The government has identified that the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the public health measures to prevent its spread could see many otherwise profitable and viable businesses temporarily face financial distress.
If ever there were times challenging enough for boards to be considering the financial lifeline that is safe harbour from insolvent trading, these are they.
On a daily basis we are reading news of businesses having to shut down and lay off employees and seeing footage of lengthy Centrelink queues. Boards are working harder than ever to govern their organisations in incredibly uncertain times.
During the second half of 2019, it was generally accepted that the US/China trade war was the most likely macroeconomic event that would precipitate a global slowdown. Even then, given the enormous amount of ‘dry powder’ capital that was available in the market, the downturn, if any, was expected to be mild.
As the social and economic disruption caused by coronavirus (COVID-19) continues to rapidly evolve, the boards of Australian companies are facing solvency related issues. These issues extend to the solvency of suppliers and customers, and the potential consequences of the appointment of a voluntary administrator.
During the second half of 2019, it was generally accepted that the US/China trade war was the most likely macroeconomic event that would precipitate a global slowdown. Even then, given the enormous amount of ‘dry powder’ capital that was available in the market, the downturn, if any, was expected to be mild.
The perception of Australia as being a relatively “risky” place to sit on a Board has generally focused on the insolvent trading prohibition in section 588G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and how it interacts with general directors’ duties.[1]
A recent decision of Justice Rees of the Supreme Court of New South Wales confirms the importance of keeping proper financial books and records in the context of insolvency.
It is inevitable that companies will face periods of financial distress during their corporate lives. During these times, it is incumbent on the directors and management to seek to maximise the company's chances of survival and preserve value for stakeholders. Certainly it has not been uncommon for directors to use the threat of voluntary administration as a part of their stakeholder management strategy during these times.
New laws under consideration could expose company directors to jail terms of up to ten years for engaging in ‘Phoenix activity’ – the practice of closing down an enterprise, shifting its assets then re-starting it to avoid creditors.
For company directors, the threat of personal liability for debts incurred in periods of actual or potential insolvency looms large. The creation of the ‘safe harbour’ provisions in the Corporation Act 2001 (Cth) that took effect in September 2017 may provide some welcome relief to company directors in periods of financial distress.