speaker mike johnson's refusal to bring a legon up for a vote. nbc news contest when regul hakeem jeffries who is urging democrats to sign the petition as a statement of psptive that the only way forward is bipartisanpr security built thas sent over from theate saying it deserves an up or down vote. at the same time c-span's pnts out bri fitzpatrick of pennsylvania has also filed a discharge petition on similar legislation that includes border security provisions. the senate passed its $95 billion aid package last month by a vote of 70-29 with 22-29 with 22epublicans voting in favor. >> a healthy democracy doesn't just look like this. it looks like this, where americans can see democracy at work, where citizens are truly informed, a republic fries. get informed straight from the

source on c-span. unfiltered, unbiased, word for word. on the nation's capital to wherever you are. because the opinion that matters the most is your own. this is what democracy looks like. c-span, powered by cable. >> now to discuss on the effects of sanctions against russia two years after its invasion of ukraine with youth deputy treasury secretary wally adeyemo. during his remarks on the economy and the treasurys in new department domestic plants. this is about an hour. >> actually a great pleasure ana former colleague, deputy secretary of treasury wally adeyemo to the council. wally has had a jobs both in got and the private sector, of course the most important job yet was as the g20 and g7 sherpa

and assistant to the president for international economic policy which happened to be my job. onon to bigger and better things from there, including playing an absolutely critical role on whole range of domestic and international■?óa economic issues at the u.s. department of the treasury. he is known throughout the world, highly respected. whenever i travel peoples they y wally? i said, yes, i know wally. it is uniformly positive reaction from capitals around the f f world. you probably saw some of the news in the media major announcy president biden. we are delighted have the deputy secretary due to talk about those issues and me. please wely secretary wally adeyemo. [applause] >> well, mike, let me thank you

for happening here today and for your leadership of this institution. i know that i and your members are grateful for the fact that you taken this on at this critical time around the world. and thank you to all of you joining his today. while i wish i suit under different circumstances, tomorrow we will be marking the two-year anniversary of russia's horrific war on ukraine. as the war stretches on, you know this andyo you've seen thi, skeptics are starting to see ukraine's endurance as the denial of reality rather than what it is, a show of bravery that continues to frustrate one of the world's largest army's. it's important we be clear.the e is a strategic failure for russia. putin expected to take the ukrainian capital withinpi

weeks. he's lost about 300,000 troops. he expected that this war with divide democracies around the world, but today nato is larger and stronger than it was prior to russia's invasion. and in order to pay for his brutal war, the kremlin is mortgaging russia'sgi future. ae when hundreds of thousands of russians are fleeing the country because they see the lack of, prospects and refused to be drafted into putin's war of choice. foreign direct investment has ecdried up. the ruble is weak. the country is cut off from nearly every major financial sector andaj major financial capital in the world. and while gdp is up, it largely been driven by a 70% increase in military spending, which is driven inflation higher and a stake in the of critical

investments in the russian future.nd their and it's important toti note tht for the first modern russian history, russia is investing more in its military than in its people. which over the medium and long term is not sustainable for any country, especially in countries like russia that is largely being cut off from much of the , conventional wisdom is that ukraine lacks the capacity to persevere and that our coalition is weakening. this this is a narrative beid by the kremlin, one that they are using usefully to try and demonstrate that they can outweigh test. i want to be clear that this is false. the truth is that ukraine has the ability to defeat russia. has withstood the test of timing, and the alliance between europe and the united states is stronger than it's been.

and american history showsta us that we know what it takes to stopse a tirade who seeks to unleash rewrite borders, and to rewrite the global order. and cementing russia's failu requires us to use not only our diplomacy but also our sanctions and export controls to deny equipment access to the goods they need to build the weapons they want. but it also requires us to provide ukraine with the financial support and the weapons they need tone defend their country. as i mentioned earlier, russia today is more■e isolated from a global economy than at any point since the cold war. the basic reason for this is that the countries that are part of our coalition represent more than 50% of the global economy. the breadth and durability of our coalition sends a strong message that just to the club but also to other regimes that seek to engage in unprovoked

aggressions against their neighbors. a key part osuring ukraine as y and economic support needed to defend itself and to ensure that there is a a country and econy left to defend, which i'll touch on shortly. but before he turned to that i want to discuss treasuries were using sanctions to make it harder for the kremlin to wage its war of choice. our sanctions have two rules. ultimately, sanctions are a tool of a foreign standpoint of the strategy the president and other leaders have asked the sanctions to accomplish two things. one, reduced the kremlin's revenues in order to make sure that it's hard for them to both fund the war of choice but also to prop up economy. and two disrupt russia's ability to get the goods they need to build the weapons that they want. to that fir point, we are going after, successfully,

russia's most lucrative source of revenue, energy.ederal revenm energyen in 2023 were down 40%, while their expenses for the mitary were up 70%. in large part this cut in revenues has been driven by our sanctions and export contrs madr russia toio sell oil. in addition to that the actions we've taken with regard to the price cap has been that russia has a simple oil for under $60 or they can invest thousands upon millions of dollars and billions of dollars sell oil. but that money that they invest in building at the ecosystem is money they can't investding wear wars in ukraine. unsurprisingly, these investment by rush is taking resource and time. what we are committed to doing is continuing to act to make sure that russia's revenues or

decrease over time so they're in a in a position where they face a choice between investing and propping up the domestic economy and continued to invest in their war of choice in ukraine. today, we will impose additional price cap sanctions that will increase russia's circumventionn costs as well asos reinforce our policy of reducing the kremlin'o reduce r their revenues, we are making harder for russia to purchase the weapons of war that you need going forward. this includes sections on russian companies. importantly, we are also sanctioning companies in third goods that they the need to build weapons that they're using in ukraine. we are making it harder for the russian military to build in country. president biden recently signed an executive order that makes the choice clear for companies outside of russia. you have the ability to continue to do business with russia's

military-industrial complex. if you do we will use every turr you. which means that fundamentally you can't get continued to sell to russia, a small economy that is likely to get smaller, or to do business with the united states and the members of our coalition who represent 50% of the global economy. it is a choice that company after company is finding easier because ultimately they care deeply about their larger, their largest customers which are in ■çthe west in that in russia. as russia struggles to evade our sanctions, we are committed to continue to take actions like the one that we took today to go after that the asian. but we also note that in order to evade the sanctions, they are investing time from the intelligence■ aaratus come fm their economy and that is time did not spending on waging the war of choice in ukraine. but ultimately sanctions are only a part of our foreign policy strategy.

at the same time that the sanctions can curb violence,■mne sped up. and it order to do that, ukraine needs access to financial resources.■, adfast in their support. the european union took important steps by agreeing to provide c50 50 billion euroh of support to ukraine. canada, japan and the netiquettd kingdom of each committed billions of dollars. but as those of you whon in this room know, this effort cannot be successful without american leadership and american support. the senate rectly supplemental that include $33 $33 billion in investment and american companieske and workers to build weapons for ukraine, weapons they need to defend themselves. but in addition the package includes $10 billion of economic assistance. sustain economic assistance that only helps ukraine defend itself from attacks on its infrastructure and economies, it

makes it clear to russia and other belligerentates will stans fighting for our shared values. and as our partners standup, it's important that america stand with them. and while wen are focused on making sure that in the short-term the financial support from congress comes through, the president has also made clear that he believes it's essential the kremlin pay for the damage they have done to ukraine. early on in the invasion president biden and other leaders of our coalition made the decision to mobilize russian sovereign assets held in our jurisdictions. in december the g7 stated clearly it is not for russia to decide if or when it will pay for the damage it has caused. with this direction we are working actively with our g7 counterparts to find ways to use these assets to support the ukrainianeople. taking these steps will increase pressure on russia to in its illegal war of aggression.

it'sti important that president putin andnd the kremlin know tht if they choose to prolong this war, the ukrainian people continue access to the finances they need to defend themselves and to make sure their economy continues to function.wo years,t violation of international law has helped to forge an unprecedented show of strength in opposition to his aggression. together, our international coalition has responded to his barbarism with innovation, collective c countermeasures lie the price cap, that we would not of have been able to accomplish alone. but now the kremlin continues to employ a strategy aimed at destroying ukrfight. but i remain hopeful because a brave ukraine is, like roman period . in 2014, just 16 years old, he

joined thousands of protesters in ukraine's main square, demanding democracy and an end to government corruption. eight years later, still young man, he enlisted, ready to defend theat fragile democracy that he helped restore. on the front roman prepared a will, writing like a man who already knew his fate. kyiv, i died far from you. but i died for you. just two weeks later, he was killed inion, giving what lincoln called, the last full measure of devotion. roman understood theow the values that bind the ukrainian people with democracies all over the world. he joined the sea of demonstrators in kyiv driven by the same man pulses that show people to march in washington,

to bring down the wall in berlin, and stand up to apartheid in johannesburg. roman and countless others that some of the spirit of service and sacrifice did not die in vain. as brave ukrainians fight for the future, we must continue to support them as long as russia's aggression continues. i thank you for your time and i look forward to your questions and continuing this conversation■! [applause][a >> there we are. well, thank you forll that. reat honor to have you on this really momentous day, for all the reasons that you said.

the treasury department is involved in everything, hold economy, tax policy, domestic financial regulation, irs. is irs still part of the treasury department? >> it is part of the department. >> les samuels is here's i hope it's a part of that. and yet it feels like inevitably the treasury department has had is that most of i time on issues like sanctions and economic security. how do you spend your time? how do you make sure the treasury department is havingn l issues, tax issues, other issues? >> so you're right that ultimately we have been, when we came into office, as of you know, we were facing a global pandemic. the place we spent our time with the treasury department was in implementing the american rescue plan. one $20 of that money came to the treasury department. everything from the date of the

child tax credit which dramatically reduce child verty in this country in some communities by as muchats 50%, to the money that went out to state and local governments, which included $13 billion and workforce training. we spent a quick and the time implement these programs. just as we're saying the economy start to grow, and we were starting to see people return to the wise, and we were seeing the impacts of this policy choices, russia invaded ukraine. in addition to the human toll i think we often forget now the economic damage that did not just in ukraine, not just in europe but around the world. you think about a country like he just had to go to the imf because of the fact that the cost of went up significantly. with the fact that a pair of brent with up t $120 edges like as prices go up to about five dollars here in the united states. the actions russia took had a significant economicx9 impact. we responded of course. the president use the strategic petroleum reserve.

gas prices are down $1.90 nothing bute the actions we have taken here's both being things were doing to reinforce the values but also central make a short that destabilize activities like the ones russian are taking don't create economic headwinds for certain. but a great deal d of my time today spent on also t proactive agenda the president has in place, in permitting the inflation reduction act. i was in atlanta last week where in the state of georgia alone we have 33 projects in the last year that have been announced around inflation reduction act that of putting $14 billion into that'p economy. i'm also working making sure we modernize the irs. you know this will because you worked at the treasury department but the irs before the inflation reduction act had a computer system that was still running on cobol. it hadt been put in place before our coacht atm machines or the personal computer. >> hey, if it ain't broke, don't

fix it, right? lab expert exactly. what we can modernize the government to effective and investing here in the united states because we know ultimately our ability to use tools like sanctions, our strength around the world comes from having a stronger economy and what were seeing■# in ameriy strong work around the world because of the policy choices we've made, because the dynamics when the american economy that are created by the american people. >> let's talk about the sanctions. we have a of robust sanctioned programs, iran, north korea, cuba, now russia. how do you rate how strong the sanctions program is against russia right now compared to 500 more sanctions to impose like you do tricks do you have another 500 up your sleeve? [laughing] how much more could the sanctions up on russia? >> those of you who spent time

on sanctions you know this. over time the impact of sanctions grow because what you're doing is your constraining the access of those who are sanctioned or the■ economy's that are sanctioned to things like foreign direct investment. we've onlyor seen that foreign direct investment in russia is now negative. it's going to overtime have more of an effect on the russian economy. what we've also seen is the criminal that asked their intelligence services to go out and find ways to evade our sanctions. a lot of whatng you can use as doing it is as russia sets up cutouts companies, and takes steps to try to evade our sanctions we're going too continue to go after those cutouts and finding ways to identify to further constrain russia's access to two things.ee money they need to buy those weapons are goingng to be our focus. when you compare the programs that were implementing an russia the programs,f the most important thing is that we've taken the lessons we've learned from those programs, we

are applying them to the russia when i started this job, secretary yellen sp to conduct a review of sanctions over the last 20 years, since 9/11. what we found in that review wa. one, making sure that sanctions are a tied to a clear foreign policy objectives are critical to both measuring success and knowing when you need to do more. and you're the president was clear about what we were trying to accomplish, which was using the sanctions to slow russia there are going to be others in our government are going to help speed the ukrainians up with financial support and military support, and you get the the way we measure that is are the revenues coming out and is it harder for them to build weapons? there's going to be more for us to do because what russ try to doo is get rid of the sanctions going forward. you should think about the impact of the sanctions summer to the sanctions on a country like iran, n venezuela is russia's economy today looks a lot more like iran's and does like western

europe's. but if you would look before the invasion, russian wake of a function economy with large numbers of fdi. if you were an investor it were paf your em basket. to date anyone who is an investor the thing they're trying to dous is get money outf russia rather than putting it int is going to do more successful overtime as well. >> there's a robust debate going on about whether to take the frozen process assets of the russian central bank and redeploy them to ukraine, either for reconstruction or conceivably even for militaryct purposes. i gather the u.s. and europe are not completely on the same page on this. how do you feel that issue is going to get worked out? are you i'll build on this soon, on the impact that doing something like this might have countries willingness to use dollar-based assets and keep the reserves in dollars? >> i think the most important thing i think we are across our

coalition unified on this front in terms of our leaders have said something very important, which is, one, they make an the invasion to mobilize russia's assets. that was a critical decision. it was going to surprise the russians but also it was the decision we could only make because our coalition included the countries that help of those assets, the ones with deep, liquid currenciess, that people want to putat assets into. that meant that not only with those assets and mobilize but thatas able to use the warchest they had created for this type of event to help pay for the weapons that they needed going forward. in addition to mobilizing those assets, our leaders have now said that russia is not getting back to assets until they pay for the damage they've done to ukraine's economy.y in december they finally said russia's not going to get to pick the time and place when they compensate the ukrai

after that, they asked expert across our coalition to start thinking about ways in which we can make sure the economic value of assets are helping to, take the ukrainians, and were continue to work through that and talking to a set of ideas. i meaningful i step that is been taken is europe's windfall profits tax which may not touch the principal is using some of the money that's generated from estment of those assetsat to support ukraine over time. i think we're going to continue to explore these because fundamentally the message want to send to the criminal is ukraine is going to have the resources they need too continue to support the economy going forward so you can't outlast us. ultimately, it will russia has to pay for the damage they've done, and what we're doing is making sure we are bringing forward that committed to ensure that ukraine has access to the money they need to defend themselves. >> over the last dangers there's been concerned about the weaponization of finance,

starting with the sanctions after the first russian invasion of ukraine and the taking of crimea, all the other sanctions programs since.bout perhaps grabbing a foreign countries reserves. are you concerned that the particular position of the dollar in the global system, the really privileged position we have of being the global reserve currency, could risk as countries decide to do trade outside of the dollar, to rely on other currencies, which would raise the borrowing costs for tt that you referring to earlier? >> i think one of the things we've learned through this process, reviewing sanctions since 9/11, including the actionsde we took when russia invaded crimea is of the reports a multilateral icing the sanctions. both from the standpoint of send a clear political message to the person or the country where

acting against but also because it protects against some of the downside risk that people read about in terms of getting some of these actors the ability to think about being able to invest in one country versus another. we've taken actio togethe in a way that estimate should you can pick and choose a marxist. and mobilizing russia sovereign assets was only possible because we ultimately after 2014 when russia invaded crimea and he saw the sanctions would put in place, what russia did was they moved the fast but rude of their sovereign assets out of the united states into other countries. they did expect that europe, japan and the members of our coalition would join us taking action like immobilizing them. they key for us is going to be that we continue to act together in order space ordered that we all believe in. fundamentally, my view about this question of whether the use of sanctions is goingf to lead some changes to the dollar is

that the thing that's going to matter to thehe doll this role n the global economy is a strength of our economy ultimately. that's what the fast but driven my time is spent in permitting things like inflation reduction act where you've seen today based on three historic piece of legislation, the infrastructure law, the chips and science act, and the ira, more than $609 and announced investment in the tourney. our goal is got to be determined at from announced investment into actual dollars that are being put into capex in projects here. when i travelk and sit down with companies or cae owes and a top did not only the sanctions, about the economy, all of them around there looking to make investments here in the united states. as long asue we're able to continue do that i feel good about thet fact that america's financial system is going to and we're going to make sure we take sanctions as a tool to be jews in in a way that is tare

and multilateral in order to make sure that they are effective. ultimately that is what we all want to make sure. >> you've underscored the importance of the bank multilateral or having allies, key allies with us. in the case of ukraine and russia that's been that the war is in europe and the europeans really there's been a lot of coherence between the united states and europe over this. let's go to another region of the world. if china were to invade taiwan tomorrow, what younv expect youo be there with us on sanctions? >> i'm■y n going to do hypotheticals. but what i will say, what i will say -- >> very well-trained. [laughing] what it was is ultimately the thing that is unified us, and we often talk about the u.s. and europe being part of this coalition the sound russia accountable. you have to member this coalition includes countries in asia as well including japan. at the number of asian countries have taken action because fundamentally this is about a

violation of the rules-based order that matters to all of us and it should be seen as as a message to countries around world that countries that represent 50% of the global economy are willing to act in aa way to hold another major countryt's essential congress act is because we want to make sure the aggressors around the world see that the united states is going to stand up f our values and were going to stand with our allies and partners to do that. and that goesli beyond just the u.s. and europe. it includes a f countries into asia-pacific that are not close to russia and ukraine but see the impact that russia's decision has hadnhe global economy but also on the rules that we all helped create after world war ii, to ens that we no longer had this type of global context. >> let's talk about china for a moment. traditionally, i don't think this is an unfair characterization, treasury has

been more atha the dovish end of u.s.-china relations. usually strummed advocating for engagement and cooperati like ur have tended to be more combativ combative. >> it's funny because you worked at both agencies. i don't know where -- >> exactly. >> how worried are you, first, about the c economy and the capacity to work their way through their current challenges? and where do you see u.s.-china going in terms of where are we going to engage, where is engagement constructive and was engagement not constructive? >> maybe i'll start with the second because i think over the course of theast of did you e this engage with the chinese both on a number of issues where we see mutual benefit on everything from climate change and addressing the climate understanding what they're doing in terms of economic policy and what we're doing. fundamentally that matters that just to us but to the world.

there are clear places we whe can engage you want to work together. there are going to be places where we disagree, i want to make sure we are able to explain that to each other so we understand when we each stand. and then our hope is there are we can compete with china on a level playing field. fundamentally, this gets to then question about the chinese economy, and disclose the chinese economy faces a number of challenges, many of them emanating from the property sector but it goes be on the property sector. they have demographics challenge. they haveivate sector actors ths quite poor as well. from a macro standpoint, our economy is quite s moment. i am not concerned about thend headwinds from china having a large impact on the u.s. economy. if the region you are more concerned. the thing i am fundamentally concerned about from china is excess capacity come the global.

when you wereti at ustr we thout about excess capacity a lot in s in fields like solar panels which we were concerned about then as well, electric vehicles, which i did production at■d,■ is chinese demand and fundamentally that of the capacity is going to consumer. fortunately we've taken a lot of steps in terms of the irate that is helping to spur demand here. we're using some of our trade tools to make sure were putting us in a position where our companies can compete on a level playing field but fundant this is going to be a challenge for the global economy and the something were talking directly with thehe chinese about. they need to compete on a level plin united states but with countries around the world. one of the things we're doing is we're talking to our partners and allies around the world about what we can do to make sure shyness excess capacity doesn't wash on to our shores in a way that is hurting our ability to compete on a level playing field. >> one of the things we're doing

some work on here is about trade-offs and making explicit some of the trade-offs involved in policy decisions. we would look at the international economic policy, for decades was really based on efficiency, the mostos efficient outcomes. now efficienc resilience and security. all of which come at a cost. maybe high cost of living for goods or for■(n" inputs. when you're traveling around the country and you're explaining our policies toto the american people, how do you explain the trade-off between become less dependent on china perhaps as a manufacturing hub but at the cost of raising the price of see at the store or that they may need in their business? >> i think the truth is that for most americans today they still remember the pandemic. in the pandemic one of the challenges we face was of the inability to get a supply of things. many companies are learned that

efficiency without resilience could in some ways impact your ability to service your so while your right to focus on the fact that government policy is leading to some of these changes, wrinkly business policies leading to a far faster because businesses, while they may continue to invest in china for china, they are looking desk in other places to bld both resilient for their companies, but also to bring production closer to their customers. you are seeing that be a huge again to countriesh are close td the united states as well, but also places like vietnam and in india. the message really isbu rent ths idea that we to be overly dependent on one supplier for any good of one country for anything. reasons but because ultimately we want tore make sure the globl economy is far more resilient going forward. that's the message of the american people because we know in order for the

u.s. economy to do well we have to have access w to supply of te things we need that are essential, like chips, like solar panels, the things that are critical to building the global economy of the future. what the president has done is that we've strategically made investment in these areas to try and unlock the billet for us to produce these things in the united states, but not just in the united states. we are creating incentives that are going to draw in our friends and allies to be part of the ecosystem, in order to make sure we have■b resilience within the global economy and were not overly dependent on one country, on one company to produce the things we need for the modern economy. >> last point before it opened it up for question. rapidfire and to aca scale of oe to ten, ten as a sure thing, one is absolutely no chance. what's the likelihood congress passes the ukraine israel taiwan support bill? >> i think they have to. i don't think thisngs that you - >> i i didn't hear a number the.

[laughing] yeah, i appreciate the by nurturers of numbers. [laughing] but that you hear, is when you look at the house of representatives, a majority of house members are supportive of the ukraine bill. it comes down to speak of letting this house members vote. the reason i continue t have confidence that they're going to do this is because the alternative is us being in a position where where a yoi mentioned and the people in ukraine who are fighting so greatly don't have the weapons they need to defend themselves. secretary austin put it best, that we knew that putin will not stop with ukraine. my view is congress going to act and is critical the ability to . >> it sounds like it then, yeah? okay. i don't want to put words in your mouth. second one, i can want toment c?

>> my view is we've seen this a number of times. i don't expect the government to close. i think congress will find way to continue to fund the government, but the more why do wething withh a step bak continue to do this to ourselves? it makes absolutely no sense to do this. it's not good for anyone. fundamentally, the united states has easily and the capacity to continue to pay its bills and keep the government open. this comes down to really the speaker making the decision tswe can't. the people who are in this room, the people who are members of your organization, they run businesses, they went organizations. when you make a deal the most important deal as you keep that deal and you don't continue to be negotiated. see the government shutdown but in order for that to happen to record the speaker and others in congress to keep the deal that at's what i expect to happen. >> all right.

let's open up her question. first in the room and then will go -- with online. dan r rosen. >> dan rosen from rhodium group. you mentioned egypt, a geopolitics. thee past week part of your team was in beijing talking to thelk chinese about global debt stress and the need a to work togethero do with risks before they blow up. is setting sample ofth u.s. and china cooperation what is that as requiring china to take responsibility for the debt mess it's contrary to? >> i think it has been very of cooperation altima, and not just the u.s. and china. traditionally for many of past the paris club played a major role here. ultimately, given the role that china place in terms of the debt holdings of these countries they have depletable as well. we have worked together work together to do this. it's fundamentally in china's interest to address this in allr interests to make sure we're in

a position where this country that face the challenges are able to work these things out in a way that allows the to the global economy and thus our conversation has been about. not just between u.s.. and china even though that's part of the things were talking about, but multilaterally as well. >> yes, rebecca. >> rebecca patterson. thank for your comments and your service. i wanted to bring to make things that you both talked about, trade-offs and multilateralism and alliances. it for the u.s. and the west generally right now making the russian sanctions effective is the fact some of our alliances are somewhat opportunistic. i think it india as a case study if you will. they are our friend. we wanted as a friend but the also need cheap e i think i about china. i know if you're not doing hypothetical but that could be even more challenging given the integration between the economy's.rtunistic alliances? how can we make the more our

friends and have fewer loopholes? i again i think of things like mexico, our neighbor and allies, and we are reading more and more and see more data suggesting changes exports are going through mexico to the u.s. to tentially avoid some tariffs. how are youou processing that? what steps can we take to make what we're trying to do more effective? >> this comes down to incentives.th at price cap is worked despite lots of peoples concerns that never would. ultimately what the price cap was doing was it was held with price discovery when you came to russian oil, which was hard for anybody who is purchasing at that time. western countries largely no longer purchasing russian o■ril, because we thought that by doing that russia would still sell oil to some players but the price would go up which would increase their revenues, we said you can continue to sell as long as it's under $60 a barrel. one of the biggest beneficiaries is in theaters by quill. y are buying that oil far more cheaply

than russia would like to sell it. fundamentally for them the incentives areed so they want to buy russian oil as cheap as possible. we want russian to sell as cheap as possible because it. reduces the revenues. russia is the only one who does. they are the only ones who are not doing in the strategy. ultimately what russia doing is they're getting a bunch of rupees andhing else. you're trying to buy as much as you can in india and it's hard for them to do because it's hard to use the banking sector there given the sanction regime that we put in place in india's banks resistance to violating those sanctions. so from our stamp of what i most do using our sanctions and export controls is create incentives that make it hard for russia to be able to earn revenues or get access to the g need, but it at the countries to want to be an alignment with us. the same is true when you think about refined products. whence ministers from countries in africa or latin america, they

can play just as much as our country's about high headline invasion of ukraine, the egypt where you saw huge increases in the cost of wheat, or huge increase in the cost of energy.e countries in africa or latin america are benefiting on the price cap we have put on refined products coming out of russia because it's met that because we are not buying it they can buy cheaper diesel and cheaper refined products frombu russia. so our goal try and get incentives aligned in a way that allow us to reduce russia's revenues, and to mean that companies and fir%mstries want h russia and more with us going forward. we think that's the best way to effectuate the change we want in those countries. >> let's go to a question from our online audience. >> we will take our next question from carol. carol, please accept the unmute

now prompt. i'm sorry, that was a mistake. i did have a question. [laughing] >> that's all right. do we have a second onenl questn from tess davis. >> good afternoon or an executive director of thex antiquities coalition, an organization dedicated to building a responsible art market. first, thank you for your work onrk this issue. slid from the global economy but the remains and easy backdoor through the $30 billion american art market which is i the world, period. the u.s. government has proven in great detail how art is providing a lucrative and, unfortunately, untraceable funding source for blacklisted individuals and entities. we are talking tens of millions to putin's top enablers,lso one of 16 million to hezbollah.

treasury itself sounded the alarm two years ago very commendably call for action today mom and pop pawnshops are subject to much or regulations in the multibillion-dollar auction houses. i was wondering if we continue to ramp up the sanctions against russia very important given all that's happening in the world, is treasury plan implement its own recommendations to close these art market loopholes? >> i appreciate the question and have to admit to its a place i haven't spent at regular my time but i know my colleagues at the office o of focus on the art market and going after these ways in which wealthy oligarchs and others who are close to the women are able to move their assets. coming out of the invasion, one of the things we set up was the repo task which was a task force made up of not only the g7 but also countries outside of the g7 eberstadt of to make sure that we are art, ar

things that these rich russians are using to try and move money around thebi world. and going after those assets, freezing those assets and working to seeds of them, and were committed to continue to do that. and implement these types of recommendations.at ultimately the thing that we know is that wealthy russians have spent decades learning to evade not only our sanctions but russian taxes frankly. so they are very good at this but by setting up a task force, the repo task force,, it put us in a position where we are able to share more information that will in the united states, not only with the uk but with a number of our allies imparted to be illegal after their ability to move well in ways like this. but thank you for the question. >> more questions your? yes, the center. >> two. in t■2he failed russian israel border security bill that didn't

happen, there was significant funding for border security that the president supported. now that the congress is sort of shutdown to that idea,s any beld any of that, , finance in initiatives in the program? >> i think it'se president suppt commonsense legislation. and without that legislation would lack much of the funding that we need to be able tow do some of the things that we want to do on the border to make sure we're securing the border better. we don't have options at treasury without authorization and financing which can significantly to address those challenges. >> okay. yes, this woman athe >> you've discussed the inflation reduction act a bit, and the aspects of the act which are really about supporting american citizens at home,

bringing jobs back home, expand interest at home, chips for el. we've also seen reporting some aspects of the ira have a european allies nervous and uncomfortable, for the obvio re. to what extent do you see this as a balancing act? how do you think about aspects of thean irb that brings jobs at home versus support for industries within and among our allies abroad? >> i think it's a great question is when you get when and in europe. my view here is the inflation reduction act is not only about creating good-paying jobs here in america. when you think about climate provision, it is about even with existential threat that is climate change, not all here and the united stas but around the world. before the ira the united states did not have the tools to do this. now with the ira we're making the investments that will mean america's able to meetcommitment also the longer-term commitments we've made aroundd the world in

bringing down a r by making these investments in some of the sectors we believe it's going to bring down the cost to some of these technologies as much as 25% which will mean that now what was cost prohibitive in burgeoning market economies hopefully for the more formal for them as well. in addition to the investments were making here in the united states it's important member of many of the provisions of the ira allow us to, for example, is countries that we have agreements with. we've entered into agreements like this with japan, a critical minerals agreement that allows them to be part of our supply chain. when negotiating the some of the quibble with europe and with the uk. fundamentally the thing we know to be true is that the united states alone cannot build a clean energy ecosystem that will be able to meet the needs of the united states andnd the rest of the world. and also keepingh china. we need to do that with our allies and partners including in

europe and working actively with and to make sure we both get agt signed, but we also think through how we build an ecosystem that allows us to about three secdss going to beo aboard. because the last thing we want is to go from a world in which some offer our supporters were overbill gas to one with their overreliance on china for batteries. we are very focused on this issue is both an important one from a climate standpoint but standpoint. >> let's go to an online question. >> will take our next question from chris wall. mr. wall, please accept the unmute now prompt.?$ it looks like were having technical difficulties. the room,back to mike. >> arbeit. will go back to the room.he filter. >> dan katz from treasury

department official. i wanted to return to the this issue of trade-offs.ap one of the reasons i think it's an interesting innovation and sanctions policies because it's very clear craps with the strata between reducing russian revenue and that increasing the price of oil and global markets. i was hoping maybe could talk more about how you think about the trade-off and where the level of thehe price cap is set. this is that the day at a level where you believe there's no impact on the global price of oil comped to the status quo? or alternatively is their ability to move that down in order to achieve the goal of reducing russian revenueeasing ? >> one thing people often miss was that in response to the price cap was the duma in russia did was they pass legislation that said that because of the impact the price caps have on■> the money the russian state was getting from the energy companies, , instead of charging them taxes based on urals and

the price of euros which is a price of russian oil.ey adequate in ain position where when you need to come to charge them a tax based on the price of brent. so what this means is ultimately the thing which i do is reduce the revenues that come to the russian state so they can use to fund the war and pop up their economy. what they're saying is they are willing now to increase the taxes on energy companies regardless of how much money they madeling a barrel of urals. our goal then became to continue to maintain the price can because it effective in reducing revenues of these energy companies, now the court if less money to invest in tap asked if the race of those taxesad of tht this as only one variable where we can go, when we can increase or decrease the price ofoz oil,e are now also thinking about what we can do to increase the cost to these energy companies going forward.

.. oil, lots of people befe it would do -- energy prices would mean a shy in. we have been able to reduce their revenue while also making sure russia is able to produce oil in the shortnt, the most important thing we can do is from my standpoint. making it harder watch the rest this on c-span.org. we take you live to a proposed rule would regulate payment apps and digital wallets. you're watching live coverage

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]