Category Archives: Bankruptcy

While the people behind the Issue 7green-energy initiative on Tuesday's ballot haveremained largely secretive, court records reveal that two of their leaders have been mired in majorpersonal financial problems that have doggedthem for the past 14 years.

John A. Clarke Jr. and his wife, Irene Gil-Llamas,the married couple who are the key players behind the ballot measure,filed an unsuccessful multimillion-dollar bankruptcy duringthe 2007 housing crash. Court records from U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Ohio, show the couple being hit with more than a dozen foreclosure cases on properties they owned, including on their 5,500-square-foot, historic home on the Near East Side.

Issue 7 in Columbus: Murky 'green energy' ballot initiative would take millions from Columbus budget

The current status of the debt at one time listed in bankruptcy court filings at almost $2.3 million remains unclear. The couple'sChapter 11 bankruptcy cases were dismissed twice in federal court in 2008. The second time the dismissal was"with prejudice" after they had failed to show up at court-scheduled hearings and provide requested disclosures, court records show.

Without the protection of bankruptcy reorganization, foreclosure cases against the couple stretched into late 2011,months before they began their quest to control tens of millions in taxpayer dollars through what they have called"green energy" initiatives, first at the state level, and now in Columbus.

Your subscription to the Dispatch helps support local journalism. Stay connected with our daily stories, in-depth reporting and more by clicking Subscribe at the top of the page.

If approved by voters Tuesday, Issue 7 would take a total of $87 million, or about 11%, fromthe city of Columbus general fund and put it in the control of a five-member group that calls itselfProEnergy Ohio.The group proposes to use $57 million of it for a "Clean Energy Partnership Fund" to subsidize electric rates for city residents through green energy, but at ProEnergy's discretion.

The initiative also says it wouldestablish three funds which would becontrolled by a majority of the petitioners on the ballot. One would be for education, one for clean energy education and training and one for minority business enterprise. Each fund would get $10 million ofcity taxpayer money, held by an unnamed entity the group would designate.

But the group's petition contains few specifics, and committee members and one of their attorneys have declined or failed to respond to repeated opportunities offered by The Dispatch to explain their plan and their intentions. There is no evidence that they have the experience or staffingto manage the funds or the programs listed in the ballot initiative.

One thing the petition does spell out is that ProEnergy Ohiowould have unregulated control over the city money.Fees the group could charge to administer the $87 million in funds are not capped.

From the Dispatch Editorial Board: Weaselly 'green energy' group tries to con Columbus voters out of $87 million

Bankruptcy records show that mortgage documents executed by Clarke and Gil-Llama also show a lack of controls that reflect the hallmarks of what eventually led to the nationwide housing market collapse that began in 2007: "cash-out" mortgages,open-ended mortgages, second mortgages, strict prepayment penalties, interest-only adjustable borrowing plans that started out at 1% but could increase up to 14.5%, anddebt payments that could increase by up to 7.5% per month.

The couple used these risky lending devices to assemble aninventory of rental properties, buttheir plan suddenly went belly-up with plunging property values, documents indicate. They listed "secured liabilities," or debt backed by collateral,of more than $2 million, which included mortgages on11 properties whose resale value had plunged to roughly half the amount they had borrowed.

Ten of the properties were rentals, their bankruptcy filing said, and listed 11 already "closed" foreclosure cases, and four properties that had been repossessed by creditors.

According to a motion in bankruptcy court that Clarke and Gil-Llamas filed,tenants and Legal Aid lawyers in Licking County had filed a lawsuit against them that caused the economic failure of the real estate investments debtors made in Newark, Ohio. Mortgage lenders have pursued foreclosure actions to gain control of the Licking County real estate owned by debtors.

Records show the couple paid $72,000 for aNewark apartment building in 2005, but declared its value at $20,000 just two years later. It has since been torn down.

According to the Licking County Clerk of Courts office, 10 foreclosure actions were filed against the couple in that county alone from February through April of 2007. All those cases are closed.

Atotal of $18,413in credit card debt also was listed in the bankruptcy case.A 2008 filing in the case said Gil-Llamas received credit counseling that outlined the opportunities for available credit counseling and assisted me in performing a related budget analysis.

More recent filings in Franklin County Common Pleas Courtagainst the couple were by the city and state for unpaid income taxes.

The Dispatch visited the Clarke and Gil-Llamas home on Wednesday. Clarke was not there, but Gil-Llamas was. Asked for details about the Issue 7 initiative, she said the ballot language speaks for itself.

Were trying to do what the legislation says, Gil-Llamas said of Issue 7. Were trying to help minorities get a head start, help with energy efficiency, install monitoring devices.

Asked about another green-energy ballot initiative ProEnergy Ohioinitiated last week with Columbus for a future election, even before the current Issue 7 is even decided, Gil-Llamas said she didnt know anything about the larger $107 million efforteven though her name is on the petition documents.

Gil-Llamasended the conversation before answering any questions about her and her husband's financial troubles, saying she couldn't talk further because they weregetting ready for Halloween.

Daniel van Hoogstraten, spokesman for the campaign trying to defeat Issue 7, said the couple's financial history is a big red flag.

"John Clarke's sketchy financial dealings and legal troubles are even more reason he and his company have no business controlling city resources," van Hoogstraten said in an email. "Every Columbus voter should understand that Issue 7 is a scam it would cause devastating cuts to city services and hand that money over to John Clarke and his corrupt cabal."

More: Opinion: Voters should reject issue 7; lawmakers need to ensure this never happens again

Nana Watson, the executive director of the NAACPs Columbus chapter, said Clarkecalled her on Wednesday morning, asking about her organizations thoughts on Issue 7, and told her the initiativewould help minorities.

We are telling people to vote no, she said she told him.

We think its a bad idea, because we dont know whos behind it, Watson told The Dispatch.Its problematic. Youre hiding something because you wont give us full disclosure. How is this going to help Black people?

In December, a Franklin County grand jury indicted Clarke on four felony counts related to the running of the Issue 7 campaign, charging that in July and August of 2019, Clarke did knowingly state falsehoods in a state campaign finance report as to the source or amounts of contributions, and also that he altered campaign finance information already filed.

Former Franklin County Prosecutor Ron OBrien said in December that investigators found that five people listed on the campaign finance report, one of whom was listed as contributing $13,000 and the other four listed as contributing $10,000 each, actually had given nothing.

Clarkes trial was scheduled for Tuesday, but was continued to Jan. 31 under an order signed byFranklin County Common Pleas Court Judge Chris Brown.

Todd Helpbringer, president of Helpbringer Mortgage Services, said Clarkes and Gil-Llamas financial situation is emblematic of the 2007 housing implosion, which economists say was the major factor leading to the Great Recession in 2008.

The market was just flushed with what I called silly financing. I wouldnt allow that. I couldnt understand that, Helpbringersaid.

If a person cant pay, are we really helping them? All those foreclosures, all those bankruptcies, he said.

Despite theirfinancial history, Clarke and Gil-Llamas have managed to hang onto their primary residence, though it has traded ownership several times since 2012 before landing back inGil-Llamas' name in 2018 for $464,000.

In September 2020, the couple took out a $500,000 line of credit on their home, records show. That's almost the entire $503,800 value that the Franklin County Auditor's office places on the 121-year-old house.

Dispatch reporter Jim Weiker contributed to this report.

wbush@gannett.com

@ReporterBush

mferench@dispatch.com

@MarkFerenchik

Read the original:

Couple behind Issue 7 in Columbus have history of bankruptcies - The Columbus Dispatch

Nationally, Frontiers reputation also has taken hits.

Then, in May, Wisconsin, five other states and the Federal Trade Commission announced they were suing Frontier in a federal court in California, claiming the company failed to provide customers with the internet speeds Frontier originally promised. The company has about 80,000 customer accounts in Wisconsin, a company spokesman told The Badger Project last year.

I hope the state will seriously consider the track record of companies to understand which ones have a long record of meeting the needs of residents and businesses, Christopher Mitchell, director of the Community Broadband Networks Initiative, a Minnesota-based think tank supporting communities telecommunications efforts, said in an interview with The Badger Project.

Frankly, Frontiers record suggests it should not receive a single additional dollar from any government, he added. Local companies, communities, and cooperatives have proven to be much better at turning public subsidies into needed networks.

Earlier this month, a federal judge dismissed Wisconsin and four other states from the litigation, but the claims of the FTC and California will move forward.

In an email response to questions, Frontier spokeswoman Brigid Smith said, despite bankruptcy, the company has honored its obligations required by federal funding. She added that Frontier has been awarded state broadband grant funding in numerous states and has fulfilled its grant obligations in all of them.

And she said the companys DSL internet speeds have been clearly and accurately described in our marketing materials and disclosures.

Frontier emerged from bankruptcy earlier this year and said in a press release it would upgrade millions of its internet accounts across the country to modern fiber optic cables from the old and slow copper phone wire.

The company is making its case to the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, which distributes the grants for high-speed internet expansion. The PSC awards funding based on several criteria, including whether a project is in an area unserved or underserved by internet providers, said PSC spokesman Jerel Ballard said.

The PSC also considers grant projects based on scalability, impact, matching funds, applicant capacity and performance, service affordability, economic development and public-private partnership, Ballard added.

Overall, Wisconsin has distributed about $72 million in broadband expansion grants to a number of companies and the state legislature continues to give the PSC more funding to expand the effort.

On top of the state program, Gov. Tony Evers announced in May he was setting aside $100 million in federal funds for high-speed internet expansion. The state then received about $440 million in requests from telecommunications companies including Frontier.

Those also include a proposal from the Eau Claire-headquartered WIN Technology, which has a fiber optic network across much of Western Wisconsin and is owned by 31 independent telephone companies. WIN asked the state for more than $77 million.

Spectrum and TDS asked for about $39 million and $29 million, respectively.

The PSC said it will likely decide on grant winners by the end of this month.

Link:

Sued by Wisconsin and fresh off of bankruptcy, Frontier asks the state for $35 million in grants - HNGnews.com

Rachel Kuechle, who accuses San Jose Sharks left wing Evander Kane of assault, asked a federal bankruptcy court to partially lift the stay on her five-year-old lawsuit, raising the prospects of another messy legal proceeding against Kane.

Kane filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in January, which itself has spawned at least four derivative lawsuits within that process, including a creditor who says she is owed millions of dollars because he agreed to pay her for aborting their pregnancy. He is also engaged in a divorce proceeding with his soon-to-be ex-wife Anna, which has generated allegations of abuse from each side.

Kuechles request is to allow her case to re-commence in upstate New York state court, where it has automatically been stayed since Kane filed for bankruptcy. She accused Kane of physical assault in a 2016 lawsuit, though her relief from stay motion in the bankruptcy court describes it as a sexual assault, the first time that description has been used in the case.

Evander Frank Kane, Debtor herein, sexually assaulted Rachel Kuechle in the City of Buffalo, New York, after midnight on the morning of December 27, 2015, the motion read. Asked about the addition of the term sexual, her attorney, Reno F.R.

View post:

Evander Kane assault accuser asks bankruptcy court to allow her case to proceed - The Athletic

Chapter 7: Liquidation

Chapter 7 is designed for individuals and businesses experiencing financial difficulty that do not have the ability to pay their existing debts. Under Chapter 7 a trustee takes possession of all of your property. You may claim certain property as exempt under governing law. A bankruptcy trustee then liquidates all non-exempt property and uses the proceeds to pay your creditors according to a distribution scheme required by the Bankruptcy Code.

The main purpose of filing a Chapter 7 case is to obtain a discharge of your existing debts. A bankruptcy discharge is a court order releasing you from liability for many types of debts. If, however, you are found to have committed certain kinds of improper conduct described in the Bankruptcy Code, your discharge may be denied by the court and the purpose for which you filed the bankruptcy petition will be defeated.

Even if you receive a discharge, there are some debts which are not discharged under the law. These include certain types of taxes, student loans, alimony and child support payments, debts fraudulently incurred, debts for willful and malicious injury to a person or property, and debts arising from a drunk driving charge. Generally speaking, a bankruptcy discharge does not remove liens (including tax liens) from your property.

Chapter 11 is designed for the reorganization of a business. It is also available to individual debtors who exceed the thresholds for Chapter 13 bankruptcies.

Under Chapter 11 the Bankruptcy Court approves a plan of reorganization which provides for payment of claims in full or in part, depending on the priority and type of claim.

Chapter 12 is designed to permit family farmers to repay their debts over a period of time from future earnings. It is in many ways similar to a Chapter 13 filing.

The eligibility requirements are restrictive. It is limited to those whose income arises primarily from a family-owned farm.

Chapter 13 is designed for individuals with regular income who are temporarily unable to pay their debts. Chapter 13 gives them the option to pay their debts in installments over a period of time. You are eligible for Chapter 13 if your debts do not exceed certain dollar amounts set forth in the Bankruptcy Code.

Under Chapter 13 you must file a plan with the court to repay your creditors all or part of the money that you owe them, using your future earnings. Usually the period allowed by the court to repay your debts is three years, but may be extended to five years. Your plan must be approved by the court before it can take effect.

After completion of payments under your plan, most debts are discharged. Debts such as alimony and child support payments and certain long-term secured obligations are never discharged.

The information contained on this page is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advise or a complete explanation of any topic.

View post:

Bankruptcy | Mass.gov

If you owe past due federal taxes that you cannot pay, bankruptcy may be an option. Other options include an IRS payment plan or an offer in compromise.

For individuals, the most common type of bankruptcy is a Chapter 13. Before you consider filing a Chapter 13 here are some things you should know:

Partnerships and corporations file bankruptcy under Chapter 7 or Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code. Individuals may also file under Chapter 7 or Chapter 11. For additional tax information on bankruptcy, refer to Publication 908, Bankruptcy Tax Guide and Publication 5082, What You Should Know about Chapter 13 Bankruptcy and Delinquent ReturnsPDF.

Other types of bankruptcy include Chapters 9, 12 and 15. Cases under these chapters of the bankruptcy code involve municipalities, family farmers and fisherman, and international cases. For information see Other Types of Bankruptcy Chapters 9, 12 & 15.

If you listed the IRS as a creditor in your bankruptcy, the IRS will receive electronic notice about your case from the U.S. Bankruptcy Courts within a day or two of the petition date. If you're not sure if we received notice, call the Centralized Insolvency Operation at 800-973-0424 and give them your bankruptcy case number.

Call 800-973-0424 with your bankruptcy case number and ask to be referred to a bankruptcy specialist.

Call 800-222-8029 at the U.S. Bankruptcy Courts and follow the prompts.

Debtor must file returns for the last four tax periods.

Dismissal: IRS may keep payments, and time in bankruptcy extends time to collect remaining tax liabilities.

Discharge: Will eliminate (discharge) personal liability for tax debts older than three years unless returns filed late. Businesses don't receive a discharge since they're liquidated.

Debtor must file returns for the last four tax periods.

Dismissal: IRS may keep payments, and time in bankruptcy extends time to collect remaining tax liabilities.

Discharge: Will eliminate (discharge) tax debts paid in the plan and tax debts older than three years unless returns filed late.

Debtor must file returns for the last four tax periods.

Dismissal: IRS may keep payments, and time in bankruptcy extends time to collect remaining tax liabilities.

Discharge: Will eliminate (discharge) tax debts paid in the plan and tax debts older than three years unless returns filed late. For businesses with employees, will not eliminate (discharge) unpaid employee Social Security and income tax withheld.

Debtor must file returns for the last four tax periods.

Dismissal: IRS may keep payments, and time in bankruptcy extends time to collect remaining tax liabilities.

Discharge: Will eliminate (discharge) tax debts paid in the plan and tax debts older than three years unless returns filed late. For businesses with employees, will not eliminate (discharge) unpaid employee Social Security and income tax withheld.

See original here:

Declaring Bankruptcy | Internal Revenue Service

Johnson & Johnson is drawing criticism after using a controversial bankruptcy maneuver to block roughly 38,000 lawsuits linked to claims that its talc baby powder was contaminated with cancer-causing asbestos.

The health products giant used a quirk of Texas state law to spin off a new company called LTL, then dumped all its asbestos-related liabilities including the avalanche of lawsuits into the new firm.

LTL filed for bankruptcy last week in a federal court in Charlotte, N.C., a move designed to sharply limit efforts to recover damages for those who say they were harmed by J&J's baby powder.

"Johnson & Johnson doesn't have this liability anymore. They pushed all of it into the company they created just to file for bankruptcy," said Lindsey Simon, a bankruptcy expert at the University of Georgia School of Law.

As a result, Simon said, "consumers can't recover [damages] against a big solvent company. They have to recover against this smaller fictional company created [by J&J]."

The move sparked outrage from lawmakers and consumer advocates.

"J&J knew asbestos laced some bottles but kept it a secret for decades," Rep. Katie Porter, D-Calif., tweeted on Tuesday. "Tens of thousands of women with ovarian cancer are suing, and the company wants to shield its assets."

In 2018, separate investigations by Reuters and The New York Times revealed documents showing Johnson & Johnson fretted for decades that small amounts of asbestos lurked in its baby powder, without telling regulators.

J&J has repeatedly denied the claim. The company remains one of the wealthiest corporations in the world, with more than $25 billion in cash reserves, and has not filed for bankruptcy.

During a call with investors on Tuesday, J&J CFO Joseph Wolk defended the bankruptcy maneuver and again said its talc baby powder products, discontinued last year, were safe.

"There's an established process that allows companies facing abusive tort systems to resolve claims in an efficient and equitable manner," Wolk said.

"It's really the bankruptcy courts that will ultimately decide this. It's not plaintiff attorneys. It's not Johnson & Johnson," he added.

In a separate statement, LTL said J&J had agreed to provide the new firm with $2 billion, along with other funds, for future payouts linked to baby powder asbestos claims.

"We are confident all parties will be treated equitably during this process," said John Kim, chief legal officer of LTL, in the statement.

But Andrew Birchfield, an attorney with the firm Beasley Allen who represents women who have sued J&J, said this legal maneuver could make it far more difficult for his clients to recover damages.

"Women and families would be devastated, and it would just be a get-out-of-jail-free card for Johnson & Johnson," Birchfield said.

J&J has had a mixed record defending itself against these talc-asbestos lawsuits.

The company has prevailed in many cases, but last year an appeals court in Missouri ordered the firm to pay $2 billion to women who say J&J's talc product caused their ovarian cancer.

Critics say this is another instance of a growing trend: corporations and wealthy individuals using bankruptcy to block lawsuits without actually filing for bankruptcy themselves.

"Another giant corporation is abusing our bankruptcy system to shield its assets and evade liability for the harm it has caused people across the country," Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., tweeted last week.

The American Association for Justice, a coalition of trial lawyers, also blasted J&J's maneuver and called for legislation to block this kind of legal tactic.

"There are countless Americans suffering from cancer, or mourning the death of a loved one, because of the toxic baby powder that Johnson & Johnson put on the market," the group said in a statement. "Their conduct and now bankruptcy gimmick is as despicable as it is brazen."

In recent months, legal scholars, bipartisan members of Congress and consumer advocacy groups have raised alarms about the use of bankruptcy courts by wealthy and powerful entities seeking to block lawsuits.

Simon, at the University of Georgia, published a widely read paper in the Yale Law Journal in April that described wealthy companies like Johnson & Johnson as "bankruptcy grifters."

She argued such firms and organizations receive the benefits of Chapter 11 protection while "incurring only a fraction of the associated burdens."

Critics also say lax bankruptcy laws allow companies to "venue shop," choosing to file for bankruptcy in federal jurisdictions viewed as friendly to corporations.

In this case, Johnson & Johnson is headquartered in New Jersey, but these legal maneuvers have been executed in North Carolina and Texas.

Similar legal strategies have been used in bankruptcy courts by members of the Sackler family who own OxyContin-maker Purdue Pharma, as well as by the U.S. Olympic Committee and the Boy Scouts of America, which face a barrage of sex abuse-related claims.

Simon said this bankruptcy maneuver offers J&J significant advantages in negotiations that are likely to follow over a final settlement.

But she said the company may still be on the hook for sizable payouts to victims as determined by the bankruptcy court.

"[J&J is] not completely wiping their hands of the issue, and I think probably awareness of how that would be perceived is the reason why," Simon said.

Johnson & Johnson, meanwhile, has asked a federal bankruptcy judge to halt progress on talc-asbestos claims while LTL's bankruptcy filing is under review.

Judge Craig Whitley will hold a hearing on that request on Friday in Charlotte.

: 10/20/21

An earlier version of this story misstated the name of Craig Whitley as Frank Whitney.

Continue reading here:

J&J is using a bankruptcy maneuver to block lawsuits over baby powder cancer claims - KRWG

FORT WAYNE, Ind. (Fort Wayne's NBC) - The city's distressed trash collection company says it expects no interruptions in trash pickup service in Fort Wayne.

But Mayor Tom Henry's administration plans to have discussions with one or more substitute providers just in case Red River Waste Solutions doesn't survive a reorganization plan.

Red River Waste Solutions last week filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Texas.

The bankruptcy somewhat limits the city's next steps.

It can't simply end its contractual relationship with Red River now.

The bankruptcy court over the next 120 days at least would have to approve Red River stopping service in Fort Wayne or the city trying to cut off its contract with the trash collection company.

City attorney Tim Haffner met Tuesday with Red River officials.

He says they were in Fort Wayne, but indicated they had a "scheduling conflict" that prevented them from showing up at a city council meeting that night to update the fiscal body on the company's capabilities to continue service.

In its bankruptcy filing, the company said the pandemic increased the volume of trash produced by customers in cities where they collect garbage, but that it also made it harder to hire enough workers to keep up.

It claims that situation led to cities levying fines that triggered financial troubles for Red River Waste Solutions.

The company actually has had a poor performance record regarding delayed or missed pickups since it started hauling trash with the city almost four years ago.

We asked if the bankruptcy filing hurts the city's ability to develop backup plans.

"It ties the hands in the context of attempting to renegotiate the contract or attempting to terminate the contract, we can't do that under the bankruptcy code. What we can do is evaluate opportunities in the market that may be relevant when the time comes. So there's nothing that prevents us from having conversations with other service providers," said Tim Haffner, corporate counsel for the city of Fort Wayne.

Red River was the low bidder to secure the city's trash contract in 2017. But one neighborhood leader we spoke with doesn't believe it was the best bidder.

"If you're getting three estimates and someone's estimate is so low wouldn't you question, okay, is this too good to be true, kind of, are you really able to do what I'm asking you to do? And I guess that's been my position all along when it comes to this contract that we have with Red River," said Cherise Dixie, president of the Southeast Area Partnership. She also serves on the city's Solid Waste Advisory Board.

Red River Waste Solutions released a statement Wednesday that reads, in part, "While (the company) moves through the re-structuring process as quickly as possible, it intends for its day to day operations, engagement with customers, and top notch service to continue as usual."

Republican city council member Russ Jehl has a different take on Red River's track record.

He says, "The Solid Waste Fund is over $1-million in the red and asking for a bailout and a rate increase for city trash customers. Now the contractor is bankrupt. What more of a wake-up call do we need to start getting serious about addressing our garbage mess."

Original post:

City readies for conversations with alternative trash haulers on heels of Red River bankruptcy filing - Fort Wayne's NBC

Former Washington Prime Group CEO Lou Conforti (Twitter, iStock)

Just a few months after filing for Chapter 11, mall operator Washington Prime Group has emerged from bankruptcy.

When the real estate investment trust, which owns more than 100 malls across the country, filed for bankruptcy protection in June, it listed $4 billion in assets and $3.5 billion in debts. Through the process, the company has reduced its debt by nearly $1 billion.

WPGs Josh Lindimore and Mark Yale

The company also announced that Lou Conforti is stepping down as chief executive officer. Mark Yale, the executive vice president and chief financial officer, and Josh Lindimore, the executive vice president and head of leasing, will serve as interim co-CEOs.

It is a new beginning for WPG, and myself, Conforti said in a statement.

The bankruptcy had been a long time in the making for Washington Prime. In November, Conforti said that bankruptcy was off the table. However, in March, talks on bankruptcy once again emerged, before the company filed in June.

Washington Prime Group was formed when it spun off from Simon Property Group in 2014.

Like other mall operators, the REIT has struggled with foot traffic and competition from e-commerce. The pandemic was the final straw, as it sent rent revenue plunging. Washington Prime collected just 52 percent of the rent due in the second quarter of 2020.

The firm followed fellow mall operators CBL & Associates Properties and Pennsylvania REIT into bankruptcy. In March, CBL announced that 88 percent of voting bank lenders and 64 percent of voting noteholders approved an amended restructuring support agreement. Neither company has emerged from bankruptcy.

Contact Sasha Jones

Go here to read the rest:

Washington Prime Group back from bankruptcy; CEO out - The Real Deal

(Reuters) - Bonuses for executives of bankrupt companies have been commonplace for many years now, occurring either during a bankruptcy or shortly before a company files its Chapter 11 petition. Now, politicians on both sides of the aisle have decided its time to rein that practice in.

A report from the Government Accountability Office in late September found that in fiscal year 2020, $165 million in bonuses were paid to 223 executives across 42 companies shortly before they filed for bankruptcy and another $207 million in incentive bonuses were granted for 309 executives across 47 companies during their Chapter 11 cases.

Representative Cheri Bustos, a Democrat from Illinois, recently spoke with Reuters about the bonuses and her bill, introduced last week, that would prevent executives of bankrupt companies who make more than $250,000 per year from receiving bonuses either during, or in the six months before, a bankruptcy.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

REUTERS: Why is this an important issue?

BUSTOS: I think it's an incredibly important issue when you look at what most people in a congressional district like mine make maybe $50,000 a year for a family of four. And we get this (GAO) report back and it shows that we have C-suite level folks in these companies that are paid as much as $13 million dollars while they have filed bankruptcy.

The way I look at this is that if you're a worker, you're not getting big bonuses for screwing up. And here you've got these CEOs and CFOs and all the C-suite folks who are getting paid while they're laying off people at their companies. So we thought that it was important to commission this report. And now that we've gotten it back, we want to take this to the next level.

REUTERS: What were your key takeaways from the report?

BUSTOS: I think really that it was so widespread, this abusive practice. We're talking about hundreds of companies that laid off their workers, that filed for bankruptcy and then took in millions of dollars in incentive bonuses.

REUTERS: Do you have co-sponsors?

BUSTOS: We have a Republican co-sponsor. I'm a Democrat that's in a Trump district. So the people back home for me want to make sure that we are working across the aisle. So we have Tim Burchett out of Tennessee, who's our Republican lead on this.

What our next goal will be is that we get as many co-sponsors as possible bipartisan and my hope is that we can get this all the way through the House. Hopefully we'll be able to get some leads in the Senate as well and be able to send this over to President Biden to sign into law.

REUTERS: Some bankruptcy scholars say executives play a critical role in the bankruptcy process and need to be compensated at a level that ensures they won't leave. What is your response to that?

BUSTOS: Ill go back to what I started out saying these are folks who at minimum would be making $250,000 a year. These are folks who have in many cases driven their company to bankruptcy. This bill doesn't do anything to their base salary. This is just saying that you don't deserve a bonus if your company has filed for bankruptcy.

REUTERS: The report mentioned that almost no bankruptcy judge rejected these bonus plans. Is that a concern?

BUSTOS: That's actually why we've added this provision that would let trustees claw back bonuses paid in the six months before a bankruptcy was filed. I think whether you're a bankruptcy judge or you're somebody who's trying to make decisions about bonuses, this is the right thing to do.

Maria Chutchian reports on corporate bankruptcies and restructurings. She can be reached at maria.chutchian@thomsonreuters.com.

Go here to see the original:

Bankruptcy bonuses for top executives are in trouble, if this congresswoman gets her way - Reuters

Your vendor or key customer files for bankruptcy. What do you do?

Heres what you dont do: Wait until that moment and send a note to your lawyer, asking them to file a proof of claim. It wont be worth much.

Unfortunately, for many companies, thats the only option they have. But it doesnt have to be that way.

So said Rob Nies and Sam Della Fera, the co-chairs of the Bankruptcy and Creditors Rights Group at Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi, who will be hosting a webinar on the subject on Oct. 26 (register here).

Nies and Della Fera advise that the time to make the call is when you suspect your vendor or customer is headed for bankruptcy (and there are plenty of warning signs for that).

The pair would then instruct their clients to restructure their agreements before bankruptcy hits and do it in a way that ensures you get paid first.

It may sound easy and obvious but not everyone does it.

Nies gave a recent example where their client, who operates warehouses, benefited during the bankruptcy of a retailer. Working with the client, Nies put language in the contract that would allow a court to find that it was an executory contract, and therefore, the warehouser falls into a different category than an unsecured creditor.

The result: The owners of the warehouse were fully reimbursed the millions they were owed, while others received only pennies on the dollar.

Nies and Della Fera will discuss all this and more during a webinar that will show steps companies can take, including:

The one thing it wont do? Tell you what to do after a bankruptcy is declared. By then, its often too late.

Our objective is always to maximize recovery to distinguish the clients claim from all other unsecured creditors, such that you get paid, Nies said.

Register for the webinar, which is free, here.

ROI-NJ will serve as the moderator.

Continued here:

Fear a key customer will file for bankruptcy? Webinar will tell you how to act before it happens - ROI-NJ.com