LyrArc Article Gist
The Biden administration informs the WHO that it no longer supports the approach taken by previous administrations from Bush through Obama and Trump of not regulating Tech companies. Tech companies Google, Facebook and Apple have through heavy lobbying written the regulatory framework of no regulations. This has resulted in monopolistic behaviours, suppressing competition, ignoring customer needs, not considering privacy of information and other problems. Farah Stockman of the NYT traces how this happened and why the Biden administration is taking action.

LyrArc Article Gist
Michael Barr was appointed in July 2022 to the Federal Reserve Board of Governors by president Biden, and made the vice chair of financial supervision. As a legal scholar at the University of Michigan with a number of books published on the plight of black Americans after the financial crisis of 2008, he is familiar with the problems created by banks from a laissez fairre approach to regulation.  Barr helped write the rules for the legislation on supervision of banks after the financial crisis of 2008 that hurt worker and families, and minorities particularly in places like Detroit. He is now responsible for correcting the problems created by the Trump legislation that exempted banks under $250 billion from this regulation. Barr will bring this down to $100 billion, the original 2008 legislation has a threshold of $50 billion for banks to be subject to oversight by the central bank and stress testing. In 2018 Barr said about Trump's legislation to limit regulatory oversight in an op-ed in American Banker- "The rules (after 2008) were not meant to apply only to the largest handful of systemically important firms. It is the very antithesis of macro-prudential supervision to focus only on the largest handful of financial firms and to ignore risks elsewhere in the system." ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Coronavirus testing is taking off in the U.S. for the first time after the U.S. Federal Drug Administration relaxed testing regulations on February 29, and as more universities and hospitals develop their own testing technology and apply it. The FDA has approved more than 15 tests and many more are awaiting approval. 

This includes UC Davis, Washington University School of Medicine, Brigham and Women's, Harvard Medical School, Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City, centers that are running the tests limited only by the shortage of reagents supplies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Banks in the UK are considering giving investment bankers allowances to make up for lower bonuses mandated by new EU rules. This is one of the mechanisms banks are considering to be able to pay competitively. EU rules do not limit total compensation making it possible to shift pay given earlier as bonuses to the new 'allowance' category. For instance a 1.8 million euro bonus might be dropped to 1 million euros and 800,000 euros given as an allowance. Such an arrangement means banks can adjust the allowance as markets and regulations change. Increasing fixed salary would mean effects such as higher pension costs. Most of the 35,000 higher level banking employees to which the EU rules apply work in London, England. The UK Prudential Regulation Authority has come out against the EU bonus rule and the UK has taken this up in a legal challenge at the European Court of Justice. U.S. and Asian banks are deferring parts of bonuses and paying in a mix of shares and cash.

LyrArc Article Gist
Google, Meta, Apple, Microsoft effort to cancel all AI regulation by states, effectively leaving AI unregulated. What was Senator Ted Cruz doing sponsoring a 10 year rule of this kind that required protections to be put in place for child online safety so that the dangerous AI law for unregulation, no supervision, would not intrude into other areas such as child online safety. What was Senator Blackburn of Tennessee thinking when she joined that effort and had second thoughts pulling back to 5 years from 10 years of unregulated AI. Everyone from the entire Democratic caucus, Steve Bannon and advocacy groups fighting for citizen control over AI, and many Republican Senators who were not clear why such a law was being proposed by AI interests and Cruz's willingness to take the Tech monopolies interests in a dangerous direction of no regulation. “The way these provisions are written, they’re very sweeping, and they would trip up almost any attempt to regulate the harmful use of AI.”  -Ed Wytkind, interim director of the AFL-CIO’s technology institute. “Google and Meta had AI amnesty in the bag yesterday at 10 a.m. Then the Article III Project and Steve Bannon’s War Room sprang into action. Sometimes feeling the heat makes people see the light. We are pleased 99 senators finally decided to side with kids and content creators over AI amnesty and Big Tech profits.”-Mike Davis founder Article III Project ...

LyrArc Article Gist
THe Economist says that the efforts of banks like Chase JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo to rewrite history are wrong and dangerous. They are wrong because there was acomplete collapse of confidence by December 2009 and these banks benfitted from state guarantees and government efforts to help the banks without which Goldman, and Morgan Stanley and other banks would be in serious difficulty or in danger of collapsing. It is dangerous because it is being used to distort the process of putting in place the right compensation incentives to avoid overleveraging and risk taking, putting in place prudent regulation, and taking all the right steps to prevent a future banking crisis, with the argument that this should apply only to the weaker banks. It is dangerous on two other points. The banking regulations should apply to the entire banking industry, and especially on banks that are too big to fail. These banks now are content to leave the toxic assets on their books where they are and consider government efforts to purchase these toxic loans and securoities or otherwise resolve these assets in some kind of good bank-bad bank scheme, as unnecessary. All this is happening even as the banks themselves remain poorly capitalized, even after raising funds in the capital markets recently, and remain very dependent on the government. The danger is that this may make everyone complacent in the event of a developing new storm....

LyrArc Article Gist
Where changes are being made that make America stronger business leaders wholeheartedly support and value the president's work and the people on his team working on it. Brad Smith of Microsoft says of Biden on cybersecurity "he has done more in his presidency than any president ever." CEO's of auto companies (Stellantis, GM, Ford) and Intel CEO Geisinger value the investment the government is making for climate change transition and investments in rebuilding semiconductor manufacturing to level the playing field with China, something the US Chamber of Commerce never advocated. It is the policy officer of the US Chamber of Commerce who uses the word "complicated" because the positions taken by the US Chamber of Commerce are at odds with what the American people need, or are demanding of the president. If one is talking about large oil companies, so called Tech companies such as Google and Apple that are not paying their fair share of taxes, and Pharma companies that are charging exorbitant prices, the president is only doing what is best for the American people. One could see this in the recent Senate hearings with Big Pharma companies ,when out of sheer frustration the senior Republican senator Mike Braun of Indiana warned the Pharma companies, that they were following a path that he other Republicans could no longer support. Banks faced tighter regulation because of banking crises including the 2009 crisis caused by the banks that hurt workers and middle class. Business relations with the Biden administration are being shaped then by a new vision for America and the American people, to point to a brighter future, not to pull back to the past. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Kenneth Rogoff, Harvard University economist, author of the well researched book on the 2008 financial crisis, "This Time Is Different," gives his thoughts on the economic prospects for the U.S under the new Trump administration. He says 4% GDP growth and 3% inflation is possible temporarily for a while with stimulus policies, less regulation, and increased private investment. After 8 years of not investing in much needed infrastructure because of concerns about the deficit, the timing is right for such investments, especially as the economic effects of the crisis of 2008 gradually fade.  This is about taking advantage of ultra low interest rates to invest in infrastructure. He says it helps that Trump policies are pro-business. He sees drawbacks as the stimulus program adds a 25% increase with extra debt, adding $5 trillion over 10 years, but adds that for many years Nobel prize winning economist Krugman and others have said that there is good reason to increase borrowing to invest, and this is now being tried. Inflation remains an uncertainty- if there are large quantities of underutilized and unemployed resources it would raise prices less than its effect to increase output. The reverse would apply if the U.S. economy is closer to full capacity. One factor that would help- increasing confidence for business and increasing investment. Against this what he calls optimistic view or spin, is the idea of mistakes under a Trump administration, errors made and a degree of incompetence which he says is a real possibility. Overall his view is that some risks are appropriate now, and from his deep study of financial crises sees the slow growth of the last 8 years a result of a financial crisis that now begins to fade, creating the possibility of higher growth under prudent policies.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden signs a broad executive order on July 9, that is directed at promoting competitive behaviour in the American economy, and taking action against companies that have anti competitive behaviours. It also aims to limit corporate dominance that then can lead to anti competitive behaviours. These types of behaviours puts consumers, workers and small compoanies at a disadvantage. The Biden plan stretches from the smaller items such as hearing aids and baggage fees, to the task of putting in place the first antitrust regulation on tech companies Apple, Google, Amazon and others. Industries Biden sees as needing help are agriculture, healthcare, shipping, transportation, technology, and labor practices that limit wages and mobility. In making the executive order the White House says it "will lower prices for families, increase wages for workers and promote innovation and even faster economic growth." As each step is taken by the Biden administration to help workers, families, women and children, the situation is a reminder of the actions taken by Franklin Delano Roosevelt at another period of crisis in the nation's history. The July 9 executive order will create a Competition Council as proposed by Tim Wu, special assistant to the president for technology and competition policy in the White House National Economic Council. The Compeititon Council task will be to get federal agencies to take action to promote competitive behaviours for the first time since the 1980's when Republican presidents Reagan, Bush, and Democratic presidents Clinton, Obama, allowed such behaviours in some industries to get entrenched. In Biden's own words "the rise of monopolies weaken labor." In each industry agencies will now have the task of pushing back against anti-competitive behaviours already put in place by companies. In agriculture it will help small farmers, in pharmaceutical sector it will help the American people deal with a problem that has no end in sight of high drug prices and practices that support this. In all areas of the economy the Biden plan is for a new coordinated effort across all the agencies of the government and under the leadership of the president, to restore the vibrant economy to what it was before the long deterioration through anti-competitive behaviours. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Microsoft CEO Brad Smith is taking a different approach with regulators than tech rivals Apple and Google. In this report by WSJ he says that tech is now in the same situation that the financial companies were after the financial misdeeds of 2008 which caused a global financial crisis. Banks had to adapt to the regulation that followed. Tech says Brad Smith will have to do the same after missteps of its own. Better for Microsoft to work proactively with regulators than to stall regulation is Smith'e view.

To do this Smith brings 30 years of experience working with Microsoft and seven as president. During this time he had extensive interface with regulators and government, so that he brings more experience in this field than his peers at Google or Apple. 

LyrArc Article Gist
Danny Hakim's gives this indepth account on the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's connections to the tobacco industry, with reporting from Ukraine, Nepal, the Philippines and other poorer nations struggling with the public health implications of widespread smoking. Since 1997 the Chamber of Commerce, which is viewed in foreign countries as an outpost of the U.S. government, has taken some controversial positions. In the U.S. the chamber has as it members the tech industry leaders such as Google and Microsoft. Yet it is increasingly at odds with these companies. In 2009 the chamber under Mr. Donahue opposed greenhouse gas emissions regulation by the EPA, leading to the departure of Apple from the group and Nike stepping down from the board. In 2013 the American subsidiary of Sweden's construction company Skanska left the group, in protest against the chamber's opposition to green building codes. Michael Bloomberg and Bill Gates have set up an international fund to fight law suits challenging international anti-smoking laws by tobacco companies. The TPP's provision for companies being able to sue foreign governments for violation of trade agreements has no exception for tobacco companies. Similiar concerns are raised about pharmaceutical companies suiing foreign governments where the governments are working to increase access to medicine for poorer sections of the population....

LyrArc Article Gist
That social media is likened to cigarettes and Joanna Stern gives this WSJ video titled  "Facebook and Big Tobacco: Why Social Media is (and isn't) like Cigarettes" itself tells a lot about the way the public in the US perceives the dangers of social media. Social media regulation is compared to the experience with tobacco regulation in the US in this WSJ report. Senators Amy Kobluchar, Democrat of Minnesota and Chuck Grassley Republican of Iowa lead the effort for regulation in the US Senate in the face of lobbying millions spent by so-called tech companies. Tech in history goes back to the period following the Renaissance in Europe when hundreds of scientific discoveries changed the way we live and work with advances in medicine, science, manufacturing, infrastructure, rail, flight, and computers  whereas the tech of tech companies such as Google and Facebook, Amazon, and Apple is around for 15-20 years, and built on the hundreds of years of innovation coming before, and now degenerated into monopolistic profit seeking. With negative consequences for women, children, and which violate basic ideas of fairness on which America is built.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Rappaport of the NYT asks how it is possible that the U.S. Treasury is critical of the EU Commission's ruling that Apple pay back $13 billion in taxes because of its low tax rate of .005% in Europe, when Treasury is strongly critical of tax avoidance. The negligible tax by Ireland, base of Apple operations, is seen as a state subsidy not available to competitors. It also, as the EU Commission says, does not correspond to economic reality because the revenues are mostly made outside Ireland. An arrangement that is basically a strategy of tax avoidance. Today the leading candidates for president, Trump and Clinton, the major parties, and Congress, all are critical of tax avoidance strategies which deprive Treasury of much needed revenues. Restoring upward mobility is a priority today and programs to provide tution free access to public colleges, healthcare access, and infrastructure development, require public funding. Then why is the U.S.Treasury critical of the EU ruling? It is because Treasury sees this as money that should be coming to Treasury not the EU. However Treasury has failed to make this clear. The Financial Accountability and Corporate Transparency Coalition's Clark Gascoigne, calls it very ironic. And other experts say the money would not be coming to the U.S. anyway unless a low tax rate induces Apple to repatriate profits to the U.S. One expert calls it hypocritical. Senator Schumer says he agrees with Paul Ryan that tax legislation for a low tax rate for repatriation of profits back to the U.S. should be the next step, so that an infrastructure fund can be setup. Senator Levin and transparency advocates sees the EU action as normal and to be expected, as the anti-establishment sentiment today comes from such dealings that create the impression that the system is rigged in favor of some corporations. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Richard Fisher, president of the Dallas Federal Reserve Bank, has a three part proposal for tackling the "too big to fail" problem and concentration of 70% of the U.S. banking assets in a few banks. It calls for Market Discipline to be exercized in a way that the Dodd-Frank legislation fails to do. This is to be accomplished by having deposit insurance and the Fed's discount window apply only to traditional commercial banks, not the nonbank affiliates and parent holding companies. Customers, creditors and counterparties of all nonbank affiliates and the parent holding companies would be asked to sign a disclosure accepting that there is no government guarantee. In addition the largest financial holding companies would be restructured so that all their corporate entities would fall under a speedy bankruptcy process. Fisher does not clarify how he would do this restructuring. The Fisher idea come after changes in the banking industry through internal management restructuring following trading losses, legal settlements and the passage of a Swiss referendum called the Minder Initiative on compensation. Fisher suggests the U.S. Fed and regulatory authorites in other countries should push for further restructuring and calls for action beyond the limited results from 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. He is critical of Dodd-Frank's often ambiguous and lengthy worded legislation- 849 pages for the law and 9000 pages for the regulations written to implement the law. Fisher emphasizes the point that its hard to implement a law and enforce rules when its not clear and is difficult to understand....

LyrArc Article Gist
Former Fed chairman Paul Volcker has opinion about the financial crisis that is deeply felt. He wants the wall that separates banks that take in federally insured deposits from the public separated from the risky trading activities of investment banking houses. That would essentially put us back to the situation that existed before Glass Steagall Act of 1933 was revoked in the 1999. The lessons of the thirties apply today. Says Volcker "people say I am old-fashioned and banks can no longer be seaprated from nonbank activity, but that argument brought us back to where we are today." The Obama advisers like Geithner and Summers are close to the bankers- see the links to Geithner and Summers- and believe that extensively regulating the banks would prevent the banks from engaging in risky practices. However as this reporter Louis Uchitelle of the NYT has not pointed out, the problem is that this is more easily said than done. The very fact that there were close ties between Geithner and Summers and the bankers during the Clinton Administration and Geithner as head of the New York Fed under the Bush administration, and the aggressive lobbying by the investment banks like Goldman and others who are now banks to water down any regulation on derivatives trading and on other supervision, can only lead to a situation where neither Volcker's solution or the Obama people's solution is put into effect. THis will only invite another crisis. With the public anger even worse as the bonuses and compensation from trading profits by Goldman and other banks come through cheap money created by the Fed- see links- for the purpose of addressing the financial crisis. Volcker would separate JP Morgan and Bear Stearns trading operations and separate Merrill from BofA, and Goldman would revert from abank holding company to a investment banking house. Volcker believes that the pay on Wall Street "has gotten grotesquely large." Volcker believes that the separation of deposit taking institutions from investment banking would reduce trading profits and consequently automatically reduce these large bonuses. So is Volcker being ignored by the Obama administration, even as his glow helped the Obama people win public support as a better steward of the economy than McCain during the election campaign? During the crisis Volcker headed the president's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. Today he is rarely seen in his Washington office, he talks to administration officials mostly on the phone, at 82 he is not knocking on doors, and the advisory board has been assigned to look at the tax law on overseas corporate profits. Volcker agrees with most of the Obama plan on financial regulation including higher capital requirements and and pay guidelines, but if this is not enacted because of lobbying by bankers then the nation will have the benefit of neither the Volcker Plan or the Obama Plan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post article by Henry Farrell explains the implications of the 2016 EU ruling on Apple asking it to pay 13 billion euros in back taxes. Other countries in the European Union are upset that Ireland is taking away business and siphoning away tax revenues from their country, and giving most of it back to Apple. Normally the European Union Commission does not have authority over taxes in the member states. However considering the social and political implications at a time of deep recession and political upheaval in the EU and the U.S., the European Union Commission under Margarethe Vestager has seen it proper to look at arrangements in which companies come up with tax arrangements that deprive member states unfairly of tax revenues- revenues that could support social welfare and basic education, healthcare services at a time of painful cuts. A tax rate of .005% in 2013 for Apple is cited by Vestager as she points out that Apple's taxable profit does not correspond to economic reality, as most operations are conducted outside Ireland. Ireland is just on paper the tax location for EU operations. Vestager has thus come up with a legal approach based on Ireland's tax arrangements being a form of illegal state subsidy, which is not allowed under EU rules, and gives the EU Commission authority to require that it be reversed by paying the back taxes of 13 billion euros. Farrell answers the question why the U.S. Treasury is saying that Apple should not have to pay these taxes, as the U.S. also hopes to get some of these taxes at some future date with Apple repatriating profits to the U.S. under a still to be set tax arrangement. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Norris quotes Senator John McCain who said that when corporations such as Apple and Google do not pay their share of taxes, other companies in the U.S. and ordinary taxpayers have to make up the difference.

LyrArc Article Gist
Pearlstein raises the question, are there business leaders who believe that what's good for America, is good for business, rather than the other way around. Google, like other technology companies, pays much less in taxes than the corporate tax rate suggests. Research by the Washington Post shows this to be 18%, not 35%, for 2009.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fact checking Apple CEO Tim Cook's statements on the EU Commission ruling for $13 billion in back taxes, shows that CEO Tim Cook's statement that "we never asked for, nor did we receive any special deals," is not true. Ireland let Apple determine what it would pay in tax, and Apple had the benefit of loopholes in Irish tax laws, the fact check by experts shows here. Apple's Cook also says it would hurt investment and jobs in Ireland. Another NYT article showed that the entire healthcare budget of Ireland would be covered by the $13 billion, and 66% of its budget for social support services to the public. Apple has 22,000 employees in Europe and 6000 in Ireland in 2016. Based on the $13 billion owed in taxes, for every job in Ireland the cost to Ireland is 2.17 million euros, and for every job in the EU the cost is 590,000 euros. Apple could turn around and locate in some other place, other than Ireland, in which case Ireland does not get the 6000 jobs. This is Ireland's incentive to give Apple tax benefits. Only if all EU countries had common tax laws would it be possible to avoid this situation, and generate much needed tax revenues at a time of cuts in public spending in healthcare, education, and social services, and invest in infrastructure, worker retraining. The alternative is for the EU to look at other remedies. This is what the EU Commissioner Vestager did when she announced that this was a state subsidy and illegal under EU rules. Because the appeal by Apple goes to the EU Courts the appeal is difficult say legal experts. The EU courts look at the legal aspects of the ruling, was it justified, not at the overall aspect of the ruling by Vestager, as EU Competition Commissioner. This may be why there is so much outcry from Apple, and other digital companies.  ...