Introduction

In the current economic crisis, an increasing number of companies are facing financial difficulties and potential insolvency. Unsurprisingly, at such times, tax issues can often be overlooked. This can lead to potential tax risks, lost opportunities and a failure to maximise assets. Correct planning can make a significant difference to the potential tax liabilities and maximisation of tax assets of a company or a group that is facing insolvency.

The UK generally distinguishes between “loan relationship” debts (e.g. loan receivables) and other debts (e.g. trading debt in respect of outstanding consideration for the sale of goods or services). It is possible to turn a trading debt into a loan relationship by issue of a debenture in respect of it.

Tax treatment in the hands of the creditor

Treasury has made a new set of Financial Markets and Insolvency Regulations that change the insolvency regime that applies to RIEs and RCHs. The Regulations amend several existing pieces of legislation including Part VII Companies Act 1989 and the 1991 Regulations. The changes include:  

Although service of a statutory demand or winding-up petition on a company is a blunt and unsophisticated debt recovery tool, it will often have the desired effect for a creditor as they are seldom ignored and ignored only at the company's peril. It can often prompt payment of the sum due, or judgment owed, where previously there has been prevarication and empty promises of payment.

Here is a reminder of some important issues a (solvent) company should consider if a statutory demand or petition is served upon it.

Doing nothing is not an option

Historically, the United Kingdom has not had a specialised bankruptcy regime for dealing with the failures of financial institutions. Rather, these were handled under the same rules that applied to ordinary corporations.

In (1) James Robert Tucker (2) Jeremy Spratt (Joint Supervisors of Energy Holdings (No 3)(in liquidation) v Gold Fields Mining LLC [2009] EWCA Civ 173 the Joint Supervisors (JS) of a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) appealed against a decision that they had wrongly excluded a claim form on the grounds that it had been out of time.

On 23 March 2009, the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) published a report on the market impact of the Lehman Brothers default. The report began with a brief discussion of the causes of the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. It then set out some of the regulatory and industry responses to the challenges in the securities field including:

This recent case in the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) is one of the first to examine how the insolvency provisions in the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (TUPE) should apply and, in particular, the circumstances in which employment liabilities passed under TUPE to the buyer of the assets of an insolvent company.

Facts

This case involved a "pre-pack" administration.

Introduction

This Note deals with the potential liabilities under English Law of the directors and officers (secretary and managers) of a UK company in the event of its (potential) insolvency.  

Summary  

Directors - and, to a lesser extent, other officers of a company - face a number of areas of potential personal liability. Of most relevance is the liability of the directors for ‘wrongful trading’.  

The following is a broad overview of the duties and liabilities of directors when their company is in financial difficulties. It is a general guide only and there will be variations according to the specific laws in each jurisdiction.