Legal entity

MakerDAO will dissolve the Foundation and become truly decentralized again

By Posted on 0 Comments3min read14 views

The pioneering decentralized financial protocol, MakerDAO, has announced that its foundation will formally dissolve in the coming months, marking one of the final steps in the protocol’s roadmap to decentralized governance.

A July 20 blog post describes Maker’s Decentralized Autonomous Organization, or DAO, as now “fully self-sufficient” – with its community spread around the world “now responsible for all aspects of the Maker Protocol.”

“Maker’s complete decentralization means that the future development and operation of the protocol and DAO will be determined by thousands, if not millions of engaged and enthusiastic community members, all determined to extend the benefits of digital currency to people across the world. whole world. “

Article author, Maker Foundation CEO Rune Christensen, shares highlights of the project’s six-year journey, with Christensen first revealing his plans in a Reddit Publish detailing his vision for a stable Ethereum token dubbed “eDollar” in March 2015.

The Maker Foundation was formed as a nonprofit to oversee the development and funding of the project in September 2018, apparently at the behest of its early investors. While Christensen created the Foundation with the intention of dissolving it within two to three years, the movement catalysis internal tensions between Foundation supporters and those who viewed the legal entity as at odds with crypto’s fundamentally lawless ethics.

He describes Maker as having “come a long way in a relatively short period of time,” going from a beginner DAO to a foundation, and then back to a DAO.

“Although the Foundation played a specific and important role in the further development of the Maker Protocol and the growth of a global team, it was designed to exist only temporarily,” said Christensen.

In May 2017, more than two years after Christensen revealed Maker on Reddit, the protocol carried out a limited version of ProtoSai, the precursor to Maker’s first stablecoin, SAI, or Single-Collateral Dai.

SAI would get a wholesale release in December 2017 and circulate for nearly two years, with Maker introducing the Multi-Collateral Dai (DAI) in November 2019 – allowing the DAI to be hit against a variety of digital assets approved by the governance of Maker.

Related: Australia’s digital finance industry wants to legally recognize DAOs

As Maker would emerge as a pioneering DeFi protocol perched atop the industry rankings by total value locked in, 2020 has not been smooth for Maker, with users launching a class action lawsuit against the foundation in the wake of ‘Black Thursday’ in March. The incident saw Maker lose around $ 6.64 million in DAI to cascading liquidations after the price of ether slumped 50% in about 24 hours.

March 2020 would also see the Maker Foundation transfer the MKR token contract to community governance, marking the start of the project’s journey towards restoring decentralizing governance – with Christensen. characterizing the foundation as “completely unnecessary”.

The protocol would also add support for Circle’s centralized USDC stablecoin this month, igniting controversy over Maker’s support for centralized crypto assets as collateral for its alleged decentralized stable token.

In March of this year, “central units” were created to coordinate the management of the different teams and activities of the protocol. The foundation would also return development funds of MKR 84,000 to Maker DAO in May, worth nearly $ 500 million at the time.

According to DeFi Llama, MakerDAO is currently the sixth decentralized financial protocol with a total locked-in value of $ 5.62 billion.

Source link

EY Announces Andy Park As New Managing Partner Of Los Angeles Office

By Posted on 0 Comments3min read14 views

LOS ANGELES, July 20, 2021 / PRNewswire / – Ernst & Young LLP (EY US) has appointed tax partner Andy Park as managing partner in the Los Angeles office, effective 1st of July. Parc succeeds Patrick niemann, who took on a new leadership role at the EY Center for Board Matters after a decade as Managing Partner of the Los Angeles office.

As Managing Partner of the Los Angeles office, Park is responsible for leading 2,300 professionals while continuing to drive growth and advance the firm’s inclusive and people-centered culture. EY’s Los Angeles office, which celebrated its centenary in 2020 and was recently redesigned to encourage more flexibility and collaboration, will be overseen by Park.

Frank mahoney, Regional Managing Partner of EY US-West, says:

“Andy has deep roots and a passion for Los Angeles office and community. He has demonstrated this passion, along with solid technical background, entrepreneurial and innovative spirit and a commitment to teamwork throughout his career at EY. I have no doubts that Andy will excel in leading this dynamic office and market as we emerge from the pandemic and are at the forefront of both operating and advising clients in our new world of work. . ”

Park began his career at EY US 17 years ago as a tax intern, and after earning his master’s degree in Washington University, joined EY in 2005. Most recently, he served as Tax Account Manager in EY’s Private Client Services practice, advising high growth pre-IPO companies across a wide range of industries. Park is passionate about entrepreneurship and is co-director of EY Entrepreneur of the Year®Greater Los Angeles program. Now in its 35th year, the EY Entrepreneur Of The Year program honors business leaders whose ambition, courage and ingenuity help transform the world.

“I am incredibly honored to serve our EY professionals, clients and the community as Managing Partner of the Greater Los Angeles office,” said Park. “This is a phenomenal opportunity to lead an inspiring and talented group of professionals as we help clients navigate this new world of work. At Pat Niemann leadership over the past decade, our Los Angeles the practice has reached new heights as the premier professional services organization in the greater Los Angeles market, and I am committed to building on its remarkable heritage and success. “

The son of Korean immigrants, Park was the first in his family to attend college. He is an active member of EY’s Pan-Asian Professional Network, is a Head of Family on the EY Board and is on the Girl Scout Board of Directors of Greater Los Angeles. He lives in Palos Verdes with his wife, daughter and new puppy.

About EY
EY exists to build a better world of work, helping to create long-term value for customers, individuals and society and to build confidence in the capital markets.

Through data and technology, EY’s diverse teams in more than 150 countries ensure trust and help clients grow, transform and operate.

Working across assurance, consulting, law, strategy, tax and transactions, EY teams ask better questions to find new answers to the complex issues facing our world today. .

EY refers to the global organization and may refer to one or more of the member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited, each of which is a separate legal entity. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients. Information on how EY collects and uses personal data and a description of the rights of individuals under data protection law can be found at EY member firms do not practice law where local laws prohibit. For more information about our organization, please visit

This press release was issued by Ernst & Young LLP, an EY member firm serving clients in the United States.

About Ernst & Young LLP Los Angeles practice
Ernst & Young LLP has nearly 2,300 people in its Greater Los Angeles offices that serve 40% of Fortune 1000 companies and 31% of Russell 3000s in LA. Our LA office professionals work with a diverse clientele of innovative and entrepreneurial companies spanning the consumer products, engineering and construction, financial services, healthcare, life sciences, manufacturing, media and entertainment, private equity, real estate, retail and technology. EY also recognizes entrepreneurs globally and locally with EY Entrepreneur Of The Year®, the world’s most prestigious trade award for entrepreneurs.

Cision View original content to download multimedia:


Source link

EU launches WTO dispute over discriminatory public procurement of Russian state-owned enterprises

By Posted on 0 Comments2min read14 views

Dispute Resolution | Brussels, July 19, 2021

The EU calls for consultations with Russia in the World Trade Organization (WTO) regarding certain Russian measures that restrict or prevent EU companies from selling goods and services to Russian state-owned enterprises and to other entities through government procurement for commercial purposes. These practices appear to be contrary to WTO rules which require Russia not to discriminate against foreign companies in this area.

Since 2015, Russia has gradually extended its import substitution policy using various restrictions and incentives. These aim to replace the use of foreign goods and services in public procurement by certain state-linked entities, and by legal persons in state-funded investment projects. The economic impact for EU businesses is very significant. In 2019, the value of tenders published by state-owned enterprises was 23.5 trillion rubles, or about 290 billion euros and the equivalent of 21% of Russia’s GDP.

The EU is challenging in particular three Russian measures which appear to be inconsistent with WTO law, notably with the fundamental WTO principle of national treatment which obliges WTO members to treat foreign and domestic producers in a non-compliant manner. discriminatory. These include:

  • Discriminatory evaluations of calls for tenders: during the assessment phase of their markets, certain state-linked entities charge 15% (up to 30% for certain products) of the price offered for the domestic products or services of Russian entities. If the offer with domestic products or services of a Russian entity is subsequently selected, the full price is subsequently always paid. This means that products or services imported from foreign entities are considered less favorably during this assessment phase, as they do not benefit from this 15% price reduction. This results in discrimination against offers with imported goods or services provided by foreign entities.
  • Requirements for prior authorizations: Russian companies wishing to source certain engineered products abroad need permission from the Russian Import Substitution Commission. This authorization appears to be given on an arbitrary basis and is not necessary for the purchase of domestic engineered products.
  • National procurement quota requirements: for around 250 products, including vehicles, machinery, medical devices and textile products, of which up to 90% must be domestic products.

Next steps

The dispute settlement consultations the EU has requested are the first step in the WTO dispute settlement procedures.

If they do not reach a satisfactory solution, the EU can ask the WTO to set up a panel to rule on the matter.

The consultation request

Learn more about commercial disputes

Source link

AML / CFT supervisory authorities publish an update to the Directive for the 2013 Amended Code of Good Practice for Identity Verification

By Posted on 0 Comments5min read13 views

On July 16, 2021, the Financial Markets Authority, the Department of Internal Affairs and the Reserve Bank of New Zealand (Supervisors) released the update Explanatory Note: Guideline on Electronic Identity Verification (Guideline) on the Amended Code of Practice for Identity Verification 2013 (AIVCOP). The guideline replaces the previous one Code of Practice for Identity Verification – Explanatory Note published in December 2017 (previous explanatory note).

A link to AIVCOP is available here and a link to the new directive is available here.

Who needs to read it? Why?

The changes will be relevant to all AML / CFT reporting entities, especially those that use Electronic Identity Verification (EIV) as a means of verifying the identity of a customer. Overall, the guideline is more specific and restrictive in terms of what controllers think is appropriate for EIV compared to the previous explanatory note. Significant changes to the guideline are described below.

What does it cover?

Documentation of EIV procedures

The guideline provides much more detail than the previous explanatory note on how reporting entities should document their use of EIV as part of their AML / CFT program. Specifically, the following information should be included:

  • when the reporting entity will use the EIV;
  • the supplier and the EIV product (if the reporting entity relies on a third party to perform the EIV);
  • the electronic source (s) used to verify the person’s name and date of birth;
  • record keeping process;
  • how the reporting entity verifies in its records that the details of a potential client have not been used before; and
  • exception and escalation process.

Supervisors state that the AML / CFT program should also make it clear whether the reporting entity using the EIV uses a single independent source with a high confidence level, or two (or more) reliable and independent matching sources. . If a reporting entity uses a single independent source, then the AML / CFT program should document how the assurance of a “high level of confidence” in an individual’s identity is met. If two (or more) reliable and independent matching sources are used, the AML / CFT program should document the measures taken to ensure compliance with AIVCOP clauses 17 and 18.

EIV sources

The guideline builds on the previous explanatory note and includes additional content identifying electronic sources commonly used in New Zealand. It also sets out the expectations of controllers when reviewing or inspecting the EIV procedures, policies and controls of a reporting entity. Various examples of EIV practices are also included in the guideline.

Use of two reliable and independent pairing sources

Regarding the use of two reliable and independent matching sources for verifying a client’s identity, supervisors indicated in the guideline that in their opinion, the name and date of birth of the person should be verified from one source, while only the name should be verified from the other.

Further, they said that in their view the confirmation service offered by the Department of Home Affairs and the New Zealand Driver’s License database offered by the New Zealand Transport Agency are the main ones. electronic sources that they would expect a reporting entity to use to verify a customer’s name and date of birth.

Regarding the second electronic source that would be used to verify the client’s name, supervisors suggested that credit bureaus, companies office, Land Information New Zealand land registry and vehicle registration details from the New Zealand Transport Agency are acceptable. .

Use of a single independent source

Regarding the use of a single independent electronic source for verifying a customer’s identity, supervisors have stated that in their view, only a verified RealMe identity [1] can meet the requirement for a single independent source to verify a person’s identity with “a high level of trust” as it biometrically compares the person’s photo and identity details to neo government records -Zeeland.

Link a customer to their claimed identity

In the guideline, the supervisors pointed out, in stronger language, that if an electronic source does not have a mechanism in place to determine whether a customer can be linked to their identity, or if the mechanism in place is not not robust enough, then a reporting entity has to adopt additional methods that will be used to complement it or otherwise mitigate the shortcomings of the process.

The guideline indicates that one way for a reporting entity to achieve this is to require that the first credit to the customer’s account or facility be received from an account / facility held at a bank registered in New Zealand. – Zealand on behalf of the customer which cannot be tampered with or changed. To complete these guidelines, the supervisory authorities have specified in a new annex to the directive a list of registered banks with which the first credits can be invoked for this purpose, because they do not allow the customer to modify or change the name of the payer.

Our point of view

Despite its title and status as “guidance”, the guideline uses prescriptive language suggesting that supervisors expect it to be followed.

The AIVCOP itself remains unchanged since its amendment in 2013. Codes of good practice, like AIVCOP, are intended to provide a statement of practice to help reporting entities comply with their AML / CFT obligations. and are governed by Subpart 5A of AML / CFT. Act. Compliance with a code of conduct is not compulsory. However, if fully adhered to, codes of practice function as a “safe haven” for reporting entities. If the controllers wish to change a code of conduct, including AIVCOP, this will require the approval of the Minister of Justice. In turn, the Minister could only approve the changes if the supervisors consulted with the people and organizations he deems appropriate. This provides an additional layer of control before a modified code of practice can be promulgated.

However, the controllers did not obtain here the modification of the AIVCOP itself, which leaves an ambiguity as to the position of the reporting entities which consider that they comply with the AIVCOP, but whose interpretation differs. that of the controllers as defined in the directive. However, many reporting entities will prefer the more conservative approach of complying with the Guideline even though, as the Guideline itself indicates in an introductory paragraph, the Guideline cannot be relied on as evidence of compliance. to the AML / CFT Law and does not constitute advice.

A good example of the difference is the question of what is a single acceptable independent source that can be trusted to verify the identity of an individual with a high level of trust. The Guide indicates that Supervisors consider RealMe to be the only example available. However, if a private sector entity were able to develop a mechanism that offered the same level of trust, or even a better level of trust in a person’s identity, reporting entities would have to decide whether to trust the person’s identity. this new technology on the basis that it meets the requirements imposed by AIVCOP, even if this was not foreseen by the guideline.

After that ?

Reporting entities may need to modify their AML / CFT programs to ensure that they take into account the expectations of supervisors regarding their use of the EIV. If you have questions regarding the changes to the Directive or would like help updating your AML / CFT programs to reflect the new requirements.

Source link

Wates to turn three sites into £ 690million reclamation in Harrow

By Posted on 0 Comments2min read14 views

Cllr Graham Henson, Head of the Harrow Board, said: “This decision opens Harrow to a new and exciting future. Our work with Wates will benefit countless local people and improve the lives of generations to come. As we begin to emerge from the devastating pandemic, I want this to mark the beginning of our renewal.

“Wates Residential has extensive experience in delivering high quality development projects. With their expertise, we will unleash the potential of these sites, creating new communities and new opportunities for local people. I would like to extend a very warm welcome to Wates and look forward to the amazing things that I know our partnership can achieve.

“Harrow calls for high quality affordable housing. Too many people are trapped in inadequate and overcrowded housing. They deserve places to live that will promote their success and allow their families to flourish.

“We are committed to doing everything possible to meet the future needs of Harrow in our existing developed environment. This means using sites like these in a much more efficient way. By making this commitment, we can protect our precious green belt and ensure that the development proposals we present are appropriate, sustainable and supported by investments in infrastructure.

Helen Bunch, Executive Director of Wates Residential, said: “At Wates Residential we are truly thrilled to be a part of this incredible regeneration program that will transform the face of Harrow.

“This £ 690million regeneration program will provide 1,500 quality affordable housing, a new civic center, retail space as well as green public spaces for the people of Harrow to enjoy.”

The three main sites on which Harrow’s new strategic development partnership will focus are Poets Corner, currently the site of the Council’s Civic Center; Peel Road, next to Wealdstone High Street and Byron Quarter, next to Byron Park and including the site of a former driving test center.

Cabinet approval to form a partnership with Wates will now see the creation of a new legal entity called the “Harrow Strategic Development Partnership” – the board and Wates will each hold a 50 percent stake.

Source link

Interesting facts about the former South African president

By Posted on 0 Comments2min read14 views

(Nelson Mandela (Shutterstock)

Nelson Mandela International Day: Here are some interesting facts about the former South African president that most people don’t know.

  • New Delhi
  • Last update:July 18, 2021, 11:30 am IST

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has designated July 18 as “International Nelson Mandela Day”, in honor of the former South African president and his achievements in favor of the spirit of peace and freedom .

The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) has recognized Mandela’s values ​​and dedication to serving humanity in the following areas: conflict resolution, race relations, promotion and protection of human rights, reconciliation, equality gender and the rights of children and other vulnerable groups, the fight against poverty and the development of social justice.

Here are some interesting facts about Mandela that most people don’t know:

  1. He was president of South Africa from 1994 to 1999. He was the country’s first black president and the first to be chosen in a truly representative election.
  1. Mandela’s rulers focused on dismantling the country’s apartheid regime, which had focused on legalized racial segregation.
  1. Mandela studied law in school and became one of South Africa’s first black lawyers.
  1. In the 1950s, he was chosen to head the youth wing of the African National Congress (ANC) liberation movement.
  1. When the government banned the ANC on racial grounds, Mandela created an underground armed movement. He had participated in peaceful rallies before, but when these encountered violence from the government, he left to help an armed movement.
  1. Mandela was jailed for treason and conspiracy against the government from 1962 to 1990. He was sentenced to life in prison but was released earlier when the ANC was reinstated as a legal entity.
  1. During his incarceration, Mandela served as a rallying point for the oppressed in South Africa who fought for their rights.
  1. Mandela is widely regarded as the father of modern South Africa. He played a key role in the overthrow of the repressive regime and the establishment of democracy.
  1. Mandela received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1993 for his role in the peaceful downfall of the apartheid system and the laying of the foundations of democracy. In addition to the Nobel Prize for Literature, he received nearly 250 additional distinctions.
  1. After leaving politics, Mandela established the Nelson Mandela Foundation, which focused on HIV / AIDS research, rural development and school building.

Read all the latest news, breaking news and coronavirus news here

Source link