Company duplication – plain fraud or a ‘poor man's’ bankruptcy? A case study in the financial distress of small businesses

Two possible solutions to corporate financial distress are traditionally considered: commencing a formal bankruptcy proceeding or arranging an out‐of‐court capital restructuring. Corporate bankruptcy scholarship has largely ignored a third solution occasionally undertaken by small businesses, that is, resorting to self‐help measures. The purpose of this paper is to start filling the gap using a unique case study. The paper describes and analyses an existing phenomenon among small firms in Israel experiencing financial distress – company duplication. A typical scenario unfolds as follows. An entrepreneur who controls the financially distressed Company A registers a new Company B in an attempt to avoid a complete shutdown of her creditors' disturbed business. The assets of Company A are transferred to Company B in what appears to be fraudulent conveyance. Company B serves as a vehicle through which the original business is kept running. If necessary, the entrepreneur will also register Company C and repeat the process. Israeli law regulates company duplication in an ambivalent manner. On the one hand, conventional wisdom considers company duplication to be tantamount to fraud against Company A's unaware creditors. Accordingly, company duplication has been recently denounced by the Israeli Supreme Court as an illegitimate way of conducting business. The Court held that notwithstanding the principle of limited liability, an entrepreneur resorting to company duplication is personally liable to pay any debt of Company A that was not serviced by it. On the other hand, company duplicators do not face criminal charges. To the extent that company duplication is practiced by insolvent entrepreneurs, deterrence is therefore suboptimal, as insolvent duplicators are not sanctioned at all. Against this backdrop, this paper advances two normative arguments. First, a more sympathetic explanation should be considered to account for company duplication. An entrepreneur resorting to company duplication might actually be arranging for a ‘home‐made’ bankruptcy proceeding (i.e. buying time which could help the business establish its viability and regenerate). According to this narrative, the duplication mimics the role of a formal bankruptcy stay on unsecured creditors' collection efforts, thus suggesting that company duplication serves as ‘a poor man's’ bankruptcy proceeding. Second, this new explanation of company duplication, combined with the current level of suboptimal deterrence, mandates a re‐evaluation of this business pattern to assess its relative efficacy. I argue that at least in the Israeli context because of its special features, company duplication should be tolerated with regard to small businesses, assuming that the entrepreneur is not defrauding creditors or attempting to rescue a business that has failed due to economic rather than merely financial factors. To that end, company duplicators should be held personally liable to debts of the duplicated companies and be pursued with criminal sanctions only selectively, as explained in the paper. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Proposal to Formulate “Global Informal Workout Rules” Adopting “Asian Bankers' Association Informal Workout Guidelines” and “Model Agreement to Promote Company Restructuring by Informal Workout” with Some Minor Amendments

The INSOL 8 Principles is a set of model domestic rules for out‐of‐court workouts. Many Asian countries have created workout rules referring to the Principles. A uniform insolvency code applicable worldwide may be impossible to achieve. Instead, international professional associations such as the INSOL International and/or official international organizations such as the World Bank may be able to establish global informal workout rules that are applicable in cases to restructure multinational business enterprises that are indebted to multinational financial creditors. The “Asian Bankers' Association Informal Workout Guidelines” and the “Model Agreement to Promote Company Restructuring by Informal Workout” of 2005 are buried treasure tools. They could be transformed to global rules with some minor amendments with the consent of the Association. Copyright © 2013 INSOL International and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd     

The role of stakeholders on rejection of bankruptcy applications in the case of “poverty” of the estate: A Polish case study

The aim of this article is to supplement the Law and Economics area of science with regard to the scope of the ex ante effectiveness of bankruptcy law using the example of Poland. Bankruptcy law is effective in the ex ante stage when it eliminates from the market insolvent entrepreneurs who cannot even afford to cover the costs of bankruptcy proceedings. In these cases, the bankruptcy court should dismiss the petition for bankruptcy because of “poverty” of the insolvent estate. As a result, the insolvent debtor should be liquidated and deleted from the register of companies. This paper investigates entities whose bankruptcy petition has been rejected due to “poverty” of the insolvent estate. The study shows that, after the filing has been dismissed, the majority of these entities are not liquidated. To determine who is responsible for this state of affairs, the article identifies the stakeholders at the time that applications are filed for bankruptcy proceedings and also after the bankruptcy petition has been rejected. The article highlights stakeholders' diverging interests, strengths, and weaknesses to assess their potential impact on bankruptcy procedures that should be dismissed due to “poverty” of the insolvent estate.     

Near-sighted Justice

Chapter 11 structures complex negotiations between creditors and debtors that are overseen by a bankruptcy court. We identify conditions where the court should sometimes err in determining which firms should be liquidated. Such errors affect actions by both good and bad entrepreneurs. We first characterize the optimal error rate without renegotiation. When creditors and debtors can renegotiate to circumvent an error‐riven court, for one class of actions a blind court that ignores all information is optimal. For another class, the court should place the burden of proof on the entrepreneur. The robust feature is that the court should sometimes err.     

Does pre‐packed bankruptcy create value? An empirical study of postbankruptcy employment retention in The Netherlands

In recent years, there has been growing interest in whether pre‐packed bankruptcy can be a mechanism through which firms facing imminent insolvency can preserve value. Although an extensive body of literature exists on “pre‐packs,” whether such techniques really preserve value remains ambiguous. By analysing bankruptcy proceedings filed with Dutch courts in the period 2012–2018 through the lenses of real options and debt overhang theory, we examined employment retention postbankruptcy as a consequence of the type of bankruptcy proceeding (pre‐packed bankruptcy and conventional bankruptcy) and the severity of prebankruptcy financial distress. The results show that in the Netherlands, a pre‐packed bankruptcy, when compared with a conventional bankruptcy proceeding, positively impacts employment retention rates after bankruptcy. The severity of financial distress before bankruptcy does not affect employment retention rates postbankruptcy. This implies that despite the amount of resource slack, the preservation of employee value is better served under a pre‐packed bankruptcy than a conventional bankruptcy proceeding. This finding is important for insolvency practice, as up to 22 June 2017, employee rights in the Netherlands (including redundancy) were not considered to be automatically transferred to the firm acquiring the bankrupt debtor's assets when a pre‐packed bankruptcy was applied. Implications for insolvency regulation and practice are discussed.     

Skinner's “Interpretation Panel”— A Means to Balance “Power”

The rules versus principles debate and the vital importance of context ‐ the circumstances‐specific nature of judgment ‐ are at the heart of Ross Skinner's suggestion for an “interpretation panel". International considerations and developments involving governance and regulation have created imbalances in power, expertise, and impartiality, increasing the importance of and need for such a panel. This analysis considers the nature of the problem, how professional judgment has been characterized, and why a panel would be appropriate to address, among other concerns, the audit committee's dilemma when accounting disputes arise. Evidence is provided that management turnover is higher in cases involving multiple restatements, governance problems, or regulators' sanctions. Although, intuitively, management turnover is likely to be associated with widely publicized restatements, some patterns suggest that it is a function of entity size, scope of management changes considered, and the manner in which the restatement was identified. Specifically, an identifiable source of discovery, as well as external involvement, is associated with a greater propensity for management change. In contrast, restatements linked to changes in available guidance from regulators are less likely to result in such turnover. One implication is that effective control design and monitoring to facilitate internal discovery of errors can decrease the likelihood of multiple restatements and reduce fault finding that leads to management change. The judgmental nature of restatements suggests that an infrastructure supporting “right‐mindedness” does have merit. An interpretation panel would increase the feasibility of principles‐based standards, facilitating timely resolution of accounting‐associated disputes and thereby enhancing the information environment underlying the allocation of capital.     

Hurdles to debt relief for “no income no assets” debtors in Germany: A case study of failed consumer bankruptcy law reforms

Given that many overindebted households have low or no assets and income, governments have increasingly tried to adapt their consumer bankruptcy regimes to the needs and capacities of these NINA (“no income, no assets”) debtors. Most notably, since the mid‐2000s, some countries from the Anglosphere have created low‐cost, means‐tested, and administrative (i.e., nonjudicial) debt relief procedures as alternative to traditional bankruptcy for NINA debtors. By contrast, in some European countries such as Germany, legislators have tried—but until today failed—to create efficient debt relief measures for NINA debtors. This contribution aims to make English‐speaking readers familiar with the history of consumer insolvency law in Germany, with a focus on legislative developments regarding NINA debtors, and to identify actors, institutions, and ideas that have contributed—especially during the 2000s—to the failure of consumer bankruptcy reforms addressing the main problems of NINA cases in Germany (i.e., high hurdles to relief for debtors, high administrative efforts for trustees and courts, high costs for the public purse, and yet very few payments to creditors). The German case is relevant not only because it is a striking case of failure to adapt a debt relief regime to NINA debtors but also because German consumer bankruptcy law—despite its shortcomings—continues to serve as a template for insolvency law reforms in European and other countries.     

Entrepreneurial Spawning: Experience,Education, and Exit

We investigate the career dynamics of high‐tech entrepreneurs by analyzing the exit choice of entrepreneurs: to act as a business angel, to found another firm, or to become dependently employed. Our detailed data from CrunchBase indicate that founders are more likely to stick with entrepreneurship as a serial entrepreneur or as an angel investor in cases where the founder had prior experience either in founding other startups or working for a startup, or had a “jack‐of‐all‐trades” education.     

Maritime cross‐border insolvency in China

Due to the high degree of mobility of ships and the special operational structures of shipping companies, it is difficult to harmonise the cross‐border insolvency regime with the maritime law regime governing ships. One of the typical examples is the recent bankruptcy of Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd. Chinese creditors were heavily affected by the bankruptcy of Hanjin. However, Hanjin never filed an application to have its Korean insolvency proceeding recognised in the People's Republic of China (PRC). Nor did it commence any ancillary insolvency application under the Enterprise Bankruptcy Law of the PRC. Taking Hanjin's bankruptcy as an example, this article examines the current statutory regime of cross‐border insolvency in the PRC in detail and analyses the approach adopted by the Chinese courts to resolve the conflicts that arise between the cross‐border insolvency and maritime law regimes.     

Rethinking priority: The dawn of the relative priority rule and the new “best interests of creditors” test in the European Union

This article identifies one aspect of the cross‐class cram‐down from the EU Directive on restructuring and insolvency that has not drawn wide attention to date. In addition to giving EU Member States the option of a “relative priority rule,” the European legislator has introduced a new “best interest of creditors” test, which does not—like in Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code—use the value that a party could expect in a hypothetical liquidation as a comparator but refers to the “next‐best‐alternative scenario.” First, this article addresses the concepts of the absolute and relative priority rule from the Directive and explores the motives for introducing the relative priority rule. In particular, a demand for more flexibility in restructuring negotiations, the call for an instrument to overcome structural hold‐out positions of preferential (priority) creditors in some Member States, as well as a trend in Europe to break with the “traditional laws of insolvency law” of law and economics seem to have inspired the legislator in drawing up the relative priority rule. This article then deals with the new “best interest” test and examines its interaction with the relative priority rule. It is shown that the concept of combining the new “best interest” test with the relative priority rule is coherent in theory. However, this article remains skeptical as to whether this interaction can succeed in practice, as the new “best interest” test is likely to add another stress point to the negotiations of restructuring plans.     

Disclosure “Bunching”

This paper studies managers' preferences among information acquisition and disclosure policies when their firms are required to engage in “real‐time” or “continuous” financial reporting. The paper predicts that for many, but not all, processes describing the distribution of their firms' cash flows, when subject to such reporting requirements, managers will engage in disclosure “bunching,” that is, they will bunch the discretionary component of the information they acquire and disclose into a single point in time rather than spread the acquisition and disclosure of that information over time. We show that managers' preferred bunching period depends on managers' strategy for trading in their firms' shares, managers' risk aversion, the risk premium the capital market attaches to firms' shares, and the size of managers' initial ownership stakes in their firms. We also study and characterize how the equilibrium prices of firms' shares vary over time and also how managers' optimal trading strategies vary with their most preferred “bunching” strategies. Several extensions confirm the robustness of the optimality of disclosure “bunching.”     

United States Bankruptcy Code,Section 304(b)(3): “Other Appropriate Relif” for Multinational Bankruptcy

Section 304 of the United States Bankruptcy Code was enacted to provide a statutory solution to the “murky and uncharted waters” of multinational bankruptcies. Part I of this article provides a brief background and analysis of section 304; Part II canvasses court decisions fashioning relief to multinational bankruptcies; and in Part III, the author attempts to synthesize the legislative goal of efficient multinational bankruptcy administration with examples of “appropriate relief” that American bankruptcy courts should consider. L'article 304 du code américain sur l'insolvabilité a été passéafin de fournir une solution légale aux “eaux troubles et inconnues” des faillites multinationales. La première partie de cet article donne une brève histoire et analyse de l'article 304; la deuxieme partie couvre les décisions juridiques qui détermient comment assister les compagnies mutinationales en faillite; et dans la troisième partie, l'auteur essaye de synthétiser le but législatif d'une administration éfficace des faillites multinationales avec des exemples de “secours adéquats” que les tribunaux américains de faillite devraient prendre en compte.     

The Economic Impact of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy versus Out‐of‐Court Restructuring

Companies in financial distress have usually been able to choose between working out an agreement with their creditors (“private restructuring”) or entering into more expensive and lengthier formal Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings. But 2015 rulings in two cases by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York may force distressed firms to enter Chapter 11 rather than seek negotiated out‐of‐court settlements. Using a large sample of U.S. companies that experienced financial difficulty during the period 2006–2014, the authors found that the companies that filed for bankruptcy and went through Chapter 11 proceedings experienced significantly more job losses and reductions of economic output than companies achieving out‐of‐court restructurings, both overall and on a per‐case basis. The authors' estimates of the overall losses in output associated with Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases ranged as high as 2.3% of 2014 GDP, as compared to at most 0.3% of GDP in the case of out‐of‐court negotiations. At the same time, the authors estimate that as many as 2.2 million job losses were attributable to cases involving bankruptcies while the out‐of‐court cases were associated with the loss of at most about 300,000 jobs. But, as the authors concede, these findings are exaggerated by a clear self‐selection bias—one that stems from the well‐documented tendency of more fundamentally profitable, and hence more solvent, companies to choose private restructuring over bankruptcy. Despite this limitation, the study provides a useful point of departure for future studies that aim to quantify the costs to the U.S. economy of limiting or removing the option of companies with valuable operations but the “wrong” capital structures to work out their financial difficulties outside of the bankruptcy court.     

The Effects of Monetary Policy “News” and “Surprises”

There is substantial agreement in the monetary policy literature over the effects of exogenous monetary policy shocks. The shocks that are investigated, however, almost exclusively represent unanticipated changes in policy, which surprise the private sector and which are typically found to have a delayed and sluggish effect on output. In this paper, we estimate a New Keynesian model that incorporates news about future policies to try to disentangle the anticipated and unanticipated components of policy shocks. The paper shows that the conventional estimates confound two distinct effects on output: an effect due to unanticipated or “surprise” shocks, which is smaller and more short‐lived than the response usually obtained in the literature, and a large, delayed, and persistent effect due to anticipated policy shocks or “news.” News shocks play a larger role in influencing the business cycle than unanticipated policy shocks, although the overall fraction of economic fluctuations that can be attributed to monetary policy remains limited.     

The Chinese Approach Toward Cross‐Border Bankruptcy Proceedings: One Progressive Step Ahead

The birth of the law on enterprise bankruptcy of the People's Republic of China in 2006 was highly acclaimed. It was generally regarded as a modernized comprehensive legislative work at home and abroad. The “territorialism” approach adopted therein respecting foreign bankruptcy proceedings, however, has received floods of criticism ever since. It has left a great legal vacuum for the protection of foreign bankrupt debtor's assets in China. Foreign investors, however, may see dawn and have their confidence restored after the recent decision of the Supreme People's Court in the well‐known case of Thumb Environmental Technology Group v Sino‐Environment Technology Group, which was made on 11 June 2014. From this case on, with some limitations, the legitimate powers of foreign bankruptcy administrators might normally be ensured once foreign bankruptcy proceedings are initiated in the place of registration or place of principal business of the foreign debtor, whereby foreign administrators will be able to take effective measures to investigate, protect and dispose of the bankrupt's assets located within the Chinese territory.     

“Too big to fail”? The Agrokor case and its impact on West Balkan economies

From about April 2017, Agrokor became the main economic topic in the Balkans. Once the greatest pride of the Croatian economy, it became a serious problem for its government. Its systemic importance for the country and the region required an immediate legislative solution. The Government had Parliament pass a special law intended to save this company. The special law on the procedure of extraordinary administration in companies of systemic importance adopted in April 2017 is an interesting example, because it introduced a new insolvency procedure titled “extraordinary administration” clearly following the example of the Italian Legge Marzano, which was adopted in order to save the Parmalat group in 2003. It also represents an example of a collision of legislation in the case of cross‐border insolvency proceedings inside and outside of the European Union, where different jurisdictions have diverging standpoints on the question of its recognition as a foreign insolvency procedure. However, once the rescue proceedings began, numerous (and some dubious) interests of the different stakeholders came to the light. The government tried not only to rescue the company and its assets throughout the Balkans region but also to acquire control of it. This was especially visible through the prerogatives of the extraordinary commissioner, formally appointed by the court, but in fact a government official. Creditors at risk, mainly Russian and Italian banks, filed lawsuits to prevent the selling of the debtor's assets. At the end, the majority creditors called to vote on the settlement agreement became the new owners of the company. However, Agrokor is still far from the end of the crisis. It has more than 60,000 employees in the region and their destiny depends on the outcome of the crisis. In more recent times, the case also revealed major political scandals.     

How does credit risk affect cost management strategies? Evidence on the initiation of credit default swap and sticky cost behavior

In this paper, we examine the effect of credit defaults swaps (CDS) initiation on reference firms' cost management strategies. CDS contracts provide insurance protection for creditors, inducing a shift in bargaining power from borrowers to creditors and an excessive incidence of bankruptcy. Anticipating more intransigent creditors in debt renegotiations and higher bankruptcy risk, CDS firms are incentivized to mitigate risk through decreasing cost stickiness after CDS initiation, as cost stickiness lowers liquidity and triggers early covenant violations. We find that, on average, CDS initiation is associated with a decline in reference firms' cost stickiness. This association is more pronounced for less liquid, financially distressed, and lower credit quality firms. We also find that CDS firms with a reduction in cost stickiness will exhibit lower future bankruptcy risk than CDS firms without such as reduction in stickiness. Collectively, our findings suggest that the CDS-induced “empty creditor problem” causes reference firms to undertake more conservative cost management practices to alleviate downside risk.     

A Look Back at Merton Miller's “Financial Markets and Economic Growth”

The author begins by agreeing with Miller's characterization of the fragility of U.S. banks and of the shortcomings of the Asian model of bank finance‐driven growth. The article also expresses “emphatic agreement” with Miller's arguments that the protection of banks through deposit insurance, regulatory forbearance, and other forms of “bailout” have created costly moral‐hazard problems that encourage excessive risk‐taking. And the author endorses, at least in principle, Miller's main argument that the development of capital markets that do not require the direct involvement of banks should make economies if not less prone to financial crises, then at least more resilient in recovering from them. But having acknowledged the limitations of bank‐centered systems and the value of developing non‐bank alternatives for savers and corporate borrowers, the author goes on to point to the surprising durability of some banking systems outside the U.S.—notably Canada's, which has not experienced major problems since the 1830s. And even more important, the author views banks and capital markets not as “substitutes” for one another, but as mutually dependent “complements” whose interdependencies and interactions must be recognized by market participants and regulators alike.     

The Primacy of “Present Fairly” in the Auditor's Report*

In this paper, the author examines the historical evolution in the United States of the use of the term “present fairly” in the auditor's report, as well as the experience and arguments in the United States and Canada regarding the use of a “two‐part” opinion in the report. He then develops an argument for the adoption of a “two‐part” opinion, decoupling “present fairly” from conformity with generally accepted accounting principles, which would place primary emphasis on “present fairly".     

From Accounting to “Forecounting”*

Using Ross Skinner's 1995 CA Magazine article, “Judgment in Jeopardy", as a stepping stone, we revisit the meaning of professional judgment in accounting in light of developments in standard setting, financial markets, and business operations that have taken place over the past two decades. We argue that it is time to change the view that accountants' professional judgment is the application of accounting‐based knowledge and experience in the selection of an appropriate accounting method. Accountants now face a standard‐setting context that emphasizes the estimation of future cash flows as well as new business and financial realities. This context implies that, in exercising their professional judgment to choose between forecast alternatives, accountants must rely on knowledge and experience from other disciplines (even though this is not well integrated into accounting). Hence, accounting must evolve from its traditional stewardship role to the new role of “forecount‐ing” (the estimation of future cash flows). The implications as well as the challenges of that evolution are discussed.