Britain’s energy regulator said that fuel bills for 24 million households would rise by 80 percent beginning in October, putting pressure on the next prime minister, expected to be Liz Truss, to turn immediate attention to coming up with a massive aid package to head off a catastrophic winter.

Britain’s government is not the only one working to mitigate the energy crisis in Europe. Facing dire circumstances, lawmakers and regulators across the continent are increasingly intervening in the energy markets to protect consumers.

At the same time, the European natural gas market has changed substantially over the last year as Russia crimped supplies and Europe turned to other sources. Flows from Russia to Europe have declined sharply.

imports of liquefied natural gas shipped by sea from the United States and elsewhere, and increased pipeline flows from producers including Norway and Azerbaijan. The problem is that the shifts have forced gas prices higher, as Europe vies with Asia for limited supplies of liquefied gas.

Until Friday’s announcement there was increasing optimism about the prospect for navigating the winter with less Russian gas, leading to the fall in natural gas prices in recent days. Wood Mackenzie, an energy research firm, has projected that Russian pipeline gas imports will steadily decline from supplying more than a third of European demand in recent years to around 9 percent in 2023.

Even the importance of Nord Stream has diminished. Analysts say that Gazprom has so constrained Nord Stream volumes this summer that the pipeline’s performance is no longer crucial to the overall fundamentals of the market. But news about the conduit still has a psychological impact, and some analysts expect gas prices to jump when markets open on Monday.

“A complete shutdown will obviously have implications on market sentiment given how tight the market is,” said Massimo Di Odoardo, vice president for global gas at Wood Mackenzie. Such an event, he added, would “increase the risk of further cuts via other pipelines bringing Russian gas to the E.U. via Ukraine and Turkey.”

Andrew E. Kramer contributed.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

A Who’s Who of Silicon Valley Lawyers Up for the Musk-Twitter Trial

Jack Dorsey, a founder of Twitter, got a subpoena. So did Marc Andreessen, a prominent venture capitalist. Larry Ellison, Oracle’s chairman, and the investors David Sacks and Joe Lonsdale received them, too.

They were all summoned to share what they know about the rancorous, knock-down, drag-out tech spectacle of the year: the fight between Twitter and Elon Musk, the world’s richest man.

Mr. Musk enthusiastically agreed to buy Twitter in April for $44 billion, but has since tried to back out of the blockbuster deal, leading to lawsuits and recriminations. Both sides are set for a showdown in Delaware Chancery Court in October over whether Mr. Musk needs to stick with the acquisition. The torrent of legal demands in the case has forced a who’s who of Silicon Valley to now lawyer up, creating a heyday for top-tier law firms.

unsolicited bid worth more than $40 billion for the social network, saying he wanted to make Twitter a private company and allow people to speak more freely on the service.

Of the two sides, Twitter has so far been more aggressive in the discovery process for the case. The company has issued more than 84 subpoenas to uncover discussions that might prove that Mr. Musk soured on the acquisition because the economic downturn decreased his personal wealth. (Mr. Musk’s net worth still stands at $259 billion, according to Bloomberg.)

Twitter has sent subpoenas to Mr. Musk’s friends and associates, such as the former SpaceX board member Antonio Gracias and the entertainment executive Kristina Salen, to get insight into their group chats. The company has also summoned investors like Mr. Andreessen and Mr. Ellison, who agreed to pony up money so Mr. Musk could do the deal.

Mr. Musk himself has agreed to sift through every text he sent or received between Jan. 1 and July 8 for messages relevant to Twitter. His side’s subpoena total stands at more than 36 — including one to Mr. Dorsey — as Mr. Musk tries to show that Twitter lied about the number of inauthentic accounts on its platform, which he has cited as a reason to pull out of the deal.

Mr. Musk has demanded voluminous data from Twitter, including correspondence among its board members and years of account information. Last Thursday, the court granted Mr. Musk a limited set of 9,000 accounts that Twitter audited to determine how many bots were on the platform during a particular quarter. He has also subpoenaed the company’s bankers, Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan.

But Mr. Musk has also shown his unhappiness over Twitter’s attempts to obtain his group chats. This month, his lawyers tried limiting the company’s inquiries, saying they did not plan to turn over messages from “friends and acquaintances with whom Mr. Musk may have had passing exchanges regarding Twitter.”

tweeted.

Mr. Sacks, another friend of Mr. Musk’s who worked with him at PayPal, responded to a subpoena from Twitter with a tweet that included an image of a Mad magazine cover featuring a giant middle finger.

In a court filing on Friday, Mr. Sacks’s lawyers, who filed a motion to quash the subpoenas, said he had produced 90 documents for Twitter so far. They accused the company of “harassing” Mr. Sacks and creating “significant” legal bills for him by subpoenaing him in California and Delaware.

A lawyer for Mr. Sacks did not respond to a request for comment.

Kathaleen McCormick, the judge overseeing the case, has largely waved off Mr. Musk’s objections about the subpoenas to his friends. Mr. Musk’s conduct in discovery “has been suboptimal,” and his requests for years of data were “absurdly broad” she wrote in rulings last week.

“Defendants cannot refuse to respond to a discovery request because they have unilaterally deemed the request irrelevant,” Ms. McCormick wrote. “Even assuming that Musk has many friends and family members, Defendants’ breadth, burden, and proportionality arguments ring hollow.”

Ed Zimmerman, a lawyer who represents start-ups and venture capitalists, said it wasn’t surprising that Silicon Valley techies appeared unwilling to be drawn into the case. The venture industry has long operated with little regulatory oversight. Investors have only begrudgingly become more accustomed to legal processes as their industry has fallen under more scrutiny, he said.

“Venture for so long has been very accustomed to being an outsider thing,” he said. “We didn’t have to focus on following all the rules, and there wasn’t that much litigation.”

For law firms, Mr. Musk’s battle with Twitter has become a bonanza — especially financially.

“I’m sure they’re all hiring fancy high-end law firms,” Mr. Melkonian said. “Those guys are going to charge thousands of dollars per hour for preparation.”

That’s if you can find a lawyer at all. Between Mr. Musk and Twitter, they have sewn up a passel of top law firms.

Twitter has hired five law firms with expertise in corporate disputes and Delaware law: Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz; Potter Anderson & Corroon; Ballard Spahr; Kobre & Kim; and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati. Mr. Musk has retained a team of four firms: Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan; Chipman Brown Cicero & Cole; and Sheppard Mullin.

Other leading tech law firms — including Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer, Perkins Coie, Baker McKenzie, and Fenwick & West — declined to comment, citing conflicts in the case.

Lawyers sitting on the sidelines probably feel left out, Mr. Zimmerman said. “If I were a trial lawyer in San Francisco, with a specialty of dealing with venture funds and the growth companies they invest in, there ought to be that FOMO,” he said, referring to the shorthand for the “fear of missing out.”

For those who have been tapped, the next several months are likely to be chaotic.

“For people who do this work, this is what we live for,” said Karen Dunn, a litigator for tech companies who has represented Apple and Uber, and who is not involved in the Twitter case. “It moves incredibly fast, it is all consuming.”

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

Canada’s OpenText to buy British software firm Micro Focus in $6 bln deal

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals!<<<<

A sign stands outside the offices of Micro Focus after they and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co announced that Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co will spin off and merge its non-core software assets with Britain’s Micro Focus International in a deal worth $8.8 billion, in Newbury, Britain, September 8, 2016. REUTERS/Eddie Keogh

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

  • OpenText to buy Micro Focus in all-cash deal
  • Will enable OpenText to expand in enterprise info management
  • Micro Focus shares soar 92% in early trade
  • UK company to recommend deal to shareholders

Aug 26 (Reuters) – Shares of Micro Focus (MCRO.L) soared more than 90% on Friday after Canadian software company OpenText (OTEX.TO), agreed to buy the enterprise software maker in an all-cash deal valuing the British company at $6 billion including debt.

In a push to expand its enterprise information management business, OpenText said on Thursday it would pay 532 pence ($6.30) in cash for each Micro Focus share, a 98.7% premium over Micro Focus’s closing price on Thursday, giving the company a market capitalization of about $2 billion.

Micro Focus’ shares soared to a more than one-year high of 518 pence in early trade.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

The UK company said it considered the terms of the deal to be “fair and reasonable” and would recommend shareholders vote in favour of the acquisition, according to the joint statement on Thursday.

Micro Focus, based in Newbury, Berkshire, has $4.4 billion debt on its balance sheet, according to its latest earnings report.

OpenText will fund the deal by raising $4.6 billion in new debt, $1.3 billion in cash and drawing $600 million from its existing revolving credit facility.

During a call with analysts, OpenText Chief Executive Mark Barrenechea said the company can stabilize Micro Focus’ business and accelerate its cloud transition.

Micro Focus helps customers maintain and integrate legacy IT technology, a business it has grown by acquiring legacy technology such as mainframe computer software used by banks, retailers and airlines.

OpenText, one of Canada’s largest software makers, said it expects cost savings of $400 million after the deal closes. The deal will be subject to regulatory approval.

The company’s U.S-listed shares were down 4.8% in after-hours trading on Thursday.

Barclays served as financial adviser to OpenText on the deal, which is expected to close in the first quarter of 2023.

Micro Focus was advised by Goldman Sachs and Numis.

($1 = 0.8448 pounds)

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Eva Mathews and Yadarisa Shabong in Bengaluru and Krystal Hu in New York;
Editing by Vinay Dwivedi, Arun Koyyur and Susan Fenton

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

What Will Happen to Black Workers’ Gains if There’s a Recession?

Black Americans have been hired much more rapidly in the wake of the pandemic shutdowns than after previous recessions. But as the Federal Reserve tries to soften the labor market in a bid to tame inflation, economists worry that Black workers will bear the brunt of a slowdown — and that without federal aid to cushion the blow, the impact could be severe.

Some 3.5 million Black workers lost or left their jobs in March and April 2020. In weeks, the unemployment rate for Black workers soared to 16.8 percent, the same as the peak after the 2008 financial crisis, while the rate for white workers topped out at 14.1 percent.

Since then, the U.S. economy has experienced one of its fastest rebounds ever, one that has extended to workers of all races. The Black unemployment rate was 6 percent last month, just above the record low of late 2019. And in government data collected since the 1990s, wages for Black workers are rising at their fastest pace ever.

first laid off during a downturn and the last hired during a recovery.

William Darity Jr., a Duke University professor who has studied racial gaps in employment, says the problem is that the only reliable tool the Fed uses to fight inflation — increasing interest rates — works in part by causing unemployment. Higher borrowing costs make consumers less likely to spend and employers less likely to invest, reducing pressure on prices. But that also reduces demand for workers, pushing joblessness up and wages down.

“I don’t know that there’s any existing policy option that’s plausible that would not result in hurting some significant portion of the population,” Mr. Darity said. “Whether it’s inflation or it’s rising unemployment, there’s a disproportionate impact on Black workers.”

In a paper published last month, Lawrence H. Summers, a former Treasury secretary and top economic adviser to Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, asserted with his co-authors that the Fed would need to allow the overall unemployment rate to rise to 5 percent or above — it is now 3.5 percent — to bring inflation under control. Since Black unemployment is typically about double that of white workers, that suggests that the rate for Black workers would approach or reach double digits.

The Washington Post and an accompanying research paper, Jared Bernstein — now a top economic adviser to President Biden — laid out the increasingly popular argument that in light of this, the Fed “should consider targeting not the overall unemployment rate, but the Black rate.”

Fed policy, he added, implicitly treats 4 percent unemployment as a long-term goal, but “because Black unemployment is two times the overall rate, targeting 4 percent for the overall economy means targeting 8 percent for blacks.”

news conference last month. “That’s not going to happen without restoring price stability.”

Some voices in finance are calling for smaller and fewer rate increases, worried that the Fed is underestimating the ultimate impact of its actions to date. David Kelly, the chief global strategist for J.P. Morgan Asset Management, believes that inflation is set to fall considerably anyway — and that the central bank should exhibit greater patience, as remnants of pandemic government stimulus begin to vanish and household savings further dwindle.

“The economy is basically treading water right now,” Mr. Kelly said, adding that officials “don’t need to put us into a recession just to show how tough they are on inflation.”

Michelle Holder, a labor economist at John Jay College of Criminal Justice, similarly warned against the “statistical fatalism” that halting labor gains is the only way forward. Still, she said, she’s fully aware that under current policy, trade-offs between inflation and job creation are likely to endure, disproportionately hurting Black workers. Interest rate increases, she said, are the Fed’s primary tool — its hammer — and “a hammer sees everything as a nail.”

having the federal government guarantee a job to anyone who wants one. Some economists support less ambitious policies, such as expanded benefits to help people who lose jobs in a recession. But there is little prospect that Congress would adopt either approach, or come to the rescue again with large relief checks — especially given criticism from many Republicans, and some high-profile Democrats, that excessive aid in the pandemic contributed to inflation today.

“The tragedy will be that our administration won’t be able to help the families or individuals that need it if another recession happens,” Ms. Holder said.

Morgani Brown, 24, lives and works in Charlotte, N.C., and has experienced the modest yet meaningful improvements in job quality that many Black workers have since the initial pandemic recession. She left an aircraft cleaning job with Jetstream Ground Services at Charlotte Douglas International Airport last year because the $10-an-hour pay was underwhelming. But six months ago, the work had become more attractive.

has recently cut back its work force. (An Amazon official noted on a recent earnings call that the company had “quickly transitioned from being understaffed to being overstaffed.”)

Ms. Brown said she and her roommates hoped that their jobs could weather any downturn. But she has begun hearing more rumblings about people she knows being fired or laid off.

“I’m not sure exactly why,” she said.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

Exclusive: Wall Street revives Russian bond trading after U.S. go-ahead

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals!<<<<

NEW YORK, Aug 15 (Reuters) – Several major Wall Street banks have begun offering to facilitate trades in Russian debt in recent days, according to bank documents seen by Reuters, giving investors another chance to dispose of assets widely seen in the West as toxic.

Most U.S. and European banks had pulled back from the market in June after the Treasury Department banned U.S. investors from purchasing any Russian security as part of economic sanctions to punish Moscow for invading Ukraine, according to an investor who holds Russian securities and two banking sources.

Following subsequent guidelines from the Treasury in July that allowed U.S. holders to wind down their positions, the largest Wall Street firms have cautiously returned to the market for Russian government and corporate bonds, according to emails, client notes and other communications from six banks as well as interviews with the sources.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

The banks that are in the market now include JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), Bank of America Corp (BAC.N), Citigroup Inc (C.N), Deutsche Bank AG (DBKGn.DE), Barclays Plc (BARC.L) and Jefferies Financial Group Inc (JEF.N), the documents show.

The return of the largest Wall Street firms, the details of the trades they are offering to facilitate and the precautions they are taking to avoid breaching sanctions are reported here for the first time.

Bank of America, Barclays, Citi and JPMorgan declined to comment.

A Jefferies spokesperson said it was “working within global sanctions guidelines to facilitate our clients’ needs to navigate this complicated situation.”

A source close to Deutsche Bank said the bank trades bonds for clients on a request-only and case-by-case basis to further manage down its Russia risk exposure or that of its non-U.S. clients, but won’t do any new business outside of these two categories.

STRANDED ASSETS

Some $40 billion of Russian sovereign bonds were outstanding before Russia began what it calls a “special military operation” in Ukraine in February. Roughly half was held by foreign funds. Many investors got stranded with Russian assets, as their value plummeted, buyers disappeared and sanctions made trading hard.

In May, two U.S. lawmakers asked JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs Group Inc (GS.N) for information about trades in Russian debt, saying they may undermine sanctions. read more The following month the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control banned U.S. money managers from buying any Russian debt or stocks in secondary markets, prompting banks to pull back.

Regulators have since taken steps to help ease the pain for investors.

The Treasury provided further guidance on July 22 to help settle default insurance payments on Russian bonds. It also clarified that banks could facilitate, clear and settle transactions of Russian securities if this helped U.S. holders wind down their positions. read more

Separately, European regulators have also eased rules to allow investors to deal with Russian assets by allowing them to put them into so-called side pockets on a case-by-case basis. read more

The price of some Russian bonds has jumped alongside the renewed trading activity since late July. That could make the trades more attractive to investors and also help companies that sold protection against Russian default.

For example, U.S. bond manager PIMCO – which was on the hook for a payout of around $1 billion after Russia defaulted on its dollar debt in June – could now save around $300 million, one investor estimated. PIMCO declined to comment.

“There’s some bid emerging for both local and external bonds for the first time in a while,” said Gabriele Foa, portfolio manager of the Global Credit Opportunities Fund at Algebris, who follows the market for Russian securities. “Some banks and brokers are using this bid to facilitate divestment of Russian positions for investors that want to get out.”

Reuters could not establish who was buying the bonds.

Reuters Graphics Reuters Graphics

LOTS OF RULES

Some banks are offering to trade Russian sovereign and corporate bonds, and some are offering to facilitate trades in bonds denominated in both roubles and U.S. dollars, according to the documents and the investor who holds Russian securities. But they are also demanding additional paperwork from clients and remain averse to taking on risk.

In a research update to clients on Wednesday, for example, Bank of America declared in capital letters in red: “Bank of America is now facilitating divestment of Russian sovereign and select corporate bonds.”

But it added that it would be acting as “riskless principal on client facilitation trades,” meaning a situation where a dealer buys a bond and immediately resells it. It also warned there were “a lot of rules around the process” which remained subject to “protocol and attestation.”

The approaches also differ among banks. In some cases, for example, banks are offering clients to help divest their holdings as well as other types of trades that would reduce exposure to Russian assets, while others are limiting trades to asset disposals only.

At times they are asking investors to sign documents prior to trade execution that would allow the banks to cancel trades if settlement does not go through and risks leaving the banks with Russian paper on their books, according to one of the documents and the investor.

One bank warned clients that settlements would take longer than usual.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Davide Barbuscia in New York; Additional reporting by Rodrigo Campos.
Editing by Megan Davies, Paritosh Bansal and Edward Tobin

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

U.K. Lawmakers Select 2 Final Candidates To Replace PM Boris Johnson

By Luke Hanrahan
July 21, 2022

Prime Minister Boris Johnson will remain in office until lawmakers vote and decide on either Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss as the new leader.

Members of Parliament have selected the final two candidates in the contest to become the U.K.’s next prime minister.

Rishi Sunak, the man in charge of the country’s finances during the pandemic, was an analyst at Goldman Sachs before government.

His Achilles heel is his family’s fortune and his wealthy wife’s controversial tax record.  

If Sunak is successful, he will become the country’s first prime minister of South Asian descent.  

“The question now for our members is, ‘Who is the best person to defeat Keir Starmer and the Labour Party at the next election?’ I believe I’m the only candidate who can do that,” Sunak said. 

The second final candidate is Liz Truss, who is the country’s current foreign secretary. Before becoming a politician, she was a successful accountant. Her Achilles heel is the fact that she was once a member of another political party — the Liberal Democrats — and, a leading campaigner to keep Britain in the European Union.

“What’s important is that we hit the ground running,” Truss said. “We’ve got two years until a likely next general election. And I want to deliver for people. I want to deliver lower taxes. I want to help struggling families.”

Both candidates have argued for extreme tax cuts. Truss’ proposed cuts would go furthest, and arrive faster — a move which appeals to core Conservative voters.

Sunak has countered by claiming his government will follow the mold of Margaret Thatcher’s, perhaps the most notorious Tory tax-cutting prime minister the country has ever seen.  

Sunak may have been the most popular with MPs, but the challenge now is to win over the Conservative Party’s roughly 160,000 members. Half of that number are over 60, and 97% of them are white and live in southern England. Among members, Truss is the favorite to win, and they now decide who will be Britain’s next prime minister.  

In Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s final appearance in Parliament, he paid tribute to himself. He will remain in office until the new leader is selected in early September.

Source: newsy.com

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<

How Republican-led states are targeting Wall Street with ‘anti-woke’ laws

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals!<<<<

WASHINGTON, July 6 (Reuters) – Republican-led states have unleashed a policy push to punish Wall Street for taking stances on gun control, climate change, diversity and other social issues, in a warning for companies that have waded in to fractious social debates.

Abortion rights are poised to be the next frontier.

This year there are at least 44 bills or new laws in 17 conservative-led states penalizing such company policies, compared with roughly a dozen such measures in 2021, according to a Reuters analysis of state legislative agendas, public documents and statements.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

While some of the individual moves have been reported, the scale and speed at which such “anti-woke” state laws and policies are ballooning and the challenges they are creating for Wall Street companies is detailed here for the first time.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines “woke” as being aware of and actively attentive to issues of racial and social justice, but it is often used by conservatives to disparage progressive policies. The term has gained traction as America has become more politically polarized over issues from racial justice and LGBTQ rights to the environment and COVID-19 vaccines.

Reuters counted bills considered and state laws passed in 2021 and 2022, although some state officials are also using executive powers to punish Wall Street.

The growing restrictions show how America’s culture wars are creating new risks for some of the most high-profile U.S. companies, forcing them to balance pressure from workers and investors to take stances on hot-button issues with potential backlash from conservative policymakers.

West Virginia and Arkansas this year, for example, stopped using BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) for certain services, due to its climate stance, according to West Virginia’s Republican treasurer Riley Moore and Arkansas media reports.

In Texas, JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N), Bank of America (BAC.N) and Goldman Sachs (GS.N) have been sidelined from the municipal bond market due to laws passed last year barring firms that “boycott” energy companies or “discriminate” against the firearms industry from doing new business with the state.

In many cases, the measures target a range of companies, restricting their ability to conduct state business. But financial institutions have been primary targets due to the pivotal roles they play in the economy and the early stances many took on such issues as fossil fuel and firearms financing.

Republicans say the policies of such companies deprive legitimate businesses of capital.

“They’re using the power of their capital to push their ideas and ideology down onto the rest of us,” said Moore. He spearheaded a law, passed in March, refusing business to banks that “boycott” fossil fuel companies and has rallied officials from 16 other states to promise to adopt similar policies. read more

With several major financial companies stepping in to cover travel costs for employees seeking abortions after the Supreme Court last month reversed federal abortion rights, the Republican push to sanction Wall Street for “woke” stances is likely to grow. read more

Republican Texas lawmaker Briscoe Cain said he plans legislation to outlaw such coverage and prohibit companies that provide it from receiving any Texas state business or contracts.

“No corporation doing business in Texas will be allowed to subsidize abortions or abortion travel in any manner,” Cain told Reuters in an email.

NO BOYCOTTS

The new curbs will make it harder for financial firms to do a range of state business, from bond underwriting to managing state funds, depository accounts and government credit cards, according to interviews with more than a dozen industry sources, bank lobbyists and lawyers.

Such contracts can be worth several million dollars each, public procurement data shows.

JPMorgan, for example, underwrote $3.2 billion worth of Texas muni bonds last year, compared with $210 million so far this year, Refinitiv data shows. Bank of America, which underwrote $3.7 billion in Texas muni bonds last year, has done none this year.

Some smaller firms, including Ramirez & Co Inc and Loop Capital Markets, meanwhile, have jumped more than 10 places so far this year in the Texas muni bond market bookrunner rankings, based on deal values.

To be sure, some Democratic-led states are also looking to tilt the scales. Washington state floated a “climate resiliency fee” for institutions that fund fossil fuel projects. California is considering a bill that would stop its pension plans, the country’s largest, from investing in fossil fuel companies.

But states led by Democrats are not pursuing as many punitive measures, according to the review and sources.

“We’re going to see a lot more of these statutes on one side of the coin or the other,” said John Crossley, a partner at K&L Gates who focuses on energy. “It’s going to make it more and more difficult for people to operate in these markets.”

Spokespeople for the above financial firms declined to comment or did not respond to requests for comment.

Financial firms say they aim to provide comprehensive healthcare benefits. They also argue government restrictions will drive up costs for Americans, and they dispute the characterization of their policies as boycotts.

BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager and a frequent target of Republican attacks, for example, has told Texas officials that while it has joined various efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, it supports fossil fuel companies. read more

“The economy and financial system are best served when banks of all sizes can make their own banking and lending decisions about how to meet the needs of their communities based on their business model and risk tolerance,” said Joseph Pigg, senior vice president at the American Bankers Association.

ANTI-WOKE PUSH

The review shows “anti-woke” measures are gaining ground not only in traditional conservative strongholds such as Texas and Kentucky but also in so-called purple states – whose voters swing Democratic or Republican – such as Arizona and Ohio.

The issues such measures target are also mushrooming.

Guns and energy were the focus of the roughly dozen state laws and bills last year andof at least 30 legislative measures this year.

But this year there were also more than a dozen bills relating to social and other issues, including “divisive concepts” like critical race theory – an academic theory that racial bias is baked in to U.S. laws and institutions – mandatory COVID-19 vaccines, or the use of “social credit scores,” the Reuters analysis shows.

The latter is a theory that companies may take into account an individual’s political leanings when providing and pricing services.

In April, for example, Florida made it illegal for companies to require training that might make staff feel “guilt” or “anguish” because of past actions by members of the same race. Unveiling the bill, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis flagged Bank of America as one company conducting such “woke” training.

A bank spokesman said the materials were offered to hundreds of companies by a nonprofit and were not part of the bank’s training materials.

While the measures reviewed do not target corporate abortion policies, Cain said he expected other Republican-led states to pursue business restrictions on companies with such policies.

WALL STREET DIVISIONS

The financial industry is struggling to repel the onslaught, the sources said. Its trade groups are mainly registered to lobby the federal government, while state-based groups are not always aligned with Wall Street companies’ priorities.

Moore, for example, said West Virginia’s community banks supported his measures. The West Virginia Bankers Association declined to comment. The Texas Bankers Association said the group had not opposed the Texas curbs because its members were not in “consensus.”

Wall Street’s adversaries, on the other hand, are united.

Galvanized by what they say are efforts by Democrats in the federal government to push “woke” policies, oil and gas, firearms and conservative groups, including the Texas Public Policy Foundation and the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), are successfully pushing such curbs, according to industry sources and advocates. read more

“Banks should stay out of making policy choices,” said Lawrence Keane, general counsel at the NSSF, which advocated for the Texas law targeting lenders’ firearms policies.

The American Petroleum Institute, a major energy group, said it opposes discriminatory policies toward the industry.

Jason Isaac, a former Texas lawmaker who leads energy advocacy for the Texas Public Policy Foundation and helped craft the Texas fossil-fuel law, said he was discussing similar laws with other states, adding: “This woke political ideology will continue unless we get it in check.”

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Pete Schroeder in Washington
Additional reporting by Chris Prentice in Washington and Ross Kerber in Boston
Editing by Michelle Price, Paritosh Bansal and Matthew Lewis

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

View Source

>>> Don’t Miss Today’s BEST Amazon Deals! <<<<