Capsugel/Lonza Exports Capsules From New Jersey To Cuba; On Behalf Of Customer In Europe

Morristown, New Jersey-based Capsugel (2017 revenues US$1 billion), a subsidiary since 2017 of Basel, Switzerland-based Lonza Group (2017 revenues US$5.5 billion) exported gelatin capsules valued at US$25,826.00 (.84 metric tons) from the United States to the Republic of Cuba in August 2018; the first reported shipment valued at US$3,914.00 was in April 2018.  Capsugel reported that the export was licensed on behalf of a Europe-based company. 

From Capsugel

Were the capsules were manufactured in the United States? Yes.  

Who was the purchaser? Lonza sold empty capsules to a purchaser in Europe with the knowledge that the capsules could be re-sold to an end-user in Cuba. Due to such knowledge, Lonza obtained all necessary export licenses for such a sale.  

What use(s) the capsules would have for the healthcare system(s) in the Republic of Cuba? Our Coni-Snap® Hard Gelatin Capsules – are used for numerous pharma and nutritional applications. (https://www.capsugel.com/knowledge-center/coni-snap-capsules-brochure)  

Exports of healthcare products (medical equipment, medical instruments, medical supplies, pharmaceuticals) to the Republic of Cuba are subject to provisions of the Cuban Democracy Act (CDA) of 1992, which require end use-verification, but are not subject to cash-in-advance payment requirements.   

Triangular transactions are not prohibited; and the initial Europe-based purchaser likely provided payment terms on behalf of the Republic of Cuba end-user. 

Capsugel reported no transactional issues with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the United States Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the United States Department of Commerce, or Office of Legal Adviser (OLA) at the United States Department of State. 

There are United States-based companies who have declined to export healthcare products to the Republic of Cuba.  Reasons have included, but have not been limited to ideological position of the company, the export licensing process, belief that transactions with the Republic of Cuba may invite scrutiny from local, state and federal agencies/departments and issues relating to the image of the company, particularly in the State of Florida marketplace. 

Since 1992, successive presidential administrations have generally sought not to impede healthcare product-related transactions, including the licensing for organizing events in the Republic of Cuba; and for United States-based companies to participate in events organized by the government of the Republic of Cuba.  One Westport, Connecticut-based company received licenses to organize the first U.S. Healthcare Exhibition in January 2000 followed by a United States Pavilion at the bi-annual “Salud Para Todos” (Health for All) Exhibition and a second U.S. Healthcare Exhibition in January 2002.  

U.S. HEALTHCARE PRODUCT EXPORTS- Exports of healthcare products have included, but not been limited to: Medicaments (penicillin and insulin); Dentifrices (toothpastes); Laboratory regents; Ultrasonic scanning equipment; Artificial limbs; Medical appliances; Surgical appliances (dental); Ophthalmic (eye); Cannulae (tubing) and gelatin capsules. 

2018- US$2,045,272.00

2017- US$5,663,254.00

2016- US$6,121,425.00

2015- US$5,003,169.00

2014- US$879,267.00

2013- US$2,155,024.00

2012- US$234,718.00

2011- US$103,771.00

2010- US$226,563.00

2009- US$85,408.00

2008- US$320,420.00

2007- US$436,773.00

2006- US$814,866.00

2005- US$404,001.00

2004- US$468,485.00

2003- US$9,416.00

Total- US$24,631,246.00

LINK to complete post text

166_main.jpg

Who Might Influence The Next U.S. Congress On Cuba Issues?

The Next Months (Or Years) …  

After 6 November 2018, regardless of which political party controls which chamber of the United States Congress, the Trump Administration (with assistance from some members of the United States Congress) will continue to pursue commercial, economic and political policies and regulations designed to promote “regime change” in the Republic of Cuba.  However, according to a senior-level official of the Trump Administration, “the phrase ‘regime change’ will focus upon changing the behavior of the leadership of the regime as we are unlikely to replace those who lead the regime.”   

The Trump Administration’s term ends in 813 days… 

Rules and policies for the United States House of Representatives tend to make easier inserting and retaining a legislative measure while rules and policies for the United States Senate tend to make easier preventing and removing a legislative measure. 

Republic of Cuba-focused legislation is generally hostage to members of the United States Congress believing: 1) a perception that the legislation will benefit the Republic of Cuba and 2) a perception that the legislation will harm the Republic of Cuba.  Both 1 and 2 are not necessarily mutually-exclusive to one another. 

Legislative history has shown the Republic of Cuba to be a low-value commodity; to be traded away in most instances because it lacks importance.  The legislative calendar is littered with Members of Congress pronouncing they would not permit legislation unrelated to the Republic of Cuba to proceed unless issues relating to the Republic of Cuba were resolved.  In the end, no Member of Congress was going to seek to hold appropriation or other legislation of national importance because of the Republic of Cuba.

Prudent to remember that the last change in United States law relating to the Republic of Cuba was more than 6,575 days ago- nearly eighteen (18) years. 

If the Republican Party retains control of the United States Senate: The Honorable James Risch (R- Idaho), will likely become Chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.  Senator Risch was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  One member of the United States Senate remains the most influential Member of the United States Congress relating to the Republic of Cuba- The Honorable Marco Rubio (R-Florida).  He is of Cuban descent.  He is chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Transnational Crime, Civilian Security, Democracy, Human Rights, and Global Women's Issues of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate.  He is thinking about the next opportunity to run for president of the United States; his first effort in 2016 having been unsuccessful.  The second-most influential member of the United States Senate with respect to the Republic of Cuba is The Honorable Robert Menendez (D- New Jersey), who is also of Cuban descent.  The third-most influential member of the United States Senate with respect to the Republic of Cuba is The Honorable Ted Cruz (R- Texas), who is also of Cuban descent.  They represent three percent (3%) of the one hundred (100)-member United States Senate.    

If the Democratic Party gains control of the United States Senate: Senator Robert Menendez likely (should he be re-elected one 6 November 2018) will become chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate.  Senator Menendez was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  The Honorable Benjamin Cardin (D- Maryland) would likely become chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Transnational Crime, Civilian Security, Democracy, Human Rights, and Global Women's Issues of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate.  Senator Cardin supported Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba. 

If the Republican Party retains control of the United States House of Representatives: The Honorable Christopher Smith (R- New Jersey) would likely become the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee; Representative Smith was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  The Honorable Paul Cook (R- California) will likely remain chairman of the Western Hemisphere subcommittee; Representative Cook was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  

If the Democratic Party gains control of the United States House of Representatives: The Honorable Ed Royce (R- California) chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the United States House of Representatives, who is retiring, would likely be replaced by The Honorable Eliot Engel (D- New York), the ranking Democratic member who was supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  The Honorable Paul Cook (R- California), chairman of the Western Hemisphere subcommittee would likely be replaced by The Honorable Albio Sires (D- New Jersey), the ranking Democratic member who is of Cuban descent and was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  The Honorable Christopher Smith (R- New Jersey) would likely become the ranking Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee; Representative Smith was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.   

An amendment to what is known as the “Farm Bill” is expected to soon be enacted into law.  The amendment, authored by The Honorable Heidi Heitkamp (D- North Dakota), a member of the United States Senate (who polls indicate may lose her re-election effort on 6 November 2018), was made likely (and ironically) to be included in the legislation specifically due to efforts by Senator Marco Rubio.  The amendment will permit United States taxpayer funds to be used for United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs managed by independent organizations for agricultural commodity and food product promotion in the Republic of Cuba.  Senator Rubio added language to prohibit any of the USDA funds from being directed to any Revolutionary Armed Forces of the Republic of Cuba (FAR)-owned/controlled/affiliated entity.   

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the United States Department of the Treasury, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the United States Department of Commerce, and the Office of Legal Adviser (OLA) at the United States Department of State will continue to be weaponized for use towards the Republic of Cuba. 

A new Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the National Security Council (NSC) in The White House is The Honorable Mauricio Claver-Carone, a highly competent and skilled political operative… who is of Cuban descent.  His role in shaping the United States relationship with the Republic of Cuba and his relationships with members of the United States Congress should not be undervalued and ignored at one’s peril.

LINK to Complete Analysis In PDF Format

in-charge.jpg

Cubana Again Commences Flights; Will U.S. Tour Operators/Travel Agents Embrace?

Johannesburg, South Africa-based Solenta Aviation (www.solenta.com) will be wet-leasing one (1) 68-passenger ATR72-500 to Republic of Cuba government-operated Cubana de Aviacion for two weekly flights from Jose Marti International Airport (HAV) to Mariana Grajales Airport (GAO) in Guananamo, one weekly flight from HAV to Gustavo Rizo Airport (BCA) in Baracoa and one weekly flight from HAV to Ignacio Agramonte International Airport (CMW) in Camaguey. The flights commence on 28 October 2018.

Established in 2000, Solenta Aviation, which confirms a presence in eighteen (18) countries- nineteen (19) with the Republic of Cuba, shares that "... first class service is the primary focus of the people that make up Solenta Aviation. Our staff have a wealth of experience in the aviation field and are hand-picked for their excellent track records in the industry." The company manages ten (10) different types of aircraft, from single-engine propeller 9-passenger C208B Caravan to twin-jet engine aircraft 106-passenger EMB 190.

According to the company, clients include DHL, BP/Shell, Exxon, GE Energy, International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and World Food Program (WFP).

Critical to the sustainability of the flights, and for Cubana de Aviacion to re-establish a robust domestic route network, will be an embrace by tour operators and travel agents to use the flights for internal transportation of their customers to locations throughout the Republic of Cuba.

President Diaz-Canel To Visit France, Russia, China, Vietnam, Laos and North Korea

The Government of the Republic of Cuba reported that H.E. Miguel Diaz-Canel, President of the Republic of Cuba, will depart Jose Marti International Airport (HAV) on 31 October 2018 to Paris, France and then on 1 November 2018 in Moscow, Russian Federation, and then travel to Beijing (6-8), People’s Republic of China; Hanoi (8-11), Socialist Republic of Vietnam; Vientiane, Lao People’s Democratic Republic; and Pyongyang, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

According to a senior-level official of one of the governments whose representatives will meet with President Diaz-Canel, “… he is coming to ask us to help him not do what Cuba needs to do; he wants us to defend Cuba against the changes that the United States wants Cuba to make- and, I might add, we and others want Cuba to make. Everyone can’t continue to loan Cuba money to make purchases and loan them money in solidarity when everyone knows that the loans are unlikely to be repaid or we will be required to write them down or write them off. Cuba needs to grow-up and make changes so that it can be a better importer, exporter and partner.”

Panama Welcomes Cuba's Self-Employed To Shop, Shop, Shop; Cuba Doesn't Object

Why Does This Make Sense?

 

Need A Blender, Fabric, Paint, Spices For Your Business? Get A Passport

5 Hours Round-Trip, US$400.00+ Airfare & Hotel

Two Days Of Flights Could Be Worth US$3 Million To Panama

For 12 Months, US$100 Million?

A Tax On The Self-Employed?

Mexico, Panama & United States Benefit Financially So Cuba May Restrain Self-Employed 

Will the decision by the H.E. Juan Carlos Varela, President of Republic of Panama, to specifically (and publicly) designate a purchasing pathway for self-employed Republic of Cuba nationals convince H.E. Miguel Diaz-Canel, President of the Republic of Cuba, to establish a legitimate and sustainable wholesale marketplace for the self-employed? 

Was the decision by the Varela Administration, likely designed with the cooperation of the Diaz-Canel Administration, a marketing effort to increase the number of self-employed in the Republic of Cuba, but permit the Diaz-Canel Administration not to be perceived as substantially supporting the self-employed?  Permit the self-employed to travel far and spend much for the products they desire, but not provide the necessary purchasing infrastructure within the Republic of Cuba. 

The Government of the Republic of Cuba reports approximately 593,000 Republic of Cuba nationals as having licenses permitting self-employment, representing approximately 13% of the workforce.  The Republic of Cuba has a population of approximately 11.3 million.   

The Government of Panama will issue a tourist card valid for a visit of thirty (30) days and at a cost of US$20.00 with a focus upon Republic of Cuba nationals who are self-employed. Link to Government of Panama Announcement: https://www.mire.gob.pa/index.php/es/noticias-mire/13663-gobierno-adopta-medidas-migratorias-para-promover-turismo-de-compras-y-facilitar-solicitudes-humanitarias-de-reagrupacion-familiar 

Panama City, Panama-based Copa Airlines (CM) has up to seven (7) flights per day from Jose Marti International Airport (HAV) to Panama City, Tocumen International (PYT) using primarily 160-passenger Boeing 737-800 aircraft.  Round-trip airfares range from approximately US$398.50.  On an annual basis, currently-scheduled Copa Airlines flights from HAV to PYT can transport approximately 350,000+ passengers.  Bogota, Colombia-based Avianca Airlines (AV) has one-stop flights from HAV to PYT from US$380.00 round-trip. 

If 2,000, for example, self-employed Republic of Cuba nationals, representing .33% of the total registered self-employed in the Republic of Cuba, were to obtain the tourist card and travel to Panama City, Panama, the Government of Panama would earn US$20,000.00; Copa Airlines could earn US$800,000.00 (plus likely substantial excess baggage charges); hotels in Panama City could earn US$200,000.00 (if double-occupancy for two-nights); and taxis could earn US$25,000.00.   

If each of those 2,000 travelers were to spend US$1,000.00 on purchases from wholesale/retail establishments in Panama City, Panama, the gross revenue from those purchases could be US$2,000,000.00.  Panama also has a 7% Value Added Tax (VAT), so the government of Panama could receive US$140,000.00.   

A representative of the Colon Free Trade Zone in Panama reported that approximately 3,000 Republic of Cuba nationals received visas in the first sixty (60) days of the inauguration of the tourist card program.

A 1,990 mile, five-hour round-trip from Havana to Panama with a total visit cost likely exceeding US$500.00 is a tax upon the self-employed, a voluntarily-accepted tax, but an unnecessary expense for the self-employed to absorb in the pursuit of providing a product and/or a service.   

Current laws and regulations and policies adopted by the government of the Republic of Cuba suggest a preference to enrich other countries rather than authorize a critical component required to develop and sustain a private sector- the availability of an import/export wholesale marketplace from which self-employed may purchase products, add a value mark-up, and then price for retail whether through a kiosk, store, gift shop, café, restaurant, beauty salon, rental residence or among the other 123 authorized self-employed categories. 

Absence of an import/export wholesale marketplace, the self-employed price their products (and services using the products) above what their customers may pay for the products at a Republic of Cuba government-operated retail entity.   

A successful private sector represents a pathway to inequality amongst a population.  The self-employed, the small business, the private sector consist of owners and those who work for the owners.  Some earn more than others.  Some want to earn more than others.  The government of the Republic of Cuba has struggled with defining success and to what level an individual may be successful.  

Many self-employed Republic of Cuba nationals also travel to Mexico (Cancun (CUN) and Mexico City (MEX)) to purchase products using regularly-scheduled flights operating multiple times per day priced from approximately US$120.00 to US$250.00 round-trip with round-trip flight times of three hours (CUN) to seven hours (MEX).  Mexico has a Sales Tax (ST) of 16%.  

For comparison, round-trip flights from HAV to Miami International Airport (MIA) or Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport (FLL) have a duration of approximately one (1) hour and are generally priced from US$150.00.  Because of the frequency of flights (using various aircraft types), not unreasonable for a passenger to arrive to MIA/FLL in the morning, visit retail/wholesale establishments, and return to HAV in the evening.  The State of Florida has ST ranging from 6% to 8%. 

If the government of the Republic of Cuba were to establish a membership-based wholesale warehouse operation, and charge US$500.00 per membership, and if 2,000 Republic of Cuba nationals were to join, representing .33% of reported self-employed in the Republic of Cuba, revenue of US$1,000,000.00 would fund the construction of the warehouse and provide a provisional inventory and provide employment opportunities for Republic of Cuba nationals. 

If 5% of the licensed self-employed traveled once from HAV to PYT or MIA or FLL or CUN or MEX and spent U$1,000.00, the purchases would be valued at US$29,650,000.00, plus VAT and ST. 

A representative of the Colon Free Trade Zone in Panama reported that individuals from the Republic of Cuba spent approximately US$308 million in 2017; and revenues are expected to increase approximately 8% in 2018.

Uncertain is how General Customs of the Republic of Cuba (http://www.aduana.gob.cu/index.php/valor-en-aduanas-3) will manage any collection of duty on imported product from Panama.    

Since 2015, Tampa, Florida-based Florida Produce of Hillsborough County has sought approval from the government of the Republic of Cuba to manage a wholesale marketplace in the city of Havana for the benefit of self-employed Republic of Cuba nationals. 

Link to article: https://www.tampabay.com/news/business/Tampa-company-won-t-give-up-on-its-dream-to-build-a-warehouse-in-Cuba_171447164

LINK To Complete Analysis

United States Represents 1 In 5 Visitors To Cuba, But Are Most Profitable

Agence France-Presse:

"In 2017, Cuba welcomed 619,523 American tourists, up 217 percent over 2016, while 453,905 Cubans living in the United States visited their native country, an increase of 138 percent over a year."

Thus, 1,073,428 individuals subject to United States jurisdiction ("American tourists" and "Cubans living in the United States") visited the Republic of Cuba in 2017.

The Ministry of Tourism of the Republic of Cuba (MINTUR) reported visitor arrivals of 4,689,894 in 2017.

Thus, 22% of visitors to Cuba in 2017 were from United States.

Visitors from the United States have the highest net-profit margin to the Republic of Cuba compared to visitors from other countries as visitors from the United States are not purchasing highly-discounted all-inclusive holidays at tourist-focused resorts.

1-in-5-blue-orange.jpg

Cuba Imports Sugar From France

https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/world/bitter-taste-for-cuba-as-it-imports-sugar-for-the-first-time--10858752 

Bitter taste for Cuba as it imports sugar for the first time  

Cubans quickly noticed the change in the sugar - when produced from cane, it tends to be brownish, but the French version comes from beets so it is whiter - and the granules are finer. (Photo: AFP/Yamil Lage)  

24 Oct 2018 

HAVANA: Sugar - it's so quintessentially Cuban that even a young, machete-wielding Fidel Castro used to hack away at the cane stalks vital to the Caribbean island's economy.

Now, the long-time world leader in sugar production is importing the stuff for the first time, and in large amounts, from France after another bad harvest. 

Sugar used to account for the vast majority of Cuba's exports. But the fall of its big brother, the Soviet Union - a key, hungry customer - changed everything, as did a lack of investment in seeds, fertiliser and pesticides. 

To wit: in the early 1990s, Cuba produced about eight million tons of sugar a year. A decade later, it stopped reaching two million a year. 

A woman buys sugar produced in France at a grocery store in the Cuban capital Havana - experts are hoping the sector can rebound on the island, possibly with some foreign investment. (Photo: AFP/Yamil Lage)  

Back then, sugar accounted for almost 75 per cent of Cuban exports. In 2015, it was only 13 per cent, with other products like nickel and tobacco making up some of the difference. 

The 2017-2018 harvest suffered badly after Hurricane Irma ravaged the country, followed by a long rainy season.  So Cuba is importing sugar from France. 

WHITER SUGAR 

On the island, residents quickly caught wind of the somewhat counter-intuitive development.  Here, sugar from cane tends to be brownish. But the French version comes from beets so it is whiter, and the granules are finer. And that is what Cubans started receiving with their "libreta" - their ration book. 

Sugar produced in France is weighed at a grocery store in Havana - Cuba, long the world leader in sugar production, is importing the sweetener in huge quantities. (Photo: AFP/Yamil Lage)  

"The sugar we get now is very good. It is very sweet, not very different. The only difference is the color," said Felicia Navarro, a 40-year-old homemaker. 

The French government farm and seafood export agency FranceAgriMer said that from 2001 to 2017, Cuba had imported just three tons of sugar from France.  But in just three summer months this year - June, July and August - that number ballooned to 40,000 tons.  "This is the first time in history that Cuba is importing significant amounts of sugar from France," FranceAgriMer said. 

Cuba imports most of the food it consumes. Yearly, it imports 400,000 tons of wheat. 

"THE GOLDEN AGE IS OVER" 

These new numbers are humiliating for Cuba, given its past as the world's largest producer of sugar and one of the biggest exporters. Until 1960, the US was one of its main customers.

Then came the Soviets, who bought Cuban sugar at a discounted price. These days, sugar production here is disappointing. 

Sugar imported from France is somewhat of a humiliation for Cuba, which once was one of the world's top suppliers. (Photo: AFP/Yamil Lage)  

The expected annual amount is 1.6 million tons, but it is actually just 1.1 million. And it is no surprise that Cuba has to import because it has export contracts with China to fulfill, said FranceAgriMer. 

A British farm consultancy called FO Licht said it expects Cuban output to improve next season and reach 1.5 million tons - even if that is far from the big numbers it used to post in the 1980s. 

Cuba's government blames the US trade embargo, which since 1962 has blocked imports of badly needed farm and industrial equipment.  "The main obstacle to the development of the island is the embargo imposed by the United States," Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel said recently, adding his people were "condemned to die of hunger." 

The island nation lacks resources and hard currency, but there are also structural and logistical factors at play, said Cuban economist Omar Everleny Perez.  Cuba has been obsessed with diversifying its economy and making it less dependent on sugar exports, he said, but that has led to underinvestment - and the sector's worst harvest in a century.  "The Golden Age is over because production capacity is not what it was," said Perez.   

There used to be 150 factories in Cuba for processing sugar cane. Now there are only around 50.  Cuba should turn over 15 or so to foreign investors who have shown interest, he added. 

A new draft national constitution that will be voted on February should make things easier because it acknowledges that foreign investment is important to Cuba's development.  Otherwise, said Perez, Cuba runs the risk of being short on sugar in the next few years. 

Source: AFP/zl

Fogo In Florida Confirms 2nd Charcoal Purchase From Cuba; Two 20ft Containers

Hialeah, Florida-based Fogo Premium Lump Charcoal has confirmed an additional two (2) 20ft containers of charcoal from the Republic of Cuba were purchased and delivered from the Republic of Cuba to the United States in July 2018. 

The company reported no transactional issues with the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the United States Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the United States Department of Commerce, or Office of Legal Adviser (OLA) at the United States Department of State.

The July 2018 purchase was the second for the company; the first in January 2017 when the company purchased two (2) 20ft containers: 

https://www.cubatrade.org/blog/2017/1/5/charcoal-joins-coal-to-become-second-commodity-exported-from-cuba-to-the-united-states?rq=Fogo 

A thirty-three (33) pound bag of the charcoal costs US$49.95 with free shipping.

Unknown_c4ec4be0-8e5d-459b-9767-d06e17225d8d.jpeg

Council Of Economic Advisors Issues Report On Socialism; Cuba Featured

Today, the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) released a report outlining the opportunity costs socialism on the macro economy, including standards of living, and the impact on the Federal budget.  Below is the executive summary.  Read the full report here.  

Coincident with the 200th anniversary of Karl Marx’s birth, socialism is making a comeback in American political discourse. Detailed policy proposals from self-declared socialists are gaining support in Congress and among much of the electorate.  

It is unclear, of course, exactly what a typical voter has in mind when he or she thinks of “socialism.” But economists generally agree about how to define socialism, and they have devoted enormous time and resources to studying its costs and benefits. With an eye on this broad body of literature, this report discusses socialism’s historic visions and intents, its economic features, its impact on economic performance, and its relationship with recent policy proposals in the United States.  

We find that historical proponents of socialist policies and those in the contemporary United States share some of their visions and intents. They both characterize the distribution of income in market economies as the unjust result of “exploitation,” which should be rectified by extensive state control. The proposed solutions include single-payer systems, high tax rates (“from each according to his ability”), and public policies that hand out much of the Nation’s goods and services “free” of charge (“to each according to his needs”). Where they differ is that contemporary democratic socialists denounce state brutality and would allow individuals to privately own the means of production in many industries.  

In assessing the effects of socialist policies, it is important to recognize that they provide little material incentive for production and innovation and, by distributing goods and services for “free,” prevent prices from revealing economically important information about costs and consumer needs and wants. To this end, as the then–prime minister of the United Kingdom, Margaret Thatcher (1976), once argued, “Socialist governments . . . always run out of other people’s money,” and thus the way to prosperity is for the state to give “the people more choice to spend their own money in their own way.”  

Whether socialism delivers on its appealing promises is an empirical question. We begin our investigation by looking closely at the most highly socialist cases, which are typically agricultural economies, such as Maoist China, Cuba, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Their nondemocratic governments seized control of farming, promising to make food more abundant. The result was substantially less food production and tens of millions of deaths by starvation. Even if highly socialist policies are peacefully implemented under the auspices of democracy, the fundamental incentive distortions and information problems created by large state organizations and the centralized control of resources are also present in industrialized countries, as is currently the case in Venezuela. Lessons from poorly performing agricultural economies under socialist regimes carry over to government takeovers of other modern industries: They produce less rather than more.

These countries are examples of a more general pattern of socialism’s negative output effects. Such outcomes have also been observed in cross-country studies of the effect of greater economic freedom—quantified as an index of taxation and public spending, the extent of state-owned enterprises, economic regulation, and other factors—on real gross domestic product (GDP). This literature finds a strong association between greater economic freedom and better economic performance. It suggests that replacing U.S. policies with highly socialist policies, such as Venezuela’s, would reduce real GDP at least 40 percent in the long run, or about $24,000 per year for the average person.  

Although they are sometimes cited as more relevant socialist success stories, the experiences of the Nordic countries also support the conclusion that socialism reduces living standards. In many respects, the Nordic countries’ policies now differ significantly from what economists have in mind when they think of socialism. For instance, they do not provide healthcare for “free”; Nordic healthcare financing includes substantial cost sharing. Marginal labor income tax rates in the Nordic countries today are only somewhat higher than in the United States, and Nordic taxation overall is surprisingly less progressive than U.S. taxes. The Nordic countries also tax capital income less and regulate product markets less than the United States does. However, the Nordic countries do regulate and tax labor markets somewhat more; thus, American families earning the average wage would be taxed $2,000 to $5,000 more per year net of transfers if the United States had current Nordic policies. Living standards in the Nordic countries are at least 15 percent lower than in the United States.  

It may well be that American socialists are envisioning moving our policies to align with those of the Nordic countries in the 1970s, when their policies were more in line with economists’ traditional definition of socialism. We estimate that if the United States were to adopt these policies, its real GDP would decline by at least 19 percent in the long run, or about $11,000 per year for the average person.  

The Nordic and European versions of socialized medicine have been viewed as so desirable by modern U.S. socialists that they have proposed nationalizing payments for the healthcare sector (which makes up more than a sixth of the U.S. economy) through the recent “Medicare for All” proposal. This policy would distribute healthcare for “free” (i.e., without cost sharing) through a monopoly government health insurer that would centrally set all prices paid to suppliers such as doctors and hospitals. We find that if this policy were financed out of current Federal spending without borrowing or tax increases, then more than half the entire existing Federal budget would need to be cut. Or if it were financed through higher taxes, GDP would fall by 9 percent, or about $7,000 per person in 2022, due to high tax rates that would reduce incentives to supply the factors of production. Evidence on the productivity and effectiveness of single-payer systems suggests that “Medicare for All” would reduce both short- and long-run longevity and health despite increasing somewhat the population with health insurance.

Council_of_Economic_Advisers.png

Why Won't Governor Cuomo Confirm If He Met With President Diaz-Canel In NYC During UNGA?

The Honorable Andrew Cuomo (D), Governor of the State of New York, visited the Republic of Cuba in April 2015.

His office is refusing to disclose if the Governor met with H.E. Miguel Diaz-Canel, President of the Republic of Cuba, during the United Nations General Assembly held in New York City in September/October 2018.

LINK to three-year-since report on visit of Governor to the Republic of Cuba.

static1.squarespace.com.jpg

Ag/Food Exports To Cuba Turn Negative For The Year; And It's Counterintuitive

With prices of United States-sourced agricultural commodities and food products lower in 2018 compared to 2017 primarily due to political issues with China, Russia and European Union (EU)-member countries, the Republic of Cuba would have been expected to increase its purchases from the United States- spending less to obtain more as they have done in previous years when commodity prices were to their advantage.

However, primarily due to commercial and economic issues within the Republic of Cuba, lack of foreign exchange and necessity for long-term payment terms (365 days is not an uncommon request), there have been no sustained efforts by the government of the Republic of Cuba to take advantage of lower prices from the United States- and attempt to curry favor with United States-based exporters and public sector advocates.

For the period January 2018 through July 2018, agricultural commodity and food product exports (on cash-in-advance terms as required by statute) from the United States to the Republic of Cuba had increased 2.8%, although at a month-to-month declining rate, from the same period in 2017.

For the period January 2018 through August 2018, agricultural commodity and food product exports from the United States to the Republic of Cuba have decreased 8.8%.

ECONOMIC EYE ON CUBA©

October 2018

August 2018 Food/Ag Exports To Cuba Decrease 46.4%- 1

-8.8% Decrease Year-To-Year-5

Cuba Ranks 54th Of 224 U.S. Food/Ag Export Markets- 2

August 2018 Healthcare Product Exports US$42,320.00- 2

August 2018 Humanitarian Donations US$1,151,123.00- 3

Obama Administration Initiatives Exports Continue To Increase- 3

U.S. Port Export Data- 15

AUGUST 2018 FOOD/AG EXPORTS TO CUBA DECREASE 46.4%- Exports of food products & agricultural commodities from the United States to the Republic of Cuba in August 2018 were US$15,322,008.00 compared to US$28,627,776.00 in August 2017 and US$17,227,971.00 in August 2016. Exporters in August 2018 included among others: Wellesley, Massachusetts-based Grove Services (poultry); Atlanta, Georgia-based AJC International (poultry); Atlanta, Georgia-based Intervision Foods (poultry); Salisbury, Maryland-based Perdue Agri-Business (soybeans); Northbrook, Illinois-based PCS Sales (phosphates); and Little Rock, Arkansas-based Mountaire Farms (poultry).  Morristown, New Jersey-based Capsugel (2017 revenues US$1 billion), a subsidiary since 2017 of Basel, Switzerland-based Lonza Group (2017 revenues US$5.5 billion) exported gelatin capsules valued at US$25,826.00 (.84 metric tons) to the Republic of Cuba in August 2018; the first reported shipment valued at US$3,914.00 in April 2018.  Capsugel reported that the export was licensed on behalf of a Europe-based company.

Link To Complete Report With Port Data

Well-it-was-nice-while-it-lasted.jpg

From Marseille, France "Current State Of Play: US-Cuba Trade & Investment Relations"

4 October 2018

Cuba Business Club

9:00 am to 6:00 pm

Current State Of Play: United States-Republic Of Cuba Trade & Investment Relations

Villa Valmer

Avenue Corniche Président John Fitzgerald Kennedy

Marseille, France

 

PREPARED REMARKS (subject to editing)

 

John S. Kavulich

President

 

Good afternoon…. 

My four (4) most important messages to you:   

First, United States companies want to engage with the Republic of Cuba.   

Second, the Republic of Cuba is reluctant to engage with United States companies.   

Third, the Trump Administration has decimated the interest by United States companies towards the Republic of Cuba. 

Fourth, United States companies are not optimistic for any near-term to medium-term expansion of the commercial, economic or political bilateral relationship. 

United States laws, regulations and policies do authorize United States companies to engage in a substantive range of exporting, importing and the provision of services.  Obviously, the range of opportunities are constricted- and United States companies generally prefer to determine their survivability in terms of identifying and engagement with markets rather than their local, state or federal government determining their destiny.     

What is the United States commercial relationship with the Republic of Cuba?  Sixty (60) companies with a limited presence in Cuba; there nine (9) sales offices (five airlines, two travel agencies, and distribution facility in ZED Mariel (controlled by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of the Republic of Cuba (FAR)), managed by the Territory of Puerto Rico-based distributor for Illinois-based equipment manufacturer Caterpillar Inc.), one (1) healthcare product joint venture (also located in ZED Mariel), and no assembly or manufacturing operations.  Connecticut-based General Electric Co. due to its acquisition of France-based Alstom, has undertaken a multi-million-dollar valued power generation project for which it is being paid to perform.  General Electric has a certified claim against the Republic of Cuba valued at US$5.9 million registered with United States Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (USFCSC). 

The sixty (60) United States companies have combined global revenues of US$1 trillion and employ 2,000,000 worldwide.   

Since 2001, approximately ninety-five (95) companies have exported more than US$5.8 billion in agricultural commodities and food products to the Republic of Cuba.   

Since 2003, United States companies have exported approximately US$25 million in healthcare products to the Republic of Cuba including medical equipment, medical instruments, medical supplies and pharmaceuticals.   

For the period 2016 through 2019, the three-largest United States cruise lines (Florida-based Carnival Corporation & PLC, Florida-based Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. and Florida-based Norwegian Cruise Lines Holdings) and some smaller companies have announced more than 375 sailings; potentially delivering more than 624,000 passengers to the Republic of Cuba.  The companies could earn more than US$834 million in gross revenues- and US$89+ Million would be spent in the Republic of Cuba by passengers; and port fees to the Republic of Cuba of approximately US$23 million. 

In conjunction with and independent of the cruise line activities, United States airlines will earn gross revenues of approximately US$800 million from transporting passengers to/from Florida in conjunction with the cruises and for other visits to the Republic of Cuba by individuals subject to United States jurisdiction; with an additional US$200 million going to hotels & restaurants located in Florida. 

Some United States airlines have relinquished their routes to the Republic of Cuba citing low demand, high operating costs, and fare competition.  Then, some other air carriers have sought those routes and requested new routes.  The Trump Administration has approved those new routings with a hope that its policies will result in fewer flights.   

More than 3,000 representatives of United States companies- sole proprietorships, consultants, partnerships; small, medium and large; privately-held and publicly-held; organizations, associations, co-operatives, groups- if you can think of a type of business, then it has probably visited the city of Havana since 17 December 2014.  Some visited with official invitations; most on their own. 

Thus far, the Republic of Cuba has responded by focusing upon Obama Administration initiatives that will bring it revenue with the least depth of footprint in the Republic of Cuba by United States companies. 

So how does it look since 17 December 2014 when The Honorable Barack Obama, President of the United States, and H.E. General Raul Castro, President of the Republic of Cuba, addressed their respective nations to discuss the commercial, economic and political re-engagement? 

When President Obama addressed the nation in December 2014, he wore a dark suit, stood at a podium, and for fifteen minutes (using 2,283 words) shared with specificity what he wanted to do to, with, and for the citizens of the Republic of Cuba.   

When President Castro addressed his nation the same day, he wore a military uniform, sat at a desk, and spoke with vagueness for five minutes (using 682 words).   

Those Presidential Optics mattered…. 

Other than permitting a substantial increase in the number of visitors to the Republic of Cuba, and thus earning significant revenues, there has been no embrace (or authorization) for most of the commercially-focused initiatives offered through the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the United States Department of the Treasury, Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) of the United States Department of Commerce and United States Department of State (OLA- Office of Legal Advisor)- unless they primarily focus upon hospitality and travel:   

·        Maryland-based Marriott International is managing one property, the Four Points Sheraton Havana, and has announced that the Hotel Inglaterra in Havana will be under its management in December 2019- three years behind schedule; a third property management opportunity vanished without explanation.  As a result of a series of mergers and acquisitions during the last fifty-eight (58) years, a US$63 million certified claim against the Republic of Cuba for assets (including land) initially made by New York-based International Telephone & Telegraph Corporation (ITT), which became ITT Sheraton, then acquired by Connecticut-based Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide which was itself was acquired in 2016 by Marriott International which can use this value as a means to secure opportunities within Cuba; and a provision within the Libertad Act (“Helms-Burton”) of 1996 permits Marriott International to settle, sell, rent, lease, barter or obtain short-term, medium-term, long term or permanent disposition.  In 2016, the OFAC granted a license(s) to Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide to manage three properties owned by Republic of Cuba government-operated entities.    

·        California-based Airbnb is managing reservations for approximately 23,000 residences in the Republic of Cuba.   

·        New York-based Verizon, Texas-based AT&T, Kansas-based Sprint and Washington-based T-Mobile have roaming agreements in the Republic of Cuba.   

·        A recently-announced joint venture (in conjunction with clinical trials of a therapeutic) located within ZED Mariel to develop pharmaceuticals relating to the treatment of cancer with Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center from my hometown of Buffalo, New York.  ZED Mariel is controlled by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of the Republic of Cuba (FAR). 

·        Texas-based American Airlines, Georgia-based Delta Air Lines, New York-based JetBlue Airways, Texas-based Southwest Airlines and Illinois-based United Airlines are operating regularly-scheduled flights to cities in the Republic of Cuba.  Four (4) airlines have ticket offices in Havana; one airline, Jet Blue Airways, has two.  In 2016, eight (8) airlines requested 3.4 million seats from the authorized 1.2 million passenger seats for the 110 daily United States-Republic of Cuba routes.  The 3.4 million was nearly the total number of visitors to the Republic of Cuba from throughout the world in 2016.     

·        In August 2016, Switzerland-based Nestle, through its New York-based Nestle Nespresso subsidiary, began importing to the United States “Cafecito de Cuba” capsules.  A journey for the coffee beans of 10,000 miles (Republic of Cuba-Switzerland-United States) rather than hundreds of miles (Republic of Cuba-United States) … The Republic of Cuba was sending a message to United States-based companies; watch, but don’t participate.  

What Hasn’t the Republic of Cuba Done With United States Companies?   

·        Ferries await authorization 

·        Authorization for a wide variety of United States companies to open offices has yet to materialize 

·        United States companies continue to await permission to export products directly to independent businesses in the Republic of Cuba.   

·        A proposal remains under consideration, more than two years after initially proposed, to establish a wholesale distribution center in Havana. 

·        One Alabama-based company has waited more than two (2) years to deliver agricultural equipment that was ordered by a Republic of Cuba government-operated entity. 

The United States business community is in this place precisely because the Obama Administration and Castro Administration believed in inevitability rather than uncertainty.  And this place is frustrating.  And this place is unnecessary.     

Each government expected their respective negotiation platforms to remain afloat until 12:00 pm on 20 January 2017 rather than 3:00 am on 9 November 2016.  They didn’t prepare for Mr. Donald Trump to become President-Elect Donald Trump.  They only prepared for President-Elect Hilary Clinton. 

Companies always model for the results that want and for the results they do not want.  Neither the Obama Administration nor the Castro Administration modeled for what they did not want.   

With respect to the interests of the United States business community, the Obama Administration and Castro Administration were reckless.  They should have permitted more commerce so there would be strong commercial roots immune from interruption.  And now we have the Trump Administration. 

The Obama Administration should have lessened restrictions upon the use of the U.S. Dollar by the Republic of Cuba for its international transactions; should have authorized Direct Correspondent Banking (DCB)- rather than one-way accounts; should have done something relating to certified claims settlements; and should have permitted more than coffee and charcoal to be imported to the United States for commercial sales. 

Noticeable, however, the Trump Administration has not impeded meetings between representatives of the United States Department of State and their counterparts at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs; nor have meetings been disrupted with respect to other bilateral issues.  Diplomatic travel visas continue to be issued; and the Trump Administration was criticized by its allies in the United States Congress for permitting too many officials to accompany H.E. Miguel Diaz-Canel, President of the Republic of Cuba, to the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York City in September 2018.  Republic of Cuba government-operated Prensa Latina’s Washington, DC bureau was permitted to re-open.  And, while in New York City at a meeting with United States business representatives, H.E. Miguel Diaz-Canel, President of the Republic of Cuba, intimated that he might return to the United States, not to New York City, but to Washington DC.  A cryptic message.   

The Trump Administration believes that lessening support from Venezuela and increasing inability of countries making payment for services provided by Republic of Cuba nationals will force the Republic of Cuba to make further changes. 

The (relatively) slow-motion implosion of the Bolivar Republic is an unwelcomed catalyst for the Diaz-Canel Administration to absorb changes that it would not engage within the context of a voluntary program. 

Note that as the Republic of Cuba is meaningfully responsible for the endurance of the Maduro Administration in Caracas, the Diaz-Canel Administration could leverage that influence to assist the Duarte Administration in Colombia and the Trump Administration in bringing stability to Venezuela.   

However, a result of a re-stabilized Venezuela is increased oil production which would benefit Venezuela- and the People’s Republic of China and Russian Federation to whom Venezuela is substantially indebted; and would benefit the Republic of Cuba by lessening rationale for necessary changes to its commercial, economic and political infrastructure.  Those necessary changes are primarily a result of decreased (and inconsistent) commercial and economic benefits received during the last five (5) years from Venezuela.   

A prosperous Venezuela and a stable Republic of Cuba would be challenges for the Trump Administration.  Global oil prices would likely decrease, but stabilize from increased oil production in Venezuela as there would be greater dispersion among producers- thus competition.  Lower oil prices would benefit the Republic of Cuba, and the People’s Republic of China; not so much the Russian Federation.  

The Trump Administration has been brilliant (which doesn’t mean that the United States business community is supportive) with its focus upon the role of the military throughout the economy of the Republic of Cuba.  No United States company executive wants to be interviewed on television explaining why their company prefers to be in business with a country where the military controls the economy. 

United States companies are prepared for increased restrictions upon transactions and relationships with entities controlled by the Revolutionary Armed Forces of the Republic of Cuba (FAR): Enterprise Administration Group (GAESA) and its subsidiaries including, but not limited to Gaviota (tourism). 

Being Used As Bait 

United States companies are under no illusion as to their role in today’s Republic of Cuba.  They appreciate, but do not approve of being proffered as bait to entice companies from European Union (EU)-member countries and other countries. 

The Republic of Cuba encourages United States companies to want to be in the Republic of Cuba- and to say so in public.  However, the Republic of Cuba does not necessarily want United States companies operating in the Republic of Cuba. 

Examples include the first agreement to export coffee from the Republic of Cuba through the United Kingdom (where the coffee beans had previously been shipped) then to Switzerland rather than to United States-based companies who had for many years expressed an interest.  There was an export of charcoal from the Republic of Cuba to the United States- ironically brokered by the United States-based attorney for the United States citizen whose reckless behavior and subsequent imprisonment in the Republic of Cuba disrupted most of the Obama Administration’s time in office; executives of United States companies were appalled by the optics of that transaction process.  Other opportunities have gone unanswered.  

United States companies have licenses from the OFAC and BIS and authorizations from the OLA which remain unannounced, unimplemented, and unpublicized.  Executives are concerned about being used as the subject of a Presidential Tweet or mention during a Presidential Speech. 

Despite the repeated introduction of legislation in the United States Congress which, if enacted into law, would remove prohibitions upon the provision of payment terms for the sale of agricultural commodities and food products to the Republic of Cuba, there have been no financial institutions or companies which have publicly said what payment terms they would provide to Republic of Cuba government-operated Alimport (under the auspice of the Ministry of Foreign Trade of the Republic of Cuba- MINCEX) which contracts for most United States exports and other Republic of Cuba government-operated entities.   

That’s a problem and a (not the) reason there has been no legislation that has become law in more than 6,500 days- that’s almost eighteen (18) years.  However, during the last eighteen (18) years, more than US$5.8 billion in agricultural commodities and food products have been exported from the United States to the Republic of Cuba on a “cash in advance” basis. 

Note that United States exporters did not want payment terms when the last legislation (Trade Sanctions Reform and Export Enhancement Act of 2000- TSREEA) was moving through the United States Congress in 1999 and 2000 which ultimately re-authorized the direct export, on a payment of cash-in-advance basis, of agricultural commodities and food products; they preferred the security from cash payments even if the requirement resulted in less sales; they were keenly aware of a risk of payment default and what the result would be for overall commercial and political engagement from the report of a default.  Unfortunately, the TSREEA also specifically prohibited individuals subject to United States jurisdiction from visiting the Republic of Cuba for the purpose of tourism.  It was an unfortunate, and likely avoidable compromise by a Member of the United States Congress.  

United States Exports & Imports 

Of 232 global export markets for food products and agricultural commodities from the United States, since 2001 the Republic of Cuba has ranked from 25th to 60th.  That’s impressive. 

Why doesn’t the Republic of Cuba doesn’t purchase rice from the State of Arkansas?  Because government of Vietnam-owned companies provide the Republic of Cuba with up to two years to pay for rice; and some Republic of Cuba government-operated companies generally request from one year to three years to make payments for most imports.  No United States company will provide those payment terms. 

United States export (product and service) opportunities to the Republic of Cuba have expanded from food products and agricultural commodities to telecommunications equipment and services, agricultural and construction equipment, power generation machinery, almost any product for the direct use by an independent business and (quasi) private cooperative, and provision of micro-credits.  However, the Republic of Cuba has yet to authorize United States companies to directly export products or services to independent businesses.

Equipment manufacturer Illinois-based Deere & Company has offered to provide financing for its exports to the Republic of Cuba; that is a first such public offering by any United States company. 

Import opportunities from the Republic of Cuba remain limited to software, coffee, charcoal, music, artwork, informational materials, crafts, and items produced by the self-employed and independent businesses. 

Foreign Subsidiary Opportunities 

United States companies have explored the use of export credit and export guarantee programs of countries within which they have foreign subsidiaries, Canada for example.   

At present, this limited focus is primarily towards the export of products to the Republic of Cuba that are authorized by the United States government, but have issues relating to the provision of long-term financing, such as those for power generation projects.   

Direct Foreign Investment (DFI) 

In the United States individuals in government or at companies vie to be the last signature on a document that authorizes a project- so that they might gain the most credit for the project.   

In the Republic of Cuba, the general rule is to avoid being the last signature on a document- because that person may be held accountable for the project… they “made it happen.”   

Important to appreciate the view of DFI from the perspective of the Republic of Cuba, today’s Republic of Cuba…. DFI is not regarded as a means to change the Republic of Cuba; it is permitted as a means to sustain the Republic of Cuba, to preserve the Republic of Cuba. 

During the last twenty-five (25) years, when the presence of DFI has fulfilled its need to provide foreign exchange, the Republic of Cuba has throttled-back its impact. 

Today, however, as the Republic of Cuba can no longer depend upon the financial largess of Venezuela; and the governments of Russia, Iran, and China are incapable of replacing the billions of dollars in annual value that’s been provided by Venezuela and to a lesser extent by countries on the continent of Africa, since the signing of a discount oil agreement in 2000, DFI is a beast that must now be embraced, albeit reluctantly.  

For United States businesses, there is a prospect of 11.3 million consumers residing 93 miles south of Key West, Florida, who have one of the highest awareness’s and preferences for United States brands of any non-English-speaking country. 

President Obama may have been the last lifeguard to save the Republic of Cuba from retaining the status quo.  He provided a twenty-five-month (25) lifeline valued at a potential US$12 billion in earnings and savings to the Republic of Cuba.  He was disruptive.  He required little and some would argue nothing from the Republic of Cuba.   

Certified Claimants- 30 of 5,913 Can Make The Difference 

Neither the Obama Administration nor the Castro Administration focused upon the difficult issues and, as a result, the foundation for what is known as “the embargo” has not shifted.  The Trump Administration and the Diaz-Canel Administration could change that lack of resolve.   

From 17 December 2014 through 20 January 2017, there were two (2) meetings in more than 700 days where the issue of the 5,911 certified claims was discussed- two meetings.  And, at the end of first meeting, a second meeting was not scheduled.  And, at the end of the second meeting a third meeting was not scheduled.  And, the meetings were discussions rather than negotiations.  The Obama Administration reported that the issue of the certified claims was a “high priority.” 

With a publicly established timetable for completion and publicly established benchmarks to manage progress.  United States companies, and not only certified claimants, would applaud this effort as the foundation for United States statutes, regulations and policies are constructed upon the issue of the certified claims.  The Republic of Cuba would also gain mightily as a result- from governments and countries with whom it seeks commercial, economic and political value- specifically European union (EU)-member countries.  With a settlement of the certified claims, there truly would be a reason for non-United States-based companies to believe that competition from United States-based companies would be more than a marketing strategy by the Republic of Cuba.  The Trump Administration wants to make deals; settling the issue of the certified claims is precisely the type of legacy deal that is attractive to the Trump Administration and should be attractive to the Diaz-Canel Administration.  Be bold. 

If the Republic of Cuba wants to move the bilateral relationship forward, then the Diaz-Canel Administration should propose directly to the Trump Administration that each country appoint a negotiating team and immediately commence negotiations, not discussions, to settle the issue of the certified claims- and only the certified claims.  The issue of the certified claims will not simply vanish if ignored.   

There were 8,821 claims of which 5,913 awards certified by the United States Foreign Claims Settlement Commission (USFCSC) are valued at US$1,902,202,284.95.  The USFCSC permitted interest to be accrued in the amount of 6% per annum; the current total value is approximately US$6 billion to US$8 billion.  Thirty (30) United States-based companies hold 56.85% of the total value. 

The Republic of Cuba seeks from US$134 billion to US$933 billion for damages it believes were inflicted by United States laws, regulations and policies from 1962 onward; the United States seeks from US$1.9 billion to US$8 billion for expropriated assets (beginning with an oil refinery).  Can there be a negotiation when the parties are potentially US$925 billion apart? 

A certified claims settlement should be based upon the payment of 100% of the value of each certified claim.  Even with a full settlement based upon principal and interest, the annual rate of inflation has substantially diminished the value of each certified claim.   

Opportunities for settlement include, but are not limited to, debt-for-equity swaps and substitution investments (one structure for another; one piece of land for another, etc.).  In combination with or separately from compensation formats, the Republic of Cuba could provide transferable values to the certified claimants including: 

·        Income tax holidays

·        Import duty exemptions

·        Reduced energy rates

·        Property tax credits

·        Earned income tax credits  

The Republic of Cuba should consider hosting a multi-day Certified Claimant Settlement Forum- and any certified claimant who desires to return to the Republic of Cuba marketplace and has a proposal would be welcomed; and all proposals would be subject to a thirty (30) day yes-or-no response.   

Given the lack of progress, the Trump Administration might step aside and authorize a Certified Claims Committee (using the thirty (30) largest certified claimants) to directly negotiate a certified claims settlement with the Republic of Cuba; or, as the Libertad Act (“Helms-Burton”) of 1996 permits, create individual private settlements amongst themselves and the Republic of Cuba. 

Some certified claimants have pondered asking the Obama Administration to retain Mr. Kenneth Feinberg, a New York, New York-based attorney specializing in mediation and alternative dispute resolution, who served as Special Master for the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund and TARP Executive Compensation; Administrator of the BP Deepwater Horizon Disaster Victim Compensation Fund; and retained to assist in the Michigan-based General Motors recall response and compensation for Volkswagen owners.  Mr. Feinberg, who could be appointed as a Special Envoy, appreciates the singular importance of deadlines. 

What’s Truly Important? 

The legacy of the Diaz-Canel Administration should not be that it attempted to preserve what could not be preserved; its legacy can be having removed the foundation upon which conflict with the United States is based- and as a result, dismantle a significant component, not the component of hardship inflicted upon the citizens of the Republic of Cuba. 

The Obama Administration initiatives towards the Republic of Cuba helped to expand the desire of citizens to communicate with one another, inside and outside of the Republic of Cuba, with family and friends; and increased both the desire and the opportunities for independent (self-employed) commerce.    

During the coming years, the Republic of Cuba will increasingly find a magnetism from the United States that will be impossible to reject- and the forces created by the desire of youth, equipped with the means to communicate within the country and outside of the country- principally to the United States, will result in societal schisms that will require careful management. 

The Republic of Cuba continues to struggle with the definition of success- how much may a person make and retain and disperse?  Must there be a limitation upon earnings; a level at which the government will seek to mandate, regulate, legislate so that citizen equality is forcibly maintained.  

The Republic of Cuba will restrain economic prosperity for its citizens if the perceived result from re-engagement with the United States government, and United States companies, and United States citizens (focused upon South Florida and Northern New Jersey) means increased uncertainty in commercial, economic and political control. 

The Republic of Cuba is continuing a period of cautiousness and a full-on re-engagement with the United States is problematic as the policy of the United States remains to use all means to seek commercial, economic and political change within the Republic of Cuba.  Not regime change, rather change of behavior by the regime.   

Any re-engagement with the United States results in uncertainty… the Republic of Cuba dislikes uncertainty.   

The Republic of Cuba often believes that it need not make any changes, concessions, repatriations or reparations.  It does, and it will. 

We hear often that for the Republic of Cuba, the reason for a limited response to the Obama Administration initiatives was and remains “the embargo.”  Granted, there are statutory and regulatory impediments to a “normalized” relationship. 

However, the question for the Republic of Cuba is to what extent will the people of the country be denied opportunities solely because not all bilateral issues have been resolved?   

There is no sugar-coating of the impact of United States polices, regulations and laws- they are comprehensive and exterritorial and unlikely to be removed as a package; they will be lessened in pieces; that’s the political reality. 

The relationship between the United States and the Republic of Cuba has never been about a moment; its been about a series of moments.  Awaiting a moment is futile. 

Which leaves us where?  

The initiatives proposed and implemented by President Obama (some of which were unsuccessfully attempted by predecessors) were designed to tear at the social fabric of the Republic of Cuba; with a goal of recreating a middle class and a professional class abridged by the 1959 Revolution… a challenging landscape today defined by those who have (through earnings or remittances or labor) and those who have not. 

President Obama's message… Create your worth as opposed to the government of the Republic of Cuba determining your worth.  Be what you can, what you want... not what you're told to be. 

The private restaurants- or paladares, have become cathedrals representing the demise of the Republic of Cuba’s Socialist model.  The owners and the workers want more and are willing to work to get more.  Socialism does not provide them with everything that they need or want or aspire to have. 

There are entrepreneurial Republic of Cuba nationals, mostly young, who are using the revised landscape as incubators for their talents- initiate, develop, and then for some, they believe the only means to flourish is to leave the country.  These individuals know that they have talent- that their talent may be expressed, to limits…. They want more. 

Where We’re Headed?...  

The Obama Administration used visitors as an army, airlines as an air force, cruise ships as a navy and, to a lesser extent thus far, companies as marines to create a beachhead in the Republic of Cuba that can't be pulled or pushed off the island- either by political forces in the United States or in the Republic of Cuba.
In Internet terms, The Obama Administration wanted to create “CubaLegacy 2.0”- too big to roll back, too visible to hide, too collaborative, too many participants to remove, too bilateral to untangle.  President Obama wanted to bring change to the Republic of Cuba far more and far faster than the Republic of Cuba wanted change to arrive in the Republic of Cuba.    

H.E. Excellency General Raul Castro, then-President of the Republic of Cuba wanted, and now H.E. Excellency Miguel Diaz-Canel, current-President of the Republic of Cuba, wants to withstand (almost) everything that is coming his direction, yet find a means to gain value from it and not be perceived as rejecting it by governments and companies that are needed to fund what the Republic of Cuba believes it requires; a complex series of juggling maneuvers.   

The Republic of Cuba will never have a more energetic negotiating partner than they did in President Barack Obama.  There were lost opportunities in Washington and in Havana.  The Republic of Cuba was hoping to wait-out the Obama Administration until the transition to the expected Clinton Administration.  And now there is the Trump Administration.   

The Next Months (Or Years) …  

One member of the United States Senate is, today, the most influential Member of the United States Congress relating to the Republic of Cuba- The Honorable Marco Rubio (R-Florida).  He is of Cuban descent.  Senator Rubio is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Transnational Crime, Civilian Security, Democracy, Human Rights, and Global Women's Issues of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate.  He is thinking about the next opportunity to run for president of the United States; his first effort in 2016 having been unsuccessful.  The second-most influential member of the United States Senate with respect to the Republic of Cuba is The Honorable Robert Menendez (D- New Jersey), who is also of Cuban descent.  The third-most influential member of the United States Senate with respect to the Republic of Cuba is The Honorable Ted Cruz (R- Texas), who is also of Cuban descent.  They represent three percent (3%) of the one hundred (100)-member United States Senate. If the Republican Party retains control of the United States Senate as a result of the 6 November 2018 elections, The Honorable James E. Risch (R- Idaho), will become Chairman of the United States Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.  Senator Risch was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba. 

If the Democrat Party gains control of the United States Senate, Senator Robert Menendez likely (should he be re-elected one 6 November 2018) will become chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate.  Senator Menendez was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  The Honorable Benjamin Cardin (D- Maryland) would likely become chairman of the Subcommittee on Western Hemisphere, Transnational Crime, Civilian Security, Democracy, Human Rights, and Global Women's Issues of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate.  Senator Cardin supported Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba. 

If the Democrat Party gains control of the United States House of Representatives, The Honorable Ed Royce (R- California) chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the United States House of Representatives, who is retiring, would likely be replaced by The Honorable Eliot Engel (D- New York), the ranking Democrat member who was supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  The Honorable Christopher Smith (R- New Jersey) would likely become the ranking Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee; Representative Smith was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  The Honorable Paul Cook (R- California), chairman of the Western Hemisphere subcommittee would likely be replaced by The Honorable Albio Sires (D- New Jersey), the ranking Democrat member who is of Cuban descent and was not supportive of Obama Administration initiatives relating to the Republic of Cuba.  

Regardless of which political party controls which chamber of the United States Congress, the Trump Administration will likely pursue commercial, economic and political policies, through the use of regulations and other processes, which will be influenced by the Republican party, especially with respect to the Republic of Cuba.  The OFAC, BIS and OLA will continue to be weaponized. 

A new Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs at the National Security Council (NSC) in The White House is The Honorable Mauricio Claver-Carone, a highly competent and skilled political operative… who is of Cuban descent.  His role in shaping the United States relationship with the Republic of Cuba should not be undervalued and ignored at one’s peril. 

An amendment to what is known as the “Farm Bill” is expected to soon be enacted into law.  The amendment, authored by The Honorable Heidi Heitkamp (D- North Dakota), a member of the United States Senate (who polls indicate may lose her re-election effort on 6 November 2018), was made likely (and ironically) to be included in the legislation specifically due to efforts by Senator Marco Rubio.  The amendment will permit United States taxpayer funds to be used for United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) programs managed by independent organizations for agricultural commodity and food product promotion in the Republic of Cuba.  Senator Rubio added language to prohibit any of the USDA funds from being directed to any FAR-owned/controlled/affiliated entity.    

Legislative history has shown the Republic of Cuba to be a low-value commodity; to be traded away in most instances because it lacks importance.  The legislative calendar is littered with Members of Congress pronouncing they would not permit legislation unrelated to the Republic of Cuba to proceed unless issues relating to the Republic of Cuba were resolved.  In the end, no Member of Congress was going to seek to hold appropriation or other legislation of national importance because of the Republic of Cuba. 

Prudent to again remember that the last change in United States law relating to the Republic of Cuba was more than 6,500 days ago- nearly eighteen (18) years. 

Final Observations… 

United States companies are not delusional with respect to the construct within which they observe and analyze the Republic of Cuba; they are generally sober in appreciating the complex and often, from their perspective, self-defeating decision-making process and resulting decisions by the Republic of Cuba relating to the interests of United States companies. 

There will be a significant presence in the Republic of Cuba by United States companies.  The current government of the Republic of Cuba will seek to limit that presence; and they will likely succeed.  Successor governments of the Republic of Cuba will have neither the political desire nor commercial interest to do so.  

Thank you.

LINK To Complete Text

IMG_20181004_0938498.jpg

Trump Administration Travel Regulations Claim A High Profile Victim: American Airlines

Excerpts:

28 September 2018

MOTION OF AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE U.S. GATEWAY CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO ALL U.S.-CUBA FREQUENCIES

American desires route flexibility to move its daily Charlotte (CLT) – Havana (HAV) flight to its Miami (MIA) hub for the near future. American’s CLT-HAV service is underutilized, with an average load factor of under 55 percent for the first half of 2018. Of the passengers who fly this route, fewer than one in five is a local passenger. Both local passengers and connecting passengers on American’s CLT-HAV service will retain multiple connecting opportunities via MIA. 

In every month in 2018, since the new restrictions on U.S.-Cuba travel became effective, the load factor on this route has been substantially lower than at the same point in 2017.

The evolving restrictions on travel to Cuba have caused sharp changes in demand for U.S.- Cuba scheduled service, creating unique challenges for carriers. When the U.S. Government normalized relations with Cuba and authorized “individual people-to-people” travel to Cuba, traffic to Cuba from several U.S. gateways surged. But the new restrictions on individual people- to-people travel, which became effective on November 9, 2017, reduced demand by non-Cuban- American travelers and caused U.S.-Cuba traffic at many gateways to drop significantly.5 As a result, Alaska and Delta terminated their daily Havana services from Los Angeles and New York, respectively. Both carriers attributed their service terminations to the new U.S.-Cuba travel restrictions.6 Frontier and Spirit cancelled service as well, and several other Havana services were downgauged, greatly reducing overall Havana capacity, to the detriment of passengers. 

The cuts to Havana service that began in 2017 have reduced Havana seats by nearly 20 percent from the Department’s initial allocation in 2016, even accounting for the new services that will begin later this year.

American respectfully requests that the Department remove the U.S. gateway conditions applicable to the current allocations and future awards of U.S.-Cuba frequencies.1 This request, if granted, will provide all carriers that offer scheduled service to Cuba the flexibility to operate service from any U.S. gateway where the carrier holds underlying route authority. Route flexibility will enable carriers to respond quickly and efficiently to the unusually frequent and marked changes in demand for U.S.-Cuba travel since the re-introduction of scheduled service in 2016. Passengers will be the winners as scarce frequencies will be more likely to remain in continuous usage and to be directed to gateways with the greatest demand. The current gateway-specific awards have proven not to maximize public benefits. Due to sharp and unforeseeable demand fluctuations, frequencies have gone unutilized pending Department reallocations and carriers have been unable to provide sufficient service where it is most needed. Granting carriers route flexibility resolves these problems by allowing market forces to work while maintaining the Department’s important role in the allocation of scarce frequencies. 

Executive Summary

American seeks route flexibility to allow all carriers to adjust their Cuba services efficiently in response to the rapid shifts in demand that are unique to U.S.-Cuba travel. Changing restrictions on travel to Cuba have already contributed to the failure of several Cuba services in the two-year period following the reinstitution of scheduled passenger service. The effect of those changes and the likelihood of further change warrant providing carriers more tools to ensure that Cuba capacity at all U.S. gateways can be realigned to match demand. Without this flexibility, carriers, passengers, and the Department must endure lengthy and repeated frequency allocation proceedings before frequencies can be moved to other gateways. Passengers suffer during the extended period when the frequencies at issue remain unused.

LINK TO COMPLETE MOTION

airfare.jpg