Ambac Rocky Balboa oder chapter 11
Seite 268 von 309 Neuester Beitrag: 25.04.21 01:14 | ||||
| Eröffnet am: | 14.05.09 22:36 | von: pacorubio | Anzahl Beiträge: | 8.707 |
| Neuester Beitrag: | 25.04.21 01:14 | von: Petraqnvka | Leser gesamt: | 1.360.794 |
| Forum: | Hot-Stocks | Leser heute: | 480 | |
| Bewertet mit: |  | |||
| Seite: < 1 | ... | 266 | 267 | | 269 | 270 | ... 309 > | ||||
Optionen
| Boardmail an "LGDFLI" |
Wertpapier: Ambac Financial Group |
http://www.aktienbase.de/index.php?page=Portal
Optionen
| Boardmail an "LGDFLI" |
Wertpapier: Ambac Financial Group |
Hi,
danke - aber das 3. Quartal wurde bereits veröffentlicht. Mir ging es um das 4. Quartal. Da hätten die Zahlen am 9. Februar veröffentlich werden müssen.
Kurz vor den letzten avisiererten Gerichtsterminen stieg der Aktienkurz an. Das habe ich am Freitag vermisst - was wieder zu Vermutungen Anlass gibt.
MfG
Hi,
ich kann mir eine kurzfristig verkündigte Verschiebung vorstellen. Dazu meine Überlegungen:
- die Zocker, die vor dem letzten Gerichtstermin eifrig waren, wurden am Freitag nicht aktiv
- die Einwände gegen eine geplante Ausbuchung waren zu massiv und überzeugend
- Abwarten des wichtigen Gerichtstermins über die Washington Mutual Inc. am 14.03.
MfG
The city, whose debt load of more than $300 million is five times its general-fund budget, will miss $5.27 million in general-obligation bond payments due March 15, according to a notice its receiver posted on the Electronic Municipal Market Access system, a database for filings by municipal-debt issuers.
Ambac Assurance, a unit of Ambac Financial Group Inc., insures the city's general-obligation debt. The city anticipates that the paying agent for the debt will ask the insurer to cover next week's obligations, according to today's notice.
To contact the reporter on this story: Romy Varghese in Philadelphia at rvarghese8@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Tannenbaum at mtannen@bloomberg.net
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/...DTL#ixzz1owJQ1YCl
Wisconsin Supreme Court says the federal government failed to preserve its right to appeal because it did not get involved in circuit court-level proceedings.
By Joe Forward, Legal Writer, State Bar of Wisconsin
March 12, 2012 – The federal government’s failure to preserve issues in the Dane County Circuit Court means it can’t appeal those issues now, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled.
With a $700 million tentative tax refund at stake, the U.S. Justice Department wanted to appeal a circuit court order that blocked the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from pursuing claims against the segregated account of a deteriorating financial guaranty insurer.
But in Nickel v. United States, 2012 WI 2012 (March 8, 2012), the Wisconsin Supreme Court unanimously said no, concluding the U.S. waived its ability to appeal the circuit court order.
Rehabilitation Act and tax liability
Wisconsin’s Insurers Rehabilitation and Liquidation Act allows state intervention to protect creditors and policyholders from the failure of a financially troubled insurer.
In 2010, Wisconsin’s Commissioner of Insurance (Ted Nickel) proposed a rehabilitation plan to assist Ambac Assurance Corp., a Wisconsin-based financial guaranty insurer that was financially troubled. The rehabilitation plan established a “segregated account” to separate potentially damaging liabilities from Ambac’s general account, liabilities such as mortgage-backed securities and other risky financial products, to be rehabilitated through protective measures.
One of those protective measures prevented the IRS from pursuing claims against the segregated account, which included a federal tax liability. Specifically, the IRS gave Ambac – through its parent corporation – a $700 million tentative tax refund for corporate taxes.
Tentative tax provisions are designed to give ailing companies cash refunds quickly based on tentative estimates, but the IRS is entitled to later examine whether the full refund is allowed.
The rehabilitation plan temporarily prevented the IRS from seeking tax liability payments from Ambac’s segregated account if an examination revealed a corporate tax liability outstanding.
Appeals court decides based on pro hac vice rules
The U.S. and the IRS had received notice of the court’s rehabilitation plan confirmation hearings and the injunction, which allowed interested parties to object within 45 days of the order. The U.S. did not object to the order, and it did not appear at the confirmation hearings.
Instead, the U.S. tried to remove the case to federal court, and filed a notice of appeal in state court to reserve that right, signed by an attorney from the tax division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) who was not licensed to practice law in Wisconsin.
The notice asked the state appeals court to hold the appeal in abeyance while the federal court decided whether it had subject matter jurisdiction (note: a U.S. District Court in Wisconsin ruled that the federal court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear the case. The U.S. has appealed the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.).
Meanwhile, a Wisconsin appeals court granted the Wisconsin Insurance Commissioner’s motion to dismiss the federal government’s appeal, concluding that state statute requires all filings in the Wisconsin state courts to be signed by a Wisconsin licensed attorney, or by a non-resident attorney admitted pro hac vice. The DOJ lawyer was not admitted pro hac vice.
On appeal to the Wisconsin Supreme Court, the U.S. argued that federal law preempts any state law or regulation that precludes DOJ attorneys from appearing in state court.
Specifically, 28 U.S.C. section 517 provides that a DOJ attorneys “may be sent by the attorney general to any state or district in the United States to attend to the interests of the United States” in a suit pending in state court.
State supreme court decides case based on waiver
In its March 8 opinion, the Wisconsin Supreme Court affirmed the state appeals court decision, but on different grounds. It ruled that the federal government waived its ability to appeal the circuit court’s temporary injunction of IRS claims against Ambac’s segregated fund.
“In reaching our conclusion, we focus not on the signature, but on the fact that the notice of appeal itself was the only effort by the United States to involve itself with the circuit court,” wrote Justice Patrick Crooks for the supreme court. “Our case law is clear and consistent: failure to preserve issues at the circuit court means that they are waived.”
The supreme court explained that the “waiver rule” bars a party’s requested “do-over” after sitting by while other interested parties endure expensive litigation.
“The United States never appeared in the circuit court proceedings” Justice Crooks wrote. “It has acknowledged its strategic decision not to litigate in state courts. A party is entitled to make such a decision, but it is not entitled to a reversal when its strategy has ‘proved ineffective.’”
Having decided the case on grounds of waiver, the supreme court did not address whether a federal DOJ attorney can appear in state courts without a state license or pro hac vice status.
Chief Justice Shirley Abrahamson filed a concurring opinion to declare that “forfeiture,” not “waiver” is the proper term to use when a party fails to raise issues in circuit court.
Attorneys
Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Humphrey, Madison, and Anthony Sheehan of the U.S. Department of Justice, Washington D.C., represented the United States.
Daniel Stolper and Barbara Neider of Stafford Rosenbalm LLP, Madison, and Richard Reinthaler, Peter Ivanick, Henry Ricardo, and Emily Saffittz of Dewey & LeBoef LLP, New York, represented Ambac Assurance Corporation.
Michael Van Sicklen, Naikang Tsao, and Matthew Lynch of Foley & Lardner LLP, Madison, represented Wisconsin Office of the Insurance Commissioner, Ted Nickel.
* IRS must accept settlement for plan to become effective
* Noteholders would get some recovery; equity wiped out
March 14 (Reuters) - Ambac Financial Group Inc gained court approval on Wednesday on a plan to emerge from bankruptcy by restructuring nearly $1.7 billion in notes and settling a key tax dispute with the Internal Revenue Service.
As part of the plan, Ambac has proposed a $101.9 million settlement with the IRS, which had challenged Ambac's tax accounting practices related to credit default swap contracts.
The settlement needs IRS approval before Ambac can officially exit bankruptcy.
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Kleinkosto" |
Wertpapier: Ambac Financial Group |
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Gropius" |
Wertpapier: Ambac Financial Group |
und wieder einmal sieht man die Betrugsmasche, die die Amis und Ihre Justiz drauf haben......
Vorgestern wurde der Richterin (Chapman) aufgezeigt wo welche Bilanzmanipulationen stattgefunden haben......Sie wischte das hinweg und akzeptierte Zeugenaussagen von Aktionären erst garnicht.......
Die Kohle von "Takefuji" steht auch noch aus. Takefuji ist erst vor 2 Jahren in Konkurs gegangen und schuldet Ambac vertraglich 302 Mrd. Yen. (ca. 3,5 - 4 Mrd. Dollar).
Dann sind die Gaunereiverfahren gegen einige Großbanken noch nicht abgeschlossen.
IRS-Forderung (der Grund für CH11) wurde abgelehnt. Also besteht eigentlich kein Grund mehr für ein verbleiben in "CH11". Kohle ist auch genug da, denn Ambac bekommt bis zum Jahr 2098 (oder so) quartalsweise 200 Mio. Dollar an Prämien von staatlichen Versicherten.........
Alleine die Verträge wollte der Großaktionär "Buffet" kaufen. Er bot ca. 5 Mrd. Dollar soweit ich das in Erinnerung habe......
Jetzt bleibt nur noch der Klageweg...... :-(
Aber den scheuen wohl viele und stecken den Kopf in den Sand........
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Memory193" |
Wertpapier: Ambac Financial Group |
Hab heute morgen alles verkauft, um wenigstens die Verluste zu sichern, vielleicht kommt es ja nochmals zu einem kleinen Zock.
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Kleinkosto" |
Wertpapier: Ambac Financial Group |
Sollte es doch zu Klagen kommen, dann sind doch die Pre-Holder bevorzugt.
Von dem her gesehen lasse ich die eben einfach mal weiter liegen.
By Bloomberg News
March 15, 2012 9:10 a.m.
Ambac Financial Group Inc., the bankrupt holding company for a failed bond insurer, has won a judge's final approval to reorganize its $1.7 billion in debt over objections from shareholders, who will get nothing.
U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Shelley Chapman in Manhattan on Wednesday confirmed the company's Chapter 11 plan, which calls for it to cancel all of its pre-bankruptcy shares and restructure more than $1.25 billion in senior notes. The plan relies on a proposed settlement with the Internal Revenue Service, which has yet to be consummated.
"It is with significant regret that I confirm a plan that has no recovery for equity holders," Chapman said, saying that shareholders must "unfortunately join the ranks of millions of innocent victims of the financial crisis," because there was not enough money to repay equity holders, who are last in line behind creditors.
On March 13, Chapman heard hours of arguments from individual shareholders over why they believed there should be money left for them, and testimony from a financial adviser that there wasn't.
"The fact that it's confusing doesn't change the fact that there's no hidden value here," Ambac lawyer Peter Ivanick told Chapman. "There is no Ambac leprechaun that has hidden pots of gold into the loss reserves."
The reorganized company's main business will be "looking after" its interests in Ambac Assurance Corp., its failed bond insurance unit, though it may seek to acquire other businesses, C.J. Brown, a managing director at Blackstone Group, an adviser to Ambac, testified in court. Brown also testified about how Ambac's assets had been valued, and said there was nothing left for shareholders.
The case relied on close work with a Wisconsin regulator which has rehabilitated part of Ambac Assurance, and mediation with the IRS. Ambac just finalized its settlement offer to the IRS and on Wednesday began to seek approval from government agencies; that means the time between Wednesday's confirmation of the plan and Ambac's exit from court protection will be longer than usual, Ivanick said.
Ambac Financial, which relied on dividends from the operating unit, filed for bankruptcy in November 2010, about two years after Ambac Assurance stopped selling new policies in 2008.
At the outset of the bankruptcy, Ambac sued the IRS and the IRS made a counter-claim, questioning how Ambac Financial used $7.3 billion in net operating losses to account for its losses from credit default swaps.
Chapman said that given the company's debt of about $1.7 billion, it would need to have made an error of $1.5 billion to $1.6 billion in its valuation estimate for there to be value for shareholders.
The market for trading in the company's senior debt currently values it at about 12 to 13 cents on the dollar and the junior debt is valued at 2 to 3 cents on the dollar, showing that debt investors don't believe there will be anything left for shareholders, Brown testified.
Ambac Assurance was the second-largest bond insurer before the 2008 financial crisis, when mounting defaults on mortgages swamped the company with claims. It guaranteed about $256 billion of $1.4 trillion in insured municipal debt, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Hi,
sorry, aber ich verstehe das nicht. Die Abweisung der Einwendungen seitens der Aktionäre, der durch Bloomberg verkündigte Totalverlust für Aktionäre führten nachvollziehbar zu einem schnellen Kursverfall. Aber das nur kurzfristig, die Kurse in USA kletterten dann wieder in die Nähe der ursprünglichen Kurse. War die Bloombergmeldung so nicht zutreffend? Gab es in USA bessere Informationen? Also meine Bitte - Wer weiß mehr?
MfG
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1Hh81AsY3A
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xCVzV4uW00
Optionen
| Boardmail an "Memory193" |
Wertpapier: Ambac Financial Group |
Ambac’s IRS Tussle Slows Bankruptcy Exit
Bond insurer Ambac won court approval of its bankruptcy exit plan this week, but won’t finish the process until it settles a long-running dispute with the Internal Revenue Service over how it accounted for credit default swaps.
The dispute stemmed from a change in Ambac’s accounting methods for CDS, and is a reminder that companies need to check with the IRS when switching to accounting methods even if the new treatment is considered to be more proper, according to Robert Willens, an independent tax and accounting expert at Robert Willens LLC in New York.
“The problem here is that Ambac never obtained permission,” Willens told CFO Journal.
In the fall of 2010, Ambac was expecting to file for bankruptcy but hurried into court protection ahead of schedule in an attempt to secure its assets after the IRS questioned its accounting for tax refunds related to CDS and its $7.3 billion of net operating losses.
The tax refunds were about a third of Ambac’s liquid assets and the company was worried the IRS would seize them. The IRS has demanded that Ambac return $807 million in tax benefits, and Ambac is offering to settle the claims for $102 million and give up $3.7 billion in related net operating losses. The IRS has not yet accepted the plan.
Prior to 2007, Ambac had recognized gains on its CDS contracts as capital gains. But when the housing market turned amid the financial crisis, Ambac switched its accounting method to recognize CDS losses as operating losses – making it eligible for a refund and to record net operating losses from the huge hits it was taking.
As Daily Bankruptcy Review reports here:
Ambac has maintained that its accounting was proper when it collected more than $700 million in tax refunds related to credit default swap contracts between December 2008 and January 2010. The disagreement stems from Ambac’s decision in 2007 to switch to what is called the “impairment” method when accounting for losses on CDS contracts, rather than the “wait-and-see” method it used before. Ambac has called the switch a “reasonable” accounting decision.
Whether the switch was technically proper from an accounting perspective, Ambac still needed to get formal approval from the IRS, Willens said. Ambac made the change without explicit approval from the IRS, but contends that the IRS ignored its requests that the agency review the change. An Ambac spokesman was not immediately available.
“Even if you’re using an ‘improper’ or less preferable method of accounting for an item, the case here, you’re still required to secure permission to change to the proper or more preferable method,” Willens added.
http://mobile.blogs.wsj.com/cfo/2012/03/16/...-slows-bankruptcy-exit/