More stories

  • in

    More than $90 million in cryptocurrency stolen after a top Japanese exchange was hacked

    Japanese cryptocurrency exchange Liquid said Thursday some of its digital currency wallets have been “compromised.”
    Elliptic, a blockchain analytics company, said just over $94 million in cryptocurrencies has been received by the hackers.
    It’s the second major crypto heist to take place in little over a week.

    An illustration showing physical bitcoins alongside binary code displayed on a laptop.
    Jakub Porzycki | NurPhoto via Getty Images

    Japanese cryptocurrency exchange Liquid said Thursday it has been hit by a cyberattack that saw hackers make off with more than $90 million worth of digital coins.
    Liquid said some of its digital currency wallets had been “compromised,” and that hackers were transferring the assets to four different wallets.

    “We are currently investigating and will provide regular updates,” Liquid tweeted. “In the meantime deposits and withdrawals will be suspended.”
    Liquid says it is regulated by Japan’s Financial Services Agency. The watchdog was not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNBC.
    Elliptic, a blockchain analytics company, said its analysis showed that just over $94 million in cryptocurrencies had been obtained by the hackers.
    Out of the total haul, $45 million in tokens were being converted to ethereum through decentralized exchanges — blockchain-based platforms that require no intermediaries — like Uniswap and SushiSwap, Elliptic said.
    “This enables the hacker to avoid having these assets frozen — as is possible with many Ethereum tokens,” Elliptic said in a blog post.

    Liquid ranks among the top 20 crypto exchanges globally by daily trading volumes, processing more than $133 million of transactions in the last 24 hours, according to CoinMarketCap data.
    It’s the second major crypto heist to take place in little over a week. Last Tuesday, hackers stole more than $600 million of digital tokens from Poly Network, a so-called decentralized finance firm.
    In an unusual turn of events, the hackers opened a dialogue with the organization they attacked, and gave back nearly all of the funds. However, more than $200 million remains locked in an account that requires a password from the hacker.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Robinhood is not a meme stock and doesn't plan to sell shares to raise funds, CFO says

    Newly public stock trading app Robinhood is not looking to do a secondary offering to take advantage of its retail investor-driven share price rise, according to the company’s chief financial officer.
    “It doesn’t resonate with me to call Robinhood a meme stock,” Robinhood CFO Jason Warnick told CNBC’s Kate Rooney on “Squawk Box” on Thursday. “To your question about additional fundraising, we don’t have any plans at this time to raise additional funds.”

    A week after Robinhood’s lackluster debut at $38 per share, the stock experienced a surge in share price. The free trade pioneer become part of the meme-stock craze it once helped ignite, with retail traders driving an eye-popping rally. Shares of Robinhood touched $85 at one point, after falling back to its current level around $49.80.

    Arrows pointing outwards

    After reporting on Wednesday a record second-quarter revenue, Warnick said the fundamentals for Robinhood are strong.
    “We have 22-and-a-half million customers, our record quarter of $565 million. I think a really, you know, strong, kind of unit economics underlying our business,” added Warnick.
    Robinhood’s revenue more than doubled in the second quarter to $565 million, helped by a massive surge in crypto trading. However, shares are down 9% in early trading on Thursday on investor concerns about a potential trading slowdown. Market participants could also be concerned whether volatile crypto can continue to provide such a tailwind for the brokerage.
    Revenue from crypto trading totaled $233 million, more than half of all the transaction-based revenue of $451 million for the second quarter. Cryptocurrency’s share of revenue jumped to more than 51% from 17% in the first quarter.
    Warnick also said Robinhood has enough capital to withstand another shock like in January with the GameStop short squeeze.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    $200,000 paychecks, exit opportunities and proximity to power: Why graduates flock to Wall Street

    Tough conditions created by a boom in deals haven’t dimmed the most obvious allure of Wall Street: money. Investment banking analysts at major firms can expect total compensation approaching $200,000 in their first year out of college.
    JPMorgan received almost 50,000 applications for about 400 internship positions at its investment banking program this year. Goldman Sachs saw a 50% increase in applications for its investment banking analyst program this year, compared with 2018.
    At top feeder school University of Pennsylvania, the percentage of graduates with full-time jobs choosing Wall Street has stayed at roughly 30% since at least 2015, beating out consulting, technology and health care.

    The New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) stands in lower Manhattan on the first day that traders are allowed back onto the historic floor of the exchange on May 26, 2020 in New York City.
    Spencer Platt | Getty Images

    When junior bankers at Goldman Sachs complained about what they called “inhumane” working conditions in an internal survey that made waves across the industry this March, one incoming analyst wasn’t fazed.
    He knew about the industry’s reputation for hazing its recruits with 90-hour work weeks. But for him and many others, tough conditions created by a boom in deals combined with a still-raging pandemic haven’t dimmed the most obvious allure of Wall Street: money.

    The son of South Asian immigrants said he’s planned for a Wall Street career since high school after seeing his parents struggle financially. He secured an internship at JPMorgan Chase in New York midway through his time at a prestigious Ivy League and started as a full-time analyst in June.
    “I grew up in, not a super-poor family, but at points we were really struggling,” he told CNBC. Banking will enable him to repay his massive student loans and support his parents, said the analyst, who asked not to be named discussing his JPMorgan role.
    “The most important thing was financial security,” he added. “You are willing to put in whatever hours, and at the end of the day it’s totally worth it.”
    Despite the harsh spotlight the Goldman story put on the industry’s treatment of young adults, thousands still flock to Wall Street. The industry remains a top destination for high achievers seeking outsized pay and broad career options, according to recruiters, campus advisors and more than a half dozen first-year analysts interviewed by CNBC.

    More selective than Harvard

    JPMorgan, for instance, received almost 50,000 applications for about 400 internship positions at its investment banking program this year, according to a person with knowledge of the company. (Interns typically return as first-year analysts after they graduate.) The acceptance rate of less than 1% makes JPMorgan’s investment bank harder to get into than Harvard or Yale.

    That level of interest doesn’t seem to be isolated to JPMorgan, which is a juggernaut on Wall Street across advisory and trading businesses.
    Goldman Sachs, the world’s top mergers advisor, saw a 50% increase in applications for its investment banking analyst program this year compared with 2018, according to a person with knowledge of the bank. While banks don’t typically disclose specifics about their programs, making it hard to know how many join Wall Street out of college, it’s likely that a few thousand are hired at the top investment banks every year.
    Meanwhile, the industry’s best-known feeder schools say that demand for finance careers hasn’t abated.

    Barbara Hewitt, UPenn
    Source: Barbara Hewitt

    At the University of Pennsylvania, for instance, finance has been the top destination for students for the past two decades, according to Barbara Hewitt, executive director of its career services group. The percentage of graduates with full-time jobs choosing Wall Street has stayed at roughly 30% since at least 2015, beating out consulting, technology and health care.
    “It’s been the largest industry sector that our students at the undergraduate level have gone into for as long as I can remember,” Hewitt said. “There’s been surprisingly little change.”
    To be fair, the industry’s reputation has ebbed and flowed over the years. Earlier rounds of angst and self-examination were caused by banks’ role in the 2008 financial crisis and the 2013 death of London-based intern Moritz Erhardt. The rise of the technology sector over the past decade, as well as the growth in private equity and venture capital firms, have given young achievers other avenues for high-paying, rewarding positions.

    Understaffed and overworked

    But each time, despite headlines proclaiming that young people have soured on the industry, there is no shortage of volunteers willing to sign their lives away to a bank.
    “I don’t think investment banking has lost any of its appeal; it’s still a phenomenal job in a great industry,” David McCormack, an 18-year recruiting veteran, told CNBC. “It’s just that you’re asking people to work unprecedented levels without the support they would’ve had pre-pandemic.”
    Analysts on Goldman’s technology advisory team involved in the now-famous survey were caught in a “perfect storm” earlier this year, according to Alan Johnson of New York-based pay consultancy Johnson Associates. Investment banks reined in hiring at the start of the pandemic because they thought the impending recession would limit deals activity, he said.
    When deal flow and the IPO market boomed, thanks to the Federal Reserve’s response to the pandemic, banks were caught understaffed. The companies resorted to hunting for junior bankers in unusual places including among consulting and accounting firms, offered perks like free Peloton bicycles and raised base salaries.

    The motivations of the JPMorgan analyst recalls a phrase from an earlier era on Wall Street, showing that some things never change.
    In earlier decades — when investment banks were more likely to be staffed with the well-connected offspring of wealthy families — young, hungry outsiders were known as PSDs. The acronym stands for Poor, Smart, with a Deep desire to become wealthy. That phrase was born at Bear Stearns, the training ground for future industry titans including Citigroup’s former CEO Sandy Weill and Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon.

    ‘Sell my soul’

    If anything, rising levels of student debt owed by recent graduates have made them more risk-averse and less likely to gamble on careers that might not pay off financially, according to some of the bankers. More than 40% of U.S. adults who went to college took on debt, while outstanding student loans totaled $1.7 trillion by the end of 2020, according to the Federal Reserve.
    “If I have to basically sell my soul to this bank for a few years, I need to be paid for it,” said a first-year banker at Citigroup. “There are a million students who are all deserving, but there just aren’t enough spots; they would kill for this opportunity.”
    (CNBC withheld her name and the names of the other junior bankers in this article because their employers prohibit them from speaking to the press.)
    Besides starting pay that is higher than virtually every other industry – top analysts at major firms can expect total compensation approaching $200,000 in their first year out of college, according to McCormack – junior bankers often cited “exit opportunities” as a reason for joining a bank.

    David McCormack, head of recruitment firm DMC Partners
    Source: David McCormack

    That is Wall Street-speak for the types of careers that await after a successful stint at investment banking, whether it’s in private equity, hedge funds, fintech, consulting or venture capital.
    While she considered roles at technology and venture capital firms as well as graduate school, the Citigroup analyst ultimately placed her bet on investment banking because it offers the most exit opportunities, she said.
    “It really came down to the fact that I felt strongly that I could pretty much go anywhere after I do two solid years of investment banking,” she said. “People make this assumption that if you can survive investment banking at a top firm, you can handle anything.”

    ‘The best people’

    Another first year, this one at Goldman, reiterated that sentiment. Many of her peers are motivated by the cachet of the firm and the possibilities it opens up, she said.
    “It’s very simple: Goldman picks the best people,” she said. “It’s like a boot camp for being the best professional.”
    Young employees like her join Goldman not necessarily out of an innate interest in finance, she said, but for the security of knowing she will have opportunities at the end of her two-year program. “It’s what you can do after Goldman that’s a big motivator for people,” she said. “It’s the launching pad into whatever you want.”
    Still, others were attracted to banking itself and its proximity to the powerful. Those who make it past the analyst and associate levels can begin doing more substantive work, and managing directors are often tasked with bringing in multi-billion dollar deals, basking in glory when a merger closes.

    Glory of the deal

    “If you show that you’re a really strong player at a younger age, you get more responsibility and more autonomy, and then — boom — you’re sourcing your own deals,” said a male Citigroup analyst. “Being a trusted advisor to these really powerful, really influential, really intelligent people who put their faith in you to guide them through a process” is tantalizing, he said.
    He and others said that while technology jobs like coding also pay well, they often have relatively limited career ceilings compared to banking.
    Most of the analysts said they were aware of the industry’s reputation for grueling work, an assertion backed up by the University of Pennsylvania’s Hewitt: “They know it’s going to be a lot of work for a couple of years,” she said. “They’re pretty open-eyed about that.”
    In recent years, banks have begun recruiting as early as freshman year, probably due to competition for top students from big tech and other firms. They have also begun leaning on testing and interviewing software platforms to help pull from a broader array of schools as part of the industry’s diversity push.

    Emma Rasiel, Duke University
    Source: Emma Rasiel

    Many students prefer the security of knowing where they will land after finishing their expensive educations, according to Emma Rasiel, an economics professor at Duke University who mentors finance students. The two-year analyst program often leads to interest for two- to three-year stints in private equity, she said.
    “Especially in investment banking, there’s a really clear drawn-out career path,” Rasiel said. “My students are saying, ‘I won’t have to think about finding a job for myself until I’m 27.'”
    Demand for investment banking among Duke students has stayed at roughly the same level for most of the past decade, Rasiel said. Further, about 70% of students headed to Wall Street decide to go into banking over trading roles, compared to a 50-50 split before the financial crisis, she said.

    No illusions

    But being courted by banks so early in their college tenures can lock out other possibilities and contribute to peer pressure to join finance, according to another Goldman analyst.
    “I never really heard of banking before, but during freshman year, it’s like this whole wave of everyone saying ‘banking, banking,'” said the analyst. “I was like ‘Wow, that sounds awful. Why would anyone want to work those hours?’ But then it’s kind of like a herd mentality.”
    In the aftermath of the Goldman junior bankers’ survey, banks declared a renewed push to set boundaries, enrich analyst programs and develop technology to automate the more mundane aspects of the job.
    But few junior bankers are under the illusion that the core nature of their jobs will have changed. So long as graduates scramble to join investment banks, the industry has little incentive to fundamentally change a system fueled by overworked 22-year-olds glued to Excel spreadsheets, one of the junior bankers said.
    “They want the best people, and they need the best people,” she said. “Once those people aren’t available anymore, then they’ll start to change.”

    Become a smarter investor with CNBC Pro. Get stock picks, analyst calls, exclusive interviews and access to CNBC TV. Sign up to start a free trial today.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Cryptocurrency traders seek damages from Binance after a major outage cost them millions

    Hundreds of investors are expected to take part in proceedings against crypto exchange Binance, seeking damages for money they lost during a major outage.
    Binance says it has no official headquarters. That has made it incredibly difficult for investors to figure out how, and where, to take the company to court.
    Liti Capital has promised to provide a minimum of $5 million in funding for the case. New York-based law firm White & Case will represent the claimants.

    The logo of cryptocurrency exchange Binance displayed on a phone screen.
    Jakub Porzycki | NurPhoto via Getty Images

    When Canadian cryptocurrency trader Fawaz Ahmed saw the price of ethereum dropping, he knew it was time to get out. Unfortunately for him, he couldn’t.
    Ahmed was trading on Binance, the world’s largest digital currency exchange by trading volume. And on May 19, Binance experienced a major outage which meant that, for about an hour, he was unable to exit his position.

    That day, bitcoin and ethereum posted their biggest one-day drops since March 2020, with the entire crypto market losing roughly $1 trillion in value. When prices fell below a certain point, Ahmed’s position got wiped out. His personal losses came to about $6 million.
    “This loss was not fair,” Ahmed, a 33-year-old who trades full-time, told CNBC. “This is something which was out of my control.”
    Binance’s customer service team gave Ahmed an “absurdly” low offer of compensation, he said.
    Ahmed is one of hundreds of investors expected to take part in arbitration proceedings against Binance, seeking damages for the money they lost when the cryptocurrency exchange went offline.
    Binance said it was unable to comment on “pending legal matters.”

    “Our policy is fair in that we compensate users who experienced actual trading losses due to our system’s issues,” a spokesperson for the firm told CNBC. “We do not cover hypothetical ‘what could have been’ situations such as unrealized profits.”

    Binance has experienced several outages over the years in times of heightened volatility for virtual currencies. That can be costly for traders, especially when prices are plunging.
    And those losses can balloon to millions of dollars when investors make risky bets using leverage, or borrowed money, to augment trades — which, on Binance, is something users do often.
    Binance recently cut the maximum leverage customers can take on futures — financial derivatives that oblige investors to buy an asset at an agreed-upon price at a later date — to 20 times from a previous limit of 125 times.
    Binance wasn’t the only crypto exchange to face disruption to its service on May 19. Coinbase users were also temporarily unable to access its site. Bitcoin plunged as much as 30% to nearly $30,000 that day. It has since recovered to $45,790.

    No headquarters

    Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, Binance’s boss, has previously said the exchange has no official headquarters. That makes it extremely difficult for investors to figure out how, and where, to take the company to court.
    A group of crypto traders hopes to change that. With the help of Liti Capital, a little-known private equity firm providing litigation financing, nearly 1,000 people are expected to join arbitration proceedings in Hong Kong to seek damages from Binance.
    “This is a landmark case for the industry,” David Kay, chief investment officer of Liti Capital, told CNBC.

    Read more about cryptocurrencies from CNBC Pro

    Binance is “the first company that has ever grown to any size in any industry — much less the financial industry — where there is no regulation,” he said. “They have no home, they have no headquarters, they have no office.”
    “The only place where Binance has said they have jurisdiction is in a Hong Kong international arbitration court,” Kay added. “This will be the largest consumer international arbitration in history.”
    Kay said that Liti Capital began working on the Binance case after receiving a call from Aija Lejniece, an independent lawyer working with a group of crypto traders in France. Lejniece specializes in international arbitration cases.
    Binance’s terms of use say that any legal dispute must be resolved through arbitration at the Hong Kong International Arbitration Centre. Arbitration proceedings, unlike class action lawsuits, aim to settle disputes out of court.
    The format makes it harder for the average consumer to make a claim, Kay said, as claimants have to pay arbitration fees and additional costs — for instance, traveling to Hong Kong. Individually, that could set each claimant back an estimated $65,000. To cover those costs, Liti Capital has promised to provide a minimum of $5 million in funding.

    White & Case, a New York-based law firm, has been hired to represent the claimants. Abby Cohen Smutny and Darryl Lew, two White & Case partners based in Washington, D.C., will serve as their lawyers.

    Crypto crackdown

    Crypto, a nascent industry, is still largely unregulated. While some firms in the space, like Coinbase, have sought to build rapport with regulators, Binance and many others operate mainly outside the purview of established rules.
    That hasn’t gone unnoticed by regulators, who are racing to catch up with new innovations in financial services. Two main concerns with crypto are a lack of protections for consumers and the risk of money laundering and other illicit activity.
    Binance, in particular, has attracted attention from authorities in multiple countries. Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority recently banned the firm’s U.K. subsidiary after finding it failed to meet anti-money laundering requirements. Meanwhile, financial watchdogs in Japan, Canada and Italy have issued warnings saying Binance does not have the authority to operate in the countries.
    To add to Binance’s woes, the company lost its U.S. chief Brian Brooks, who was formerly acting head of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a U.S. banking regulator.
    The company, which was founded by Zhao in China four years ago, recently said it was pivoting to become a regulated institution, with plans to obtain licenses in multiple jurisdictions and set up regional headquarters. Zhao has said he is willing to step down from the exchange to hand the baton to someone with more regulatory experience.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Stocks making the biggest moves premarket: Macy's, Kohl's, Tapestry, Petco and others

    Check out the companies making headlines before the bell:
    Macy’s (M) – The retailer reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.29 per share, well above the 19 cents consensus estimate, with revenue also above forecasts. Macy’s reported a better-than-expected increase in comparable-store sales, raised its annual sales forecast, and also announced a share buyback and the reinstatement of its dividend. Shares jumped 3.7% in the premarket.

    Kohl’s (KSS) – Kohl’s fell 2.6% in premarket action despite quarterly results that beat analyst forecasts. Kohl’s reported an adjusted quarterly profit of $2.48 per share, well above the $1.21 consensus estimate.
    Tapestry (TPR) – The company behind the Coach and Kate Spade brands beat estimates by 5 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of 74 cents per share and revenue above estimates as a reopening of economies around the world boosted demand for luxury goods. Tapestry also reinstated its dividend, but shares fell 2.3% in premarket trading.
    Petco (WOOF) – The pet products retailer beat estimates by 5 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of 25 cents per share and revenue that beat analyst forecasts as well. Petco also raised its full-year earnings and revenue outlook.
    BJ’s Wholesale (BJ) – The warehouse retailer beat estimates on the top and bottom lines for its latest quarter, earning an adjusted 82 cents per share for the second quarter, 17 cents above estimates. It also reported unexpected growth in same-store sales.
    Robinhood (HOOD) – Robinhood slumped 9.9% in the premarket after the company behind the popular trading app warned of a slowdown in trading activity during the current quarter. In its first report as a public company, Robinhood reported its quarterly revenue surged 131% compared with a year earlier, driven by a surge in cryptocurrency activity.

    Cisco Systems (CSCO) – The networking equipment and services company beat estimates by 2 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of 84 cents per share and revenue above estimates as well. Cisco did give a current-quarter profit forecast that fell shy of analyst forecasts, due to supply chain issues, and shares lost 1.4% in premarket trading.
    Bath & Body Works (BBWI) – The personal care products retailer’s stock added 2.7% in premarket trading, after beating Street forecasts in its first quarterly report since L Brands spun off Victoria’s Secret and renamed itself Bath & Body Works.
    Victoria’s Secret (VSCO) – The women’s apparel company’s shares plunged 8.6% in premarket action, after reporting quarterly sales that fell short of analyst expectations. Victoria’s Secret did see an improvement in profit margins as it kept tight inventories and ran fewer promotions.
    Nvidia (NVDA) – The graphics chipmaker came in 3 cents above estimates with adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.04 per share, while revenue also topped estimates. Nvidia shares gained 1.4% in the premarket after it forecast better-than-expected current-quarter revenue.
    Toyota Motor (TM) – The automaker’s stock dropped 3.1% in premarket trading, following a report by Japan’s Nikkei News service that Toyota would slash planned September production by 40% due to the global chip shortage.
    Wells Fargo (WFC) – The bank reversed a previous decision to discontinue revolving lines of credit, following complaints by customers. However, Wells Fargo will not offer those lines of credit to any new customers. Shares fell 1.7% in the premarket.
    Red Robin Gourmet Burgers (RRGB) – The restaurant chain’s shares tumbled 9.4% in premarket trading after posting an unexpected quarterly loss and lower-than-expected revenue. Red Robin said a worker shortage led to reduced operating hours at certain restaurants during the quarter.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Hard lesson for U.S. investors: Chinese companies don't make the rules in China

    Beijing’s regulatory crackdown on Chinese tech companies has revealed to American investors fundamental differences in the relationship each country’s government has with its corporations.
    The U.S. government “often acts as a servant to business interests,” while Chinese authorities may want businesses to sacrifice profits in order to meet national development goals, said Gabriel Wildau, senior vice president at consulting firm Teneo.
    Political risk for Chinese companies has increased significantly, according to Zeren Li, whose doctorate studies at Duke University focused on China’s version of the “revolving door” — the practice of people moving back and forth between government and the lobbying industry.

    Beijing office towers, including Alibaba’s, are illuminated with Chinese characters reading ‘blessing to China’ to celebrate National Day in October 2020.
    Zang Zhihao | Visual China Group | Getty Images

    BEIJING — American investors’ shock at an ongoing regulatory crackdown in China points to a fundamental difference between the two countries that many didn’t seem to grasp: When it comes to making the rules, corporations don’t have as much influence in China as they do in America.
    U.S. investors in Chinese companies have been caught off guard this summer by a slew of actions Beijing has taken against homegrown tech companies, including several whose shares trade in the United States. Among the surprises was an order that app stores remove Chinese ride-hailing app Didi, just days after its massive U.S. IPO. in late June.

    Authorities then suspended new user registrations for Chinese job search app Boss Zhipin and subsidiaries of Full Truck Alliance, which both listed in the U.S. in June. In late July, two U.S.-listed after-school tutoring companies plunged after a mandate telling the industry to restructure its businesses and remove foreign investment through a commonly used overseas listing structure.
    Behind the dramatic shift is emerging political rhetoric around “common prosperity,” which analysts say means companies will be scrutinized for their contributions to the broader population, rather than rapid creation of wealth for a few.
    Big corporations in both countries work to build political connections and influence government policy. But whereas the U.S. system is designed to let corporations influence the government, China’s system is designed to bring corporations in line with government goals. Recent government campaigns have focused on the protection of Chinese data, stemming monopolistic practices — even increasing the birth rate.

    In China, the party-state wants the business community to serve its development objectives and is willing to sacrifice corporate profits to make that happen.

    Gabriel Wildau
    senior vice president, Teneo

    “In the U.S., the government often acts as a servant to business interests, whether it’s tech or other sectors,” said Gabriel Wildau, senior vice president at Teneo, a firm that does consulting for corporate clients. “In China, the party-state wants the business community to serve its development objectives and is willing to sacrifice corporate profits to make that happen.”
    Political risk for Chinese companies has increased significantly, according to Zeren Li, whose doctorate studies at Duke University focused on China’s much more limited version of the “revolving door” — the American practice of regulators and lawmakers flipping back and forth between working for government and working for the lobbying industry.

    Chinese entrepreneurs found it easier to obtain subsidies, cheap land or other benefits from local governments in an earlier era, when China’s central government was judging those officials by their ability to deliver GDP growth, Li said.
    But since Chinese President Xi Jinping took office in 2013, local officials are measured more by how well they help advance Beijing’s goals: contributing to what it calls “common prosperity,” hitting pollution targets, and the like.
    “Now officials are reluctant to collude with local entrepreneurs,” said Li, who added that it’s more difficult for companies to do business as a result.

    Buying influence: How lobbying works in the U.S.

    In contrast, companies in the United States regularly hire former lawmakers or ex-regulators who have flipped over to the lobbying industry so they can get paid to help corporate clients shape government policy.
    Most frequently, lobbyists gain influence by buying it — they pump money into lawmakers’ re-election campaigns or drop funds into a lawmaker’s favorite project back in the congressional district.
    Foreign governments also buy influence over American lawmakers through lobbyists. Increasingly, lobbyists exercise influence over federal agencies.

    You could say the U.S. government to corporations is very much a two-way street.

    Isaac Stone Fish
    founder, Strategy Risks

    The total spending on lobbying in the United States skyrocketed from $1.56 billion in 2000 to $3.53 billion last year, according to Senate Office of Public Records data compiled by non-profit OpenSecrets.org.
    That is not how things work in China.
    “You could say the U.S. government to corporations is very much a two-way street,” said Isaac Stone Fish, founder of Strategy Risks, a New York-based firm that examines businesses’ exposure to China.
    “China to Chinese corporations is a 1.5-way street,” he said. “It’s not entirely just [a situation where] the Party tells companies what to do and companies listen. Companies offer feedback. They just have much less opportunity to push than U.S. companies do in America.”

    Chinese lobbying in the United States

    Amazon.com and Facebook are among the top 10 lobbying entities in the United States by spending, according to OpenSecrets.
    Chinese companies, including Jack Ma’s U.S.-listed e-commerce giant Alibaba and TikTok owner ByteDance, have spent far less in the United States, but they’ve increased their lobbying in recent years, according to OpenSecrets.
    Alibaba, the poster child for both China’s tech boom and the recent crackdown, spent a record $3.16 million last year on lobbyists, the data shows.
    It’s unclear how effective those efforts have been. A feature of American lobbying is that while spending is tracked openly, success is not.

    Read more about China from CNBC Pro

    “I’m not aware of many examples of Chinese companies lobbying successfully” in the United States, Wildau said. “Lobbying usually works better for obscure issues that don’t get much attention from politicians and the media. With an issue like US-China relations, where it’s front and center in Washington and everyone has an opinion, lobbying can’t overcome the big political forces at work.”
    “Chinese companies have had better luck in court,” Wildau said.
    Earlier this year, Chinese smartphone maker Xiaomi won a U.S. court’s approval to keep itself off a blacklist introduced by the Trump administration that linked companies to the Chinese military.
    In June of this year, President Joe Biden revoked and replaced three executive orders issued by then-President Donald Trump that sought to ban transactions with ByteDance’s TikTok and Tencent’s WeChat by American businesses.
    A spokesperson for Tencent acknowledged that the company hired three lobbying firms to deal with the proposed WeChat ban.
    According to OpenSecrets, Tencent Holdings and Tencent America paid a combined $910,000 to those three firms in 2020. Tencent was unable to immediately confirm that figure for CNBC.
    ByteDance paid a total of $2.6 million to lobbyists last year, according to OpenSecrets, up from $270,000 the year before.
    ByteDance did not respond to CNBC’s request for comment. Alibaba had no comment on its lobbying efforts.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Stock futures are flat after a market sell-off amid Fed's taper discussion

    Traders works at the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), August 4, 2021.
    Andrew Kelly | Reuters

    Stock futures were flat in overnight trading on Wednesday after Wall Street suffered a sell-off as meeting minutes showed the Federal Reserve started eyeing tapering before the year-end.
    Futures on the Dow Jones Industrial Average dipped just 20 points. S&P 500 futures and Nasdaq 100 futures were both little changed.

    Robinhood shares tumbled more than 7% in after-hours trading after its first earnings report as a public company. The trading app reported a net loss of $502 million, or a loss of $2.16 per share, within the range the company had guided. Its revenue more than doubled in the second quarter thanks to a massive surge in crypto trading.
    Nividia’s stock climbed more than 2% after the chip giant’s quarterly earnings and revenue beat Wall Street estimates amid strong graphics cards sales.
    The central bankers at their July meeting made plans to pull back the pace of their monthly bond purchases likely before the end of 2021, the minutes showed.
    “Looking ahead, most participants noted that, provided that the economy were to evolve broadly as they anticipated, they judged that it could be appropriate to start reducing the pace of asset purchases this year,” the minutes stated.

    Stock picks and investing trends from CNBC Pro:

    However, committee members broadly agreed that employment has not met the “substantial further progress” benchmark the Fed has set before it would consider raising rates.

    The 30-Dow stocks dropped 380 points, falling for a second day, while the S&P 500 slid more than 1% on Wednesday.
    “The minutes reflect a Fed that is prepared to accelerate its taper timeline to perhaps the next few months,” said Sean Bandazian, investment analyst at Cornerstone Wealth. “Both the Fed and market participants learned lessons from the Taper Tantrum. While we expect less of a surprise this time around there is still reason to believe we will see volatility throughout areas of the market with high sensitivity to interest rates.”
    Investors will monitor new jobless claims data due Thursday morning. Economists polled by Dow Jones expect a total of 365,000 in the week ended Aug. 14, slightly below the total of 375,000 in the prior week.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More

  • in

    Federal Reserve preparing for taper this year, July minutes show

    Minutes from the July Federal Reserve meeting, released Wednesday, indicate a willingness to start reducing asset purchases before the end of the year.
    Officials stressed that there is no link between tapering and potential interest rate hikes.
    Some members expressed concern over inflation, though opinions varied widely.

    Federal Reserve officials at their July gathering made plans to pull back the pace of their monthly bond purchases likely before the end of the year, meeting minutes released Wednesday indicated.
    However, the summary of the July 27-28 Federal Open Market Committee gathering indicated that the central bankers wanted to be clear that the reduction, or tapering, of assets was not a precursor to an imminent rate hike. The minutes noted that “some” members preferred to wait until early in 2022 to start tapering.

    “Looking ahead, most participants noted that, provided that the economy were to evolve broadly as they anticipated, they judged that it could be appropriate to start reducing the pace of asset purchases this year,” the minutes stated, adding that the economy had reached its goal on inflation and was “close to being satisfied” with the progress of job growth.
    However, committee members broadly agreed that employment has not met the “substantial further progress” benchmark the Fed has set before it would consider raising rates.
    Addressing interest rate concerns, committee members also stressed the need to “reaffirm the absence of any mechanical link between the timing of tapering and that of an eventual increase in the target range for the federal funds rate.”
    Fed officials have said repeatedly that tapering will happen first, with interest rate hikes unlikely until the process has been completed and the central bank isn’t growing its balance sheet anymore.
    Markets briefly rebounded after the minutes’ release but then turned negative again, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average down more than 150 points.

    The FOMC voted at the meeting to keep short-term interest rates anchored near zero while also expressing optimism about the pace of economic growth.
    While the message about tapering had been telegraphed, the Fed has a difficult communications job in making sure its strategy is clearly outlined. There are concerns in the market that the Fed might set its tapering pace on a strict course even if the economy sours.

    Stock picks and investing trends from CNBC Pro:

    The post-meeting statement painted a generally upbeat look on the economy, but the minutes noted some misgivings.
    Officials judged that “uncertainty was quite high” about the outlook, with the Covid-19 delta variant posing one challenge and inflation another. Some members noted “upside risks to inflation,” in particular that conditions Fed officials have labeled as transitory might last longer than anticipated.
    Those worried about inflation said tapering should start “relatively soon in light of the risk that the recent high inflation readings could prove to be more persistent than they had anticipated.”
    However, the minutes noted substantial differences of opinion, with some members even worried that inflation could go back into a downward drift if Covid cases keep rising and potentially dampening economic growth.
    While the market is expecting tapering soon, it still doesn’t see interest rate hikes coming at least for another year or so. Futures contracts tied to the fed’s benchmark interest rate are pricing in about a 50% chance of a rate hike in November 2022 and a 69% chance of an increase the next month.
    There also was talk about “elevated valuations” across asset classes, with some members worrying that easy Fed policy was raising prices and threatening financial stability.

    Become a smarter investor with CNBC Pro.Get stock picks, analyst calls, exclusive interviews and access to CNBC TV.Sign up to start a free trial today.

    WATCH LIVEWATCH IN THE APP More