1 / 16

Taking on Asset Privatization: Recent Cases and State-Based Responses

Taking on Asset Privatization: Recent Cases and State-Based Responses. Phineas Baxandall Senior Analyst for Tax & Budget Policy U.S. Public Interest Research Group phineas@pirg.org.

juana
Download Presentation

Taking on Asset Privatization: Recent Cases and State-Based Responses

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Taking on Asset Privatization: Recent Cases and State-Based Responses Phineas Baxandall Senior Analyst for Tax & Budget Policy U.S. Public Interest Research Group phineas@pirg.org AkPIRG / Arizona PIRG / CALPIRG / CoPIRG / ConnPIRG / Florida PIRG / Georgia PIRG / Illinois PIRG / INPIRG / Iowa PIRG Maryland PIRG / MASSPIRG / PIRGIM (PIRG in Michigan) / MoPIRG / NCPIRG / NHPIRG / NJPIRG / NMPIRG / NYPIRG / Ohio PIRG / OSPIRG / PennPIRG / RIPIRG / TexPIRG / WashPIRG / WISPIRG

  2. Road data excludes 40 design-build projects for $16.6 billion

  3. Road data excludes 40 design-build projects for $16.6 bn

  4. Strategy =Raise the bar

  5. State Investors Public

  6. What do investors want that the public does not?

  7. What do investors want that the public does not? Lots

  8. What do investors want that the public does not? Lots Public understands ‘conflict of interest’

  9. How Does it Work? • Up-front outlays for 50+ years rising user fees • “Lease” assets or build new capacity • Contract protects revenues • “Proprietary information” blocks full disclosure In other words, the state outsources borrowing & rate hikes

  10. Basic message: Public assets should be operated for the public interest • Public must receive full value • Public must retain control • Full transparency and accountability

  11. Public must receive full value Investors want high fees, low costs Public wants to save money Solution: Benchmark deal against public financing with same user fees  All costs and revenue  Over the entire term, not this budget Show how public would lose money

  12. Public must retain control Investors want certainty about revenue stream and future costs Public wants to operate for public benefit without hidden costs Solution: Prevent “non-compete” and “adverse action” clauses in contract. Show how risks would shift to public.

  13. Full transparency and accountability Investors want to keep information “proprietary” Public wants to avoid back-room deals, corruption Solutions: All bids, contracts, projections and communication promptly disclosed, including between private partners Time and forums for public feedback Legislature must approve final terms of major deals

  14. Publicly Raising the Bar Feeds Political Advantage Opposite of back-room negotiations Common-sense protections expose: • Public risks • Budget gimmicks • True source of profits • Conflicts with public interest Requires investors to internalize risks

  15. The more public the better State Investors Public

More Related