Notifications
Clear all
I still think they should have jumped on the Atlantic Basin Refining (ABR) deal.
As far as the bulk of the old refinery, I agree with VICANUCK,
The only ones making out in this deal are the lawyers. They've got years of work (and ridiculous paychecks) ahead of them.
Posted : September 15, 2015 4:04 pm
Hovensa files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
I was able to access above link for article.
Hope it works for you.
Posted : September 16, 2015 12:05 pm
Ditto this link: Regarding the concessions Hovensa and buyer want from the VI which is a full and unconditional release from liability.
The release would be a termination of contracts between the VI government and previous and current owners of refinery and a release on any claim arising from those contracts.
Although the release would be mutual, it has one key exception: tax related matters.
Seems to me, Hovensa wants their cake and to eat it, too!
Posted : September 17, 2015 10:16 am
Right now the GVI is the one eating the cake.
Maybe they will decide that it doesn't taste too good.
Posted : September 17, 2015 10:44 am
From the article, it says that while Hovensa can continue it lawsuits, including the $286M lawsuit and others it filed regarding tax related matters against the VI government, the VI government would be forced to drop any and all litigation against Hovensa if agreement signed.
Posted : September 17, 2015 10:56 am
No, it says the release from liability is mutual except for the tax liability issues.
Posted : September 17, 2015 11:28 am
And that tax liability matter includes the $286M lawsuit amongst others that Hovensa brought against the VI government.
Posted : September 17, 2015 12:15 pm
Yes, Alana.Hovensa will drop all litigation against the GVI (and not persue any future suits) except the tax issue. The GVI can also continue to pursue their tax case against Hovensa. But the BIR is wrong in their assessment. The GVI is the one that owes Hovensa ans PDVSA a huge tax refund. The BIR has no concept of international and large corporate tax law. Just look at how they are being sued by Fox Rothschild LLP. BIR claims that they (Fox) owe taxes when they aren't licensed in the VI and never did any work in the VI in the Prosser bankruptcy. Fox has had to sue to protect their reputation.
Posted : September 17, 2015 6:03 pm
Okay, it was my understanding that VI couldn't pursue Hovensa but Hovensa could continue with their suits. Not that I believe the VI government knows it's ass from its elbow or has the knowledge or ability to litigate its way out of a paper bag. Doubt we'll see any positive results in our lifetime. The lawyers must be clapping their hands in glee!
Posted : September 17, 2015 6:55 pm
http://m.virginislandsdailynews.com/news/hovensa-buyer-to-seek-release-from-liability-1.1943957
The issue: A full and unconditional release from liability.
HOVENSA and its parent companies want a waiver from the V.I. government, and have made such a release a condition of a sale to new prospective buyer Limetree Bay Holdings, according to a proposed sale agreement filed in federal bankruptcy court.
Although the release from liability would be mutual, it also has one key exception: tax-related matters.
The release would be a termination of the contracts between the government and the current and previous owners of the refinery - and a release of liability on any claims arising from those contracts.
If such a release were to happen, the V.I. government would have to forgo the lawsuit it filed against Hess Corporation on Monday that seeks at least $1.5 billion in damages and alleges that Hess violated the law and its contracts with the government over the course of years.
However, the exception noted in the release - tax matters - would mean that lawsuits that HOVENSA's owners filed in December, contending the V.I. government owes them more than $236 million in tax refunds, would continue to move forward, as would a number of other tax-related cases the companies have filed against the government more recently.
The V.I. government has not yet negotiated terms, but these are among the major terms contained in the document that was filed with the court:
- An initial term of 40 years, with a 20-year extension upon written notice to the government at least 18 months before the expiration of the initial term.
- Exemption for the terminal operator from all corporate income taxes, excise taxes, customs duties, fuel taxes, gross receipts taxes, highway users' taxes, production taxes, property taxes, franchise taxes and annual report fees.
- The terminal operator would make a monthly payment to the government, in lieu of those taxes, of 7 percent of terminal revenue.
- The terminal operator would operate the fuel-loading rack to provide a reliable supply of fuel for St. Croix and would use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain the fuel supply at prevailing market prices.
- Navigational access to the Limetree Bay Channel would be under the terminal operator's sole control. The terminal operator would use commercially reasonable efforts to facilitate navigational access to the Limetree Bay Channel - but not the terminal loading docks - to commercial vessels en route to and from the Gordon Finch Molasses Pier and the Wilfred "Bomba" Allick Port and Transshipment Terminal.
- The terminal operator would make a minimum commitment to 70 full-time employees
- A year after operations begin, 70 percent of the full-time employees would have to be V.I. residents. Those who had worked for the refinery within five years of the effective date of the agreement would be considered V.I. residents.
- The terminal operator would make a commitment to offering training and continuing education at St. Croix Vocational Training Center for the purpose of maximizing employment opportunities at the terminal for V.I. residents.
Posted : September 19, 2015 12:12 pm
Not a bad deal. Just look at the lesson we learned from turning down ABR. Nothing is NOT better than something.
This article also fails to mention anything about the other suits that the GVI have filed against Hovensa.
Posted : September 19, 2015 2:57 pm
(td)
Posted : September 19, 2015 9:03 pm
(tu)
Posted : September 20, 2015 12:15 am
Senator Vialet appalled at latest hovensa deal.
Posted : September 23, 2015 2:59 pm
Senator Vialet appalled at latest hovensa deal.
He's appalled by everything that happens here. Where has he been the last few decades?
Posted : September 24, 2015 12:26 am
Observations....can anyone add or comment? It's no surprise that Hovensa filed Chapter 11. It's interesting that Monarch reappeared from under some rock, but do they have any money? Put up or shut up, as the saying goes! ArcLight seems to be legit but the ball is in Mapp's lap and the Senate. The government's lawsuit is contentious and it seems that only the attorneys will win and the VI people will lose. Shouldn't the VI government take the deal? Where else are they going to get $90 million. $40 million in NRD and $50 million from the sale. We sure could use those funds and give the economy a boost!
Posted : September 27, 2015 2:48 pm
That's if they wish to agree to the terms of dropping the all lawsuits against Hovensa while allowing Hovensa to continue with all of theirs against the VI government.
That's in addition the "Exemption for the terminal operator from all corporate income taxes, excise taxes, customs duties, fuel taxes, gross receipts taxes, highway users' taxes, production taxes, property taxes, franchise taxes and annual report fees."
Plus Navigational access to the Limetree Bay Channel would be under the terminal operator's sole control. The terminal operator would use commercially reasonable efforts to facilitate navigational access to the Limetree Bay Channel - but not the terminal loading docks - to commercial vessels en route to and from the Gordon Finch Molasses Pier and the Wilfred "Bomba" Allick Port and Transshipment Terminal.
Don't know enough of how channel there works so can't evaluate but all that for 70 hires?
Posted : September 27, 2015 4:17 pm
How the channel works: If an unqualified/idiot/drunk pilot blocks the channel then the Terminal owners would not be able to move any ships in or out of the Terminal docks. Would you take that kind of risk?
Posted : September 27, 2015 9:12 pm
Posted : October 5, 2015 4:39 pm
Wow!
Buckeye wants the fuel storage / terminal.
Very interesting.....the VI could select which company we want based on how many jobs they promise....or how much revenue.
Posted : October 5, 2015 9:28 pm
Except that the VI doesn't OWN the refinery.
Posted : October 5, 2015 10:07 pm
But they own the rights to negotiate the deal.
Posted : October 5, 2015 10:12 pm
Not exactly true. The only reason they are involved is because the purchaser is asking for concessions only the govt can grant. If there were no concessions being sought the govt would have no input.
Posted : October 5, 2015 11:38 pm
DUH!
Posted : October 6, 2015 1:26 am
(tu)
Posted : October 6, 2015 6:43 am
