Tag Archives: regulators

Jack Ma loses more than half of his wealth after criticizing Chinese regulators – CNN

  1. Jack Ma loses more than half of his wealth after criticizing Chinese regulators CNN
  2. Beijing’s regulatory crackdown wipes $1.1 trillion off Chinese Big Tech stocks value Yahoo Finance
  3. Jack Ma was once Asia’s richest person—but he’s lost more than half of his $61 billion fortune in the last 3 years Fortune
  4. Jack Ma’s Wealth Drops $4.1 Billion as Ant’s Valuation Slashed Bloomberg
  5. Jack Ma’s run-in with Beijing not only saw him disappearing for over 2 years, it led to his wealth tanking by half and cost his companies hundreds of billions Yahoo! Voices
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Minnesota Governor Says Indian Tribes Could Start Selling Marijuana Before Regulators Approve Standard Licenses – Marijuana Moment

  1. Minnesota Governor Says Indian Tribes Could Start Selling Marijuana Before Regulators Approve Standard Licenses Marijuana Moment
  2. Marijuana is legalized, but Rochester law enforcement officials note not everything surrounding pot is legal Rochester Post Bulletin
  3. At Issue: June 4 — Walz signs cannabis bill into law; Rep. Omar discusses debt ceiling vote KSTP
  4. Feds: combining cannabis with guns or ammo is still illegal St. Paul Pioneer Press
  5. Marijuana legalization: Tribes could fill dispensary sales gap, Gov. Walz says FOX 9 Minneapolis-St. Paul
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

EU antitrust regulators clear $69 billion Microsoft, Activision deal – Economic Times

  1. EU antitrust regulators clear $69 billion Microsoft, Activision deal Economic Times
  2. Microsoft CEO Raises Eyebrows With Comment About UK & Activision Blizzard Pure Xbox
  3. CMA defends decision to block ABK/MS before UK MPs GamesIndustry.biz
  4. UK’s CMA On The European Commission Approval Of Microsoft And Activision Deal: ‘We Stand By Our Decision’ – Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT), Activision Blizzard (NASDAQ:ATVI) Benzinga
  5. Microsoft is ‘putting their money where their mouth is,’ says asset management firm CNBC International TV
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

US Congressman Tom Emmer Says ‘Control Freak’ Senators and ‘Bad-Faith’ Regulators Want To Control C… – The Daily Hodl

  1. US Congressman Tom Emmer Says ‘Control Freak’ Senators and ‘Bad-Faith’ Regulators Want To Control C… The Daily Hodl
  2. Congressman Tom Emmer says SEC chair Gary Gensler is a ‘bad faith regulator’ Cointelegraph
  3. Ripple’s Policy Chief Clashes With SEC Chair Gary Gensler On Crypto-Securities Compatibility Coinpedia Fintech News
  4. U.S Congressman Tom Emmer Slams SEC Chair Over Crypto Regulation Bitcoinist
  5. Ripple Policy Head Reveals Crucial Flaw in SEC Boss’s Crypto Views U.Today
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

House lawmakers tear into top bank regulators in second hearing this week on SVB collapse – CNBC

  1. House lawmakers tear into top bank regulators in second hearing this week on SVB collapse CNBC
  2. LIVE: House Financial Services Committee holds hearing on SVB and Signature Bank collapses — 3/29/23 CNBC Television
  3. SVB customers tried to withdraw nearly all the bank’s deposits over two days, Fed’s Barr testifies CNBC
  4. Crapo: Setting record straight on bank failures, their causes and what to focus on | Opinion Idaho Statesman
  5. SVB bank run could have far-reaching implications in banking industry and regulation CNBC Television
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Treasury Secretary Says Regulators Are ‘Looking For Solutions’ To Marijuana Banking Problem As Schumer Recommits To Addressing The Issue – Marijuana Moment

  1. Treasury Secretary Says Regulators Are ‘Looking For Solutions’ To Marijuana Banking Problem As Schumer Recommits To Addressing The Issue Marijuana Moment
  2. Feds Are ‘Weaponizing’ Bank Crisis to Kill Crypto: Rep. Tom Emmer Yahoo Finance
  3. US lawmaker suggests Signature’s collapse was tied to instability of crypto Cointelegraph
  4. Former FDIC Regulator: Friendliness Toward Crypto ‘Does Not Exist’ CoinDesk
  5. Janet Yellen Says Regulators Seeking Solutions For Marijuana Banking, Sen. Bennet Calls Cannabis More Sta Benzinga
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Dow Jones Futures Rise As Regulators Protect All SVB Deposits; Signature Bank Closed | Investor’s Business Daily – Investor’s Business Daily

  1. Dow Jones Futures Rise As Regulators Protect All SVB Deposits; Signature Bank Closed | Investor’s Business Daily Investor’s Business Daily
  2. Dow futures surge higher as concerns about Silicon Valley Bank prompt emergency intervention by regulators MarketWatch
  3. Multiple-Alarm Markets Fire (SPX) May Need Time to Burn Itself Out Bloomberg
  4. Dow futures lift as Fed contains banking crisis By Investing.com Investing.com
  5. Stock Market Today: Dow Futures Jump After Regulators Announce Silicon Valley Bank Plan The Wall Street Journal
  6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Read original article here

Sony accused of lying to EU regulators about the Microsoft Activision deal

What you need to know

  • Microsoft’s Frank X. Shaw has claimed that Sony recently lied to European Union (EU) regulators about its in-progress acquisition of Activision Blizzard.
  • Specifically, Shaw says that Sony told the EU Microsoft wasn’t willing to offer the PlayStation maker parity with Call of Duty, despite Microsoft previously proposing a 10-year deal.
  • Microsoft continues to assert that it wants to bring games to more people, not less, and that making Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox would “defy business logic.”

As Microsoft’s planned $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard continues to attract thorough scrutiny from regulators, the company has claimed that Sony — the  producer of PlayStation and one of the deal’s largest opponents — recently lied to the European Union (EU) about its plans for Call of Duty. While Microsoft has publicly committed to keeping the popular first-person shooter franchise on PlayStation once the merger closes, the firm says that Sony has been suggesting otherwise to Brussels officials. This news comes as the EU reportedly plans to serve Microsoft an antitrust warning about the deal.

“I hear Sony is briefing people in Brussels claiming Microsoft is unwilling to offer them parity for Call of Duty if we acquire Activision. Nothing could be further from the truth,” wrote Frank X. Shaw, Microsoft’s Corporate Vice President of Communications. “We’ve been clear we’ve offered Sony a 10 year deal to give them parity on timing, content, features, quality, playability, and any other aspect of the game. We’ve also said we’re happy to make this enforceable through a contract, regulatory agreements, or other means.”

Call of Duty, a series frequently home to countless players and hundreds of millions of dollars in sales, is unquestionably one of the largest entertainment franchises in the world. Initially, Microsoft offered Sony terms to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation for three years following the completion of its Activision Blizzard acquisition, which CEO Jim Ryan called “inadequate” in a statement. Following this, Microsoft offered Sony a 10-year deal, with the two companies reportedly meeting to discuss specific details. The full outcome of these talks remains unknown, but based on Shaw’s public statements, it appears that an agreement was not reached.

See more

Microsoft has repeatedly asserted that making Call of Duty exclusive to its Xbox consoles wouldn’t be in line with its plans, with Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer stating that Microsoft is primarily acquiring Activision Blizzard for its dominant mobile gaming position and that the firm “wants to be where players are, especially with franchises the size of Minecraft and Call of Duty.” In an op-ed, Microsoft President Brad Smith also wrote that making Call of Duty exclusive would be “economically irrational,” as “a vital part of Activision Blizzard’s ‘Call of Duty’ revenue comes from PlayStation game sales.” Shaw reiterates these arguments in his own comments.

“Sony is the console market leader and it would defy business logic for us to exclude PlayStation gamers from the Call of Duty ecosystem,” Shaw said. “Our goal is to bring Call of Duty and other games – as we did with Minecraft – to more people around the world so they can play them where and how they want.”

Regulators are expected to make final decisions about the merger in the spring, with the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) planning to share a preliminary decision in late January or February. The EU and the CMA are set to deliver their verdicts on April 11 and April 26, respectively. 

Notably, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has already filed a lawsuit to block the deal, citing upcoming Xbox and Windows PC exclusive games from the recently-acquired ZeniMax such as Starfield and Redfall as examples of why the company can’t be trusted (Microsoft never committed to making these games multiplatform). Earlier this week, a report suggested that the FTC timed its lawsuit to manipulate the EU and discourage the regulator from reaching a settlement with Microsoft regarding its concerns about the deal.

Windows Central’s take

Between the FTC reportedly timing its lawsuit against the merger to manipulate the EU into avoiding settlements with Microsoft and Sony outright lying about Microsoft’s planned commitments, it’s hard not to laugh at how ridiculous things have gotten. Assuming Shaw’s assertions are true, Sony’s approach to opposing the merger has reached a new level of bad faith. It reminds me of when the company complained Microsoft might raise its Xbox prices after buying Activision Blizzard, mere months after it rose the cost of its own PS5 systems.

Admittedly, it’s possible that Microsoft isn’t being honest here itself. However, unlike Sony, it’s proven that it’s actually willing to come to the table, with the company publicly stating several times that it’s happy to work with regulators and negotiate with competitors. Notably, Microsoft even entered 10-year commitments to put Call of Duty on Steam and Nintendo Switch, showing its willingness to bring Activision’s premier shooter to platforms other than its own. For those reasons, and because of Sony’s conduct thus far, I’m strongly inclined to believe Shaw’s claim.

At the end of the day, it’s become increasingly clear that Sony is willing to say or do whatever it has to do to obstruct Microsoft’s acquisition, and that now includes blatantly lying to regulators. So, I ask this: who’s really trying to stifle competition?



Read original article here

Antitrust regulators propose banning noncompete clauses for workers

Comment

The Federal Trade Commission proposed a rule Thursday to prohibit employers from imposing noncompete clauses on workers — a widespread practice that economists say suppresses pay, prevents new companies from forming and raises consumer prices.

The ban would make it illegal for companies to enter into noncompete contracts with employees or continue to maintain such contracts if they already exist, and it would require that companies with active noncompete clauses inform workers that they are void. Such agreements typically prevent workers from getting jobs at a competitor of a current or former employer for a defined period.

The FTC estimates that banning noncompete contracts would open new job opportunities for 30 million Americans and raise wages by $300 billion a year. If enacted, the rule could send shock waves across a wide range of industries.

One widely cited survey of economists from 2014 found that close to 20 percent of workers in the United States are bound to noncompete clauses across a variety of jobs, from hairstylists to software engineers to nurses. These contracts have forced workers to take on loads of debt during lengthy job searches, locked workers out of their own professions or shunted them into lower-paying industries.

The proposed rule, recommended by President Biden as part of a 2021 executive order, is the FTC’s first big shot at stretching the boundaries of antitrust enforcement to empower American workers.

FTC Chair Lina Khan, a Biden appointee who has promised to “use all of the tools in our toolbox” to rein in anticompetitive behavior from companies, said the rule is being proposed because of “a raft of economic evidence” that now shows “the ways that noncompete clauses undermine competition.”

Congress expands protections for pregnant and nursing workers

“Noncompetes are basically locking up workers, which means that they’re not able to match with the best jobs for them,” Khan said on a call with reporters Wednesday afternoon. “If this rule were to be finalized and go into effect … [it] would force employers to compete more vigorously over workers in ways that should lead to higher wages and improved working conditions, basically injecting competition into the labor market.”

The proposed rule is based on an initial finding that noncompete clauses violate Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which prohibits “unfair” methods of competition. The FTC is seeking public comment on the proposed rule for 30 days, but it has not disclosed a timeline for its approval.

Under its current Democratic majority, the FTC voted 3-1 to publish a notice about the proposed rule, the first step in its rulemaking process.

The prospect of banning noncompete agreements has been met with some backlash from the business community. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote in a letter to the FTC in 2021 that the agency “lacks legal authority” to enforce such a rule that “would harm consumers by banning the many pro-competitive aspects of noncompetes.”

A record tight labor market fueled by supply chain shortages and the coronavirus pandemic has forced many companies over the past year to raise wages and improve conditions, as workers have used their leverage to quit and change jobs, especially in low-wage industries, such as hospitality. But workers covered by noncompete clauses haven’t had the same power because the labor market in such jobs has been artificially constrained.

A growing body of research shows that noncompete contracts reduce wages and mobility for workers across various industries by ensuring that employers do not have to compete against one another for workers by raising wages or improving working conditions.

The use of noncompete clauses dates back hundreds of years. Such restrictions were originally meant to protect a business’s trade secrets, but they have become especially commonplace in employment contracts in recent years — for low-wage workers, white-collar workers and executives alike — allowing companies to benefit from less competition across the board.

The proposed rule would not apply to other types of employment restrictions, such as nondisclosure agreements, but those provisions could be subject to the FTC’s rule if the agency determines that they prevent workers from switching jobs. It would extend beyond employees to independent contractors and uncompensated workers, such as unpaid interns.

A few states have already banned noncompete contracts, including California, Oklahoma and North Dakota. Other states have banned such clauses for workers who earn below a certain income. Data shows that workers in these states with bans have seen larger wage increases and more job mobility than when noncompete clauses were legal. Some observers suggest that the rise of Silicon Valley in California as a global hub of tech innovation was helped along by the state’s unwillingness to enforce noncompete contracts.

Still, many employers continue to ask workers to sign noncompete contracts in states where the practice has been prohibited, in part because low-wage workers remain unaware of their rights. A challenge going forward may be enforcing these rules as the FTC grapples with its own limited resources.

After months of deadlock, Lina Khan is unleashed

Khan said she’s confident in the agency’s ability to make companies follow the rule if it is enacted.

“Companies right now might still be sneaking these into contracts, thinking, ‘Hey, these workers are unlikely to actually know what their legal rights are,’” Khan said. “All of that would be precluded by the fact that firms would actively have to inform the employees and give them clear notice.”

Read original article here

Exclusive: U.S. regulators to vet Alibaba, other Chinese firms’ audits -sources

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

  • Alibaba notified of U.S. audit inspection -sources
  • Vetting of U.S.-listed Chinese firms’ audits starts next month
  • Follows landmark U.S.-China audit deal
  • Alibaba shares fall nearly 3%

HONG KONG, Aug 31 (Reuters) – U.S. regulators have selected e-commerce giant Alibaba Group Holding Ltd (9988.HK) and other U.S.-listed Chinese companies for audit inspections starting next month, three sources familiar with the matter said.

The move follows Friday’s landmark audit deal between Beijing and Washington allowing U.S. regulators to vet accounting firms in mainland China and Hong Kong, potentially ending a long-running dispute that threatened to boot more than 200 Chinese companies from U.S. stock exchanges. read more

Alibaba has been notified that it is among the first batch of Chinese companies whose audits will be inspected by the U.S. audit watchdog – Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) – in Hong Kong, the sources told Reuters.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

PwC, the accounting firm of China’s biggest e-commerce company, has also been informed of the audit work inspection, said the sources, declining to be identified due to confidentiality constraints.

Alibaba did not respond to a request for comment while a PwC spokesperson said it was company policy not to comment on any client matters.

A PCAOB spokesperson said the board did not comment on inspections. The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Alibaba’s U.S.-listed shares closed down nearly 3% on Tuesday after the Reuters report, having been up about 1% in pre-market trade. Its Hong Kong shares slumped more than 3% in Wednesday morning trade while tech giants listed in the city (.HSTECH) dropped nearly 2%.

U.S. regulators have for more than a decade demanded access to audit papers of U.S.-listed Chinese companies, but Beijing has been reluctant to let U.S. regulators inspect its accounting firms, citing national security concerns.

Alibaba, which went public in New York in 2014 in what was at the time the largest listing in history, is the most valuable Chinese firm listed in the United States with a market value of $248 billion as of Tuesday.

NO SPECIAL TREATMENT

The PCAOB said on Friday that the watchdog had notified the selected companies, without naming them, and its officials are expected to land in Hong Kong, where the inspections will take place, by mid-September.

The regulator, which oversees audits of U.S.-listed companies, would select companies based on risk factors, such as size and sector, and that no companies could expect special treatment, according to the PCAOB. read more

Reuters could not immediately determine how many and which other Chinese companies were in the first batch of U.S. inspections.

Founded in 1999, Alibaba counts e-commerce as its key business and has expanded into fast-growing sectors such as cloud services and internet of things in recent years. It also owns AutoNavi Holdings Ltd, a large Chinese digital mapping and navigation firm.

In July, it was added to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) list of Chinese companies that might be delisted for not complying with audit requirements. read more

The list now has more than 160 Chinese companies including fellow e-commerce group JD.com Inc (9618.HK) and electric vehicle maker Nio Inc .

Current U.S. rules stipulate that Chinese companies that are not in compliance with audit working papers requests will be suspended from trading in the United States in early 2024.

Days before being added to the SEC’s delisting watchlist, Alibaba said it planned to add a primary listing in Hong Kong to its New York presence, targeting investors in mainland China. read more

Already present on the Hong Kong bourse with a secondary listing since 2019, the tech behemoth said it expects the primary listing to be completed by the end of 2022.

Register now for FREE unlimited access to Reuters.com

Reporting by Julie Zhu in Hong Kong; Additional reporting by Katanga Johnson in Washington; Editing by Sumeet Chatterjee and Christopher Cushing

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Read original article here

The Ultimate News Site