PPCC: Pisitófilos Creditófagos. Primavera 2026

[Derby]

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/04/30/private-credit-risk-banks-europe-earnings-barclays-ubs-debt-santander.html

Private credit fears loom large over Europe’s banks this earnings season

Key Points
*European banks’ exposure to private credit has returned to the spotlight this earnings season.
*Both UBS and Deutsche Bank called their positions “well diversified”, while Santander said its exposure is “immaterial.”
*But Bank of America’s latest credit investor survey highlighted growing anxieties over spillover risks from private credit, particularly among higher-grade investors.

Banking executives in Europe have moved to calm investor concerns over private credit risks, as lenders’ exposure to the troubled sector re-emerged during earnings season.

Barclays revealed a £15 billion ($20.3 billion) exposure to private credit in its first quarter earnings statement on Tuesday. This formed part of an overall structured financing exposure to non-bank financial intermediaries, totaling £66 billion, which also included an additional £1 billion tied to business development companies, a focus of recent stress in the U.S.

The U.K. lender said it took a £228 million credit-related hit during the quarter after the collapse of specialist mortgage provider Market Financial Solutions (MFS) in February.

C.S. Venkatakrishnan, Barclays’ CEO, said the single-name charge, which related to a “well-publicized, sophisticated fraud”, was in its securitized products business. The U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority opened an investigation into MSF in March. Its collapse was viewed as a potential “cockroach” pointing to wider issues in the space.

Barclays said its broader private credit activity is focused mainly on senior corporate lending, predominantly in closed-end funds involving large established managers, with strict limits on borrower and sector concentrations.

Meanwhile, Santander’s potential losses arising from its credit exposures, including those tied to Market Financial Solutions, have been “fully covered” in the first quarter, according to CFO José García Cantera.

Speaking with CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe” on Wednesday, Cantera declined to comment specifically on MFS. But he said Santander’s exposure to the wider private credit space remains “immaterial”, representing less than 1% of its total exposures, with 70% of it comprising subscription facilities.

“For us, the question is not if one particular case attracts attention. It’s whether systems actually work,” he said. “We feel very, very comfortable with our credit systems because they have proven time and time again they work properly.”

Tensions spread

Santander’s exposure to London-based MFS, which focused on bridge loans and buy-to-let mortgages, is believed to be between £200 million and £300 million.

MFS entered insolvency proceedings in a U.K. court in February, leaving debts of some £1.3 billion amid allegations of mismanagement, with its failure reverberating across a range of banks and asset management firms on both sides of the Atlantic.

Its implosion followed the high-profile collapses of First Brands and Tricolor in the U.S. last year, which ignited fears over risky debt underpinning the private credit market — even though those failures related to complex asset-based finance and bank-syndicated debt, rather than traditional private middle-market direct lending.

Anxieties have since spread to U.S. business development companies — investment vehicles managed by private credit firms — amid growing scrutiny over lending to the software sector, which faces disruption from agentic AI.

UBS CEO Sergio Ermotti acknowledged the ongoing stress within private credit this year, particularly in the so-called “semi-liquid” BDC space, where several asset managers have restricted investor redemptions.

“It’s more of a liquidity kind of issue, than necessarily a clear underlying performance issue,” Ermotti told CNBC’s Carolin Roth in an interview on Wednesday.

But UBS, which reported its first-quarter earnings on Wednesday, does “not see any major dislocation or issues” arising from its own private credit investments, according to Ermotti.

The Swiss banking and asset management giant’s exposure to private credit is “well diversified” and “good quality”, amounting to around 0.5% of its balance sheet, he added.

Deutsche Bank, meanwhile, said its private credit exposure has not incurred losses, is “well diversified,” and reflects “strong underwriting standards.”

‘Opaque’

Private credit spillover risks remain a major concern among investment-grade investors, partly due to uncertainty around bank and insurance exposure, according to Bank of America’s latest credit investor survey.

Barnaby Martin, head of European credit strategy at BofA Global Research, said IG investors see the asset exposure of the banks and insurers as “still a bit opaque,” while software loan volatility is also a pressure point.

In contrast, high-yield specialist investors “nearer the fault line” currently appear “a lot more sanguine” on private credit spillover risks, Martin told CNBC’s “Squawk Box Europe”. Instead, they’re more concerned about high energy prices and inflation, according to the BofA survey.

He explained that while credit concerns in the U.S. center around software risk, distress in Europe is emerging in the chemicals sector, and the impact of China exporting goods and raw materials into the continent.

“That’s what we’ve got to worry about,” Martin added. “That’s where your credit loss problem in Europe is more centered.”

[Derby]

https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-is-losing-e500m-a-day-in-energy-crisis-ursula-von-der-leyen-warns/

Iran war costs EU €500M a day, von der Leyen warns

The ongoing closure of the Strait of Hormuz has driven up global energy prices.


European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen delivers a speech at the European Parliament in Strasbourg on April 29, 2026. | Sebastien Bozon/AFP via Getty Images

Europe is losing nearly €500 million a day as the Middle East conflict drives up fossil fuel costs, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said Wednesday, as turmoil in the Persian Gulf continues to rattle global energy markets.

“In just 60 days of conflict, our bill for fossil fuel imports has increased by over €27 billion, without a single molecule of additional energy,” she told the European Parliament in Strasbourg.

On Tuesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. President Donald Trump has instructed aides to prepare for a prolonged blockade of Iran, a strategy aimed at squeezing Tehran’s economy by restricting shipping to and from its ports. The approach risks further disrupting oil and gas flows through the Strait of Hormuz, through which a quarter of global oil trade and significant volumes of natural gas and fertilizers flow.

Von der Leyen framed the conflict as further proof that the EU should accelerate its shift away from imported fossil fuels and electrify faster.

“The way forward is obvious. We must reduce our overdependency on imported fossil fuels and boost our home-grown, affordable, clean energy supply. From renewables to nuclear, in full respect of technology neutrality," she said.

Von der Leyen said the Commission will present an Electrification Action Plan by the summer, including an “ambitious” EU-wide target. A draft Commission agenda seen by POLITICO showed the plan is now expected on June 10, alongside a broader strategy on strengthening energy security.

The Commission president renewed calls for faster progress on the EU’s Grids Package, which is currently being negotiated by EU lawmakers and governments and aims to upgrade infrastructure to handle more renewable power and rising electricity demand.

She also urged closer coordination on diesel and jet fuel reserves, oil stock releases and output from refineries, measures which are part of Brussels' broader response to the energy crisis unveiled by the Commission last Wednesday.

[Derby]

https://www.ft.com/content/19cf1211-f2b7-48bc-ae8b-8c36c8d3da40

Starwood real estate fund halts redemptions as bet on lower interest rates bites

Move comes after fund restricted investors’ liquidity rights two years ago


Barry Sternlicht, Starwood’s billionaire founder and chief executive © Bloomberg

Starwood’s high-profile property fund has halted redemptions as it seeks to prevent a flight of assets amid mounting pressure on its bet that property markets would quickly recover from interest rate rises in 2022 and 2023.

Starwood Real Estate Income Trust, one of the first retail private markets funds, pinned its decision to temporarily suspend most redemptions on interest rates that have “remained high”. The move comes after Sreit had restricted investors’ liquidity rights by more than 80 per cent two years ago.

The issue was “not the real estate,” said Barry Sternlicht, Starwood’s billionaire founder and chief executive, in a letter to shareholders on Wednesday, but rather “the pressure created by elevated redemption requests, which rose quite suddenly when interest rates spiked and remained high”.

Sreit has struggled to recover from a real estate market that has remained weak since interest rates began to creep up four years ago. The fund owns 598 properties across the US.

Sternlicht, in his letter, said Sreit would “reintroduce liquidity when it can be done in a consistent and sustainable way”.

The CEO said Starwood expected “the war with Iran to conclude, oil prices to subside, inflation to stabilize, and for Kevin Warsh to be seated as Fed Chair, supporting a lower interest rate environment”.

“The temporary actions announced today reflect our commitment to making the right long-term decisions for all Sreit shareholders, including the nearly 70 per cent who have never made a redemption request,” Sternlicht said in a statement.

Sreit also cut its distribution from 6.3 per cent to 4.7 per cent to conserve capital.

US hedge fund Saba Capital last month offered to buy 5 per cent of the outstanding shares in Sreit, at a discount of more than 20 per cent of the fund’s most recent stated value.

Two years ago, Starwood limited investors’ ability to redeem their investments after the FT reported that Sreit had tapped its credit facility to support redemptions, rather than selling real estate assets.

The move by Sternlicht comes as similar private credit funds sponsored by the likes of Blue Owl and BlackRock have been forced this year to halt redemptions after investors’ requests breached the 5 per cent threshold.

[pollo]

No soy físico, pero hasta donde yo sé, todas esas viviendas que se retiran del mercado del alquiler "por la inseguridad jurídica" y demás cuentos, no se desintegran.

Tampoco las 2.000.000 que se habían estimado en toda España que estaban cogiendo polvo (dato aquí aparecido en mil ocasiones) por ser básicamente invendibles al precio que se pide o porque al propietario le sale gratis tenerla cerrada sin motivo durante décadas.

Aun sólo teniendo en cuenta las primeras (las que son puro chantaje social) ya valdría como ejemplo de que no hay nada que averiguar, ya va implícito en la situación.

Se parte de una falsa premisa: que la vivienda es escasa y "no hay".
Las medidas tienen que ir principalmente a castigar duro a quien tenga vivienda inutilizada en zonas de alta demanda por que le sale de los cojones.

Es un chantaje a toda la sociedad.

Impuestos exponenciales según número de viviendas inactivas y a correr. Se acababa la tontería en dos meses.

La consecuencia última será la destrucción total del tejido económico y productivo de occidente y el consiguiente vasallaje a China y demás, tanto miedo que se les tiene.

Una crisis gorda es lo mejor que nos puede pasar, porque matará expectativas.

[...]
• Omite que las contradicciones internas del sistema son insalvables: Habla correctamente de la ecuación Inmigración + Habitacionismo. Lo importante es la inmigración masiva porque genera mayor demanda de vivienda baratísima. El crecimiento vía inmigración diluye la ratio deuda/PIB pero también tensiona el Gasto Público. ¡Y hay darle vivienda a los inmigrantes! En cuanto al habitacionismo hay que hablar de serios riesgos legales y reputacionales. Habría un tercer sumando: Turistificación. Este asunto está muy estudiado. La gran paradoja es que el turismo destruye precisamente aquello que lo hacía atractivo: precios, desplazamiento de residentes, pérdida de autenticidad, etc. Se vende autenticidad (verdad) al Turismo, pero este la elimina.
[...]

Ojalá me equivoque pero no veo claro como van a "dar vivienda" y además baratísima. Esa vivienda a día de hoy ni está en el mercado ni hay un marco legal y de financiación que permita construir a destajo para resolver el problema en un plazo de tiempo adecuado para que evitemos ver cosas muy locas.

No es tan fácil como sacarse de la manga un IMV, que al fin y al cabo es meter dinero en una cuenta bancaria; aquí hablamos de que algo tangible como un parque de vivienda nuevecita y barata no está construida. Si de verdad se quieren evitar tiendas de campaña y pisos patera generalizados la única solución a corto plazo es dar un disgusto al propietariado. ¿Hay narices para eso?. Yo lo dudo.

No tengo ni idea cómo van se va a salir de esta situación de una manera digna.

Así:

https://okdiario.com/coolthelifestyle/arquitectura/dia-china-construye-edificio-10-plantas-bloques-hormigon-como-si-fueran-piezas-lego-915165

El otro día hice un post sobre la partida de ajedrez inmobiliaria. Hay solares urbanos vacíos de sobra, con sus conexiones de electricidad, agua y alcantarillado. Si hubiera voluntad teníamos 50.000 viviendas nuevas antes de final de año como aviso a navegantes. Si el propietariado no se baja de la burra se anuncia un millón de viviendas nuevas para finales de 2027.. aunque sólo se construyera una cuarta parte, ya teníamos el mercado arreglado. Y si encima ponemos como condición a los chinos que levanten sus fábricas en España y contraten personal español, tenemos arreglado el problema de la vivienda en Europa entera (con vivienda china made in Spain).

Necesito un censo de vivienda vacía para poder coincidir contigo. A nivel personal, y puedo estar muy equivocado porque me falta perspectiva, es que yo no conozco pisos vacíos donde vivo: o están alquilados a la antigua usanza o son pisos turísticos. Ningún rentista deja escapar la posibilidad de ponerse las botas.

Respecto a la construcción modular: la primera vez que la vi fue hace ya 20 años y hace unos 10 me impactó lo que vi. Estuve un par de semanas en un capital báltica y al lado de mi hotel estaban construyendo otro a un ritmo de dos pisos diarios. Todas las paredes, incluidas ventanas venían ya hechas y sólo se atornillaban los módulos para ir creciendo. El cableado y tubería iba por otra parte. Me dijeron que el tiempo de ejecución de la obra era inferior a un año.

Aquí podemos hacerlo pero os recuerdo el show de cuando se construyó el Hospital Isabel Zendal (sin ser del todo prefabricado, porque creo que tiene cimentación tradicional). Todos, ciudadanía y políticos, poniéndolo a parir porque no era lo suficientemente noble para sus señorías. Por mi parte, llenaba el extrarradio de todas las ciudades españolas tensionadas con prefabricados a precio irrisorio, pero no veo nada clara la intención de hacerlo.

[Derby]

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/currencies/articles/europe-moves-break-visa-mastercards-050114080.html

Europe moves to break Visa and Mastercard's grip — but not everyone agrees


Europe moves to break Visa and Mastercard's grip — but not everyone agrees · Euronews

Europe's payment system is on the brink of its biggest shake-up in decades.

A digital euro, a push for sovereignty from US payment giants and a bitter fight between banks and Brussels are all coming to a head — and the outcome could affect how Europeans conduct even the simplest day-to-day payments.

The digital euro is electronic cash, backed by the European Central Bank (ECB) and designed to sit alongside banknotes and the services offered by commercial lenders.

Under the European Commission's proposal, users would get a digital wallet — with a spending limit yet to be defined — that works for both online and offline payments, with transactions designed to be untraceable.

If legislation passes before the end of 2026, it could be available for retail payments by 2029.

The push is political as much as it is financial.

Visa and Mastercard, both American, account for 61% of card payments in the eurozone and nearly all cross-border transactions, according to ECB data.

US President Donald Trump's return to the White House and his hostile approach to both foreign policy and trade accelerated the debate, and at the European Council in mid-March, EU leaders set a deadline to approve the legislation before the end of 2026.

The ECB's push to launch one is partly a response to the rise of privately issued stablecoins, which have steadily eaten into the payments landscape.

The message from Brussels and institutions across the continent is clear: Europe wants to control its own money.

The contrast with other major economies is stark. The US has moved in the opposite direction, advancing the GENIUS Act to give private stablecoins a regulatory footing, while China has already rolled out its digital yuan at scale.

Europe is charting a middle path — state-backed, tightly regulated and designed to keep monetary sovereignty out of private hands.

Who's fighting it and who is making the case for it?

Not everyone is convinced. As the legislation advances, opposition from commercial banks has intensified.

At an industry event in Brussels in mid-April, French Banking Federation chairman Daniel Baal took direct aim at the project.

"The retail digital euro, as currently designed, disrupts this balance by turning central bank money into a direct competitor of commercial bank money," he said.

Wero, the European payments platform backed by major banks, is also wary.

Its CEO, Martina Weimert, acknowledged a use case for offline payments but warned the legal tender status, which would oblige merchants to accept the digital euro just as they must accept cash, would create a "distortion of competition".

Supporters say the banks are missing the point entirely.

"It's as if cash did not exist, and the industry argued it was unfair because merchants have to accept it, and users don't pay a fee," Peter Norwood, a researcher at Finance Watch, a European non-profit that aims to reform finance in the public interest, told Euronews.

"Cash is a public good. That is what the digital euro is meant to preserve in the digital age."

Without legal tender status, he argued, the project would never reach critical mass.

"If merchants do not have to accept it, it won't have a high uptake and will not ensure the continued availability of public money," Norwood added.

The ECB is trying to minimise tensions over the digital euro by arguing that the private sector will be involved in shaping and managing it.

The bank says commercial lenders will act as the ultimate service providers and will be compensated by the ECB for doing so.

Opposition to the digital euro, however, extends well beyond the banking sector.

Privacy advocates and decentralisation campaigners have raised concerns that a state-issued digital currency could give governments unprecedented visibility over citizens' spending — and, potentially, the power to restrict it.

The planned cap on individual holdings has done little to ease those fears.

Crypto industry voices, though a smaller force in Europe than in the US, have also pushed back, wary of a digital currency that competes with decentralised alternatives while operating under full institutional control.

The man who holds the keys

The fate of the digital euro now rests largely with one person: Fernando Navarrete Rojas, a Spanish centre-right MEP from the European People's Party (EPP) who is steering the file through the European Parliament, the only EU institution yet to move it forward.

He did not respond to requests for comment from Euronews.

His conduct in parliamentary negotiations, his public speeches and his appearances at industry events all suggest a preference for private-sector solutions over the digital euro.

Navarrete has an extensive background in the banking sector. He held several high-level positions at the Bank of Spain and served as the director of finance at the Spanish Official Credit Institute.

He also led the economic and public policies at the Foundation for Social Analysis and Studies (FAES), a right-wing think tank linked to the former Spanish Prime Minister José María Aznar López.

According to his public meeting records, he held more than a hundred meetings specifically on the digital euro since he took over the file in December 2024.

With EU governments strongly backing the project, the Parliament is where the battle will be won or lost.

At an industry event in mid-April organised by the French Banking Federation, Navarrete was candid about his scepticism, describing the digital euro as not an urgent priority.

"I'm sorry that we started maybe with not the most urgent parts of the building," he said.

He made it clear he favours the private sector, describing it as "much more efficient".

And like the commercial banks, he warned that legal tender status, which he called an "atomic weapon," could fatally undermine private alternatives. "Even if (the digital euro) is no good, you're forced to use it," he said.

Behind the scenes

According to several people familiar with the negotiations, the Spanish MEP used closed-door meetings to slow the process down, pushing his views into the text and campaigning hard for a key concession: limiting the digital euro to offline use only, on the grounds that an online version would compete directly with Wero, Visa, Mastercard and other private players.

The meetings grew increasingly polarised.

On one side, the Socialists (S&D), liberals (Renew Europe), the Greens and the Left broadly backed the Commission's proposal.

On the other, Navarrete — representing the EPP — took an opposing minority stance, occasionally joined by far-right parties, though their attendance was inconsistent.

Two people familiar with the negotiations described his conduct as unpredictable and determined to stall the legislation.

"We are going nowhere," was the message at the end of several meetings.

German Minister of Finance Lars Klingbeil said in February that those opposing the digital euro were harming Europe — a pointed message aimed at Navarrete and the EPP group, which is divided over the file.

The offline-only position was ultimately dropped from the text, clearing a significant hurdle.

Where do things stand now?

Negotiations are not yet over and remain complex, but the process is moving forward.

Draft texts and meeting minutes seen by Euronews point to a more balanced dynamic than in previous months.

A plenary vote originally scheduled for May has slipped. The parliamentary committee is now expected to vote at the end of June, with the full plenary to follow.

Once the Parliament signs off, interinstitutional negotiations between EU member states, the Parliament, and the Commission will begin, with the final adoption of the legislation targeted for the end of 2026.

[Derby]

https://www.benzinga.com/markets/prediction-markets/26/04/52204146/senate-bans-members-betting-prediction-markets-polymarket-kalshi

Senate Bans Members From Betting On Prediction Markets Such As Polymarket, Kalshi With Immediate Effect

The Senate unanimously passed on Thursday a resolution introduced by Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio) that bans Senators, Officers, and staff from participating in prediction markets.

Senate Says No To Prediction Market Wagering

The Senate agreed to pass the resolution “effective immediately,” according to an update on Moreno’s official Senate website.

The resolution alters the Senate’s standing rules, preventing lawmakers from entering financial agreements where the “outcome depends on whether a specific event does or does not happen.”

“Serving in Congress should never be about finding new ways to profit; it should be about delivering results for the American people,” said Moreno. “Senators have no business engaging in speculative activities like prediction markets while collecting a taxpayer-funded paycheck, period.”

Kalshi CEO Tarek Mansour applauded the Senate’s decision, saying, “This is a great step to increase trust in our markets by making it an industry standard. Now, let's pass this in the House!” (...)

[asustadísimos]

[Derby trae una noticia sesgada por los intereses anglo, como todo en esta impresentable 3.ª Guerra Mundial De/Por el Dólar...
https://www.transicionestructural.net/index.php?topic=2646.msg258765#msg258765

Mi crítica

A fecha de hoy (01/05/2026), el euro digital está más vivo que nunca después del giro de su principal pepito grillo en el Parlamento Europeo, el popular-FAES Fernando Navarrete. Sin embargo, nos esperan semanas decisivas de negociaciones y presión de los bancos de depósitos antes de la votación final en junio.

La trayectoria del proyecto ha sido un tira y afloja constante, pero en los últimos meses se ha producido el giro decisivo.

Durante mucho tiempo, el avance estuvo bloqueado. Proliferaron deposiciones antieuro digital en la fachosfera y en los círculos falsolibertarios, que arrastraron a los politiqueros patrioteros proanglo: «El euro digital será caducable y 'ellos' controlarán tu vida». ¡Paparruchas!

La división arreció tras la publicación en octubre de 2025 del informe del europarlamentario ponente Navarrete, que abogaba por un euro digital castrado, de la señorita Pepis.

Pero el 10 de febrero de este destemplado primer año de la Era Cero (2026) el pleno del Parlamento Europeo dio el paso crucial. Respaldó con 420 votos a favor, 158 en contra y 64 abstenciones, la enmienda a favor del euro digital con todos sus avíos y funcionalidades, 'online' y 'offline'.

Navarrete, Manolete, si no sabes torear, ¿pa qué te metes?

A finales de marzo, Navarrete cambió. Y retiró su propuesta de reducir el euro digital a un juguete.

Hoy, por lo tanto, el proyecto ha despejado el mayor bloqueo que tenía, el del búnker de medio pelo proanglo (EE. UU. ha prohibido el dólar digital —GENIUS 2015—). ¡Hay vida en la UE!

El siguiente paso será la votación en la comisión de Economía el próximo 23 de junio.

¿Por qué el eurodiputado Navarrete, del PP, ha cambiado de chaqueta? Sus argumentos iniciales contra el euro digital escondían la defensa de soluciones privadas. Prefería un sistema de pagos paneuropeo privado, y proponía que el euro digital 'online' funcionase solo si la iniciativa privada fracasaba. Ni que decir tiene que las empresas que dan estos servicios son anglo o proanglo.

Decía tonterías contra el padre de la criatura, el BCE, como que, al ofrecer depósitos 100% seguros en el banco central, los ahorradores retirarían en masa su dinero de los bancos de depósitos (desintermediación bancaria, consiguiente fuga de depósitos y desestabilizadora del sistema financiero).

La guinda era el espantajo anarcoide del control social por el Estado, como si las actuales empresas privadas estadounidenses de mediación en los pagos fueran hermanitas de la caridad.

Concluía con algo así como que la moneda digital era cosa de comunistas chinos (el yuan). No lo decía, pero lo pensaba. «Hacer hago».

Solo aceptaba que el euro digital fuera un instrumento 'offline', una suerte de 'dinero interno de El Corte Inglés', para descambios y poco más, un simple monedero, una evolucioncita del 'efectivo', del 'numerario'.

No ha cambiado de chaqueta de forma espontánea. Primero está el respaldo abrumador del Parlamento el 10 de febrero, del que ya hablamos en este foroblog; que fue una demostración de fuerza que le chafó su participación en el «hacer haga» poniéndose la UE por montera. Luego vino la crítica por parte del BCE, cuyos técnicos explicaron que la propuesta de un euro digital 'offline' no era viable. Y la puntilla ha sido la presión de los socios comunitarios, bajo la batuta del Consejo Europeo, que representa a todos los gobiernos de los Estados miembros, que se fijó como objetivo aprobar la ley «a finales de 2026». Todo ello en el contexto geopolítico por todos conocido de obscenidad sanguinolenta estadounidense, y considerando el imperio de sus sistemas de pago Visa y Mastercard.

Todavía hay frentes abiertos. Aún deben negociarse y acordarse dos puntos críticos: cuánto dinero digital podrá tener un ciudadano en su monedero digital (límites de tenencia) y cómo exactamente será el proceso de compensación entre entidades gestoras, que serán los bancos de depósitos, directa o indirectamente.

Los bancos de depósitos no paran de quejarse de que les costará dinero y depósitos. Nada que no sea compensable. En cualquier caso, en todas estas décadas, los bancos europeos han sido incapaces o impotentes para desarrollar una alternativa competidora de los gigantes estadounidenses.

Como ya hemos visto en este foroblog, el proyecto piloto, la prueba, del euro digital está iniciado. Los ensayos reales con usuarios comenzarán en 2027. Se harán transferencias entre particulares y pagos en tiendas físicas, comercio electrónico y por móvil. El proceso de selección empezó en marzo y termina este junio. Desde julio hasta mediados de 2027, se trabajará para ajustar la operativa y, del 2.º semestre de 2027 al 2.º semestre de 2028 (12 meses), se desarrollará la fase experimental pura y dura.

Resumiendo:
• 2026: Aprobación del euro digital.
• 2027-2028: Proyecto piloto.
• 2029: Primera emisión.

Un servidor espera estar ahí para ser de los primeros en gozar de esta bendición. Me cambiaré de móvil a uno chino, solo por joder.

En mi modesta opinión, el euro digital es un hecho irreversible y va a dejar en ridículo y oliendo a naftalina a todos sus opositores.

El dólar, que se joda. Ya no lo aguanto más. Desde 2013 el dólar no está haciendo nada más que cabronadas para frenar al mundo, especialmente a la UE y nuestro queridísimo euro: Euromaidán 2013, Brexit 2016, QUAD II 2017, Afganistán 2021, AUKUS 2021, Nord Stream 2022, Palestina 2023, BRICS+ 2024, Siria 2024, Aranceles 2025, Stablecoins-Dollar 2025, Turnberry 2025, Caribe 2026, Usexit 2026, Ormuz 2026...

El euro digital no va a estar en esta lista, gracias a Dios, por mucho que degraden al euro los histriones de «el dinero es basura», ganchos de la ESTAFA del Ladrillo.]

[El afilador]

No soy físico, pero hasta donde yo sé, todas esas viviendas que se retiran del mercado del alquiler "por la inseguridad jurídica" y demás cuentos, no se desintegran.

Tampoco las 2.000.000 que se habían estimado en toda España que estaban cogiendo polvo (dato aquí aparecido en mil ocasiones) por ser básicamente invendibles al precio que se pide o porque al propietario le sale gratis tenerla cerrada sin motivo durante décadas.

Aun sólo teniendo en cuenta las primeras (las que son puro chantaje social) ya valdría como ejemplo de que no hay nada que averiguar, ya va implícito en la situación.

[...]

Haciendo una búsqueda rápida, veo que el año pasado y este se estimaba que había 3.8 millones de viviendas vacías en España, pero la mayor parte está en sitios donde nadie puede vivir por falta de trabajo: sólo el 10.5% de esa vivienda vacía está en ciudades de más de 250.000 habitantes. Que sí, que estaría bien movilizar ese porcentaje, pero sería un parche de corto recorrido y sospecho que con elevado coste político. No es que me importe maltratar al rentismo, pero ya sabéis cuál es el panorama.

https://elpais.com/expres/2026-02-12/tres-millones-de-casas-vacias-en-espana-y-nadie-sabe-exactamente-cuales-son-ni-donde-estan.html

Por otro lado, una de las razones esgrimidas para no sacar vivienda la mercado del alquiler, que es la okupación, es una falacia. El 2024 hubo 16400 denuncias por usurpación, que representa el 0.06% del total de la vivienda del país.

https://www.bbc.com/mundo/articles/c7767r5xmvmo

Sobre los supuestos pisos que sacarán los rentistas del mercado... pues a la gente se le calienta mucho la boca. No conozco a nadie que deje de ganar 1200€ al mes para joder a Sánchez y a los terribles "comunistas". Tendrán sus ideitas, pero no van a dejar de parasitar.

[senslev]

Estamos volviendo a la Edad Media: Por qué el Sistema se está Rompiendo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Au_WAfxkweA

Sorpresa!

[Zugzwang]

No soy físico, pero hasta donde yo sé, todas esas viviendas que se retiran del mercado del alquiler "por la inseguridad jurídica" y demás cuentos, no se desintegran.

Tampoco las 2.000.000 que se habían estimado en toda España que estaban cogiendo polvo (dato aquí aparecido en mil ocasiones) por ser básicamente invendibles al precio que se pide o porque al propietario le sale gratis tenerla cerrada sin motivo durante décadas.

Aun sólo teniendo en cuenta las primeras (las que son puro chantaje social) ya valdría como ejemplo de que no hay nada que averiguar, ya va implícito en la situación.

[...]

Haciendo una búsqueda rápida, veo que el año pasado y este se estimaba que había 3.8 millones de viviendas vacías en España, pero la mayor parte está en sitios donde nadie puede vivir por falta de trabajo: sólo el 10.5% de esa vivienda vacía está en ciudades de más de 250.000 habitantes. Que sí, que estaría bien movilizar ese porcentaje, pero sería un parche de corto recorrido y sospecho que con elevado coste político. No es que me importe maltratar al rentismo, pero ya sabéis cuál es el panorama.

https://elpais.com/expres/2026-02-12/tres-millones-de-casas-vacias-en-espana-y-nadie-sabe-exactamente-cuales-son-ni-donde-estan.html

Por otro lado, una de las razones esgrimidas para no sacar vivienda la mercado del alquiler, que es la okupación, es una falacia. El 2024 hubo 16400 denuncias por usurpación, que representa el 0.06% del total de la vivienda del país.

https://www.bbc.com/mundo/articles/c7767r5xmvmo

Sobre los supuestos pisos que sacarán los rentistas del mercado... pues a la gente se le calienta mucho la boca. No conozco a nadie que deje de ganar 1200€ al mes para joder a Sánchez y a los terribles "comunistas". Tendrán sus ideitas, pero no van a dejar de parasitar.

Vivienda no falta, es una falacia ad populum. Yo cada vez veo más vivienda disponible. El problema no es que falte vivienda, sino que falta vivienda asequible, y defino asequible que sea congruente con el nivel de salarios de España.

Te pongo un ejemplo, que conozco, pero si extrapolamos, el problema es el mismo. Hay vivienda, pero no a los precios que se pueden pagar.

Albacete:

Viviendas en venta de segunda mano: https://www.idealista.com/venta-viviendas/albacete-albacete/?ordenado-por=precios-asc
Viviendas en alquiler: https://www.idealista.com/alquiler-viviendas/albacete-albacete/?ordenado-por=precios-asc
Habitaciones en alquiler. https://www.idealista.com/alquiler-habitacion/albacete-albacete/?ordenado-por=precios-asc

Y aquí solo hablamos de Idealista. Si rascamos en otros sitios, hay muchas más. Y el problema es el que es: los precios. Y lo que es asequible, directamente, no ofrece unos estándares mínimos.

Si miramos el salario medio, el mediano y el modal, los niveles de desempleo, subempleo y temporalidad, podemos sacar aún mas conclusiones. Los precios no están adaptados a la realidad salarial del país. El debate debe ir incisivamente por ahí. Se ha construido mucha vivienda en Albacete, y gran parte de ella no se está vendiendo. Porque los salarios dan para lo que dan.

 

[Derby]

www.ft.com/content/cd5a7cb6-4265-410f-b461-f5bc84a00e64

US Republicans break ranks to challenge Trump administration on Iran war

Some from president’s own party have begun to demand accountability in the unpopular conflict


Pete Hegseth, defence secretary, centre, says he ‘would defer to the White House and White House counsel’ on whether the ceasefire pauses the 60-day threshold © Getty Images

The Trump administration is coming under mounting pressure over its war in Iran, with some Republican lawmakers breaking ranks and challenging the US president’s authority to keep waging his increasingly unpopular conflict.

With the war poised to enter its third month and oil prices continuing to rise amid uncertainty over the conflict, a handful of lawmakers in President Donald Trump’s party are looking to convince him to get congressional approval for further military action while a shaky ceasefire remains in place.

John Curtis, a first-term Republican senator from Utah, on Thursday called on lawmakers to invoke the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which requires the president to wind down any use of military forces within 60 days of troops being sent into conflict unless Congress has declared war or authorised further military action. The law also allows for a 30-day extension to remove troops from conflict.

Friday will mark 60 days since Trump notified Congress that he had begun strikes in Iran.
“As we reach this 60-day mark, it is time for decision-making from both the administration and from Congress,” Curtis said on Thursday, adding he was engaged in “thoughtful discussions” with fellow senators and the White House on a “path forward that honours our respective constitutional roles”.

Two other Republican senators, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Susan Collins of Maine, also broke ranks on Thursday to vote with all but one Democratic senator on a resolution directing the administration to remove American forces from the Iran conflict. The measure nevertheless failed to advance in the Republican-controlled Senate.

Curtis, who voted against the resolution, said Trump’s authority as commander-in-chief was “not without limits.”

“The Constitution gives Congress an essential role in decisions of war and peace, and the War Powers Act establishes a clear 60-day deadline for Congress to either authorise or end US involvement in foreign hostilities,” he said.

US defence secretary Pete Hegseth told senators on Thursday that the administration did not need congressional authorisation to continue the war because the 60-day timeline had been halted due to the ceasefire with Tehran.

“On Iran, ultimately I would defer to the White House and White House counsel on that, however we are in a ceasefire right now, which our understanding means the 60-day clock pauses or stops in a ceasefire,” Hegseth told the Senate armed services committee.

The US and Iran on April 8 agreed a two-week ceasefire, which has been extended by Trump, who has also enforced a “blockade” on Iranian ships in the Strait of Hormuz, the critical waterway through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes.

Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, a member of the armed services committee, told reporters that the administration appeared ready to “blow through the 60-day deadline, illegally and unwisely”.

A White House official said the administration was in “active conversations with the Hill on this topic” but criticised lawmakers who questioned Trump’s legal authority.

“Members of Congress who try to score political points by usurping the commander-in-chief’s authority would only undermine the United States military abroad, which no elected official should want to do,” the official added.

President Donald Trump speaks at a podium during a news conference, with John Ratcliffe, Pete Hegseth, and Dan Caine standing behind him

Despite the criticisms from a handful of Republicans, most GOP lawmakers are reluctant to challenge the president’s legal authority.

Republican Senator Mike Rounds, a member of the armed services committee, told reporters he needed to do an “analysis” of what the law said about the 60-day timeline, but added he was “not going to disagree with [Hegseth] at this stage”.

Florida Republican Senator Rick Scott said: “The president has got the right to use the military to defend freedom in this country.”

“President Trump has been transparent with the Hill since before Operation Epic Fury began, and administration officials provided over 30 bipartisan briefings for members of Congress to keep them apprised of military updates,” said White House spokesperson Anna Kelly. “The president’s preference is always diplomacy, and Iran wants to make a deal.”

[Derby]

https://www.wsj.com/politics/u-s-debt-smashes-through-unthinkable-milestone-can-it-be-stopped-348aec9f

U.S. Debt Smashes Through Unthinkable Milestone. Can It Be Stopped?

Plus, Trump is poised to defy Congress over authorization for the Iran war


ALLIED INTERNATIONAL PICTURES/Zuma Press

Good morning. “The Blob” is a campy 1958 sci fi/horror movie about an alien, erm, blob that lands on Earth and mercilessly consumes everything in its path, growing bigger, meaner and redder as it goes.

The 2026 version would be called “The Debt.”

As the Journal’s Richard Rubin reports, total U.S. government debt (all $31.265 trillion of it) now eclipses the size of the entire U.S. economy. Don’t worry, you don’t need to be an economist to understand the math. I can help you. It’s bad. Real bad.

Over the past several decades, leaders and lawmakers from both parties have aggressively added to the deficit by spending much more money than they have brought in through taxes. The annual gulf—called the deficit—just adds more and more red ink to the blob, I mean, debt. The deficit in 2026 is projected to be $1.9 trillion.

The government can only sustain this by borrowing more money. And it has to pay interest to borrow money. This has now become astronomical on its own, with interest payments projected to breach $1 trillion this year. Roughly $1 out of every $7 spent by the government this year is going toward interest on the debt.

Neither party has a political incentive to do much about it. It is hard to cut spending (ask Elon Musk) and it is also hard to raise taxes (ask, well, anyone in Washington). So, the debt snowballs.

Reason for hope? Well, a very young Steve McQueen helped (temporarily?) freeze the Blob in 1958. Who wants to star in another sequel?(...)

[tomasjos]

El Gobierno y Junts reabren las vías para negociar la prórroga de los alquileres | España | EL PAÍS https://share.google/Owb3aWvkxldyYCBTT




El Gobierno y Junts reabren las vías para negociar la prórroga de los alquileres
Los nacionalistas catalanes exigen discutir rebajas fiscales para las rentas más bajas y autónomos


Tanto desde el Gobierno como desde Junts han mostrado su disposición a negociar una salida inmediata para que prospere un próximo decreto que volverá a plantear la congelación de los alquileres, tras ser derrotado el pasado martes en el pleno del Congreso el aprobado por el Ejecutivo hace un mes y publicada su derogación en el BOE este jueves. En el Gobierno se declaran optimistas para “aprovechar esa ventana de oportunidad” y Junts no niega esa opción, si se corrigen en el texto algunas cuestiones jurídicas y se toman en cuenta sus propuestas para aplicar rebajas fiscales a las rentas más bajas y los autónomos. El PSOE, Sumar y Junts parecen querer aparcar así sus crecientes diferencias en otras materias ante la emergencia del problema de la vivienda y en el inicio de otra campaña electoral.

La portavoz parlamentaria de Junts, Míriam Nogueras, se desplegó por varios medios de comunicación el mismo día del pleno, tras votar contra la convalidación del decreto que establecía la prohibición de subir los alquileres por encima del 2%, para abrir su puerta a contactos para negociar y aprobar cuanto antes un próximo decreto sobre la misma cuestión para evitar dramas habitacionales e inseguridades jurídicas. Nogueras fijó una serie de condiciones, pero sobre todo reconoció que Junts no está en contra de limitar las subidas de los alquileres en el actual contexto económico de incertidumbres e inflación de precios por la guerra en Irán, que es el fondo del problema que movió a Sumar a presionar al máximo al PSOE dentro del Gobierno para aprobar hace un mes el decreto derrotado este miércoles.

El ministro de Derechos Sociales, Pablo Bustinduy, de Sumar, formuló en el pleno un apasionado alegato en forma de dicotomía para los demás responsables políticos entre el interés general o el de los especuladores y los fondos buitres que controlan ya el 60% del mercado de la vivienda en el país: “Lo que está en juego para casi tres millones de compatriotas es poder seguir viviendo en sus casas o ser expulsados de sus barrios”.

Sumar llevó en esa primera etapa las riendas de esa negociación contra reloj con los grupos para lograr la convalidación de ese decreto, hasta el punto de enviar cartas y llamar directamente a los portavoces de prácticamente todos los partidos representados en el Congreso, pero no logró convencer ni al PP ni a los nacionalistas catalanes, pese a que aceptó ceder en la concesión de algunas líneas rojas de beneficios fiscales para los propietarios y los autónomos. Junts ya avisó desde el primer momento sobre que no le gustaba ni la redacción de la norma por varios defectos técnicos ni el método del decreto. El partido que lidera Carles Puigdemont registró el pasado 15 de abril su propia propuesta, en forma de proposición no de ley de medidas urgentes relacionadas con la vivienda y a esa norma se remiten ahora para hablar.

La propuesta de Junts, firmada por su portavoz y experta en temas inmobiliarios, Marta Madrenas, plantea en primer lugar, contra los fondos buitres, “la modificación del Código Civil para permitir a los deudores hipotecarios cancelar su deuda por el mismo precio por el que el banco la haya vendido a un tercero; garantizar que la casa de una persona mayor siga siendo considerada vivienda habitual una vez ingresa en una residencia, evitando que Hacienda les penalice fiscalmente si deciden venderla” y, finalmente, fomentar el ahorro con “incentivos fiscales para las cuentas bancarias destinadas a la rehabilitación de viviendas”.

Entre las deducciones fiscales por la compra y renovación de vivienda, Junts requiere rebajas al alquiler para inquilinos con rentas inferiores a 33.007,20 euros y que se apruebe un IVA franquiciado para los autónomos con una exención para los que facturen menos de 85.000 euros anuales.

Desde el Gobierno, tras digerir el varapalo de la derrota del decreto en el pleno con algunos resquemores entre los socios por su diferente grado de implicación en la defensa de su oportunidad ahora, se ha puesto en marcha una doble estrategia para salvar el nuevo proyecto en el futuro inmediato.

La vicepresidenta segunda y ministra de Trabajo, Yolanda Díaz, y los demás miembros en el Gabinete de Sumar, han optado por la presión máxima en el ámbito político, pero también por apostar por las movilizaciones en la calle para facilitar el giro de posición de Junts, tras apuntar contra la “irresponsabilidad” y falta de sentido de Estado del PP de Alberto Núñez Feijóo. Díaz hizo ese llamamiento de nuevo este viernes desde Málaga, tras participar con los principales sindicatos, CC OO y UGT, en la manifestación del 1 de mayo que lleva entre sus lemas el derecho a la vivienda. Ernets Urtasun, el portavoz y ministro de Cultura, advirtió de que no pararán en esa reivindicación hasta que la prórroga de la congelación de alquileres se mantenga.

En el área socialista del Ejecutivo quieren ver agua en la piscina y se inclinan por reabrir las negociaciones, pero desde la discreción con Junts. El secretario de Estado de Relaciones con las Cortes, Rafael Simancas, fue el que mantuvo contactos casi diarios con los partidos durante estas pasadas semanas sin éxito. La interlocución se lleva ahora también desde el Ministerio de Vivienda, cuya titular, Isabel Rodríguez, avanzó este jueves que hará una ronda de contactos con varios partidos para “aprovechar esa ventana de oportunidad” abierta por Junts y ha manifestado su disposición a sentarse a hablar, dialogar y negociar para ver dónde puede haber coincidencias. En el Gobierno han rescatado ahora, y sobre esas demandas en el ámbito fiscal, que ya en enero el propio presidente Pedro Sánchez ofreció algunas bonificaciones del 100% del IRPF a los propietarios que pusieran sus casas en el mercado de alquiler.

[Derby]

Los propietarios atrapados en el triángulo de Karpman: víctima, perseguidor y salvador.

https://www.cityam.com/renters-rights-act-enters-law-amid-warnings-of-landlord-exodus/

Renters’ rights act enters law amid warnings of landlord exodus


The renters' rights act came into force today

The renters’ rights act came into force on Friday, amid warnings that private landlords have rushed to exit the rental market to avoid the new powers for tenants.

The new law bans no-fault evictions and abolishes fixed-term contracts, with other elements including decent homes standards and a rental ombudsman still yet to be implemented.

Law firms had warned that the new tenant powers prompted a rush of landlords opting to exit the rental market for good, as an end to fixed-term contracts means landlords could be powerless to evict problem tenants.

Thackray Williams, a London-based law firm, said it received a wave of last-minute selling instructions from landlords in the run up to this week.

Landlords fear the new rules will make it harder and more expensive for them to regain possession of their property, the lawyers said.

The renters’ rights act will bring an end to fixed-term contracts, meaning all rental agreements will automatically become rolling from Friday, with tenants needing only to provide two months’ notice for moving out.

Renters’ rights could hit house prices

Mustafa Sidki, a contentious construction litigation partner at Thackray Williams, said: “This reduced flexibility is causing many landlords to rethink their investment strategies, especially as other factors mean they are facing reduced – and even negative cashflow – while also facing increased admin and responsibilities.”

The law firm warned the rush of new housing stock on the market could weaken house prices.

Claire Josef, a conveyancing partner at Thackray Williams, said: “We’re anticipating increased instructions for our conveyancing team as these landlords put their properties on the market as soon as they are able.

“[This] in turn could negatively impact property prices, particularly in areas that have traditionally had a strong rental sector.”

Demand for rental flats could fall

Property experts have warned the renters’ rights act could damage demand for flat developments, amid warnings that build-to-rent construction could grind to a halt.

Audit firm RSM said housing developments are becoming more favourable for developers, as landlords “retract from the market and shrink their portfolios” in response to increasing regulation.

The National Residential Landlords Association dubbed the new laws the biggest shakeup to the private rental market in nearly 40 years.

Its chief executive, Ben Beadle, said he hopes the act will “root out for good the minority of rogue and criminal landlords who undermine the reputation of the responsible majority”.

Because the new laws will make it more difficult for rented properties to change hands, some property lawyers warn landlords will become more picky about the tenants they take on.

‘Good’ landlords may quit

This could mean that renters on lower incomes – and who therefore may be on paper less dependable for landlords – could miss out, according to Legal for Landlords.

Sim Sekhon, chief executive of the advisory service, said the act “aims to create a fairer, more secure rental market for tenants”.

“[But] as landlords lose certain safeguards, many will look to mitigate risk elsewhere, most commonly through stricter affordability criteria.”

One building society has raised the alarm that these reforms could cause “good” landlords to exit the market, leaving only exploitative landlords who hike rents for their tenants.

Jonathan Sinton, head of mortgage relations at Coventry Building Society, said: “The renters’ rights act brings meaningful protections for tenants – and all responsible landlords will welcome that. But it’s important the changes work for landlords too.”

The government says the act will offer better protections for 11m private tenants.

Steve Reed, secretary of state for housing, said: “Our historic act marks the biggest leap forward in renters’ rights in a generation.

“We are finally ending the injustice overseen by previous governments that has left millions living in fear of losing their homes.“

[sudden and sharp]

Trump acusa sin pruebas a la UE de incumplir el acuerdo comercial y anuncia aranceles del 25% a los coches y camiones europeos
https://www.eldiario.es/internacional/trump-anuncia-aranceles-adicionales-25-coches-camiones-ue_1_13188968.html

“Me complace anunciar que, dado que la Unión Europea no está cumpliendo con el acuerdo comercial que acordamos en su totalidad, la próxima semana aumentaré los aranceles que se aplican a la Unión Europea por los automóviles y camiones que entran en Estados Unidos”, ha anunciado el presidente de EEUU en un post en Truth Social.

Allá vamos otra vez... 

---------
Edit. Se complace dice...