt or equity” issued by the Russian Ministry of Finance, the central bank or the national wealth fund. However, this exemption expires on May 25, with Russia having to pay almost $2 billion on its external sovereign bonds after this deadline and until the end of the year.

WHAT IS THE PROSPECT OF A RUSSIAN DEFECT?

A default on Russia’s external debt seemed unthinkable, with its international bonds trading above par until February.

The harsh penalties changed all that and now the bonds are hovering at distressed levels, some as low as a tenth of their face value.

Most payments due – like the one on Wednesday – have a 30-day grace period during which Russia has time to make the payment. Some issues have a 15 day grace period. Unlike some of Russia’s other external bonds, which have alternative payment provisions in the fine print, the coupons due Wednesday must be paid in US dollars.

Failure to pay them in full or pay in another currency would result in default by the end of the grace period, analysts said.

WHAT WILL BE THE CONSEQUENCES OF A DEFAULT?

Defaulting countries do not have access to international capital markets, although under current restrictions Russia is shut out of the markets anyway.

However, a default could have far-reaching consequences.

This could trigger Russian debt default insurance policies known as Credit Default Swaps (CDS) that investors take out for this kind of situation. Investment bank JPMorgan estimates that there are around $6 billion worth of CDS outstanding that should be paid out.

Moreover, it is not just international asset managers who are exposed to Russia’s external debt. “Many Russian investors bought this paper through their accounts at Western banks,” said Evgeny Suvorov, Russia-based economist at CentroCredit Bank. “There is a great suspicion that it is specifically Russian investors who are the main bondholders of sovereign external debt.”

Russian banks could also struggle with bonds forming part of their capital buffers.

Being under the jurisdiction of a defaulting sovereign adds pressure on Russian companies, which have frequently used international capital markets to raise funding and have nearly $100 billion in hard currency obligations. in circulation.

Join now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reuters reporting; Editing by Nick Macfie

Our standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

]]>
The Glaucoma Research Foundation announces $1.3 million in research grants for 2022 https://flight93.org/the-glaucoma-research-foundation-announces-1-3-million-in-research-grants-for-2022/ Thu, 10 Mar 2022 08:30:20 +0000 https://flight93.org/the-glaucoma-research-foundation-announces-1-3-million-in-research-grants-for-2022/ March 9, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — Glaucoma Research Foundation (GRF) today announced a total of $1.3 million in annual research grants to support 10 researchers at leading universities across the United States. GRF is awarding $1 million to the four Catalyst for a Cure Principal Investigators ($250,000 to each lab) to continue their research to restore […]]]>

March 9, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — Glaucoma Research Foundation (GRF) today announced a total of $1.3 million in annual research grants to support 10 researchers at leading universities across the United States.

GRF is awarding $1 million to the four Catalyst for a Cure Principal Investigators ($250,000 to each lab) to continue their research to restore vision in glaucoma. One-year Shaffer Grants from the GRF in the amount of $50,000 each will be awarded to six individual grant recipients to support their research into potential new glaucoma treatment targets.

“Glaucoma Research Foundation is funding six investigators at prestigious medical research centers with our one-year Shaffer Grants,” said Andrew G. Iwach, MD, Chairman of the GRF Board of Directors. “In addition, we will continue to fund the four principal investigators engaged in our multi-year Catalyst for a Cure Vision Restoration initiative. With this diverse research portfolio, we are doing our best to invest in research that brings us closer to our goal of finding a cure for glaucoma and restoring vision, while developing better solutions for glaucoma patients today. .”

Catalyst for a healing research collaboration
“The Catalyst for a Cure team continues to make excellent progress in their collaborative research,” said Thomas M. Brunner, President and CEO of GRF. “Their efforts are our best hope for a cure for glaucoma.” he said. The four Principal Investigators of Catalyst for a Cure are Xin Duan, PhDUniversity of California, San Francisco; Yang Hu, MD, Ph.D.Stanford University School of Medicine; Anna La Torre, PhD, University of California, Davis; and Derek Welsbie, MD, PhDShiley Eye Institute at UC San Diego.

The 2022 Shaffer Grants for Innovative Glaucoma Research
Here is a summary of the Shaffer Research Grant projects that the Glaucoma Research Foundation is funding at $50,000 each:

Kun-Che Chang, PhD
University of Pittsburgh
A novel therapeutic gene for RGC survival and axon regeneration in glaucoma

Mr. Elizabeth Fini, PhD
Tufts University
Mechanisms of steroid-induced ocular hypertension

Sidney Kuo, PhD
University of Minnesota
Early structural changes of Müllerian glial cells in glaucoma

Myoungsup Sim, PhD
duke university
Cilia-mediated primary nitric oxide production in Schlemm’s canal cells

Brian Soetikno, MD, Ph.D.
Stanford University
Visible light OCT for glaucoma

Qing Wang, MD, Ph.D.
Colombia University
New tools to identify and target astrocyte subtypes to treat glaucoma

More information on each research project.

About the Glaucoma Research Foundation.

Show original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/glaucoma-research-foundation-announces-1-3-million-in-2022-research-grants-301499614.html

SOURCE Glaucoma Research Foundation

]]>
Today’s mortgage rates are lower | March 7, 2022 https://flight93.org/todays-mortgage-rates-are-lower-march-7-2022/ Mon, 07 Mar 2022 13:27:26 +0000 https://flight93.org/todays-mortgage-rates-are-lower-march-7-2022/ Average mortgage rates are lower today for all loan categories. Homebuyers looking for a 30-year fixed rate mortgage will find average rates of 4.387%, down 0.144 percentage points from the end of last week. Refinancers can also take advantage of lower rates. Expect to see an average rate of 4.467% for a 30-year refi. The […]]]>

Average mortgage rates are lower today for all loan categories.

Homebuyers looking for a 30-year fixed rate mortgage will find average rates of 4.387%, down 0.144 percentage points from the end of last week. Refinancers can also take advantage of lower rates. Expect to see an average rate of 4.467% for a 30-year refi.

  • The last rate on a 30-year fixed rate mortgage is 4.387%. ⇓
  • The last rate on a 15-year fixed rate mortgage is 3.362%. ⇓
  • The last rate on a 5/1 ARM is 3.105%. ⇓
  • The latest rate on a 7/1 ARM is 3.378%. ⇓
  • The latest rate on a 10/1 ARM is 3.458%. ⇓

Money’s daily mortgage rates reflect what a borrower with a 20% down payment and a credit score of 700 — roughly the national average score — could pay if he or she applied for a home loan right now. Each day’s rates are based on the average rate that 8,000 lenders offered applicants the previous business day. Freddie Mac weekly rates will generally be lower, as they measure the rates offered to borrowers with higher credit scores.

Are you looking for a loan? Check out Money’s lists of top mortgage lenders and top refinance lenders.

Today’s 30-Year Fixed Rate Mortgage Rates

  • The 30-year rate is 4.387%.
  • It’s a day offold by 0.144 percentage points.
  • It’s a month to augment by 0.171 percentage points.

Predictable and relatively low interest rates make the 30-year fixed rate mortgage the most popular home loan in America. The long repayment period makes monthly payments on a 30-year loan more affordable than on a shorter-term loan. On the other hand, the overall cost will be higher because you will be paying a higher interest rate for longer.

Ads by Money. We may be compensated if you click on this ad.A d

Average mortgage rates

Data based on US mortgages closed March 4, 2022

Type of loan March 4 Last week Change
15-year fixed conventional 3.36% 3.53% 0.17%
30-year fixed conventional 4.39% 4.49% 0.1%
ARM rate 7/1 3.38% 3.52% 0.14%
ARM rate 10/1 3.46% 3.64% 0.18%

Your actual rate may vary

15 years today fixed rate mortgage rates

  • The rate over 15 years is 3.362%.
  • It’s a day offold by 0.132 percentage points.
  • It’s a month infold by 0.136 percentage points.

The 15-year fixed rate loan will have a lower interest rate than a 30-year loan, which means you will have lower total costs over time. However, since you have to pay off the loan faster, the monthly payments will be higher and may not suit all budgets.

Use a mortgage calculator to determine which option is best for you.

The latest rates of adjustable rate mortgages

  • The last rate on a 5/1 ARM is 3.105%. ⇓
  • The latest rate on a 7/1 ARM is 3.378%. ⇓
  • The latest rate on a 10/1 ARM is 3.458%. ⇓

Variable rate mortgages will start with an initial fixed interest rate before the rate begins to adjust at set intervals. The rate on a 5/1 ARM, for example, is fixed for five years and then adjusts once a year. Although the initial rate tends to be quite low, it could increase significantly after the fixed period ends.

The Latest VA, FHA, and Jumbo Loan Rates

The average rates for FHA, VA, and jumbo loans are:

  • The rate on a 30-year FHA mortgage is 4.099%. ⇓
  • The rate for a 30-year VA mortgage is 4.517%. ⇓
  • The rate for a 30-year jumbo mortgage is 3.853%. ⇓

The latest mortgage refinance rates

The average refinance rates for 30-year loans, 15-year loans and ARMs are:

  • The refinance rate on a 30-year fixed rate refinance is 4.467%. ⇓
  • The refinance rate on a 15-year fixed rate refinance is 3.433%. ⇓
  • The rollover rate on a 5/1 ARM is 3.154%. ⇓
  • The refinance rate on a 7/1 ARM is 3.426%. ⇓
  • The refinance rate on a 10/1 ARM is 3.514%. ⇓
Ads by Money. We may be compensated if you click on this ad.A dAds by Money Disclaimer

Average Mortgage Refinance Rates

Data based on US mortgages closed March 4, 2022

Type of loan March 4 Last week Change
15-year fixed conventional 3.43% 3.62% 0.19%
30-year fixed conventional 4.47% 4.57% 0.1%
ARM rate 7/1 3.43% 3.59% 0.16%
ARM rate 10/1 3.51% 3.72% 0.21%

Your actual rate may vary

Where are mortgage rates going this year?

Mortgage rates have fallen through 2020. Millions of homeowners have responded to low mortgage rates by refinancing existing loans and taking out new ones. Many people bought homes they might not have been able to afford if rates were higher. In January 2021, rates briefly fell to lowest levels on record, but rose slightly for the rest of the year.

Looking ahead, experts believe that interest rates will rise further in 2022, but also modestly. Factors that could affect rates include continued economic improvement and further labor market gains. The Federal Reserve has also started to scale back its purchases of mortgage-backed securities and said it plans to raise the federal funds rate three times in 2022 to combat rising inflation from March.

While mortgage rates are likely to rise, experts say the increase won’t happen overnight and it won’t be a dramatic jump. Rates are expected to remain near historic lows throughout the first half of the year, rising slightly later in the year. Even with rising rates, it will still be a good time to finance a new home or refinance a mortgage.

Factors that influence mortgage rates include:

  • The Federal Reserve. The Fed acted quickly when the pandemic hit the United States in March 2020. The Fed announced its intention to keep money flowing in the economy by lowering the Federal Fund short-term interest rate between 0% and 0.25%, which is also low as you go. The central bank also pledged to buy mortgage-backed securities and treasury bills, supporting the housing finance market, but began to scale back those purchases in November.
  • The 10-year Treasury bond. Mortgage rates keep pace with government 10-year Treasury bond yields. Yields first fell below 1% in March 2020 and have since risen. On average, there is typically a 1.8 point “spread” between Treasury yields and benchmark mortgage rates.
  • The wider economy. Unemployment rates and changes in gross domestic product are important indicators of the overall health of the economy. When employment and GDP growth are weak, it means the economy is weak, which can lower interest rates. Thanks to the pandemic, unemployment levels reached historic highs early last year and have yet to recover. GDP has also taken a hit, and although it has rebounded somewhat, there is still plenty of room for improvement.

Tips for getting the lowest possible mortgage rate

There is no universal mortgage rate that all borrowers receive. Qualifying for the lowest mortgage rates takes some work and will depend on both personal financial factors and market conditions.

Check your credit score and your credit report. Mistakes or other red flags can lower your credit score. Borrowers with the highest credit scores are the ones who will get the best rates, so it’s essential to check your credit report before you begin the home hunting process. Taking steps to correct mistakes will help increase your score. If you have high credit card balances, paying them off can also give you a quick boost.

Save money for a large down payment. This will lower your loan-to-value ratio, which is the share of the house price that the lender has to finance. A lower LTV usually translates to a lower mortgage rate. Lenders also like to see money that has been saved in an account for at least 60 days. It tells the lender that you have the money to finance the home purchase.

Shop around for the best rate. Don’t settle for the first interest rate a lender offers you. Check with at least three different lenders to see who offers the lowest interest rate. Also consider different types of lenders, such as credit unions and online lenders in addition to traditional banks.

Also, take the time to learn about the different types of loans. Although the 30-year fixed rate mortgage is the most common type of mortgage, consider a shorter-term loan such as a 15-year mortgage or an adjustable rate mortgage. These types of loans often come with a lower rate than a conventional 30-year mortgage. Compare the costs of all to see which best suits your needs and financial situation. Government loans — such as those backed by the Federal Housing Authority, Department of Veterans Affairs, and Department of Agriculture — may be more affordable options for those who qualify.

Finally, lock in your rate. Locking in your rate once you’ve found the right rate, the right loan product, and the right lender will help ensure that your mortgage rate doesn’t increase until the loan is closed.

Our mortgage rate methodology

Money’s Daily Mortgage Rates show the average rate offered by more than 8,000 lenders across the United States for which the most recent rates are available. Today we are posting rates for Friday, March 4, 2022. Our rates reflect what a typical borrower with a credit score of 700 might expect to pay for a home loan right now. These rates were offered to people depositing 20% ​​deposit and include discount points.

More money :

]]>
Eli Lilly to stand trial over Medicaid reimbursements https://flight93.org/eli-lilly-to-stand-trial-over-medicaid-reimbursements/ Fri, 04 Mar 2022 17:52:49 +0000 https://flight93.org/eli-lilly-to-stand-trial-over-medicaid-reimbursements/ A whistleblower complaint against Eli Lilly is now heading to a jury trial. On February 28, Judge Harry D. Leinenweber ruled that the lawsuit against Eli Lilly for allegedly compromising the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) on rebates will go to trial, despite Lilly’s request to dismiss the case. Monday’s ruling, filed in […]]]>

A whistleblower complaint against Eli Lilly is now heading to a jury trial.

On February 28, Judge Harry D. Leinenweber ruled that the lawsuit against Eli Lilly for allegedly compromising the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) on rebates will go to trial, despite Lilly’s request to dismiss the case.

Monday’s ruling, filed in the U.S. District Court for Eastern Illinois, is the latest development in years of legal back-and-forth regarding Indianapolis-based Lilly’s reimbursement amounts between 2005 and 2016.

Whistleblower Ronald J. Streck filed the original lawsuit against Lilly, claiming the drugmaker violated the False Claims Act by submitting false claims and certifications to the United States as well as several states as part of its claims program. Medicaid reimbursement, ending up underpaying.

Lilly participates in the Medicaid Reimbursement Program (MDRP), where participating drugmakers must provide government and state reimbursement in order for their drugs to be used by Medicaid patients. The amount of the rebate is determined by the average manufacturer’s price (AMP), which Congress defined in 1991 as “the average unit price paid to the manufacturer for the drug in the [United] States by wholesalers for drugs distributed to the retail pharmacy trade class,” according to the filing.

In addition, the MPA “must be adjusted by the manufacturer if cumulative rebates or other arrangements subsequently adjust actual realized prices,” the decision explained. For example, when prices increase, the discount amount should also increase.

However, the 1991 agreement provided leeway for a drugmaker to calculate MPA themselves in the absence of specific guidelines. Lilly says it did so until CMS issued clarifying rules in 2016, according to the filing.

Monday’s decision found otherwise, directly calling Lilly’s interpretation of the pre-2016 GPA “objectively unreasonable.”

Following Monday’s ruling, a jury trial will ultimately determine whether Lilly acted intentionally in not calculating MPA as high as it should have between 2005 and 2016, as well as whether it caused a loss to Medicaid agencies in all 26 states and the federal government. government.

Lilly did not respond to request for comment at the time of publication.

Photo: Eli Lilly

]]>
State of the Union and Polarization in Education https://flight93.org/state-of-the-union-and-polarization-in-education/ Fri, 04 Mar 2022 10:00:00 +0000 https://flight93.org/state-of-the-union-and-polarization-in-education/ “Our schools are open,” said the President of the United States. “Let’s keep it that way. Our children must be in school. Why Joe Biden felt the need to utter those three short sentences in an hour-long State of the Union address to Congress speaks to the enduring importance of education to American life. His […]]]>

“Our schools are open,” said the President of the United States. “Let’s keep it that way. Our children must be in school.

Why Joe Biden felt the need to utter those three short sentences in an hour-long State of the Union address to Congress speaks to the enduring importance of education to American life. His words also respond to the blows that public schools have faced both from the prolonged pandemic and the ongoing political polarization.

As a president prepares a State of the Union message, as required by the Constitution, pollsters typically seize the opportunity to gauge the state of public opinion. In the days leading up to Biden’s speech, the results of several polls shed light on the complex atmosphere in which public schools operate in 2022.

Education ranked fourth – behind strengthening the economy, lowering healthcare costs and fighting COVID-19 – in the Pew Research Center January List major public priorities. In a test Pulling together results from multiple surveys, the Pew Center reported that “only about one in five adults (22%) said the quality of K-12 education in public schools was a major problem in their local community, unchanged from 2018.”

And yet, this Pew essay delivered troubling conclusions about a growing partisan divide over schools. Pew, an independent, nonpartisan research organization, reported that “amid high-profile debates over a range of K-12 school policies — from mask mandates to teaching race-related issues — a dwindling share of Republicans in the US say they trust public school principals to act in the public’s best interest.

Certainly, Pew has not sought to target principals, most of whom remain widely respected in their communities and who enforce policies established by superintendents and school boards. The results come from a recent survey designed to measure the level of public trust in the leaders and practitioners of critical societal institutions. Pew asked about medical scientists, police officers, journalists, business and religious leaders, and public school principals.

A simple majority (52%) of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents said they have a great deal or a fair amount of confidence in K-12 public school principals to act in the public interest, versus 79% two years ago. Today, almost a majority (47%) say they have little or no confidence in school principals. In contrast, 76% of Democrats and Democrats express a great deal or somewhat of a great deal of confidence in directors, up from 87% two years ago.

“In March 2020, when the coronavirus epidemic first hit the United States, the vast majority of Republicans (85%) and Democrats (94%) said the closure of K-12 schools was a necessary step,” Pew said. “But as the pandemic continues, partisan disagreements over school closures have become more acute.”

Loud protests in state capitols and local school boards have certainly had an influence on politics and politics, although they do not represent the totality of public opinion. “In a survey last January – when the omicron variant was spreading rapidly and some schools were closing again,” Pew said, “Republican K-12 parents were significantly more likely than Democratic parents (55% vs. 26%) to favor schools with in-person instruction only . Democratic parents were more likely than Republicans (64% vs. 39%) to favor a mix of in-person and online instruction.

The split in public opinion on education issues is one aspect of the broader “severe partisan polarization on the issues” explored in the 2022 Hoover Poll, as reported in RealClearPolitics, an online news site. The research has its base at the Hoover Institution, a conservative think tank at Stanford University.

Partisan differences, the report says, “manifest themselves in differential support for American institutions. Majorities of Democrats support universities, unions, the media, the United Nations, public schools, local governments and the judiciary. Republican majorities support the police, churches, and organized religion, with pluralities having faith in state and local government. There was cross-partisan agreement that neither business nor Congress inspired much confidence.

Amid their overall finding of severe bias, the Hoover researchers made an intriguing observation: “It seems that many Americans have friends in the other party and don’t feel like they can’t say what’s going on.” they think… 71% of Democrats have Republican friends. say they discuss politics, and 67% of Republicans with Democratic friends say they discuss politics.

No doubt President Biden would welcome such a discovery. As the nation’s top civil servant, the president persists in articulating a “unity agenda” and defining Americans as “one people.”

As a political leader, the Democratic president must face the reality of polarization and attempt to persuade a narrow band of persuasive voters. By proclaiming that “our children need to be in school,” Biden seeks a safer footing to engage in the turbulent education politics that will play out in the election years of 2022 and 2024.

Ferrel Guillory

Ferrel Guillory is Director of the Public Life Program and Professor of Practice at UNC Hussman School of Journalism and Media, and Vice President of EducationNC.

]]>
Chinese lenders put more pressure on African borrowers https://flight93.org/chinese-lenders-put-more-pressure-on-african-borrowers/ Mon, 28 Feb 2022 00:01:43 +0000 https://flight93.org/chinese-lenders-put-more-pressure-on-african-borrowers/ Chinese lenders are imposing even stricter collateral requirements on borrowers in low-income countries than before as they seek to hedge the risks of their massive overseas development finance program. As part of a $200 million loan from China Eximbank for the expansion and modernization of Entebbe Airport, the Ugandan government is required to channel all […]]]>

Chinese lenders are imposing even stricter collateral requirements on borrowers in low-income countries than before as they seek to hedge the risks of their massive overseas development finance program.

As part of a $200 million loan from China Eximbank for the expansion and modernization of Entebbe Airport, the Ugandan government is required to channel all revenue from the country’s only international airport into an escrow account , according to the contract obtained by AidData, a research company based in the United States. laboratory.

The document sheds light on a long-running controversy over the loan to the Ugandan government, which has damaged its relationship with the bank.

Although Chinese creditors have required sovereign borrowers to place project revenues in escrow as collateral for repayment more frequently than other development lenders, the Entebbe accord goes further.

“The Sales Collection Account will be used to collect revenue from Entebbe International Airport [including but not limited to revenues generated from the project)]“, he specifies.

“It’s more aggressive than what we’ve seen before,” said Bradley Parks, executive director of AidData. “[They are] taking all revenues from the underlying public infrastructure. It’s a pretty intrusive condition to impose on a sovereign borrower.

Nearly 30% of 100 Chinese loans examined in an AidData study last year used collateral mechanisms such as sales collection accounts, and 70% of those borrowers required borrowers to deposit all project revenues in escrow.

A loan, for the construction of water supplies in Benin, required revenue collection not only from the project but also from the underlying infrastructure. This was different from the Ugandan case in that the contract provided for the deposit of only part of these revenues in escrow.

Some analysts played down the controversy. “The Chinese have funded a new terminal, widened runways and new cargo and fuel depots,” said Deborah Brautigam, a professor at Johns Hopkins University who studies Chinese economic engagement in Africa.

“It would be very difficult to separate the revenue generated by the new and improved assets of the project from other revenue, and it would avoid any quibbles about which revenue should go into the escrow account.”

Citing a project supported by the US Agency for International Development where the Liberian government hired international financial controllers with co-signing authority, she called the Entebbe case “rather mild” in terms of sovereignty intrusions. .

But Nicholas Opiyo, a Ugandan civil rights lawyer, said the requirement to channel revenue into an account supervised by China Eximbank was onerous. “From the lender’s side, it’s a very good deal: it guarantees the value of your loan,” he said. Parliament, he added, also lacked proper scrutiny.

Experts believe that the debate, which pushed Uganda to try to renegotiate the agreement, arose because it mixed concessional and commercial elements.

“This is an example of government-to-government borrowing that is framed in largely commercial terms,” said Vijay Bhalaki, co-founder of Athena Infonomics, a development consultancy. He called the revenue collection clause “extraordinary but not unwarranted”.

While the 2% interest rate and seven-year grace period suggest that part of the deal is a concessional loan, other parts, such as the guarantee mechanism, management fees and d commitment and use requirements of Chinese entrepreneurs, are “like a business structure”. “, said Bhalaki.

China Eximbank did not respond to a request for comment.

Additional reporting by David Pilling from London

]]>
Winchester’s Elijah Majak Buoi convicted in COVID fraud scheme after trying to secure more than $13 million in Paycheck Protection Program loans https://flight93.org/winchesters-elijah-majak-buoi-convicted-in-covid-fraud-scheme-after-trying-to-secure-more-than-13-million-in-paycheck-protection-program-loans/ Sat, 26 Feb 2022 17:32:00 +0000 https://flight93.org/winchesters-elijah-majak-buoi-convicted-in-covid-fraud-scheme-after-trying-to-secure-more-than-13-million-in-paycheck-protection-program-loans/ A 40-year-old Massachusetts man was convicted by a federal jury on Friday of filing fraudulent loan applications seeking more than $13 million in forgivable loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a announced the United States Attorney’s Office. Elijah Majak Buoi, of Winchester, was found guilty following a three-day trial in which the man faced […]]]>

A 40-year-old Massachusetts man was convicted by a federal jury on Friday of filing fraudulent loan applications seeking more than $13 million in forgivable loans through the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP), a announced the United States Attorney’s Office.

Elijah Majak Buoi, of Winchester, was found guilty following a three-day trial in which the man faced four counts of wire fraud and one count of misrepresentation at a financial institution, officials said.

Buoi, who is the president and CEO of an information technology services company, Sosuda Tech, LLC., was arrested and charged by criminal complaint in June 2020 and later indicted by a federal grand jury in July 2020.

Prosecutors say Buoi submitted six fraudulent PPP loan applications requesting more than $13 million in forgivable loans, on behalf of his IT company, guaranteed by the Small Business Administration for COVID-19 relief from the Coronavirus. Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act.

In each loan application, Buoi misrepresented the number of employees and salary expenses. He also submitted fraudulent IRS tax forms in support of his claims, authorities said.

Evidence presented at trial showed that Buoi’s company was a startup with no US payrolls or US-based employees. However, as a result of his scheme, he obtained a $2 million PPP loan, the US attorney’s office said.

The government recovered approximately $1.97 million of the loan funds.

U.S. District Court Chief Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV scheduled Buoi’s sentencing for June 16, 2022.

The CARES Act is a federal law enacted in March 2020 designed to provide emergency financial assistance to millions of Americans who are suffering the economic effects caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The bill authorized up to $349 billion in forgivable loans to small businesses for job retention and certain other expenses, through the PPP. In April 2020, Congress authorized over $300 billion in additional PPP funding.

The PPP allows small businesses and other eligible organizations to receive loans with a term of two years and an interest rate of 1%.

Loans are to be used for payroll costs, mortgage interest, rent and utilities. The PPP allows for the interest and principal of the PPP loan to be forgiven if companies spend the proceeds of these expenses within a specified period of time and use at least a certain percentage of the loan for payroll expenses.

Related content:

  • Massachusetts man charged with coronavirus fraud after authorities say he applied for more than $13 million in Paycheck Protection Program loans
]]>
Robins Kaplan LLP Announces Class Action Settlement for Third-Party Payers Who Made Payments or Reimbursed Drug Daraprim from August 7, 2015 to January 28, 2022 https://flight93.org/robins-kaplan-llp-announces-class-action-settlement-for-third-party-payers-who-made-payments-or-reimbursed-drug-daraprim-from-august-7-2015-to-january-28-2022/ Fri, 25 Feb 2022 22:00:00 +0000 https://flight93.org/robins-kaplan-llp-announces-class-action-settlement-for-third-party-payers-who-made-payments-or-reimbursed-drug-daraprim-from-august-7-2015-to-january-28-2022/ NEW YORK, February 25, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — Legal notice If you are a Third Party Payer and you have made payments or refunds for all or part of the purchase price of Daraprim from August 7, 2015by January 28, 2022you may be eligible for a payment as part of a class action settlement. A settlement […]]]>

NEW YORK, February 25, 2022 /PRNewswire/ —

Legal notice

If you are a Third Party Payer and you have made payments or refunds for all or part of the purchase price of Daraprim from August 7, 2015by January 28, 2022you may be eligible for a payment as part of a class action settlement.

A settlement providing for a total potential cash payment of up to $28 million has been proposed in a class action brought on behalf of third-party payer entities who, for the consumption of their members, employees, insureds, participants or beneficiaries, and not for resale, have indirectly purchased, paid for and/or refunded all or part of the purchase price of Daraprim between August 7, 2015and January 282022.

The trial, titled BCBSM, Inc. v. Vyera Pharmaceuticals, et al., no. 21-cv-1884-DLC, is pending at United States District Court for the Southern District of new York (the court”). Plaintiff in the lawsuit alleges that defendants Vyera Pharmaceuticals, LLC and Phoenixus AG, Martin Shkreliand Kevin Mulleady (collectively, the “Defendants”) engaged in a scheme to thwart generic competition for Daraprim in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act and various state antitrust, unjust enrichment and protection consumers.

The plaintiff has entered into a settlement proposal that provides for a minimum cash payment to the settlement class of $7 million and additional potential payments of up to $21 million for a total potential settlement amount of up to $28 million (the “Class Settlement Amount”). The settlement is subject to court approval.

Who is included?

The settlement group includes:

All entities which, for the consumption of their members, employees, policyholders, participants or beneficiaries, and not for resale, have indirectly purchased, paid and/or reimbursed all or part of the purchase price of Daraprim between August 7, 2015and January 28, 2022 (the “Class Period”). The following persons are excluded from the settlement class:

(a) Individual consumers;
(b) the defendants and their employees, affiliates, parents and subsidiaries, whether or not named in the complaint;
(c) All federal and state government entities, except cities, towns, or counties with self-funded drug plans;
d) Fully insured health insurance plans (that is to say, health plans that have taken out insurance covering 100% of their reimbursement obligation towards members); and
e) The judges assigned to this case and any member of their immediate family.

If you are a member of the settlement class, your rights will be affected by the pending lawsuit and the settlement, and you may have the right to share in the settlement fund.. If you have not yet received the printed Notice and Claim Form in full, you may obtain copies of these documents by contacting the Claims Administrator at Daraprim TPP Regulationsc/o AB Data, Ltd., PO Box 173115, Milwaukee, Wis. 53217, 1-877-316-0144. Copies of the Notice and Claim Form, as well as other documents related to this lawsuit and a related government lawsuit against the Defendants, may also be downloaded from the website operated by the Claims Administrator,www.DaraprimTPPsettlement.com.

What does the regulation provide?

The proposed settlement provides for a total collective settlement amount of up to $28,000,000. Attorney’s fees (not to exceed 30% of funds received into the class settlement fund), litigation costs, plaintiff service awards, taxes, and notice and administration fees, such as approved by the court, will be deducted from the fund before distribution to the members of the settlement class. A more detailed description of the Class Settlement Amount is available in the Settlement Agreement downloadable at www.DaraprimTPPsettlement.com.

The Net Settlement Fund will be awarded to Settlement Class Members who submit valid Claim Forms based on a plan of distribution to be approved by the Court. Under the Plaintiff’s Proposed Allocation Plan, the Net Settlement Fund will be distributed to Settlement Class Members who indirectly purchased, paid for and/or reimbursed Daraprim in any of the following 36 states and territories during the period of the settlement group: Arizona, Arkansas, California, District of ColombiaFlorida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, new York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Porto Rico, Rhode Island, Caroline from the south, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginiaand Wisconsin (“Eligible States”). Net settlement will be distributed over a pro rata to Eligible Claimants based on the amount they paid for Daraprim in Eligible States during the Class Action Period, prorated to the total amount that all Eligible Claimants paid for Daraprim in Eligible States during the Class Period.

How do you get paid?

To receive a settlement payment, simply complete a Claim Form and provide the information requested on the Claim Form, and submit it no later than June 1, 2022. A complaint form is available at www.DaraprimTPPsettlement.com.

What are my legal rights and options?
If you are a Settlement Class Member, please review the full Notice, available at www.DaraprimTPPsettlement.com, regarding your rights and options. Only a summary is provided here.

  • stay in the colony To classify and submit a claim form to get paid. Claim Forms must be postmarked (if mailed) or submitted online by June 1, 2022. You waive your right to sue and are bound by all court orders.
  • Exclude yourself (“opt out”) of the Settlement Class. A written request for exclusion must be has received by April 18, 2022. You retain your right to sue and you will not receive any payment as a result of this legal action. Please see the full notice for information on how to request exclusion.
  • Object settlement, proposed plan of distribution and/or attorney’s request for attorneys’ fees and expenses. Written objections must be has received by May 23, 2022. You waive your right to sue and are bound by all court orders even if your objection is denied. If you file an objection, you may attend the settlement hearing to explain your objection, but you are not required to attend. Please see the full notice for how to file an objection.
  • Do not do anything and remain in the settlement group. You waive your right to sue and are bound by all court orders. You must submit a claim form to obtain payment.

The court will determine whether to approve the settlement, along with attorneys’ fees and expenses, at a settlement hearing to be held on June 17, 2022at 10:00 a.m.

The Court has appointed lawyers to represent you at no cost to you. You may choose to hire your own lawyer at your own expense.

Inquiries, other than notice and claim form requests, should be directed to the Acting Lead Counsel:

ACTING SENIOR ADVISOR
Kellie Lerner
Benjamin Steinberg
ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
900 3rd Ave, Suite 1900
New York, NY 10022
Phone: (212) 980-7400
Fax: (212) 980-7499
[email protected]
[email protected]

Requests for notification and complaint forms should be addressed to:

Daraprim TPP Regulations
c/o AB Data, Ltd.
Box 173115
Milwaukee, Wis. 53217
1-877-316-0144
www.DaraprimTPPsettlement.com

SOURCERobins Kaplan LLP

]]>
With ESG focus, sustainability-linked lending delivers benefits to borrowers and lenders – Finance and Banking https://flight93.org/with-esg-focus-sustainability-linked-lending-delivers-benefits-to-borrowers-and-lenders-finance-and-banking/ Thu, 24 Feb 2022 08:05:04 +0000 https://flight93.org/with-esg-focus-sustainability-linked-lending-delivers-benefits-to-borrowers-and-lenders-finance-and-banking/ United States: With ESG Focus, sustainability-linked lending delivers benefits to borrowers and lenders February 24, 2022 Duane Morris LLP To print this article, all you need to do is be registered or log in to Mondaq.com. As environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) initiatives are increasingly implemented by borrowers and lenders, […]]]>


United States: With ESG Focus, sustainability-linked lending delivers benefits to borrowers and lenders

To print this article, all you need to do is be registered or log in to Mondaq.com.

As environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) initiatives are increasingly implemented by borrowers and lenders, sustainability-linked lending offers opportunities for both.

What are sustainability-linked loans?

Sustainability Linked Lending (“SLL”) is based on the Sustainability Linked Lending Principles developed by the LMA, APLMA and LSTA. In SLLs, a borrower, together with its lender group, determines and sets certain sustainability performance objectives (“SPTs”) that the borrower must achieve, to be measured by key performance indicators (“KPIs”). ). Independent organizations, including the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (“SASB”), provide guidance on the most relevant ESG measures for certain industry sectors. Once agreed between the borrower and lenders, the KPI/SPT benchmarks are then incorporated into the interest rate or commitment fee margin adjustments for the credit facility (i.e. ‘by reaching the KPIs, the interest rate is reduced). The credit facility documentation will also include reporting requirements for independent external verification of the Borrower’s level of performance against each SPT for each KPI, at least annually.

Benefits for the borrower

Many companies have already undertaken ESG data collection and reporting, and more will likely do so as the SEC expands its focus on ESG disclosures and more investors demand this information. While the third-party verification and reporting costs mentioned above are inherent to SLLs, borrowers who are already engaging in these efforts may find that they can effectively gain an additional economic incentive through SLL financing. Additionally, SLLs can be part of a full alignment with the borrower’s ESG strategies and policies.

Benefits of the lender

Lenders are also undertaking ESG initiatives, of which SLLs can be a component. Additionally, regulators of some lenders are communicating their plans to provide guidance on climate-related risks and incorporating these principles into their oversight expectations. Additionally, studies have shown that companies (e.g. SLL borrowers) that identify and manage their ESG risks have improved financial performance. Thus, SLL financing can benefit lenders in all political, regulatory and commercial aspects.

Current state of the market and next steps

Although SLLs are a relatively new financing concept, particularly in the United States, the volume of SLLs issued globally has quadrupled between 2020 and 2021. As ESG momentum continues to strengthen in the United States, the volume of SLL should also continue to grow. Currently, terms are negotiated on a transaction specific basis and market provisions have not been added as a result of LSTA documents. But, as SLLs become more common, the market is likely to merge on terms. Stay tuned for more updates on SLLs and other trending sustainable finance products, including Green Bonds and Commercial Property Assessed Clean Energy Finance (C-PACE).

Warning: This alert has been prepared and posted for informational purposes only and is not offered and should not be construed as legal advice. For more information, please see the full disclaimer.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Finance and Banking of the United States

Regulation of cryptography by any other name

Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP

2022 has been heralded as the year when regulations will apply to the cryptocurrency (“crypto”) and decentralized finance (“DeFi”) spaces.

]]>
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC ANNOUNCES EXPIRATION OF OFFER TO PURCHASE https://flight93.org/dominican-republic-announces-expiration-of-offer-to-purchase/ Wed, 16 Feb 2022 13:50:00 +0000 https://flight93.org/dominican-republic-announces-expiration-of-offer-to-purchase/ Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, February 16, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — The Dominican Republic (the “Republic“) today announced the aggregate principal amount of Notes that have been validly tendered pursuant to its previously announced offer to purchase in cash the Existing Notes listed in the tables below (the “To offer“), on the terms and subject to the […]]]>

Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, February 16, 2022 /PRNewswire/ — The Dominican Republic (the “Republic“) today announced the aggregate principal amount of Notes that have been validly tendered pursuant to its previously announced offer to purchase in cash the Existing Notes listed in the tables below (the “To offer“), on the terms and subject to the conditions described in the information notice of the February 9, 2022 (the “Offering Document“). The Offer expired as scheduled at 8:00 a.m. (New York City It’s time February 16, 2022. The total principal amount of the tendered Existing Bonds was $1,162,218,000.00. Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the meaning ascribed to them in the Offer Document.

The following tables indicate the total principal amount of the Existing Bonds which have been validly tendered in response to the Offer at 8:00 a.m. (New York City It’s time February 16, 2022.

Table 1 – Existing aggregate ratings

Title of Existing Global Notes

ISIN / CUSIP code

Global Principal
Amount offered(1)

Percentage of
Global Principal
Amount offered(2)

Purchase price(3)

6.6000% bonds due 2024

144A: US25714PBZ09 / 25714P BZ0

Reg S: USP3579EAT49 / P3579E AT4

$228,658,000.00

81.97%

$1,093.25

Bonds redeemable at 5.875% due

2024

144A: US25714PBY34 / 25714P BY3

Reg S: USP3579EAS65 / P3579E AS6

$536,495,000.00

87.74%

$1,057.50

___________________

(1)

Information regarding the aggregate principal amount of the Outstanding Global Notes is based on information received from the Tender and Information Agent (as defined below).

(2)

Principal amount of each series of Existing Global Notes deposited under the Offer, expressed as an approximate percentage of the aggregate principal amount of outstanding Existing Global Notes of such series.

(3)

Per $1,000 principal amount of Existing Global Bonds validly presented and accepted for purchase. Holders whose Existing Global Notes have been validly tendered and accepted for purchase pursuant to the Offer will also receive Accrued Interest. Holders whose Existing Global Notes have been validly tendered and accepted for purchase pursuant to the Offer will be paid in US dollars as described in the Offer Document.

Table 2 – Existing local notes

Title of existing local notes

IS IN

Global Principal
Amount offered(1)

Percentage of
Global Principal
Amount offered(2)

Purchase price(3)

7.000% US dollar denominated bonds due
July 2023

DO1005244525

$397,065,000.00

79.41%

$1,090.00

___________________

(1)

Information regarding the Aggregate Principal Amount of Existing Local Notes is based on information received from CEVALDOM, Deposito Centralizado de Valores, SA

(2)

Principal amount of the Existing Local Bonds tendered to the Offer expressed as an approximate percentage of the aggregate principal amount of the Existing Local Bonds outstanding.

(3)

Per $1,000 principal amount of existing Local Notes validly tendered and accepted for purchase. Holders whose Existing Local Notes have been validly tendered and accepted for purchase pursuant to the Offer will also receive Accrued Interest. Holders whose Existing Local Notes have been validly tendered and accepted for purchase pursuant to the Offer will be paid in US dollars as described in the Offer Document.

The Offer is conditional upon, among other things, the simultaneous (or earlier) closing of an issue by the Republic of one or more series of bonds denominated in US dollars, New York debt securities governed by law, in an aggregate principal amount, with a price and terms and conditions acceptable to the Republic in its sole discretion (the “New ticket offer“). The Republic intends to use a portion of the net proceeds of the New Bond Offering to purchase the Existing Bonds accepted for purchase. The New Bond Offering has been made solely by way of a offering memorandum relating to the Offering of New Bonds, and neither this announcement nor the Offering Document constitutes an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy such new bonds.

The Republic reserves the right, in its sole discretion, not to accept valid orders to tender Existing Obligations in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Offer or to terminate the Offer with respect to one or more series for any reason whatsoever. it would be. Upon termination of the Offer with respect to a series, the tendered Existing Bonds of that series will be returned to the Holder.

The aggregate purchase price for the principal amount of a series of Existing Notes validly tendered by a Holder and accepted by the Republic will be a cash amount equal to the principal amount outstanding of such Existing Notes, multiplied by the price of purchase, plus accrued interest (the “Total purchase price“). If the Aggregate Purchase Price less Accrued Interest for all Existing Bonds validly tendered (the “Offered total purchase price“) would exceed the maximum purchase price, then the Republic will, in its sole discretion, select one or more series of existing tickets to be pro-rated based on the same or different pro-rating factors.

The purchase price applicable to each series of Existing Notes will be payable in US dollars.

Settlement for Existing Securities validly offered and accepted should take place on Tuesday, February 22, 2022subject to change without notice (the “Settlement date for existing tickets“).

If the Republic accepts all or part of a holder’s offer of Existing Notes of any series, the holder will be entitled to receive for such Existing Notes the applicable purchase price plus accrued interest, which will be paid on the date settlement of the existing notes if the conditions of the Offer are satisfied.

At February 16, 2022at or around 5:00 p.m. (New York City time), subject to change without notice, the Republic plans to announce: (i) the maximum purchase price; (ii) the total purchase price offered; (iii) the aggregate principal amount of the Offers of each series of Existing Bonds which has been accepted; and (iv) any pro rata submissions of any series of Existing Securities.

The Offer Document can be downloaded from the website of Global Bondholder Services Corporation (the “Tender and Information Officer“) at https://www.gbsc-usa.com/dominican/ or obtained from the tender and information agent or from one of the concession-managers at the coordinates below. Questions regarding the offer can be directed to the dealership managers at the contact details below.

The Dealer Managers of the Offer are:

Citigroup Global Markets Inc.

388 Greenwich Street, 4and Ground negotiation

New York, New York 10013

united states of america

Attention: Accountability Management Group

Collect: +1 (212) 723-6106

Toll Free: +1 (800) 558-3745

Email: ny.liabilitymanagement@citi.com

JP Morgan Securities LLC

383 Madison Avenue

New York, New York 10179

united states of america

Attention: Latin American Debt Capital Markets

Collect: +1 (212) 834-7279

Toll Free: +1 (866) 846-2874

The Submission and Information Agent for Existing Global Securities is:

Global Bondholder Services Company
65 Broadway – Suite 404
New York, New York 10006
united states of america
Attention: Corporate Actions

Banks and brokers call: (212) 430-3774
Toll free +1 (855) 654-2014
E-mail: contact@gbsc-usa.com

By fax:
(For eligible establishments only):
+1 (212) 430-3775/3779

Confirmation:
+1 (212) 430-3774

By email:

By night courier:

By the hand:

65 Broadway – Suite 404

New York, New York 10006

united states of america

65 Broadway – Suite 404

New York, New York 10006

united states of america

65 Broadway – Suite 404

New York, New York 10006

united states of america

Important Notice

This announcement is for informational purposes only. It is not complete and may not contain all the information you need to consider before depositing Existing Securities. You should read the entire offering document.

This announcement is not an offer to buy in cash or a solicitation of invitations to offers to buy in cash for Existing Securities. The distribution of documents relating to the Offer and the transactions contemplated therein may be restricted by law in certain jurisdictions. The Offer is made only by the Offer Document and in jurisdictions where it is legal to do so. The Offer is void in all jurisdictions where it is prohibited. If any documents relating to the Offer come into your possession, you are responsible for informing yourself of and complying with all such restrictions. Each person accepting the Offer shall be deemed to have represented, warranted and covenanted (with respect to himself and any person for whom he is acting) that he is not a person to whom it is unlawful to make the Offer pursuant to the Offer Document, that it has not distributed or transmitted the Offer Document or any other document or material relating to the Offer to any such person, and that it has complied with all laws and regulations applicable to it for the purpose of participating in the Offer. Neither the Republic nor the Dealer Managers accept any liability for any breach by any person of the applicable restrictions in any jurisdiction.

The Offer Materials, including this announcement, do not constitute, and may not be used in connection with, an offer or solicitation in any location where offers or solicitations are not permitted by law. This announcement and the Offer Document do not constitute an offer to buy or a solicitation of an offer to sell securities in any jurisdiction to any person to whom it is unlawful to make such offer or solicitation in such jurisdiction. In any jurisdiction in which the Offer is required to be made by an approved broker or dealer and in which any Dealer Manager or any of its affiliates is so approved, it shall be deemed to have been made by the Dealer Managers or such affiliates on behalf of the Republic.

Quote

Show original content:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-dominican-republic-announces-expiration-of-offer-to-purchase-301483704.html

SOURCE The Dominican Republic

]]>