LAW OF STABILITY ‘, ARRIVES ANOTHER GIFT TO BANKS

As reported by   Reuters , it would seem that the government has tabled an amendment to the Stability Law that would allow banks to strengthen the regulatory capital by issuing hybrid bonds, without thereby suffer the tax consequences arising from extraordinary gains that would ensue in the event of conversion of the bond into equity.

Basically hybrid bonds are a number of innovative financial instruments connotations halfway between debt instruments (bonds) and equity risk (equity).
Hybrid bonds, having a higher seniority to equity instruments (shares), but subordinate to all bond issues,in the event of bankruptcy of the issuer, the shares are redeemed first, but only if you have paid all other bonds.
Typically these particular bonds are issued by banks for their great benefits that derive from this tool, both in relation to the shares to bonds.
The advantages for issuers are varied and represent a means of collecting funds very attractive in comparison to the issuance of equity or senior debt.
If companies reperissero capital with senior debt would worsen their credit more debt means more default risk for lenders. Hybrids, as lower emissions with seniority, have a risk and therefore a different rating that does not get worse than the senior titles. The hybrid tranches, in fact, may not be refunded or go into default without the interests of the senior bondholders are affected. This feature is especially useful for obtaining the necessary financial resources in the event of major acquisitions. Or, as in the present case, just to strengthen the quality of bank capital, affected by the suffering that emerge as a result of the protracted crisis. Although it does not dilute the ownership interests of shareholders in the event of capital increases is avoided so that the majority shareholders or consortia must buy new shares to maintain control. The shareholders also do not suffer reductions in profit, with more outstanding securities, would be divided between more members.
It ‘clear that in a moment of extreme difficulty for the banking system-in the throes of suffering colossal that erode the heritage-the use of this financial instrument will strengthen the heritage of better quality, the common equity tier 1 (CET1).
In fact, in the case of conversion of hybrid bonds in banks’ balance sheets emerge within the contingent that compensate for the resulting reduction of the debt. These contingent, being the proceeds of an extraordinary nature, contribute to the formation of income and therefore are subject to taxation for IRES purposes that the IRAP. So the banks, in some way, suffer a tax burden which is an obstacle to the conversion of hybrid bonds.
The amendment proposed by the Government states that:
“The higher or lower values ​​resulting from the implementation of specific contractual provisions of the financial instruments [regarding capital adequacy] does not contribute to the formation of the taxable income of the issuer for IRES and IRAP.”
In practice, the text, ensuring tax neutrality in these types of operations, removes the tax obstacles that have so far disincentivavano banks to strengthen the regulatory capital through the use of such tools and then through the conversion of bonds into equity.
It ‘also clear that this measure, being yet another intervention in favor of the banking system, there is also concern that meanders in government circles and the fragile financial conditions prevailing in much of the banking system.
Posted by 
Advertisements

O “NELEGALNIM” BANKARIMA I “POVOLJNIM” KREDITIMA

Krajnje je vreme da preuzmemo odgovornost i brigu za svoju imovinu i novac ulazemo ili pozajmljujemo tako sto cemo se prethodno dobro informisati.  Nedavno je NARODNA BANKA SRBIJE izdala upozorenje da  gradjani  treba da se cuvaju jer kako dnevni list Blic prenosi:

Prema zakonskim propisima u Republici Srbiji, davanjem kredita mogu se baviti samo banke i republički Fond za razvoj, saopštila je danas Narodna banka Srbije (NBS), reagujući na oglašavanje i distribuciju reklamnih materijala, kojima se građanima nude “povoljni” krediti, a posebno onima koji ne ispunjavaju uslov za dobijanje bankarskih zajmova.

“Upozoravamo građane da paze šta rade, jer nije reč o legalnim tokovima jer samo banke i republički Fond za razvoj mogu da se bave kreditima,”

Da li je to bas tako????

….. zbog toga sto je kredit najcesce i povecanje novca u opticaju i potencijalni generator inflacije drzava strogo kontrolise koliko banke daju kredita. Sustina je da su nekontrolisani krediti koje daju upravo banke PLJACKA NARODA jer nemaju podlogu u realnoj vrednosti vec korisnik kredita treba tek da stvori tu vrednost. Pozajmice izmedju pravnih ili fizickih lica TO NIKAD NISU (jer taj novac vec ima podlogu u necijem radu, osim ako neko sam kod kuce ne nastampa novcanice)

Bankovnim kreditima se narod siromasi jer banke ne daju kredit iz 100% depozita koji dobiju nego tog trenutka, prosto receno stampaju vrednost date pozajmice. Vremenom, kada se “podeli” previse kredita, dolazi do toga da radom ne moze da se stvori toliko realne robe i usluga za vrednost novca (kredita) koji banke i drzava preko NB kreira. Takvi krediti dodatno guraju inflaciju a zna se da ona ima za cilj da obezvredi imovinu gradjana i prelije profit u kase privilegovanih tajkuna bliskih vlasti

Po zakonu o obligacijama koji je stariji od zakona o bankama ukoliko dodje do spora Ugovor o kreditu koji smeju da daju samo banke se na sudu tretira isto kao ugovor o zajmu koji mogu da daju i druga pravna i fizicka lica. On podrazumeva razmenu jedne vrednosti za drugu. Na primer: Ja sam nesto stvorila i to prodajom pretvorila u novac koji meri vrednost moga rada. Taj novac sam pozajmila komsiji koji ce ga uloziti u nesto sto muje potrebno da stvori novu vrednost koju ce posle opet pretvoriti u novac da meni vrati. Sustina ugovora po zakonu o obligacijama je da mora biti razmene realnih vrednosti u ekvivalentu. Svaka strana daje nesto za nesto. Problem sa bankama je sto u trenutku kad uz odobrenje NB daju kredite one nemaju pokrice vec prakticno tada vrse emisiju novca sto je inace velika prevara koja se tolerise i kojom oni koji kontrolisu banke stvaraju sebi profit bez razmene realnih vrednosti.

Pojam i bitni elementi ugovora o zajmu i ugovora o kreditu

Član 557 Zakona o obligacionim odnosima Ugovorom o zajmu obavezuje se zajmodavac da preda u svojinu zajmoprimcu određenu količinu novca ili kojih drugih zamenljivih stvari, a zajmoprimac se obavezuje da mu vrati posle izvesnog vremena istu količinu novca, odnosno istu količinu stvari iste vrste i istog kvaliteta. Član 558 (1) Zajmoprimac se može obavezati da uz glavnicu duguje i kamatu. Ako se već borite protiv zelenašenja, nemojte lagati javnost! Jedan subjekat prava može drugom davati zajam, osim ako: Član 141 ZOO (1) Ništav je ugovor kojim neko, koristeći se stanjem nužde ili teškim materijalnim stanjem drugog, njegovim nedovoljnim iskustvom, lakomislenošću ili zavisnošću, ugovori za sebe ili za nekog trećeg korist koja je u očiglednoj nesrazmeri sa onim što je on drugom dao ili učinio, ili se obavezao dati ili učiniti.

Ugovorom o zajmu obavezuje se zajmodavac da preda u svojinu zajmoprimcu određenukoličinu novca, ili kojih drugih zamenjivih stvari, a zajmoprimac se obavezuje da mu vrati posle izvesnog vremena istu količinu stvari, iste vrste i iste kakvoće (član 557. Zakona o obligacionim odnosima). Ovakva definicija ugovora o zajmu upućuje na njegov konsesualni karakter. Ona ukazuje i da se tim ugovorom vrši prenos prava svojine određene količine zamenljivih stvari. Međutim, zajmoprimac ne vraća istu stvar uzetu na zajam, već istu količinu stvari iste vrste i kvaliteta. To čini različitim ugovorom o zajmu od ugovora o otuđenju stvari, kao što su kupoprodaja, poklon ili razmena. Po tome je ovaj ugovor drugačiji i od ugovora kojima se konstituiše obaveza vraćanja ustupljene stvari, kao što su zakup, posluga ili ostava. Ugovor o zajmu je i dvostrano obavezan. On može biti teretan i dobročin u zavisnosti da li se pozajmljene stvari vraćaju sa kamatom ili bez nje. Ugovor o zajmu je i komutativan, jer su u trenutku njegovog zaključenja poznate sve prestacije ugovornih strana. U slučaju kada se daje beskamatni zajam ovaj ugovor se može zaključiti i s obzirom na lična svojstva ugovornih strana. U tom slučaju ugovor o zajmu ima sva obeležja i pravnog posla intuitu personae. Osim toga, on se može zaključiti i kao predugovor kojim se određuju bitni elementi budućeg glavnog ugovora o zajmu. I na kraju, taj ugovor ima obeležje kauzalnog ugovora

DOPUSTENOST ZAJMA IZMEDJU PRIVREDNIH SUBJEKATA

Sasvim proscen primer kako banke kreiraju nepostojeci novac pa ga dalje pozajmljuju sa kamatom:
Zamislimo da je banka prazna i da jos nema nikakvih aktKako je osoba A uzela kredit u iznosu od 3000 dinara? Elem, osoba A je, svojih mukom zaradjenih 600 dinara, dala banci u deposit kako bi dobila kredit (realan novac) . Banka nema depozit a ipak je isplatila 2850 dinara kredita (jer je odbila razne troskove) I tako kad se oduzme deponovanih 600 evra osoba A je izasla iz banke sa 2250e(kreiranog novca bez vrednosti) Za taj dobijeni iznos banci svakog meseca osoba A treba da placa ratu pravog s mukom zaradjenog novca. Banka je Ugovor o kreditu kao hartiju od vrednosti knjizila u dugorocni prihod u iznosu od oko 6000evra (iznos koji osoba A tek treba da stvori i plati banci tokom godina otplate kredita.) Banka je za takav ugovor od narodne banke povukla opet tri do pet puta vecu vrednost u kesu npr oko 18000evra (tzv leveridz 1:3) Banka je i onaj deposit od 600 evra prikazala kao obaveznu rezervu i kod centralne banke i povukla bar 3 puta vecu vrednost radi daljeg DAVANJA KREDITA. Znaci Banka je iskoristila realnih 600evra da bi dobila 18000evra (i vise) takozvanih toksicnih papira a osoba A ce da zaradi (pod pretnjom sankcija i prinude) za banku i drzavu i da da ekvivalent vrednosti o kome pise zakon o obligaciji , naravno samo ako je supermen. Posto nije Supermen gradjanin A ce postati rob koji ni za 10 sati dnevnog rada i dodatnog posla ne moze ovoliki falsifikat da pretvori u pravi novac

2011

PRoblem postojanja centralnih banaka

Neophodan je povratak poverenja u ljude a ne u institucije zbog politicke korupcije koja zloupotrebljava Vlade i drzavne institucije za potrebe manjine, manje od 2%. Velika je obmana ubedjivanje javnosti da je poreski obveznik  i to jos dobar i uredan kao platisa, danas najpozeljnija kreatura u jednoj zajednici koja mu daje pravo da…. laje na zvezde

To je ne samo obmana vec nacin za postrojavanje gradjana u silu koja ce se suprotstavljati ostalima a u ime ovih 2 posto.

Centralne banke na zalost danas nisu samostalne i nezavisne. One su uvezane u medjunarodnu mrezu koja stiti  interese bankara i multinacionalmih kompanija a ne interese drzava u kojima  se preko CB implementira nov nacin poslovanja.

Ne moze Srbija i ne mogu gradjani male zajednice da se protiv toga bore direktno ali mogu da izgrade ili odrze svoj nezavisni i suvereni sistem koji ce obezbediti da se zastiti imovina i rad svakog pojedinca pa samim tim i zajednice, drzave u kojoj se takav sistem primenjuje. Mi kao drzava svakako treba da nastavimo da primenjujemo medjunarodna pravila jer ne mozemo biti izolovani od sveta ali sa posebnom paznjom preduzimajuci operacije koje ne idu na stetu nasih gradjana.

Pokazalo se da su toliko najavljivane  strane investicije samo velika obmana. Amerika stampa dolare na tone a onda te papire njihovi postari pokusavaju da prodaju malim ekonomijama kao strane investicije. Papiri ne vrede, ono sto vredi je imovina , rad i znanje . dakle to su prave vrednosti a ne nekakvi papiri koje zovemo novac. Kada ljudi shvate ovu prvu lekciju onda ce poceti da veruju da promene mogu da dodju lako i brzo. Banke treba da se spuste na mesto koje treba da zauzimaju, da budu serv is gradjanima u njihovim transakcijama a ne da one generisu kapital stampanjem papira i da ga plasiraju gradjanima i drzavama u vidu kredita, kao da ti papiri vrede vise od rada, imovine ili znanja.

Zasto drzave stite banke?

Zato sto banke mogu uvek da proizvode papir koji se zove novac a drzave upravljaju i kontrulisu kolicinu tih papira koji je u opticaju. Oni preko te moci prakticno drze narod na uzdama jer menjajuci kolicinu i vrednost novca u opticaju,  oni kada im treba obezvrede ljudima imovinu i / ili prelivaju kapital u budzete iz kojih sami sebe finansiraju na racun gradjana

 

Sta je resenje?

Narod treba da se udruzi u zadruge i da svako postane deonicar u svakom preduzecu, a ne radnik. Takva preduzeca treba da vode dobro placeni strucnjaci a profit da dele svi koji su unutra vlasnici i istovremeno radnici. Pozeljno je da svako ima svoju malu firmu i da uvek moze da deluje i samostalno i kao deo veceg preduzeca, zadruge. Najveca na svetu takva zadruga danas je spanski MONDRAGON. Ona ima oko 16000 clanova. Poenta je da sa ekonomske i drustvene scene nestane radnik kao izdvojena klasa vec da on postane ,jer i jeste , neodvojivi deo kapitala. Bez rada koji ulaze radnik kapitalista ne moze da odrzi svoj kapital.  Zato su danas na koruptivni nacin, uvezane drzavne poluge da rade za interes malog broja multinacionalnih kapitalista a protivno interesa vecine. To naravno nije ni dobro ni lose, to je samo dokaz da  svako sam mora da se bori za svoje mesto u drustvu. Ako tu brigu prepustite drzavi, nju je korumpirati neko  ko se prosto vise brine o svom interesu.

Kako izbeci da nam drzave preko banaka obezvredjuju imovinu, jer mi smo obavezni da poslujemo preko banaka a oni nase depozite koriste da multipliciraju svoju aktivu i da zaradjuju preko nase grbace. Osim sto vrte nas novac i zaradjuju a ne placaju nama interes oni ne placaj ni porez na profit koji ostvaruju. Njihov profit se ne oporezuje. Za to vreme  preduzetnici mukotrpno proizvode a onda kad proizvode razmenjuju za njihove papire papiri podcenjuju  realne proizvode cak do 30% od njihove stvarne vrednosti. Banke  kamatama  sebi obezbedjuju da profit nikada ne gubi vrednost. Takav apsurd dovodi do toga da godinama radimo samo da bi placali kamate koje su u stvari nesto sto nema nikakvu vrednost, niti novac koji su nam dali vredi objektivno. On vredi samo dok mi verujemo da vredi

Avgust 2012.

 

 

The Hedge Fund That Almost Broke The World

Published on Zero Hedge (http://www.zerohedge.com)
Home > The Hedge Fund That Almost Broke The World
The Hedge Fund That Almost Broke The World

By Tyler Durden
Created 07/29/2017 – 20:30
[1]
by Tyler Durden [1]
Jul 29, 2017 8:30 PM
TwitterFacebookReddit[2] [3]
Before the financial crisis and the billions of dollars in corporate bailouts, and trillions more in central bank quantitative easing, the world of investing was simpler.

Back then, markets moved in two directions, traders trusted their models, and hedge funds stacked with PhDs and top executives from well-respected bond trading houses were expected to make money hand over fist. And for three glorious years in the mid-1990s, Long Term Capital Management did exactly that. But when the fund suddenly imploded in 1998, stung by economic crises in Russia and Asia that caused it to lose $4 billion in a bizarre six-week stretch… Continue reading

“One does not exchange money for money “

Autor: Ljiljana Tatic                                                                                                                     Nicosia, 17.07.2016

Bitcoin should not be incorporated into the existing system of central banks. Problem of Central Banks is not only a fact that they are centralized. Bigger problem is that they consider money as a capital ‘per se’. The role of Bitcoin has to become a new standard of value, and as such to become an alternative to the current financial gambling system.  

logo_bis

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is a treaty organization that is not under the jurisdiction of any government. The BIS operates as a kind of central bank of central banks that settles international imbalances caused by uneven international trade.1

Friedman, whose monetary economic theories heavily influenced Greenspan, was concerned about the stifled nature of the debate on why Federal Reserve Bank engaged almost 500 prestiges Economists. Milton Friedman, in a 1993 letter to Auerbach that the author quotes in his book, argued that the Fed practice was harming objectivity: “I cannot disagree with you that having something like 500 economists is extremely unhealthy. As you say, it is not conducive to independent, objective research. You and I know there has been censorship of the material published. Equally important, the location of the economists in the Federal Reserve has had a significant influence on the kind of research they do, biasing that research toward noncontroversial technical papers on method as opposed to substantive papers on policy and results,” Friedman wrote.2

Continue reading

HOW MARKET DEMAND FOR BITCOIN MIGHT BE AFFECTED BY FAILED MONETARY POLICY

Ljiljana Tatic
Nicosia, 13.07.2016.all-the-worlds-money-and-markets-dv

All of the World’s Money and Markets in One Visualization How much money exists in the world? Strangely enough, there are multiple answers to this question, and the amount of money that exists changes depending on how we define it. The more abstract definition of money we use, the higher the number is. In this data visualization of the world’s total money supply, we wanted to not only compare the different definitions of money, but to also show powerful context for this information. That’s why we’ve also added in recognizable benchmarks such as the wealth of the richest people in the world, the market capitalizations of the largest publicly-traded companies, the value of all stock markets, and the total of all global debt. The end result is a hierarchy of information that ranges from some of the smallest markets (Bitcoin = $5 billion, Silver above-ground stock = $14 billion) to the world’s largest markets (Derivatives on a notional contract basis = somewhere in the range of $630 trillion to $1.2 quadrillion). In between those benchmarks is the total of the world’s money, depending on how it is defined. This includes the global supply of all coinage and banknotes ($5 trillion), the above-ground gold supply ($7.8 trillion), the narrow money supply ($28.6 trillion), and the broad money supply ($80.9 trillion). All figures are in the equivalent of US dollars.

 

If all cash money will be replaced with crypto currency, and even if Central Bank lose its clearinghouse monopoly and bitcoin is spread everywhere, the CB can still exert itself over the economy because it issues the one special asset that defines the unit of account: reserves. Central Bank monetary policy can still exist in a world without central bank money.

While bitcoin could one day shut down most of the roles that the Central Bank plays, the monetary policy will most probably stay intact. The reason for this is that the no matter what happens to all its other functions, the Central Bank will continue to define the economy’s unit of account.

Small minorities of transactions are made with bitcoin so far. Most of these transactions are rarely priced in terms of bitcoin. Rather, a merchant’s website typically display prices in terms of dollars, and then compute the amount of bitcoin that a customer must fork over by referring to the current dollar-to- bitcoin exchange rate. The dollar is very much the unit of account in the US, not bitcoin. In Europe even less.

Continue reading