Tag: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

DEFAULTING ON A MORTGAGE: THE BEST COURT-APPROVED WAY TO DEBT FREEDOM IN 2020 & BEYOND

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Defaulting on a mortgage introduction

I just finished reading a defaulting on a mortgage decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released on September 15, 2020. It had to do with a person who had filed a proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). The court case is about the debtor who could not afford to pay all the mortgages on her home. The home was sold on a conditional basis, and a dispute occurred between two potential purchasers. I describe below how the court dealt with the dispute.

That case highlighted for me three things:

  • what we advise everyone who comes to us for a no-cost initial consultation who cannot afford to keep paying a loan registered against an asset, normally a vehicle or house;
  • how sometimes a strategic default on a mortgage or vehicle loan can help someone in dealing with all of their debts when they are about to file either a proposal or for bankruptcy; and
  • the appropriate manner (in my view) the court decided to resolve the dispute between the two potential purchasers.

Defaulting on a mortgage: What we advise debtors

Whenever someone comes to us for a no-cost consultation, we first get financial information from them. We want to understand the nature of their assets and liabilities and their household income and expenses. Through our analysis and discussion, we determine if the person can afford to keep paying that loan or mortgage. We also ask them, if appropriate, are they happy with the asset if it seems that they are paying too much based on the level of secured debt and the market value of the asset.

If the person says they would love to get rid of the asset, that they have no or little equity in, then we look at the impact of using defaulting on a mortgage as a strategic default so that any shortfall experienced by the lender will be an ordinary unsecured debt which can be discharged through either a proposal or bankruptcy.

Obviously, the person has to have a realistic option to replace that asset or have an alternate plan:

  • Can they lease a different vehicle at a lesser cost before filing which they can afford and therefore will not default on?
  • Is public transit a realistic option as opposed to having their own vehicle for the time being?
  • Is there a relative who will co-sign for them so that they can lease or buy a more reasonable cost vehicle?
  • Can they rent somewhere that they can afford for much less than what they have been paying on their home and then look at buying something after they are through their debt restructuring when they are back on their feet?

As I said, we do this all the time when working with people to look at all of their options for financial restructuring. We especially look at in the case of a home, does defaulting on a mortgage make financial sense?

Defaulting on a mortgage: What is a strategic default?

When the market value of your home is less than the amount owed on the mortgage, that mortgage debt is underwater. To put it simply, an underwater home mortgage loan has a higher remaining principal balance than the value of the house.

Homeowners with little or negative home equity can find themselves in this situation when housing prices fall, even if they are current on all their payments. It’s also described as being “upside-down” or having “negative equity” in the residence.

When it doesn’t make sense to keep using your cash to stay current on that underwater mortgage, rather than using that money for other necessary expenses, defaulting on a mortgage as a strategic default may be your only option. After establishing that you can’t see your property rising in value in a reasonable period to restore some of your equity, you may plan to just stop making mortgage repayments. You’ll default and eventually, the lender will enforce on its mortgage, take over the property and sell it.

Even if you have equity in the home, but you can no longer afford to keep up the payments, you may find that putting your home up for sale is your best option. Again, you need to have a realistic plan in place on where you will live once your home sells. Depending on the situation, you might decide to also create a strategic default by defaulting on a mortgage at the same time you list your home for sale. Once sold, the net proceeds of the sale, representing the equity in the home, can be used to help fund the proposal.

During the financial crisis in the United States, a strategic default on underwater homes by defaulting on a mortgage became progressively typical. Such home loans came to a head at 26 percent of all mortgaged homes in 2009. Many house owners did the math and made the agonizing however rational decision to leave the home and let the lender deal with the property and its underwater mortgage.

As I explain in the next section, in most cases, you can just walk away from such a loan in the United States. Unfortunately, it is not so easy for Canadians to walk away from their homes and defaulting on a mortgage. But there is one way to do it in Ontario.

defaulting on a mortgage
defaulting on a mortgage

Defaulting on a mortgage: Walking away from a mortgage in Canada is not simple

In the United States, it is normal for a mortgage to be “non-recourse“. What this means is that the lender can only look to the value of the property it has mortgage security against to repay the mortgage loan. If the lender suffers a shortfall, unless there is a separate guarantee given, the lender cannot sue the mortgagor, the borrower, for any shortfall. So if you have negative equity, defaulting on a mortgage may be the right decision for such a US resident.

In Canada, it is normal for a mortgage to be “full recourse“. This means that if the lender suffers a shortfall on the mortgage debt, the terms of the mortgage loan automatically allows the mortgagee, the lender, to go to court and get a judgment against the borrower for the amount of the shortfall. So defaulting on a mortgage needs to be done in conjunction with a plan to deal with the shortfall debt.

For this reason, walking away from a mortgage in Canada is not simple. However, there is one way to do it. Once the shortfall is known and, either before or right after the lender gets a judgment, the debtor can file a proposal under the BIA to restructure all their unsecured debt. If that is not practical, then bankruptcy is the other option.

Now the shortfall is caught in the insolvency proceeding. The filing invokes an automatic stay of proceedings so that the lender cannot take action to try to execute against any of the assets or income of the debtor who has filed. The debt is caught in the insolvency proceeding and will be dealt with in that forum.

Defaulting on a mortgage: The first sale

The court case deals with a woman in Ontario who had begun a proposal process under the BIA. The debtor owned (at least) two residential properties. The property in question had 4 mortgages registered against it. The other property had multiple mortgages against it, including a mortgage as additional security for the 4th mortgage loan against the property in question. To make matters worse, there was also a lien registered against the same residential property in favour of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) in the amount of $308,258.

The 4th mortgage was totally underwater. The debtor entered into an agreement of purchase and sale. The sale of the home would result in a shortfall of over $700,000. It would not provide any funds for the 4th mortgage. It would only partially repay the 3rd mortgage. So, one of the conditions of sale was that the vendor would either get a discharge of all of the mortgages or a court order vesting title in the home to the purchaser clear of all mortgages and other registrations against the title. The 4th mortgagee’s charge against the other home, which was also in 4th position, was also totally underwater.

As part of the proposal proceedings, the debtor brought a motion to the court to approve the sale (supported by appraisals) and get the vesting order to vest title clear of all registrations against the title. The debtor was not only going to be defaulting on a mortgage but on at least 2 of them!

Defaulting on a mortgage: The 4th mortgagee opposes the sale approval motion

The 4th mortgagee appeared at the motion with her lawyer to get an adjournment in order to oppose the authorization and vesting order and enable her to acquire the home on the same terms but also for even more money. This would enable the 4th mortgagee to possibly recover something on her outstanding mortgage loan at a later date.

The purchaser or the purchaser’s lawyer was not told in advance that there was going to be an opposition to the application. Therefore, the purchaser’s lawyer did not attend the hearing.

At the hearing, the court authorized the sale and vesting order yet suspended its issuance for 9 days to allow the 4th mortgagee the chance to make an offer. She did, on the very same terms yet $5,000 greater than the approved offer. She also had the deposit funds put into her lawyer’s trust account. She then made a motion for the approval of her offer and vesting order. Not surprisingly, and as to be expected, the first purchaser objected to her motion.

Defaulting on a mortgage: What the court decided

The 4th mortgagee’s lawyer argued that the first purchaser’s agreement of purchase and sale is nullified since there was neither discharges provided nor a binding court order vesting title free and clear from all mortgages and the CRA registration by the closing date. Therefore, it cannot now come to court and try to extend the closing of a deal that is already dead.

Legal counsel for the first purchaser argued that if the court approves the 4th mortgagee as the buyer, the sales procedure will be unfair. The first purchaser was not notified that there would be any type of objection to its motion for the approval and vesting order of its deal. Although the first purchaser can be criticized for not keeping up with what was happening both before and on the date of its court motion, it is still a good-faith buyer who took part in a fair sales process. The 4th mortgagee had every right to bid on the subject property when it was initially listed and did not do so.

The court decided that ultimately, this situation boils down to the process being fair and seen as being fair. So given all of this, the court decided:

  • All previous agreements of purchase and sale for the subject property are terminated.
  • A new sales process will be carried out where any of the interested parties, being the first purchaser and the 4th mortgagee, can send their best offers to the Trustee, on a confidential basis.
  • The offers are to be submitted and evaluated by the Trustee by September 18, 2020, with the closing of September 25, 2020.
  • In the event, the winning bid is not able to close on September 25, 2020, the other party may purchase the property.
  • If court approval of the successful offer and a vesting order is needed, a draft order may be provided to the court.
  • The proceeds of the sale, presumably net of the realtor commission, the vendor’s real estate legal fees, and any HST that may be applicable on the sale, are to be paid into court in order to figure out the proper amount and priority of the charges against the property.

As neither side was totally successful, the court did not award costs to any party. This seems to be the fairest outcome to all concerned.

Defaulting on a mortgage: A proposal is your best option

So as you can see, it is possible to use the proposal process under the BIA either to sell a home you can no longer afford to keep which has equity. The net sales proceeds can be used to partially fund the proposal. A proposal under the BIA is the only government-approved debt settlement plan.

Alternatively, you can use the proposal process to sell the home where you are defaulting on a mortgage where there are one or more mortgages underwater. The proposal process will compromise the resulting ordinary unsecured debt arising from the shortfall claim of underwater mortgage lenders. An application can be made to the court for an order approving the sales process, the sale, and obtaining a vesting order to complete the sale.

We have helped many people and companies do exactly that when defaulting on a mortgage.

Defaulting on a mortgage summary

I hope you have enjoyed this defaulting on a mortgage Brandon’s Blog. Hopefully, you have better insight now into the fact that there is a way to get out of a secured loan, especially a mortgage. It will require an insolvency proceeding to settle all your debts, including any shortfall on the sale of the secured asset.

Do you have too much debt? Are you in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt.

You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges.
It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. The way we take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people facing financial problems need realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain you are facing. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious in finding a solution, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team today.
Call us now for a free consultation.

We will get you or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

defaulting on a mortgage
defaulting on a mortgage

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

STALKING HORSE INSOLVENCY PROCESS: OUR BEST GUIDE TO GET YOUR M&A DEAL DONE

stalking horse

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

If you would like to listen to an audio version of this stalking horse insolvency process Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click on the podcast.

Stalking horse introduction

I have written before about a stalking horse in the insolvency context. Two things recently happened that suggested that I should write about it again, from a slightly different perspective. The first thing was that Ira Smith recently did a Zoom webinar presentation for the M&A Club Canada. The topic they wanted the webinar on and the title of the webinar was “Insolvency restructuring to get your M&A deal done”. Second, I see that there has been an increase in online searches for that term.

So, the purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to describe what a stalking horse is and provide you with some insight as to how an insolvency process can be used to get an M&A deal done.

What is a stalking horse in the insolvency and M&A world?

In the distressed M&A context, a stalking horse refers to a possible buyer participating in a stalking horse auction to purchase the assets of an insolvent debtor as a going concern. In a stalking horse public auction of a financially troubled business, an initial bid by the stalking horse bidder is divulged to the marketplace and becomes the minimum quote, or floor cost, that potential purchasers can then outbid.

It was first extensively utilized in the USA and currently is a routine part of the Canadian insolvency landscape. The stalking horse process is different than the sealed tender sale approach that is traditional in Canada. The stalking horse sales process has been used in Canada many times. The case study that Ira presented in his webinar and gone over below, was one that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved.

The stalking horse participates in the process understanding that it might be outbid. Accordingly, it negotiates a break fee to cover its costs. This includes its due diligence costs to put together the first offer. Typically, for a competing bid to knock out the stalking horse offer, it will certainly have to be more than the stalking horse bid plus the Break Fee (described below). The competing offer will certainly likewise need to be on the exact same terms as the stalking horse bid, and cannot include any kind of burdensome conditions.

Why would anyone want to become a stalking horse?

So, why would someone want to be a stalking horse? Initially, as a stalking horse, you will certainly have the most effective opportunity of discussing the terms of a purchase that are customized to satisfy your specific issues. Also, as the first prospective buyer, you will have even more time to evaluate and comprehend the insolvent debtor’s company. You will also have a chance to develop connections with management, vendors, and key stakeholders in the sales process. This gives the stalking horse bidder a leg up.

Their expenses of participating in the sales procedure are covered by the break fee that you will negotiate. That break fee is generally secured by a unique court-ordered charge against the assets of the insolvent debtor. However, you will need to consider the ranking of this charge against other charges that may have been already granted by the court.

How a stalking horse bid works

The stalking horse method permits a distressed company to prevent receiving reduced proposals as it sells its assets. When the stalking horse prospective buyer has made its deal, the court has accepted that quote and all other conditions of the court-supervised sale, other prospective purchasers may send contending bids for the company’s assets.

By setting the low end of the bidding process, the insolvent firm wishes to realize a greater price, yet understands it cannot obtain a lower one. Insolvencies are public. The general public nature allows for the disclosure of even more information about the opportunity and the company than what would certainly be available in a private deal. Because of this, in this case study, I explain below, I can mention some names.

Stalking horse prospective buyers can typically bargain which specific assets it wishes to obtain. It likewise does not have to acquire any of the insolvent business’s liabilities. It may however choose for business reasons to take some on voluntarily. Examples would be amounts owing to critical suppliers or employment-related liabilities for employees of the insolvent company they may wish to retain.

MPH Graphics stalking horse bid process case study

MPH Graphics inc. (MPH) was an insolvent company. They had a potential purchaser who was willing to stand as a stalking horse bidder. We ran a successful stalking horse process in this case. This case happened quite a few years ago, but, since then, we have used the identical technique in other cases. When a similar kind of case comes up in the future, we would use the same process. So, although the case is older, the steps taken are still well suited today.

MPH was a company that provided printing design and finishing for Canadian and US customers. MPH printed a variety of products such as business cards, direct mail pieces, annual reports, and marketing materials and primarily serviced government agencies, not for profit organizations, and unions.

MPH grew by acquisitions and required additional capital equipment financed by debt. The business also had to change because the industry was changing from traditional printing presses to digital. That changeover required further capital investment.

MPH was insolvent

MPH’s line of business primarily serviced government agencies, not for profit organizations, and unions. Absorbing the acquisitions produced inefficiencies and redundancies. It also needed to move to larger premises which meant moving costs and higher ongoing rent costs were being incurred.

At the same time, the industry was extremely pricing competitive. Gross margins were squeezed. Overhead costs, especially sales salaries and entertainment expenses increased. There was now a history of losses. The technical staff was very experienced. To get the union business, MPH’s technical side had to be a union shop. MPH had a blue-chip client list, which is what was really of interest to the stalking horse bidder.

Receivable collections were slowing down and the bookkeeper had to put payable cheques that were printed every month in a drawer. The cheques could not be released because there was not enough money to pay their liabilities as they become due.

stalking horse

The stalking horse bidder came knocking

The bidder was an industry consolidator. They came knocking to try to buy the MPH assets. The consolidator did its due diligence and issued a non-binding letter of interest. After further discussions, that interest turned into a binding agreement to purchase the assets. One of the terms of the deal was that the stalking horse bidder required court approval of the purchase and a vesting order from the court to vest the assets out of MPH into the acquiring corporation.

Notwithstanding there were tax losses, the purchaser did not want to purchase shares and have to deal with all the creditor issues. The company could not on its own give the purchaser the certainty it wanted by way of a vesting order. So an insolvency process was required.

What kind of stalking horse insolvency process?

There are generally three insolvency options. Some are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They are:

  • receivership;
  • bankruptcy; and
  • restructuring.

Receivership is a remedy for secured creditors. In a receivership, the company loses control of the sales process. Bankruptcy is a remedy for unsecured creditors. In bankruptcy, likewise, the company loses control. It needed a process where the company stays in control.

The insolvent company’s requirements were:

  • stay in control of the process;
  • do that specific transaction or a better one; and
  • get court protection for both the sales process and the sale.

So neither receivership nor bankruptcy would work. So what would allow the company to meet its requirements and run a stalking horse bid process?

A stalking horse process works best in an insolvency restructuring process

What is needed is a debtor in possession option. In the United States, it is called a Chapter 11 proceeding. In Canada, there are two federal statutes that apply and can accommodate the needed process:

The benefits of this approach are:

  • The company stays in control of the process.
  • It allows for the stalking horse transaction or a better one to be completed.
  • Allows the insolvent company to get protection from its creditors through the automatic stay of proceedings. This gives it the time to run the stalking horse process, go back to court for approval, and to complete a transaction.

Liquidating proposal under the BIA to run the stalking horse process

We chose the strategy of a proposal filing under the BIA. The main reason was that the CCAA is for companies that owe $5 million or more. MPH owed under that threshold, so only the BIA process was available. The strategy would have been the same, even if MPH qualified for a CCAA process and we decided to go under that statute.

As time was of the essence, we MPH first filed a Notice of Intention to Make a Proposal (NOI). This quickly got them the stay of proceedings they needed and access to the court, before needing to draft the definitive proposal document.

The company filed the NOI to implement a sale of its assets, properties, and undertaking, in order to attempt to preserve as much value as possible for the Company’s stakeholders, while preserving as many jobs as possible. As Trustee, we then wrote a report to the court in support of the company’s motion to get the purchaser’s agreement of purchase and sale to be approved as a stalking horse bid and for approval of a sales process, we would run.

As Trustee, we worked with MPH, the purchaser, and their respective legal counsel, to draft the sales process and the terms and conditions of sale. These would be the rules that would allow for the marketplace to become aware of the opportunity to purchase all or substantially all of the assets, properties, and undertaking of MPH.

Key elements of the stalking horse sales process

The key elements of the stalking horse sales process were:

  • The break fee payable to the stalking horse bidder if they turned out to not be the successful purchaser was set at the amount of $100,000.
  • The Overbid Amount (as described in the Stalking Horse Agreement of Purchase and Sale) was reduced to the amount of $100,000.
  • If an auction was to be held between parties that all qualified as successful bidders, each bid had to be at least $5,000 higher than the last one.

The outcome of the stalking horse sales process

The process we recommended to the court was a 5-week process. The court approved our recommendations and ran the sales process. The process included:

  • Advertising the opportunity in a national newspaper.
  • Preparing and distributing a “teaser” non-confidential information circular to distribute to anyone who requested it along with the terms and conditions of sale.
  • Preparation and distribution of a confidentiality agreement to those who wished more detailed financial information.
  • Receipt of signed confidentiality agreements and distribution of the confidential information memorandum we prepared.
  • Receiving non-binding letters of intent from potential purchasers and deciding which ones we chose to provide access to our electronic data room.
  • Potential purchasers performed due diligence and submitted their final binding offers with deposit funds.

We then reviewed all offers received, to make sure that they met the terms and conditions of sale. We did receive a better offer, but that purchaser’s offer was conditional on them obtaining financing. They could not waive the condition, so the stalking horse bidder’s agreement of purchase and sale turned out to be the winning bid.

Court approval of the stalking horse bid

As Trustee, we then prepared our report to court to provide all the information as to the steps we took and the results of the process. We obviously recommended that the company be allowed to complete the stalking horse agreement. The court agreed and issued the vesting order.

There were enough funds to pay out the government trust claim and all the secured creditors in full. There was also enough cash left over to pay for all the costs of the process. Unfortunately, there was not enough money to do any sort of proposal. So the company filed an assignment in bankruptcy and we became the trustee in bankruptcy.

Moving from our role as proposal trustee to the bankruptcy trustee, we informed all the creditors the details of the sale and the outcome. The business and many jobs were saved as a result.

Stalking horse summary

I hope you have enjoyed this stalking horse Brandon’s Blog. Hopefully, you have better insight now into the fact that a sick insolvent company’s business can be saved by doing a sale of its assets to a healthy organization.

Do you have too much debt? Are you in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt.

You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges.
It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. The way we take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people facing financial problems need realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain you are facing. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious in finding a solution, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team today.
Call us now for a free consultation.

We will get you or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

INSOLVENCY CANADA: IS IT ILLEGAL FOR INSOLVENT COMPANY TO APPLY FOR THE CEWS

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure.

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

insolvency canada
insolvency canada

Insolvency Canada introduction

Canadian business restructuring, a type of insolvency Canada, has been in the news lately and no doubt will continue to be for some time. The COVID-19 pandemic, the lockdown and general fear have affected everyone; both Canadian business, employees and all other Canadians. Everyone is forecasting that business insolvencies will rise as a result of the coronavirus.

An interesting question posed to us recently is, is it illegal for an insolvency Canada company to apply for the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS). I have written a couple of blogs specifically on the CEWS previously:

In this Brandon’s Blog, I discuss the concept of CEWS and try to answer the question about insolvent companies applying for COVID-19 support.

Insolvency Canada CEWS refresher

The CEWS was established for an initial 12-week period from March 15 to June 6, 2020, offering a 75-per-cent wage help to qualified firms. Then on May 15, 2020, PM Justin Trudeau announced a CEWS expansion for 3 additional months to August 29. The CEWS safeguards work by assisting organizations to maintain workers on the payroll as well as also encouraging firms to re-hire staff members previously laid off. To date, 296,030 employers, representing 924,970 applications, have applied to the CEWS program.

Former Finance Minister Bill Morneau then announced in July that the CEWS extension would consist of program changes that would broaden the reach of the program. It would certainly offer much better-targeted assistance to guarantee that more workers can return to their work without delay as the economy reboots.

The modifications announced in July for the CEWS extension would:

  • Prolong the program up until November 21, 2020, with the intent to provide additional support up until December 19, 2020.
  • Make the aid available to a more variety of companies to include those with a revenue decline of less than 30%.
  • Provide a slowly lowering base help to all eligible companies. This would assist various companies with much less than a 30% earnings loss get aid to keep employees.
  • Present a top-up aid of around an added 25 percent for companies that have really been most adversely affected by the pandemic. This would be particularly practical to firms in markets that are recovering far more slowly.
  • Offer assurance to firms that have really already made business decisions for July as well as August by ensuring they would not have their benefits less than they would have had under the previous CEWS program.
  • Address particular issues brought to the government’s attention by various stakeholder groups.

By helping people get back to work and sustaining companies as they try to grow their income, these modifications gave companies some certainty that they needed to recall workers. It is very possible that some employers would fall into an insolvency Canada category.

Insolvency Canada: The current CEWS statistics

The Canadian government has approved 910,940 of the total applications so far. The approved applications by value are:

Under $100K 863,700

$100K to $1M 44,990

$1M to $5M 2,010

Over $5M 240

Total 940,940

To look at is it illegal for an insolvent company to apply for CEWS, we first need to see what the requirements are. Could it be that applications have been made by insolvency Canada employers? For sure it is!

Insolvency Canada: When is an employer eligible for the CEWS

The CEWS was first set up through the passage of BILL C-14, A second Act respecting certain measures in response to COVID-19. It received Royal Assent on April 11, 2020. It establishes the rules for the CEWS program, as amended and extended.

For the purposes of the wage subsidy, an eligible employer is:

  • a company or a trust, besides a corporation or a trust fund that is excluded from tax obligation under Part I of the Income Tax Act or is a public institution;
  • an individual aside from a trust;
  • a registered charity (other than a public institution);
  • a person that is exempt from tax obligation under Part I of the Income Tax Act (aside from a public institution), that is:
    • a farming organization;
    • a board of trade or a chamber of commerce;
    • a non-profit corporation for SRED activities;
    • a labour organization or society;
    • a benevolent or fraternal benefit society or order; and
    • a non-profit organization;
  • a partnership where each member of which is an individual or partnership in this listing;
  • a prescribed company, including certain Indigenous companies or businesses.

As you can see, the list is very exhaustive. The legislation does not exclude an insolvent company or mention anything about insolvency Canada. The legislation also does not exclude a company that has filed for a corporate restructuring being either a proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) or under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA).

Insolvency Canada: How does an eligible employer qualify for the wage subsidy?

In order to get the wage subsidy in respect of a specific claim period, an eligible company needed to have on March 15, 2020, an open payroll program account with the CRA and was using that account to make its payroll remittances.

Concerning the revenue test, a company’s income for the subsidy includes its revenue earned in Canada on an arm’s length basis, calculated utilizing the employer’s regular bookkeeping approach. Companies can pick to calculate their earnings using either a cash basis or the accrual technique of bookkeeping. Companies have to make use of the method they select when they first make an application for the CEWS for the duration of the program. Employers cannot combine the methods.

When a qualified employer has computed its qualifying revenue for each and every relevant claim period, it would determine if it has actually experienced the needed reduction in income to qualify for the wage subsidy for that claim period. However, the company is under no obligation to prove that the decrease in income is connected to the COVID-19 situation. If it does not qualify for one claim period, it is not barred from determining if it qualifies for any other claim period.

There is nothing in the legislation that disqualifies an insolvent company that is an eligible employer from calculating if it meets the test for eligibility for the CEWS. The phrase “insolvency Canada” does not appear anywhere.

Insolvency Canada: It is not illegal for an insolvent company to apply for the CEWS

From my research, as described above, I have not found anything in the legislation that established the CEWS that would make it illegal for an insolvency Canada employer to apply for the CEWS. If you think about it, this makes sense.

The Canadian government was worried that companies shutting down meant all workers were laid off and be applying for the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB). As the economy opened up again, the government wanted to make it easier for businesses to bring back some or all of their workers in a very unsettling and uncharted time. The aim of all the Canadian government support programs is to give assistance to struggling companies.

There is an implicit assumption that companies could very well be insolvent and would therefore not be able to reopen unless they had financial support. So not only is it not illegal for an insolvent company to apply for the CEWS, it is quite logical that an insolvent company would not reopen or if it did, not hire back many workers.

This is, in my view, one of the reasons why the CEWS was established; to bring back Canadian workers to companies that could not otherwise afford to pay its employees if it could not receive back a refund for what it was spending on wages or salaries.

Insolvency Canada: How would the CEWS be treated under a formal restructuring

Whether the company is restructuring under the BIA or CCAA, the treatment of the CEWS is the same. The CEWS is taxable. You need to include the amount you get on the company’s or business’s income tax return when calculating your taxed revenue.

You will certainly likewise be expected to report the amount of the CEWS that was used to pay each of your staff members’ incomes by utilizing a unique code in the “other information” area at the end of the respective employee’s T4 slip. That specific information on the reporting needs has not yet been made public by the government. It presumably will be before the end of the year.

So in either a BIA or CCAA insolvency business restructuring, the CEWS should be shown as:

  • revenue in any cash flow statement prepared with anticipated receipt dates;
  • income for accounting and financial statement purposes; and
  • disclosed in the Trustee’s/Monitor’s reporting to stakeholders.

If it turns out that the employer involved in a formal restructuring did not qualify for a CEWS payment for one or more of the periods that it applied and received one, then it is a liability to the government. How is that handled in the restructuring? There could be two answers. From my research, I do not see this specifically being addressed.

You may need to return all or part of the CEWS you have actually already received if you:

  • send to the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) any type of modifications to a previous application;
  • terminate an application;
  • made a calculation or data mistake for a claim;
  • learn you do not qualify after getting a subsidy payment for a claim made; or
  • receive a notice from the CRA that, following an evaluation, your claim has actually been lowered or disallowed.

Any type of CEWS overpayment you received that is not returned will be subject to interest charges. In the very next insolvency Canada section, I discuss what kind of liability a CEWS overpayment would be in a formal insolvency restructuring.

Insolvency Canada: What kind of liability is a CEWS overpayment

The CEWS is a subsidy payment made to you by CRA based on an application the insolvent company makes. Unlike a claim for unremitted source deductions or HST, it is not an amount the insolvent company collected, held in trust for and failed to remit to CRA. So as far as I am concerned, it is not a trust claim. It would be an ordinary unsecured claim.

The overpayment claim may not necessarily be caught in the restructuring. If the insolvent company applied for the CEWS AND received the subsidy payment BEFORE making the restructuring filing under either the BIA or CCAA, then I believe it would be an ordinary unsecured claim in the restructuring. However, if the company applied for the CEWS AFTER filing for restructuring, regardless of the claim period, the overpayment claim would be a post-filing claim and not caught in the restructuring. All of the overpayment would have to be repaid notwithstanding the formal restructuring.

If not repaid, presumably CRA would offset any other amount payable to the company, such as for HST input tax credits, against the CEWS overpayment liability in such an insolvency Canada situation.

Again, I caution that none of this appears in the CEWS legislation. It is my opinion based on my experience and the review of the relevant legislation.

Insolvency Canada summary

I hope you have found this Insolvency Canada CEWS Brandon’s Blog interesting and helpful. The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance for debt relief Canada COVID-19, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CCAA CANADA: OUR EXTRAORDINARY GUIDE TO 2020 TROUBLED CANADIAN COMPANIES SEEKING BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION

ccaa canada
ccaa canada

The Ira Smith Team is totally operational and both Ira and Brandon Smith are here for a telephone consultation, conference calls and virtual meetings.

Keep healthy and safe everybody.

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

CCAA Canada introduction

We are now about 5 months into this COVID-19 pandemic since the state of emergency was announced in Canada. There has also been a lot of media coverage of the many negative effects it has had on Canadians and the Canadian economy. I thought it might be interesting at this point to do some review on CCAA Canada. Now I am not talking about the Canadian Collegiate Athletic Association. Rather, I am going to look at the companies that have so far filed for creditor protection under one of Canada’s insolvency statutes. The Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.

When a company tries to reorganize under CCAA Canada – What does CCAA mean?

When Canadian companies who owe more than $5 million experience financial problems, they might go to court to seek creditor protection, filing under the CCAA Canada. That’s federal legislation that primarily offers a company time to try to work out its financial troubles with those to which it owes money.

As I have written before in various Brandon’s Blogs, if the company owes less than $5 million it can file under the Part III Division I reorganization section of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). Although it is the other Canadian federal insolvency statute and some procedures are more streamlined and handled slightly differently, the net effect is the same as the matters I explain below about the CCAA Canada.

What does CCAA Canada protection mean? CCAA vs Chapter 11

“Bankruptcy protection” is a term closely associated with a US company filing under Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code. That term has been adopted into the Canadian insolvency dialogue. In Canada, it most likely means that the Canadian company has applied to a Canadian court to look for protection from their creditors by filing under CCAA Canada.

A firm files under CCAA Canada for consent to come up with a restructuring plan strategy that would certainly provide it time to rearrange its financial affairs to make sure that it can keep operating.

As long as a CCAA order continues to be in place, creditors are not allowed to start or continue any kind of action to recover money owed to them. They can’t try to confiscate the firm’s property or try to petition it into bankruptcy, without the prior approval of the court. This is called the CCAA stay of proceedings.

Considering that a CCAA Canada filing is made because a business is deeply in the red, the initial order of business is to strike some kind of satisfactory arrangement with its creditors. That includes secured creditors, unsecured creditors and shareholders.

Can CCAA Canada protection be extended?

Yes, under CCAA Canada, court-ordered protection can be extended. After Algoma Steel filed under CCAA Canada in April 2001, the firm had gotten eight extensions prior to emerging with a new ownership framework.

Who gets priority under a CCAA Canada filing?

Not all creditors are treated equally. There is a priority generally established for the ranking of creditors and the order in which they might be paid by a debtor.

First in a CCAA Canada restructuring, will be any government claims that rank as a priority deemed trust claim. Next will be any new charges ordered by the court as part of the restructuring. Examples of such court-ordered security charges are Key Employee Retention Plans, financing the company needs in order to survive during the restructuring period and the costs of the professionals involved in the restructuring for the company.

Secured creditors, including lenders and bondholders, usually head the list next when it concerns getting back their money. Secured creditors might hold security such as a general security agreement and/or a mortgage as security for their debt held.

Unsecured creditors follow next on the list of creditors. Unsecured creditors have supplied goods or services on credit to the company without being given any security. In the many retailer filings that have been in the news recently, even customers who have paid deposits for items not yet picked up or who have gift cards are also unsecured creditors. Last on the list are the shareholders.

What happens if the court doesn’t approve a CCAA Canada application or the sides can’t agree on how to restructure debt?

If a restructuring effort is not successful, or if the court does not approve it, a company can be placed right into receivership or bankruptcy. The main difference between a CCAA Canada filing and the options of receivership or bankruptcy, suggests that the company can no longer be a going concern and will be liquidated.

The choice between receivership or bankruptcy depends on the nature and extent of the creditors. If there is a major secured creditor who is owed more than the assets are worth, on a failed restructuring, the court will allow that secured creditor to appoint a receiver (or the court will appoint the receiver). The receiver will then liquidate the company’s assets and repay the secured creditor as much as possible. If there are no secured creditors (which is highly unusual), or there will be money left over from the liquidation after full repayment of the secured creditors, then there will be bankruptcy. The licensed insolvency trustee acting as the bankruptcy trustee will make a distribution to the unsecured creditors.

Sometimes the type of company or industry will require both receivership and bankruptcy. Retail liquidations are a good example. The reasons are outside the main topic of discussion for this CCAA Canada Brandon’s Blog, but, one day, I will do one on that topic.

What happens to shareholders in a CCAA Canada restructuring?

Holders of common stock generally come last. On a regular basis in a CCAA Canada restructuring, they tend to get wiped out. Their old shares come to be worthless. Usually, brand-new shares are issued in the restructured company.

Holders of preferred shares rank ahead of common shareholders (for this reason the title “preferred”) yet more often than not do not get back the full value of their shares.

Public company shares in a company if it enters CCAA Canada protection and all trading is halted

When a public company announces that it has filed under CCAA Canada, a trading halt is applied. The listing exchange notifies the marketplace that trading is not taking place. While the stop is in effect, brokers are forbidden from publishing quotations or signs of interest in trading. The listing exchange will end the trading stop by taking the actions called for by its rules. Generally, the marketplace is alerted that a trading halt is about to end either at the same time the halt finishes or a few minutes before.

When a company gets on the edge of bankruptcy, its stock value mirrors the danger of a CCAA Canada administration becoming liquidation. Purely as an example, a business that used to trade at $50 might trade at $2 per share as a result of the bankruptcy environment. After entering into a CCAA Canada filing, the company’s stock price might be up to $2.10. This value is composed of the potential amount that shareholders might get after liquidation and also the possibility that the firm might restructure and run effectively in the future. Investors can buy and sell these $2.10 shares in the market. The actual value does not reach zero unless the likelihood of restructuring is so low that liquidation becomes a certainty.

While the company is in a CCAA Canada restructuring, its stock will certainly still have some value, though it will likely plummet. The regulatory authorities will watch it very closely and shut down trading if any anomalies are encountered where investors could get hurt. This was recently seen in the United States in the Hertz Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection administration.

Nonetheless, if the business restructures and emerges from CCAA Canada reorganization as a solvent going-concern, its share price might start to rise again. How much will depend on the unique restructuring issues. If a business rises from its restructuring stronger than ever, investors can take advantage of the turnaround, as old stock may get cancelled during the insolvency process, and new shares issued.

List of CCAA filings under CCAA Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic so far?

There have been many media reports about companies filing under CCAA Canada during this coronavirus pandemic. I thought it would be useful to look at which companies have filed and what industries seem to be most affected between the calling for the state of emergency and the last date for which these statistics have been published, July 31, 2020. All of this information comes from statistics published by the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada.

The number of companies and the industries that these companies engage in is allocated as follows:

Cannabis6
Charity1
Construction4
Energy4
Entertainment1
Hospitality1
Manufacturing1
Media1
Mining2
Pulp and Paper1
Real Estate2
Retail8
Technology1
Travel1
34

 

The following chart shows the filings by the province in this same time frame:

ccaa canada
ccaa canada graph

CCAA Canada summary

I hope you enjoyed this CCAA Canada Brandon’s Blog. The Ira Smith Team family hopes you and your family are staying safe, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person who has been affected either through inconvenience or personal family tragedy.

We are all citizens of Canada and we have to coordinate our efforts to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Family members are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when things can return to something close to normal and we can all be together again physically.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has always employed clean and safe habits in our professional practice and continues to do so.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. Should you take advantage of the CEBA? I say a resounding YES!. I just wanted to highlight all of the issues that you should consider.

If anyone needs our assistance, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

Are you now worried just how you or your business are going to survive? Those concerns are obviously on your mind. This pandemic situation has made everyone scared.

The Ira Smith Team understands these concerns. More significantly, we know the requirements of the business owner or the individual that has way too much financial debt. You are trying to manage these difficult financial problems and you are understandably anxious.

It is not your fault you can’t fix this problem on your own. The pandemic has thrown everyone a curveball. We have not been trained to deal with this. You have only been taught the old ways. The old ways do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team makes use of new contemporary ways to get you out of your debt problems while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief now.

We look at your whole circumstance and design a strategy that is as distinct as you are. We take the load off of your shoulders as part of the debt settlement strategy we will draft just for you.

We understand that people facing money problems require a lifeline. That is why we can establish a restructuring procedure for you and end the discomfort you feel.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will listen to the unique issues facing you and provide you with practical and actionable ideas you can implement right away to end the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Team is totally operational and both Ira and Brandon Smith are here for a telephone consultation, conference calls and virtual meetings.

Keep healthy and safe everybody.

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CANADIAN BUSINESS: WHAT WILL BE THE ULTIMATE BUSINESS IN ONTARIO RECOVERY PROGRAM?

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Canadian business introduction

In April 2020, a survey of entrepreneurs who own what could be called a small Canadian business across the GTA was conducted. It found that almost two-thirds of them might have to shut down for good as they struggle to stay on top of rent and other bills throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I look at entrepreneurs in Canadian business, both small and large, and talk about the one essential ingredient that will determine Canadian business success or failure. This one necessary item may turn out to be the only Canadian business recovery program that will ultimately work.

Canadian business opening-up again

Many are progressively opening up under local, provincial and federal government guidance. They need to navigate a host of constraints, including restrictions on the number of customers at any one time. I have read that many say the restrictions with their added layer of costs may stop them from being profitable. Even though COVID-19 cases appear to be under control in Ontario, companies have actually reopened to dramatically smaller sized groups, imperilling their survival.

To save local Canadian businesses, and the millions they employ, the federal government developed Canada’s COVID-19 Economic Response Plan. The federal assistance programs for Canadian business include:

I have already written about most of these support programs. I have attached relevant links above so that you can read up on the various support programs for Canadian business.

Provincial governments have also stepped up. For example, in Ontario, the Doug Ford Conservative government has implemented:

  1. Interest/penalty relief – Canadian business in Ontario will get five months of interest and fine relief to make payments for taxes administered by the Province. From April 1, 2020 – August 31, 2020, Ontario will not apply any penalty interest on any late-filed returns or incomplete or late tax obligation payments under the Employer Health Tax, Tobacco Tax and Gas Tax obligations. This enhances relief from the federal government on interest and other charges from not remitting the amount owing for corporate income tax.
  2. WSIB payment deferments – Employers can delay WSIB payments for 6 months.
  3. Rent support for local Canadian business – Ontario has partnered with the Government of Canada on the Ontario-Canada emergency commercial rent assistance for small businesses and landlords experiencing financial problems throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

But there are still Canadian business problems

Despite all these support programs, the Canadian business world still has to figure out how to pay the balance of their rent, utility, insurance as well as a host of various other recurring expenses. While some have had the ability to delay these expenses, they can’t do so for life. Companies will become required to take care of their unmet commitments. They will also have to figure out how they are going to go back to paying all their expenses in full once the support programs end and business has not yet come back to the pre-coronavirus pandemic level.

Some companies may have enough cash savings to ride out the pandemic or can access fresh cash resources from owners. That is both good and bad. Entrepreneurs will take from their retirement savings, and in some cases deplete them, in the hopes of keeping their business alive long enough to survive and once again be profitable. It is highly doubtful that Canadian business will be able to borrow from the Banks as a source of fresh capital under these circumstances.

For a lot of others, the crush of past-due costs will certainly limit and maybe even end their business.

What happens when the government support programs end?

That is a big question that I get asked always. The answer is somewhat obvious: Everyone will have to stand on their own two feet just like they had to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Right now all the Canadian business support programs are all scheduled to end August 31. What will happen then?

My personal belief is that the federal and provincial governments will not be able to end the economic response support programs that soon. Rather, I think they will have to extend all the programs again. They may tweak them to begin the process of weaning Canadian business off of government support. Nevertheless, I feel they will have to be extended.

I think the extension will come with stark warnings. I believe the government would not want to extend for more than 90 days, but Christmas will still come in December. Pandemic or no pandemic. Nobody will want to shut off the tap before Christmas. So, that means an extension until the end of the calendar year 2020. With it, the governments will have to warn everyone to get their houses in order now because for certain there will be no more support programs after December 31.

I don’t have any inside information. I am just guessing. But to me, that seems the most realistic to still help Canadian business because entrepreneurs and workers are still all scared. At the same time, the governments’ exit strategy time clock begins ticking. Everyone will have a fair warning.

There is one precious commodity Canadian business will need when the support programs stop

Please humour me. Let us just say you find my prediction to be a reasonable one. On January 1, 2021, Canadian business is not all of a sudden flush with cash. They have survived. Entrepreneurs will still be scared. They certainly will not hire everyone back with an uncertain economic climate. All of the creditors of the businesses will start demanding payment in full. They have been patient and understanding. But now, all business debts will be demanded.

What is the one commodity Canadian business will desperately need? Cash is an obvious one but, no more is coming. Not from the government, the Banks or investors. Entrepreneurs are already tapped out having used personal savings to keep their businesses afloat. The most precious commodity Canadian business will need is TIME. Time to gear up again. Time to get back on their feet and bring in some cash. The Courts will have reopened. Creditors will begin to sue. There will be no more “time-outs” built into our Canadian economic system.

How will businesses get the time they need?

Bankruptcy protection will very likely be the answer

Breathing time that briefly ices up the need to pay off old debt while letting Canadian business function and have the time to find a strategy to keep going. In most cases, that will only be able to happen with a bankruptcy protection insolvency filing.

While bankruptcy is only thought of with going out of business, there are two Canadian federal statutes that allow viable businesses to develop a restructuring plan to lead them back to success. The trouble is that bankruptcy laws don’t give sufficient time to do this while there is still a pandemic. Ongoing COVID-19 health problems will likely suppress the Canadian economy in 2021.

Some out-of-the-box thinking and creativity are going to have to go into bankruptcy restructuring. It will be incumbent on licensed insolvency trustees (formerly called bankruptcy trustees), insolvency lawyers and the courts to recognize viable businesses that deserve to survive. This will be the case even if the processes being recommended are a bit unorthodox. These times are unorthodox and the solutions will have to fit the realities of our time.

I have previously written many blogs on how the two Canadian insolvency statutes can be used to allow Canadian business to restructure. The two statutes are:

For the purpose of this blog, I won’t repeat what I have previously written about corporate restructuring under either the BIA or CCAA. For this blog, what you need to know is that CCAA proceedings are for companies with $5 million or more of debt. BIA proceedings are for those companies with $4,999,999 of debt or less. Both statutes allow for bankruptcy protection filing. They are the Canadian equivalent to Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States.

How will bankruptcy protections help Canadian business?

For numerous companies battling the consequences of COVID-19, the main issue will not be a massive backlog of debt. It will be the inability to pay off the debt fast due to an absence of immediate profits. Cash will be needed to carry on business and make commitments on a go-forward basis. Given enough time, Canadian business will be able to repay its debts which accrued during the coronavirus shutdown. Unfortunately, the time Canadian business will need will be much longer than how much longer creditors will be willing to wait.

This is where bankruptcy protection filing, under either the BIA or CCAA comes in. First, under a bankruptcy protection filing, there is an automatic stay of proceedings. Creditors will not be able to start or continue collection efforts. This includes repossession by secured creditors or beginning or continuing legal proceedings.

Other benefits of a bankruptcy protection filing for Canadian business will be:

  1. Buying some time to come up with a restructuring plan to keep viable businesses in operation.
  2. Saving jobs through restructuring rather than liquidating the assets of many companies.
  3. Allowing for the sale of entire business units to be integrated into other healthier companies in order for businesses to survive, albeit in a different legal format.
  4. To allow for the sale of redundant assets to raise much-needed cash.
  5. Get out of onerous equipment, IP or premises leases/contracts that need to be jettisoned or else a restructuring is not possible.
  6. Stopping secured lenders from calling a default on loan facilities due to either cash or non-cash impairment charges leading to going concern worries.
  7. Obtain operating capital by way of a new debtor-in-possession loan credit facility for restructuring. Most companies outside of a formal restructuring will be unable to borrow any more money as I have already mentioned. However, in a BIA or CCAA Canadian business restructuring, the court can approve emergency funding and raise that operating loan to the top of the pile by giving it a priority secured loan position.
  8. Stopping Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) from starting or continuing garnishee tactics, general collection efforts and especially placing liens on business property for unpaid taxes.
  9. To allow companies to restructure their debt and clean up their balance sheets in a post lockdown economy.

The biggest resource Canadian business will need is also going to be its largest enemy

So as you can see, I believe that the most important resource that Canadian business will need to survive will not be cash. It will be time. Creditors will no longer want to give businesses more time to repay. Companies will need more time to get back on their feet when the COVID-19 Economic Response Plan support programs end.

The only way I can see that truly happening while allowing for proper restructuring of viable businesses will be under bankruptcy protection filings. Those businesses that are not viable, by definition, will fall by the wayside causing more harm to many good people.

So this why I say formal bankruptcy protection proceedings to allow viable businesses to restructure will be the ultimate business recovery program in a post-lockdown Canada.

Canadian business summary

I hope you have found this Canadian business Brandon’s Blog interesting and helpful. The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance for debt relief Canada COVID-19, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

canadian business
canadian business
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY PROCESS: RIDICULOUS BUT TRUE BANKRUPTCY CHAPTER 11 CASE AND ONTARIO RESTITUTION LAW DEBT

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Bankruptcy process introduction

This week two totally unrelated items caught my attention when thinking about the bankruptcy process. The first is about Hertz Global Holdings Inc. (Hertz) bankruptcy Chapter 11 case in the United States. An update to my recent blog about Hertz titled HOW HERTZ TEACHES US MODERN AND RISKY RULES OF BUSINESS BANKRUPTCY IN CANADA AND THE USA.

The second item that caught my eye is a decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. The decision really didn’t have anything to do with bankruptcy. However, the Court of Appeal did reference the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) in its decision. It really is about restitution law and the resultant debt.

The zany twist to the Hertz bankruptcy Chapter 11 case

In my June 8 blog about the bankruptcy process used by Hertz, I wrote about the irrational behaviour of investors in trading Hertz stock. Legendary investor Carl Icahn sold his entire Hertz holdings at $0.72 per share. The stock had touched a low of $0.40. For some reason, investors bid the stock up to $5.53. The stock at the time of writing this blog is just under $2.

This made no sense at all. The only thing I can attribute it to is that investors saw an opportunity to buy in during upward momentum, sell-off with a profit, and leave someone else holding the bag. Hertz debentures are selling for pennies on the dollar. The assumption being that those creditors will largely get wiped out as part of the bankruptcy chapter 11 case. If creditors get next to nothing, then for sure shareholders are going to get wiped out. That is what happens in these bankruptcy process cases.

This activity did not escape Hertz’s attention. Now the restructuring team got an idea. What if we could sell more stock, given the interest in our shares. If we sold $1 billion worth, while telling everyone it was worthless, then we would have the necessary cash to fund our restructuring. Better yet, Hertz would not have to borrow money with high rate debtor-in-possession financing. All they needed was to convince the court to approve it. It sounds like a Mel Brooks comedy script!

The Hertz bankruptcy process application for share sale approval motion

June 19, 2020 UPDATE: Late yesterday, Hertz announced that it has determined to end a questionable stock sale of as much as $500 million since the Securities and Exchange Commission questioned and put a hold on the insolvent company’s plans. Hertz is currently in talks for a debtor-in-possession bankruptcy loan of up to $1 billion to fund its business reorg.

On June 11, 2020, Hertz filed its motion for court approval to issue more of its common stock. Since the common shares are being actively traded, Hertz filed its emergency motion to seek emergency relief from the court to allow the Debtor to try to capture value for the unissued Hertz shares for the benefit of the bankruptcy process Estate.

The approval sought from the court was approval to participate in a sale arrangement with Jefferies LLC (Jefferies), to act as the sales representative. Under the sale contract, Hertz might offer and sell common shares of Hertz having an aggregate offering value not to surpass $1 billion. Hertz has 246,775,008 unissued common stock shares. Jefferies will use its best efforts to market, as the sales representative the unissued shares of common stock.

In support of their motion, Hertz advised the court that:

  1. The recent market prices of the trading quantities in Hertz’s ordinary shares creates a special possibility for Hertz to raise funding on terms that are much superior to any kind of debtor-in-possession funding.
  2. If successful, Hertz might possibly offer up to and an aggregate of $1.0 billion of ordinary shares.
  3. Unlike regular debtor-in-possession funding, the issuance of the ordinary shares would certainly not enforce restrictions on Hertz or its bankruptcy process restructuring efforts and would certainly not hinder any of the creditors.
  4. Additionally, the stock issuance would bring no repayment obligations to Hertz.
  5. Other than the Jeffries fee, there would be no other significant costs to obtain the funding through the sale of shares.
  6. Hertz would include disclosure in any prospectus for the sale of the unissued common shares highlighting that a financial investment in these Hertz’s shares involves substantial dangers. This includes the danger that the common stock can inevitably be worthless (emphasis added).

What the court said

After deliberating on the issue, on June 12, 2020, Judge Mary F. Walrath of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware granted Hertz’s motion. She ordered that:

  1. Hertz is allowed, but not required, to enter into the Sale Arrangement with Jeffries and perform all obligations called for in the agreement.
  2. Hertz may, but again is not required to, market the unissued common shares.
  3. Jeffries may earn its fee in accordance with the Sale Agreement.

This is truly novel, yet whacky. Anyone who would buy these shares must be gambling on the fact that market activity will remain hot and that they will be able to sell the shares for a profit.

As I mentioned above, creditors are going to be given a haircut. So how can shareholders expect a return on their investment? Any savvy creditor being asked to agree to a bankruptcy process restructuring plan certainly will insist that creditors must receive payments on account of what they are agreeing to give up, should funds become available, before shareholders see one penny.

Lots of people are going to be left without a chair when the music stops. It will be fascinating to see how this all works out.

Restitution law

This matter is totally unrelated to the Hertz bankruptcy process. It is in Ontario and I found the Court of Appeal for Ontario’s decision very interesting. Especially so because it really didn’t have anything to do with insolvency or bankruptcy either.

On June 11, 2020, the appellate court issued its decision in a matter dealing with restitution law. The case involved a 32-year-old man with high school education. In between September 30 and November 6, 2018, he went on a drug-fuelled rampage, that included the robbery of 10 businesses. He was sentenced to 4.5 years in jail and subject to a restitution order in the amount of $15,000. It was the restitution payment that was appealed.

His lawyer argued that the sentencing judge erred by not taking into consideration whether he had the ability to make restitution before imposing the restitution. They also argued that it will likely hinder his possibilities of rehabilitation. They said that the restitution order ought to be vacated.

The appeal court agreed. In allowing the appeal, the appeal court stated that the purpose of a restitution order is not intended to undermine the culprit’s chance for rehabilitation. The appeal court then went on to equate the rehabilitative aspects of restitution law with the rehabilitation intention of Canadian bankruptcies laws in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). The Court of Appeal for Ontario also correctly stated that a restitution order made by a sentencing judge will survive through any type of bankruptcy of the criminal. This suggests it is there for life and restitution is not meant to be a life sentence.

That is what caught my attention. I never would have equated restitution with bankruptcy or rehabilitation.

Summary

The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

I hope you have found this bankruptcy process Brandon’s Blog interesting. I will eagerly watch what happens in the Hertz common share sale and the subsequent trading in the shares. I also never thought of criminal restitution as part of rehabilitation. I also for sure never thought of it in the area of bankruptcy and insolvency.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance for debt relief Canada COVID, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

bankruptcy process
bankruptcy process
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

HOW TO USE QUADRIGA CX SCANDAL TO IMPROVE FINANCIAL LITERACY

quadriga cx
quadriga cx

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.

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Introduction

Quadriga CX (Quadriga, QuadrigaCX or Quadriga CX) was a subsidiary of Quadriga Fintech Solutions Corp. (Fintech). Fintech operated an online cryptocurrency exchange system where parties interested in acquiring, offering or trading numerous cryptocurrencies were able to complete such purchases on the QCX System.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I explain how the QuadrigaCX financial scandal can be used as an important lesson to aid in our financial literacy.

The Quadriga CX demise

Quadriga was experiencing a liquidity crisis as well as having been incapable to honour withdrawal requests from individuals. Furthermore, Quadriga had not been able to find a substantial amount of cryptocurrency upon the death of QuadrigaCX founder and CEO, Gerald William Cotten.

As a result of the liquidity situation combined with missing cash and cryptocurrency, Fintech and related companies made a decision to call a time out by filing for bankruptcy protection and hope for business restructuring on February 5, 2019, under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act( Canada) (CCAA).

By April 11, 2019, it was obvious that there was no possibility of restructuring. On that date, the Court made a Termination and Bankruptcy Assignment Order was made by the court confirming the process through which the Quadriga CX CCAA procedure would terminate and shift to a corporate bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA).

QuadrigaCX 2020 update

The demise of the cryptocurrency trading system QuadrigaCX arises from a fraudulent scam by Gerald Cotten. Clients delegated their assets to Quadriga, which supplied fraudulent guarantees that those properties would be protected. In truth, Mr. Cotten invested, traded and made use of those properties as he pleased. Running with no proper system of oversight or interior controls, he had the ability to misuse those assets, uncontrolled and undiscovered, eventually bringing down the entire trading exchange.

On January 14, 2019, Quadriga CX announced that Mr. Cotten had passed away in India the previous month. With the Quadriga CX CEO death, he could not continue to manipulate the Quadriga CX platform and hide his fraud. The entire business operation imploded as described above.

It turns out that over 76,000 Quadriga CX customers were owed a combined $215 million. About 40 percent of the clients were from the province of Ontario. The bankruptcy trustee recovered $46 million in assets for distribution to unsecured creditors. The people that relied on QuadrigaCX collectively lost at least $169 million.

The Ontario Securities Commission investigation into the Quadriga CX demise

The staff of the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) carried out an evaluation of the QuadrigaCX business operations to establish how the system was run, what created its collapse, and where the money went. Over a period of approximately ten months, a multi-disciplinary team of OSC Enforcement Branch staff analyzed trading and blockchain information, interviewed key witnesses and worked together with many regulatory bodies.

Most of the $169 million shortfall arose from Mr. Cotten’s fraudulent conduct. It has been widely guessed that the bulk of the losses arose from crypto properties ending up being lost or hard to reach as a result of Mr. Cotten’s death. The OSC found that most of the $169 million shortage arises from Mr. Cotten’s deceitful conduct.

The OSC report states that the bulk of the loss– about $115 million– occurred from Mr. Cotten’s illegal trading on the QuadrigaCX platform. He opened up Quadriga CX accounts under pen names and attributed himself with phony Quadriga cryptocurrency balances which he traded without knowledge by unwary Quadriga CX customers. He incurred losses when the price of the cryptocurrency would change, thus producing a deficiency in the assets needed to satisfy customer withdrawals. Mr. Cotten covered this deficiency with other customers’ deposits. This indicated that Quadriga CX, a state of the art new technology operated an old-time Ponzi scheme.

It is reported that Mr. Cotten lost an additional $28 million while trading customer deposits on three external cryptocurrency trading systems without permission from, or disclosure to, clients. He also misappropriated millions to fund his and his wife’s, Jennifer Robertson, way of living. In its final months, Quadriga CX had virtually no balances left and was running like a revolving door– brand-new customer deposits were quickly re-routed to money needed for Quadrigacx withdrawals.

In summary form, the OSC described the losses as:

  1. $115 million trading losses sustained by Mr. Cotten on the Quadriga CX platform.
  2. $46 million assets recovered or identified by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee).
  3. $28 million trading losses sustained on external platforms.
  4. $23 million which could not be accounted for because of the poor state of the Quadriga CX books and records.
  5. $2 million of client funds misappropriated for living and travel expenses.
  6. $1 million estimated operating loss.

What the Quadriga CX scandal can teach us for improving our financial literacy

  1. In Canada, lots of crypto property trading systems are not registered. They have taken the view that they do not need to sign up with regulatory authorities. This is an essential message to users and possible users of these platforms. So we need to keep in mind that there may be no regulatory oversight at all on these cryptocurrency trading platforms.
  2. Cryptocurrency trading and the trading platforms are risky. Trading in crypto assets carries threats. Many platforms preserve safekeeping and control of their clients’ crypto assets. Clients just have ordinary unsecured claims against the platform for their assets. Clients are relying upon the solvency and stability of the system operators. Crypto asset trading systems might not operate transparently. Clients might have restricted or no details regarding how the platform is protecting and managing their assets.
  3. Cryptocurrency system clients ought to perform due diligence and look out for signs of fraud. Anyone considering delegating their assets to a crypto asset trading platform should take action to learn more about the platform’s operations and approach to control the risk of monitoring. I recognize that this may not be feasible with the present degree of disclosure supplied by some systems. Cryptocurrency trading platforms are a bit of a black box that ordinary people do not really understand.
  4. If cryptocurrency trading platforms were required to sign up with the provincial regulatory authority, perhaps there would be some oversight and protection for consumers.
  5. Platforms need to make sure that they have systems as well as controls in a position to take care of risks. Having an internal control system to take care of risks, including those pertaining to business protection, vital employees and compliance with regulations is an important step for consumer confidence. The trading platforms should be able to describe the systems used to protect client assets. That way the public at least has a chance of being able to properly evaluate between different systems.
  6. Systems should reveal key details to customers. Supplying clients with exact details regarding crucial aspects of their operations – such as asset wardship and storage techniques, charges, reported volumes, system protection actions and internal controls will help with educated decisions by investors and also advertise capitalist confidence in the platform.

Summary

The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

I hope you have found this Quadriga CX scandal Brandon’s Blog helpful. Cryptocurrency trading is still in the realm of the Wild West. Further work must be done before crypt currency can be widely used as a cash replacement. There are many financial literacy lessons we can garner from the Quadriga CX story. Even if Mr. Cotten had lived, the Ponzi scheme could only have been kept afloat for a finite time period before it would implode.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance for debt relief Canada COVID, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

HOW TO USE DEBT RELIEF CANADA COVID TO ACHIEVE THE BENEFIT OF MORE TIME

debt relief canada covidThe Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Stay healthy, well balanced and safe and secure everyone.

If you wish to listen to the audio version of this debt relief Canada COVID Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click play on the podcast

Debt relief Canada COVID introduction

I have written before many blogs about debt relief in Canada and debt relief Canada COVID. I have written about:

Personal insolvency –

Corporate insolvency

  • Bankruptcy protection restructuring, both under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) and the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada)
  • Receivership
  • Liquidation
  • Bankruptcy

Debt relief Canada COVID specific:

Now the federal government has drafted legislation to guarantee that Canadians, as well as Canadian companies, have the ability to meet governing time frames and target dates found in federal statutes. Some key target dates for debt relief Canada COVID found in the BIA and other statutes, such as the Canada Labour Code, given the COVID-19 pandemic and the courts essentially being shut down and only hearing emergency matters.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I discuss the proposed Time Limits and Other Periods Act (COVID-19). The purpose of this proposed statute will aid debt relief Canada COVID.

Canadian Department of Justice concerns

On May 19, 2020, the Canadian Department of Justice unveiled draft legislation. The government has posted it online and is allowing 10 days for any comments to be submitted on the proposed Time Limits and Other Periods Act (COVID-19). The federal government is concerned about debt relief Canada COVID and all other issues federal legislation deals with.

As I previously wrote, the OSB, went to court in each province to get certain deadlines suspended so that debt relief in Canada would not suffer. The OSB ensured that the system would work for debt relief Canada COVID. The federal government believes that so many Canadians, as well as Canadian companies, could be impacted in other federal statutes not designed for financial restructuring or debt settlement. The government is concerned that they may encounter possible legal jeopardy if, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, they fall short to meet target dates.

Consequently, the Government of Canada published draft legislation, which outlines prospective remedies that the Federal government might apply to deal with these essential problems. The draft legislative proposal for dealing with debt relief Canada COVID is online for 10 days. Interested stakeholders are invited to share their comments by May 29.

What the draft legislation is designed to do

The draft legal proposal is designed to suspend specific time frames as well as enable government ministers to prolong or put on hold other time limits consisted of in government regulations to:

  • Ensure that Canadians, as well as Canadian companies, are able to satisfy governing time frames and deadlines found in federal statutes, such as some key due dates found in the BIA for debt relief Canada COVID and under the Canada Labour Code during the coronavirus pandemic.
  • Protect Canadians’ rights and access to justice in the context of civil proceedings before the courts, by making sure that people and companies are protected to assert their rights and not miss a time limit or deadline during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The draft legislation includes stipulations to make certain that short-term extensions or suspensions cannot be made after September 30, 2020, and could be retroactive to March 13, 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic officially began.

What the draft legislation says

As already mentioned, the draft relief is designed to protect Canadians under federal statutes designed for debt relief Canada COVID and other federal laws. So here are the highlights of what the draft Time Limits and Other Periods Act (COVID-19) currently proposes.

Section 3 defines a time frame. It says such time periods that are either suspended or prolonged under this Act, then, during the period that the suspension or extension holds, every mention in any Act of Parliament to that time restriction or duration is to be read as referring to the time limit or period as it is suspended or expanded.

Section 4 states that the Act does not refer to any time frame or any other duration related to the investigation of an offence or a proceeding arising from an offence.

Sections 6 and 7 deal with time limits related to proceedings. The proposed legislation purports to:

  • Put on hold, as of March 13, 2020 as well as until September 13, 2020, or an earlier day set by the Governor in Council, certain time frame certain proceedings, aside from proceedings from offences, before the courts.
  • Allow courts to adjust the suspension within particular limits and take measures regarding the results of a failure to satisfy a put on a hold time limit.
  • Allow the Governor in Council to waive such suspensions in particular scenarios.
  • Permit ministers, in respect of defined regulations, to put on hold or prolong time limits and also prolong other durations for no greater than six months, as well as to offer such suspensions or extensions retroactive to March 13, 2020.
  • A time frame might be put on hold or extended and also a time duration might be expanded for a total maximum period of 6 months.
  • permit ministers in the case defined in the previous point to give specified persons, bodies or tribunals some adaptability in applying these suspensions or expansions.
  • Prevent these powers from being exercised after September 30, 2020.

This draft Act would certainly permit the Governor in Council to restrict or enforce conditions on the powers provided to ministers. Having a federally mandated “time out” will certainly aid debt relief Canada COVID.

Summary

It appears that the federal government realizes that there are many federal laws where time periods must be met. During the coronavirus emergency shutdown of the courts, it may not be possible to meet all the deadlines. So, this omnibus proposed legislation aims to suspend or expand time frames to September 13, 2020. The hope is that it will allow for more orderly conduct for debt relief Canada COVID under the BIA and for other purposes different federal legislation allows.

The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance for debt relief Canada COVID, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Stay healthy, well balanced and safe and secure everyone.

You may also be interested in:

PERSONAL BANKRUPTCY CANADA FAQ: VIDEO – PERSONAL BANKRUPTCY FAQ CANADADEBT REDUCTION PROGRAM: MY TOP 10 STEPS ANYONE CAN START IMMEDIATELY TO STOP BEING IN DEBT VIDEODEBT REDUCTION PROGRAM: MY TOP 10 STEPS ANYONE CAN START IMMEDIATELY TO STOP BEING IN DEBT VIDEODEBT REDUCTION PROGRAM: MY TOP 10 STEPS ANYONE CAN START IMMEDIATELY TO STOP BEING IN DEBT VIDEO

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT BANKRUPTCY CANADA – COVID-19 AND “THROWBACK THURSDAY”

office superintendent bankruptcy canadaThe Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and both Ira, as well as Brandon Smith, are right here for a telephone appointment, conference calls and also virtual meetings.

Stay healthy and safe everybody.

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

Introduction

As issues about COVID-19 in Canada grows, insolvency practitioners are doing their part by having determined it is needed to take steps to reduce in-person contact. The Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada has helped Licensed Insolvency Trustees (formerly called bankruptcy trustees) (Trustee) in these initiatives while keeping all aspects of Canada’s insolvency system running.

In my April 29 Brandon’s Blog, CONSUMER PROPOSALS IN ONTARIO TEST POSITIVE FOR COVID-19, I described how the Superintendent of Bankruptcy went to Court in Ontario. They made a motion to have the Court direct how certain procedures would change during the state of emergency lockdown. Part of that will be how the government wants to have Trustees resurrect an old methodology in personal debt settlement plans and corporate restructuring plans not really been used in the last 25 years.

Since then the government has come out with additional information and clarifications on how they see the bankruptcy Canada process continuing to work during the coronavirus shutdown. In Brandon’s Blog, I talk about these issues.

Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada approves social distancing

There are many ways that the Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada has approved social distancing for Trustees.

Initial free strategy session – Most if not all Trustees will provide a no-cost consultation for a personal or corporate insolvency discussion. In the pre-coronavirus era, most of these were done in a face to face meeting. Trustees can and do use methods aside from in-person assessments. These methods were always reserved for extraordinary circumstances. Boy, are we in one now!

So, the Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada has reminded Trustees that the COVID-19 pandemic is such a phenomenal circumstance and Trustees can conduct assessments making use of approaches other than face to face. Where video-conferencing is not viable, assessments may be done using a mix of telephone conversations and e-mail.

Credit counselling in personal debt settlement or bankruptcy cases – Trustees can offer counselling through telephone conversations or videoconference. The government is updating its software to allow for Trustees to file confirmation of credit counselling done this way as before it was not available. I am finding that our “customers” like this way of being able to deal with credit counselling. They don’t need to travel to our office and appreciate that we are still checking in with them.

Meetings of Creditors – The Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada is encouraging Trustees as the Chair of the creditors’ meeting to hold the meetings on time using either telephone conference call or video methods. Trustees can rely on the oral representation from everyone on the call as proof of attendance. The notice and legal ad calling the meeting of creditors looks a bit different than we are normally used to seeing because of this change. At the top of this Brandon’s Blog is an image of the legal notice I ran in a local newspaper.

Signatures/Oaths – I am now circulating papers that call for signature by means of e-mail. I then supply debtors the necessary support to explain the papers via videoconference. I then ask the debtor over the Zoom meeting if they swear or affirm that what is in the document is true. When they respond affirmatively, I then ask them to sign in the space provided. I then commission the document on my end, ask them to email me a copy of the signed document and put the original signed paper in the mail to me. So far it has been working smoothly.

Closure of non-essential businesses

The provinces have ordered the closure of non-essential businesses. So far, the businesses of lawyers and accountants have been deemed essential. The Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada has confirmed to Trustees that it wants the Canadian insolvency system to continue operating smoothly. So, the Trustee business is considered to fall under these same categories as being essential.

As you are aware, creditors right now seem to be choosing to either explicitly or implicitly forbear on amounts owing to them. They are trying to be supportive of people by recognizing that with reduced or no income, they need some breathing room. Although there are media reports to the contrary, as of now, debtors seem to be getting a break. Trustees are also encouraged to do the same if someone is having trouble making a surplus income payment in their bankruptcy right now. In fact, Trustees will probably be held to a very high standard when their conduct is reviewed by the Court.

In my April 29 Brandon’s Blog, I spoke about the whole issue of a debtor in a consumer proposal who misses three payments. If that happens, the consumer proposal is considered annulled. In this case, the Order the Ontario Court issued essentially gives debtors up to the end of 2020, and in some cases, beyond that date, to make up the missed payments.

COVID-19 insolvency frequently asked questions

There are some frequently asked questions that are coming up. So, I want to give the questions and answers to help people better understand what is going on right now in the Canadian insolvency system.

Q: Do consumer proposal debtors need to make up all missed payments by December 2020?

Response: This was not previously well explained. The answer is No. As much as an extra three monthly payments can be missed between March 13, 2020, and December 31, 2020, before a consumer proposal is considered annulled. Missed payments will need to be made up by the end of the proposal or a modified proposal will certainly need to be authorized by creditors. I am advising debtors to carefully think about whether it is necessary to miss making payments. There is no guarantee that later on, debtors will be able to make up the missed payments. So I am telling debtors that if they can still afford to make the payments, they should. Don’t choose to miss payments you otherwise can afford to. What if you can’t catch up? Do you really want your consumer proposal to be annulled later on after potentially you have paid everything except a few payments? That would be terrible..

Q: If a proposal was deemed annulled before April 27, 2020, when does it need to be revitalized to be covered by the order?

Response: A proposal that is revived by the steps taken under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) on or prior to June 30, 2020, will certainly be covered by the order.

Q: If three payments were missed on or before April 27, 2020, but the Trustee did not send notices of deemed annulment, does anything require to be done to be covered by the order?

Response: Yes. When three payments prior to April 27, 2020, are missed out on the BIA states that a consumer proposal is regarded annulled despite administrative actions that may or might not have been taken. Thus, where the equivalent of three or even more payments has been missed out on, the consumer proposal will certainly need to be revived according to the BIA on or before June 30, 2020, in order to be active under the order.

Q: Is the duration under which a consumer proposal can be automatically revived likewise extended?

Response: No. The order allows the equivalent of as much as three extra payment defaults or an added three months time during the March 13 to December 31, 2020 timeline, prior to a deemed annulment of a consumer proposal. After this happens, a notice of revival has to still be filed within 30 days of the deemed annulment.

Q: Will the five-year restriction on consumer proposals be lengthened in order to offer debtors the time required to make up the missed out on payments?

Response: The BIA says that a consumer proposal needs to say that it will be completed within 5 years. Consequently, all payments, including missed repayments, have to be made during this same timeline. The only thing that will change that is if an amended proposal is filed and approved. After saying that, the BIA does not offer instant repercussions for defaults that lead to non-performance during this 5 year time period. If a consumer proposal has exceeded the five-year period but has actually not been annulled, it remains in force and therefore, in my view, can be completed.

This assumes no interested party goes to Court to ask for a court-ordered annulment. The Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada has formally stated that where hold-up in completion is due to COVID-19 reasons, they will not be seeking an annulment.

Everything old is new again or “Throwback Thursday”

There is one area that has not yet been covered off by the Order obtained by the Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada. When a person who does not fit under the $250,000 debt limit of consumer proposals, and for all companies, debt settlement restructuring plans under the BIA are done under Part III Division I Proposal section.

If a restructuring proposal cannot be filed straight away, the BIA allows for the filing of a Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal (NOI). The BIA statute says that unless extended by the Court, a Proposal needs to be filed within 30 days after the filing of the NOI. The Court can extend the timeline for a period not exceeding 45 days for any individual extension. In total, extensions cannot be more than 5 months. So in total, a debtor who has filed an NOI can be operating under the NOI for a maximum of 5 months and 30 days.

The Court has to order the extension prior to the expiry of the earlier time period trying to be extended. But the Courts are currently closed. They are only hearing emergency applications via telephone conference call or videoconference. Are a bunch of businesspeople fighting over money with the debtor asking for more time to file a Proposal an emergency? I can’t answer that right now. So if they can’t get into Court, what is the answer?

The Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada has recommended an old method. In the “old days”, before 1992, there was no NOI provision. So what did a person or company who needed more time to formulate and file a Part III Division I Proposal debt settlement plan, but needed to hold off creditors right now, do? They filed what was called a “holding proposal”. A holding proposal is no more than a proposal that says I promise to file a debt settlement plan that will clearly say how I plan to settle my debts either by a certain date or when a specific set of events happen.

The benefit was that the debtor got help from the immediate stay of proceedings. If the debtor could, he, she or it filed an amended proposal at the meeting of creditors which really said how the debts would be settled and then paid. If not, the creditors could consider the issues holding up the filing of the real proposal. If they felt it was in their best interests, they voted in favour to give the debtor the necessary time. If not, they voted it down and the debtor was immediately deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy.

Where the creditors gave the debtor more time under the holding proposal, the Court approved them as long as the requirements the Court had to review were met. It was ultimately the creation of the NOI that was made to make it easier for debtors who were not ready to file a definitive proposal but needed relief from creditors to get it.

So now, the Office Superintendent Bankruptcy Canada is recommending for those cases where you just can’t get into Court, file a holding proposal. I am glad that Ira has kept a copy of a holding proposal in our document template file!!

Summary

I hope you found this case review helpful. It should be of particular interest to contractors, developers and builders in Ontario.

The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

Are you now worried just how you or your business are going to survive? Those concerns are obviously on your mind. This pandemic situation has made everyone scared.

The Ira Smith Team understands these concerns. More significantly, we know the requirements of the business owner or the individual that has way too much financial debt. You are trying to manage these difficult financial problems and you are understandably anxious.

It is not your fault you can’t fix this problem on your own. The pandemic has thrown everyone a curveball. We have not been trained to deal with this. You have only been taught the old ways. The old ways do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team makes use of new contemporary ways to get you out of your debt problems while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief now.

We look at your whole circumstance and design a strategy that is as distinct as you are. We take the load off of your shoulders as part of the debt settlement strategy we will draft just for you.

We understand that people facing money problems require a lifeline. That is why we can establish a restructuring procedure for you and end the discomfort you feel.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will listen to the unique issues facing you and provide you with practical and actionable ideas you can implement right away to end the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and both Ira, as well as Brandon Smith, are right here for a telephone appointment, conference calls and also virtual meetings.

Stay healthy and safe everybody.

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CONSTRUCTION LIEN ACT: CAN YOU TRUST AN INSOLVENCY PROCEEDING?

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and both Ira, as well as Brandon Smith, are right here for a telephone appointment, conference calls and also virtual meetings.

Stay healthy and safe everybody.

Introduction

Matters involving the Construction Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30 ( formerly known as the Construction Lien Act) is very complex. In this Brandon’s Blog, I will use the term that laypeople are most familiar with, being the former name of the provincial legislation.

Construction law is a specialty unto itself. It gets even more complex when a company involved in construction enters insolvency proceedings. There is normally a conflict in these kinds of files between:

In this Brandon’s Blog, I describe a recent 5 member panel decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario who had to decide whether a trust created under section 9(1) of the provincial Construction Lien Act survives a sale by the Monitor in an insolvency proceeding under the federal Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA).

The case is Urbancorp Cumberland 2 GP Inc. (Re), 2020 ONCA 197 (Urbancorp). The matter was heard on October 3, 2019. The unanimous decision was recently released on March 11, 2020.

Some background matters

Before getting into the actual case, there are two background matters that I should first explain. When I thought of these concepts and then the decision this way, it made it easier for me to understand.

The first issue is the types of insolvency proceedings. There are essentially four types of insolvency proceedings. Some are not mutually exclusive. Each one of them can be used for the assets of the insolvent debtor to be sold. I break down the insolvency proceedings list in this way:

  1. Using the restructuring provisions of either the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) or CCAA.
  2. A bankruptcy administration under the BIA.
  3. A secured creditor taking enforcement proceedings on the assets subject to its security through the security itself by privately appointing a Receiver or Receiver and Manager.
  4. A secured creditor making an application to the Court that it is just or convenient for the Court to appoint a Receiver to act on behalf of all creditors in stabilizing an insolvent debtor situation and to come back to Court with recommendations on how to proceed, including the sale of assets.

The second issue has to do with trust claims under the Construction Lien Act. There are several sections in the legislation dealing with trust claims. As I stated above, it is a very complex topic. So, I am going to only focus on the one that is the subject matter of this case. That is section 9(1) of the Act. That section deals with a trust claim against the vendor of the construction assets. It states:

“9 (1) Where the owner’s interest in a premises is sold by the owner, an amount equal to,

(a) the value of the consideration received by the owner as a result of the sale,

less,

(b) the reasonable expenses arising from the sale and the amount, if any, paid by the vendor to discharge any existing mortgage indebtedness on the premises,

constitutes a trust fund for the benefit of the contractor. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, s. 9 (1); 2017, c. 24, s. 9, 70.

Obligations as trustee

(2) The former owner is the trustee of the trust created by subsection (1), and shall not appropriate or convert any part of the trust property to the former owner’s own use or to any use inconsistent with the trust until the contractor is paid all amounts owed to the contractor that relate to the improvement. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, s. 9 (2).”

The distinction here that I want you to keep in mind is the words in the very first line “Where the owner’s interest in a premises is sold by the owner…”(emphasis added).

Now for the case.

The Urbancorp Construction Lien Act case

This case deals with Urbancorp and related companies that developed and was building a residential condominium project. Urbancorp was insolvent and filed first a Notice of Intention to Make A Proposal under the BIA. The proceedings were later converted by the Court into proceedings under the CCAA. The insolvency proceeding was in both cases under a Federal restructuring statue. The Court appointed a Monitor to oversee the insolvency administration. Through various Court applications and court orders, the Monitor was given the authority to market and sell the condominium assets. The Monitor did so.

Now the cash the Monitor received from the sale stood in place of the original condominium assets. Subcontractors brought an application before the lower Court claiming they had a valid trust claim under the Construction Lien Act. The lower court judge carefully reviewed the evidence and prior decided cases and came to the conclusion that the subcontractors did not have a valid trust claim against the assets. The subcontractors appealed the lower court’s decision.

In addition to appealing the lower court’s decision, they also raised with the Court of Appeal a constitutional question that comes up many times. The constitutional question is, does federal law always take priority, or trump (with a small “t”!!) provincial law. This is otherwise known as the concept of paramountcy. Stated slightly differently, the issue can be stated as does section 9 of the Construction Lien Act remain to have application after a bankruptcy or initial order under the CCAA? The Attorney General of Ontario also stepped in on that part of the case.

The Court of Appeal accepted this constitutional question to be decided so there were now two issues before the Court of Appeal; the issue of paramountcy and the trust claim issue.

The constitutional question

The Court of Appeal went through a very thoughtful and careful analysis. It confined the constitutional question to the facts of this case. The court concluded in this case:

  1. The trust created under section 9(1) of the Construction Lien Act is a valid trust under provincial law.
  2. The BIA excludes from property available to the creditors any property held in trust.
  3. Therefore, this provincial trust can be effective when there is an insolvency proceeding under the BIA.
  4. Similarly, with the CCAA legislation, it follows that a section 9(1) provincially created trust might be effective when the insolvency administration is subject to the CCAA.

Now for the actual appeal

The Appeal Court now turned to the lower court judge’s decision that a section 9(1) of the Construction Lien Act trust did not apply in this matter. The five-member panel again went through a careful analysis of the statute and the case law. They spent a lot of time reviewing an earlier Court of Appeal for Ontario decision which the lower court judge relied upon in his decision.

The Court of Appeal highlighted that in that decision the lower court relied upon, the owner, being the insolvent debtor, had no interest in the asset that the subcontractors were claiming a trust claim against. The reasons were:

  1. The asset was part of a package of assets sold.
  2. There was a secured creditor who had security over all of the assets of the developer.
  3. The proceeds less the expenses to produce the sale were less than what was owed to the secured creditor.
  4. The court allowed the cash from the sale to stand in place of the assets.

Using this framework, the Court of Appeal stated that a s.9( 1) trust only arises if the value of the consideration received by the owner from the sale of assets, which have actually been enhanced by the work or materials of the contractor, surpasses the amount of the mortgage debt. A trust will not occur if the value is zero, or if the mortgage debt is equal to or above any kind of sale proceeds.

Therefore, the decision that the lower court relied upon in disallowing the trust claim does not stand for the suggestion that control by a CCAA Monitor of a sales process, or the receipt by the Monitor of the proceeds of the sale by itself, avoids a s.9( 1) trust against the proceeds of the sale of the enhancement are shown to have a positive worth that surpasses the mortgage debt on the asset. That fact pattern was absent from the case relied upon.

The decision

Now, you remember at the beginning of this blog I went through the essentially four types of insolvency proceedings. The Court of Appeal also considered the various types. The court drew a distinction in them as it relates to section 9(1) of the Construction Lien Act. Also remember that from my quotation above of this section, it starts with “Where the owner’s interest in a premises is sold by the owner…”(emphasis added).

In a receivership or bankruptcy, the owner loses control of the assets. The vendor in a sale is either the receiver/receiver and manager or the trustee in bankruptcy, respectively. In those examples, it is not the owner selling its own assets. It is the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) selling its right, title and interest, if any, in the assets of the debtor. So the vendor is the licensed insolvency trustee in its specific capacity.

The Urbancorp matter started out as a restructuring under the Proposal provisions of the BIA and was then converted by the Court and continued under a different restructuring statute, the CCAA. In an insolvency administration under the restructuring provisions/statue, the owner does not lose control of its assets. True that the Monitor is given court authority to make decisions, market and then sell the assets. However, one of the cornerstones of the appointment of a Monitor is that the owner does not lose control of the assets and the Monitor does not become the owner of the assets.

Rather, the Monitor gets its powers from the court. The Monitor is actually selling the insolvent company’s assets as the company’s representative or agent. So even though it is the Monitor doing the selling, it is doing so on behalf of the owner. This is very different than a sale by a receiver/receiver and manager or trustee in bankruptcy.

In the Urbancorp situation, the value of the consideration received by the owner from the sale of assets, which have actually been enhanced by the work or materials of the contractor, surpasses the amount of the mortgage debt.

Highlighting these distinctions, the Court of Appeal for Ontario overturned the lower court decision and upheld the subcontractors’ trust claim. It substituted the lower court decision with an order that a s.9( 1) trust under the Construction Lien Act applies for the sum of $3,864,429 held in the accounts of the Monitor on account of the Urbancorp companies, for the benefit of the subcontractors, pro-rata in accordance with the amount owing to each of them.

Summary

I hope you found this case review helpful. It should be of particular interest to contractors, developers and builders in Ontario.

The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

Are you now worried just how you or your business are going to survive? Those concerns are obviously on your mind. This pandemic situation has made everyone scared.

The Ira Smith Team understands these concerns. More significantly, we know the requirements of the business owner or the individual that has way too much financial debt. You are trying to manage these difficult financial problems and you are understandably anxious.

It is not your fault you can’t fix this problem on your own. The pandemic has thrown everyone a curveball. We have not been trained to deal with this. You have only been taught the old ways. The old ways do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team makes use of new contemporary ways to get you out of your debt problems while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief now.

We look at your whole circumstance and design a strategy that is as distinct as you are. We take the load off of your shoulders as part of the debt settlement strategy we will draft just for you.

We understand that people facing money problems require a lifeline. That is why we can establish a restructuring procedure for you and end the discomfort you feel.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will listen to the unique issues facing you and provide you with practical and actionable ideas you can implement right away to end the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and both Ira, as well as Brandon Smith, are right here for a telephone appointment, conference calls and also virtual meetings.

Stay healthy and safe everybody.construction lien act

Call a Trustee Now!