Some customers of the failed cryptocurrency exchange FTX could receive the full value of the money they lost if a court approves the company’s bankruptcy plan.

However, they will not see the gains on their holdings of bitcoin and other digital assets that have occurred over the past two years, despite massive increases in the value of those financial instruments since the FTX exchange collapsed in November 2022.

According to a news release filed Tuesday by FTX, which is going through reorganization, 98% of FTX creditors, including individual investors, who had $50,000 or less with the company will receive the funds they lost, in cash, within 60 days of a reorganization plan going into effect. The plan must still be approved by a court and by creditors.

“We are pleased to be in a position to propose a chapter 11 plan that contemplates the return of 100% of bankruptcy claim amounts plus interest for non-governmental creditors,’ said John J. Ray III, who took over as chief executive officer of FTX alongside his role as chief restructuring officer.

That plan is possible mostly because FTX and its sister company, Alameda Research, held a number of other assets that the reorganization team has sold off. These included shares in Anthropic, the Amazon-backed artificial intelligence startup now valued at nearly $20 billion. FTX said it had sold shares in the company worth $900 million this year.

But some claimants have objected to their crypto assets being valued at November 2022 prices as part of the bankruptcy. Since that date, the price of bitcoin has climbed more than 250%.

In February, the Justice Department appointed an independent examiner, Robert Cleary, to review potential issues with parties involved in the bankruptcy, including past investigations into the FTX debtors and potential conflicts of interest in the FTX bankruptcy involving FTX’s law firm, Sullivan & Cromwell.

A spokesperson for the firm did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Adam Moskowitz, a lawyer representing some of the FTX bankruptcy claimants, said that even with the unusually generous returns to the claimants outlined by the company, outstanding questions about the bankruptcy process remain.

‘We have serious concerns,’ Moskowitz said.

The Sullivan and Cromwell law firm has denied any wrongdoing.

FTX acknowledged that some claimants might find the value of what’s coming back to them through the bankruptcy to be insufficient.

But at the time of its collapse, the release said, FTX held ‘only 0.1% of the Bitcoin and only 1.2% of the Ethereum customers believed it held.’

Because of that, FTX — referred to as a debtor in the bankruptcy case — has ‘not been able to benefit from the appreciation of these missing tokens during the chapter 11 cases,’ the news release said.

‘Instead, the debtors have had to look to other sources of recoverable value to repay creditors.’

In March, former FTX chief Sam Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison for masterminding the fraud that led to the exchange’s collapse.

Applebee’s and IHOP owner Dine Brands thinks its deals can lure away fast-food customers who have grown frustrated with menu prices.

As consumers pull back their restaurant spending, Applebee’s and IHOP are fighting against a larger group of rivals than usual for a smaller pool of customers. Dine Brands CEO John Peyton said full-service restaurants, fast-food chains and even eating at home are all competing for diners’ dollars.

To rise above the competition, Applebee’s has been leaning into value with a slate of promotions that includes the return of Dollaritas, which makes Peyton confident that it can beat out the fast-food chains vying for its customers.

“The Whole Lotta Burger for $9.99 — if you can have our burger for $10, which is great quality, abundant and eat in our restaurant, in our experience, why would you eat a $10 burger out of a paper bag in your car?” he told CNBC.

Low-income consumers visited less frequently and spent more carefully when they did eat out in the first quarter, according to Peyton. Consumers with incomes under $50,000 account for about 40% to 50% of Dine’s customers, he said.

Dine Brands reported first-quarter earnings that fell short of Wall Street’s estimates, and both Applebee’s and IHOP’s same-store sales shrank more than expected. Still, Dine reiterated its full-year outlook and said sales have improved sequentially. Shares of the company closed roughly flat.

But it’s too soon to tell if Dine will succeed in winning over diners — and investors. The company will need to improve its same-store sales growth significantly to meet the full-year outlook it reiterated this year, Raymond James analyst Brian Vaccaro wrote in a research note on Wednesday.

Applebee’s isn’t the only casual dining chain aiming at McDonald’s and the rest of the fast-food category. Chili’s, which is owned by Brinker International, recently rolled out an ad campaign that calls out the Big Mac and other fast-food burgers for their prices.

And McDonald’s is certainly feeling the heat. CEO Chris Kempczinski told analysts on the company’s latest earnings call that “everybody’s out there with a value message,” which is why the chain is looking to create a nationwide value menu.

Besides leaning into deals, Applebee’s might also get an edge on the competition from a triad of recent pop-culture moments: a pivotal cameo in the tennis drama film “Challengers,” an Applebee’s-motivated meltdown on “Survivor” and a shoutout from football legend Peyton Manning during Netflix’s roast of his former rival Tom Brady.

Not since Beyonce name-dropped Red Lobster on her hit song “Formation” has a casual-dining chain felt so relevant in pop culture.

“It’s top of mind for so many people, and it’s because they’ve grown up with Applebee’s,” Peyton said.

LONDON — The Bank of England on Thursday announced a widely expected hold on interest rates as it said restrictive monetary policy was taming inflation, but warned a June rate cut was not a done deal.

Members of the central bank’s Monetary Policy Committee voted 7-2 to hold, with the latter favoring a cut. In the prior meeting only one member voted for a cut.

The MPC nonetheless cautioned that indicators of inflation persistence “remain elevated,” highlighting that services inflation came in at 6% in March, and that there are “upside risks” to the near-term outlook from geopolitics.

It said it would monitor upcoming data releases closely. Two consumer price index prints are due before its next meeting on June 20.

The decision keeps the BOE’s key Bank Rate at 5.25%.

“We need to see more evidence that inflation will stay low before we can cut interest rates,” BOE Governor Andrew Bailey said in a statement reported by Reuters.

“I’m optimistic that things are moving in the right direction.”

Market anticipation has been building for interest rate cuts to begin in the summer, with money markets fully pricing in a 25 basis point reduction in August and 50 basis points overall this year.

Some economists see a cut in June and three or more cuts in 2024, though market pricing suggested a 45% probability of that following the meeting.

U.K. headline inflation is forecast to drop dramatically in April due to lower energy prices, from the current 3.2% to below the BOE’s 2% target, according to some projections.

In its Thursday release, the BOE said it expected it expected the U.K. gross domestic product to grow by 0.4% in the first quarter of the year, and by 0.2% in the second quarter. The economy fell into a shallow recession in the second half of 2023.

It meanwhile sees headline inflation close to 2% in the near-term, and expects it to increase slightly later in the year as the drag from the energy market wanes.

In a press conference following the announcement, Bailey emphasized the message in its statement that the MPC “will consider forthcoming data releases and how these inform the assessment that the risks from inflation persistence are receding.”

“June is not a fait accompli, but each meeting is a new decision,” he said.

Paul Dales, chief U.K. economist at Capital Economists, noted the BOE had repeated previous messaging on monetary policy remaining restrictive for “sufficiently long” and for “an extended period.”

This “suggests to us that the Bank is not implying it will cut rates at the next policy meeting in June,” he said in a note.

“But the new line that the MPC will ‘consider forthcoming data releases and how these inform the assessment that the risks from inflation persistence are receding’ implies that the MPC is willing to change its stance and that the data will determine when that happens.”

Wage data may end up informing whether the cut falls in June or August, he added.

Ascension Health, the nation’s largest chain of Catholic hospitals, said Thursday it was responding to a cyberattack that was disrupting its operations.

In a press release on its website, Ascension said the attack had caused ‘disruption to clinical operations’ as access to some systems had been interrupted.

‘Our care teams are trained for these kinds of disruptions and have initiated procedures to ensure patient care delivery continues to be safe and as minimally impacted as possible,’ it said.

An Ascension spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The company said it had engaged cybersecurity consulting firm Mandiant to assist in the investigation and remediation process, and had notified law enforcement authorities.

A spokesperson for the FBI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The attack follows one that has caused a weekslong disruption to health insurance giant UnitedHealthcare and its affiliates. While UnitedHealth has restored most operations affected by the event, some still remain offline, according to its website. UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty testified last month that the company had inadequate cybersecurity protocols in place, and that it had paid $22 million in bitcoin to lift the siege of its operations.

According to Becker’s Hospital Review, Ascension is the fourth-largest hospital network in the country, with 140 locations in 19 states and Washington, D.C., including major presences in St. Louis and the Chicagoland area.

Hyundai’s and Kia’s American financing arm will pay $334,941 to settle charges it illegally repossessed vehicles belonging to military service members, the U.S. Department of Justice said on Wednesday.

According to papers filed in Los Angeles federal court, Hyundai Capital America violated the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act between 2015 and 2023 by repossessing 26 vehicles whose owners had begun paying off their loans prior to active duty.

The Justice Department said the law required the financing arm to obtain court permission before repossessing vehicles.

It cited as an example the 2017 repossession and sale of Navy Airman Jessica Johnson’s three-year-old Hyundai Elantra, after the financing arm determined that she was on active duty but “not deployed.”

Johnson still owed $13,796 on the car, and Hyundai Capital America realized in 2020 it should not have repossessed it, court papers show.

“Members of our Armed Forces should not have to worry about having their cars repossessed while they are in military service,” Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke said in a statement.

Without admitting wrongdoing, Hyundai Capital America will pay $10,000 plus lost vehicle equity to each of the 26 service members, and repair their credit. It will also pay $74,941 to the U.S. Treasury “to vindicate the public interest.”

Hyundai Capital America is based in Irvine, California.

“HCA takes pride in supporting our military families,” it said in a statement. “Additionally, we have already taken steps to further enhance our compliance with all SCRA requirements.”

The Justice Department in the last several years settled claims under the servicemembers law against several financing companies, including General Motors, Nissan and Wells Fargo financing arms.

The case is U.S. v. Hyundai Capital America, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, No. 24-03818.

A Consumer Financial Protection Bureau regulation that promised to save Americans billions of dollars in late fees on credit cards faces a last-ditch effort to stave off its implementation.

Led by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the card industry in March sued the CFPB in federal court to prevent the new rule from taking effect.

That effort, which bounced between venues in Texas and Washington, D.C., for weeks, is now about to reach a milestone: a judge in the Northern District of Texas is expected to announce by Friday evening whether the court will grant the industry’s request for a freeze.

That could hold up the regulation, which would slash what most banks can charge in late fees to $8 per incident, just days before it was to take effect on Tuesday.

“We should get some clarity soon about whether the rule is going to be allowed to go into effect,” said Tobin Marcus, lead policy analyst at Wolfe Research.

The credit card regulation is part of President Joe Biden’s broader election-year war against what he deems junk fees.

Big card issuers have steadily raised the cost of late fees since 2010, profiting off users with low credit scores who rack up $138 in fees annually per card on average, according to CFPB Director Rohit Chopra.

As expected, the industry has mounted a campaign to derail the regulations, deeming them a misguided effort that redistributes costs to those who pay their bills on time, and ultimately harms those it purports to benefit by making it more likely for users to fall behind.

Up for grabs is the $10 billion in fees per year that the CFPB estimates the rule would save American families by pushing down late penalties to $8 from a typical $32 per incident.

Card issuers including Capital One and Synchrony have already talked about efforts to offset the revenue hit they would face if the rule takes effect. They could do so by raising interest rates, adding new fees for things like paper statements, or changing who they choose to lend to.

Capital One CEO Richard Fairbank said last month that, if implemented, the CFPB rule would impact his bank’s revenue for a “couple of years” as the company takes “mitigating actions” to raise revenue elsewhere.

“Some of these mitigating actions have already been implemented and are underway,” Fairbank told analysts during the company’s first-quarter earnings call. “We are planning on additional actions once we learn more about where the litigation settles out.”

Like some other observers, Wolfe Research’s Marcus believes the Chamber of Commerce is likely to prevail in its efforts to hold off the rule, either via the Northern District of Texas or through the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals. If granted, a preliminary injunction could hold up the rule until the dispute is settled, possibly through a lengthy trial.

The industry group, which includes Washington, D.C.-based trade associations like the American Bankers Association and the Consumer Bankers Association, filed its lawsuit in Texas because it is widely viewed as a friendlier venue for corporations, Marcus said.

“I would be very surprised if [Texas Judge Mark T.] Pittman denies that injunction on the merits,” he said. “One way or another, I think implementation is going to be blocked before the rule is supposed to go into effect.”

The CFPB declined to comment, and the Chamber of Commerce didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.