US sides with Argentina in YPF dispute, investors suggest alternative collateral
In a filing late Thursday night, the government told the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that the public interest supports resolving the dispute on the merits, "free from the rushed compulsion of an unstayed turnover order and any negative effects it may have on U.S. foreign relations with Argentina."
The investors, Petersen Energia Inversora and Eton Park Capital Management, separately urged the Manhattan-based appeals court to reject a stay of U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska's June 30 turnover order while Argentina appeals.
They said the appeal would likely fail, and Argentina's "strategy of delay and obstruction" against collecting the $16.1 billion judgment, which the country is also appealing, justified the turnover.
The investors nonetheless said if the appeals court is not inclined simply to deny a stay, it should return the case to Preska to let Argentina propose alternative collateral or set conditions to avoid "irreversible outcomes" during its appeal.
"Plaintiffs have no interest in having the shares become unrecoverable in the (unlikely) event Argentina prevails on appeal, and no interest in running an oil company, and so would accept reasonable conditions to ensure the share transfer can be easily unwound if necessary," the investors' lawyers said.
Representatives for Argentina had no immediate comment outside business hours.
Argentina has said it would suffer irreparable harm and its economy could be destabilized if it gave up its stake in YPF, the country's largest energy company.
It has until July 22 to respond to the investors' filing.
Petersen and Eton Park are represented by litigation funder Burford Capital (BURF.L), opens new tab, which has said it expected to receive 35% and 73% of their respective damages.
The litigation arose from Argentina's 2012 decision to seize the YPF stake from Spain's Repsol (REP.MC), opens new tab without making a tender offer to minority shareholders.
Preska awarded the $16.1 billion judgment in September 2023.
The U.S. government expressed its position in a proposed friend-of-the-court brief, which mirrored a position it first took last November during the Biden administration. It said Petersen and Eton Park opposed its motion to file the brief.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
CK Hutchison ports deal deadline likely to be extended as geopolitics weigh, sources say
HONG KONG, July 25 (Reuters) - CK Hutchison's ( opens new tab plan to sell most of its $22.8 billion ports business is unlikely to be finalised anytime soon, with political brinkmanship set to continue, and sources saying that a Sunday deadline for exclusive talks was likely to be extended. The Hong Kong conglomerate's plan to sell the business, which would include two ports along the strategically important Panama Canal, to a consortium led by BlackRock (BLK.N), opens new tab and Italian billionaire Gianluigi Aponte's family-run shipping company MSC, has become politicised amid an escalating China-U.S. trade war. Negotiations for the deal, which covers 43 ports in 23 countries, are on an exclusive basis between CK Hutchison, controlled by Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-shing, and the consortium for 145 days until Sunday, according to the terms announced in March. The deal talks, however, are unlikely to collapse if the two parties do not ink a pact by Sunday, with three people close to the ports-to-telecoms conglomerate saying the parties could extend the deadline to continue exclusive negotiations. The first part of the deal - definitive documentation to sell two port operations near the Panama Canal - was also not signed by an April 2 deadline set in the sales announcement. The people declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the matter. BlackRock declined to comment. CK Hutchison and MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company, which CK Hutchison said in May was the main investor in the consortium, did not respond to requests for comment. U.S. President Donald Trump hailed the deal as "reclaiming" the Panama Canal, after his administration previously called for the removal of what it said was Chinese ownership of the ports near the canal. But in April, China's top market regulator said that it was paying close attention to CK Hutchison's planned sale and that parties to the deal should not try to avoid an antitrust review. Beijing's stance on the planned deal was made public after pro-China media launched a stinging criticism, saying China had significant national interests in the transaction and it would be a betrayal of the country. "I think at this moment it's not very optimistic that they can directly sell the ports to the consortium," said Jackson Chan, global fixed income senior manager at FSMOne Hong Kong, which has clients holding CK Hutchison bonds. "The market has already digested the news, even if it announces next week that it won't sell anymore, I don't think it'll be a shock because the market understands it wouldn't have a large impact on its operations." CK Hutchison shares, which jumped 33% the following two days after the deal was announced in early March, erased all of the gains by mid-April. But since then it regained lost ground along with the rise in the broader Hong Kong market index (.HSI), opens new tab. The outlook for the deal has been clouded further in recent days, with a separate source telling Reuters that Chinese ports operator China Cosco Shipping Corp (COSCO) was also looking to join the consortium to buy the ports business. COSCO is requesting veto rights or equivalent power in the entity that will take over 43 ports from CK Hutchison, Bloomberg News reported this week, citing people familiar with the matter. COSCO did not respond to a request for comment. Responding to Reuters' emailed queries on the deal prospects and possible involvement of COSCO in the consortium, a White House official said: "As the president said, we didn't give it to China. We gave it to Panama, and we're taking it back." The official did not elaborate. The existing consortium would likely allow COSCO into the deal, said Cathy Seifert, an analyst at CFRA Research. "The bigger risk to the deal being consummated, in my opinion, is likely the Trump administration, which is likely to block a deal that would include China," said the New Jersey-based analyst who tracks BlackRock. Ballingal Investment Advisors strategist David Blennerhassett, who publishes on the independent online research platform Smartkarma, said the addition of COSCO in the consortium was likely to enrage Trump. "Trump, who has a handful of issues already on his plate, would be incandescent," he said.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
NFL rocked by Super Bowl scandal with around 100 players facing possible suspension
At least 100 NFL players, as well as coaches and staff from around half of the 32 teams, have been accused of violating league rules by selling their Super Bowl tickets for above face-value. That is according to a report Friday, which said an NFL investigation found that some employees and players flogged their tickets to a 'small number of "bundlers"' who were working with a reseller to sell them for inflated fees. All NFL players are allowed to buy two tickets at face-value. This year, when the Philadelphia Eagles beat the Kansas in New Orleans, prices reportedly ranged from $950 to $7,500. On resale sites, however, some tickets were going for more than $10,000. ESPN claims the players face a possible fine and could be suspended if they refuse to pay. They will also lose the right to their allotted tickets to the next two Super Bowls. Unless they are playing in the game, in which case they will have the opportunity to buy seats. No specific players, coaches or teams who violated the policy were named but some people have already shelled out, to avoid missing playing time, according to ESPN. Players violating the agreement between the league and the NFL Players Association around the re-sale of Super Bowl tickets are reportedly subject to penalties including fines of one-and-a-half-times the face value of the tickets. Other team employees who violated the policy will reportedly be fined two times the face value of the tickets. According to reports, those players and employees who had a 'greater role' - by working directly with the 'bundlers', for instance - 'will face increased penalties' 'Our initial investigation has determined that a number of NFL players and coaches, employed by several NFL Clubs, sold Super Bowl tickets for more than the ticket's face value in violation of the policy," read a memo, sent to teams by the NFL - and cited by ESPN. 'This long-standing League Policy, which is specifically incorporated into the Collective Bargaining Agreement, prohibits League or Club employees, including players, from selling NFL game tickets acquired from their employer for more than the ticket's face value or for an amount greater than the employee originally paid for the ticket, whichever is less.'
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
‘Terrible fuel efficiency, no right-hand drive': why trade deal won't warm up Japan to American cars
Donald Trump has declared that Japan is opening up its domestic market to US cars as part of the bilateral trade deal announced this week. But American manufacturers will find it no easy task convincing Japanese drivers to choose what they see as oversized, unreliable gas-guzzlers. Announcing the agreement – which includes 15% tariffs on imports from Japan, including cars – Trump posted: 'Perhaps most importantly, Japan will open their country to trade including cars and trucks, rice and certain other agricultural products.' Earlier this month, the US president had complained: 'We didn't give them one car in 10 years – they send out millions but they won't take any of ours.' The US claims Japan uses non-tariff barriers (NTBs) to keep out American cars. Japan imported 16,707 American vehicles in 2024, according to the Japan Automobile Importers Association (JAIA). European brands, led by Mercedes-Benz and other German automakers, sold more than 250,000 into the same market, which overall is dominated by Japan's huge domestic auto industry. 'We don't receive any requests from our member companies to address non-tariff barrier issues,' said the JAIA's Sho Matsumoto. Takeshi Miyao, head of the Carnorama auto consultancy's Tokyo office, also says no such hurdles exist for US imports. 'There are non-tariff barriers on rice [another sticking point in the trade negotiations], because the government feels it has to protect Japanese farmers, but not on vehicles,' he says. US manufacturers like GM and Ford simply don't focus on the Japanese market, according to Miyao. 'They don't really do any marketing, and often don't even offer right-hand drive models. So the cars don't sell.' Size is also a problem, Miyao notes. The Ford F-150 pickup is around six metres long and 2 metres high. That kind of vehicular behemoth is particularly ill suited to Japan's narrow roads and tight parking spaces. US cars also have longstanding image problems, says Takahisa Matsuyama, an instructor for chauffeurs and private hire drivers in Tokyo. 'Going back to the days when we first came across US cars like Cadillacs, they're seen as having terrible fuel efficiency and breaking down easily; that impression hasn't changed much,' says Matsuyama. The 2025 car reliability rankings from Consumer Reports, a US non-profit organisation, bear this sentiment out. The top four marques were Subaru, Lexus, Toyota and Honda – all Japanese. The bottom four – Jeep, GMC, Cadillac and Rivian – were all American. Matsuyama points out that the biggest sellers in Japan have long been kei cars. Short for kei-jidosha (light vehicle), these compact cars and trucks are only allowed a tiny 660cc engine, and have topped sales rankings for decades – even as the government has gradually eroded the tax and insurance advantages they receive over regular vehicles. The automotive antithesis of the giant pickup, the kei truck has actually gained a cult fanbase in the US, mostly through private imports. Japan's automakers will now face 15% tariffs on their exports to the US, up from 2.5% and the highest levy in decades. But investors have welcomed the figure as much less than the originally threatened 25% hike, to a total of 27.5%. The news sent the Nikkei 225 index up more than 4% this week, and shares in Japan's biggest carmakers surged even higher – Toyota, Honda and Nissan all gaining more than 10%. One of Trump's perennial complaints in his trade and tariff war has been that other companies 'rip off' the US by selling it more than they buy from it. In that vein, as part of the bilateral negotiations, Tokyo has agreed to encourage Japanese auto brands that also build cars in US factories to import some of them into Japan. That may at least put some US-built vehicles into the showrooms of Japan that motorists might actually buy.
