• No results found

Section 3: Analysis of the Content of the Third Order Codes

3.1 Third Order Codes (Disputes)

3.1.5 Transactions with Self-Interest

This category views corporate disputes from the perspective of interested parties.

It includes practices such as transfer pricing, insider dealing, assets stripping, appraisal of assets and share dilution. However, the main focus of the analysis is on the alleged identity of benefiting parties. Here association with second order codes demonstrates whether such self-centred actions were limited to a straightforward diversion of funds or, in more extreme cases, led to noticeable changes in ownership structure and levels of control.

In 1998 there were 55 disputes97 with elements of the above category. This is the biggest third order code in the study. It is not surprising since very often corporate conflicts are fuelled by self-centred actions of the stakeholders involved98. In 1998 a vast majority of reported disputes were under the hierarchy of the diversion of claims code. However, control and ownership codes were also visibly represented in the graphical representation of the reported material (see graph 4.24 and table 4.11).

97 43 individual disputes of which 12 were parallel coded.

98 Agency theory

Page 176

Graph 4.24: Transactions with Self-Interest Disputes, 1998

Table 4.11: Transactions with Self-Interest Dispute, 1998

Company Benefiting Party Nature of the

Transactions Template Details

Appendix 9a Aeroflot 1 Article, ref. 1

Coding: Diversion of Claims

Majority shareholder (Boris Berezovsky)

Insider dealing

MGTS 4 Articles, ref. 3

Coding: Diversion of Claims

AO Sistema (a secretive outfit with links to Yury Luzhkov)

Share dilution

VimpelCom 2 Articles, ref. 4

Coding: Control

First Deputy Prime Minister Yury Maslyukov

Insider dealing

AvtoVaz 1 Article, ref. 6

Coding: Diversion of Claims

Criminal dealerships Insider dealing

KamAz 2 Articles, ref. 8

Coding: Diversion of Claims

Majority shareholders Share dilution

Page 177

Company Benefiting Party Nature of the

Transactions

Gazprom managers Appraisal of assets

Gazprom 1 Article, ref. 11. 7

Diversion of Claims

Management of Gazprom Insider dealing

Yukos

Directors of Yukos Share dilution

Yukos

Menatep Group Share dilution

Page 178

Company Benefiting Party Nature of the

Transactions

Page 179

Company Benefiting Party Nature of the

Transactions one of the contenders for the CEO position).

Majority shareholders Share dilution

Norilsk Nickel

Ordinary shareholders Share dilution

Novolipetsk 3 Articles, ref. 29.2

Parallel Coding: Diversion of Claims/Control

Trans-World Group. Transfer pricing

Magnitogorsk charged with the task of managing a 25% stake).

ZAO RudementInvest Insider dealing

Page 180

Company Benefiting Party Nature of the

Transactions

Uneximbank‘s officials. Insider dealing

Pioneer Group 1 Article, ref. 44

Coding: Diversion of Claims

Pioneer Bank officials. Insider dealing

Channel 5

Page 181

Company Benefiting Party Nature of the

Transactions

Kemerovo administration. Appraisal of assets

MCCI

A police department in St.

Petersburg.

Page 182

Below is the summary of various forms of transactions reported in 1998:

Type of transaction Companies

Insider Dealing

Appraisal of Assets

Asset Stripping

Transfer Pricing

Share Dilution

Aeroflot, VimpelCom, AvtoVaz, Gazprom, Sibneft, UES, UES,

Lebedinsky Ore Mining Plant, MOST Bank, Pioneer Group, ORT, Subway, MCCI, Post Office (14 disputes).

Rosneft, Gazprom, Transneft, Tyumen, Krasnoyarsk Hydro Plant, Norilsk Nickel, Lomonosov Porcelain Factory,

Kuznetsky Mine (8 disputes).

Yukos, Yukos, Magnitogorsk, Knauf, Channel 5, Standart NMT (6 disputes).

Rosneft, Yukos, Surgutneftegaz, Sibneft, Sibneft, Sidanko, UES, Novolipetsk, Channel 5, Post Office (10 disputes).

MGTS, KamAz, Yukos, Yukos, Sidanko, Mosenergo, Norilsk Nickel, Lebedinsky Ore Mining Plant, Knauf (9 disputes).

In summary, 1998 involved a variety of stakeholder groups who allegedly abused the corporate system to their advantage. On the government‘s side there were examples of when Boris Yeltsin allegedly received a large number of shares in ORT as a bribe from the then financial tycoon Boris Berezovsky and Anatoly Chubais (Chief Executive of UES) who allegedly walked out of the Russian white house with a $90 thousand dollar bribe for fixing a privatisation deal99. On the local administration level, there was a case involving Surgutneftegaz when subsidiaries diluted the stake of the parent to almost nothing with the help of St. Petersburg officials. Additionally, there were a lot of transactions to the benefit of well-connected individuals like Khodorkovsky, Berezovsky, Potanin, Fridman on the

99 Interestingly, Chubais sued an investigative journalist and a radio station for libel at the time of the alleged offence when the journalist openly accused him of accepting the bribe. Although Chubais was never convicted, a Moscow district court ruled in favour of the journalist and did not award any damages.

Page 183

oligarchic level and Bordug, Lisovsky, Sharipov and Sergiyenko on a more modest level of private ‗entrepreneurs‘.

In 2006 a vast majority of disputes associated with transactions with self-interest were also connected with the diversion of claims code. In total there were 31 disputes100 with only a single category of misinvestment not represented in the hierarchy of codes.

Graph 4.25: Transactions with Self-Interest Disputes, 2006

Table 4.12: Transactions with Self-Interest Disputes, 2006

Company Benefiting Party Comments

Template Details Appendix 9b MegaFon 2 Articles, ref. 5

Parallel Coding: Diversion of Assets/ Control

IT and

Telecommunications minister Leonid Reiman

Share dilution

Rosneft 1 Article, ref. 10.1

Coding: Diversion of Claims

Unidentified government and Rosneft officials.

Insider dealing

100 21 individual disputes of which 10 were parallel coded.

Page 184

Company Benefiting Party Comments

Template Details

Page 185

Company Benefiting Party Comments

Template Details

The government Insider dealing

Yukos

Unnamed third parties. Transfer pricing

LUKoil

CEO Mordoshov Transfer pricing

Evraz

Page 186

Company Benefiting Party Comments

Template Details Appendix 9b Eurocement 1 Article, ref. 37

Coding: Diversion of Claims

Majority owners of Eurocement.

Transfer pricing

IKEA 4 Articles, ref. 48

Parallel Coding: Diversion of Claims/ Misimplementation

An unidentified business group.

Asset stripping

Below is the summary of various forms of transactions with self-interest reported in 2006:

Type of transaction Companies

Insider Dealing Appraisal of Assets

Asset Stripping Transfer Pricing

Share Dilution

Rosneft, Gazprom, Yukos, Yukos, (4 disputes).

Rosneft, Rosneft, Yukos, LUKoil, RusAl, RusAl. (6 disputes).

Gazprom, Yukos, Yukos, IKEA (4 disputes).

Rosneft, Yukos, Novolipetsk, Severstal, Evraz, Eurocement (6 disputes).

MagaFon (1 dispute)

The main characteristic in 2006 was a very clear shift away from private individuals benefiting from questionable corporate conduct towards the government. Even disputes involving private individuals like Severstal‘s Mordoshov and Evraz‘s Abramovich were all visibly connected to the government‘s agenda; perhaps with the exception of the cases involving MagaFon‘s share dilution by the IT and Communications Minister Leonid Reiman, Eurocement‘s transfer pricing and IKEA‘s assets stripping. All remaining transactions were conducted to the benefit of the government or were forcefully challenged if they were not in the interests of the latter.