Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Commercial Awareness Update - February 2019!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sara Moon" data-source="post: 9349" data-attributes="member: 525"><p><strong>‘NOPEC’ - No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act 2019 Bill - Angel</strong></p><p><strong><u></u></strong></p><p><strong><u>The Story</u></strong></p><p><strong><u></u></strong></p><p>Congress further advances the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act Bill (“NOPEC”) – a Bill that would subject the oil cartel, OPEC, to potential antitrust actions by the Department of Justice. In other words, it would change US antitrust law to revoke OPEC’s protection from their sovereign immunity. This would give the US government jurisdiction to prosecute OPEC member countries on the grounds of collusion for fixing oil prices. The Bill is now on course for a potential vote by the full house.</p><p></p><p>Indeed, various iterations of the bill had been proposed in the past two decades but failed to be implemented because former presidents like President Bush and President Obama have threated to use their veto power to scupper such legislation. There are better prospects for the Bill to be passed this time because unlike previous the previous Presidents, President Trump is much more vocal about his distaste for the cartel’s practice in holding back oil output to maintain oil prices.</p><p></p><p><strong><u>Impact on businesses and law firms </u></strong></p><p><strong><u></u></strong></p><p>International oil companies and experts warned that passing such a law would risk unknown geopolitical risks and severe unintended consequences. US investors, corporations and the government risk facing retaliation from OPEC members. It would have a negative impact on the US’s presence in the OPEC countries at all levels. Business conditions, profitability and the economies of the countries involved will take the blow.</p><p></p><p>On the other hand, supporters of the Bill would argue that OPEC member’s manipulation of prices has had a profound effect on US consumers, businesses and military. Republican senator (Chuck Grassley) says that OPEC needs to know that the US is ‘committed to stopping their anti-competitive behaviour’.</p><p></p><p>While it is true that, theoretically, open competition in an industry as large and globally crucial as the international oil markets is important to ensure its end-users (Americans, in this case) pay fair prices, it must also be noted that US oil companies have benefited from OPEC’s decisions in the past as well. This is why ExxonMobil, BP, The American Petroleum Institute and the US Chamber strongly opposed the proposed law. The risk of retaliatory action from OPEC members against the US government and large oil groups is simply too big. This is especially so when many US oil companies, including both Exxon and BP, have operations in Opec countries like Nigeria and Iraq.</p><p></p><p><strong>Italy’s Recession - Sara</strong></p><p><strong></strong></p><p><strong><u>The story</u></strong></p><p><strong><u></u></strong></p><p>A recession is when the economy contracts (usually measured by fall in the GDP) for at least two consecutive quarters. Recession manifests itself in the form of a rise in unemployment and a fall in retail sales and incomes. According to the figures published in January, Italy’s economy shrank by 0.2% in the final quarter of 2018, following a 0.1% contraction in the third quarter. This officially marked recession in the EU’s third-largest economy. This is the third time Italy has fallen into recession in a decade.</p><p></p><p>The Italian’s government and European Union’s executive Commission’s conflict over Italy’s budget plans have largely been blamed for the country’s recession. Italy’s government had been keen to increase the budget deficit so that it can increase spending through greater social security payments and pension reform to stimulate the economy while, at the same time, cutting tax. It wanted to increase the deficit from 1.8% of GDP, the rate a previous government had agreed with the EU, to 2.4% of GDP. The dispute between the Italian government and the commission prolonged for months, hurting business confidence and raising borrowing rates, until a settlement was reached before Christmas, to the deficit of 2.04%.</p><p></p><p>Although many economists regard the budget deficit dispute as the main reason for Italy’s economic slowdown, the prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, blamed external factors such as the US-China trade war, which undermined Italian export rates, as the cause of the economic slowdown.</p><p></p><p><strong><u>Impact on businesses and law firms</u></strong></p><p><strong><u></u></strong></p><p>The recession has different implications for different practice areas in law firms. Fall in business confidence and higher borrowing cost means that there will be less inclination of companies to expand a business, and thus fewer mergers and acquisitions and private equity projects. This means that many transactional practice areas governing M&A and private equity will suffer from lower client demand. In contrast to this, areas like litigation, restructuring and bankruptcy will see an increase in demand for legal services from firms that are in danger of insolvency. Therefore, law firms with a presence in Italy with strong corporate and private equity practices but weaker bankruptcy and restructuring practices will suffer while those with strength in latter areas will remain strong even during the gloomy period of the economy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sara Moon, post: 9349, member: 525"] [B]‘NOPEC’ - No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act 2019 Bill - Angel [U] The Story [/U][/B] Congress further advances the No Oil Producing and Exporting Cartels Act Bill (“NOPEC”) – a Bill that would subject the oil cartel, OPEC, to potential antitrust actions by the Department of Justice. In other words, it would change US antitrust law to revoke OPEC’s protection from their sovereign immunity. This would give the US government jurisdiction to prosecute OPEC member countries on the grounds of collusion for fixing oil prices. The Bill is now on course for a potential vote by the full house. Indeed, various iterations of the bill had been proposed in the past two decades but failed to be implemented because former presidents like President Bush and President Obama have threated to use their veto power to scupper such legislation. There are better prospects for the Bill to be passed this time because unlike previous the previous Presidents, President Trump is much more vocal about his distaste for the cartel’s practice in holding back oil output to maintain oil prices. [B][U]Impact on businesses and law firms [/U][/B] International oil companies and experts warned that passing such a law would risk unknown geopolitical risks and severe unintended consequences. US investors, corporations and the government risk facing retaliation from OPEC members. It would have a negative impact on the US’s presence in the OPEC countries at all levels. Business conditions, profitability and the economies of the countries involved will take the blow. On the other hand, supporters of the Bill would argue that OPEC member’s manipulation of prices has had a profound effect on US consumers, businesses and military. Republican senator (Chuck Grassley) says that OPEC needs to know that the US is ‘committed to stopping their anti-competitive behaviour’. While it is true that, theoretically, open competition in an industry as large and globally crucial as the international oil markets is important to ensure its end-users (Americans, in this case) pay fair prices, it must also be noted that US oil companies have benefited from OPEC’s decisions in the past as well. This is why ExxonMobil, BP, The American Petroleum Institute and the US Chamber strongly opposed the proposed law. The risk of retaliatory action from OPEC members against the US government and large oil groups is simply too big. This is especially so when many US oil companies, including both Exxon and BP, have operations in Opec countries like Nigeria and Iraq. [B]Italy’s Recession - Sara [U]The story [/U][/B] A recession is when the economy contracts (usually measured by fall in the GDP) for at least two consecutive quarters. Recession manifests itself in the form of a rise in unemployment and a fall in retail sales and incomes. According to the figures published in January, Italy’s economy shrank by 0.2% in the final quarter of 2018, following a 0.1% contraction in the third quarter. This officially marked recession in the EU’s third-largest economy. This is the third time Italy has fallen into recession in a decade. The Italian’s government and European Union’s executive Commission’s conflict over Italy’s budget plans have largely been blamed for the country’s recession. Italy’s government had been keen to increase the budget deficit so that it can increase spending through greater social security payments and pension reform to stimulate the economy while, at the same time, cutting tax. It wanted to increase the deficit from 1.8% of GDP, the rate a previous government had agreed with the EU, to 2.4% of GDP. The dispute between the Italian government and the commission prolonged for months, hurting business confidence and raising borrowing rates, until a settlement was reached before Christmas, to the deficit of 2.04%. Although many economists regard the budget deficit dispute as the main reason for Italy’s economic slowdown, the prime minister, Giuseppe Conte, blamed external factors such as the US-China trade war, which undermined Italian export rates, as the cause of the economic slowdown. [B][U]Impact on businesses and law firms [/U][/B] The recession has different implications for different practice areas in law firms. Fall in business confidence and higher borrowing cost means that there will be less inclination of companies to expand a business, and thus fewer mergers and acquisitions and private equity projects. This means that many transactional practice areas governing M&A and private equity will suffer from lower client demand. In contrast to this, areas like litigation, restructuring and bankruptcy will see an increase in demand for legal services from firms that are in danger of insolvency. Therefore, law firms with a presence in Italy with strong corporate and private equity practices but weaker bankruptcy and restructuring practices will suffer while those with strength in latter areas will remain strong even during the gloomy period of the economy. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Interviews & Vacation Schemes
Commercial Awareness Discussion
Commercial Awareness Update - February 2019!
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…