Boeing Pushes Back 737 Max Return Again

anastasios pallis

The return of Boeing’s 737 Max has been delayed again. On Tuesday, the company said that it did not expect regulators to approve the jet to fly again until the middle of the year. American Airlines, United and Southwest had already taken Max flights off their schedules until June and this new timeline will further push back when the plane will be available for commercial flights.

Boeing shares dropped sharply after CNBC first reported the news on Tuesday afternoon before trading was temporarily halted.

The Max was involved in two accidents, in late 2018 and early 2019, that killed 346 people. It has been grounded worldwide since last March.

Boeing has encountered repeated setbacks in its efforts to return the plane to service, as the company and regulators continue to find flaws with the Max that go beyond an automated software system known as MCAS, which contributed to both accidents. Late last year, the company discovered a potential problem with wire bundles on the plane, which were placed so close together that an electrical short could cause a catastrophic accident.

In assessing the issue, the company discovered about a dozen places in the Max where wire bundles may need to be separated, including in the electrical bay under the cockpit, according to two people familiar with the situation who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. The company is still analyzing whether it needs to separate the wire bundles, the people said.

“Returning the Max safely to service is our No. 1 priority, and we are confident that will happen,” the company said in a statement. “We acknowledge and regret the continued difficulties that the grounding of the 737 Max has presented to our customers, our regulators, our suppliers and the flying public.”

The grounding of the Max is the worst crisis in the company’s 117-year history. It has cost the company billions of dollars, led to the ouster of its chief executive and disrupted the global aviation industry. Last month, Boeing announced that it would temporarily halt production of the Max.

Boeing is the largest manufacturing exporter in the United States. It employs more than 130,000 people, in all 50 states, in addition to a network of thousands of suppliers. The Max production shutdown led one of them, Spirit AeroSystems, to announce that it was laying off 2,800 employees.

The mass cancellation of flights caused by the grounding has led to steep losses for airlines, which have scrambled to fill key routes without a workhorse jet. Several airlines, which pay roughly $100 million each for the Max planes, have reached settlements with Boeing to compensate for those losses.

Boeing’s announcement on Tuesday was a departure from the company’s handling of the crisis under its previous chief executive, Dennis A. Muilenburg, who was prone to making overly optimistic projections about how quickly the plane would fly again. The delay through June reflects a new appreciation for the difficulties facing the company and the Federal Aviation Administration, which is under intense pressure to prove to lawmakers and the flying public that it has conducted a thorough review of the plane.

Boeing prepared the estimate on when the Max would be approved for its own financial planning in advance of the company’s report on quarterly earnings next week, said Gordon Johndroe, a company spokesman. It did not expect any layoffs as a result of the move. The company also wanted to publicize the new timeline before United, Southwest and American Airlines report quarterly earnings this week “to make sure they had our most recent estimate,” Mr. Johndroe said.

Airline stocks, which opened the day down on fears of the potential impact of a deadly viral outbreak in China, continued to slump. At roughly 3 p.m., United Airlines was down more than 5 percent, and American and Delta had dropped by about 4 percent.

Mr. Muilenburg’s replacement, David Calhoun, formally stepped into the chief executive role last week.

For its part, the F.A.A. said it was continuing with the process of getting the plane approved to fly again.

“We have set no time frame for when the work will be completed,” the agency said in a statement.

This article is from NYT – go to source

This Company Says It Will Fix Your Smile. It May Shush You if It Doesn’t.

To fix some crowding in her teeth, Taylor Weakley, an environmental scientist in Denver, ordered teeth aligners two years ago from SmileDirectClub, a start-up she had seen advertised on social media.

At $1,850, the products were cheaper than braces, and she did not have to visit an orthodontist to get them.

But when the aligners did not correct Ms. Weakley’s teeth as promised, she asked for a refund. After a lengthy back-and-forth, SmileDirectClub said she would get her money back if she signed a nondisclosure provision as part of a general release form. In September, Ms. Weakley, 25, agreed.

“Going forward, I can’t say anything,” she wrote in an email.

What Ms. Weakley experienced was part of SmileDirectClub’s methods to limit information about customers’ dissatisfaction with its products. Seven people who ordered teeth aligners from the company described to The New York Times how the products did not fix their teeth; four said the aligners had created new problems that required traditional dentistry to correct.

When some of the customers requested refunds, SmileDirectClub asked them to sign the confidentiality provision. The agreement prohibited the customers from telling anyone about the refund and required them to delete negative social media comments and reviews, according to a copy viewed by The Times. Two of the seven people The Times talked to had signed the agreement.

SmileDirectClub’s actions underline the risks of ordering products from young companies that are bringing start-up-style “disruption” to health. Many such start-ups have sprung up in recent years selling contact lenses, birth control, acne medicine and prescription drugs directly to consumers without their needing to visit a medical professional.

But even in this world, the tactics employed by SmileDirectClub, which went public last year, stand out.

In addition to linking confidentiality to refunds, the company sued the parent of the productivity site Lifehacker last year for defamation and libel over an article that outlined the risks of its products. It also sued several state dental boards, the bodies that regulate dentistry, after they took steps that would have made it harder for SmileDirectClub to operate.

“They’ve been almost like nervous bullies to critics,” said Arthur L. Caplan, a professor of medical ethics at the New York University School of Medicine.

Susan Greenspon Rammelt, SmileDirectClub’s chief legal officer, said in interviews that the vast majority of users were happy with the company. SmileDirectClub pointed to an average customer rating of “4.9 out of 5” on more than 100,000 reviews on its website. It said fewer than 5 percent of its customers had received a refund. It does not publish the success rate of its aligners.

Ms. Greenspon Rammelt added that SmileDirectClub’s legal moves were necessary to protect itself. “When we believe that there is an organized campaign to damage our reputation amongst consumers, dentists and/or investors, we will defend ourselves and our mission to democratize access to care every chance we get,” she said.

SmileDirectClub has negotiated some of the general release forms with those who have asked for refunds, she said.

SmileDirectClub, founded in Nashville in 2014 by a pair of childhood friends, Alex Fenkell and Jordan Katzman, is one of the largest of the new online health companies that sell directly to consumers. Mr. Katzman’s father, David, is the company’s chief executive, and his uncle, Steven, is the chief operating officer.

Mr. Fenkell and Jordan Katzman had earlier started a website for Illinois license plate renewals. David Katzman has invested in companies such as 1-800-Contacts and Lens Express.

Credit…Lucas Jackson/Reuters

To obtain SmileDirectClub’s teeth aligners, people make a mold of their teeth at home with a kit provided by the company or visit one of more than 300 “Smile Shop” retail locations to have their mouth and teeth scanned. The impressions and scans are reviewed by one of the 250 dentists and orthodontists in the company’s network, who generally do not interact directly with customers.

Potential users check a consent form saying they have had their teeth examined and X-rayed by a dentist, but are not asked to verify that. The form also states that they cannot sue the company for any reason. Then the aligners, which cost $1,850, or around a third of the cost of traditional braces, are sent to customers by mail.

SmileDirectClub offers refunds within 30 days after the aligners arrive. Anything after that is considered outside the company’s official refund policy and comes with the nondisclosure provision, which it said it began using in 2016.

Traditional orthodontists, who make money from in-person consultations, said that cutting dental professionals out of the process was dangerous and that regular visits were a key to avoiding new dental problems.

“Very few of my patients go from beginning to end in the way that I envisioned or planned,” said Brent E. Larson, a professor of orthodontics at the University of Minnesota and a practicing orthodontist.

SmileDirectClub grew quickly, fueled by $440 million in funding from venture capital and private equity investors. The company spent heavily on television and social media ads, promising to give people “a smile they love.” It also recruited influencers and celebrity spokesmen like the N.B.A. player Draymond Green.

In September, the company raised $1.29 billion in its initial public offering, which valued it at nearly $9 billion. SmileDirectClub, which is unprofitable, lost more than $74 million in 2018, as its sales nearly tripled to $423 million from a year earlier.

By then, SmileDirectClub had more than 750,000 customers, according to company filings. Around two-thirds of them used its financing plan, SmilePay, which charges an annual interest rate of 17 percent.

SmileDirectClub declined to say what percentage of applicants it turns down because they are not suitable for treatment; it rejects hundreds of cases a week, it said.

Rob Porter, 54, an executive recruiter in Frisco, Texas, said that he used SmileDirectClub’s aligners last year and that they had fixed his minor overbite. “Given the cost, I was not expecting perfection,” he said.

But others have differed. SmileDirectClub has been the subject of more than 1,670 Better Business Bureau complaints since 2014. In contrast, Align Technology, which makes the Invisalign teeth aligners that people get through orthodontists and that has been in business for more than two decades, has had five complaints.

SmileDirectClub said the “vast majority” of the Better Business Bureau complaints were related to shipping delays, with 3 percent linked to clinical concerns.

One unhappy user is Jessica Shorts, who turned to SmileDirectClub in 2017 to fix a slightly crooked tooth. Nine months into her treatment, she said, she experienced migraines and jaw pain. The aligners shifted her teeth so much, she said, that she could not properly chew and she developed an open bite, meaning her teeth no longer touched when she bit down.

SmileDirectClub declined her refund request, suggesting more treatment instead. The experience inspired her to go to dental school in Indiana, where she lives.

“If I knew then what I know now about teeth, I never ever would have done it,” said Ms. Shorts, 38, who eventually spent $6,000 on braces.

Some customers have flocked to Facebook groups to ask for advice on what happens if the aligners don’t fit or if they experience pain. They have also flooded SmileDirectClub’s Facebook page with complaints about the long wait for aligners or dissatisfaction with the results.

In September, some customers filed a class-action lawsuit against the company accusing it of false advertising and violating Food and Drug Administration regulations. All but two plaintiffs later withdrew from the suit because SmileDirectClub’s consent form required them to resolve disputes in arbitration.

As SmileDirectClub has grown, so have its regulatory fights. In recent years, Georgia’s dental board approved a new rule requiring a licensed dentist to be present when dental scans are taken. In Alabama, the state dental board interpreted existing regulations as requiring a dentist to be present.

Those rules might hurt SmileDirectClub, which was built on not needing dental professionals to be in the room. In 2018, the company sued the state boards in federal court. Parts of the company’s lawsuits have since been dismissed, though its claims that the boards violated federal antitrust laws are proceeding. Both cases are now at appellate courts.

In October, Gavin Newsom, California’s governor, signed legislation requiring dentists to review recent X-rays before prescribing orthodontic treatment. That same month, SmileDirectClub sued California’s dental board, accusing it of trying to “squelch the competitive threat.” The board has filed a motion to dismiss the suit.

Ms. Greenspon Rammelt, SmileDirectClub’s chief legal officer, said state dental boards were trying to stifle competition. “The fact of the matter is that you’ve got over 750,000 people who’ve been able to get access to this type of care and they’re really happy,” she said.

The regulatory issues have been punishing for the company. Its stock is down around 40 percent since it went public.

This month, SmileDirectClub said it would sell its aligners through dentist and orthodontist offices, as well as online. Ms. Greenspon Rammelt said the move was “a natural progression of our model” in response to demand from consumers and dentists.

For Gavin Graham, 40, a technology worker in Toronto, that was too late. He used SmileDirectClub’s aligners last year, but said the treatment had created an open bite that he previously did not have.

Mr. Graham said SmileDirectClub had offered him 25 percent of his cost back, including agreeing to confidentiality. He declined and is fighting for a full refund.

“Had I known that I would end treatment with an open bite, I would not have signed up for it,” he said.

This article is from NYT – go to source

France and U.S. Move Toward a Temporary Truce in Trade War

anastasios pallis

PARIS — France and the United States appeared to strike a temporary truce in a trans-Atlantic trade war, French officials said Tuesday, after President Emmanuel Macron agreed to suspend a tax on American technology giants in exchange for a postponement of threatened retaliatory tariffs on French goods by the Trump administration.

The apparent détente emerged after Mr. Macron and President Trump agreed in a phone call late Sunday to grant more time for negotiations over a global solution to taxing Amazon, Facebook and other digital companies.

“We will work together on a good agreement to avoid tariff escalation,” Mr. Macron said on Twitter Monday. “Excellent!” Mr. Trump replied on the social media platform.

A deal between the two countries would buy time for the development of an international framework to prevent large multinational companies and digital giants from avoiding taxes by shifting profits between countries.

Negotiations are continuing at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, but the slow pace of the talks has frustrated European officials — and especially the French government, which has insisted that digital businesses must pay “fair taxes.”

France’s finance minister, Bruno Le Maire, said Tuesday at a meeting in Brussels with European Union officials that Presidents Macron and Trump had “agreed to avoid all escalation between the U.S. and France on this digital tax issue.” But he cautioned that discussions on finding a compromise “remain difficult.”

White House officials declined on Tuesday to confirm the scope of the apparent deal. Late Monday, they released a statement that said the heads of state had “agreed it is important to complete successful negotiations on the digital services tax.”

Mr. Le Maire is scheduled to meet with Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Wednesday to discuss next steps.

Silicon Valley’s tech giants are a target for Europe. Last summer, the European Commission unveiled a proposal to significantly revamp how technology companies are taxed in the 28-nation European Union.

The attempt to prevent global companies from avoiding taxes has intensified a fight between the United States and Europe, as policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic spar over efforts to impose new taxes on foreign firms.

France drew special scorn from President Trump after officials announced plans to impose a 3 percent tax starting Jan. 1 on the revenues that companies earn from providing digital services to French users. The government estimated a €500 million (about $563 million) windfall.

Mr. Trump insisted that only the United States could tax American-based companies, and threatened to retaliate with American tariffs of up to 100 percent on French wine, cheese, handbags and more.

On Tuesday, Mr. Le Maire signaled that France would take a step back from the dispute by offering to postpone collection of the tax until the end of 2020, giving time for negotiators at the O.E.C.D., an intergovernmental economic organization with 36 member countries, to hammer out an agreement on a broader framework to tax digital firms.

The Trump administration has turned to tariffs as a source of leverage in trade negotiations and other transnational disagreements. The threat, or imposition, of painful levies has prompted China, Mexico, Canada and other countries to sign trade deals with the United States. Yet the Trump administration has been slow to negotiate new trade terms with Europe.

The digital tax is one of the thorniest issues around. The O.E.C.D.’s original proposal, released late last year, would allow countries to tax large multinationals even if they did not operate inside their borders. It suggests companies should pay taxes largely based on where their sales occur, and on which profits are subject to taxation.

“In a digital age, the allocation of taxing rights can no longer be exclusively circumscribed by reference to physical presence,” the proposal states.

Mr. Le Maire has been especially vocal about taxing Facebook and other big digital players, saying governments must stand up to tech behemoths that have become the equivalent of sovereign states and act with virtual impunity, maneuvering to keep their tax bills low across the world.

In a recent speech, he noted that 15 countries will have their own national tax on digital giants by June, including Italy and Austria. The Czech Republic, Britain, Turkey, Israel and India are also making plans.

“Digital taxes are going to happen one way or another. We prefer an international solution. But it’s up to the U.S. to decide,” he said.

Jim Tankersley contributed reporting from Washington, D.C.

This article is from NYT – go to source

Chinese City Uses Facial Recognition to Shame Pajama Wearers

anastasios pallis

BEIJING — When officials in an eastern Chinese city were told to root out “uncivilized behavior,” they were given a powerful tool to carry out their mission: facial recognition software.

Among their top targets? People wearing pajamas in public.

On Monday, the urban management department of Suzhou, a city of six million people in Anhui Province, sparked outrage online when it published surveillance photos taken by street cameras of seven local residents wearing pajamas in public along with parts of their names, government identification numbers and the locations where their “uncivilized behavior” had taken place.

City officials quickly apologized, but not before stirring nationwide ire over the use of a state-of-the-art digital tool to stamp out a harmless and relatively commonplace practice — an unusual note of resistance in a country where the instruments of digital totalitarianism have spread largely unchecked.

On social media, the Suzhou department publicly called out, among others, a Ms. Dong, a young woman in a plush pink robe, matching pants and orange pointy flats, walking on a street, and a Mr. Niu, who was singled out for donning a black and white checkered full pajama suit in a mall.

“Uncivilized behavior refers to when people behave and act in ways that violate public order because they lack public morals,” read a post on WeChat, a common social messaging app, which has since been deleted.

“Many people think that this is a small problem and not a big deal,” the post said. “Others believe public places are truly ‘public,’ where there is no blame, no supervision and no public pressure.”

“This has brought about a kind of complacent, undisciplined mind set,” it concluded.

The use of facial recognition software by law enforcement authorities remains a hotly debated topic worldwide and has even been banned in some major American cities.

Not so in China. In just a few years, use of the software has become widespread. Police have used it to create a powerful surveillance dragnet and profile racial minorities, giving rise to fears that China represents a future in which governments rule via digital authoritarianism.

The technology is also used to solve more mundane problems. Local authorities use it to catch tissue bandits at public toilets. People use it to board planes and order fried chicken. It is even used on pigs and pandas.

In a country where enthusiasm for new digital tools often outpaces their capabilities, China’s facial recognition capabilities are far from clear. Still, many Chinese people have embraced the technology.

Naming and shaming pajama wearers in Suzhou may have been a step too far. Though China lacks an independent court system or other means to challenge rising powers to track people, an increasing number of citizens are raising privacy concerns, though often focused more on internet companies than the government.

“Facial recognition technology should be used with caution,” wrote a user named Xiu Li De Xiao Wo on Sina Weibo, a popular microblogging platform. “They should really be restricting access.”

Some users on the platform said they disagreed with the government’s decision to release private information online. Others simply wanted to know what was so wrong with wearing pajamas in public.

“When celebrities wear pajamas to an event, they are called fashionable,” wrote a user named Cai Shen Jie. “But when ordinary people wear pajamas to walk around on the streets, they are called uncivilized.”

Public pajama wearing is common in China, particularly among older women who tend toward bold colors and floral or cartoon patterns. It is also a popular sartorial practice in the winter in southern China where, unlike in the north, most homes do not have centralized heating.

The origin of the practice is widely debated, though virtually everybody agrees on one point: Pajamas are extremely comfortable.

Shanghai especially has been an epicenter of pajama couture. In 2009, local authorities tried to ban the practice ahead of the World Expo in 2010. Signs reading “pajamas don’t go out of the door; be a civilized resident for the Expo” were posted around the city while “pajama policemen” were sent around to patrol neighborhoods.

Still, the pajamas-in-public tradition persisted.

Hung Huang, a Beijing-based writer and proud pajama-wearing fashion blogger, said the government had no business interfering in the fashion choices of the Chinese public.

“In China, when these things happen, it is when very high technology gets into the hands of very low-level bureaucrats, and by low level I mean low level of intelligence,” said Ms. Hung.

“The decision was probably made by somebody who has no understanding of international fashion and of how to use technology to benefit the people rather than to just control them,” she added. “This should be an alarm for all Chinese tech developers and Chinese government policymakers.”

The Suzhou ban on pajamas in public is not the first time China has sought to crack down on what they deem uncivilized behavior. Chinese authorities have imposed fines for public spitting and, more recently, gone after the “Beijing bikini” — or the practice of men rolling up their shirts and baring their bellies in the summer.

Public shaming is a common tactic. In theaters, laser pointers are used to shame audience members who play on their phones during shows. And in Shanghai, facial recognition systems have been installed at some crosswalks to single out jaywalkers.

Following the online uproar on Monday, urban management officials in Suzhou quickly took down the original post and issued an apology. According to the Global Times newspaper, a tabloid controlled by the Communist Party, the city had been competing for the title of “National Civilized City,” a designation granted by the government, which is why it had banned residents from wearing pajamas in public.

“We sincerely apologize,” said the Suzhou department in a statement posted on its official WeChat. “The way we released the information and the content of the article were not handled properly.”

Zoe Mou contributed research.

This article is from NYT – go to source

Detroit’s Revival Is Anchored in Its Train Station

DETROIT — Detroit’s former main train station, designed in the Beaux-Arts style by the same architects who created Grand Central Terminal in New York, has tall columns and vaulted ceilings that hint at its past glory.

Yet much of the station is now crumbling, covered in rainbow graffiti and weathered by decades of rain and snow that seeped in through the deteriorating roof.

“Michigan Central Station has long been a symbol of Detroit’s vibrancy, and then it became an international symbol of decline,” said Detroit’s mayor, Mike Duggan.

Now the long-vacant station is getting a new life, thanks to the Ford Motor Company, which will transform the depot as well as an adjacent book depository, brass factory and hosiery factory into a 1.2 million-square-foot transportation innovation district.

The new development will house Ford’s autonomous vehicle division, among other units. The automaker also plans to lease space to companies working on mobility and transportation projects, such as smart vehicles, infrastructure and parking.

The innovation hub will also have shops, restaurants, art and performance spaces as well as a boutique hotel on the top floors of the 15-story tower rising above the station.

Credit…Alexandre Da Veiga for The New York Times

Ford’s transformation of Michigan Central Station is part of the bigger resurgence of Detroit, a story mirrored in cities, like Pittsburgh and Cleveland, that are trying to reinvent themselves to attract new jobs and residents. These Rust Belt cities, formerly known for their steel production, have struggled since the 1950s as jobs disappeared and residents left en masse.

Many of these turnarounds start in city cores, and transformation is indeed most evident in Detroit’s downtown, too. In early 2019, the luxury retailer Shinola opened its first hotel there, a 129-room boutique resort that has the feel of a private London club with fireplaces and reading nooks.

The hotel’s walls have a palette of cream, camel and “Shinola blue,” a shade of navy blue that was derived from a fleck of paint found in a former Singer sewing machine factory, one of the five downtown buildings Shinola occupies.

Behind the hotel is a cobblestone alley lined with shops run by local female entrepreneurs, a beer hall and a Detroit-style fried chicken joint. This multiuse development was a joint project between Shinola and the real estate firm Bedrock, founded by the Detroit billionaire Dan Gilbert, whose firm has acquired and developed more than 100 properties in Detroit and Cleveland since 2011.

Across the street from the Shinola Hotel is another Bedrock project, a $1 billion skyscraper being built on the site of the former Hudson’s department store that will house a hotel, offices, shops and high-end residences when it opens in 2023.

The transformation of the train station has helped attract other investment throughout Detroit, Mr. Duggan said: “Ford has created momentum for other mega projects.”

In February, Fiat Chrysler announced a $4.5 billion investment in five Michigan plants, creating about 6,500 jobs in Michigan. Waymo, the self-driving technology company owned by Alphabet, the parent company of Google, opened its first factory in Detroit in late 2019.

Ford has a long history in Motor City, thanks to its Model T, the first affordable mass-produced automobile, which was made at the company’s Piquette Avenue Plant, built in 1904.

Train travel, however, was king in the early 1900s. Michigan Central Station opened in 1913, replacing a station that had burned down. In the station’s heyday in the 1940s, more than 4,000 passengers passed through each day.

After World War II, car travel surpassed train travel, and the city faltered over the decades for political and economic reasons, its plight exacerbated by race riots in 1967. The last trains, operated by Amtrak, departed Michigan Central Station in 1988, after which the station closed and fell into disrepair.

The city hit a low point in 2013 when, billions of dollars in debt, it declared bankruptcy, the largest by a municipality in the United States.

In 2018, Ford announced it would acquire Michigan Central Station and several nearby properties, investing $740 million in the project. Ford began by winterizing, drying out and securing the 640,000-square-foot train station. Now, construction workers are repairing the steel structure and replacing damaged terra cotta, limestone and brick that make up the station’s exterior.

Credit…Alexandre Da Veiga for The New York Times
Credit…Alexandre Da Veiga for The New York Times

Inside, much work is being done on the waiting room, which was modeled on a Roman bathhouse. About 22,000 square feet of Guastavino clay tiles covering three self-supporting arches are being repaired. Five thousand replica tiles have been ordered from a company in Buffalo that specializes in the tiles and has supplied them for projects such as the Grand Central Oyster Bar.

Ford is also hoping to add co-working spaces and university resources to help foster a start-up culture.

The project is modeled after Kendall Square, the neighborhood in Cambridge, Mass., known for its cluster of technology companies and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said Paula Carethers, a project manager at Ford.

“We want to build a collaborative ecosystem of companies, educators, investors and innovators,” she said.

The Ford team has studied closely what has worked in other cities. For instance, one section of the train station is elevated and adjacent to former rail lines.

“For this part, we have looked at images from the High Line in New York for inspiration,” Ms. Carethers said, referring to the elevated park on the West Side of Manhattan. An elevated skating rink was one idea, she said.

Ford’s project is helping revitalize Corktown, Detroit’s oldest neighborhood, created by Irish immigrants about one mile west of downtown. But connecting the various pockets of development in Detroit remains a challenge.

“Most people don’t realize that Detroit is a very sprawling city,” said Thomas Weidenbach, a former adjunct lecturer of American history and political science at the University of Michigan’s Dearborn Campus. Mr. Weidenbach’s grandparents were born in Detroit at the turn of the 20th century and raised their family here until the 1970s. “The new prosperity is still uneven,” he said.

The city’s nearly three-year-old streetcar, called the QLine (after Mr. Gilbert’s mortgage lending company, Quicken Loans), is a first effort to better connect the downtown with various neighborhoods north of it.

Ensuring the revitalization reaches all residents has been a focus for Mr. Duggan, the mayor. While Detroit’s unemployment rate fell from more than 20 percent in 2010 to 3.4 percent in November, it is still higher among African-Americans, who make up nearly 80 percent of the city. Detroit also continues to have one of the highest poverty rates in the country, at 33.4 percent, though that number is down from 39.8 percent in 2015, according to the Census Bureau.

The growing number of visitors and their influx of cash are helping Detroit rebound. Fourteen million visitors came to the area in 2013, according to the Detroit Metro Convention and Visitors Bureau, a number that jumped to 19 million in 2019. Detroit has four major-league sports teams, all of which play in the downtown area. There are several arts venues in the downtown district, such as the Detroit Opera House and the Fox Theater, a performing arts center that opened as a movie theater in 1928.

Aaron K. Foley, who was Detroit’s “chief storyteller” from 2017 to 2019, said he was “cautiously optimistic” about the city’s progress. His role was created by the mayor as an attempt to diversify the way Detroit was portrayed.

“I was tired of people arriving in Detroit and beelining to take photos of the empty buildings and empty train station,” Mr. Foley said. “Detroiters have a name for that: ‘poverty porn.’”

Mr. Foley helped start the Neighborhoods website that showcases local artists, small-business owners, doctors and nonprofit groups. “Our aim is to add the missing parts of Detroit’s narrative that the national media misses,” he said.

Still, Mr. Foley cautions that gentrification comes with new challenges.

“We have seen what happened in cities like Brooklyn and San Francisco, where longtime residents can no longer afford to live in the cities they call home.”

This article is from NYT – go to source

DealBook: Davos Warms to Trump’s Results (if Not Him Personally)

anastasios pallis

Good morning from Davos. We’re bringing you the latest from here all week. One tidbit: Bill Gates, who has attended for 30 years, canceled his plans to come this year. (Was this email forwarded to you? Sign up here.)

As the 50th annual World Economic Forum — the conclave of global business and political leaders — begins today in Davos, Switzerland, Andrew writes in his latest column that the assembly has warmed to President Trump, at least economically.

• Mr. Trump’s policies are the opposite of Davos doctrine, advocating trade wars and a fragmenting of the global economy.

• But “to the surprise of many Davos regulars, the economic results have yet to prove as disastrous as they expected — and, at least in the short term, have seemingly proven to be quite positive,” Andrew writes.

• Maybe it shouldn’t be surprising, the corporate leadership expert Jeff Sonnenfeld tells Andrew: “The Davos crowd are well-respected followers of fashion and love whomever is in power.”

• But they don’t like him personally, says the Trump-friend-turned-foe Anthony Scaramucci: “The unspeakable truth is that C.E.O.s and their staff are horrified.”

Mr. Trump took a victory lap in his speech at the Forum this morning:

• “Today I’m proud to say the U.S. is in the midst of an economic boom the likes of which the world has never seen before.”

• Of China, he said, “Under my leadership, America confronted the problem head on.” He also defended his trade war, saying, “Our relationship with China right now has probably never been better.”

• And he criticized the Fed’s unwillingness to cut U.S. interest rates to his liking.

But much of this year’s event focuses on issues that Mr. Trump doesn’t like, including:

Climate change, which will almost certainly be a big topic, according to Stanley Reed of the NYT (especially since Greta Thunberg is set to speak). Mr. Trump himself said the U.S. would join a major tree-planting initiative, but urged a rejection of “the perennial prophets of doom.”

Falling economic growth, partly prompted by his trade wars, according to a new study by PwC.

More: The forum’s founder, Klaus Schwab, tells David Gelles of the NYT that the event is still relevant today. And here’s the full list of this year’s attendees.


Today’s DealBook Briefing was written by Andrew Ross Sorkin in Davos and Michael J. de la Merced in London.


To accompany the Davos gathering this week, the World Economic Forum has tallied up what it says is the financial incentive for countries to shrink their wealth gaps.

The report estimates that China could gain an additional $1 trillion in G.D.P. growth by 2030 if its social inequality is solved over the next decade, while the U.S. could gain $866.7 billion.

If social inequality remains a problem, “we will continue to see discontent, with far-reaching consequences for economic growth, the green transition, trade and geopolitics,” said Saadia Zahidi, a World Economic Forum managing director.

Provisions in the first phase of the trade deal between China and the U.S. help American tech companies like Micron, a major semiconductor maker. But the pact also causes them a lot of collateral damage, according to Ana Swanson and Cecilia Kang of the NYT.

• “The deal contains provisions meant to protect American technology and trade secrets and allow companies to challenge China on accusations of theft,” Ms. Swanson and Ms. Kang write.

• It could help Micron, which accused a Chinese rival of stealing its technology after rebuffing a takeover bid in 2015.

• But the fight that led to the trade deal prompted China to redouble efforts to produce its own advanced tech in areas like semiconductors, driverless cars and artificial intelligence.

• “It’s like China woke up and said, ‘We’ve relied too much on the United States,’” Robert Atkinson of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, an industry think tank, told the NYT.

• The Trump administration is increasingly putting much of the lucrative Chinese market off limits for American tech companies.

The venture capital industry helped create Apple, Google, Intel and Uber. But Nathan Heller of The New Yorker asks whether the benefits are worth the downsides — citing the rises and catastrophic falls of WeWork and other start-ups.

“A thriving society needs moon shots, and, in the absence of a literal space race, only venture capitalists have the mandate to throw cash at an improbable success,” Mr. Heller writes.

But the financiers earn a lot from fees regardless of whether the start-ups they invest in thrive, he adds. “If you’re a venture capitalist, you know that you will not be the one to go broke.”

And the industry may have too much money, leading to bad decisions and excesses: “Venture capital, once a small and chancy field, is now a profit machine for its managers, with all that entails. Poorly designed for its scale, rote and entrenched at the higher echelons, it has become vulnerable to a particular sort of change: disruption by a bright, daring idea.”

With the impeachment trial kicking off in earnest in the Senate today, Anita Kumar of Politico takes a look at how President Trump has combined his personal business with the job of running the government’s executive branch.

• “A Chinese state-owned company was awarded a multimillion contract to help develop a Trump golf course in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, amid a U.S.-China trade war,” Ms. Kumar writes.

• “T-Mobile executives stayed at Trump’s Washington hotel while seeking a green light from the federal government for a merger.”

• “Even after Congress launched an investigation into his businesses, the Trump administration authorized foreign governments to rent condos in Trump World Tower in New York.”

• “Trump has promoted his properties dozens of times while in office.”

Mr. Trump’s decision not to divest his real estate business “has created a vast web of potential conflicts of interest, accusations about his policies being driven by his business interests and even possible violations of the law, according to documents and interviews,” Ms. Kumar adds.

Democratic lawmakers say they will continue investigating potential conflicts of interest, though they didn’t include them in the two articles of impeachment now under consideration in the Senate.

Britain is set to leave the E.U. in a little over two weeks. Some fear that could disproportionately affect women, Alisha Haridasani Gupta of the NYT reports.

• In 2018, women made up a majority of Britain’s part-time or temporary workers, which would probably be the first kinds of jobs to go in the predicted economic slowdown.

• Social protections and workplace policies like parental leave and sexual harassment regulations have “a foundation” in E.U. law, according to Roberta Guerrina, a professor at Bristol University in England who specializes in gender politics.

• “Many of Britain’s standards and protections for women that were once guaranteed by the E.U. can theoretically be repealed,” Ms. Gupta writes.

• The regulations’ fate depends on whether Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s government keeps the country aligned with some European rules as it seeks to diverge from others.


• Uber agreed to sell its Uber Eats business in India to a local rival, Zomato, as it continues to exit unprofitable overseas operations. (NYT)

• Antitrust regulators are reportedly still investigating Altria’s $12.8 billion investment in the vaping company Juul. (WSJ)

• JPMorgan Chase is creating a division to invest in development projects in emerging markets. (CNBC)

• Twenty top performing hedge funds made $59.3 billion in investment profits last year, their biggest annual gain in at least a decade. (FT)

Politics and policy

• France and the U.S. called off a potential trade war after Paris agreed to freeze plans to tax American internet giants. (WSJ)

• Conservative states are lining up for federal funds to deal with natural disasters — but they’re careful not to use the term climate change. (NYT)

• The plastic-bag industry is winning the fight over bans of single-use plastic shopping bags in the U.S. (Politico)

• Mike Bloomberg’s huge spending on ads for his presidential run are raising rates for political campaigns across the country. (Politico)


• Privacy advocates are worried about Clearview, a facial recognition start-up that has scraped the internet — and that claims to be able to identify almost anyone. Separately, Alphabet’s C.E.O., Sundar Pichai, has called on regulators to clamp down on facial recognition technology. (NYT, FT)

• The trial over whether Canada should extradite Meng Wanzhou, the C.F.O. of Huawei, to the U.S. has begun. (NYT)

• Instagram’s C.E.O., Adam Mosseri, is trying to make the social network a safer place. (NYT)

Best of the rest

• American consulting firms like Boston Consulting Group and McKinsey have been accused of helping Africa’s richest woman loot her native Angola and stash that money abroad. (NYT)

• The mysterious coronavirus behind a growing epidemic in China now appears to be spreading from humans to humans. (NYT)

• One of Boeing’s top customers has urged the company to rename the 737 Max. (Bloomberg)

Thanks for reading! We’ll see you tomorrow.

We’d love your feedback. Please email thoughts and suggestions to

This article is from NYT – go to source

Women’s Gains in the Work Force Conceal a Problem

anastasios pallis

American women have just achieved a significant milestone: They hold more payroll jobs than men. But this isn’t entirely good news for workers, whether they’re men or women.

The difference is small, but it reflects the fact that women have been doing better in the labor market compared with men. One big reason is that the occupations that are shrinking tend to be male-dominated, like manufacturing, while those that are growing remain female-dominated, like health care and education. That puts men at a disadvantage in today’s economy — but it also ensures that the female-dominated jobs remain devalued and underpaid.

“Female-dominated jobs in the working class are just not comparable to men’s jobs,” said Janette Dill, a sociologist at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. “So yes, it’s great to see women participating at such a high level in the labor market, but it also really means continuing challenges for working-class families, because these jobs just don’t replace manufacturing jobs in terms of job quality and wages.”

Women now hold 50.04 percent of payroll jobs (which excludes people who work on farms or in households or are self-employed), according to the Labor Department’s jobs report this month. (Men are still a larger share of the labor force than women, a number that is calculated differently — it includes people who don’t have jobs but are looking for work; farm and household workers; and self-employed people.)

The only other time women have held more jobs was in mid-2010, when men were hit particularly hard by the recession and the decline in construction and manufacturing jobs. This time, the economy is thriving — but women seem better able to take advantage of it.

Reasons for the decline in work for less educated men are many. They include the rise of automation; the waning power of unions; rising incarceration rates; the factories that move overseas; and hurdles to switching jobs like having to move away or return to school. But gender norms are a major and often overlooked factor. However much politicians talk about manufacturing jobs, the United States economy has become service-dominated — and jobs helping people have typically been done by women, while jobs making things have been associated with men.

Sectors that gained jobs

Sector Job change,
Nov.-Dec. 2019
Pct. women
Retail +41,200 48%
Hospitality +40,000 52%
Health care +28,100 78%
Construction +20,000 10%
Business services +10,000 42%
Child care and social services +5,800 84%
Education +1,300 68%

Sectors that lost jobs

Sector Job change,
Nov.-Dec. 2019
Pct. women
Mining -7,600 14%
Transport and warehousing -10,400 24%
Manufacturing -12,000 29%
Pct. women

Excluding farm workers and self-employed people.

Source: United States Bureau of Labor Statistics

Women’s success in the labor market has been driven by their educational gains, and by black and Hispanic women. While women in large numbers have moved into male-dominated jobs, especially professional ones, the reverse isn’t true. Women are 84 percent of social services workers and 78 percent of health care workers. Differences in the jobs that men and women choose are now the single largest cause of the gender pay gap, accounting for more than half of it, research by the economists Francine Blau and Lawrence Kahn has found.

Sex segregation is much more prevalent in working-class jobs than in white-collar ones. But even the more prestigious female-dominated jobs, like nurse practitioner or high school teacher, have failed to attract many men. Yet when men do so-called pink-collar jobs, they tend to have more job security and wage growth over time than they would have in blue-collar jobs, research has found.

One reason men are reluctant to take pink-collar jobs is that over all, they pay less than male-dominated ones. When women enter fields in greater numbers, pay declines, the sociologist Paula England and colleagues have found. Jobs that involve caregiving, like health aide or preschool teacher, are particularly low-paying, even after controlling for the high share of female workers, other work by Ms. England has found.

Most workers have in mind the lowest wage they’re willing to accept in a new job, economists say, and men who have left higher-paying manufacturing and construction jobs might be unwilling to take a large pay cut.

“The wages that nursing assistants and home health aides get, and child care workers and teachers get, communicate to society that these jobs are not valued compared to male-dominated jobs, so of course men don’t want to do that,” Ms. Dill said.

Another thing holding men back from service jobs is norms about masculinity. The markers of masculinity include earning a good income and distancing oneself from feminine things, research has shown. Taking a job traditionally done by women threatens both, said Jill Yavorsky, a sociologist at the University of North Carolina, Charlotte.

A new experiment found that when unemployed men looked at job postings, they were willing to take a job that employed mostly women. But if it called for stereotypically female traits like interpersonal skills or care work, they were not, found Ms. Dill, Ms. Yavorsky and Enrica Ruggs at the University of Memphis. Moreover, a study published in December by Ms. Yavorsky found that men, across education levels and job types, were less likely to be called back by employers for interviews when they applied for traditionally female roles.

Also, social scientists have observed that women seem to show more flexibility than men in training for and moving to new industries. Women who worked in manufacturing were hit harder than men during the recession, but they were also more likely than men to move into high-skill jobs and health care jobs.

The men who have gone into pink-collar work have viewed these jobs as a last resort after facing disadvantages in the labor market, researchers have found. They are more likely to be black or Hispanic and to have had the least education and the lowest earnings. Even though pink-collar jobs pay less over all, the men who take them often earn more than they had in jobs like manual labor, found a paper published this month by Ms. Dill and Ms. Yavorsky, using census data from 2004 to 2013.

When men take female-dominated jobs, they’re more likely than not to use them as a stopgap, and return to a male-dominated job as soon as they can, found Margarita Torre Fernández, a sociologist at the University Carlos III of Madrid. Using data from the census and the National Longitudinal Study of Youth from 1979 to 2006, she found this happened in nearly every female-dominated occupation, particularly elementary school teaching, health technology and social work.

“Some men would rather endure unemployment than accept a relatively high-paying women’s job and suffer the potential social stigma,” she wrote.

Policymakers and recruiters have discussed various ways to address this issue, like bringing back manufacturing jobs, or emphasizing the masculine qualities of service jobs. But there’s another solution, researchers say: improving the quality of pink-collar jobs, in terms of wages, stability, benefits and hours. That could both attract men to these jobs and also benefit women.

“There are immense economic benefits to these jobs,” Ms. Yavorsky said. “Inevitably, if they were more highly valued in our society, I think men would be more likely to enter them, and women would very much benefit from the higher wages.”

Improving the quality of pink-collar, working-class jobs has the potential to close gender gaps — and also to shrink the widening gaps between the highest and lowest earners, both women and men.

This article is from NYT – go to source

Trump to Focus on Economy at Davos, Seeking a Counter to Impeachment

anastasios pallis

DAVOS, Switzerland — Before the Senate impeachment trial begins in earnest on Tuesday, President Trump was more than 4,000 miles away from Washington, in this glitzy Alpine village, planning to drive a competing narrative — one that has nothing to do with pressure on Ukraine, abuse of power or obstruction of Congress.

In his first appearance on the international stage since Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent articles of impeachment to the Senate, before the senators who will decide his fate even arrive at the Capitol building, Mr. Trump was scheduled to address the World Economic Forum, focusing on the success of the global economy under his leadership.

Mr. Trump, aides said, planned to highlight the first phase of his trade deal with China and another with Mexico and Canada, accomplishments he thinks are being overshadowed by a focus on an impeachment trial he is trying to dismiss as a “hoax.” And the audience was expected to be friendly — to his face, at least — having warmed to him over the past two years because they have benefited from his policies.

“Lev Parnas is not a topic of conversation at Davos,” said Ian Bremmer, president and founder of Eurasia Group, a political research and consulting firm.

Mr. Parnas, an associate of Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, has been on a nonstop media tour over the past week, asserting that Mr. Trump was fully aware of the pressure campaign to force Ukraine to investigate Mr. Trump’s political rivals. Democrats have not ruled out trying to call him as a witness.

The open question, as it is with all of Mr. Trump’s prewritten addresses, was how much he would stray from the prepared remarks and the escape of the world stage, and vent his grievances about his legal and political predicament at home. Also an unknown: whether he would try to stage a stunt and meet with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, who is also attending the international forum, even though officials said the optics of such a meeting would be unhelpful to Mr. Trump.

In Davos, however, Mr. Trump may find the right audience for support if he sticks with efforts to counter the impeachment narrative at home. There was less anxiety rippling through the one percent set about him on Tuesday than there had been when he first arrived at the annual forum two years ago, fresh off an “America First” campaign filled with promises to rip up international agreements and alliances.

This time, there’s more concern about some of the progressive Democrats running to replace him. Through regulatory rollbacks, tax cuts, the success of the global economy, the president who ran as a populist has benefited many of the chief executives gathered here, even those who have taken public positions against some of his policies.

“There are lot of masters of the universe who think he may not be their cup of tea, but he’s been a Godsend,” Mr. Bremmer added. “It’s interesting to hear Mike Bloomberg saying he would fund Bernie Sanders’s campaign if he won the nomination. Very few people here would say that.”

Mr. Bloomberg, the billionaire former mayor of New York City, who is running for president, has said he is open to spending $1 billion to defeat Mr. Trump, whoever emerges as the Democratic nominee.

During Mr. Trump’s colorful career in New York real estate, entertainment and business, he never cracked the Davos set, whose Fortune 500 chief executives dismissed him as something of a gaudy sideshow.

But the balance of power has shifted. And with progressives like Mr. Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts emerging as top-tier candidates in the Democratic primary, a crowd that once rejected Mr. Trump is now more willing to consider him one of their own.

Mr. Trump has happily embraced them back. When he signed an agreement at the White House for the United States-China trade deal, for instance, Mr. Trump credited himself with helping big banks and business.

“I made a lot of bankers look very good,” he said, and told attendees to send his regards to Jamie Dimon, chief executive of JPMorgan Chase.

There are however, still major points of contention ahead during the love-to-hate-it conference for Mr. Trump, who plans to spend almost two days here in bilateral meetings with leaders of Iraq, Pakistan and the Kurdish regional government, as well as sitdowns with corporate chieftains. (The forum is also Mr. Trump’s first trip abroad since the drone attack that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, Iran’s most important military official.)

Global warming and climate change top the agenda items for the conference. A star speaker on Tuesday, alongside Mr. Trump, is the 16-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg, who has said she wouldn’t “waste her time” speaking to Mr. Trump about climate change.

Mr. Trump withdrew from the Paris Climate Accord, and his administration has expanded the use of coal, downplayed concerns about climate change and rolled back environmental protections.

The president mocked Ms. Thunberg, who has been diagnosed with Asperger’s syndrome, a condition on the autism spectrum, after she was chosen as Time magazine’s Person of the Year. “So ridiculous,” Mr. Trump tweeted. “Greta must work on her anger management problem, then go to a good old fashioned movie with a friend! Chill Greta, Chill!”

Attendees at the conference said they fully expected Mr. Trump to take another whack at her while she was here.

In 2018, Mr. Trump was the first sitting president to attend the forum since President Bill Clinton did so in 2000. Last year, he abruptly canceled his plans to attend, citing a partial government shutdown.

This year, the administration delegation includes Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, as well as Robert Lighthizer, the trade representative. Other members of the administration who were expected to attend the forum were Wilbur Ross, the commerce secretary; Elaine Chao, the transportation secretary, and Eugene Scalia, the labor secretary.

Mr. Trump was also expected to be joined in Davos by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his daughter Ivanka Trump, both senior White House advisers.

This article is from NYT – go to source

Australian Coal Company Says Bush-Fire Smoke Is Slowing Production

anastasios pallis

SYDNEY, Australia — Australia’s biggest mining company, BHP, announced on Tuesday that coal output was down at one of its large mines. The reason? Smoke from the country’s ferocious wildfires — a crisis fed by climate change, which is caused in no small part by the burning of coal.

The reduced air quality in New South Wales, the country’s most populous state, has helped slow the company’s production of electricity-generating coal by 11 percent there, BHP said in a review of its midyear financial results.

“We are monitoring the situation, and if air quality continues to deteriorate, then operations could be constrained further in the second half of the year,” said the company, which ends its fiscal year on June 30.

The irony was not lost on many in Australia.

The country, which just endured its hottest and driest year on record, has been dealing for months with bush fires that have killed at least 29 people, ravaged tens of millions of acres, and left residents in its largest cities wheezing from the most polluted air in the world.

“You Can’t Make This Stuff Up!” Terry Serio, an actor and musician, said on Twitter.

“I did roll my eyes,” Bill Hare, chief executive of Climate Analytics, a policy institute, said in an interview.

The smoke, Dr. Hare said, was most likely a minor inconvenience in the supply chain for BHP, the globe’s biggest mining company. But, he added, it served as a “wake-up call” to BHP that the world needs to wean itself off coal to avert the most damaging effects of climate change.

“You can see the mood is changing in Australia,” Dr. Hare said. “Sooner or later, the companies are going to run out of social license.”

A BHP spokesman said that smoke from the bush fires had reduced visibility and made equipment harder to operate at the Mount Arthur coal site 150 miles north of Sydney.

In addition, some employees have taken leave from work to protect their properties from fires or to serve as volunteer firefighters.

While the fires have affected production, the spokesman said, the slowdown was also the result of a shift to mining higher-quality products. But even as the company investigates options to reduce its climate impact, he said, coal will remain a major part of its energy production mix.

Australia is the world’s largest exporter of coal, and the industry wields wide influence on the country’s political leaders. The country has annual coal exports worth more than 40 billion Australian dollars, or $27 billion, including to major nations like China, Japan and India.

Although Australia emits only about 1.2 percent of global greenhouse gases, its economic reliance on fossil fuel extraction makes it the sixth-biggest producer of fuels that release carbon. Those emissions are expected to double by 2030, according to a 2019 report from the United Nations Environment Program.

Under Australia’s current conservative leadership, emissions have been rising, and renewable energy targets have stagnated, even as the government says it will meet its carbon reduction targets under the Paris climate agreement. Climate scientists say the targets were among the weakest of those proposed by developed nations.

This article is from NYT – go to source

Africa’s Richest Woman Is Barred From Her Bank and Under Investigation

anastasios pallis

Isabel dos Santos, Africa’s richest woman and the daughter of Angola’s former president, is under scrutiny by her bank and the Angolan government after a leak of more than 700,000 documents showed how she exploited the country’s wealth to enrich herself.

EuroBic, a Lisbon-based arm of a bank where Ms. dos Santos is the biggest shareholder, said on Monday that it was ending its “commercial relationship” with her and investigating transfers worth tens of millions of dollars, transactions that were revealed on Sunday by The New York Times and other news outlets working with the Washington-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.

Angola’s attorney general said on Monday that the government would “use all possible means” to bring Ms. dos Santos back to the country, where she faces possible corruption charges and where her assets were frozen last month, along with her husband’s and those of a Portuguese business associate, Agence France-Presse reported. The Angolan government, led until September 2017 by her father, José Eduardo dos Santos, said the three were responsible for more than $1 billion in lost government money.

The leaked documents, which include emails, invoices, slide presentations and contracts, provided a paper trail showing how Ms. dos Santos and her husband, Sindika Dokolo, amassed a fortune of more than $2 billion through their stakes in vital Angolan industries like telecommunications, diamonds and construction. Angola, rich in oil and diamonds, is nevertheless impoverished, with one of the world’s highest infant mortality rates and endemic corruption.

The leaked materials also revealed that in November 2017, when Ms. dos Santos was chairwoman of Angola’s state oil company, Sonangol, more than $57 million was transferred from that company to the bank account of a Dubai company owned by a friend of hers. Ms. dos Santos has said the money was for fees owed to consultants and accountants, including Boston Consulting Group, McKinsey & Company and PwC, formerly called PricewaterhouseCoopers. It is not clear whether that sum matched bills from the consultants; the companies declined to provide billing details, citing client confidentiality. About $38 million was transferred in the hours after Angola’s new president at the time — her father’s successor — announced on Nov. 15, 2017, that she was being fired from Sonangol, the documents show.

Those transfers drained Sonangol’s account at EuroBic, the European arm of an Angolan bank where Ms. dos Santos owns a 42.5 percent stake. In EuroBic’s statement on Monday, cutting commercial ties with Ms. dos Santos and associates of hers, the bank said it would audit the November 2017 transfers and report its findings to Portugal’s central bank.

EuroBic’s headquarters, steps from Ms. dos Santos’s sprawling Lisbon apartment, plays a central role in her business empire, which encompasses more than 400 companies and subsidiaries. Most global banks, bound by tough reporting requirements on doing business with so-called politically exposed persons, have avoided doing business with her. EuroBic, though bound by the same rules, continued to do extensive business with Ms. dos Santos and her husband, the documents show.

Ms. dos Santos didn’t immediately respond to questions about EuroBic’s announcement that were emailed Monday evening to her London law firm.

But she made her position on the leaked documents clear on Sunday, when news organizations around the world simultaneously published their investigations — the work of more than 120 reporters in 20 countries, who spent months analyzing the documents and interviewing hundreds of people in Angola, Portugal and other countries where she has had business interests.

“The ICIJ report is based on many fake documents and false information, it is a coordinated political attack in coordinations with the ‘Angolan Government,’” Ms. dos Santos wrote on Twitter. “715 thousand documents read? Who believes that?”

This article is from NYT – go to source