US court rules in favor of Citgo bondholders: Update 2

  • : Crude oil, Oil products
  • 20/10/16

Adds detail.

A US federal court in New York today upheld the validity of defaulted Venezuelan bonds that pledged more than half of the country's US refining subsidiary, Citgo, as collateral.

US district judge Katherine Polk Failla's decision in favor of Venezuela's creditors does not immediately imperil Venezuelan control of the 760,000 b/d refining company. But the finding — that US support of stable bond markets trumped Washington's support for Venezuela's opposition government — leaves Citgo's ownership to appellate courts and White House decisions regarding sanctions.

"Venezuela has no power, save by the actions of this court or intervention by the United States, to stop defendants from enforcing their contractual remedies," Failla said. "And it is that impotence to complete the expropriation that makes clear that no taking has taken place in Venezuela."

Citgo and its US holding company, PdVH, declined to comment. Bondholder representatives could not be reached for comment.

Bondholders and companies seeking compensation for assets Venezuela expropriated roughly a decade ago have raced through US courts to claim rights to shares of Venezuela's US refining subsidiary, one of its most valuable overseas assets.

Failla reviewed dueling lawsuits between the US-recognized Venezuelan shadow government under National Assembly leader Juan Guaido and lenders who participated in a 2016 bond swap controlled by President Nicolas Maduro's government.

Guaido's government defaulted last October on $842mn in principal and $72mn in interest backed by a 50.1pc ownership interest in Citgo. The shadow government sued last October to have the bonds declared invalid. Venezuelan law required that the National Assembly approve the 2016 swap replacing PdV bonds that matured in 2017 and were close to default, they argued.

Ruling recognizes opposition

Failla's decision recognized the National Assembly as Venezuela's sovereign power dating back to 2015, when Maduro was still the US-recognized president of Venezuela. Bondholders had argued that Guaido and the National Assembly's authority began with his recognition in January 2019, and that retroactive recognition only applied to cases of a protracted revolution or other conflict with extended periods of uncertain control. The decision meant that contested National Assembly resolutions denouncing the bond swaps legislators passed in May 2016, September 2016 and October were acts of a foreign sovereign to which US courts generally defer.

That ultimately did not matter, though, because the resolutions did not plainly reject the bonds and because the debt and refining collateral were all executed in the US, the judge ruled. The assembly resolutions clearly applied to contracts with the "National Executive", not PdV, the judge said. The court found little support that the absence of explicit national assembly approval of the bonds also qualified as an act of a foreign sovereign, as the Guaido government had argued.

Venezuela's representatives "have sought to transmogrify ambiguously worded 2016 resolutions into judicially enforceable takings via the magic of 2019 hindsight," Failla said.

"Given the plain language and clear chronology of the resolutions, there is no basis for the court to find that the national assembly, through those resolutions, prevented the 2020 notes and governing documents from coming into existence," Failla wrote. "The court cannot stretch these earlier resolutions to accommodate plaintiffs' current arguments."

The case could have instead turned on a direct US government request to protect the assets of its recognized government. US reluctance to argue for a specific outcome in either case has frustrated judges wading through the morass of sovereign debt, contract law and geopolitical questions. Failla upbraided a US attorney during a September hearing for restating the legal arguments instead of taking a position on the case.

"Are you really going to sit on the sidelines, sir?" Failla asked.

US State Department special envoy on Iran and Venezuela Elliott Abrams had warned in a letter to the court that the loss of Citgo "would be greatly damaging and perhaps beyond recuperation" for US foreign policy goals. But the US government also noted in filings the importance of preserving laws governing contracts and bonds.

Ruling for the Guaido government would risk New York's status as a global center of finance, the stability of financial markets and invite more actions by "less honest foreign governments" to expropriate funds from creditors, Failla said.

"Such a reality, in the court's carefully considered view, presents just as great a risk of embarrassing the United States as opening the door to the defendants' sale or purchase of Citgo," Failla wrote.

Washington has preferred instead to rely on more direct executive branch authority over Venezuelan assets in the US. US sanctions imposed on Venezuela's oil sector in support of a Guaido-led national election and transition of power require Treasury Department approval of any efforts to sell Venezuelan assets in the US to satisfy court judgments or bond defaults. The US earlier this month extended to 20 January a block on any seizure of Venezuelan property.

Whoever voters elect in November could still intervene.

The New York case will proceed with, within 45 days, bondholders filing a calculation of the interest associated with the roughly $1.7bn owed to bondholder MUFG. The case will almost certainly enter an automatic stay and then proceed to the US 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals. Venezuela is losing its grasp on Citgo, but all parties will see the company slip away in very slow motion.


Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

24/05/03

Iraq sets plan to compensate for excess Opec oil output

Iraq sets plan to compensate for excess Opec oil output

Dubai, 3 May (Argus) — Iraq, Opec's second-largest oil producer, has submitted a plan to the Opec secretariat outlining how it will compensate for producing above quota in the first quarter of 2024. The plan indicates that Baghdad will make compensatory cuts from May through to the end of this year, although its breakdown could be tweaked if its April production is again above quota, based on average production estimates issued by the seven Opec secondary sources, including Argus . Opec+'s Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee (JMMC) said in its 3 April meeting that members that have produced above their quotas so far this year would need to submit plans to compensate for the excess. Iraq and Kazakhstan, which Opec said has also submitted its own compensation plan, have produced the most excess excess volumes in the Opec+ group since the beginning of the year. The JMMC oversees compliance to the coalition's crude production cuts and studies market dynamics. Iraq produced 194,000 b/d above target in January, and overshot by 217,000 b/d and 193,000 b/d in February and March, respectively. To compensate for this, Baghdad plans to produce 50,000 b/d below its quota between May and September, 100,000 b/d below quota for October and November, and 152,000 b/d below its quota for December. Iraq has been working to a quota of 4mn b/d since the start of the year, including two rounds of voluntary cuts it made in April and November last year. Baghdad will submit its crude production figure for April later this week, it said. Any extra volumes produced will also be factored into the country's compensation plan. To meet obligations, Baghdad says it will cap its crude burn at 75,000 b/d and maintain refining intake to between 400,000 b/d and 500,000 b/d through to the end of this year, according to Iraq's Opec national representative Mohammed Adnan Ibrahim Al-Najjar. But Iraq has yet to decide whether it will extend a 3.3mn b/d cap on exports, in place since April , beyond the second half, as it will depend on "Opec+ agreements [in the June meeting] and [the needs of] Iraq's economy over the coming months," the oil ministry told Argus last week. When needs must With the summer season around the corner in the Mideast Gulf region, Iraq has pushed the majority of its compensation into the last three months of the year. Iraq in summer often experiences extreme heatwaves resulting in a major spike in electricity demand. Power shortages during the summer season have fuelled political unrest in Iraq in recent years. To strike a balance between its Opec+ commitments and avoid similar scenarios this year, Iraq says it will import higher levels of gas from neighbouring Iran, with Baghdad also beginning to benefit from electricity supply from Jordan through a newly-established power line which became operational at the beginning of April. Iran and Iraq finalised a five-year supply agreement at the end of March, which will see Tehran send "up to 50mn m³/d" of gas to Iraq, Iraq's electricity minister Ziad Ali Fadel said. But Iraq's persistent overproduction, which has drawn scrutiny within Opec+, might be difficult to address, especially as Iraq blames it on its inability to oversee production in the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region in the north of the country. Most Iraqi Kurdish crude output is directed to local refineries or sold on the black market following the closure of the export pipeline that links oil fields in northern Iraq to the Turkish port of Ceyhan just over a year ago. Iraq's federal oil ministry says its Kurdish counterpart has stopped providing production data, but on 3 May said it estimates Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) crude production to be between 40,000 b/d and 50,000 b/d. Meanwhile, Iraq's oil minister Hayyan Abdulghani on 2 May announced that two joint Baghdad-Erbil committees have been formed to resolve the issue of contracts between Erbil and the international oil companies operating in the Kurdistan region. By Bachar Halabi Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US job growth nearly halved in April


24/05/03
24/05/03

US job growth nearly halved in April

Houston, 3 May (Argus) — The US added fewer jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked up and average earnings growth fell, signs of gradually weakening labor market conditions. The US added 175,000 jobs in April, the Labor Department reported today, fewer than the 238,000 analysts anticipated. That compared with an upwardly revised 315,000 jobs in March and a downwardly revised 236,000 jobs in February. The unemployment rate ticked up to 3.9pc from 3.8pc. The unemployment rate has ranged from 3.7-3.9pc since August 2023, near the five-decade low of 3.4pc. The latest employment report comes after the Federal Reserve on Wednesday held its target lending rate unchanged for a sixth time and signaled it would be slower in cutting rates from two-decade highs as the labor market has remained "strong" and inflation, even while easing, is "still too high". US stocks opened more than 1pc higher today after the jobs report and the yield on the 10-year Treasury note fell to 4.47pc. Futures markets showed odds of a September rate cut rose by about 10 percentage points to about 70pc after the report. Average hourly earnings grew by 3.9pc over the 12 month period, down from 4.1pc in the period ended in March. Job gains in the 12 months through March averaged 242,000. Gains, including revisions, averaged 276,000 in the prior three-month period. Job gains occurred in health care, social services and transportation and warehousing. Health care added 56,000 jobs, in line with the gains over the prior 12 months. Transportation and warehousing added 22,000, also near the 12-month average. Retail trade added 20,000. Construction added 9,000 following 40,000 in March. Government added 8,000, slowing from an average of 55,000 in the prior 12 months. Manufacturing added 9,000 jobs after posting 4,000 jobs the prior month. Mining and logging lost 3,000 jobs. By Bob Willis Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

US regulator slams executive over Opec 'collusion'


24/05/02
24/05/02

US regulator slams executive over Opec 'collusion'

Washington, 2 May (Argus) — US antitrust regulators for the first time took action against a leading US oil executive over his alleged "collusion" with Opec, but the producers' alliance itself was not a target of investigation. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) today issued a proposed consent order barring former Pioneer Natural Resources chief executive Scott Sheffield from joining the board of ExxonMobil following its $59.5bn takeover of Pioneer. FTC accused Sheffield of organizing "anti-competitive coordinated output reductions between and among US crude oil producers" and members of Opec and the broader Opec+ alliance. "Opec and Opec+ are cartels that exist to control global crude oil production and reserves," FTC said. The specific charges against Sheffield relate to the outspoken executive's frequent public appearances where he opined on US companies' desired production levels, his meetings and frequent communications with Opec officials since 2017 and his advocacy of drastic production cuts by US companies as global demand fell sharply at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. Opec under then secretary general Mohammed Barkindo began active outreach to independent US producers, starting in March 2017 with private dinner discussions held on the sidelines of IHS CERAWeek conferences in Houston, Texas. Barkindo hosted similar discussions at CERAWeek in 2018 and 2019, in addition to hosting some of the US companies' chief executives at Opec seminars in Vienna. FTC references Sheffield's public comments following those meetings and alleges that Sheffield kept in frequent touch with Opec officials via messaging service WhatsApp and other means to discuss production levels and prices. Barkindo at the time said that production cuts and prices were never on the agenda of his meetings with the US shale producers and that his organization wanted to better understand the US companies' technological innovation and to compare market outlooks and forecast models. Barkindo in the same time frame held similar discussions with major US hedge funds and money managers. US oil executives polled by Argus in 2017-20 also said that their discussions with Barkindo and other Opec officials revolved around market fundamentals. The US oil industry broadly felt that it was benefiting from a policy of production cuts Opec was implementing as it supported prices at a time when the US domestic production and crude exports grew uninterrupted. Former president Donald Trump took credit for engineering a breakthrough agreement in April 2020 to remove more than 10mn b/d of global crude supply by brokering an agreement between Saudi Arabia, Russia and other Opec+ producers. Even without prodding from Trump, US producers cut back production cuts in 2020 as transportation fuel demand and prices fell sharply in the first months of the pandemic. FTC singled out Sheffield for allegedly coordinating his company's production levels with Opec. Sheffield "held repeated, private conversations with high-ranking Opec representatives assuring them that Pioneer and its Permian basin rivals were working hard to keep oil output artificially low," according to the FTC order. Sheffield, who helped found Pioneer and was its longtime chairman, served as chief executive from 1997 to 2016 and from 2019 through 2023. He remains on the company's board, serving as special adviser to the chief executive since 1 January. The son of an oil executive, Sheffield attended high school in Tehran, Iran. Pioneer shrugged off what it termed a "fundamental misunderstanding" of global oil markets and said that FTC misread "the nature and intent" of Sheffield's actions. Opec declined to comment on FTC's action against Sheffield. FTC is so far the only US regulator to set sights on Opec, even if indirectly. President Joe Biden in 2021 separately tasked FTC with leading an investigation into whether there is price manipulation in gasoline markets. Biden, like many of his predecessors at a time of high gasoline prices, in 2022 accused Opec of uncompetitive behavior in oil markets and expressed support for US legislation allowing antitrust action against the organization by the US Department of Justice. But that acrimony has largely dissipated after global oil and US gasoline prices fell in 2023 from unusually high levels in the previous year. US Congress has not taken significant steps to advance the anti-Opec legislation since 2022. By Haik Gugarats Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Canadian rail workers vote to launch strike: Correction


24/05/02
24/05/02

Canadian rail workers vote to launch strike: Correction

Corrects movement of grain loadings from a year earlier in final paragraph. Washington, 2 May (Argus) — Workers at the two major Canadian railroads could go on strike as soon as 22 May now that members of the Teamsters Canada Rail Conference (TCRC) have authorized a strike, potentially causing widespread disruption to shipments of commodities such as crude, coal and grain. A strike could disrupt rail traffic not only in Canada but also in the US and Mexico because trains would not be able to leave, nor could shipments enter into Canada. This labor action could be far more impactful than recent strikes because it would affect Canadian National (CN) and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) at the same time. Union members at Canadian railroads have gone on strike individually in the past, which has left one of the two carriers to continue operating and handle some of their competitor's freight. But TCRC members completed a vote yesterday about whether to initiate a strike action at each carrier. The union represents about 9,300 workers employed at the two railroads. Roughly 98pc of union members that participated voted in favor of a strike beginning as early as 22 May, the union said. The union said talks are at an impasse. "After six months of negotiations with both companies, we are no closer to reaching a settlement than when we first began, TCRC president Paul Boucher said. Boucher warned that "a simultaneous work stoppage at both CN and CPKC would disrupt supply chains on a scale Canada has likely never experienced." He added that the union does not want to provoke a rail crisis and wants to avoid a work stoppage. The union has argued that the railroads' proposals would harm safety practices. It has also sought an improved work-life balance. But CN and CPKC said the union continues to reject their proposals. CPKC "is committed to negotiating in good faith and responding to our employees' desire for higher pay and improved work-life balance, while respecting the best interests of all our railroaders, their families, our customers, and the North American economy." CN said it wants a contract that addresses the work life balance and productivity, benefiting the company and employees. But even when CN "proposed a solution that would not touch duty-rest rules, the union has rejected it," the railroad said. Canadian commodity volume has fallen this year with only rail shipments of chemicals, petroleum and petroleum products, and non-metallic minerals rising, Association of American Railroads (AAR) data show. Volume data includes cars loaded in the US by Canadian carriers. Coal traffic dropped by 11pc during the 17 weeks ended on 27 April compared with a year earlier, AAR data show. Loadings of motor vehicles and parts have fallen by 5.2pc. CN and CPKC grain loadings fell by 4.3pc from a year earlier, while shipment of farm products and food fell by 9.3pc. By Abby Caplan Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

FTC clears Exxon-Pioneer deal but bars Sheffield


24/05/02
24/05/02

FTC clears Exxon-Pioneer deal but bars Sheffield

New York, 2 May (Argus) — US antitrust regulators signaled they will clear ExxonMobil's proposed $59.5bn takeover of Pioneer Natural Resources but banned the shale giant's former chief executive officer from gaining a seat on the board. A proposed consent order from the Federal Trade Commission seeks to stop Scott Sheffield, Pioneer's former chief executive, from taking part in "collusive activity" that would potentially raise crude prices and cause US consumers to pay more at the pump. The order paves the way for ExxonMobil to close its blockbuster deal for Pioneer, which will make it the leading producer in the prolific Permian shale basin of west Texas and southeastern New Mexico. It is also the top US oil producer's biggest transaction since Exxon's 1999 merger with Mobil. ExxonMobil's Permian output will more than double to 1.3mn b/d of oil equivalent (boe/d) when the acquisition closes, before increasing to about 2mn boe/d in 2027. The FTC, which has taken a tougher line on mergers under the administration of President Joe Biden, has paid close attention to oil deals announced during the latest phase of shale consolidation. Only this week, Diamondback Energy said it had received a second request for information from the regulator over its $26bn proposed takeover of Endeavor Energy Resources. And Chevron's planned $53bn acquisition of US independent Hess has also been held up. The FTC alleged in a complaint that Sheffield exchanged hundreds of text messages with Opec officials discussing crude pricing and output, and that he sought to align production across the Permian with the cartel. His past conduct "makes it crystal clear that he should be nowhere near Exxon's boardroom," said Kyle Mach, deputy director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition. ExxonMobil said it learnt about the allegations against Sheffield from the FTC. "They are entirely inconsistent with how we do business," the company said. While Pioneer said it disagreed with the FTC's complaint, which reflects a "fundamental misunderstanding" of US and global oil markets and "misreads the nature and intent" of Sheffield's actions, the company said it would not be taking any steps to stop the merger from closing. By Stephen Cunningham Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2024. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more