Image caption
Mark Okerstrom joined Expedia in 2006
Internet travel company Expedia has named its chief financial officer to replace outgoing boss Dara Khosrowshahi, who is leaving to become chief executive at Uber.
Mark Okerstrom joined Expedia in 2006 and has been its financial leader since 2011.
He was the only candidate the company considered, said board chair Barry Diller.
Mr Diller said Mr Khosrowshahi would remain on the board.
“We all wish Dara Khosrowshahi the best good fortune as Uber’s chief executive,” he said in a statement.
At Uber, Mr Khosrowshahi inherits a company that has been rocked by scandals, including investigations by regulators, a trade secrets lawsuit and complaints of sexual harassment,
Co-founder Travis Kalanick resigned as chief executive in June under pressure from investors.
This month one of the company’s largest investors, Benchmark Capital, also sued him for fraud. A judge on Wednesday said that lawsuit must be settled in private arbitration.
US President Donald Trump said “it’s time” for US lawmakers to act on tax reform, increasing pressure on Congress as he seeks to make good on one of his biggest campaign promises.
His administration is pushing for a simpler tax code and lower rates, but it has said it will leave the details of the proposal to Congress.
Lawmakers are expected to present a bill in coming months.
“They have to do it,” he said in a speech on Wednesday. “It is time.”
There is broad agreement that the US tax code – which runs thousands of pages – needs to be simplified.
Powerful business organisations, including the Chamber of Commerce and Business Roundtable, are supporting the effort.
Lower rates would be funded by eliminating dozens of special loopholes, designed for specific industries and scenarios.
Republicans hope to achieve tax reform by the end of the year, but reaching agreement on the details will be tough, analysts say.
“There are a lot of potential pitfalls,” said Scott Greenberg, an analyst at the Tax Foundation.
“Although there’s a lot of political will behind this effort, it’s not hard to imagine a world in which it doesn’t work out.”
Mr Trump said the US has surrendered its competitive advantage with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. He wants to lower the rate to 15%, among other changes.
He said he hoped Congress would not disappoint on this campaign, appealing to Democrats and Republicans to work together.
“I think Congress is going to make a comeback,” he said. “I hope so. Tell you what – the US is counting on it.”
Democrats have said they will not support a tax proposal that offers relief for the very wealthy.
They also say they want the plan to be deficit neutral, which would force lawmakers to identify how they might make up for any lost tax revenue.
Shell boss Ben Van Beurden says Storm Harvey is a “major event” for the industry and the firm’s staff in Texas.
Shell, which has its US base in the Texas city of Houston, has put some of its staff in emergency homes and closed two major facilities.
The storm, which earlier achieved hurricane status, has ripped through the US energy industry in the region.
However, Mr Van Beurden thinks the tropical storm will not have a major impact on its US oil production.
Large parts of Houston are under water, and more than 20 people are reported dead.
Thousands of people there have fled their homes in search of emergency shelter after record rainfall caused severe flooding.
The Shell chief executive said: “We’ve all seen the pictures. Many, many of our people – as with others as well – have been displaced… We’ve had to put people up in temporary accommodation.”
“The disruption for our staff has been very substantial,” he added.
Media playback is unsupported on your device
Media captionShell boss: Hurricane Harvey shut down refinery
Harvey’s path through Texas and the Gulf of Mexico has struck at a region that houses a significant proportion of US oil and gas production and refineries.
The storm has shut down about 15 refineries in Texas, knocking out about a fifth of US refining capacity, according to the US Department of Energy. Additional refineries in the Gulf Coast region are operating at reduced rates.
Mr Van Beurden, who runs Europe’s biggest oil company, said the storm ranks “right at the top” in terms of disruption.
Shell was forced to evacuate a deepwater facility, shut a large refining petrochemicals complex, and has faced major disruption in the shipping channel in the area.
Despite the refinery closures, Mr Van Beurden said he thought the impact on oil production – and the price of oil – would be “limited”.
“I don’t expect to see some disruption on world markets as a result of this,” he said.
Damage reported includes at ExxonMobil’s Baytown refinery, where flooding damaged a roof, leading to a chemical release.
Is it ironic or pure chance that the film industry is looking to movies that were first shown in the 1970s and 1980s to revive box office receipts in 2017?
Set 30 years after the original, Blade Runner 2049 will be released in October.
Meanwhile, Star Wars: The Last Jedi, the eighth film in a franchise that is four decades old, will be shown in December.
Traditionally, sequels do not remuneratively make as much as their originals, according to Richard Cooper, research director at Ampere Analysis.
However, the way the film industry is performing so far this year, it needs all the help it can get.
According to figures from Box Office Mojo, a website that monitors film receipts and cinema attendance, this summer has been damper than a blade runner’s raincoat.
Only 208 films have been released in the US during the summer, down from the usual quota of about 250.
Image copyright Warner Bros
Image caption
Wonder Woman, starring Gal Gadot, has grossed $406.4m
At $3.5bn (£2.7bn) so far this summer, total gross box office receipts are the worst since 2005, when another Star Wars film, Revenge of the Sith, was the year’s biggest draw.
Although the summer season isn’t over yet – this key period for the movie industry runs from the first Friday in May to Labor Day on 4 September – it is doubtful enough people will go to the cinema to compete with the same months in 2015 and 2016, when gross box office takings reached $4.4bn in each year.
This last weekend in the US was the worst at the box office since September 2001. “No need to sugar-coat it, this was a miserable weekend,” said Box Office Mojo.
Cinema attendance is down 52% compared with last year at 385 million people, the poorest figure since Michael Keaton squeezed himself into rubber for Batman Returns and took on Michelle Pfeiffer’s Catwoman in 1992.
Studio strategy
Mr Cooper says there are a number of reasons for the dip.
Firstly, he says: “There has been a change in terms of the movie studios’ strategies. They are starting to look at the long-term life of a film.”
So instead of relying solely on the big screen, studios also want the film to make money on the small screen through pay-TV.
What it means is that a blockbuster is released earlier in the season – such as this year’s summer smash, Wonder Woman, which hit cinemas in May – so it can make it into homes while it is still riding the wave of success.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption
It, starring Pennywise the clown, is released in September
Mr Cooper also points out that this year’s crop of films have also found it hard to compete with the previous two years’ stellar slate of movies.
Although the biggest grossing films in the summers of 2015 and 2016 were sequels, they drew the crowds in the US and overseas because, says Mr Cooper, “action films translate well internationally rather than drama which may have subtle nuances.”
Last year, Finding Dory, a sequel to Finding Nemo, grossed $486.2bn, while Captain America, Civil War, the third film in the series, took $408bn. The year before, Jurassic World took $652.2bn.
All is not lost for 2017.
As well as Star Wars and Blade Runner 2049, cinema goers can look forward to having the life scared out of them by Pennywise the clown when Stephen King’s It hits screens in September.
Should the movie studios be panicking about this data? “It isn’t bad enough to panic,” says Mr Cooper. “But it will raise some eyebrows.”
Image copyright Peterson Institute for internatinal economics
Image caption
Jason Furman, currently a professor at Harvard university and a senior Fellow at the Peterson Institute
Changing the US tax system will be very hard for President Trump, says a former leading adviser to the White House.
Mr Trump is expected to outline more of his thinking on such changes on Wednesday, after making the idea a cornerstone of his election campaign.
Jason Furman, the former chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers to President Obama, spoke to the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.
He said President Trump had a tough job on his hands.
“Reform has winners and losers, and often the losers feel the pain in a very specific concentred way, the winners are more diffuse and that makes it easier for the losers to organise,” Prof Furman said.
“[Also] I think there are some benefits to tax reform but I don’t think they are so huge that it absolutely has to happen.”
Loopholes
President Trump made tax “reform” a cornerstone of his economic policy during his election campaign, and has continued to stress its importance amid the administrative chaos and apparent policy failures of his presidency so far.
The idea of changing the complicated US taxation system, for both companies and people, has been bandied about for many years.
But the last substantial change was 30 years ago, indicating, according to Prof Furman, how hard it was to achieve.
And he pointed out that in fact there are two broad conceptions of what “reform” actually means, and that it was still not clear to which one the president was referring.
“The president has been on both sides of that issue so it’s a bit unclear exactly what his motivation is,” said Prof Furman, who is now Professor of Economic Policy at Harvard Kennedy School.
He said the first conception involved taking away a lot of loopholes and a lot of inefficient parts of the US tax code and lowering the overall tax rate.
That would benefit the United States, especially US companies, which currently have to pay a corporate tax rate of 35%.
Image copyright Reuters
“Much higher than in the UK, or almost any other country in the world,” the professor said.
The second idea of tax cuts, he explained, involved believing in shrinking the size of the government and changing the distribution of income.
“That’s a more ideological issue,” said the professor.
He added: “Given the size of the debt in the United States, even lot of conservatives are sceptical of it right now; there’s a division within the Republican party, of those who want to do tax reform, get rid of loopholes and lower the rates, and those who want to do tax cuts.”
The big oddity in the US tax system, explained the professor, was that the US government pretends to tax corporate profits from overseas.
In theory those earnings should be taxed at 35% but in reality they are not taxed at all unless they are brought back to the US, a feature which the president has suggested should be addressed by a lower tax rate.
“Surprise, surprise, those companies don’t actually bring any of that money back to the United States,” said Prof Furman.
“If we fixed that system, we could get more money and pose less of a distortion for those companies… maybe tax them at a moderate rate and actually collect the money,” he added.
So what is the problem?
Prof Furman said that changing the US tax code would involve taking on some sacred cows currently supported by some Republican politicians, while Democrats would probably have no interest in offering President Trump support on anything.
Thus the political arithmetic is against the President.
“There is a very, very small margin for error. If you lose just three Republicans in the Senate, or a little bit over 20 Republicans in the House [of Representatives], you can’t pass your tax reform if you don’t have Democratic votes,” the professor pointed out.
Renault-Nissan will build electric cars in China, joining the growing push by automakers to manufacture greener vehicles for the world’s biggest auto market.
The cars will be built through a new venture with local firm Dongfeng Motor.
Global automakers including Ford and General Motors are working to develop electric cars in China.
It is the largest market for electric vehicles and new rules to cut pollution are expected to boost sales.
The venture, eGT New Energy Automotive Co, will develop an electric mini-SUV to go into production in 2019. The vehicles will be sold under the partners’ own brands.
No price details for the new vehicles were given.
Renault-Nissan and Dongfeng already work together to manufacture combustion vehicles.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption
China wants more electric cars on the road to fight pollution
Automakers are jostling for a slice of the growing Chinese market ahead of the introduction of new rules designed to fight pollution.
China wants electric battery cars and plug-in hybrids to account for at least one-fifth of its vehicle sales by 2025.
The proposals, due to take effect as early as next year, would require 8% of automakers’ sales to be battery electric or plug-in hybrids, rising to 12% in 2020.
Earlier this month Ford said it was exploring a joint venture with carmaker Anhui Zotye Automobile Co to build electric vehicles under a new brand, in competition with China manufacturing plans previously announced by Tesla, Volkswagen and General Motors.
Renault-Nissan chairman Carlos Ghosn said the move “confirms our common commitment to develop competitive electric vehicles for the Chinese market”.
Ghosn has previously discussed plans to “change the game” with a low-cost electric car priced below $8,000 after Chinese incentives, and ultimately without them.
Image caption
Dara Khosrowshahi has not commented on the development
Expedia boss Dara Khosrowshahi has told US news outlets he plans to leave the travel company for the top job at Uber.
Uber’s board picked Mr Khosrowshahi for the post late on Sunday, ending months of speculation.
Expedia had already told staff it expected him to accept the offer from the ride-hailing firm.
Meanwhile, Uber has said it is cooperating with a US probe into possible bribery law violations.
Mr Khosrowshahi will replace Uber co-founder Travis Kalanick, who stood down in June following investor pressure after months of turmoil at Uber.
The resignation came after clashes with regulators, a trade secrets lawsuit and controversies about sexual harassment.
The firm also continues to report heavy losses.
Mr Khosrowshahi told Bloomberg News that is aware of the challenges, but he is interested in working at a company that is “redefining the transportation industry”.
“Are there difficulties? Are there complexities? Are there challenges? Absolutely, but that’s also what makes it fun.
“I am not in this to coast. I’m in it to get my hands dirty and build a team and do something that people will look back on with tonnes of satisfaction,” he said.
Mr Khosrowshahi told the Wall Street Journal that he intends to take the job.
It is not clear when Mr Khosrowshahi will officially leave Expedia, which he has led since it became an independent company in 2005.
Expedia board chair Barry Diller told staff on Monday the move has not been finalised, but was in the works.
Mr Khosrowshahi earned about $2.5m in total compensation at Expedia last year.
His pay has fluctuated wildly because of stock options. In 2015, he earned more than $94m in total compensation, primarily due to stock awards.
Meanwhile, Uber said on Tuesday that it was cooperating with a preliminary investigation led by the US Department of Justice into possible violations of bribery laws.
The London company that makes the Rubik’s Cube has sued two US companies for selling what it alleges is a knock-off of the classic puzzle.
Rubik’s Brand Limited says retailer Toys “R” Us and manufacturer Duncan Toys are violating its trademark and hurting its reputation with an “imitation twist puzzle cube”.
It has asked a US court to stop the companies from selling the toys.
It is also seeking damages from profits from the puzzle.
The Rubik’s Cube was invented by a Hungarian professor in 1974, and has sold more than 100 million copies worldwide.
The lawsuit was filed Monday in a federal court in New York.
It alleges that Duncan Toys, a unit of Wisconsin-based Flambeau, makes products that mimic the appearance of the Rubik’s Cube, but with slight alterations, such as white instead of black borders.
Rubik’s said the differences are confusing to customers and dilute its brand.
Duncan said the allegations are without merit, and the company intends to vigorously defend itself.
Toys “R” Us did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The Duncan’s 3×3 Quick Cube is available on the Toys “R” Us website for $4.99, about a third of what the classic Rubik’s Cube costs.
Image caption
UK companies now have to reveal how much chief executives are paid, compared to other employees
Prime Minister Theresa May has been accused by Labour and trade unions of “watering down” plans to tackle corporate excess.
But Downing Street said Mrs May had been “consistent” in her approach.
Under government reforms, the UK’s biggest firms will have to reveal how much more their chief executives are paid compared with the average worker.
Companies will also be encouraged to represent workers’ voices on boards.
Unions attacked the plans, saying they were “feeble”, and Labour said the prime minister had backtracked on promises.
However, a Downing Street spokeswoman said Mrs May “wants to improve workers’ representation and that’s going to be achieved with part of this report, which is about changes to the corporate governance code.”
“From her perspective, her position has been consistent and has not changed,” the spokeswoman added.
The government has released measures aimed at increasing boardroom transparency in publicly listed companies.
Business Secretary Greg Clark said the changes would make firms “more accountable to their employees and shareholders”.
Pay ratios
The new corporate governance laws, which are due to come into effect by June 2018, will force some 900 publicly listed companies to reveal the pay ratio between bosses and workers.
Bosses of the UK’s 100 biggest listed firms earned £4.5m on average last year, and typically took home 129 times more than the average employee at those firms.
The Conservatives had promised in their manifesto that executive pay should be approved by an annual vote of shareholders.
However, the new measures instead propose that those public companies who face a shareholder revolt on pay will be named on a register overseen by the Investment Association.
BBC business editor Simon Jack said the government had watered down plans in the face of business lobbying, but also pragmatic and legal problems.
‘Watered down’
At the weekend, Theresa May attacked firms who hand bosses excessive pay “as the unacceptable face of capitalism”.
Writing in the Mail on Sunday, she said the excesses of some chief executives was “damaging the social fabric of our country”.
Businesses will also have to ensure that staff of listed companies are better represented at board level, either by allowing workers to nominate a director, creating an employee advisory council or assigning a non-executive director to represent the workforce.
This requirement will be included in the UK Corporate Governance Code, which operates on a “comply or explain” basis.
Image copyright Getty Images
Image caption
Business Secretary Greg Clark will unveil the government plans
Mrs May had initially promised to force companies to have an employee representative on the board, during her bid to become Conservative Party leader last July.
However, she backtracked in November and said businesses would not be mandated to implement the move.
Labour accused the government of “watering down” an original promise to increase workers’ voice to a lone representative on the board of directors or a separate employee advisory council.
“Each of these will be easily outvoted or ignored,” said Rebecca Long-Bailey, Labour’s shadow business secretary.
‘Weakness’
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said the government’s reforms were “feeble”.
“Just a year ago the prime minister repeatedly promised fundamental reform of business and that’s because there was real public concern about boardroom greed, about tax avoidance and exploitative work practices,” she told the BBC.
“I am afraid that the government has bottled it in the face of business lobbying and that doesn’t bode well for really tackling some of these big problems,” she added.
Vince Cable, leader of the Liberal Democrats, said: “The overblown rhetoric from Theresa May is completely at odds with the weakness of the new rules.”
While the majority of the new measures will only apply to publicly-listed companies, the government has asked the Financial Reporting Council, the City watchdog, to draw up a voluntary set of corporate governance principles for large private companies.
‘Unacceptable behaviour’
It follows the collapse of BHS last year which left 11,000 people out of a job and the company’s pension schemes in a perilous state.
The department store chain was sold by Sir Philip Green to a former bankrupt, Dominic Chappell, for £1 in 2015.
Commenting of the corporate governance reforms, Paul Drechsler, president of the CBI business lobby group, said: “Companies take this seriously and look forward to working closely with the government to ensure the UK maintains its reputation as a global leader in this field and as a primary location for international investment.
“The CBI is very clear that the unacceptable behaviour of a few firms does not reflect the high standards and responsible behaviour of the vast majority of companies.”
Analysis: The great corporate climbdown
Image copyright Getty Images
By Simon Jack, BBC business editor
It is no surprise that today’s package of reforms to the way Britain’s companies are run has fallen short of the crackdown on fat cat behaviour promised by Theresa May last year.
The watering-down can has been used liberally since she initially promised workers on boards and binding shareholder votes on executive pay.
The size of the climbdown is arguably as much to do with the scale of the original ambition as with the feebleness of the final proposals.
The Tory attempt to shake up the way corporate Britain is run hit several obstacles.
Lobbying by the business community was to be expected, but there are some pragmatic and legal problems as well.
Image copyright
