On Sunday evening, March 12, 2023, the US Department of the Treasury, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Board (Federal Reserve) and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) released a joint statement announcing various actions to stabilize the US banking system, in light of the widely publicized failures of Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) and Signature Bank (Signature Bank), each of which was closed by their respective state chartering authorities, with the FDIC appointed as receiver.

Summary

Here is the latest regarding Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) and Signature Bank as of Sunday, March 12th according to the FDIC. We expect to learn more by COB Monday, March 13th:

Depositors will have access to all of their money starting Monday, March 13.

This alert provides background on the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and explains significant recent developments, including the subsequent failure of Signature Bank and the U.S. government’s announcement that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) will make whole all depositors of both institutions. This alert also describes the new program simultaneously announced by the Federal Reserve to provide additional liquidity to the banking industry.

Run on Silicon Valley Bank

On Friday March 10, 2023, the Bank of England moved to put the UK arm of Silicon Valley Bank into insolvency after it applied for £1.8bn of liquidity as its parent company was collapsing. The situation remains fluid, and the following Q&A reflects our understanding as of Sunday, March 12.

UK resolution authority and powers

On March 10, 2023, the Bank of England published the following statement regarding Silicon Valley Bank UK Limited (SVB UK):

Two broad themes are currently emerging in relation to European private equity real estate financing.

First, market commentary has noted that €150 billion of this finance is due to mature by 2025 – the "wall of credit".

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court held that § 523(a)(2)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code precludes a debtor from discharging a debt obtained by fraud, regardless of the debtor’s own culpability. In Bartenwerfer v. Buckley, issued February 22, the Court concluded that “§ 523(a)(2)(A) turns on how the money was obtained, not who committed fraud to obtain it.”

Here’s a hard-knocks rule:

• When you can’t or won’t explain the true reason for taking a position in negotiations or litigation, distrust and suspicion of the worst-possible motives will follow.

An Exhibit A for this rule is an opinion issued February 9, 2023, in In re Heaven’s Landing, LLC, Case No. 20-21350, Northern Georgia Bankruptcy Court (Doc. 145).

Here are illustrative statements from that opinion:

Key Points:

On January 19, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Virginia entered an order sanctioning a collections law firm for violating the bankruptcy discharge injunction. The court in Skaggs v. Gooch (In re Skaggs) awarded the debtor $25,000 in attorneys’ fees based on a letter he received concerning a discharged debt.