|
Report Date : |
02.07.2014 |
IDENTIFICATION DETAILS
|
Name : |
JDM IMPORT CO., INC |
|
|
|
|
Registered Office : |
115 West 45th Street, 9th Floor, New York, NY
10036 |
|
|
|
|
Country : |
United States |
|
|
|
|
Date of Incorporation : |
06.19.1974 |
|
|
|
|
Legal Form : |
Corporation – Profit |
|
|
|
|
Line of Business : |
Importer and Distributor, Retailer of Jewelry and Watches. |
|
|
|
|
No. of Employees |
10 |
RATING & COMMENTS
|
MIRA’s Rating : |
Ba |
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
Status : |
Satisfactory |
|
|
|
|
Payment Behaviour : |
No complaints |
|
|
|
|
Litigation : |
Clear |
NOTES :
Any query related to this report can be made
on e-mail : infodept@mirainform.com
while quoting report number, name and date.
ECGC Country Risk Classification List – March 31, 2014
|
Country Name |
Previous Rating (31.12.2013) |
Current Rating (31.03.2014) |
|
United States |
A1 |
A1 |
|
Risk Category |
ECGC
Classification |
|
Insignificant |
A1 |
|
Low Risk |
A2 |
|
Moderately Low Risk |
B1 |
|
Moderate Risk |
B2 |
|
Moderately High Risk |
C1 |
|
High Risk |
C2 |
|
Very High Risk |
D |
UNITED STATES - ECONOMIC OVERVIEW
The US has the largest and
most technologically powerful economy in the world, with a per capita GDP of
$49,800. In this market-oriented economy, private individuals and business firms
make most of the decisions, and the federal and state governments buy needed
goods and services predominantly in the private marketplace. US business firms
enjoy greater flexibility than their counterparts in Western Europe and Japan
in decisions to expand capital plant, to lay off surplus workers, and to
develop new products. At the same time, they face higher barriers to enter
their rivals' home markets than foreign firms face entering US markets. US
firms are at or near the forefront in technological advances, especially in
computers and in medical, aerospace, and military equipment; their advantage
has narrowed since the end of World War II. The onrush of technology largely
explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market" in
which those at the bottom lack the education and the professional/technical
skills of those at the top and, more and more, fail to get comparable pay
raises, health insurance coverage, and other benefits. Since 1975, practically
all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households. Since
1996, dividends and capital gains have grown faster than wages or any other
category of after-tax income. Imported oil accounts for nearly 55% of US
consumption. Crude oil prices doubled between 2001 and 2006, the year home
prices peaked; higher gasoline prices ate into consumers' budgets and many
individuals fell behind in their mortgage payments. Oil prices climbed another
50% between 2006 and 2008, and bank foreclosures more than doubled in the same
period. Besides dampening the housing market, soaring oil prices caused a drop
in the value of the dollar and a deterioration in the US merchandise trade
deficit, which peaked at $840 billion in 2008. The sub-prime mortgage crisis,
falling home prices, investment bank failures, tight credit, and the global
economic downturn pushed the United States into a recession by mid-2008. GDP
contracted until the third quarter of 2009, making this the deepest and longest
downturn since the Great Depression. To help stabilize financial markets, in
October 2008 the US Congress established a $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief
Program (TARP). The government used some of these funds to purchase equity in
US banks and industrial corporations, much of which had been returned to the
government by early 2011. In January 2009 the US Congress passed and President
Barack OBAMA signed a bill providing an additional $787 billion fiscal stimulus
to be used over 10 years - two-thirds on additional spending and one-third on
tax cuts - to create jobs and to help the economy recover. In 2010 and 2011,
the federal budget deficit reached nearly 9% of GDP. In 2012 the federal
government reduced the growth of spending and the deficit shrank to 7.6% of
GDP. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan required major shifts in national resources
from civilian to military purposes and contributed to the growth of the budget
deficit and public debt. Through 2011, the direct costs of the wars totaled
nearly $900 billion, according to US government figures. US revenues from taxes
and other sources are lower, as a percentage of GDP, than those of most other
countries. In March 2010, President OBAMA signed into law the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act, a health insurance reform that was designed
to extend coverage to an additional 32 million American citizens by 2016,
through private health insurance for the general population and Medicaid for
the impoverished. Total spending on health care - public plus private - rose
from 9.0% of GDP in 1980 to 17.9% in 2010. In July 2010, the president signed
the DODD-FRANK Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, a law designed
to promote financial stability by protecting consumers from financial abuses,
ending taxpayer bailouts of financial firms, dealing with troubled banks that
are "too big to fail," and improving accountability and transparency
in the financial system - in particular, by requiring certain financial
derivatives to be traded in markets that are subject to government regulation
and oversight. In December 2012, the Federal Reserve Board (Fed) announced
plans to purchase $85 billion per month of mortgage-backed and Treasury
securities in an effort to hold down long-term interest rates, and to keep
short term rates near zero until unemployment drops below 6.5% or inflation
rises above 2.5%. In late 2013, the Fed announced that it would begin scaling
back long-term bond purchases to $75 billion per month in January 2014 and
reduce them further as conditions warranted; the Fed, however, would keep
short-term rates near zero so long as unemployment and inflation had not
crossed the previously stated thresholds. Long-term problems include stagnation
of wages for lower-income families, inadequate investment in deteriorating
infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging
population, energy shortages, and sizable current account and budget deficits
|
Source
: CIA |
JDM IMPORT CO., INC.
Address: 115
West 45th Street, 9th floor, New York, NY 10036 - USA
Telephone: +1 212-354-7680
Fax: +1
212-575-4688
Website: -
Corporate ID#: 346103
State: New
York State
Judicial form: Corporation
– Profit
Date incorporated: 06-19-1974
Stock: 4,000
shares common
Value: No par value
Name of manager: Michael KRISS
Business:
Importer and distributor, retailer of
jewelry and watches.
Office of the Foreign Assets Control (OFAC):
The company is not listed on the OFAC list.
The Specially Designated Nationals (SDN)
List is a publication of OFAC which lists individuals and organizations with
whom United States citizens and permanent residents are prohibited from doing
business.
EIN: 13-2785059
Staff: 10
Operations & branches:
At above address, we find a store and office, on lease.
The business is located at the corner of 115 West 45th Street and
1212 Avenue of the Americas.
Shareholders:
Michael and Richard KRISS are the major
shareholders.
Management:
Michael KRISS is the CEO.
James GOLDSBOROUGH is the CFO
As far as we know, they are not involved in
other local business.
Subsidiaries &
Partnership: None
In United States, privately held corporations are not required to
publish any financials.
On a direct call, nobody accepted to answer our questions.
We sent a fax but no answer received.
However, sales estimate for year 2013 is in the range of USD 3,000,000=
(same as 2012)
The cash remains low.
Banks: Israel Discount Bank of New York
Legal filings & complaints:
As of today date, there is no legal filing
pending with the District Courts.
Secured debts summary (UCC):
Haut du formulaire
|
|
Trade references:
Date reported: March
2014
High credit: USD
15,000+
Now owing: 0
Past due: 0
Last purchase: February
2014
Line of business: Payroll
Paying status: As
agreed
Date reported: March
2014
High credit: USD
600
Now owing: 0
Past due: 0
Last purchase: February
2014
Line of business: Telecommunications
Paying status: 1 day
beyond terms
Domestic credit history:
Domestic credit history appears as follow:
|
Monthly
Payment Trends - Recent Activity |
|
National Credit Bureaus gave a correct credit rating.
According to our credit analysts, during the
last 6 months, domestic payments were currently made on terms.
International
credit history:
Payments of imports are currently made on
terms.
Other comments:
The Company is in good standing.
This means that all local and federal taxes were paid on due date.
The risk is low.
Our opinion:
A business connection may be conducted now.
Standard & Poor’s
|
United
States of America Long-Term Rating Lowered To 'AA+' Due To Political Risks,
Rising Debt Burden; Outlook Negative |
|
Publication
date: 05-Aug-2011 20:13:14 EST |
TORONTO (Standard & Poor's) Aug. 5, 2011--Standard & Poor's Ratings Services said today that it lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA'. Standard & Poor's also said that the outlook on the long-term rating is negative. At the same time, Standard & Poor's affirmed its 'A-1+' short-term rating on the U.S. In addition, Standard & Poor's removed both ratings from CreditWatch, where they were placed on July 14, 2011, with negative implications.
The transfer and convertibility (T&C) assessment of the U.S.--our assessment of the likelihood of official interference in the ability of U.S.-based public- and private-sector issuers to secure foreign exchange for
debt service--remains 'AAA'.
We lowered our long-term rating on the U.S. because we believe that the prolonged controversy over raising the statutory debt ceiling and the related fiscal policy debate indicate that further near-term progress containing the growth in public spending, especially on entitlements, or on reaching an agreement on raising revenues is less likely than we previously assumed and will remain a contentious and fitful process. We also believe that the fiscal consolidation plan that Congress and the Administration agreed to this week falls short of the amount that we believe is necessary to stabilize the general government debt burden by the middle of the decade.
Our lowering of the rating was prompted by our view on the rising public debt burden and our perception of greater policymaking uncertainty, consistent with our criteria (see "Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and Assumptions ," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). Nevertheless, we view the U.S. federal government's other economic, external, and monetary credit attributes, which form the basis for the sovereign rating, as broadly unchanged.
We have taken the ratings off CreditWatch because the Aug. 2 passage of the Budget Control Act Amendment of 2011 has removed any perceived immediate threat of payment default posed by delays to raising the government's debt ceiling. In addition, we believe that the act provides sufficient clarity to allow us to evaluate the likely course of U.S. fiscal policy for the next few years.
The political brinksmanship of recent months highlights what we see as America's governance and policymaking becoming less stable, less effective, and less predictable than what we previously believed. The statutory debt ceiling and the threat of default have become political bargaining chips in the debate over fiscal policy. Despite this year's wide-ranging debate, in our view, the differences between political parties have proven to be extraordinarily difficult to bridge, and, as we see it, the resulting agreement fell well short of the comprehensive fiscal consolidation program that some proponents had envisaged until quite recently. Republicans and Democrats have only been able to agree to relatively modest savings on discretionary spending while delegating to the Select Committee decisions on more comprehensive measures. It appears that for now, new revenues have dropped down on the menu of policy options. In addition, the plan envisions only minor policy changes on Medicare and little change in other entitlements,
the containment of which we and most other independent observers regard as key to long-term fiscal sustainability.
Our opinion is that elected officials remain wary of tackling the structural issues required to effectively address the rising U.S. public debt burden in a manner consistent with a 'AAA' rating and with 'AAA' rated sovereign peers (see Sovereign Government Rating Methodology and Assumptions," June 30, 2011, especially Paragraphs 36-41). In our view, the difficulty in framing a consensus on fiscal policy weakens the government's ability to manage public finances and diverts attention from the debate over how to achieve more balanced and dynamic economic growth in an era of fiscal stringency and private-sector deleveraging (ibid). A new political consensus might (or might not) emerge after the 2012 elections, but we believe that by then, the government debt burden will likely be higher, the needed medium-term fiscal adjustment potentially greater, and the inflection point on the U.S. population's demographics and other age-related spending drivers closer at hand (see "Global Aging 2011: In The U.S., Going Gray Will Likely Cost Even More Green, Now," June 21, 2011).
Standard & Poor's takes no position on the mix of spending and revenue measures that Congress and the Administration might conclude is appropriate for putting the U.S.'s finances on a sustainable footing.
The act calls for as much as $2.4 trillion of reductions in expenditure growth over the 10 years through 2021. These cuts will be implemented in two steps: the $917 billion agreed to initially, followed by an additional $1.5 trillion that the newly formed Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction is supposed to recommend by November 2011. The act contains no measures to raise taxes or otherwise enhance revenues, though the committee could recommend them.
The act further provides that if Congress does not enact the committee's recommendations, cuts of $1.2 trillion will be implemented over the same time period. The reductions would mainly affect outlays for civilian discretionary spending, defense, and Medicare. We understand that this fall-back mechanism is designed to encourage Congress to embrace a more balanced mix of expenditure savings, as the committee might recommend.
We note that in a letter to Congress on Aug. 1, 2011, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated total budgetary savings under the act to be at least $2.1 trillion over the next 10 years relative to its baseline assumptions. In updating our own fiscal projections, with certain modifications outlined below, we have relied on the CBO's latest "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" of June 2011, updated to include the CBO assumptions contained in its Aug. 1 letter to Congress. In general, the CBO's "Alternate Fiscal Scenario" assumes a continuation of recent Congressional action overriding existing law.
We view the act's measures as a step toward fiscal consolidation. However, this is within the framework of a legislative mechanism that leaves open the details of what is finally agreed to until the end of 2011, and Congress and the Administration could modify any agreement in the future. Even assuming that at least $2.1 trillion of the spending reductions the act envisages are implemented, we maintain our view that the U.S. net general government debt burden (all levels of government combined, excluding liquid financial assets) will likely continue to grow. Under our revised base case fiscal scenario--which we consider to be consistent with a 'AA+' long-term rating and a negative outlook--we now project that net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 79% in 2015 and 85% by 2021. Even the projected 2015 ratio of sovereign indebtedness is high in relation to those of peer credits and, as noted, would continue to rise under the act's revised policy settings.
Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012, remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. Key macroeconomic assumptions in the base case scenario include trend real GDP growth of 3% and consumer price inflation near 2% annually over the decade.
Our revised upside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as consistent with the outlook on the 'AA+' long-term rating being revised to stable--retains these same macroeconomic assumptions. In addition, it incorporates $950 billion of new revenues on the assumption that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners lapse from 2013 onwards, as the Administration is advocating. In this scenario, we project that the net general government debt would rise from an estimated 74% of GDP by the end of 2011 to 77% in 2015 and to 78% by 2021.
Our revised downside scenario--which, other things being equal, we view as being consistent with a possible further downgrade to a 'AA' long-term rating--features less-favorable macroeconomic assumptions, as outlined below and also assumes that the second round of spending cuts (at least $1.2 trillion) that the act calls for does not occur. This scenario also assumes somewhat higher nominal interest rates for U.S. Treasuries. We still believe that the role of the U.S. dollar as the key reserve currency confers a government funding advantage, one that could change only slowly over time, and that Fed policy might lean toward continued loose monetary policy at a time of fiscal tightening. Nonetheless, it is possible that interest rates could rise if investors re-price relative risks. As a result, our alternate scenario factors in a 50 basis point (bp)-75 bp rise in 10-year bond yields relative to the base and upside cases from 2013 onwards. In this scenario, we project the net public debt burden would rise from 74% of GDP in 2011 to 90% in 2015 and to 101% by 2021.
Our revised scenarios also take into account the significant negative revisions to historical GDP data that the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced on July 29. From our perspective, the effect of these revisions underscores two related points when evaluating the likely debt trajectory of the U.S. government. First, the revisions show that the recent recession was deeper than previously assumed, so the GDP this year is lower than previously thought in both nominal and real terms. Consequently, the debt burden is slightly higher. Second, the revised data highlight the sub-par path of the current economic recovery when compared with rebounds following previous post-war recessions. We believe the sluggish pace of the current economic recovery could be consistent with the experiences of countries that have had financial crises in which the slow process of debt deleveraging in the private sector leads to a persistent drag on demand. As a result, our downside case scenario assumes relatively modest real trend GDP growth of 2.5% and inflation of near 1.5% annually going forward.
When comparing the U.S. to sovereigns with 'AAA' long-term ratings that we view as relevant peers--Canada, France, Germany, and the U.K.--we also observe, based on our base case scenarios for each, that the trajectory of the U.S.'s net public debt is diverging from the others. Including the U.S., we estimate that these five sovereigns will have net general government debt to GDP ratios this year ranging from 34% (Canada) to 80% (the U.K.), with the U.S. debt burden at 74%. By 2015, we project that their net public debt to GDP ratios will range between 30% (lowest, Canada) and 83% (highest, France), with the U.S. debt burden at 79%. However, in contrast with the U.S., we project that the net public debt burdens of these other sovereigns will begin to decline, either before or by 2015.
Standard & Poor's transfer T&C assessment of the U.S. remains 'AAA'. Our T&C assessment reflects our view of the likelihood of the sovereign restricting other public and private issuers' access to foreign exchange needed to meet debt service. Although in our view the credit standing of the U.S. government has deteriorated modestly, we see little indication that official interference of this kind is entering onto the policy agenda of either Congress or the Administration. Consequently, we continue to view this risk as being highly remote.
The outlook on the long-term rating is negative. As our downside alternate fiscal scenario illustrates, a higher public debt trajectory than we currently assume could lead us to lower the long-term rating again. On the other hand, as our upside scenario highlights, if the recommendations of the Congressional Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction--independently or coupled with other initiatives, such as the lapsing of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for high earners--lead to fiscal consolidation measures beyond the minimum mandated, and we believe they are likely to slow the deterioration of the government's debt dynamics, the long-term rating could stabilize at 'AA+'.
On Monday, we will issue separate releases concerning affected ratings in the funds, government-related entities, financial institutions, insurance, public finance, and structured finance sectors.
FOREIGN EXCHANGE RATES
|
Currency |
Unit
|
Indian Rupees |
|
US Dollar |
1 |
Rs.60.13 |
|
|
1 |
Rs.102.83 |
|
Euro |
1 |
Rs.82.28 |
INFORMATION DETAILS
|
Analysis Done by
: |
RAS |
|
|
|
|
Report Prepared
by : |
DPT |
RATING EXPLANATIONS
|
RATING |
STATUS |
PROPOSED CREDIT LINE |
|
|
|
>86 |
Aaa |
Possesses an extremely sound financial base with the strongest
capability for timely payment of interest and principal sums |
Unlimited |
|
|
71-85 |
Aa |
Possesses adequate working capital. No caution needed for credit
transaction. It has above average (strong) capability for payment of interest
and principal sums |
Large |
|
|
56-70 |
A |
Financial & operational base are regarded healthy. General unfavourable
factors will not cause fatal effect. Satisfactory capability for payment of
interest and principal sums |
Fairly Large |
|
|
41-55 |
Ba |
Overall operation is considered normal. Capable to meet normal
commitments. |
Satisfactory |
|
|
26-40 |
B |
Capability to overcome financial difficulties seems comparatively
below average. |
Small |
|
|
11-25 |
Ca |
Adverse factors are apparent. Repayment of interest and principal sums
in default or expected to be in default upon maturity |
Limited with
full security |
|
|
<10 |
C |
Absolute credit risk exists. Caution needed to be exercised |
Credit not
recommended |
|
|
-- |
NB |
New Business |
-- |
|
This score serves as a reference to assess SC’s
credit risk and to set the amount of credit to be extended. It is calculated
from a composite of weighted scores obtained from each of the major sections of
this report. The assessed factors and their relative weights (as indicated
through %) are as follows:
Financial
condition (40%) Ownership
background (20%) Payment
record (10%)
Credit history
(10%) Market trend (10%) Operational size
(10%)
This report is issued at your request without any
risk and responsibility on the part of MIRA INFORM PRIVATE LIMITED (MIPL) or
its officials.