Tag: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

THE HONEST TO GOODNESS TRUTH ON BANKRUPTING A CORPORATION

bankrupting a corporation

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click on the podcast

Bankrupting a corporation: Introduction

I have blogged on personal and corporate insolvency matters for just over 6 years now. I have covered many topics. During a recent corporate bankruptcy consultation, I realized that I have never written about what the steps are for bankrupting a corporation. An important issue arising from this topic would be what the Directors of a corporation going into bankruptcy should know.

There are 3 ways for a company to be bankrupt

Like in all bankruptcy matters, there are three methods that result in bankrupting a corporation in Canada. The first way is being pushed, and the second way is jumping in with both feet voluntarily (I know, corporations don’t have feet!). The third way is to have the company’s creditors vote down a corporation’s attempt to restructure under a Proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). In this Brandon’s Blog, I will focus on describing the first two methods.

Bankruptcy application – an involuntary bankruptcy

Being pushed means that one or more unsecured creditors, owed in total at least $1,000, has made a motion before the Court asking that a Bankruptcy Order be made against the company. The motion is called a Bankruptcy Application.

In order to do so, the unsecured creditor(s) have to:

  • retain a bankruptcy lawyer.
  • gotten the consent of a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (Trustee) to administer the corporate bankruptcy.
  • In addition to proving the debt owing, the applicant(s) also have to prove that at least one act of bankruptcy was committed by the company within the 6 months before the filing of the bankruptcy application.

There are various acts of bankruptcy listed in Section 42(1) of the BIA. Commonly seen acts of bankruptcy are fraudulent transfers of property, allowing a lawful seizure of some or all of their property by a creditor under a lawful process, and the catch-all ceasing to meet many liabilities as they come due.

Jumping in with both feet – a voluntary bankruptcy

By this term, I mean filing an Assignment in Bankruptcy. In this case, rather than someone going to Court, the Directors call a Directors’ meeting. At the meeting, the Directors resolve that the company is experiencing financial difficulty and cannot continue to run. The Directors also reserve that the company should file an assignment in bankruptcy and it gives authority to one Director to sign all the necessary documents.

The Director who has the authority to sign the bankruptcy documents is called the Designated Officer. Before the documents are ready for signing, the Trustee who is selected must get enough information to prepare the documentation.

Whether bankrupting a corporation in Ontario or elsewhere in Canada and regardless if it is a result of a Bankruptcy Order or an Assignment in Bankruptcy, the information the Trustee requires is the same.

Information and documents a Trustee needs

The Trustee requires a great deal of information before being able to properly administer a voluntary or involuntary corporate bankruptcy. Sometimes company officials can provide it and in other cases, the Trustee has to dig through the books and records of the company.

Here is the lengthy list of what is needed:

  • Exact corporate name and address of head office, details of any other locations, copy of any premises leases.
  • Minute book and corporate seal.
  • Bankruptcy Order or the resolution of the Directors.
  • Full description of the nature of the business.
  • Names of Officers and Directors and their addresses.
  • Date of incorporation of the company.
  • The date the company ceased operations, if prior to the date of bankruptcy.
  • The greatest number of employees employed in the last 12 months.
  • All employees – listing of names, addresses, social insurance number, amounts owing for each of severance, termination, wages, vacation pay, commissions and expenses.
  • Employee T4’s & ROE’s for current year employees (employer should issue to all employees for the year of bankruptcy and earlier if unissued).
  • Creditors’ listing (accounts payable) – details consisting of name, address, account number(s), and respective amounts owing classified as follows:
    • Secured – banks, leasing company, source deductions, etc.
    • Preferred – wages owing, rent to landlords, government remittances outstanding:
    • Workers Compensation Board, if applicable.
    • Municipal authorities: e.g. business taxes and realty taxes.
    • Employer’s health tax.
    • Unsecured – trade suppliers; Hydro; Bell Canada (quote telephone number(s); gas, etc.
    • Details of any unsecured private party loans, shareholder loans or advances due to the company.
  • Details of any unions, if applicable, including name, address, account number.
  • Details of contingent liabilities and pending legal action, if any.
  • Accounts receivable – aged trial balance and detailed backup documentation (invoices, delivery slips, purchase orders, etc.) to support collection efforts. From the aged trial balance, classify the accounts as good, doubtful, bad to equal the total balance.
  • Inventory – detailed information on inventory cost and the company’s assessment of estimated realizable values.
  • Machinery, equipment and plant – detailed listing providing original cost, if possible and estimated realizable value.
  • Office furniture & fixtures – detailed listing providing original cost, if possible and estimated realizable value.
  • Real estate – all details of real estate owned, including deeds, legal descriptions, original costs, appraisals (if any), an estimated fair market value.
  • Vehicles – provide descriptions including year, model, VIN, kilometres, original costs and estimated realizable value. Note if any vehicles are leased/financed and provide copies of the lease/finance documentation.
  • Other assets – details of other assets such as prepaid expenses, deposits, goodwill, intangibles, shares or any investments, patents, trademarks.
  • Bank accounts – details of all bank accounts, including name, address, account number and approximate balance in the accounts.
  • Last 12 months of accounting records, bank statements and cancelled cheques (for all accounts maintained).
  • Financial statements – most recent.
  • Corporate solicitor – name and address.
  • Listing of leased equipment (copy of leases) – vehicles, office and any other equipment.
  • Insurance policy(ies).
  • A brief narrative of management’s opinion as to cause(s) of insolvency.
  • Disclosure of any sale or disposition of assets, outside of the ordinary course of business, in the last year.

The Trustee’s job

In a corporate bankruptcy, the Trustee, with certain exceptions, takes possession of the assets of the company. If the Trustee is aware that there are deemed trust claims against the assets, or there is a secured creditor, like a Chartered Bank, the Trustee must be careful. If there are, the Trustee should have already had a conversation with those parties prior to the bankruptcy, to decide what rights, if any, the Trustee may have against such property.

Assuming there are assets not subject to the valid claim of third parties, the Trustee must at least:

  1. Establish whether the value of the assets will be enhanced if the Trustee operates the company’s business.
  2. Take into account what obstacles exist in running the business and how to reduce risk if it is beneficial or necessary to run the business.
  3. Decide what are the very best means to sell the properties? En bloc as one parcel or individually or at least several parcels?
  4. Determine if there are any 3rd party owned assets on the company’s premises?
  5. Identify if there are any company assets on the property of 3rd parties?
  6. Prepare the required reporting to Service Canada so that the former employees will be able to make their Wage Earner Protection Plan Act claims.
  7. See if there are proper insurance coverage and proper physical security over the assets?
  8. Identify any inventory been delivered in the 30 days prior to the date of bankruptcy? What rights of revindication might exist?
  9. Circularize the creditors requesting claims to be filed to understand what the depth and breadth of claims against the company are. This way, the Trustee can formulate a distribution to creditors, in priority, with the net funds available from the sale of assets.

What the Directors should be concerned about

Directors should have two concerns when contemplating bankrupting a corporation. First, they should be concerned about any decisions they have made or senior management actions they have ratified.

For example, Sears in the United States recently lodged a claim versus its previous CEO Eddie Lampert and a string of its top-level previous Directors. This includes Eddie Lampert’s previous Yale roomie Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin. The allegation is that the Directors condoned and approved Eddie Lampert’s actions for presumably swiping billions of dollars from the once-storied merchant.

Second, there are various types of claims against the corporation that are also personal claims against Directors. The list includes Director liability for unpaid:

  • Wages
  • HST
  • Source deductions
  • Certain environmental offences
  • Cybersecurity risks

In general, there is a relatively short list of things Directors can be personally liable for. In many cases, there will be Director and Officer Insurance to be relied upon. Directors may also have a due diligence defence.

A Director resigning their position will not protect them against any liability that would be a personal Director liability prior to their resignation.

Are you a Corporate Director?

Are you a Director of a corporation that has too much debt? Is your company’s capital insufficient to fulfill every one of its economic responsibilities and may be insolvent? Are you worried that your firm’s major secured lender will soon pull its financing completely and demand repayment in full which the company will not be able to do?

If you responded yes to any of these questions, call the Ira Smith Team today so we can kill off the stress and anxiety that these financial troubles have activated. We will create a strategy for the Directors unique for your company’s problems so that it can avoid bankruptcy and become profitable and continue to employ many people.

Call the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of experience restructuring and turning around companies seeking financial restructuring or a debt negotiation strategy. As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only specialists recognized, certified and monitored by the federal government to offer insolvency guidance to save businesses.

You can have a no-cost assessment so we can fix your company’s debt problems. Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will absolutely allow you to return to being efficient, healthy and balanced, Starting Over Starting Now.

[monkeytools msnip=”http://monkeyplayr.com/playr.php?u=5173&p=20719″]

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

MOVE FAST TO OBJECT TO AN ONTARIO RECEIVERSHIP COURT ORDER

[monkeytools msnip=”http://monkeyplayr.com/playr.php?u=5173&p=20708″]

What is a receiver in insolvency?

A recent case heard in the Court of Appeal for Ontario clarifies what the time limit is to object to an order made in a Court-appointed receivership of a company in Ontario. The bottom line is you better move fast. Before I describe this very interesting decision, I should first remind newer readers on some receiver 101 basics.

What is it?

A receivership is a remedy for secured creditors to enforce their security. In the event, the company defaults on its loan agreement, normally by non-payment, the secured creditor. There are two types of these proceedings in Canada; 1) privately appointed or; 2) court appointed. A receiver might additionally be selected in an investor dispute to complete a task, liquidate assets or market a business.

Typically, the process begins with the secured creditor consulting with a Receiver. If it is decided that there should be a receiver appointed, the secured creditor then makes a choice. They can either appoint the receiver by written appointment letter (privately appointed) or make a motion to the Court for an Order appointing the receiver (court-appointed).

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) states that only a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) can act as a receiver. A privately appointed receiver acts on behalf of the appointing secured creditor. A court-appointed receiver has a duty of care to all creditors.

What are the duties of a receiver?

The receiver’s first duty is to take possession and control of the assets covered by the secured creditor’s security in a private appointment, or all the assets indicated in the court order in a court appointment. The receiver must decide whether it can get a higher value for the assets if it operates the business. Alternatively, the receiver may decide that the risk of operating the business is not worth it in terms of any meaningful increase in the value of the assets.

The receiver then develops a plan to on the running of the business and for the eventual sale of the assets. The type of business and the nature of the assets will dictate what approach the receiver will take. In the meantime, the receiver must inventory all the assets, protect them and make sure there is adequate insurance in place for what the receiver wishes to do in terms of running the business and selling the assets.

In a private appointment, the receiver needs to get the approval of the secured creditor before embarking on the business and asset plan. In a court appointment, the receiver requires the approval of the court.

What happens when a company goes into receivership?

When the company goes into receivership, senior management and the Directors lose most of their authority for decision making. The Directors’ general corporate duty of maintaining corporate records continues, but any decision-making about the running of the business or its assets will not be effective. This is especially true in a court appointment. The subject of Director liability is too broad to start mentioning in this Brandon’s Blog. i am planning to soon write a blog on that topic.

Management’s and employees’ responsibilities about the business in a practical sense will stop upon the appointment of the receiver. Their advice and help are only required if requested by the receiver. They certainly will not be paid for any efforts unless the receiver agrees in writing to make money available for their pay.

Court of Appeal for Ontario says you better move fast

Why the confusion? Isn’t the process for an appeal of a court order straightforward? The confusion comes about because, in the standard model Appointment Order of the Commercial List of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the court-appointed receiver is appointed under two statutes:

  1. Section 101 of the provincial Ontario Courts of Justice Act, RSO 1990, c C.43 (CJA).
  2. The federal BIA, section 243(1).

The applicant, in this case, was the purchaser of assets from a court-appointed receiver of a company. One of the standard provisions in the Appointment Order is that anyone wishing to take legal action against the receiver must first get the approval of the court to do so.

They brought an application for authorization to sue the receiver over a disagreement arising from the purchase of the assets from the receiver under the asset purchase agreement. On May 17, 2018, the lower court judge dismissed the application, finding that their allegations were not supported by the evidence. On November 8, 2018, the same judge refused their demand to resume the application based on new evidence.

The applicant filed appeals from both decisions. Its notices of appeal were on time under the provincial CJA, under which there is a 30-day time limit for commencing an appeal. They were late under the federal BIA, which imposes a 10-day time limit.

The lower court judge dismissed the appeals. He held that the BIA was the governing authority for the appeal, not the CJA. He stated that the origin of authority under which the receiver was appointed was section 243( 1) of the BIA and therefore appeals are governed by the BIA, not the CJA. He further went on to say that the appointment also under the CJA did not have the result of ousting the BIA as the source of authority. He further held that it also cannot supersede the federal BIA holds paramountcy over the provincial CJA.

receivership

Business Development Bank of Canada v. Astoria Organic Matters Ltd., 2019 ONCA 269

The Court of Appeal for Ontario decision was released on April 8, 2019. The appeal court found that this was a very narrow issue to decide so that it did not have to get into the merits of the case of the purchaser wanting to sue the receiver over a disagreement arising from the purchase of the assets from the receiver under the asset purchase agreement.

The Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeal and did not find that the chambers judge made any errors. They said that when the order sought to be appealed was made in reliance on jurisdiction under the BIA, the proper appeal path is the BIA.

The lower court, the Ontario Superior Court Justice Commercial List, rejected the purchaser’s demand to sue the receiver, which is the decision the applicant wishes to appeal. The requirement to get leave of the court to sue the receiver comes from the Appointment Order. The court’s authority to include that arrangement order comes from the statutory power to appoint a receiver under s. 243( 1) of the BIA.

The Court of Appeal agreed that the legal power to appoint a receiver is also found in s. 101 of the CJA. But considering that authority for the leave to take legal action against the receiver comes from the BIA in spite of that the receiver was appointed under both laws, the appeal is governed by the BIA as a matter of paramountcy.

Therefore the Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the applicant’s appeal and awarded costs against them.

Does your company need to move fast?

Does your company have way too much debt? Is your company’s cash flow not enough to meet all of its financial obligations? Are you afraid that your company’s main secured creditor is about to demand repayment of its loan in full and you just can’t move fast enough to save your company?

If you answered yes, call the Ira Smith Team today so we can end the tension and anxiousness that these financial problems have triggered. We will develop a plan special for your company, to save it from extinction.

Call the Ira Smith Team today. We have years and generations of experience restructuring and saving companies looking for financial restructuring or a debt settlement approach. As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only professionals acknowledged, accredited and supervised by the federal government to provide insolvency advice to save companies.

You can have a no-cost analysis to aid you so we can repair your company’s debt problems. Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will certainly allow you to get back to Starting Over Starting Now.

receivership

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CANADA FEDERAL BUDGET PLAN: RETIREE BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION REJECTED

[monkeytools msnip=”http://monkeyplayr.com/playr.php?u=5173&p=20464″]

Canada federal budget plan: Introduction

Like many Canadians, on March 19 I was watching to see if the Conservative Party would be successful or not in blocking Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s budget speech. In the end, the Liberals took the drop on Parliament by getting the budget introduced early, before the Finance Minister’s speech. That allowed the media in lockup to start broadcasting the details of the Canada federal budget plan before the Finance Minister gave his speech!

Canada federal budget plan: Retiree bankruptcy protection

I was also looking to see what the budget had in it about retiree bankruptcy protection. This matter has been in the news over the past two years. High profile insolvency cases such as Sears Canada and U.S. Steel Canada brought this matter to the forefront. I have written a few blogs on the topic of proposals to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA) to provide protection to retirees. This included private members’ bills introduced by Hamilton Mountain NDP MP Scott Duvall, Bloc Québécois MP Marilène Gill and Senator Art Eggleton, P.‍C.

As I have previously written, the issue for retirees (and current employees) relates to the employee health benefits plan and pension plan when a company enters into an insolvency administration. Insolvent companies have been allowed to put a moratorium on reimbursements to employees and retirees on valid health benefits claims. Also, the employee pension plan suffers a shortfall because the insolvent company has not made the required contributions. This automatically creates reduced pension benefits for retirees.

Pensions are delayed earnings. In either a bankruptcy or bankruptcy protection reorganization, there is generally nothing left for employees.

Given the recent high-profile insolvency cases, employees now recognize just how unsecure their pension plans and health benefits might be in the case of insolvency, reorganization or bankruptcy.

The Liberal Party already recognizes that this is a major problem. However, in this budget, they decided to ignore the issue.

Canada federal budget plan: What this budget is

Rather, this budget screams please re-elect the Liberal party. In the wake of the SNC Lavalin debacle, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is trying to win votes by spending, spending and then more spending.

The Government of Canada market debt is projected to climb by $31 billion in the coming fiscal year, to strike a total amount of $754 billion. This brand-new funding demand comes along with $250 billion of existing debt that will be maturing and will require to be refinanced.

The Finance Minister estimates that Canada’s deficit will rise as a result of the $22.8 billion of new spending. The 2018-19 deficit projection is now set at $14.9 billion, slightly reduced from the Government’s estimate in Fall 2018. However, not surprisingly for an election budget, the Liberals found a way to spend those savings and then some. Their 2019-20 deficit projection is $19.8 billion.

Canada federal budget plan: What is in this budget

This budget has a bit of something for almost everyone. I am not an economist and this Brandon’s Blog is not meant to be an economic analysis of the budget. There are many sources for an in-depth analysis. However, some of the budget highlights are:

  • $1.25 billion over 3 years on a shared-equity home loan program for first-time home buyers.
  • RRSP withdrawal limit for new home buyers increases to $35,000 from $25,000.
  • To aid Canadians with uncommon medical conditions or diseases access to the medications they require, Budget 2019 proposes to invest up to $1 billion over two years into a National Pharmacare program, starting in 2022–23, with up to $500 million per year afterwards.
  • $3.25 billion to Indigenous Services for water quality, child welfare, education and other supports.
  • $2.2 billion for a one-time doubling of Gas Tax cash for cities’ infrastructure spending.
  • Personalized Canada Training Credit of $250 a year (up to $5,000 lifetime) for job retraining.
  • A credit of up to $5,000 for the acquisition of electric vehicles.
  • The rate of interest on Canada Student Loans decreased to prime and will be interest-free for 6 months after graduation.
  • Low-income working seniors can earn more without losing GIS benefits.
  • $595 million to sustain journalism will include 15% tax credit for electronic news subscriptions.
  • A promise of high-speed internet for all Canadians by 2030.

Canada federal budget plan: Vote for me

So as you can see, this budget is full of promises; a little something for everyone. The two glaring omissions seem to be nothing really for business and ignoring retiree bankruptcy protection. It appears that the Federal government went for the easy stuff – spending money, as opposed to harder things like amending the BIA and CCAA.

It is obviously an election budget. Details on how the new legislation and spending will work are scarce within Budget 2019. No doubt the devil will be in the details. The new proposed housing provisions will no doubt spur demand, which will keep the construction industry going which is a good thing. However, increased demand will probably mean higher prices in the major Canadian cities, especially in Toronto and Vancouver. So, it will take time to see if affordability gets worse or not for new home buyers.

Canada federal budget plan: I can’t spend more than I earn, how about you?

Our government has made no secret that it will be spending last year’s savings and then look to spend more than it takes in. The way they can do that is by just issuing more debt. This is certainly not unique to the Canadian government. All governments do it.

Unfortunately, normal working people can’t just take on more debt because we want to spend more. Eventually, I would run out of lenders willing to let me borrow more money, and my income would not be enough to make all my monthly payments, let alone repay the original loans! Rather, like you, I need to budget to make sure that my necessities are covered and that I have enough money for the other things I need to spend on. This includes my savings and emergency savings fund.

Have you lost the ability to borrow more money? Are you having trouble making your monthly payments? Is your business facing financial challenges that need to be addressed?

If so, call the Ira Smith Team today. We have years along with generations of experience helping people and companies in need of financial restructuring or a debt settlement plan. As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only professionals accredited as well as supervised by the Federal government to supply insolvency advice and services to help you avoid bankruptcy.

You can have a no-cost consultation to help you to fix your debt troubles. With you, we will discover your financial pain factors and offer you the strategy to finish them in your life. This will absolutely allow you to begin a clean slate, Starting Over Starting Now.

Call the Ira Smith Team today so you can start ending your stress and pain today. With the roadmap we create unique to you, we will quickly return you right into a healthy and balanced carefree life.

canada federal budget plan

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY HELP: SIGNS YOU NEED HELP

bankruptcy help

If you would rather listen to the audio version of this bankruptcy help Brandon’s Blog, scroll down to the bottom and click on the podcast.

Bankruptcy help: Introduction

When people ask for bankruptcy help, they really don’t want to talk about bankruptcy. What they are really asking for is help in eliminating the pain, suffering and stress they are going through dealing with their unmanageable debt. They want solutions to avoid bankruptcy. In this Brandon’s Blog, I discuss the debt danger signals and provide solutions to avoid bankruptcy.

As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only professionals licensed and monitored by the Federal Government. We provide options and proposed solutions to people and companies with too much debt. Our main goal is to help people and companies AVOID bankruptcy while solving their debt problems.

Bankruptcy help: 10 signs that you need help

  1. Your total debt has increased over the past year. You may be making minimum payments on some debt, paying down other debt, but increasing your debt in total. You have not accomplished anything in reducing your debt in the past year and this means you need help.
  2. Justified purchasing a new vehicle even though your existing one is fine, just not new. Taking on more debt just because of a “want” but not a “need” is irresponsible. You need help.
  3. Bought a new house with a larger mortgage, or mortgages, because you expect your income to rise in the future. Wages and salaries are not increasing in any real way. They are flat. Voluntarily carrying a larger debt load hoping that sometime in the future your income will catch up to your cash needs is not a responsible way of handling your affairs. You need help with your debt.
  4. Have borrowed money to go on a vacation. You should never go into debt to purchase something that is going to vanish in a week or two. The vacation will be gone but the debt will remain. If you can’t afford a vacation, you can’t go on one.
  5. Justify purchases based on what your peers are buying. Again, going into more debt because you want things your friends are buying is not a good reason. Their situation is not your situation. Maybe they can afford those things but you can’t. Maybe they can’t afford those things and will end up in bankruptcy. You just don’t know. Again, you can’t go into debt for “wants”.
  6. You have no emergency fund saved up. Recent surveys have shown that Canadians may be a few hundred dollars away from a financial disaster. Many Canadians are living paycheque to paycheque. You don’t know when a medical emergency, job loss or the need to replace a major appliance will happen. You need an emergency cash fund to cover those emergencies. If you have too much debt and no emergency fund savings, you need debt help.
  7. No retirement savings. It is never too soon to start planning to save a certain part of your take-home pay for retirement. A proper household budget will allow for such savings. If you are constantly battling your debt and have no money for savings, you need debt help.
  8. You quit your job without having another one lined up. This is probably the most irresponsible thing you can do. It may seem obvious to you, but trust me, I have seen it. The best way to land a better paying job or position is when you already have one. Trying it any other way is pure folly, especially when you have too much debt. Your regular monthly debt payments will not wait for you to have your income stream rolling again. Keep in mind that I am not talking about someone who is downsized and was given a package. I am talking about someone who quits without having new employment ready to go to.
  9. You are always borrowing from one source to pay down another. There isn’t enough money from your earnings to make your required debt payments. The fact is that you are borrowing from Peter to pay Paul. You’re in trouble and need debt help.
  10. You ignore your partner’s bad money habits or worse, financial infidelity. Your money habits may be impeccable. However, ignoring your partner’s money problems will bring you down too. You both need debt help.

Bankruptcy help: How we provide debt help

The first thing we offer is a free first consultation. You explain to us the financial issues you are facing. Then we talk to you about your family assets, liabilities and income. We then describe to you some possible options to help you overcome your debt problems. More information will be needed from you, but at least we start by setting your mind a bit at ease by telling you that your situation is not hopeless and we can give you solutions. All of the solutions we offer, except maybe one, are all so you can avoid bankruptcy.

The takeaways we want everyone to get from this free consultation is that you feel:

  1. We have empathy for your situation.
  2. A rapport has been built.
  3. We are the kind of people you can see yourself working with.
  4. You trust us.

If you wish to go ahead with our solving your financial and debt problems, the next step is that we have you complete our standard intake sheet called the Debt Relief Worksheet. A fully completed worksheet, complete with backup documents, allows us to drill down into all the issues and come up with our definitive recommendations.

Bankruptcy help: What are some possible solutions

The range of possible solutions depends on when we get to speak with you. Most people wait until they have no more credit line to use. Sometimes it takes a major event like the Canada Revenue Agency garnisheeing their bank account or wages before they realize they have a debt problem. The earlier you recognize there might be a problem and come speak with us, the more options we will have for you to solve your debt problems.

The range of options might include:

Credit counselling

Credit counselling is in fact debt therapy. We give advice with a host of concerns connected to debt consisting of budgeting, debt remedies, working with your lenders as well as restoring credit scores.

Debt consolidation

Debt consolidation is replacing all of your debts with new single financing at a lower overall interest rate so that you only have one debt to focus on reducing.

Consumer proposal

A consumer proposal is an official deal made to your creditors under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) to customize your repayments; e.g. paying a lesser amount every month for a longer amount of time and paying in total less than you owe. Another benefit is that the interest clock stops the moment you file your consumer proposal.

If none of the above 3 possible solutions to avoid bankruptcy will work for you, then you are a candidate to file for bankruptcy so that you can end the pain and stress your debts are causing you. This way you can be Starting Over, Starting Now.

Bankruptcy help: Do you have too much debt?

Do you have too much debt? Are you stressed that future interest rate increases will make currently affordable payments completely unaffordable? Is the pain, stress and anxiety hurting your wellness and health?

If so, speak to the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of helping people and companies looking for financial restructuring. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only experts licensed and supervised by the Federal government to provide insolvency services.

Call the Ira Smith Team today for your free consultation and to make sure that we can begin assisting you to return right into a healthy, balanced, hassle-free life.

 

[monkeytools msnip=”http://monkeyplayr.com/playr.php?u=5173&p=20280″]

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

TRUSTEE ACT ONTARIO BY A TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE

[monkeytools msnip=”http://monkeyplayr.com/playr.php?u=5173&p=20240″]

Trustee Act Ontario: Introduction

I want to highlight a provincial statute that is also important for the administration of a deceased estate; the Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.23 (Trustee Act Ontario). This blog continues my blog series to show how it would be proper to appoint a licensed insolvency trustee (LIT or bankruptcy trustee) (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) as the estate trustee (formerly called an executor or executrix) of a solvent deceased estate.

As always, since we are not lawyers, and I am by no means providing in this and upcoming Brandon’s Blogs advice on wills or estate planning matters. For that, you must consult your lawyer.

My prior estate blogs

In my blog TRUSTEE OF DECEASED ESTATE: WHAT A TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE KNOWS, I looked at some essential matters when it involves a deceased estate and why a LIT would be extremely knowledgable and competent to act as an estate trustee of a deceased estate with those basic requirements.

In the blog, TRUSTEE OF PARENTS ESTATE: DO I REALLY HAVE TO?, I explained why many times parents try doing the proper thing by appointing their children as estate trustees and how many times it just turns out all wrong.

In ESTATES ACT ONTARIO: TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE REVEALS HIDDEN SECRET, I describe how the requirements and provisions of the Estates Act are already very familiar to a bankruptcy trustee. In fact, most of the duties required by the Estates Act are already performed in the insolvency context by a LIT.

My blog ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES ACT CANADA: EASY FOR TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE TO DO, I explained why a LIT is a right professional to lead the administration of Estates Act Canada.

In this and my next blog, I will focus on two more Ontario statutes that impact the administration of a deceased estate by an estate trustee. The three statutes are:

  1. Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.23; and
  2. Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.26

As you have by now correctly guessed, in this blog, I will show how a bankruptcy trustee would be very familiar with the workings of this provincial legislation.

Things an estate trustee must be aware of

There are various sections of the Trustee Act Ontario that affects the duties and responsibilities of an estate trustee in administering a deceased estate. All the concepts are very familiar to a LIT.

Power of court to appoint new trustees

Section 5(1) of this statute gives the Ontario Superior Court of Justice the authority to make an Order for the appointment of a new trustee. This is the same Court that we attend for Court-appointed receivership and bankruptcy matters. So, a LIT is very familiar with the workings and requirements of this Court.

Who may apply for the appointment of a new trustee, or vesting order

Section 16(1) of this provincial statute says that anyone who has a beneficial interest in the property of the trust can apply for the appointment of a new trustee. This is very similar to how a Court-appointed Receiver is appointed. Although it is normally a secured creditor who makes the application, in theory, it could be any party that has an interest. Section 101(1) of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43 states that a receivership Order may be made “…where it seems to a judge of the court to be just or convenient to do so.”. It is the “just and convenient” clause that was relied upon by the judge when we were appointed Receiver and Manager of the assets, properties and undertakings of The Suites at 1 King West condo strata hotel back in August 2007.

For this reason, as a LIT, we are very familiar with this aspect of appointing a trustee.

Power and discretion of trustee for sale

In my blog ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES ACT CANADA: EASY FOR TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE TO DO, I referred to sections 16 and 17 of the Estates Administration Act. Section 17 in particular, provides the estate trustee with the power to pay off the debts of the deceased. It also allows a trustee to distribute or divide the estate among the beneficiaries.

Section 17 of the provincial Act provides the trustee with the authority to sell, but subject to the requirements of the Estates Administration Act.

A LIT, either in receivership or bankruptcy, is extremely acquainted and experienced in the sale of real and personal property. The LIT likewise makes certain that the creditors are paid in the correct order of priority.

Sales by trustees not impeachable on certain grounds

Section 18(1) deals with a certain aspect of the sale of the property. It states that unless it is proven that there was an inadequate sales price, a sale properly made cannot be impeached by any beneficiary. Any beneficiary wanting to try to impeach a sale must prove that the process used resulted in a sales price at less than fair market value.

Similarly, in a Court-appointed receivership or bankruptcy, the LIT must be able to prove that both the conditions of the sales process and the sales price achieved, was right for the types of assets in the circumstances.

The leading case is the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Royal Bank of Canada v. Soundair Corp., 1991 CanLII 2727 (ON CA). The process a LIT must follow is known as the “Soundair principles”. This is the test used when deciding whether a receiver or trustee applying for Court approval of a sales process and the authority to sell assets has acted properly. The Court must decide whether the receiver or trustee has:

  • made a sufficient effort to get the best price and has not acted improvidently;
  • considered the interests of all parties;
  • Devised a fair process that has integrity by which offers were obtained; and
  • Introduced any element of unfairness in the working out of the process.

Therefore, I submit, that a LIT is very experienced in devising a sales process and selling assets in a way that is fair to all stakeholders or beneficiaries to attempt to maximize sales proceeds.

Trust funds and investing

Section 26 of the Act deals with the area of the requirement for a trustee to maintain trust accounts and to invest trust property in a way that will maximize the return while not putting the capital at risk to swings in investment pricing, inflation or income tax.

The LIT is very familiar and experienced in trust accounts and the investing of trust funds. Section 25 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) deals with the requirement of a trustee to establish trust accounts. Also, the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Directive no. 5R5 deals with Estate funds and banking. The Superintendent also monitors the banking of trust funds by all LITs across Canada.

Therefore a LIT is very knowledgeable and experienced in the banking, investing and protection of trust funds.

Security by the person appointed

If letters of administration were granted under the Estates Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.21, section 37(2) of the provincial legislation requires every trustee to post security.

I discussed in my blog ESTATES ACT ONTARIO: TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE REVEALS HIDDEN SECRET, the experience of a LIT in the posting of security by way of an insurance company bond.

Actions for torts

Section 38(1) of the provincial statute gives authority to an estate trustee of a deceased person to maintain an action for all torts and injuries to the deceased person or his or her property, except in cases of libel and slander. Any recovery forms part of the deceased’s personal estate. Section 38(3) provides for a limitation on such actions. The action cannot be brought after the expiration of two years from the date of death.

As a LIT, this is a familiar concept to us. When a person or company is insolvent and has a chose in action against one or more parties, such action can be started or continued by a receiver or bankruptcy trustee. In fact, in a bankruptcy, the action actually vests in the trustee.

The receiver or trustee has to make sure that they have a legal opinion on the likelihood of success. The receiver or trustee also has to make sure that they can afford to fund the litigation. The litigation cost cannot reduce the value of the assets under administration. This includes the issue of costs if the action proves unsuccessful.

Distribution of assets under trust deeds for benefit of creditors, or of the assets of the intestate

Section 53(1) of the Act lays out the requirements of a trustee to make a distribution for the general benefit of creditors. As I have described in previous blogs, Section 135 of the BIA deals with the admission and disallowance of proofs of claim and proofs of security.

A LIT is an expert at sorting out creditor claims and could certainly do so under the Trustee Act also.

Trustee Act Ontario: Summary

I hope that this blog reveals to you how the provisions of this provincial statute, detailing the duties of a trustee or estate trustee tracks really close to how a LIT performs in either a Court-appointed receivership or bankruptcy administration.

Therefore, the LIT is used to acting as a Court officer and could very easily perform the requirements and duties of a trustee as described in this provincial legislation.

If you have any questions about a deceased estate and the need for an estate trustee, whether it is solvent or insolvent, contact the Ira Smith Team. We have decades and generations of experience in helping people and companies overcome their financial problems. You don’t need to suffer; we can end your pain.

In my next blog, I am going to write a similar comparison. It will be about the requirements outlined in the Succession Law Reform Act and how a LIT is most familiar with it also.

In the meantime, if you have any questions at all, contact the Ira Smith Team.

 

trustee act ontario

[monkeytools msnip=”http://memochimp.com/memo.php?u=4931&p=3676″]

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

PRIVACY BREACH LAWSUIT AGAINST LICENSED INSOLVENCY TRUSTEE FAILS

privacy breach lawsuitPrivacy breach lawsuit: Introduction

A licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) and a Court appointed Receiver are both officers of the Court. As such, they have a duty of care to all stakeholders and parties. A decision of the Supreme Court of British Columbia released in late 2018 deals with an application to begin a class action privacy breach lawsuit against a licensed insolvency trustee (LIT or Trustee).

The case I am referring to is Netlink Computer System Inc. (re),2018 BCSC2309. Netlink Computer System Inc. (Netlink) was a British Columbia-based business that marketed computers and associated software solutions. In late 2017, Netlink went bankrupt.

Privacy breach lawsuit: The request to go ahead

As is required under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA), any party wishing to initiate litigation against a bankruptcy trustee must first get the permission of the Court to do so.

In the Netlink case, a former Netlink customer wanted to start a class action lawsuit against the Trustee. The customer claimed that the Trustee breached the personal privacy of Netlink’s customers by permitting their personal details to be revealed. The unproven claim was that the Trustee sold to or, otherwise, allowed 3rd parties to get personal information of the Netlink customers.

This particular customer wished to start an action versus the Trustee for breach of privacy. If leave is approved, this customer would then seek certification of his case as a class action lawsuit.

Privacy breach lawsuit: The issue in requesting the leave of the Court

The Court’s task was to figure out whether to exercise its discretion to allow the claim to go ahead. The Court had to look at the nature and scope of the proposed claim taking into account the evidence. Leave is rarely given. If leave was granted in this case, it would be the first time in Canada a bankruptcy Trustee has been taken legal action against in a potential class action proceeding.

The BIA does not give any type of specific advice about the elements the Court ought to take into consideration in thinking about an application for leave to start an action against a LIT. These have just been developed through case-law analyzing and using s. 215 of the BIA.

For almost 150 years, Courts and legal scholars have been of the view that the bar for approving the commencement of litigation I versus a Court-appointed receiver or Trustee is not a high one. It is designed to protect the receiver or LIT against only frivolous or vexatious actions which have no basis.

The leading cases on the issue of leave to go ahead with litigation against either a Court-appointed receiver or LIT can be summarized as follows;

  • Leave to take such legal action should not be given if the action is frivolous or vexatious. Manifestly unmeritorious claims need to not be allowed to continue
  • Actions need to not be allowed to continue if the evidence submitted on behalf of the action, does not show a cause of action against the Trustee.
  • The court is not required to make a final evaluation of the benefits of the claim prior to granting leave.

This threshold tries to strike the ideal balance between the security of bankruptcy trustees and Court appointed receivers from the interruption of an insolvency administration from unimportant or simply tactical suits and preserving to the maximum degree possible the legal rights of creditors and other stakeholders.

In this privacy breach lawsuit case, the claimant states that his affidavit evidence provides proof reveals a real case against the Trustee. The Trustee says that the proposed claim and the evidence on its behalf does not satisfy the relatively reduced threshold called for to prove leave.

The claimant described in his materials, his potential claim. . He also discloses that he has already begun a claim against the auction company who sold the bankruptcy company’s assets, Netlink and Netlink’s landlord. (The action versus Netlink has remained stayed due to the fact that Netlink is in bankruptcy). The proposed claim against the LIT is exactly the same and consists of practically the same phrasing as the action already started. There is no separate accusation that the Trustee did anything different from the auctioneer, Netlink, or the landlord.

The proposed claimant’s main points were:

  1. He purchased a product from Netlink and provided personal information, including, his name, address and credit card details.
  2. The Trustee contracted with the auctioneer to sell the assets.
  3. During that process, the Trustee allowed customers’ private information, including addresses, credit card numbers, and various other sensitive information (the “Private Information”) to be exposed and offered to or otherwise acquired by 3rd parties, including criminals.
  4. The Trustee provided the auctioneer computers and Netlink servers and other records containing the Private Information.
  5. Criminals that obtained the Netlink servers offered the information to other criminals, consisting of cybercriminals and identity thieves.
  6. The trustee knew that customer details are often included in the property of such bankrupt’s estates and it took no steps to safeguard the information when taking guardianship of Netflix’s property.
  7. The Trustee’s choice to offer the Private Information, or at a minimum, the Netlink servers including the Private Information, was intended and deliberate and was made knowing that Netlink customers had not consented to their details being shared.
  8. Customers have suffered damages.

Privacy breach lawsuit: This evidence

The Court examined the claims and the evidence. Unfortunately, the claimant did not have first-hand knowledge of what the Trustee did or did not do. Rather, the claimant submitted two sworn affidavits of what he believed took place. The information contained in the two affidavits was derived mainly from blog posts and YouTube videos that the claimant believed to be true.

The Trustee submitted 2 sworn affidavits of the LIT responsible for the Netlink file. The Trustee’s evidence was mainly why the relatively low threshold for allowing a claim against a Trustee or Court appointed receiver were not met. It did not provide much information about what the Trustee actually did (or did not do).

The Court had no choice but to rule that the claimant’s evidence was mainly hearsay and not admissible. With no real evidence before the Court to support the accusations, the Court dismissed the application and leave to begin the action against the Trustee was denied.

Privacy breach lawsuit: My take

Based on my reading of this case, I believe the Trustee was very lucky that there was no real evidence against it. There is no information indicating what steps the Trustee took to make sure that all Private Information was protected prior to the assets being sold. It is imperative that privacy breaches do not take place. Once a Trustee or Court appointed receiver to take possession of assets that may contain private or sensitive information, steps must be taken to ensure that the information does not fall into the hands of 3rd parties who have no right to that information. It does not matter whether the information is stored on computer hard drives, in the cloud, or physically in books or on paper.

The claimant still has its action against the auctioneer and the landlord. My understanding is that the landlord is involved because once the auction sale was completed and the auctioneer left the premises, there were still books, records and papers that contained some or all the Private Information. The landlord disposed of such papers in a way that did not protect the Private Information.

My Firm’s standard practice is to remove hard drives that contain Private Information so that computers would be sold minus a hard drive. With respect to physical records, any documents not required that would contain Private Information, we have shredded. We do not just throw it into a dumpster intact for someone to find. These are minimum steps required to protect Private Information.

Unfortunately, in the Netlink case, the Court’s Reasons for Decision does not include any information indicating the Trustee took such steps.

Privacy breach lawsuit: What does it all mean?

What it all means is that in any insolvency assignment, the LIT needs to know what it is he or she has taken possession and control of. Decisions must be made that protect the interests of all stakeholders, as best possible. There are always competing interests. The LIT must balance them all carefully when making decisions.

Do you have too much debt because you are a victim of identity theft? Does your company have too much debt and is in danger of shutting down? Is the pain and stress of too much debt now negatively affecting your health?

If so, contact the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of helping people and companies in need of financial restructuring and counselling. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only professionals licensed and supervised by the Federal government to provide debt settlement and financial restructuring services.

We offer a free consultation to help you solve your problems. We understand your pain that debt causes. We can also end it right away from your life. This will allow you to begin a fresh start, Starting Over Starting Now. Call the Ira Smith Team today so that we can begin helping you and get you back into a healthy, stress-free life.privacy breach lawsuit

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY BLOG REVIEW: A LOOK AT MY TOP 2018 BANKRUPTCY BLOGS

Bankruptcy blog review: Introduction

I hope that you are all enjoying quality family time together over the holidays. As 2018 is nearly over, I thought that it would be interesting to do a bankruptcy blog review on my Brandon’s Blog. So here is a review of the 7 most viewed blogs over the past year.

Bankruptcy blog review: The 7 most viewed blogs in 2018

BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT: COURT MAY NOT LISTEN TO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE

This blog was about a very interesting case decided in the Court of Appeal of British Columbia. The bankrupt’s creditors applied to have the transactions reviewed under section I00 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (“BIA”). One of the areas of contention was that the judge in the lower court found he could not rely on the bankruptcy trustee’s opinion of value in the circumstances.

MORTGAGE LENDING CRITERIA SELF EMPLOYED: BIGGEST MYTH MAY BE RIGHT

In this Brandon’s Blog, I wrote about mortgage lending criteria self-employed, I discussed a Court decision that shows when it comes to a self-employed person’s mortgage, if there is a deemed trust claim by Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), you cannot solely rely upon the registry system.


STALKING HORSE CREDIT BID: WE NEED COURT APPROVAL BEFORE STARTING A COURT SUPERVISED SALES PROCESS

This bankruptcy blog review post came from our corporate case files. I discussed the decision making process the Court goes through when being asked to approve a stalking horse sales process and the stalking horse credit bid being recommended by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee).


CREDIT KARMA CANADA REVIEW: IS IT REALLY FREE AND LEGITIMATE?

Since 2007, Credit Karma USA has attempted to simplify credit and finance for more than 60 million Credit Karma members. They advertise very heavily on US television to attract new members. Becoming a member is free, and it allows any member to get access to their free credit score and credit report, with the option to update every single week. Credit Karma also provides financial education to put credit into context.

Credit Karma Canada arrived this past year from the United States. Its website is creditkarma.ca. The purpose of this blog was to describe what Credit Karma Canada is and to let you decide if it would be helpful or not for you or someone you know.


IS GOODWILL A NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION? ARE YOU SCARED BECAUSE YOUR COMPANY HAS TURNED INTO ONE?

 

The Goodwill Toronto bankruptcy confused and astonished many people. After all, how can Goodwill, a non-profit organization, go bankrupt? Isn’t the very nature of a non-profit or not-for-profit that it doesn’t have to make a profit? This Brandon’s Blog discussed the issues.


FILING FOR BANKRUPTCY IN CANADA: MENTAL HEALTH & DISCHARGED BANKRUPTCY

 

This bankruptcy blogspot dealt with filing for bankruptcy in Canada and the bankruptcy discharge process when mental health issues are involved.


POOR CREDIT PERSONAL LOANS GUARANTEED APPROVAL CANADA: REDUCE AND DON’T INCREASE DEBT TO IMPROVE YOUR CREDIT SCORE

 

This Brandon’s Blog was a discussion about and a warning against being seduced by ads from companies for poor credit personal loans guaranteed approval. We pointed out the pitfalls of the products being offered. We also showed how people with poor credit can go about settling their debts and improving their credit score.

 

Bankruptcy blog review: Conclusion

 

These are my 7 top viewed Brandon’s Blogs in 2018. Four are about personal debt issues or personal bankruptcy blog items and three are about corporate insolvency issues. Three are about a review of a then-recent court case.

I hope that the year 2019 will be a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year for you and your families.

Have you taken on too much debt in 2018 or the years before? Is the pain and stress of too much debt now negatively affecting your health?

If so, contact the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of helping people and companies in need of financial restructuring and counselling. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only professionals licensed and supervised by the Federal government to provide debt settlement and financial restructuring services.

We offer a free consultation to help you solve your problems. We understand your pain that debt causes. We can also eliminate it right away from your life. This will allow you to begin a fresh start, Starting Over Starting Now. Call the Ira Smith Team today so that we can begin helping you and get you back into a healthy, stress-free life.bankruptcy blog review

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY CANADA

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Introduction

Encountering major money troubles is life-shattering, especially if you automatically think that bankruptcy is your only alternative. As a matter of fact, lots of people erroneously think that serious financial difficulties immediately suggest the only answer is bankruptcy. The most common question I am asked is, “what is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada”.

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Insolvency

If you are having problems meeting your financial obligations or have stopped meeting those financial obligations as they come due you are insolvent, not bankrupt. Insolvent is a cash flow problem; bankruptcy is a legal state. You can read a detailed discussion on the definition of being insolvent in my last week’s vlog INSOLVENT DEFINITION: A NEW FOCUS FOR TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE.

Bаnkruрtсу is a legal рrосеѕѕ under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA) that helps you to resolve уоur debts if they have become unmanageable. If you have relatively few assets and low іnсоmе and dесіdе to file for bаnkruрtсу, you will probably fіlе under the streamlined Summary Administration part of the BIA.

If you have realizable assets that will produce a value greater than $10,000, then your bankruptcy would be administered under the general administrative provisions. Don’t worry about these distinctions right now. For now, just know that the summary administration rules are shortened, and the cost of the bankruptcy administration is fixed by a tariff set by the Superintendent of Bankruptcy.

In either case, you will turn over to your Licensed Insolvency Trustee (“LIT”) (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) all уоur рrореrtу that is not exempt (protected) by law. The LIT will sell your property and the proceeds will be used to рау for the bankruptcy administration and then make a distribution to уоur сrеdіtоrѕ.

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Assets exempt in a bankruptcy in Ontario

In Ontario, where my practice is, the following assets are exempt from seizure in a personal bankruptcy:

  1. Your necessary clothing without any dollar restriction.
  2. Family furnishings and appliances up to a value of $13,150.
  3. Your tools and other personal property used to earn income from your occupation up to a value of $11,300.
  4. One vehicle with equity of no more than $6,600.
  5. Registered Retirement Savings Plan and Registered Retirement Income Fund savings, other than payments made within the 12 months immediately before the bankruptcy filing.
  6. The equity in your house if up to the amount of $10,000. Note that the current thinking is that if your equity is more than $10,000, then your exemption is zero.

If you have very little property, all of it may be рrоtесtеd so that you will not lose it.

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Surplus income

How much уоur сrеdіtоrѕ will get in this process dереndѕ on how much уоur unрrоtесtеd property can be ѕоld fоr and whether you will be required to pay “surplus income” to your LIT. For a detailed discussion on surplus income, read my May 28, 2013 blog CAN YOU REALLY HAVE SURPLUS INCOME IF YOU’RE BANKRUPT?

Among all the things that seem to perplex many people when it involves the bankruptcy procedure is surplus income. It’s tough to get your head around the concept of surplus income when you are heading towards bankruptcy. Can that really be true if you are insolvent?

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: What is surplus income

Surplus income in a bankruptcy describes the amount the bankrupt must pay to the Trustee monthly. The Canadian bankruptcy system attempts to balance your right to end your debt and start over with the rights of creditors to be paid.

To permit Canadians to keep a sensible right to make a living throughout the bankruptcy administration, the federal government has established limits or standards on revenue a person can keep (after tax obligations and certain limited deductions) throughout their bankruptcy. The Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy establishes the limit restriction every year tied into the cost of living.

How do you figure surplus income?

The Federal Government establishes the formula used to calculate surplus income payments. The same formula is used for all of Canada.

The limits for surplus income are based off across the country “poverty line”. Surplus income has absolutely nothing to do with what you have left over monthly. It is a federal government formula that considers your revenue, specific non-discretionary costs as well as your household size.

The calculation is to find if you will need to contribute from your earnings monthly to your Trustee, for the benefit of your creditors.

Bankruptcy discharge

The final step of your bankruptcy process will be to get your discharge. Your discharge from bankruptcy acts as the trigger to discharge you from all of your debts. This means that you will not have to рау them (with possibly certain exceptions depending on your circumstances).

Whether you get an absolute discharge from your bankruptcy will depend essentially on your conduct. Before your bankruptcy, did you treat all your creditors the same? Does anyone feel aggrieved by your actions? That will decide if any of your creditors will oppose your discharge.

For an in-depth discussion of the personal bankruptcy discharge process, check out our vlog BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE: THE TOP 8 THINGS THE BANKRUPTCY COURT WILL CONSIDER ON ANYONE’S BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE APPLICATION.

Is your debt keeping you up at night?

Do you have extreme debt and have no concept of how to handle it? Are your debt woes keeping you up at night and causing you stress, pain and maybe even depression? We understand that pain and can cut it from your life.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has helped many companies and people throughout the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) juggling too much debt in their lives that requires a blueprint for Starting Over, Starting Now. Do not delay. Help is 1 phone call away. You can fix your financial troubles while avoiding bankruptcy as long as you take swift action. Call the Ira Smith Team today for your free consultation.what is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency canada

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CORPORATE BANKRUPTCIES CANADA: SENATOR EGGLETON PROPOSES NEW PENSION FUND CANADA LAW

corporate bankruptcies canada
corporate bankruptcies Canada

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Introduction

The U.S. Steel Canada court-supervised restructuring and the court-supervised liquidation of Sears Canada have something in common. They both forced us to focus on the treatment of pensioners in corporate bankruptcies Canada under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA) (or restructurings and liquidations under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36) (CCAA)).

We previously wrote about these pension fund Canada issues and the beginning of the focus in Ottawa for the need for new legislation. My previous blogs were:

  1. TORONTO BUSINESS BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION: NDP WANTS FEDERAL INSOLVENCY LAWS CHANGED SO THERE IS PENSION PLAN SECURITY WHEN FINANCIALLY TROUBLED BUSINESSES FAIL – September 27, 2017
  2. SEARS CANADA CLOSING: POLITICIANS WANT NEW LAWS TO PROTECT PENSIONERS DUE TO SEARS CANADA CLOSING – November 1, 2017
  3. SEARS CANADA DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN SHORTFALL: MP SCOTT DUVALL COMES THROUGH ON HIS PROMISE IN CANADIAN PARLIAMENT – November 8, 2017

Senator Art Eggleton, P.‍C., shortly before his retirement proposed BILL S-253, An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and other Acts and Regulations (pension plans).

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Bill S-253

Bill S-253 passed First Reading on September 18, 2018, and Second Reading was moved on September 25, 2018. This Bill proposes to amend the BIA as well as the CCAA. It proposes to make certain that claims for unfunded obligations or solvency deficiencies of a pension are accorded priority. This is for both solvent companies and companies that would be rendered insolvent by certain payments to shareholders..

This proposed legislation likewise would change the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 as well as the Pension Benefits Standards Regulations, 1985 to equip the Superintendent of Financial Institutions to identify that the financing of a pension is impaired and to recommend procedures to be taken by the employer in regard of the financing of such plan.1

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Is Bill S-253 new?

Yes and no. In our earlier blogs, I told you about the proposals by Bloc Québécois MP Marilène Gill’s Bill, C-372 and Hamilton Mountain NDP MP Scott Duvall rose in the House of Commons for leave to introduce Bill C-384. The amendments proposed to the BIA and CCAA in those proposed Bills, to create a priority for unfunded obligations or solvency deficiencies, are pretty well the same as in Senator Eggleton’s Bill S-253.

However, Senator Eggleton’s Bill goes further. It requires a company to report to the Superintendent of Financial Institutions:

“…of any proposed or actual decision of the employer, transaction or event, including the repurchase of shares of the employer or the payment of dividends to shareholders of the employer…”

that would cause a solvency deficiency and/or render the company insolvent.

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: So what now for Bill S-253?

To become legislation, a Bill needs to initially be presented in either the Senate or the House of Commons. It needs to after that go through numerous phases in each House: 1st, 2nd and 3rd reading. After that, it has to obtain Royal Assent. No doubt there will be a lot of debating and tinkering with this Bill. It will be interesting to see if this Bill makes it all the way through, or dies before becoming legislation.

However, the picture is clear. The result of the Sears Canada dividend payments and asset liquidation is clear. Shareholders received dividends and pensioners will have to take a deep cut in their pensions. This has caught the attention of the legislators in Ottawa. It will be interesting to see if the political will is there for pensioners to be protected in Canadian insolvency cases.

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Does your company have too much debt?

Is your company experiencing financial difficulties? If yes, call the Ira Smith Team. Our approach for each file is to create an end result where Starting Over, Starting Now takes place. This starts the minute you are at our front door.

The earlier you contact us, the more options we will have to implement. Whether it is a corporate restructuring or personal debt settlement through a consumer proposal, the goal is to avoid bankruptcy. However, if bankruptcy turns out to be the best option, we can assist there too.

You’re simply one phone call away from taking the necessary steps to get back to leading a healthy, balanced hassle-free life, ending the pain and stress you are feeling forever. Call Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. today for your free consultation.ira smith trustee

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

TRANSFER OF PROPERTY UNDER S.160 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT: PROPERTY ISN’T PROPERTY

transfer of property under s.160 of the income tax actTransfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: Introduction

Last August, Rudy Giuliani said, “truth isn’t truth”. Today I want to explore an important issue we come across many times when dealing with income tax debt driven insolvency files. That is the transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act (Canada). The decision of The Honourable Justice David E. Graham of the Federal Tax Court of Canada released July 6, 2018, gives rise to a variation of Rudy Giuliani’s comment to say – property isn’t property.

The case was an appeal by Aitchison Professional Corporation (“APC”) of an income tax assessment issued by the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”). The case is Aitchison Professional Corporation v. The Queen, 2018 DTC 1101 (Tax Court of Canada).

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: The participants

APC is a law firm operating under the name Aitchison Law Office. The creation of APC happened in December 2003 by 3 people: James Aitchison (“James”) and his two daughters, Kelly Aitchison (“Kelly) and Laurie Aitchison (“Laurie”). All three are Ontario lawyers.

In 2012, the Minister of National Revenue assessed APC for nearly $2.1 million pursuant to s. 160 of the Income Tax Act. The assessment stated that James had actually moved property worth even more than $3 million to APC for little or no value.

There was no disagreement that, at the time of the claimed transfers, James owed practically $2.1 million to the CRA. James had not paid any income tax since 1992. His tax obligation, along with interest and penalty, remains outstanding.

The main concern, in this case, was whether James moved property to APC. If he did, it would have to be valued. CRA claimed the property James transferred to APC is his right to invoice for legal services.

As indicated above, CRA’s position was that the right to invoice for legal services was the property transferred. It is interesting to note that they did not claim that either the work-in-process, the accounts receivable, or both, derived from James’ work, was the property transferred. In my view, this was a fatal error in their case.

The Court considered subsection 248( 1) of the Income Tax Act and in particular, His Honour considered the definition of the word property under the Income Tax Act is “a right of any kind whatever”. In his decision, His Honour stated the distinction that “property” has a wide meaning, but not every little thing of value is property.

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: The Judge’s words


The Judge found that:

  1. CRA had problems verbalizing specifically how James’ “right to invoice for legal services” is property.
  2. He thought CRA was attempting to fit a square peg into a round hole.
  3. CRA was attempting to take something that is clearly a service and trying to make it fit into the definition of property.
  4. CRA’s position is faulty. They argued that James carried out work for APC neither as an independent contractor nor as an employee. CRA did not provide any evidence as to what they believed the actual arrangement was.
  5. Notwithstanding it is prudent for a company to have an employment agreement with all of its employees, none of James, Kelly or Laurie had an employment agreement with APC. However, CRA accepts that Kelly and Laurie are employees of APC but do not recognize James the same way.
  6. James was either an employee of APC with no salary or, an unpaid volunteer. The Judge held that it was not necessary for him to determine which one it was.
  7. It is an employee’s right to be paid. If the evidence was that James was entitled to a salary but he waived it, then he would have found that the waived salary was property transferred to APC. However, this was not the case.
  8. CRA, to their peril, did not argue that James was a sole practitioner, transferring his work-in-process and/or accounts receivable to APC.

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: Saulnier v. Royal Bank of Canada

The intersection of insolvency and the issue of a transfer of property under s. 160 of the Income Tax Act is an important one. Although it did not help them, CRA referred to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Saulnier v. Royal Bank of Canada, [2008] 3 SCR 166, 2008 SCC 58 (CanLII). That decision was in a bankruptcy case, dealing with the transfer of fishing licenses.

In that case, the Receiver and Trustee applied to the Court for the authorization to sell its interest in the fishing licenses. Due to an opposition, the Trustee went to Court seeking approval of the sale. The trial judge decided that the fishing licenses was a property that could be sold. The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal of the Court of Appeal’s decision, upholding the trial judge’s finding, that the fishing licenses was property under s. 160 of the Income Tax Act. The interesting thing about that case is that the fishing licenses were considered as property mainly because of the wide sweeping definition of property contained in another federal statute, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (“BIA”).

In the APC case, the Judge did not find the Saulnier case persuasive. The reason was the matter before him did not involve the BIA. In this case, it was only the Income Tax Act. Rather, the Judge relied upon a different case decided in the Federal Court of Appeal, Manrell v. Canada, [2003] 3 FC 727, 2003 FCA 128 (CanLII).

As explained by the Federal Court of Appeal in Manrell:

“[25] It is implicit in this notion of “property” that “property” must have or entail some exclusive right to make a claim against someone else. A general right to do something that anyone can do, or a right that belongs to everyone, is not the “property” of anyone . . . . . .

[50] The phrase . . . “a right of any kind whatever”, like the word “property”, has a very broad meaning. But it is not a word of infinite meaning. It cannot include every conceivable right. It cannot be given a meaning that would extend the reach of the Income Tax Act beyond what Parliament has conceived”.

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: The verdict and the Judge’s conflict

Based on the evidence, His Honour found that James didn’t transfer property to APC by working for APC for free. The Judge also awarded costs to APC.

However, the Judge gave his personal view of his decision in the judgment. He felt that this was a horrible outcome. Furthermore, he commented that James had not paid a cent of income tax since being discharged from his bankruptcy in 1992. The Honourable Justice David E. Graham did not feel this was a just result, based on his interpretation of the law.

So that is why I paraphrase Rudy Giuliani to say – property isn’t property!

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: Is CRA pursuing you?

Is CRA pursuing you because of transferred property to you? If so, you need an income tax lawyer. However, if you have received legal advice that you don’t really have a case, or you can’t afford to fight it out in Court and the debt renders you insolvent, then you need the help of a professional trustee.

The Ira Smith Team has years of experience of negotiating with CRA on behalf of tax debtors. If you are an individual person and owe CRA and your other creditors, other than for any loans secured by your home, less than $250,000, you can enter into a consumer proposal debt settlement plan. If you owe more or are a corporation, we can still negotiate with CRA and restructure you with a restructuring proposal debt settlement plan.

Our approach for each file is to create an end result where Starting Over, Starting Now takes place. This starts the minute you are at our door. You’re simply one phone call away from taking the necessary steps to get back to leading a healthy, balanced hassle-free life, recover your money and move on to the next investment opportunity.

In conclusion, call us today for your free consultation.

Special thanks to Ian MacInnis of Fogler Rubinoff for bringing this decision to my attention and inspiring me to write this blog.

what does a court appointed receiver do

Call a Trustee Now!