Russian authorities have initiated legal action to seize Normunds Bomis’s share in the Russian company Ryzhsky Khleb, alleging the Latvian citizen supports the Armed Forces of Ukraine, thereby engaging in extremist activities. The Prosecutor General’s Office has filed a lawsuit, claiming Bomis and his business partner, Tetiana Prykhodko, are extremists. This “extremist association” allegedly extends to Bomis’s other businesses and a Latvian foundation. This action is part of a larger trend, with Russian law enforcement seizing significant assets in favor of the state in recent years.
Read More
Russia seizes $50 billion in assets as economy shifts during war in Ukraine. This figure, though substantial, represents more than just a recent grab; it’s a compilation of seizures over the past three years, a grim testament to the economic strain caused by the ongoing war. While a headline might grab your attention with the $50 billion figure, it’s crucial to remember that this likely represents only the officially documented seizures, as reported by the Kremlin. The actual amount could be even higher, encompassing less publicized actions.
The situation can be viewed through a lens of historical comparison. The US spent around $1.1 trillion on the Iraq war, lasting eight years.… Continue reading
The Russian government has initiated a campaign to nationalize the assets of Konstantin Strukov, a billionaire and owner of Russia’s largest gold mining company, marking an escalation in the Kremlin’s efforts to seize wealth from its elite. Strukov, despite his history of loyalty and political ties, had his private jet grounded and passport seized, with the FSB involved in preventing his departure from the country. This action is part of a broader pattern of reclaiming private wealth to support the war economy, particularly in sectors like gold and oil, amidst shrinking revenues and growing budget deficits. This case, along with others, indicates a shift in the Putin-era social contract, where loyalty no longer guarantees protection from asset seizure as the Kremlin seeks new funding sources.
Read More
Germany’s Merz has stated a willingness to confiscate frozen Russian assets, but only if legally possible. This raises several key questions and highlights the complex legal and political landscape surrounding this issue. The straightforward approach of simply seizing the assets, bypassing established legal processes, is frequently suggested. This approach dismisses the complexities of German law and the implications of such an action on international relations. The argument that “Russia doesn’t concern itself with what’s legal and illegal” while tempting to mirror, ignores the significant differences between a nation-state operating under a rule of law and one that operates outside of it.… Continue reading
The Trump administration planned to impose daily fines of $998 on migrants with final deportation orders who remained in the U.S., potentially seizing their assets to cover unpaid amounts. This plan, based on a 1996 law, would retroactively apply for up to five years, leading to fines exceeding $1 million in some cases. The White House, particularly Stephen Miller, pushed for Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to implement the policy and handle asset seizures, despite CBP raising concerns about feasibility and significant resource requirements. The Biden administration subsequently halted these measures.
Read More
Russia plans to legally seize assets of Western companies on its “unfriendly” list, escalating its response to international sanctions. This new law, spurred by a May 2024 Putin decree, allows for full confiscation following a court decision, unlike previous measures that only permitted freezing or temporary control. The legislation is framed as retaliation for Western sanctions and the freezing of Russian overseas assets. The move highlights the ongoing conflict and the significant consequences for companies attempting to divest from the Russian market.
Read More
A New York civil fraud judgment against Donald Trump and co-defendants surpassed $500 million in late December, accumulating over $114,000 in daily interest. This massive debt, stemming from a judge’s finding of manipulated financial statements to secure favorable loans and insurance, is currently under appeal. Trump personally owes approximately $490 million, a sum exceeding the combined 2025 budget proposals for Albany and New Rochelle. While the appeals court’s decision is pending, interest continues to accrue, adding to the substantial financial liability.
Read More
A federal judge is considering holding Rudy Giuliani in contempt for failing to comply with court orders to provide information and assets to two Georgia election workers awarded $148 million in a defamation suit. Judge Liman is dismissive of Giuliani’s attempts to avoid compliance and may infer negatively from this evidence, potentially jeopardizing Giuliani’s Florida condominium. The contempt hearing will address the seizure of Giuliani’s assets, including his Palm Beach property, to satisfy the judgment. Giuliani maintains the property is his primary residence and contests the seizure, with a trial scheduled for January 16th.
Read More
To satisfy a $148 million defamation judgment awarded to Ruby Freeman and Wandrea Moss, I, Rudy Giuliani’s lawyer, have surrendered numerous assets, including dozens of watches, a ring, and a 1980 Mercedes-Benz. While some assets were delivered directly, I contest the immediate surrender of the Mercedes without prior appraisal, arguing it violates Mr. Giuliani’s rights if its value falls below legal exemptions. Further, I’ve requested exemptions for other items based on New York and Florida law, including clothing, household goods, and tools of the trade. Mr. Giuliani maintains this judgment is a result of political persecution and intends to appeal.
Read More
Rudy Giuliani is facing a court hearing in New York City after failing to surrender his assets as part of a $148 million defamation judgment against him. The court ordered Giuliani to surrender possessions including his Manhattan apartment, a Mercedes, and various valuables, but lawyers for the plaintiffs discovered his apartment had been emptied weeks prior to the deadline. Giuliani’s legal team has argued unsuccessfully against surrendering his assets while appealing the judgment and claims the plaintiffs are engaging in intimidation tactics. The judge has rejected these claims and ordered Giuliani to appear in court to explain his actions.
Read More
John Q. Hosedrinker 
Matt Underwood