Argentina has now staked the future of its debt, and perhaps its financial fate, with the United States Supreme Court. Yes, you read that right. Argentina wants the nine justices to weigh in on a case involving its obligations to holders of its government bonds and to resolve the mess created by a handful of federal judges, The New York Times DealBook blog reported.
The roots of the case go back to 2001, when Argentina, in the midst of a severe economic downturn, defaulted on $80 billion of government bonds. Now, Argentina is asking the Supreme Court to throw out a lower-court ruling forcing the South American country to pay up on these bonds.
How did the Supreme Court find itself dealing with this drama?
It started in the wake of Argentina’s default. There is no bankruptcy regime for sovereign countries (at least not yet). So back in 2005 and then again in 2010, Argentina forced the debt holders into a deal offering them new bonds at 25 to 29 cents on the dollar. More than 90 percent of the bondholders accepted, given the alternative of getting nothing for the bonds.
It started in the wake of Argentina’s default. There is no bankruptcy regime for sovereign countries (at least not yet). So back in 2005 and then again in 2010, Argentina forced the debt holders into a deal offering them new bonds at 25 to 29 cents on the dollar. More than 90 percent of the bondholders accepted, given the alternative of getting nothing for the bonds.
But there were holdouts, including thousands of Italian pensioners, and more important, some hedge funds, which have been trying to get Argentina to pay the bonds in full. Since then, a number of entities, led by Elliott Management and Aurelius Capital Management, have sought to compel Argentina to pay up. This has led to some odd situations. In 2012, the hedge funds won a court order to seize an Argentine Navy ship in Ghana. And the president of Argentina, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, no longer flies abroad on Argentine-owned planes for fear the jets will be seized.
The hedge funds have a strong incentive to take any property they can, since the bonds held by the holdouts are now worth on paper about $15 billion, with accrued interest. But it’s not so easy to collect against a sovereign nation. Most countries have “sovereign immunity laws,” which prevent lawsuits against them, as well as seizing their property.
It’s here where the United States federal judges come in.
The hedge funds also sued in federal court in New York to collect on these bonds. Normally, sovereign immunity would protect Argentina. In fact, in the United States, there is also a statute, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, that would prevent the hedge funds from seizing Argentine property to collect on the bonds.
The hedge funds have argued in court that they are not seeking to seize Argentine property. Instead, they argue, when Argentina pays money through the United States financial system on its new bonds, the agents transferring that money can be ordered to simply pay the holdouts first. Since there is no attachment of Argentine funds, the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act is not implicated. Voilà. Read more. (Subscription required.)
Location