La Dirección General de Tributos examina algunas de las consecuencias que pueden derivarse de una operación de reestructuración empresarial a efectos de la constitución de la reserva de capitalización prevista en el artículo 25 de la Ley del Impuesto sobre Sociedades.

El Tribunal Supremo confirma en casación la procedencia de imponer sanción en supuestos de operaciones de reestructuración empresarial carentes de motivos económicos válidos sobre la base de argumentos que, en última instancia, lo llevan a reconducir la operación al campo de la simulación negocial.

1. Análisis de la Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo de 13 de diciembre del 2016 (rec. 2211/2015)

What can a lender do about successive bankruptcy filings by a borrower? What can lessors do when their tenants file successive bankruptcy petitions? A recent decision by a bankruptcy court in the Eastern District of New York gives guidance on these questions.

In a prior post, we discussed the Third Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Jevic Holding Corp., where the court upheld the use of so-called “structured dismissals” in bankruptcy cases, and the Supreme Court’s grant of certiorari. Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Jevic. The Court’s ultimate ruling will likely have a significant impact upon bankruptcy practice.

What does it mean to “cure” a default in the context of a plan of reorganization? This question arises by virtue of section 1123(a)(5)(G) of the Bankruptcy Code, which requires that a plan provide adequate means for the plan’s implementation, including the “curing or waiving of any default.” On November 4, 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals defined what it means to “cure” by holding that a debtor can only cure a contractual default under a plan of reorganization by complying with contractual post-default interest rate provisions.

La Audiencia Nacional, en una interesante sentencia, ha matizado el criterio que desde la Administración ha venido manteniéndose en muchos casos en virtud del cual la presencia de una segunda finalidad en las operaciones de reestructuración empresarial, añadida a la de perseguir una auténtica reorganización de la entidad, conllevaría, partiendo del análisis conjunto de la operación, la exclusión de la posibilidad de aplicar el régimen especial previsto a efectos del impuesto sobre sociedades para las citadas operaciones.

When should debt be recharacterized as equity? The answer to this question will have an enormous impact upon expected recovery in bankruptcy since equity does not begin to get paid until all prior classes of claims are paid in full. In a recent unpublished opinion, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals provided some guidance on when and in what circumstances recharacterization is appropriate. The Court’s decision also serves as warning to purchasers of debt that they may not be able to hide behind the original debt transaction in a recharacterization fight.

The Jevic Holding Corp. bankruptcy case is proving to be precedent setting.  In a prior post, we examined how the court had greatly increased the evidentiary burden on a party seeking to hold one company liable for the debts of another company under a “single employer” theory.  That ruling was seen as a boon for private equity firms who were oftentimes the target of Chapter 11 creditor

El Tribunal Supremo acepta que la ausencia de entendimiento entre los socios pueda considerarse un motivo económico válido en las operaciones de reestructuración empresarial cuando aquéllos puedan probar que sus discrepancias en cuanto a la organización empresarial condicionan la viabilidad de la empresa.

When can a bank be at risk of unknowingly receiving a fraudulent transfer? How much information does a bank need to have before it is on “inquiry notice”? A recent decision from the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals highlights the risks that a bank takes when it ignores red flags and fails to investigate. This decision should be required reading for all lenders since, in the matter before the Seventh Circuit, the banks’ failure to investigate their borrower’s questionable activity caused the banks to lose their security and have their secured loans reduced to unsecured claims.