Afin de pallier à certains manquements de la LCE et de remédier à certains abus, le législateur a décidé de modifier certaines dispositions de la LCE en adoptant une loi modificative qui ne remet pas fondamentalement cause les principes généraux de la LCE et son intérêt. Certains éléments méritent toutefois que l’on s’y arrête.

Bénéficiaires d’un régime de faveur dans le cadre du concordat judiciaire, l’ONSS et l’administration fiscale sont considérés aux yeux de la LCE comme des créanciers sursitaires ordinaires, à l’instar de tous les créanciers qui ne possèdent ni privilège spécial, ni hypothèque, ni clause de réserve de propriété à l’encontre de leur débiteur.

Tariefverhoging vanaf 1 oktober 2014

De liquidatieboni, die ontstaan wanneer het vermogen van een vennootschap wordt uitgekeerd naar aanleiding van diens vereffening, konden lange tijd ‘genieten’ van een tarief van 10% aan roerende voorheffing. In de recente begrotingscontrole van de regering Di Rupo ging dit gunsttarief dan toch voor de bijl. De heffing stijgt van 10 naar 25%. Het was klaarblijkelijk niet de bedoeling van de regering om de vennootschappen op snelheid te pakken, want de tariefverhoging gaat maar in vanaf 1 oktober 2014.

Since the entry into force of the Financial Collateral Act of 15 December 2004 (the "Collateral Act") implementing Directive 2002/47/EC on financial collateral arrangements as regards linked systems and credit claims (the "Collateral Directive"), financial collateral arrangements have benefitted from increased flexibility and legal certainty in Belgium.

The Belgian Constitutional Court declared netting arrangements in insolvency proceedings, which are explicitly allowed under the Belgian Financial Collateral Law of 15 December 2004, unconstitutional where such netting arrangements apply to non-merchants. Despite the numerous criticisms on this decision, a legislative proposal was drafted on 13 September 2011 in order to explicitly exclude non-merchants from the application of the Belgian Financial Collateral Law.

Petroplus, the largest independent refiner and wholesaler of petroleum products in Europe entered into various insolvency proceedings in Switzerland, England and Wales, France, Germany and Belgium on 24-27 January 2012 after the group failed to reach agreement with its creditors to extend the deadline of its loan repayments.

Through its decision of 27 November 2008, the Belgian Constitutional Court declared netting arrangements in insolvency proceedings, which are explicitly allowed under the Belgian Financial Collateral Law of 15 December 2004, unconstitutional where such netting arrangements apply to non-merchants. Despite the numerous criticisms about this decision, the amended Belgian Financial Collateral Law, entered into force on 10 November 2011, now explicitly excludes non-merchants from its scope.

Under European law, there are no general rules whit respect to the liability of a holding company for the debts of its insolvent subsidiary.

The Council Regulation (EC) N° 1346/2000 of 29 May 2000 on insolvency proceedings only provides for a common framework for insolvency proceedings in the European Union (EU). The harmonised rules on insolvency proceedings intend to prevent assets or judicial proceedings being transferred from one EU country to another for the purposes of obtaining a more favourable legal position to the detriment of creditors (“forum shopping”).

Tax treatment in the hands of the creditor

The waiver of debt results in the accounting ‘loss’ of a receivable. Such loss, however, is not automatically tax deductible in the hands of the creditor.

The deductibility of such loss may be prohibited, either because it is deemed not to be incurred to retain or increase taxable income (‘general deduction criterion’), or because it is deemed to be an ‘abnormal or benevolent advantage’ granted to the debtor (‘anti-abuse rule’).

New restructuring legislation was recently adopted in Belgium and comes into force on 1 April 2009. The Act of 31 January 2009 on the continuity of undertakings (the Act on Continuity) aims to replace the existing judicial composition procedure (concordat judiciaire/ gerechtelijk akkoord) with a more effective and flexible restructuring instrument.  

The key features of the Act on Continuity are: