Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
TWSJ.: How Tillerson's Exxon Designed an Oil Deal to Skirt Anticorruption Scrutiny
Analysis, not LBN.
Retweeted by David Fahrenthold: https://twitter.com/Fahrenthold
Some damn fine investigative reporting: How Exxon Designed an Oil Deal to Skirt Anticorruption Scrutiny
Link to tweet
How Tillersons Exxon Designed an Oil Deal to Skirt Anticorruption Scrutiny
The big driller was excited about offshore prospects in west Africa, but worried about issues regarding U.S. anticorruption laws
By Scott Patterson, Bradley Olson and James V. Grimaldi
https://twitter.com/pattersonscott
scott.patterson@wsj.com
https://twitter.com/bradnews
bradley.olson@wsj.com
https://twitter.com/jamesvgrimaldi
March 29, 2018 11:56 a.m. ET
Negotiators for Exxon Mobil Corp. XOM 2.62% gathered in a London hotel room faced a problem. The government of Liberia suspected that oil rights the energy giant coveted were tainted by corruption. ... It was the winter of 2011, and crude-oil prices were surging. Exxon and then-Chief Executive Rex Tillerson were battling rivals to win access to fresh deposits around the globe. They wanted a deal.
The drilling rights the company sought in Liberia, however, appeared to be linked to former officials from the West African nation, according to internal Exxon documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal and people familiar with the negotiations. An Exxon presentation from the London meeting indicated the company had concern over issues regarding U.S. anticorruption laws.
An idea took shape. A Canadian company would buy the rights from a Liberian oil operator whose ownership was murky. Then Exxon would buy a controlling stake in the project from the Canadian outfit, according to the London presentation, documents outlining the deal and people familiar with the matter. Exxon completed the deal for $120 million in 2013.
There is a growing body of U.S. and European laws aimed at stamping out corruption around the world, and they have been aggressively enforced. The Exxon transaction shows the extent to which companies are structuring deals to try to minimize the risks of government scrutiny.
....
Write to Scott Patterson at scott.patterson@wsj.com and Bradley Olson at Bradley.Olson@wsj.com
The big driller was excited about offshore prospects in west Africa, but worried about issues regarding U.S. anticorruption laws
By Scott Patterson, Bradley Olson and James V. Grimaldi
https://twitter.com/pattersonscott
scott.patterson@wsj.com
https://twitter.com/bradnews
bradley.olson@wsj.com
https://twitter.com/jamesvgrimaldi
March 29, 2018 11:56 a.m. ET
Negotiators for Exxon Mobil Corp. XOM 2.62% gathered in a London hotel room faced a problem. The government of Liberia suspected that oil rights the energy giant coveted were tainted by corruption. ... It was the winter of 2011, and crude-oil prices were surging. Exxon and then-Chief Executive Rex Tillerson were battling rivals to win access to fresh deposits around the globe. They wanted a deal.
The drilling rights the company sought in Liberia, however, appeared to be linked to former officials from the West African nation, according to internal Exxon documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal and people familiar with the negotiations. An Exxon presentation from the London meeting indicated the company had concern over issues regarding U.S. anticorruption laws.
An idea took shape. A Canadian company would buy the rights from a Liberian oil operator whose ownership was murky. Then Exxon would buy a controlling stake in the project from the Canadian outfit, according to the London presentation, documents outlining the deal and people familiar with the matter. Exxon completed the deal for $120 million in 2013.
There is a growing body of U.S. and European laws aimed at stamping out corruption around the world, and they have been aggressively enforced. The Exxon transaction shows the extent to which companies are structuring deals to try to minimize the risks of government scrutiny.
....
Write to Scott Patterson at scott.patterson@wsj.com and Bradley Olson at Bradley.Olson@wsj.com
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
2 replies, 1080 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (9)
ReplyReply to this post
2 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
TWSJ.: How Tillerson's Exxon Designed an Oil Deal to Skirt Anticorruption Scrutiny (Original Post)
mahatmakanejeeves
Mar 2018
OP
They sure know how to skirt the law...too bad they never learned out to follow it.
Frustratedlady
Mar 2018
#1
Frustratedlady
(16,254 posts)1. They sure know how to skirt the law...too bad they never learned out to follow it.
If all these large corporations were closely scrutinized, I'm sure a large percentage of them are doing the same. Once this administration gets kicked out of the WH, most safeguards will have been repealed and the entire corporate community will be a mess to clean up.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)2. Trust me, I am from the corporation...................