Tag: stocks
Caught Dumping Stocks, Sen. Burr Requests Ethics Investigation

Caught Dumping Stocks, Sen. Burr Requests Ethics Investigation

Reprinted with permission from ProPublica.

Sen. Richard Burr, the powerful chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, requested a Senate Ethics Committee investigation into his stock trading, a day after ProPublica and the Center for Responsive Politics reported that he had dumped significant amounts of shares before the market crash triggered by the coronavirus outbreak.

Burr unloaded between $628,000 and $1.72 million of his holdings on Feb. 13 in 33 separate transactions, a significant portion of his total stock holdings. The sales came soon after he offered public assurances that the government was ready to battle the coronavirus.

On Twitter Friday morning, Burr defended the sell-off. “I relied solely on public news reports to guide my decision regarding the sale of stocks on February 13,” he said. “Specifically, I closely followed CNBC’s daily health and science reporting out of its Asia bureaus at the time.” He asked for the ethics committee to “open a complete review of the matter with full transparency.”

The ethics committee can recommend disciplinary action against lawmakers and refer potentially criminal violations to law enforcement. But it has been criticized for being too lax. It is illegal for members of Congress to trade shares on non-public information they gather in the course of their work. But cases are rare because proving that a politician relied on such non-public information is difficult.

As the head of the intelligence committee, Burr, a North Carolina Republican, has access to the government’s most highly classified information about threats to America’s security. His committee was receiving daily coronavirus briefings around this time, according to a Reuters story.

A week after Burr’s sales, the stock market began a sharp decline and has lost about 30% since.

After the story published, Burr faced a firestorm of criticism from both sides of the aisle. Former Obama administration officials along with prominent Trump allies blasted Burr’s stock sales. Calls for his resignation came from both ends of the political spectrum, including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and the Fox News host Tucker Carlson.

Thom Tillis, North Carolina’s junior senator, said on Friday that a review by the ethics committee was warranted. “Given the circumstances, Senator Burr owes North Carolinians an explanation,” Tillis, a Republican, wrote.

Throughout the day Thursday, news outlets reported instances of other lawmakers who also sold off stock before the market tanked.

The Daily Beast reported that Kelly Loeffler, a Georgia Republican who took office this year, sold off stocks jointly owned with her husband worth between $1.2 million and $3.1 million in the weeks after senators received a private briefing on the coronavirus from the Trump administration. Loeffler’s husband is the chairman of the New York Stock Exchange. In response, Loeffler posted on Twitter early on Friday morning that “this is a ridiculous and baseless attack. I do not make investment decisions for my portfolio. Investment decisions are made by multiple third-party advisors without my or my husband’s knowledge or involvement.”

Other senators who sold off stocks this year include Jim Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who chairs the Armed Services Committee. Reports with the Senate show that Inhofe sold shares worth between $380,000 and $830,000 both before and after the briefing, which Inhofe did not attend. “I do not have any involvement in my investment decisions,” Inhofe posted on Twitter on Friday. “In December 2018, shortly after becoming chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I instructed my financial advisor to move me out of all stocks and into mutual funds to avoid any appearance of controversy.”

Reports of sales by other senators surfaced as well. But those sales were less anomalous or noteworthy. Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, reported selling shares in a private firm he ran, Pacur LLC, worth between $5 million and $25 million. That transaction took place on March 2. The deal had apparently been in the works for some time and had been announced on Feb. 11.

In another case generating headlines, filings also show large sales reported by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who serves on the Intelligence Committee alongside Burr. But they only involved one stock. Feinstein’s husband, Richard Blum, sold off shares in Allogene Therapeutics Inc. worth between $1.5 million and $6 million on Jan. 31 and Feb. 18. Blum is a frequent stock trader, according to Feinstein’s financial disclosures, and appears to have taken a loss on at least a portion of the shares he sold.

Asked about senators making stock trades at a press conference Friday, President Trump said “I’m not aware of it, I saw some names.”

He added, “I find them to all be very honorable people, that’s all I know and they said they did nothing wrong.” The only senator he addressed by name was Dianne Feinstein, and complained that reporters at the press conference were not noting her stock trades.

By the standards of the Senate, Burr is not particularly wealthy: Roll Call estimated his net worth at $1.7 million in 2018, indicating that the February sales significantly shaped his financial fortunes and spared him from some of the pain that many Americans are now facing.

He was one of the authors of the Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act, which shapes the nation’s response to public health threats like the coronavirus. Burr’s office did not respond to requests for comment about what sort of briefing materials, if any, on the coronavirus threat Burr may have seen as chair of the intelligence committee before his selling spree.

According to NPR, Burr had given a VIP group at an exclusive social club a much more gloomy preview of the economic impact of the coronavirus than what he had told the public, saying it might close schools and impede business travel. In response, Burr said the NPR report was misleading.

Burr’s public comments had been considerably more positive. In a Feb. 7 op-ed that he co-authored with another senator, he assured the public that “the United States today is better prepared than ever before to face emerging public health threats, like the coronavirus.” He wrote, “No matter the outbreak or threat, Congress and the federal government have been vigilant in identifying gaps in its readiness efforts and improving its response capabilities.”

Members of Congress are required by law to disclose their securities transactions.

Burr was one of just three senators who in 2012 opposed the bill that explicitly barred lawmakers and their staff from using nonpublic information for trades and required regular disclosure of those trades. In opposing the bill, Burr argued at the time that insider trading laws already applied to members of Congress. President Barack Obama signed the bill, known as the STOCK Act, that year.

Stock transactions of lawmakers are reported in ranges. Burr’s Feb. 13 selling spree was his largest stock selling day of at least the past 14 months, according to a ProPublica review of Senate records. Unlike his typical disclosure reports, which are a mix of sales and purchases, all of the transactions were sales.

His biggest sales included companies that are among the most vulnerable to an economic slowdown. He dumped up to $150,000 worth of shares of Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, a chain based in the United States that has lost two-thirds of its value. And he sold up to $100,000 of shares of Extended Stay America, an economy hospitality chain. Shares of that company are now worth less than half of what they did at the time Burr sold.

The assets come from accounts that are held by Burr, belong to his spouse or are jointly held.

IMAGE: Senator Richard Burr (R-NC).

Stock Futures, U.S. Dollar, Oil Prices Plunge As Markets Recoil From Trump

Stock Futures, U.S. Dollar, Oil Prices Plunge As Markets Recoil From Trump

By Wayne Cole

SYDNEY (Reuters) – The U.S. dollar sank and stocks plummeted as mayhem came to world markets on Wednesday as investors faced the possibility of a shock win by Republican Donald Trump that could upend the global political order.

Every new TV network projection in the U.S. presidential election showed the race to be far closer than anyone had thought, sending investors stampeding to safe-haven assets.

Sovereign bonds and gold surged while the Mexican peso went into near free-fall as stations gave North Carolina to Trump.

“Markets are reacting as though the four horsemen of the apocalypse just rode out of Trump Tower,” said Sean Callow, a forex strategist at Westpac in Sydney.

“Or at least 3 of them – it might be 4 when the prospect of a clean sweep of Congress sinks in.”

As of 0425 GMT, Trump was leading Democratic rival Hillary Clinton by 19 Electoral College votes, with a tally of 228-209, with several key battleground states yet to be decided. It takes 270 to win.

U.S. stock futures recoiled more than 4.5 percent, matching the carnage that followed the British vote to leave the European Union in June that wiped trillions of dollars of value off global markets.

Investors fear a Trump victory could cause global economic and trade turmoil, discouraging the Federal Reserve from raising interest rates in December as long expected.

Fed fund futures were even starting to toy with the idea of a cut in rates next year <0#FF:> and it was possible the Bank of Japan and European Central Bank might be forced to ease policy further.

South Korean authorities were thought to have intervened to steady their currency, and dealers were wondering if central banks globally would step in to calm nerves.

The scale of the scare was clear in the Mexican peso, which plunged more than 12 percent against the dollar in the biggest daily move in two decades.

“There’s a lot of panic in the market, it is definitely an outcome it was not expecting,” said Juan Carlos Alderete, a strategist at Banorte-IXE.

The peso has become a touchstone for sentiment on the election as Trump’s trade policies are seen as damaging to its export-heavy economy.

But the story was very different against the safe-haven yen, with the dollar shedding 3.5 percent to 101.70 yen. The euro jumped 2.2 percent to $1.1265.

Graphic of live election results: http://tmsnrt.rs/2fxyZV0

Graphic of live market reaction: http://tmsnrt.rs/2fXfo0L

Live Coverage: http://live.reuters.com/event/election_2016

MAXIMUM UNCERTAINTY

Asian stocks skidded, with MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific stocks outside Japan down 2.5 percent and the Nikkei off nearly 4 percent.

With voting completed in more than two-thirds of the 50 U.S. states, the race was still too close to call in Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and New Hampshire, states that could be vital to deciding who wins the presidency.

Fox News projected Trump had taken Florida and North Carolina, and projected Clinton would win Virginia.

Markets have tended to favor Clinton as a status quo candidate who would be considered a safe pair of hands at home on the world stage.

“In contrast, a Trump victory would trigger massive uncertainty that would likely undermine risk assets at least initially, which in turn could preclude a Fed rate hike this year,” warned Michelle Girard, chief U.S. economist at RBS.

Sovereign bonds flew ahead, pushing yields on 10-year U.S. Treasury notes down a huge 13 basis points to 1.74 percent, again the largest drop since Brexit.

Yields had briefly touched a six-month high around 1.8960 percent in early trade.

In commodity markets, gold climbed 3.4 percent to $1,318 an ounce as the dollar slid.

Oil turned tail on concerns over the global economic outlook, with U.S. crude shedding $1.34 to $43.63 a barrel, while Brent fell $1.24 to $44.80. [O/R]

(Reporting by Wayne Cole; Editing by Kim Coghill & Shri Navaratnam)

Brexit Vote Sends New Shocks Through Financial Markets, Political Chaos Deepens

Brexit Vote Sends New Shocks Through Financial Markets, Political Chaos Deepens

By Kylie MacLellan and Anirban Nag

Britain’s decision to leave the European Union sent new shockwaves through financial markets on Monday, with the pound falling despite the country’s leaders’ attempts to ease political and economic turmoil unleashed by the move.

Finance minister George Osborne said the British economy was strong enough to cope with the volatility caused by Thursday’s referendum, the biggest blow since World War Two to the European goal of forging greater unity.

But sterling later sank to its lowest level against the U.S. currency for 31 years, continuing the fall that began last week when Britons confounded investors’ expectations by voting to end 43 years of EU membership.

This put the pound, and European bank shares, on course for their biggest two-day slides on record.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang said uncertainties over the global economy had heightened and called for a “united, stable EU, and a stable, prosperous Britain”.

But with the ruling Conservatives looking for a new leader after Prime Minister David Cameron’s resignation on Friday and lawmakers from the opposition Labour party stepping up a rebellion against their leader, Britain sank deeper into political and economic chaos.

“There’s no political leadership in the UK right when markets need the reassurance of direction,” said Luke Hickmore of Aberdeen Asset Management, expressing the view of many in the City of London financial center.

Cameron has promised to stay on until October as a caretaker, although a committee responsible for running the Conservative leadership contest recommended a faster process that should be completed by early September.

His refusal to start formal moves immediately to pull the country out of the EU has prompted many European leaders to demand quicker action by Britain, the EU’s second largest economy after Germany, to leave the 28-country bloc.

“It should be implemented quickly. We cannot remain in an uncertain and indefinite situation,” French finance minister Michel Sapin said on France 2 television.

Guenther Oettinger, a German member of the EU’s executive European Commission, said Cameron and his party should not risk causing damage by waiting until October to act.

“Every day of uncertainty prevents investors from putting their funds into Britain, and also other European markets,” he told Deutschlandfunk radio.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel she had “neither a brake nor an accelerator” to control events.

Hoping to ensure Germany’s strong trade relationship with Britain continues, she has appeared to take a softer line than some European leaders. But she ruled out informal talks before London notifies the EU of its intention to leave under the EU’s Lisbon Treaty, which provides its constitutional basis.

Making clear the exit negotiations would not be easy, Volker Kauder, who leads Merkel’s conservatives in parliament, told ARD television: “There will be no special treatment, there will be no gifts.”

 

FINANCIAL MARKETS’ MISJUDGMENT

Financial markets misjudged the referendum, betting on the status quo despite abundant signs that the vote would be close.

When reality dawned, the reaction was brutal. Sterling fell as much as 11 percent against the dollar on Friday for its worst day in modern history, while $2.8 trillion was wiped off the value of world stocks — the biggest daily loss ever.

That trumped even the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy during the 2008 financial crisis and the Black Monday stock market crash of 1987, according to Standard & Poor’s Dow Jones Indices.

Osborne tried to ease investors’ concerns in his first public comments since the referendum. He said he was working closely with the Bank of England and officials in other leading economies for the sake of stability as Britain reshapes its relationship with the EU.

“Our economy is about as strong as it could be to confront the challenge our country now faces,” he told reporters. “It is inevitable after Thursday’s vote that Britain’s economy is going to have to adjust to the new situation we find ourselves in.”

U.S. Treasury Secretary Jack Lew also tried to restore calm, telling CNBC television it had been “an orderly impact so far” though he later added: “We have resilience built into our economy, but we’re not cut off from the world.”

Visiting Brussels, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said it was important that “nobody loses their head” as the EU and Britain deal with the fallout from the referendum.

 

“PENSIONS ARE SAFE”

The vote to leave the EU has increased the likelihood of Scotland holding a second referendum on independence. The first, two years ago, rejected independence but some voters opposed it on concerns this meant leaving the EU.

Boris Johnson, a leading proponent of a Brexit and likely contender to replace Cameron, praised Osborne for saying “some reassuring things to the markets”.

The former London mayor said it was now clear “people’s pensions are safe, the pound is stable, markets are stable. I think that is all very good news.”

But financial markets took a different view, with sterling sliding Monday, shedding more than 3 percent against the dollar to $1.3221

The yield on British 10-year government bonds fell below one percent for the first time due to investors betting that the Brexit vote would trigger a Bank of England interest rate cut aimed at steading the economy.

Many economists have cut economic growth forecasts for Britain, with Goldman Sachs expecting a mild recession within a year. But the risks affect economies far beyond Britain.

“Against the backdrop of globalization, it’s impossible for each country to talk about its own development discarding the world economic environment,” China’s Li told the World Economic Forum in the city of Tianjin.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe instructed his finance minister to watch currency markets “ever more closely” and take steps if necessary.

At the weekend, the policy chief of Abe’s LDP party held open the possibility of currency intervention to weaken the yen and temper “speculative, violent moves”.

 

DIVIDED PARTIES

The outcome of the referendum has revived talk in Scotland of a new vote on independence, two years after Scots rejected such a move. Stunned by Thursday’s vote, a sufficient number of people have signed a petition calling for a new referendum on Britain’s EU membership to force lawmakers to at least consider a debate on the issue.

The referendum has also revealed social as well as economic stresses in divided Britain.

Immigration was one of the main themes of the referendum campaign, alongside discontent with Britain’s political establishment in general and the Conservatives in particular. Many Brexit backers complained the EU had allowed uncontrolled numbers of migrants to arrive from eastern Europe.

Police said offensive leaflets targeting Poles had been distributed in Huntingdon, central England, and graffiti had been daubed on a Polish cultural center in central London on Sunday, three days after the vote.

According to a local newspaper, the Cambridge News, the leaflets said “Leave the EU/No more Polish vermin” in English and Polish.

The Polish embassy in London said it was shocked by the “xenophobic abuse” aimed at the Polish community and others.

With Britain now facing uncertainty over how its trade relationship with the EU will unfold, Johnson tried to calm fears by writing in the Daily Telegraph newspaper that there would be continued free trade and access to the single market.

He suggested Britain would not have to accept free movement of workers, saying it could implement an immigration policy which suited business and industry.

However, single market rules stipulate that countries must accept the free movement of people as well as goods. Yielding on immigration would anger many Britons who voted to leave.

Johnson is expected to declare soon that he is running to lead the Conservatives, who have been divided for decades between pro- and anti-EU factions.

Divisions within the opposition are also deep. A wave of Labour lawmakers resigned from leader Jeremy Corbyn’s team on Monday, adding to the 11 senior figures who quit on Sunday.

They say Corbyn, a left-winger who has strong support among ordinary party members, is not fit to lead the party and point to his low-key campaign to keep Britain in the EU.

If repeated at the next parliamentary election, due in 2020, they fear Labour faces disaster following its near wiping out in Scotland last year. Corbyn has said he is going nowhere.

 

(Additional reporting by David Lawder, William James, Jamie McGeever, Nigel Stephenson, Kevin Yao, Costas Pitas, Bate Felix, Andrea Shalal, Michael Holden, Guy Faulconbridge, David Milliken, Patrick Graham, Anirban Nag, Michelle Martin, Paul Carrel, Conor Humphries, Minami Funakoshi and Tetsushi Kajimoto, Writing by David Stamp, Editing by Timothy Heritage)

Photo: Workers walk in the rain at the Canary Wharf business district in London, Britain November 11, 2013. REUTERS/Eddie Keogh/File Photo

5 Reasons Your Nest Egg Could Be At Risk In 2016

5 Reasons Your Nest Egg Could Be At Risk In 2016

By Roger Wohlner, GOBankingRates.com (TNS)

Investing for retirement, or any other objective, always carries risk. There are potential risks specific to 2016 that retirement investors should be aware as the new year approaches. There are also potential risks in any year that you should watch out for, said to Mike Piper, personal finance author and founder of the Oblivious Investor blog.

Having a significant amount of your portfolio invested your employer’s stock can be a big risk. “While familiarity with the company may make it feel safe, it’s anything but,” Piper said. “Having both your job and your portfolio exposed to the same set of risks creates a very dangerous situation.”

Also, if your portfolio contains actively managed mutual funds (like non-index funds), make sure you have a solid understanding of how the fund managers are investing. “During every market downturn, there are a handful of actively managed funds that ‘blow up’ in a spectacular manner — declining much more than investors anticipated, because the investors didn’t have a good understanding of the degree and types of risks the fund managers were taking,” Piper said.

Adjusting your long-term asset allocation based upon potential market risks in 2016, or any other year, is generally a poor idea, Piper said. However, it’s also a good idea to be aware of trends and what they can mean for your money. Here are five reasons why your nest egg could be at risk in 2016:

—The bull market might end. The current bull market began on March 9, 2009, according to the S&P 500-stock index. Although there have been a few hiccups in 2015, and at a few other points during this run, this market is six years in. It’s the third-longest bull market in U.S. history, according to a report by Bespoke Investment Management.

The S&P 500-stock gained 1,329 points through the last week of November, since the lows of March 2009 — a bit over three times the average gain during a bull market. There’s no rule that bull markets must end at a particular point, but they don’t go on forever. Furthermore, stock market risk is always heightened as a bull market progresses.

—China’s economy affects ours. This summer, the stock market experienced steep losses and a high degree of volatility. A good deal of this was due to China’s economic troubles. In this interconnected world, what happens in the second-biggest economy has an impact on the U.S. economy and financial markets.

A slowdown in China’s consumer economy, and a devaluation in its currency, hit a number of large U.S. companies that do business in China. Among the major companies that felt the impact were Apple, Yum Brands, Caterpillar, Boeing and General Motors.

—International markets are uncertain. Beyond China, other international markets also have an impact on the U.S. Because a well-diversified portfolio includes international exposure, both in developed and emerging markets, changes in those markets would be reflected in those portfolios.

“The outlook for international markets — Europe, Asia, Latin America and emerging markets — continues to be unclear,” said financial adviser Cathy Curtis. “As most diversified portfolios have a percentage allocated to stocks in these regions, they could continue to be a drag on portfolios. However, to not hold an allocation to international and emerging stocks could hurt a portfolio when these economies do improve.”

It’s this uncertainty that is a big risk to U.S. stocks in the coming year, said to Russ Koesterich, global investment strategist for money manager BlackRock. “Emerging markets account for a growing percentage of global growth, and the recent slowdown in the emerging world isn’t limited to China, as data from Bloomberg demonstrate,” he wrote in a recent economic outlook. “Economies in Brazil and Russia are contracting, and most large emerging markets, with the possible exception of India, are slowing, according to the data.”

—Tragic events have an impact. The impact of terrorist attacks on our portfolios is secondary to the human toll. However, some sort of major attack would affect our financial markets and your retirement nest egg, at least in the short term.

“The Paris attacks emphasize how vulnerable the world is to terror,” Curtis said. “Markets don’t like uncertainty, and investors could decide to put their money in safer havens — cash or short-term bonds, gold. Diversified portfolios would be vulnerable to this shift.”

—Interest rates might increase. When the Federal Reserve didn’t raise interest rates at its last meeting, experts began speculating on whether it would do so by the end of the year. An interest-rate increase will affect holders of fixed-income mutual funds, exchange-traded funds and individual bonds. The price of a bond moves inversely with interest rates.

A statistic called duration, which Morningstar and other sources provide for fixed-income mutual funds, can illustrate this. The largest bond mutual fund with Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Investor Shares currently has a duration of 5.72 years, according to Morningstar. What this means is that a 1 percent increase in interest rates would result in a 5.72 percent decrease in the value of the underlying bonds held by the fund. If you hold a longer-duration bond fund, the impact will be greater.

Bond duration is an imperfect indicator, but it can give investors a good idea of the impact on the value of their bond fund if interest rates rise. The interest rate earned from the bonds in the fund will partially offset the impact of rising rates. Investors should keep the impact of their fund’s duration in mind and might consider shortening up on the length of their bond holdings.

There are risks to your retirement nest egg in 2016. However, one of the biggest risks is overthinking what can go wrong. That doesn’t mean you should ignore what’s going on in the financial markets and the economy, but trying to time the markets based upon these or any other risk factors is not the best strategy. Retirement investors should consider investing with an asset allocation based on when they need the money, risk tolerance and their investment goals.

GOBankingRates.com is a leading portal for personal finance news and features, offering visitors the latest information on everything from interest rates to strategies on saving money, managing a budget and getting out of debt.

© 2015 GOBankingRates.com, a ConsumerTrack web property. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Photo: Pictures of Money via Flickr