On September 25, 2008 in Washington, D.C., the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) held an all-day workshop, entitled “Consumer Protection and the Debt Settlement Industry,” to explore growth in the for-profit debt settlement industry and to examine its impact on consumers and businesses.
In the biggest bank receivership in the history of the United States, the Office of Thrift Supervision seized Washington Mutual Bank on September 25 and appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver. While details are still emerging, it is at least clear that all deposits were transferred to JPMorgan, as were all loans and Qualified Financial Contracts, which include swaps, options, futures, forwards, repurchase agreements and any other Qualified Financial Contract as defined in 12 U.S.C. Section 1821(e)(8)(D).
Over the past few days, Members of Congress have engaged in intensive debate over the terms of the bailout package, now commonly referred to as the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”). Both Democrats and Republicans have offered criticisms and alternatives to the original Treasury proposal which are summarized below.
Senator Dodd Proposal
Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT), Chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs has drafted a 100 page bill that encompasses many of the Democratic proposals discussed to date. His bill would:
At the end of the day, what really drives lender decisions with regard to addressing problem loan modifications, workouts, and restructuring issues revolves around the impact of those decisions on the financial statements condition of the institution.
Likewise, the regulatory and accounting treatment behind those decisions tends to dictate policy and procedure for the CRE lending and workout areas of the bank.
As you are undoubtedly aware, the September 15 Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in New York by Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (LBHI) represents the single largest insolvency proceeding in US history. With assets and liabilities of more than US$639 billion, the LBHI filing dwarfs the previously largest US bankruptcies. The filing comes at a time of significant destabilization in US capital markets and has global ramifications. In an effort to keep our clients abreast of the LBHI situation, we are providing the following general update of significant events in the proceedings:
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently upheld a $182.9 million judgment against PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (“PWC”) for allegedly contributing to the failure of Ambassador Insurance Company (“Ambassador”) through negligent auditing. Thabault v. Chait, No. 06-2209 (3d Cir., Sept. 9, 2008).
Nothing is certain in today's financial crisis - except that the legal system will be sorting out the rights and obligations of financial market participants for years to come. This is especially true for participants in the over-the-counter derivatives markets.
Sales of assets under a confirmed plan in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy are exempt from transfer taxes. Many courts had interpreted the exemption broadly and applied the exemption to sales that occur during a bankruptcy, but before a Chapter 11 plan had actually been confirmed, so long as the sale was generally in furtherance of the ultimate goals of bankruptcy. The Supreme Court imposed a strict interpretation of the statute stating that transfer taxes must be paid unless the sale actually occurs pursuant to an already confirmed plan. Florida Department of Revenue v.
In an interpretive statement, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has taken the position that “cleared-only contracts,” over-the-counter contracts submitted for clearing through a futures commission merchant to a derivatives clearing organization, should be included within the definition of “net equity” for purposes of U.S. Bankruptcy Code provisions applicable to commodity brokers. The CFTC’s interpretation generally would treat cleared-only contracts in the same manner as exchange-traded futures contracts in the event of a futures commission merchant bankruptcy.
In Burkhart v. Coleman, (In re Tippett) --- F.3d ---, 2008 WL 4070690 (9th Cir. Sept. 4, 2008), the Ninth Circuit held that an unauthorized post-petition sale of real property may be upheld where: 1) the bankruptcy trustee failed to record the bankruptcy petition with the county recorder; and 2) a bona fide purchaser thereafter bought and recorded title in the property.