The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to describe the final type of bankruptcy in Canada. I will describe it from the viewpoint of creditors. Previously I’ve blogged about the three types of bankruptcies in Canada. I also wrote about the personal bankruptcy process and the corporate bankruptcy process in Canada.
Personal bankruptcy and corporate bankruptcy in Canada
From the first two, the personal bankruptcy process and the corporate bankruptcy process, that was from the perspective of a person or company filing an assignment in bankruptcy. I also wrote about a person or company being pushed into bankruptcy by one or more creditors through a bankruptcy application and a bankruptcy order.
Today’s blog is to talk about the third type of bankruptcy and that is a deemed assignment in bankruptcy. The deemed assignment is most commonly associated with when a financial restructuring under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) heads south.
Creditors and a deemed assignment in bankruptcy
In Canada, very large corporate restructurings are done under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act. A person or a company of any size can also restructure under the BIA. This blog is about restructuring under the BIA to illustrate the third way a person or company can go bankrupt through a deemed assignment in bankruptcy.
The reason people or companies would file for a financial restructuring is to get a time out from its creditors taking action against them trying to collect on debts. People who owe more than $250,000 and companies who have too much debt qualify to restructure under the financial restructuring debt settlement provisions of the BIA. A restructuring filing gives them the needed time out to formulate a plan for settling the debt.
If a person owes $250,000 or less, then there is a different restructuring provision of the BIA available. That provision is the consumer proposal restructuring debt settlement section. If a consumer proposal restructuring attempt fails, that ultimately does not end up in being a deemed assignment in bankruptcy.
The deemed assignment in bankruptcy, the third type of bankruptcy in Canada, is really the topic of this blog.
Financial restructuring under the BIA
So the BIA has a financial restructuring section. The debtor needing a timeout can either file their restructuring proposal straight away or first buy some extra time by filing a notice of intention to make a proposal. If a debtor first files a notice of intention to make a proposal, within 10 days after that, they need to file a cash flow statement in the prescribed form plus related extra documents (unless the time period is extended by the court). The restructuring proposal must be filed within 30 days after the filing of the notice of intention to make a proposal.
When a debtor files the actual restructuring proposal a cash flow statement has to be filed with it as well. It will be an original one if the debtor goes straight away to the filing of the proposal or an updated one if they first filed the notice of intention to make a proposal.
Meeting of creditors to consider the proposal
Once filed the Licensed Insolvency Trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (Trustee) must notify the creditors of the filing of a notice of intention to make a proposal and the restructuring proposal. The Trustee must call a meeting of creditors within 21 days of the filing of the restructuring proposal.
The creditors get to vote to approve or not approve the restructuring proposal creditor acceptances by voting and must be in the requisite majority calculated as a simple majority in number and at least 2/3 of the dollar value of all claims voting either in person at the meeting or by proxy and voting letter delivered to the trustee prior to the start of the meeting.
The need for Court approval
After creditors accept the Proposal, the Trustee must get the restructuring proposal approved by the court. For the court approval process, the court considers if:
the restructuring proposal, are the terms of the restructuring proposal fair and calculated to benefit the general body of creditors?
Did the Trustee properly follow all required procedural steps including properly holding and counting the voting by the creditors?
As long as the answers to these questions are yes and the restructuring proposal took the interests of all stakeholders into account, then the court will approve the restructuring proposal. Then the company or the person must successfully complete it including making all payments required under the restructuring proposal.
How can a restructuring proposal fail or head south?
A financial restructuring plan under the BIA can fail if:
the person or company fails to file the required cash flow statement and related documentation within the 10 day period after the filing of the notice of intention to make a proposal or the debtor;
fails to file a financial restructuring proposal within the 30-day time limit after the filing of the notice of intention to make a proposal or such greater time period authorized by the court;
the requisite majority of creditors voting do not accept the restructuring proposal;
the court does not approve the restructuring proposal; or
the restructuring proposal is accepted by the creditors and approved by the Court but the debtor fails to make the payments and do any other things contained in the restructuring proposal.
When the debtor is automatically bankrupt when there is an event of default in the Proposal
Under the following situations, the person or company will be deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy if the person or company:
fails to file the required cash flow statement;
the debtor fails to file the financial restructuring proposal on time;
the requisite majority of creditors voting do not accept the restructuring proposal; or
the court does not approve the restructuring proposal
Under any of these conditions, the person or the company is automatically deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy. You can go back and review my earlier blogs for the personal bankruptcy process and for what the corporate bankruptcy process is all about.
You can do the same thing when the restructuring proposals are accepted by the creditors and approved by the court but the debtor fails to make payments or do any of the other things contained in the restructuring proposal.
A Proposal default that does not automatically mean bankruptcy
Unlike the other events of default, when the debtor fails to make a payment under the Proposal, there is not an automatically deemed assignment in bankruptcy. Rather the Trustee has to give notice to the debtor and if there are any the inspectors in the restructuring to them also. The person or company attempting to restructure then has 30 days to remedy the default. If they do not remedy the default after the 30 day period then the Trustee has to issue a notice of default which is sent to the debtor, the creditors, and to the Superintendent of Bankruptcy.
After giving notice of default, the Trustee does not have to do anything else. Any one of the creditors can then bring a court motion to annul the restructuring proposal. If the Trustee has the funding to do so and is directed by the inspectors, the Trustee can also bring that motion.
If the motion is brought and is successful then and only then is the person or company deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy.
But if nobody brings the motion the company or person actually just floats out there and the Trustee is entitled to go for taxation of its receipts and disbursements, make whatever distribution it can with the funds on hand and then go get its discharge.
Three types of bankruptcy in Canada
So to recap, the three types of bankruptcies in Canada are:
filing an assignment of bankruptcy;
a bankruptcy application and the issuance of a bankruptcy order; and
as explained in this blog, a deemed assignment in bankruptcy.
I hope you enjoyed this blog on creditors, a financial restructuring proposal and the process for a deemed assignment in bankruptcy. The IraSmith team is available to help you at any time. We offer sound advice and a solid plan for Starting Over Starting Now so that you’ll be well on your way to a debt-free life in no time.
Do you have too much debt? Are you banking on some outside event that you have no control over, like an inheritance or gambling winnings to save you or your company?
If yes, then you need immediate help. The Ira Smith Team comprehends just how to do a debt restructuring. Much more notably, we know the demands of the business owner or the person who has too much debt. Due to the fact that you are managing these stressful financial problems, you are anxious.
It is not your fault you cannot fix this issue on your own. You have just been shown 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 troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief now.
At Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc., we take a look at your whole condition and layout a strategy that is as unique as you are. We take the load off of your shoulders as a part of the debt negotiation approach we will create just for you.
We understand that individuals facing financial troubles require a lifeline. That is why we can establish a restructuring procedure for you as well as end the pain you feel.
Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will certainly get you or your business back on the road to a well balanced and healthy life and end the pain factors in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.
If you would prefer to listen to an audio version of this Boy Scouts Of America Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom of this page and click on the podcast.
Introduction
The Boy Scouts of America has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, according to court files in Delaware bankruptcy court. The filing was done early on Tuesday, February 18, 2020. All of it began with one man in 2010.
The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to define the issues that caused this insolvency filing and to answer whether there ever was a similar type of bankruptcy protection filing under the Canadian insolvency system.
It all started with Kerry Lewis
In 2010, Kerry Lewis, a Portland Oregon man, won a lawsuit against Boy Scouts of America. Lewis was a sexual abuse victim. A jury found the Boy Scouts of America must pay $18.5 million in punitive damages for the abuse he experienced in being continuously molested by a Scout leader in the 1980s. Because of the bankruptcy protection filing, rather than potentially having their day in court, plaintiffs with unpaid judgements, and also alleged victims who have pending legal actions, will now need to file claims bankruptcy court.
The Boy Scouts of America have applied for bankruptcy protection, after being barraged by hundreds of sex-abuse lawsuits. Over 12,000 children are believed to have been sexually abused by Boy Scouts volunteers.
The Boy Scouts of America is the largest scouting organization and one of the largest youth organizations in the United States, with about 2.3 million youth participants and about one million adult volunteers. They have actually been encountering decreasing membership as well as thousands of lawsuits, with many more prospective legal actions yet to be filed. They are now dealing with new claims of sexual abuse from about 800 men throughout the country, according to attorneys representing them.
Why the Boy Scouts of America filed for bankruptcy protection
The Boy Scouts of America invested massive amounts of time as well as cash on litigation rather than protecting the children– with virtually 3,000 hidden child molesters only the Scouts know about. In a statement to National Public Radio, the Boy Scouts of America said it is working with experts and explored all options available. They think this insolvency filing will certainly be the best way they can meet their social and moral obligations to equitably treat victims who experienced abuse throughout their time in Scouting.
They went on to say that their strategy will also make certain that it will allow them to continue to perform their goal to serve young people, families and regional communities through their programs.
The issue of troop leaders sexually assaulting Scouts has tormented the Boy Scouts of America for decades. It is just now that the weight of the newer accusations and lawsuits has ended up being too much to deal with without the Chapter 11 filing.
The national organization of the Boy Scouts of America is the only entity involved in the Chapter 11 filing. The national company has created a method that intends to safeguard its local scouting councils and also the billions of dollars in properties they hold. They believe that maintaining those assets out of the reach of sexual-abuse claims is the only method to make certain that Scouting will be able to proceed in America.
That is a crucial concern. Will the Boy Scouts of America be able to shield the assets of the regional councils, which possess camps and properties in prime real estate throughout the nation. Many are claiming the Boy Scouts of America cannot be changed. Under the Chapter 11 filing, they will be able to continue its operations, and all the current claims will be put on hold.
The bankruptcy protection plan
The Boy Scouts of America are urging victims to come forward after the 110-year-old organization filed for bankruptcy protection in the first step toward dealing with a barrage of sexual abuse lawsuits. They are creating a plan, so they can capture all lawsuits yet to be filed and be able to afford to pay off thousands of still-uncompensated sex abuse victims. The filing is also an effort to stop thousands of sexual abuse claims ending up being litigated in court.
I do not think that this legal maneuver will stop survivors from stepping forward and beaming light on the criminals as well as the terrible actions of the abusers concealed by the organization. Nonetheless, sufferers will now only have access to a pool of funds to be assigned for that objective. At the initial bankruptcy hearing, the Boy Scouts of America still have actually not shared the names of the perpetrators with the general public in spite of laying out a four-point strategy with transparency as the first point!
Jeff Anderson, whose law firm has represented Scout abuse survivors for decades believes the Boy Scouts of America is using the filing to keep the names of predators a secret. “I don’t believe that this legal maneuver by the Boy Scouts of America will stop survivors from coming forward and shining a light on the perpetrators and perilous practices hidden by the organization,…” said Anderson.
The Boy Scouts of America have filed for bankruptcy protection in hopes of working out a possibly massive victim payment plan for sex abuse victims. Across the country, they have already mortgaged major properties to get a line of credit. Specifically, the national organization of the Boy Scouts of America has initiated a voluntary financial restructuring to ensure they can equitably compensate all victims of past abuse in our programs, through a proposed Victims Compensation Trust.
Public tax records show the Boy Scouts of America has more than $1 billion in assets, not including the balance sheets of local chapters. They have yet to disclose what size the Victims Compensation Trust will be.
The effect of the filing
Speculation swirled over whether the Boy Scouts of America will continue to exist in its existing organization or whether smaller teams will be formed to carry on its mission. They are establishing an approach, so they can catch all claims yet to be submitted and likewise have the ability to settle thousands of still-uncompensated sex abuse sufferers. The bankruptcy protection filing is also an approach to stop countless sexual abuse claims winding up being prosecuted in court.
The Mormon church, a long supporter of the Boy Scouts of America, has already announced that they are ending their connection, after more than 100 years of a close relationship. If successful, the plan will ensure that they will be able to continue to carry out their mission to serve youth, families and local communities through their programs.
The intriguing question is, will attorneys for victims try to pierce through the national organization and claim that all the local councils are not really independent. Or, is the independence on paper only? Is it truly a vertically integrated company that exercises considerable impact over the local councils? Only time will tell if any of the abuse victim lawyers pursue this path to attempt to increase the size of the Victims Compensation Trust.
So, the Boy Scouts of America’s insolvency strategy is the same as USA Gymnastics and the Catholic diocese. Can victims of such sexual abuse ever really be compensated? The organization in some form will move on, but sufferers will live with their pain and their scars probably forever. They will certainly most likely lose their personal voice in their search for justice because of the bankruptcy filing. This will rob sufferers of an important part of the healing process.
Is there a Canadian statue to restructure like this?
The answer is yes. Although there are two federal insolvency regimes in Canada, the only one that should be used for a very large corporate restructuring like this one is the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). The CCAA is the Canadian equivalent to Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code. It is a Canadian federal law allowing insolvent corporations that owe their creditors in excess of $5 million to restructure their business and financial affairs.
The closest Canadian example where the CCAA was used to compensate victims that I can think of is the CCAA filing of the Canadian Red Cross Society. It needed to restructure as a result of some $8 billion of tort claims being asserted against it (and others, including governments and hospitals). The claims were by a large number of people who suffered tragic harm from diseases contracted as a result of a blood contamination problem that has haunted the Canadian blood system since at least the early 1980s.
Summary
I hope you have found this explanation of the Boy Scouts of America issues informative. The Ira Smith team is available to help you at any time. We offer sound advice and a solid plan for Starting Over Starting Now so that you’ll be well on your way to a debt-free life in no time. For more information on a no-cost basis please visit our website or call us.
Does your company have many lawsuits filed against it? Will the cost of all that litigation, let alone the amount of any judgements issued against your company, too much for your company to survive? Those costs and the massive debt cries out for a debt restructuring? Would not it be great if you could do a turn-around?
The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a debt restructuring. More notably, we understand the requirements of the business owner or the person who has too much individual debt. Because you are dealing with these stressful financial issues, you are anxious.
It is not your fault you can’t fix this problem on your own. 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 get you or your business back on the roadway to healthy and balanced worry-free operations and end the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.
Trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario introduction
On April 15, 2019, a group of companies operating as QuadrigaCX (Quadriga) became bankrupt. This followed their initial application under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) to get bankruptcy protection.
The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to describe the latest events in this ongoing saga. Especially something trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario usually don’t dig this.
What was Quadriga
Quadriga operated a crypto money exchange permitting customers to save, get, and offer various cryptocurrencies (including Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash Money, Bitcoin Cash SV, Litecoin and Ethereum) on the Quadriga platform.
The cryptocurrency industry is not regulated in Canada and there is no governing body giving oversight.
Canadian chartered banks generally do not supply financial services such as bank accounts to companies operating in the cryptocurrency sector. This held true at Quadriga who needed the solutions offered by Third-Party Payment Processors (TPPP) to provide Quadriga’s treasury functions.
TPPP’s utilize various banking facilities in many countries around the globe. It can be very difficult to trace the flow of funds. Especially if the TPPP purposely sets up an international flow of funds through various intermediaries. We found this when we administered the bankruptcy of Conquest Vacations Inc. (Conquest).
No Canadian or US TPPP would clear Conquest’s credit card transactions. So, Conquest entered into an arrangement with a UK TPPP who utilized, amongst other banks, a financial institution in Mauritius. Our ability to trace the flow of funds with a high level of accuracy was thwarted in that case.
Quadriga was started by Mr. Gerald Cotten. It is reported that he died at. the age of 30 from complications from Crohn’s disease. At the time of his reported death, he was travelling in India.
Apparently, Mr. Cotten was the only person who knew the passwords associated with all the wallet addresses holding cryptocurrency.
Various issues faced by Trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario
The Trustee was unable to find any documentation or other information regarding passwords. The Trustee also was unable to locate conventional books and records. The Trustee was not able to locate basic company records or accounting records.
There were also no records found documenting the location of Quadriga’s cryptocurrency and money reserves between third party settlement processors, savings account, wallet addresses and other third-party exchanges.
There also appeared to be no segregation of assets between funds of Quadriga and its customers. This would make it extremely difficult in any bankruptcy administration for trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario or anywhere else in Canada.
The Trustee found that a substantial volume of cryptocurrency from Quadriga’s platform was transferred to competitor exchanges, some of which were transferred into personal accounts controlled by Mr. Cotten.
Additionally, significant amounts of cryptocurrency were moved to wallet holders whose identification was impossible to identify.
trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario
Gerald Cotten enrichment found by Trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario
It turns out that the cryptocurrency of Quadriga’s customers was taken off the Quadriga system to other third party exchanges and traded on those exchanges.
In other situations, cryptocurrency and its resultant cash were utilized for a margin trading account established by Mr. Cotten. Trading losses sustained and also incremental fees charged by exchanges negatively affected Quadriga’s cryptocurrency books.
Mr. Cotten created particular accounts on the Quadriga system under pen names where it appears that make-believe cryptocurrency and cash funds were deposited and used to trade within the Quadriga platform.
This resulted in inflated revenue numbers and ultimately the withdrawal of customers’ cryptocurrency. Substantial funds were moved to Mr. Cotten directly and various other associated accounts. This resulted in a substantial amount of cash and cryptocurrency reserves that could not be located.
The Trustee’s examination revealed that Mr. Cotten occasionally moved substantial cryptocurrency as well as various other funds outside of Quadriga. In certain instances, these transfers were for considerable amounts of currency routed to Mr. Cotten directly. Funds were used to fund personal costs and also the purchase of various personal assets.
In various other cases, transfers were made straight to his wife, Jennnifer Robertson. Funds were also used to pay personal expenses and to purchase personal assets both in her name or the name of companies which she controlled.
The trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario settlement with Jennifer Robertson
Ms. Robertson has offered the Trustee a settlement offer that involves returning the majority of her possessions, the assets of Mr. Cotten’s Estate and also the assets of entities owned by Ms. Robertson or the Estate to the Trustee.
Negotiations have led to a settlement agreement acceptable to the Trustee. The Trustee was of the view that a negotiated settlement was more effective than ongoing litigation.
The settlement arrangements were substantial and conducted at arm’s length. The Trustee sought and obtained the agreement of the Inspectors in the Quadriga bankruptcy administration.
The settlement to transfer almost all of the assets owned by Ms. Robertson, the various companies and the Estate was also approved by the Court. So everything seems to be going smoothly, right?
Trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario usually don’t dig this!
Not quite. On Friday, December 13, 2019, the legal team representing individuals who were users of the platform in these bankruptcy proceedings and who have lost collectively millions of dollars, sent a letter.
The letter went to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police seeking an exhumation and also post-mortem autopsy be performed on the body. The reason is to confirm both its identity as well as the cause of death.
They say information revealed during the proceedings, even more, highlights the requirement for assurance around the concern of whether Mr. Cotten is in fact deceased.
I don’t know why these lawyers feel that proving Mr. Cotten is in fact dead is so important. Maybe they feel that anyone who would give up substantially all of her assets, the Estate’s assets and related companies’ assets, must have more money somewhere else hidden.
Maybe they think that Mr. Cotten faked his own death, has millions of dollars that still have not been found and the two will reunite once the heat is off. I don’t know why, but this certainly is an unusual turn of events in a bankruptcy administration.
It is certainly something that trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario or anywhere else in Canada don’t dig!
We will have to see how this saga unfolds and if there will be any more surprises.
Summary
I hope you found this Brandon’s Blog, Trustees in bankruptcy Toronto Ontario usually don’t dig this interesting. Sometimes things are too far gone and more drastic and immediate triage action is required. 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 a 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 about 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.
If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this how bankruptcies work in Canada Brandon’s Blog, please scroll down to the bottom of the page and click on the podcast
Canadian bankruptcies laws
Last week I wrote about amendments to Canadian insolvency law for intellectual property rights in my Brandon’s Blog INSOLVENCY LAW CANADA AMENDMENTS FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS In addition to the intellectual property rights amendments, other amendments affecting how bankruptcies work in Canada. They were enacted as of November 1, 2019. They too were part of the changes announced in the Canadian 2019 Budget.
Corporate bankruptcies Canada
Most of the amendments affect not just corporate bankruptcies. Receiverships and corporate financial restructuring are likewise affected. Even the operation of solvent companies is also affected. The amendments were made to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA), Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36) (CCAA) and the Canada Business Corporations Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-44). I will focus on the changes to the BIA and CCAA.
The BIA and the CCAA modifications in the Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, are planned to boost retired life protection by making the insolvency treatment fairer and much more clear. In the legislation, the amendments fall under the heading “Enhancing Retirement Security”.
This issue remained in the news over the past two years. High profile insolvency situations such as Sears Canada and U.S. Steel Canada brought this matter to the forefront. I wrote a few blogs on the topic of proposals to change the BIA and CCAA. The proposals were meant to supply protection to senior citizens. This consisted of private members’ bills introduced by Hamilton Mountain NDP MP Scott Duvall, Bloc Québécois MP Marilène Gill and Senator Art Eggleton, P. C.
None of their Bills ever came close to being enacted. Rather, the Liberal government made some changes. Only time will tell if the changes I describe below will accomplish the stated goal of enhancing retirement security.
Insolvency and bankruptcy code amendments – BIA
The BIA amendments will apply to bankruptcy, receivership and BIA financial restructurings done under the Proposal section of the BIA. The amendments are aimed at several areas. All the insolvency amendments are for insolvency proceedings beginning on or after November 1, 2019.
1. Good faith
Section 4.2 of the BIA is amended by adding a good faith provision section(4.2)(1). The new language states that any interested person in any type of process under the BIA must act in good faith relative to those proceedings. New subsection 4.2(2) codifies a power for the Court. It now states that if the court is satisfied that an interested individual fails to act in good faith, on application by any other interested party, the Court might make any kind of order that it thinks is proper in the circumstances.
I would have hoped that acting in good faith was always a given. Previously, the Court had wide discretion in insolvency proceedings to make an order that it believed to be just and appropriate. I am not sure this new language adds much to “enhancing retirement security”, but at least now it is codified.
2. Registered disability savings plan
Before Budget Canada 2019, there was a gap when it came to a registered disability savings plan (RDSP). The gap was that unlike an RRSP or RRIF, there was no exemption for an RDSP in how bankruptcies work in Canada.
Now Paragraph 67(1)(b.3) of the BIA is amended to include the same exemption for an RDSP that an RRSP and RRIF enjoy. That is, the amounts in any of these funds are now exempt from seizure in a bankruptcy apart from property added to any such plan or fund in the twelve-month period before the date of bankruptcy.
3. Director liability – Inquiry into dividends, redemption of shares or compensation
Section 101(1) of the BIA has been amended. It now deals with certain transactions that 1 year before the corporation went bankrupt. The time period is within the day that is one year prior to the date of the initial bankruptcy event and ending on the date of the bankruptcy both such dates included. If the corporation had:
paid a dividend, aside from a stock dividend;
redeemed or acquired for cancellation any one of its shares of the company’s capital stock; or
has paid termination pay, severance pay or incentive or other benefits to a director, officer or any person that manages or controls the business
the Court may, on the application of the licensed insolvency trustee (Trustee), inquire into the transaction to find out whether it took place at a time when the firm was insolvent or whether it made the firm bankrupt.
If a transaction referred to above has actually occurred, the Court can give judgment to the Trustee against the directors of the firm, jointly as well as severally, or individually as appropriate in the circumstances.
The amount of the pay or benefits, with interest on the amount, that has not been paid back to the company if the Court discovers that the payment of the pay or benefit:
occurred at a time when the company was insolvent or it made the corporation bankrupt;
was notably over the reasonable market price of the consideration gotten by the company;
was made outside the common course of business
and the directors did not have reasonable grounds to think that the payment:
took place when the firm was not insolvent or would not render the firm insolvent;
was not conspicuously over the fair market value of the consider obtained by the corporation; and
was made in the ordinary course of business.
Interestingly, the new statute also states that a judgment will not be made against or be binding on a director who had protested against the payment of the pay or benefits and had, therefore, vindicated himself or herself under the relevant corporate legislation from any kind of resulting obligation.
No doubt we will only learn how effective this additional liability of directors provision will be after several court cases. Presumably, this amendment to the statute will provide extra food for thought for the insurance companies providing director and officer liability coverage.
Insolvency proceedings under the CCAA
The CCAA covers larger company financial restructuring. In addition to amendments to the CCAA to mirror the BIA amendments discussed above, there were also a couple of other changes made.
4. Initial application
Prior to November 1 CCAA filings, the company was given an initial stay of proceedings for 30 days. Now, for filings November 1, 2019, and after, this initial stay period has been reduced to 10 days.
5. Relief reasonably necessary
An initial order made or during the 10-day initial application stay period will be limited to alleviation that is fairly required for the continued operations of the borrower business in the regular course, but no extra relief will be granted. This narrowing of relief during the initial order period means that the Company cannot ask for all sorts of extra relief outside of the normal course of business.
In order to attempt to get extra relief, the Company will have to make a motion to the Court on notice to any affected parties. The Company will not be able to pack it into an initial order and force affected parties who did not receive notice to have to come to Court under the comeback clause. This was the case before November 1, 2019.
Most times in a CCAA restructuring, it is necessary for the Company’s survival to get debtor-in-possession financing. When such financing is available, it usually comes with very onerous terms. To avoid essentially keeping all of the Company’s assets out of reach by using such financing, the CCAA has been amended. It says that when applying for the initial order or during the initial stay period, no order shall be made unless the court is pleased that the terms of the loan are restricted to what is reasonably necessary for the continued operations of the debtor firm in the ordinary course of business during that initial stay period duration.
In this way, Parliament has tried to put the brakes on wide-sweeping initial orders that have everything including the kitchen sink in them. Parliament wants to have the initial orders contain only what is reasonably necessary to keep the Company’s operations going until everyone is back in Court all lawyered up.
It will be very interesting to see what Court decisions come from all of these new amendments to the Canadian insolvency laws.
Summary
I hope you enjoyed this how bankruptcies work in Canada Brandon’s Blog on the other BIA and CCAA insolvency amendments effective November 1, 2019. Are you or your company in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex corporate restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur. You are worried because your company is facing significant financial challenges. Your business provides income not only for your family. Many other families rely on you and your company for their well-being.
The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your company’s problems; financial and emotional. The way we deal with this problem and devise a corporate restructuring plan, we know that we can help you and your company too.
We know that companies facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a company restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain it is 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 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 Federal government published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 153, Number 18, its intention to amend Canadian insolvency law for intellectual property rights (IP). On November 1, 2019, those changes came into effect. This change was part of the Canadian 2019 Budget. In Brandon’s Blog, I will discuss what the changes are and why they were made.
Insolvency law amendments for IP in Canada
Amendments relating to how IP is treated under Canadian insolvency law were made to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36) (CCAA) was made. The BIA controls liquidations and restructurings for people and companies, and the CCAA covers large company restructurings.
The changes are meant to shield IP user rights in cases where the IP licensor becomes insolvent.
The BIA, as well as CCAA changes in the Budget Implementation Act, 2019, No. 1, are intended to improve retired life protection by making the insolvency procedure fairer and much more clear.
Previous Canadian IP insolvency law
Previously, Canadian insolvency law only explicitly dealt with IP in restructuring proceedings. Both the BIA and the CCAA allows for a debtor to disclaim or resiliate agreements. There are certain conditions that the debtor business must meet. This essentially boils down to being able to prove that the agreement in question is either so onerous and/or costly to the debtor business, that a successful restructuring is impossible if the debtor must continue honouring that agreement.
Specifically, as it relates to IP, the BIA, and CCAA if a debtor who is a licensor under an IP agreement disclaims the agreement, the licensee has rights. The licensee can continue to use the IP and gain all benefits it had bargained for, as long as the licensee continues to perform its responsibilities under the IP agreement concerning the use of that IP.
There was no such equivalent section for the receivership or bankruptcy of the debtor. So, if there was a liquidation, the licensee was not protected the same way they would be if the licensor debtor business disclaimed the agreement in financial restructuring.
Insolvency law reform
The amendments in Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 2 were done to protect copyright (IP) individual rights in situations where the IP licensor comes to be insolvent.
Effective for all filings beginning on November 1, 2019, or later, there are changes to the BIA and the CCAA, Canada’s main insolvency statutes. The November 1 amendments are done so that the rights of a licensee under an IP agreement where the licensor has disclaimed the agreement will be the same in a financial restructuring or a liquidation through either receivership or bankruptcy.
The following modifications accomplish the goal of safeguarding IP customer’s rights in instances where the IP licensor ends up being insolvent:
Many times as part of a corporate restructuring, the Court authorizes the company that filed a Notice of Intention To Make a Proposal, or a Proposal, to sell assets. The new amendments now make it so that if the corporation being restructured is the licensor under an IP agreement and sells it, the licensee retains its rights to use the IP, as long as they are and stay current under the agreement.
If a bankruptcy trustee (now called a licensed insolvency trustee) (Trustee) administering the bankruptcy (or receivership) of a licensor under an IP agreement sells the agreement, the licensee retains its rights under that agreement. Again, the licensee must be current in its obligations to continue enjoying the benefit of the IP agreement.
The Trustee disclaims the debtor licensor’s interest in an IP agreement as part of a bankruptcy (or receivership) administration. The licensee will continue to enjoy the rights and benefits of the IP agreement as long as it is current in all of its responsibilities under that same agreement.
If that IP is sold in a CCAA restructuring, the CCAA legislation has now been amended, for administrations that began after October 31, 2019, offers that an IP licensee in excellent standing can continue to utilize the IP.
Proposed BIA wording for IP insolvency proceedings
These are new amendments. There have not been any court decisions on these new amendments yet. The new legislation is not available yet as far as I know. However, my understanding is that the BIA will be amended, in part, to implement the changes concerning IP agreements as I have discussed, along the following lines:
“Intellectual property — sale or disposition
246.1 (1) If the insolvent person or the bankrupt is a party to an agreement that grants to another party a right to use intellectual property that is included in a sale or disposition by the receiver, that sale or disposition does not affect that other party’s right to use the intellectual property — including the other party’s right to enforce an exclusive use — during the term of the agreement, including any period for which the other party extends the agreement as of right, as long as the other party continues to perform its obligations under the agreement in relation to the use of the intellectual property.
Intellectual property — disclaimer or resiliation
(2) If the insolvent person or the bankrupt is a party to an agreement that grants to another party a right to use intellectual property, the disclaimer or resiliation of that agreement by the receiver does not affect that other party’s right to use the intellectual property — including the other party’s right to enforce an exclusive use — during the term of the agreement, including any period for which the other party extends the agreement as of right, as long as the other party continues to perform its obligations under the agreement in relation to the use of the intellectual property.”
Summary
I hope you enjoyed this Brandon’s Blog on the insolvency amendments effective November 1, 2019. Are you or your company in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex corporate restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur. You are worried because your company is facing significant financial challenges. Your business provides income not only for your family. Many other families rely on you and your company for their well-being.
The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your company’s problems; financial and emotional. The way we deal with this problem and devise a corporate restructuring plan, we know that we can help you and your company too.
We know that companies facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a company restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain it is 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 your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.
Small and medium-sized businesses play a vital role in all worldwide economies. Bankruptcy experts in the USA identified problems. The Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection process for these companies was not working. It is pricey, usually ineffective and impractical. So, many businesses in the USA in need of restructuring could not have access to the US insolvency system.
On July 23, 2019, the US Congress passed the Small Business Reorganization Act (SBRA). On August 1, 2019, the Senate passed the Bill. On August 23, 2019, President Donald Trump signed it to enact it.
The purpose of the SBRA is to make business bankruptcy protection much less troublesome for small and medium-size ventures. The result is Chapter 11, subchapter V of the US Bankruptcy Code (Titled: Small Business Debtor Reorganization). The aim is to make it more affordable and will serve to save otherwise viable owner-managed businesses.
The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to discuss the new US legislation. I will also comment on an approach for the Canadian insolvency system. Can we streamline restructuring under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) for small business?
Changes made by the SBRA
A small company is defined in the SBRA as a person or company whose non-contingent debts (leaving out financial obligations to affiliates or people not dealing at arms’-length) are $2,725,625 or less and which chooses to be dealt with under the SBRA. The Act includes a new subchapter V to Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code. The purpose of this new approach is to make it simpler and more economical for small companies to efficiently restructure.
The main thrust of the Act is:
A creditor cannot lodge a Chapter 11 restructuring plan that it is prepared to support. Just the business can. The company’s plan must be filed within 90 days of the day it filed its bankruptcy protection application, other than in specific conditions.
A trustee comparable to those selected in a personal restructuring (Chapter 13) situations will be selected to manage each case.
A creditors committee will not be developed.
The Chapter 11 plan can change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the mortgage/funding secured by the home was used in the person’s business and was not financing used to purchase the property.
The Court can approve a small business’ restructuring plan without the approval of any class of creditors. The Court must be satisfied that the restructuring plan treats all creditors fairly and does not prejudice any creditor class.
To be fair and equitable, the restructuring plan must offer that all earnings received throughout the term of the restructuring plan will available to fund the restructuring for a duration of 3 to 5 years.
So the onus is on the creditors to carefully review all cases filed under the SBRA. Creditors will need to retain bankruptcy experts to advise them. Their role will be to make certain that Courts appropriately examine restructuring cases for fairness and that they treat all creditors equitably. This will be especially true for those that do not have the support of the creditors.
It will be very interesting to see if this new legislation accomplishes its goal of making it simpler and less costly for small businesses to restructure and continue.
To qualify for restructuring under the CCAA, the insolvent corporation must owe at least $5 million. The CCAA is only for insolvent companies or income trusts to restructure. It is not for:
proprietors or partnerships
banks
telegraph companies (do people still send telegrams?)
insurance companies
companies to which the Trust and Loan Companies Act applies
Proceedings under the CCAA are a very heavily Court-driven process.
Restructurings under the Part III Division I proposal provisions of the BIA are available to both companies, proprietors and partnerships. It is also available to people who owe $250,000 or more, not including any mortgages or loans secured by the person’s principal residence.
For people who owe less than $250,000, a more streamlined restructuring process is available under Part III Division II of the BIA. These are called consumer proposals.
Restructuring under the proposal provisions of the BIA is not a heavily Court-driven process like the CCAA. Under consumer proposals, if all goes smoothly there is never a Court application.
So we have a simpler and streamlined version for people who have a smaller debt level but are still in need of restructuring their financial affairs. The same is also true for people with fewer or no assets that need to start over through the bankruptcy process. However, there is no equivalent streamlined version in Canada for small to medium-size businesses.
Could such a streamlined business restructuring model be developed? Not only do I think it could be, as one of the bankruptcy experts in Canada holding the designation of licensed insolvency trustee, I think it must be.
The statute for a streamlined Canadian business restructuring model
The CCAA is designed for large corporations. As I already stated, it is a heavily Court-driven process. Therefore, I think this eliminates the CCAA from developing a more streamlined version. It is not the case that it could not be done. It is just that a new section designed for simpler and more cost-effective CCAA proceedings goes somewhat against the purpose of the CCAA.
Therefore, I propose that CCAA legislation should remain available only to larger companies. Especially because the BIA, another federal statute, already includes restructuring provisions. It already has a streamlined version for bankruptcy and restructuring to avoid bankruptcy. So, why not a streamlined business restructuring section?
What would BIA streamlined business restructuring look like?
You might ask, why is this even necessary? Many small and medium-sized businesses are family-owned. There are even very large family-owned businesses. The Financial Post reports that “Family businesses own a bigger chunk of Canada’s economy than you think — way bigger”. They report it is a significant business sector contributing 35 percent of Canada’s real gross domestic product.
So with such an important business sector, it would make sense to allow those businesses on the smaller scale to qualify to have a simpler and more cost-effective way to restructure when they hit a financial bump in the road. If the viable parts of the business can be saved, it will continue to employ people, allow families to have a good quality of life and contribute to Canada’s GDP. It does not make sense to essentially kill off these smaller businesses because the cost of the restructuring will use up all the resources necessary to run the business.
I am not talking about family-owned businesses Bombardier Inc. and Loblaw Cos. Ltd. Rather, I am talking about the majority of Canadian entrepreneurial companies in the mid to small size range.
So here is what I propose for a streamlined restructuring process for small and medium-sized businesses. I will call it a new Part III Division III of the BIA. I will call it the General Scheme for Small Business Proposals (SBP) section of the BIA.
Size matters
The new SBP should be available to corporations, proprietorships and partnerships that are set up to conduct business. Their total debt should not be more than $1.5 million. There is nothing scientific about this number.
Statistics Canada could do an analysis as to the average debt load of Canadian businesses and an appropriate debt level could be picked based on it. For purposes of this Brandon’s Blog, I will use the $1.5 million amount.
I would not exclude loans from affiliates or people not dealing at arms’-length such as in the US legislation. In Canada, it is normal for the first funding of a company to come from the owners. Our chartered banks want to see a commitment from the owners before they will lend. Owners have sacrificed their own money to get the company off the ground. Just because that is how they had to finance the company, I would not preclude that debt from counting in the calculation.
The Canadian business landscape is different from that in the USA. Our numbers are generally smaller. In order to exclude non-arms’-length debt, you would probably have to lower the debt threshold I have mentioned. So, let us keep that debt threshold for discussion purposes and include all debt; secured or unsecured, arms’-length or related parties and owners.
If a person is not conducting business in his or her name, then this new SBP would not be for them. They would fall under either Division I or Divison II restructuring proposals.
Administration of restructurings under the SBP
Currently, only a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (LIT) can administer restructuring proposals. Under Division I Proposals, the LIT is called the Proposal Trustee. Under consumer proposals, Division II personal restructurings, the LIT is called the Administrator.
So, for the new SBP, I will call the LIT the Small Business Administrator. It makes it obvious that it is the restructuring of a business qualifying under the new Division III. The use of the word “administrator” ties nicely into the word chosen already by Parliament for consumer proposals. So again, it makes it obvious that the LIT is administering a small business streamlined restructuring.
Since we are not talking about personal restructuring that falls under the consumer proposal provisions in this Brandon’s Blog, my suggestions for a streamlined business restructuring applies only to Part III Division I of the BIA Proposal restructurings to avoid bankruptcy.
Time to restructure
Under a Division I Proposal restructuring, the company or person can begin the restructuring process by filing either a Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal (NOI) or the Proposal itself. Under either filing, the debtor then has 10 days to file its cash-flow statement reviewed and approved by both the company or person and the LIT. Under an NOI filing, the company or person then has an additional 20 days (30 days after the NOI filing date) to file a Proposal (unless the time is extended by Court Order).
Most times with small to medium-sized businesses, the debtor is not current in all of its filings with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). This includes payroll remittances, HST and perhaps even income tax returns. In any restructuring where CRA is a creditor, they need to have the most current information from the debtor’s business filings, to be able to know the full amount owing by the business. They will not be able to properly assess the Proposal until they know the proper amount owing to them.
Also in any Proposal restructuring, we want to have a provisional income tax return prepared by the external accountant for the business. The provisional return is to show if any further tax liability exists for the fiscal year up to and including the date of filing of the Proposal.
Books and records will first have to be brought up to date. Then the accountant will need time to prepare and file the income tax return. There is a reason for this. We want CRA to know if there is a further liability.
Although there is no statutory provision allowing for this, CRA so far on an administrative level will allow for a split tax year in a restructuring. The liability for the fiscal year up to and including the Proposal date will be included as a debt in the restructuring. This is to the company’s or person’s advantage in the business.
Once the Proposal is filed, the meeting of creditors has to take place within 21 days of the Proposal date. In my experience, there is never enough time for the business to do all the necessary filings for CRA that I just mentioned. So, CRA always requests an adjournment of the meeting until such time as all the filings are up to date.
So, in my proposed streamlined version, I would propose to extend the filing of a Proposal after the filing of an NOI from 30 days to 90 days, without the need for the expense of going to Court seeking an extension. This should give enough time for the business to get all of its filings up to date and hopefully avoid the need for an adjournment of the meeting of creditors.
Creditors
There really is nothing that needs to be changed on how creditors file their claims. The same is true for the rules of how the LIT must assess all claims. I do like the idea in the new Chapter 11 subchapter V. That is the ability to change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the mortgage/funding secured by the home was used in the person’s business and was not financing used to purchase the property.
In Canada, it is very rare, if not unheard of, for an entrepreneurial business to get a bank loan without the owner giving a personal guarantee. Many times the personal guarantee has to be backed by a hard asset, such as a pledge of the personal residence. If the secured debt can be restructured, shouldn’t the pledge agreement on a personal asset also be part of that restructuring?
So, I propose that in the new SBP, there should be the ability to change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the funds were used for the business or if the pledge was in support of a personal guarantee for funds borrowed by the business.
The types of changes to the security pledge will be unique to the individual restructuring. It has to make business sense and common sense. It is always up to the secured lender to vote against the plan if they don’t like it. In that case, the restructuring will fail. There will be great pressure on the business to bring forward the best possible restructuring plan and not go crazy on what changes the owner wants to make to the pledge of security.
Deemed acceptance and approval
Without going into all the rules, under the current consumer proposal legislation, there is the concept of deemed creditor approval and deemed Court approval. Unless creditors holding 25% in value of the proven claims request it, there is no need to hold a meeting of creditors. Creditors are asked to vote by way of voting letters when they file their proof of claim. If no obligation to call a meeting arises, then the consumer proposal is deemed accepted.
If a consumer proposal is either accepted or deemed accepted by the creditors, then there is probably never going to be a need for the LIT administrator to formally seek approval by the Court. The BIA reads that after the acceptance or deemed acceptance, the consumer proposal is deemed accepted by the Court unless the Official Receiver or “other interest party” requests it within 15 days after the date of (deemed) acceptance.
Currently, under a Division I Part III restructuring Proposal there are no deeming provisions for either creditor acceptance or Court approval. I would like to see in the new SBP section, that similar deeming provisions for both creditor acceptance and Court approval be implemented. This will save time and cost thereby being much more efficient.
No deemed bankruptcy
In a Division I Proposal, if the creditors do not accept the restructuring, or the Court does not approve it, then the debtor is automatically deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy. There is not a similar provision for consumer proposals.
If the creditors do not accept a consumer proposal, then it just dies then and there and the debtor goes back to their normal unprotected state.
My proposal for the new SBP is that if the creditors do not accept or the Court will not approve the restructuring plan, that does not produce a corporate or personal bankruptcy. Rather, the debtor just goes back to their normal unprotected insolvent state and they have to fend off their creditors as best as possible.
It may lead to bankruptcy, but that will not be automatic. In some corporate situations, the cost of a bankruptcy proceeding just does not make sense. This is especially true if a chartered bank has security over all of the assets and will be enforcing its security through a receivership.
Directors/Owners
Right now a corporate restructuring Proposal allows for Directors to be released from debts that arise prior to the date of filing the Proposal. The kinds of debts that a Director can be released from are those solely resulting from their role as a Director. In other words, generally statutory claims they would be legally liable for.
As I already mentioned, more often than not, the only way a small or medium-sized company can get a bank loan is if the entrepreneur personally guarantees the debt. There are times where a corporate restructuring can be done, but the secured debt arrangements will have to be amended. If the lender is not willing to amend the personal guarantee security arrangements in place, then, the corporate restructuring does not make sense.
So in my dream of the SBP, if a secured lender agrees to a restructuring of their debt, then the Director(s) who may be personally liable will now be responsible for the revised secured lending arrangement. This would also go hand in hand with my proposed change to the ability to change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the mortgage/funding secured by the home was used in the person’s business and was not financing used to purchase the property.
Bankruptcy experts summary
So there you have it. The US government saw fit to add to its Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection statute to allow smaller companies to restructure. My vision for a Canadian version is the SBP section to form a new Part I Division III for the BIA.
To summarize, the changes to allow for a more efficient and less costly way to restructure smaller businesses would include:
The brand-new SBP will be offered to companies, proprietorships and partnerships that are established to run a business. It will be available to businesses with any kind of debt not greater than $1.5 million.
A LIT who will be called a Small Business Administrator, will oversee and be responsible for the business restructuring.
The time for the filing of a Proposal after the filing of an NOI will be extended from the current 30 days to 90 days. This will be without the need and cost of a Court application.
There ought to be the capability to transform the rights of a lending institution who has taken an entrepreneur’s home as security for a business loan or personal guarantee of such financing and the funds were put into the business.
Deeming provisions for both creditor acceptance and Court approval be implemented. It is already done in consumer proposals, so why not in streamlined business proposals? This will result in more efficient and less costly restructuring.
If the creditors’ decline or the Court will not approve the restructuring, that will not generate a corporate or personal bankruptcy. Instead, the debtor simply returns to their vulnerable financially troubled state and they will need to deal with their creditors as best as possible. In some cases it may lead to either bankruptcy or just a closing down of the business. Where there is a secured creditor, it will lead to the enforcement of their security. Either way, it won’t be an automatic bankruptcy.
A Director of a corporation can be released not only from statutory obligations arising from their office of Director. That person, or any other person, can have their guarantee of a debt to a lender be amended if the related business debt is amended in the restructuring.
There no doubt will be other areas that would need amending once all the relevant sections of the BIA were looked at. These are my ideas of the major amendments that could be made to the BIA, to allow for a more streamlined and cost-efficient restructuring for small and mid-sized businesses.
What about your business?
The financial restructuring process for either a large or small business is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex corporate restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur. You are worried because your company is facing significant financial challenges. Your business provides income not only for your family. Many other families rely on you and your company for their well-being.
The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your company’s problems; financial and emotional. The way we dealt with this problem and devised a corporate restructuring plan, we know that we can help you and your company too.
We know that companies 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 company restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain it is 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 your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.
If you would like to listen to the audio version of this Canada insolvency Brandon’s Blog, scroll to the bottom and click on the podcast
Introduction
On September 4, 2019, the Government of Canada department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, issued a press release. They announced that there would be changes coming to the Canada insolvency legislation.
I have previously written about the fallout from the Sears Canada insolvency. Specifically, about the plight of retired employees seeing their medical benefits eliminated and their pension entitlement slashed. After that, there have been several private member bills trying to fix the Canada insolvency laws.
Budget 2019
As I have written in previous Brandon’s Blogs, the concern is for retired people (and present employees) when a company enters into an insolvency proceeding. Like in the Sears case, the worry is associated with the staff member’s health benefits plan which could be gutted for retirees. An equally important concern, are underfunded pension plans when a firm enters into bankruptcy protection.
Insolvent employers have placed a moratorium on reimbursements to workers and especially retirees on valid medical claims. Also, the staff member pension plan payments can be cut for retirees because the insolvent firm has not made the called for contributions. The retirees are in the weakest position as they can never make up for what they are now losing.
Pension payments are postponed income. In an insolvency filing, there is generally absolutely nothing left for current (other than perhaps their WEPPA claim in bankruptcy or receivership) and retired employees.
The reality is that all politicians currently acknowledge simply exactly how unsecure pension plans and health plans may be in the case of insolvency, restructuring or bankruptcy.
The Liberals acknowledge that this is a significant issue. Nonetheless, in this budget, they chose to ignore the problem.
What the press release said
The Government of Canada said that it is dedicated to far better safeguarding the rights of pensioners, employees and others during insolvency procedures. They say they can guarantee all Canadians can have satisfaction when it pertains to retirement. They say they can do this while maintaining laws that continue to support growth, advancement and also great jobs in Canada.
The Honourable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada said, that beginning November 1, 2019, reforms to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) announced in Budget 2019 will be enacted. He said that this will be done to enhance retired life security by making the insolvency procedure fairer, much more clear and also easily accessible.
So what is being planned?
The press release was consistent with the wording in Budget 2019. The press release went on to say that the BIA and CCAA modifications pertaining to boosting retirement protection will:
call for participants in an insolvency process to act in good faith (isn’t that already enshrined in our legislation and enforced by our Courts?);
offer the possibility of court-ordered disclosure of a creditor’s real financial interest in an insolvent business (how does this help retirees?);
enforce director obligations in suitable cases for senior management compensation settlements in the lead-up to an insolvency proceeding (whatever appropriate means);
limit the choices that can be taken initially in a CCAA administration to measures necessary to avoid the immediate liquidation of an insolvent company, thus boosting participation of all players (does this mean the government plans to outlaw a liquidating CCAA?);
exclude assets held in registered disability savings plans from creditors’ claims in bankruptcy;
reforms to the BIA and CCAA to guarantee the safeguarding of intellectual property user rights in insolvency, announced in Budget 2018, will also be enacted for November 1.
The devil is in the details
The Minister stated:
“It is unacceptable that some pensioners face hardship because of their employer’s insolvency and underfunded pension plans. Our government believes that after a lifetime of hard work, Canadians deserve a secure and dignified retirement. With these reforms, we are protecting Canadians’ retirement security and the ability of businesses to invest, grow and create more good jobs.”
This sounds great, but what does it mean? I don’t see anything in Budget 2019 or this recent press release that actually provides specifics on how retirees will be helped. There are no words talking about the super-priority of the amount of underfunding of pension plans. There is also no language on directors’ liability for such underfunding when the company continues to pay dividends to shareholders or bonuses to executives while the pension plan is underfunded.
We will have to wait to see how the proposed legislation actually reads. The other issue is our upcoming Federal election. Insolvency legislation is not a hot topic that gets votes. Perhaps real protection for retirees does. The government had a chance to really lay out how they will protect retirees, but they failed to do so. They talk about many issues in the press release. However, I don’t see anything directly related to retiree protection.
So I hope that the current federal government will follow through with legislation that has real teeth to protect retirees. But the 2019 Canadian federal election is scheduled to happen on or before October 21, 2019. That means that campaigning will have to begin very soon. So when will there be time to introduce the required legislation to be effective on November 1?
The federal government must have a plan otherwise they would not have put out the November 1 date in the press release. So let us wait and see and cross our fingers that retiree protection will be for real.
Canada insolvency summary
Are you nearing retirement with too much debt? Is your employer’s employee pension plan underfunded? Are you worried about how you will make ends meet in retirement?
The stress you are under because of your money challenges is huge. I understand your pain. At no cost to you, I will look at your whole set of circumstances and develop a plan that is as special as your issues. I know that I can help you through this.
There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why I can develop a debt settlement plan for you 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 your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.
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
Bankruptcy small businesses introduction
The press has reported that certain Big Pharma have considered bankruptcy as part of negotiations to reach a settlement over their liability in the opioid crisis. Bankruptcy, or bankruptcy restructuring is not just for big companies. There are bankruptcy small businesses too.
Earlier this year, Insys Therapeutics Inc. in the United States ended up being the first opioid drugmaker to use the bankruptcy statute. It followed its US$225 million settlement with the Federal government. In recent months, there’s been a supposition that drugmakers might utilize insolvency laws as a means to run away from accountability.
Bankruptcy small businesses: That is not how bankruptcy protection works
Thankfully, that’s not how bankruptcy works. Instead, as I’ve learned in my experience in the Canadian bankruptcy space, insolvency procedures are developed to not only help debtors. It likewise assists creditors too.
Bankruptcy and restructuring proceedings are not best for every stakeholder every time. The end result always appears unreasonable to creditors because they are not being paid in full. However, it’s most definitely not the free ride for the company filing under the bankruptcy laws that many people think it will be. This is especially true in the area of bankruptcy small businesses.
Bankruptcy small businesses: What happens when a small business files for bankruptcy?
To many people, the thought of bankruptcy creates an adverse reaction. The reason is simple: a bankruptcy filing means there is not enough money to pay everyone 100 cents on the dollar.
But the system makes the best of a grim situation by imposing an organized and open process that preserves value and urges negotiation. Bankruptcy reorganizations by well-known brand names such as General Motors revealed that it can bring parties to the table to reach agreements that could not be made absent the structured reorganization laws. It also resurrects sick businesses.
value and account for every one of the debtor’s assets into one proceeding;
recognize and classify creditor claims against the debtor;
in bankruptcy liquidation, sell the assets and distribute the money in priority of the claims of the creditors; and
for a bankruptcy restructuring, to take a hard look at productive assets and those no longer needed, value them, allow for selling off redundant assets to allow the company to continue in its healthy business side and offer the creditors a better deal than they would get in a liquidation.
Specifically how those essential parts of the bankruptcy and insolvency legislation play out in a specific bankruptcy small businesses situation will differ depending upon what kind of insolvency filing the borrower makes and the specific truths regarding the conduct of the debtor.
Bankruptcy small businesses: What types of bankruptcy can small businesses file?
When we hear about bankruptcy small businesses we normally think of a liquidation. However, debtors have two choices under the BIA: liquidation or reorganization.
Pure bankruptcy liquidation is designed to sell off the assets either as a whole to one buyer to allow for someone else to carry on the company’s business, or just sell pieces to many individual buyers. In the latter case, it means that business will not exist anymore.
The value obtained from the asset sale(s) will be distributed to the creditors in priority. First to statutory trust claimants, then to secured creditors, if any. If anything is left after that, it will then be distributed to unsecured creditors: first preferred unsecured and then ordinary unsecured.
On the other hand, a filing under the proposal provisions of Part III of the BIA allows for the company to attempt to reorganize. All aspects of the business will be looked at. The debtor can sell some of its assets that are underperforming or no longer fit into the restructured business plan. The cash raised can be used in the reorganization strategy that aims to resolve the current business problems and allow the company to come out of bankruptcy protection as a new and profitable viable business.
The BIA restructuring provisions are what would be used for bankruptcy small businesses. Large businesses (defined in this case as companies that owe more than $5 million) could use the same BIA proposal provisions. Alternatively, those large companies could also use the CCAA statute to reorganize. The specific situation will dictate what legislation is used for a reorganization.
Bankruptcy small businesses: A restructuring attempt could go wrong
It is possible that companies that originally file under the BIA restructuring provisions ultimately become bankrupt. The reasons can vary.
The company may find that the financing it thought it had was no longer available, so they could not put forth a successful restructuring plan. So it will have no choice but to liquidate.
The company’s creditors may not believe that the restructuring plan pays them enough, is not a viable plan or there is too long to wait for too little money. In this case, the creditors when voting on the restructuring plan will vote in sufficient numbers to tank the restructuring. Any company that tries to restructure under the BIA and receives a sufficiently negative vote, is deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy. In such a case, the only remaining option will be a liquidation, probably through a bankruptcy small businessses.
For a business wanting to make it through a restructuring, a successful plan needs lender assistance or a sufficiently strong cash flow so that the restructuring will be funded properly. If there is insufficient cash to fund the restructuring, the Trustee will have to report that to the creditors. The Trustee will also have to recommend against the restructuring plan if the Trustee believes the company does not have enough cash to provide the staying power to carry out the plan.
In that case, there will certainly be a negative vote and the company will go into bankruptcy liquidation. On the other hand, in a successful bankruptcy small businesses restructuring, as soon as a BIA proposal plan of arrangement is fully performed, a company emerges from bankruptcy protection and continues operating, generally in a more powerful position than previously.
Bankruptcy small businesses: Advantages of an insolvency process for debtors
Bankruptcy provides at the very least two valuable advantages to all debtors: time and room to maneuver.
The minute a debtor files, an automatic stay is in play for the debtor. It operates as a time out button on any litigation, collection or enforcement activities. Creditors can ask the Court to lift the stay under specific conditions, however, the standard for doing so is typically tough to satisfy.
The Bankruptcy Court has broad authority to regulate all issues involving the debtor’s estate, including adjudicating any disputed claims. By uniting all those with a stake in the business’s assets in one place, a debtor can effectively handle all claims against it.
While the stay is in place, debtors use the insolvency process to review their troubles and make the essential adjustments to prosper after reorganizing. Decisions are made about which contracts they want to carry forward and which to abandon.
To stay clear of a disputed process, smart debtors use the insolvency restructuring process to reach a total overall negotiation and agreement with all stakeholders. If necessary, smart debtors will also offer a benefit to top up its restructuring plan to make sure that it gets the number of creditors necessary for the plan to succeed.
Bankruptcy small businesses: Benefits of the insolvency process for creditors
Clearly, bankruptcy supplies debtors with substantial power to reposition their business affairs.
What lots of people misunderstand, nonetheless, is that this power is balanced by solid creditor benefits too. The BIA calls for debtors to disclose considerable information about their operations and imposes stringent checks on their actions.
As an example, the company wishing to reorganize must openly disclose financial and other information concerning every one of its assets. Much fo the disclosure is under oath in the sworn statement of affairs. There is also if necessary, the ability to examine company officials under oath. In many cases, the debtor must seek the court’s approval before taking action beyond running the business operations in the normal course.
Under the bankruptcy small businesses BIA provisions, the company is allowed to stay in possession of its property. Management also remains in control to continue running the business. The Trustee must report any material adverse change. The Trustee will also report to the creditors as part of the restructuring process.
Creditors that are worried concerning the debtor’s capacity to maintain the estate’s worth might ask the Court to expand the Trustee’s powers. It is possible to have the Trustee also appointed as an interim receiver to control the receipts and disbursements of the company. Creditors can also ask the Court to end the restructuring and place the company into bankruptcy. Creditors would need to show that either a key secured creditor or a large enough group of unsecured creditors, will under no circumstances vote in favour of any restructuring.
The insolvency laws allow for the creation of a board of unsecured creditors to oversee the restructuring. The Court might also form a unique board standing for a major group of litigants in situations where the debtor faces lawsuits or claimants whose damages are not yet quantified.
These and various other attributes include a degree of justness to an inherently unfair situation. The debtor might think that it is driving the bus, however, countless other stakeholders have the power to make sure that the business complies with the rules of the road.
With such safeguards in place, creditors and the general public need not be afraid of the most awful possible outcome if bankruptcy provisions are used to try to restructure companies involved in bitter disputes. The playing field will never be even, but the Canadian insolvency statutes try to bring as much fairness into the bankruptcy small businesses system as possible.
Bankruptcy small businesses conclusion
I hope that you found this bankruptcy small businesses Brandon’s Blog informative. The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex corporate restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur. You are worried because your company is facing significant financial challenges. Your business provides income not only for your family. Many other families rely on you and your company for their well-being.
The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your company’s problems; financial and emotional. The way we dealt with this problem and devised a corporate restructuring plan, we know that we can help you and your company too.
We know that companies 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 company restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain it is 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 your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.
There has been two recent bankruptcy Canada new events that I believe are important to discuss. I believe you will hear more about it over the next few months. The two are unrelated.
One deals with the insolvency of oil and gas companies. The other with the rights of retired people and their company pensions and health benefits when their former employer goes into insolvency proceedings.
Bankruptcy Canada – The Redwater decision fallout
I have previously written about the Supreme Court of Canada decision in the Redwater Energy Corporation matter. On January 31, 2019, the top Federal Court released its decision in the case of Orphan Well Association v. Grant Thornton Ltd. The Supreme Court reversed 2 Alberta lower Court decisions. It is now the law of the land that, prior to lenders or creditors getting any type of repayment, the receiver or trustee will need to invest the funds from the sale of assets on the environmental remediation costs on all orphaned wells, that provincial legislation may need. The decision made it clear that the receiver or trustee does not need to spend cash it does not have from the sale of assets or other recoveries. However, whatever amount it recoups from the sale of assets, on a net basis, will initially need to go to provincially mandated clean-up costs of the financially troubled company’s wells. This is before secured or unsecured creditors see a penny.
Trident Exploration Corp.
Now for the fallout. Natural gas producer Trident Exploration Corp. (Trident) ceased operations on April 30, 2019. On May 3 on application to the Court by the Alberta Energy Regulator’s Orphan Well Association, Trident was placed in receivership.
Its staff and contractors have been terminated and its 3,600+ wells are being transitioned to the Alberta regulator.
The company claimed it had functioned openly and collaboratively with its lenders and the regulator since February. It further reported that it was unable to see that a successful restructuring could be accomplished in a timely fashion. Therefore, Trident’s lender stopped supporting the business. Due to this, Trident does not have the funds to run its infrastructure or enter into insolvency proceedings. Consequently, they have determined to walk away, leaving greater than 3,600 sites, a number of them active, without an operator.
The regulator then issued its order for the sites to be properly decommissioned and capped off. On April 30, Trident, without replying to the regulator’s order or addressing their environmental obligations, the Directors ceased operations, terminated its staff and contractors. The Board then resigned. Trident’s wells will soon be transferred to the Orphan Well Association.
The Redwater effect
Trident blamed the recent Redwater Supreme Court decision which ruled that capping of orphan oil and gas wells and environmental remediation should take priority over lenders when a business goes bankrupt and leaves behind orphan wells. Trident also said that the Redwater decision, regulatory uncertainty and current low pricing has developed a treacherous setting for energy companies that dare to risk their capital in Canada. Trident estimates that its total abandonment and improvement obligations are about $329 million. They estimate that with those costs, any recovery by secured lenders is unsure and there would be no funds for either unsecured creditors or shareholders. The Redwater effect is that the Court’s decision has had the unintended result of increasing Trident’s financial distress and accelerating the abandonment of its wells, has it had no funds to live up to its obligations.
Only time will tell if other insolvent energy producers take the route of Trident by just shutting down and abandoning its business and leaving its wells for the regulator to deal with.
Bankruptcy Canada – Retiree pension and health benefit rights protection in insolvency proceedings
Another topic I have previously written about is the lack of protection for retirees for pension and health benefit payments when the former employer enters insolvency proceedings. Rank-and-file members of the United Steelworkers (USW) from across Canada were on Parliament Hill to consult with MPs and requesting a commitment to legislate protection for retired workers. The USW very much want to make this a 2019 federal election issue.
The 2019 federal budget plan was very quiet on any type of commitment to shield workers and retirees by treating them as protected or priority creditors in our insolvency laws.
As a result of high-profile cases such as Nortel in Ottawa, Stelco in Hamilton and Sears, the USW is committed to campaigning for retirees to have a safe future.
Retirees understand just how unsecure their pension plans and benefits might be if a firm gets into restructuring under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) or any proceeding under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). Pensions are delayed earnings and, by the time financial institutions as well as various other creditors are paid, there is nothing left for workers for any shortfall or benefit payments. The USW feels that all Canadians ought to be outraged by the treatment of retired Canadians in corporate insolvency matters. This is why they met with MPs Senators. They want to focus on a collection of recent Bills presently before the House of Commons and the Senate. Two are before the House of Commons but they have not progressed. One is sponsored by the New Democratic Party, and the other by the Bloc Québecois. They are focused on reforming the CCAA and the BIA to offer top priority to claims by workers arising out of an underfunded pension plan and the removal of benefits.
An additional Bill, presented in the Senate late last year by now-retired Senator Art Eggleton, likewise aims to grant secured standing for pension claims.
It will be interesting to see if the Conservative Party picks up on this important debate and turns it into an election issue. The Liberal Party had promised to deal with this issue in the last four years, but alas, they have not delivered.
Bankruptcy Canada – Summary
Corporations that cannot afford to properly shut down their business and retirees losing out on benefits they worked their whole life for are important issues in insolvency. Does your company not have enough cash to continue its operations? Did you not receive all amounts you are entitled to and now are facing personal financial problems?
If so, call the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of experience assisting people and companies trying to find financial restructuring or a financial debt negotiation strategy. As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only professionals licensed, recognized and supervised by the federal government to supply insolvency advice and carry out strategies to aid you to stay clear of personal bankruptcy. Call the Ira Smith Team today so you can cut the stress, anxiousness and pain from your life that your financial issues have caused. With the special roadmap, we establish just for you, we will immediately return you right into a healthy and hassle-free life. You can have a no-cost analysis so we can help you fix your debt troubles. Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will most certainly allow you to go back to a new healthy and balanced life, Starting Over Starting Now.
Like many Canadians, on March 19 I was watching to see if the Conservative Party would be successful or not in blocking Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s budget speech. In the end, the Liberals took the drop on Parliament by getting the budget introduced early, before the Finance Minister’s speech. That allowed the media in lockup to start broadcasting the details of the Canada federal budget plan before the Finance Minister gave his speech!
Canada federal budget plan: Retiree bankruptcy protection
As I have previously written, the issue for retirees (and current employees) relates to the employee health benefits plan and pension plan when a company enters into an insolvency administration. Insolvent companies have been allowed to put a moratorium on reimbursements to employees and retirees on valid health benefits claims. Also, the employee pension plan suffers a shortfall because the insolvent company has not made the required contributions. This automatically creates reduced pension benefits for retirees.
Pensions are delayed earnings. In either a bankruptcy or bankruptcy protection reorganization, there is generally nothing left for employees.
Given the recent high-profile insolvency cases, employees now recognize just how unsecure their pension plans and health benefits might be in the case of insolvency, reorganization or bankruptcy.
The Liberal Party already recognizes that this is a major problem. However, in this budget, they decided to ignore the issue.
Canada federal budget plan: What this budget is
Rather, this budget screams please re-elect the Liberal party. In the wake of the SNC Lavalin debacle, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is trying to win votes by spending, spending and then more spending.
The Government of Canada market debt is projected to climb by $31 billion in the coming fiscal year, to strike a total amount of $754 billion. This brand-new funding demand comes along with $250 billion of existing debt that will be maturing and will require to be refinanced.
The Finance Minister estimates that Canada’s deficit will rise as a result of the $22.8 billion of new spending. The 2018-19 deficit projection is now set at $14.9 billion, slightly reduced from the Government’s estimate in Fall 2018. However, not surprisingly for an election budget, the Liberals found a way to spend those savings and then some. Their 2019-20 deficit projection is $19.8 billion.
Canada federal budget plan: What is in this budget
This budget has a bit of something for almost everyone. I am not an economist and this Brandon’s Blog is not meant to be an economic analysis of the budget. There are many sources for an in-depth analysis. However, some of the budget highlights are:
$1.25 billion over 3 years on a shared-equity home loan program for first-time home buyers.
RRSP withdrawal limit for new home buyers increases to $35,000 from $25,000.
To aid Canadians with uncommon medical conditions or diseases access to the medications they require, Budget 2019 proposes to invest up to $1 billion over two years into a National Pharmacare program, starting in 2022–23, with up to $500 million per year afterwards.
$3.25 billion to Indigenous Services for water quality, child welfare, education and other supports.
$2.2 billion for a one-time doubling of Gas Tax cash for cities’ infrastructure spending.
$595 million to sustain journalism will include 15% tax credit for electronic news subscriptions.
A promise of high-speed internet for all Canadians by 2030.
Canada federal budget plan: Vote for me
So as you can see, this budget is full of promises; a little something for everyone. The two glaring omissions seem to be nothing really for business and ignoring retiree bankruptcy protection. It appears that the Federal government went for the easy stuff – spending money, as opposed to harder things like amending the BIA and CCAA.
It is obviously an election budget. Details on how the new legislation and spending will work are scarce within Budget 2019. No doubt the devil will be in the details. The new proposed housing provisions will no doubt spur demand, which will keep the construction industry going which is a good thing. However, increased demand will probably mean higher prices in the major Canadian cities, especially in Toronto and Vancouver. So, it will take time to see if affordability gets worse or not for new home buyers.
Canada federal budget plan: I can’t spend more than I earn, how about you?
Our government has made no secret that it will be spending last year’s savings and then look to spend more than it takes in. The way they can do that is by just issuing more debt. This is certainly not unique to the Canadian government. All governments do it.
Unfortunately, normal working people can’t just take on more debt because we want to spend more. Eventually, I would run out of lenders willing to let me borrow more money, and my income would not be enough to make all my monthly payments, let alone repay the original loans! Rather, like you, I need to budget to make sure that my necessities are covered and that I have enough money for the other things I need to spend on. This includes my savings and emergency savings fund.
Have you lost the ability to borrow more money? Are you having trouble making your monthly payments? Is your business facing financial challenges that need to be addressed?
If so, call the Ira Smith Team today. We have years along with generations of experience helping people and companies in need of financial restructuring or a debt settlement plan. As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only professionals accredited as well as supervised by the Federal government to supply insolvency advice and services to help you avoid bankruptcy.
You can have a no-cost consultation to help you to fix your debt troubles. With you, we will discover your financial pain factors and offer you the strategy to finish them in your life. This will absolutely allow you to begin a clean slate, Starting Over Starting Now.
Call the Ira Smith Team today so you can start ending your stress and pain today. With the roadmap we create unique to you, we will quickly return you right into a healthy and balanced carefree life.
