Small Business
| ID | Name | Group | Other | Code
Sec |
Cross Ref | Problem
Referenced | Proposed
Solutions |
NBRC- 0005 | Richard L. Haeussler | Law Offices of
Richard L. Haeussler. Sole practitioner who represents chapter 7 &
13 Debtors. |
|
|
| Chapter 11 does not work for small
businesses. | New Chapter should be open to
small businesses with up to $2.5 million in debt. |
NBRC- 0005 | Richard L. Haeussler | Law Offices of
Richard L. Haeussler. Sole practitioner who represents chapter 7 &
13 Debtors. |
|
|
| Chapter 11 does not work for small
businesses. | New Chapter should be open to
small businesses with up to $2.5 million in debt. |
NBRC- 0007 | Leon S. Foreman | Scholar-in-Residence
- American College of Bankruptcy - Selective Professional Association of
7, 13 & 11 Attys; Accts; Professors; Judges * Gov't Officials
(Approx. 300 Fellows). |
|
|
| Are the 1994 small business
amendments working | Small business amendments
should be given a chance to work. |
NBRC- 0021 | James I. Shepard | Practitioner;
Commissioner, National Bankruptcy Review Commission |
|
|
| Chapter 11 takes too long, Small
cases without an active creditor constituency tend to linger on without
resolution which creates a burden on taxing authorities because of the
need to handle them separately from the mainstream of taxpayers. The
voluntary "small business" amendments are simply
ineffective. | There should be provisions
which encourage the compeltion of cases as quickly as possible. The
small business provisions should be mandatory. |
NBRC- 0042 | David J. Bardin | Attorney; Arent, Fox,
Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn. DC counsel for Cult Awareness
Network. | Testified at Open Forum at July
Meeting. |
|
| Should the bankruptcy code deal
with non-profit corporations Should assets of non-profit/public interest
corps enjoy constitutional protection | No
solution suggested. Volunteered time to the Commission. |
NBRC- 0042 | David J. Bardin | Attorney; Arent, Fox,
Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn. DC counsel for Cult Awareness
Network. | Testified at Open Forum at July
Meeting. |
|
| How should the Ch. 7 trustee,
the bankruptcy court in Ch. 7 or Ch. 11 and the district court assure
protection of associational rights of non-debtor individuals who choose
to associate with the debtor For example, how should they protect
membership and donor lists of a bankruptcy non-profit
corporation | No solution suggested.
Volunteered time to Commission |
NBRC- 0042 | David J. Bardin | Attorney; Arent, Fox,
Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn. DC counsel for Cult Awareness
Network. | Testified at Open Forum at July
Meeting. |
|
| Under Ch. 7 how does the
representative of the estate carry-out fiduciary obligations of the
bankrupt corp. to those who associated with it in order to safeguard
their rights When issues of Const'l privacy are raised, how should a
trustee respond procedurally and substantively Should the trustee be
expected to present a program for vindicating such rights Should the
Code provide guidance as to these const'l
dimensions | No solution suggested.
Volunteered time to the Commission. |
NBRC- 0042 | David J. Bardin | Attorney; Arent, Fox,
Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn. DC counsel for Cult Awareness
Network. | Testified at Open Forum at July
Meeting. | 2004 |
| Should the trustee address
issues of ongoing physical access to files of non-profit debtors by
representatives of the debtor differently from the files of
for-profits | No solution suggested.
Volunteered time to the Commission. |
NBRC- 0042 | David J. Bardin | Attorney; Arent, Fox,
Kintner, Plotkin & Kahn. DC counsel for Cult Awareness
Network. | Testified at Open Forum at July
Meeting. | F.R.B.P. 7026 | F.R.B.P. 2004 | Should the trustee
allow adversaries of the non-profit debtor to acquire privileged
attorney-client and work-product documents needed by the debtor for
on-going non-bankruptcy litigation | No
solution suggested. Volunteered time to the Commission. |
NBRC- 0075 | Judge Thomas E. Carlson | Chief
Bankruptcy Judge; District of San Francisco | Invited participant to small business and jurisdiction working
groups. |
|
| Results of poll of Ninth Circuit
Bankruptcy Judges: Need for a separate chapter to deal with small
business debtors | 78% of the judges believe
there should not be a separate chapter governing the reorganization of
small business debtors. The substantive portions of Ch. 11 should apply
to such cases. |
NBRC- 0075 | Judge Thomas E. Carlson | Chief
Bankruptcy Judge; District of San Francisco | Invited participant to small business and jurisdiction working
groups. |
|
| Should there be fast track
procedures to speed resolution of small ch. 11
cases | 78% of the judges believe that there
should be fast-track procedures to speed the resolution of small chapter
11 cases. |
NBRC- 0075 | Judge Thomas E. Carlson | Chief
Bankruptcy Judge; District of San Francisco | Invited participant to small business and jurisdiction working
groups. |
|
| Should the small business
definition be $10 million in annual gross income | A plurality of the judges believe that the fast-track procedures
should apply to all cases in which the debtor's annual gross-income is
less than $10 million. |
NBRC- 0075 | Judge Thomas E. Carlson | Chief
Bankruptcy Judge; District of San Francisco | Invited participant to small business and jurisdiction working
groups. |
|
| What should proposed plan filing
deadline be for fast-track small business cases | 89% of the judges believe that the proposed 45-day plan filing
deadline is too short. Several judges also stated that any statutory
deadline should be subject to extension in suitable cases. |
NBRC- 0075 | Judge Thomas E. Carlson | Chief
Bankruptcy Judge; District of San Francisco | Invited participant to small business and jurisdiction working
groups. |
|
| Should the fast-track procedures
include standard form plans and disclosure
statements | 81% of the judges believe that
standard form plans and disclosure statements should be encouraged.
More enthusiasm for simplifying disclosure statements and eliminating
disclosure hearings than for combining the disclosure and confirmation
hearings. |
NBRC- 0075 | Judge Thomas E. Carlson | Chief
Bankruptcy Judge; District of San Francisco | Invited participant to small business and jurisdiction working
groups. |
|
| Should a chapter 13-type trustee
be appointed in small ch. 11 cases | Only
one-half of the judges believe a chapter 13-type trustee should be
appointed in small ch. 11 cases. |
NBRC- 0078 | David A. Lander | Attorney; Thompson
Coburn | Invited participant to small business
working group sessions. |
|
| How to define a small business in order to provide different
treatment in ch. 11. | Definition of $10
million in revenue is much too broad and should be reduced by at least
one-third. This definition as it now stands covers all cases except
those that would be considered very large in my part of the
country. |
NBRC- 0116 | Kenneth J. Doran | Law Offices of
Kenneth J. Doran | Participated at Consumer
Bankruptcy Working Group on July 19. |
|
| Except for sole proprietorships that meet the Chapter 13 debt
limit, there is not a useful reorganization option in the Code for the
smallest businesses (revenues in the five- and six-figure
range.) | Create a reorganization option for
small businesses, e.g., eliminate Chapter 13 debt limits, and extend
eligibility to any natural person, including sole
proprietors. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Walter | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| There is no separate chapter to
address small business bankruptcy issues. | Create a separate, small business chapter, like Chapter 12, for
businesses with aggregate debts of $2.5 million or less. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Walter | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| The 45-day plan filing
requirement is too short. | A 75-90 day plan
filing deadline is appropriate for small business cases. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Wlater | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| The proposed small business
definition of $10 million in revenues is too high. | Either lower the small business eligilibility limits or provide
an opportunity to opt out of the small business treatment on
notice. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Walter | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| The deadlines proposed in the
Sept. 7 Small Business Memo are too inflexible. | Allow courts flexibility in extending deadlines, clarifying that
extensions are the exception and not the rule. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Walter | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| Small business debtors do not
need a monitoring agent. Furthermore, the US Trustee should not be
deciding which chapter 11 cases have merit. | Find some way to increase creditor involvement in small business
cases. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Walter | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| Small business plans and
disclosure statements are unnecessarily burdensome and
costly. | Simplify plan and disclosure
statement requirements for small business cases. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Walter | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| Discharge date in Chapter 11
cases should not be extended. Confirmation creates a contract and the
enforcement is left to the state courts. The debtor needs to start with
a cleaned up balance sheet. Creditors can achieve their protections by
negotiating provisions for inclusion in the plan. | Discharge date should not be discharged. |
NBRC- 0143 | Riley C. Walter | McCormick, Barstow,
Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth LLP |
|
|
| The Code does not plainly state
that fees to oversecured creditors must be approved by the
court. | The Code should plainly state that
fees paid out of the estate to oversecured creditors must be approved by
the court. |
NBRC- 0148 | Judge Robert Martin | Chief Bankruptcy
Judge; District Wisconsin |
| 1104 |
| Lack of a viable threat that the
DIP may lose control of the reorganization process has continued what
was known under the old chapter XI as "the arrogance of the Chapter
XI debtor." Unresponsiveness, delay, looting of the estate, and
"uneconomic decisions" are all potential products of
inappropriate DIP control. | Proposed statute
would provide that at any time after the commencment of the case and
prior to the filing of a plan, any party in interest (but not the court
or the US Trustee) may move for the appointment of a trustee. In the
absence of a hearing on an objection to the motion within 30 days of its
service, the motion would be deemed granted. Any objecting party would
have to prove that: debtor is operating business consistent with DIP
duties; DIP is maintaining books & records; wages, taxes and
insurance payments are up to date; plan negotiations have begun; appt of
trustee would not be in best interest of general creditors. |
NBRC- 0148 | Judge Robert Martin | Chief Bankruptcy
Judge; District Wisconsin |
|
|
| Need for more rapid confirmation
of plans. | Disclosure statements should be
done away with, regaining the 30-45 days back in the confirmation
process would be far superior to the other expediting
proposals. |
NBRC- 0149 | L.E. Creel, III | Attorney, Malouf,
Lynch, Jackson, Kessler, Collins |
|
|
| Proposed 45 day time limit
within which debtor must file a plan is unrealistic and
impractical. | In the early days following a
ch. 11 filing by a small business debtor, the energies of the management
are directed at initiating the ch. 11 process. To think that a business
debtor can negotiate and formulate a plan of reorganization within six
weeks of filing is naive. Strongly oppose a 45-day limit or any
shortening of the 180 day exclusive period. |
NBRC- 0149 | L.E. Creel, III | Attorney, Malouf,
Lynch, Jackson, Kessler, Collins |
|
|
| Lack of creditor representation
when no committee exists and moving the ch. 11 process
along | Legislating the authority to hold
status conferences, but not imposing strict time limits is a useful
concept especially in those cases where there is no active creditors
committee. If there is an active creditors' committee, then such status
conferences should be held only upon request of a party in
interest. |
NBRC- 0149 | L.E. Creel, III | Attorney, Malouf,
Lynch, Jackson, Kessler, Collins |
|
|
| Problem with disclosure
statement requirements for small business debtors. | In the majority of cases, the disclosure statement necessitates
unwarranted expense because it is either never read or is read and used
in "the approval process for leverage or other non-disclosure
purposes." |
NBRC- 0149 | L.E. Creel, III | Attorney, Malouf,
Lynch, Jackson, Kessler, Collins |
|
|
| Whether a need exists for a
small business monitoring agent. | The
addition of a small business monitoring agent seems superfluous and an
unnecessary expense. In a case with a creditors' committee, such a
person is unneccessary. In a case without a creditors' committee, staus
conferences with the judge should suffice. The bankruptcy judge should
be more involved in the case (as under the Act) and should not merely be
a dispute resolver. The system should be based upon someone's good
judgement and who is more appropriate for that position than the
bankruptcy judge. |
NBRC- 0164 | Philip J. Hendel | Attorney; Hendel,
Collins & Newton |
|
|
| Current proposal under
consideration is unworkable. | Simpler
Solution to problems of small business bankruptcy exist. |
NBRC- 0175 | Kenneth P. Childs, on behalf of the Bankruptcy Review Committee
of the Oregon State Bar Debtor-Creditor Section | Attorney |
|
|
| Under current practice, an individual doing business as a sole
proprietorship may seek relief under Chapter 13 if his debts meet
Chapter 13's requirements. However, if the same individual has
incorporated his business, he is effectively prevented from reorganizing
because of the prohibitive costs, complexities and time consuming
requirements of Chapter 11. Small, closely-held corporations should
qualify for relief under Chapter 13, which provides an expeditious and
inexpensive method for the small business person to reorganize his or
her debts. | Small businesses that meet the
aggregate debt limitations of Chapter 13 should be allowed to seek
relief under that Chapter. |
NBRC- 0178 | Gary White, on behalf of the Natl. Assoc. of Credit
Management | Chair, Government Affairs Comm.,
Natl. Assoc. of Credit Management |
|
|
| Working group's proposed ten
million dollar income threshold in defining "small business"
would qualify businesses that otherwise would not qualify as
"small." Under this test, over 91% of all businesses filing
for bankruptcy would qualify as small businesses. Even the largest
companies, by manipulating tax returns, could be treated as small
businesses. Expedited treatment is justified for businesses who
legitimately qualify as "small" because of the difficulty of
forming creditor committees in small business bankruptcies. However,
allowing larger companies to benefit from this treatment will compromise
the bankruptcy system. | NACM strongly
supports the testimony of Jim Sczudlo, Vice Chair of NACM's Government
Affairs Committee, that was presented at the Santa Fe meetings, urging
the NBRC to define a small business as a debtor with secured and
unsecured debts totaling no more than two million dollars. |
NBRC- 0178 | Gary White, on behalf of the Natl. Assoc. of Credit
Management | Chair, Government Affairs Comm.,
Natl. Assoc. of Credit Management |
|
|
| Use of a small business
monitoring agent to ensure timely case adjudication will further and
unnecessarily erode the financial base of the small business
debtor. | NACM strongly opposes the use of a
small business monitoring agent to ensure timely case
adjudication. |
NBRC- 0178 | Gary White, on behalf of the Natl. Assoc. of Credit
Management | Chair, Government Affairs Comm.,
Natl. Assoc. of Credit Management |
|
|
| U.S. Trustee does not adequately
review the progress of small business cases. | NBRC should urge the Executive Office of the U.S. Courts to
review the efficacy of small business Chapter 11 cases and report the
findings to the General Accounting Office. |
NBRC- 0179 | Geraldine Mund | US Bankruptcy Judge,
Central Dist. of CA |
|
|
| Author states that the U.S.
Trustee in her district has asked the court to delay the initial status
conference until 60 days after commencement of a case. This would allow
the Trustee to obtain one cycle of required reports and hold the §
341(a) meeting. In so doing, the Trustee is better prepared for the
status conference and is able to give the judge meaningful
information. | Initial status conferences
should not be held until about 60 days after a case commences. If the
Bankruptcy Code is amended to make this status conference mandatory, a
flexible time period should be provided (e.g., 30-60 days) so that each
district can create a system that is tailored to its needs. |
NBRC- 0179 | Geraldine Mund | US Bankruptcy Judge,
Central Dist. of CA |
|
|
| Disclosure statement and
reorganization plan should be combined in one document in order to
minimze the time required for judicial approval. In most cases, the
plan merely reiterates the contents of the disclosure statement, and a
great deal of judicial time is required to approve both documents. A
single document could be approved more quickly. In cases where the
disclosure statement is voluminous, two separate documents should still
be required. | Disclosure statement and
reorganization plan should be combined into a single document, except in
cases where the court orders otherwise. |
NBRC- 0179 | Geraldine Mund | US Bankruptcy Judge,
Central Dist. of CA |
|
|
| Grant of discharge should not
occur until the plan is performed, unless there is cause shown to
discharge earlier. | Same. |
NBRC- 0183 | William E. Cumberland | Senior Staff
VP, Mortgage Bankers Assoc. of America | Submission of Robert P. Vestewig to Single Asset R.E. working
group |
|
| Author provides written
submission of Robert P. Vestewig, Senior Vice President of L. J. Melody
& Co. Houston, TX, a commercial mortgage banking company, for
consideration at the 12/17/96 meeting of the Working Group on
Partnerships, Small Business and Single Asset Realty. Mr. Vestewig also
serves as Chair of the Bankruptcy Working Group of the Mortgage Bankers
Association of America. In his statement, he defines and discusses the
"single asset debtor," and provides the following
observations:
1) The preservation of jobs is not usually a consideration in
reorganizing single asset debtors because these debtors normally have
few employees, if any. Also, when a lender forecloses on a single asset
property, jobs are not often lost because the lender usually retains the
debtor's employees to manage the property.
2) Contrary to some critics' opinions, large land developers and hotel
chains who own single asset properties are not automatically put out of
business where a lender forecloses on the ownership of a single asset
entity. Typically, these companies do not legally own the property, but
rather ownership rests in a legal entity such as a corporation or
limited partnership in which they own an interest or have a management
contract.
3) Often, the creditor has far more capital investment in the asset
that does the single asset debtor. Consequently, commercial mortgage
lenders are understandably concerned about delays in bankruptcy
proceedings and threats of cramdowns.
4) History has demonstrated that reorganization is not always possible
with single asset debtor-owners. According to a MBAA survey of life
insurance companies, single asset debtors often use Chapter 11 and
reorganization provisions for delay rather than legitimate
reorganization purposes.
5) Delaying a bankruptcy allows these debtors to avoid or defer income
tax liability for recapture of depreciation, to divert rents to the
owner, and to induce lenders to pay cash or to forego prepayment
penalties. Delay is costly, resulting in higher mortgage interest
rates, less investment in commercial mortages, and a decline in property
values and corresponding tax bases. During this delay, tenants in
commercial and residential property and nearby communites also suffer
when single asset properties are not maintained.
6) Congress has begun to recognize that unwarranted delay by single
asset debtors is "inappropriate," and has implied in recent
amendments that single asset cases should not be entitled to "the
presumption that reorganization is possible." The 1994 provision
lifting the automatic stay in cases where reorganization is not
reasonably likely to succeed may be "quite helpful" if ever
applied to all single asset cases. | Single
asset debtors are often incapable of reorganization because they have no
"business" to reorganize. The NBRC should approach the issue
of single asset debtors with the assumption that these debtors are not
always capable of successful reorganization, but may be using the
reorganization provisions simply to delay and take advantage of the
bankruptcy system. Many issues, such as cramdowns, creditor classes,
and the new value exception to the absolute priority rule, are more
easily resolved if "there is no pervasive presumption that
reorganization of a single asset debtor-owner is the goal." The
Bankruptcy Code should be amended to reflect this
"reality." |
NBRC- 0185 | Terrance L. Stinnett | Attorney |
| 101(51) |
| "Small business" should not be defined by a $10 million
income threshold. The author suspects that "in the Northern
District of California at least 95% of the [C]hapter 11 cases that are
filed involve debtors whose gross annual income is less than $10
million," including many businesses who should not otherwise
qualify as small businesses. This threshold seems to be based on the
incorrect assumption that only in cases where debtors' gross income
exceeds $10 million will adequate creditor interest be generated to
assure that the provisions of Chapter 11 are not abused by the debtor.
The author's experience has been that it is the size of debts owed and
not the debtor's income that determines the level of creditor interest.
Moreover, "just because creditors do not wish to become actively
involved in a case does not mean they have no interest in its outcome or
that the case lacks merit." | "Small
business" should not be defined by a bright line test of the
debtor's annual income. |
NBRC- 0185 | Terrance L. Stinnett | Attorney |
|
|
| Mandatory deadline should not be imposed for filing a plan. The
author particularly disagrees with a deadline of 45 days after the
petition date, even if the court has discretion to extend the deadline
upon a showing by the debtor that a feasible plan is possible. In the
great majority of cases, a meaningful plan cannot be formed within 45
days. The first 30-60 days are devoted to many other details, leaving
little time for plan formation. Also, in many cases development of a
plan may take an even longer period of time as the parties wait for
various events to occur, such as negotiating terms for restructuring
secured debts, finding a source of new capital, or decreasing the
vacancy rate of rental properties. In addition, requiring a plan filing
deadline is based upon the erroneous assumption that neither creditors,
debtors, nor debtors' counsel wish to move Chapter 11 cases to
confirmation. In fact, in most cases creditors will exert upon the
debtor whatever pressure is necessary to move the case along. In those
cases that do languish, the Bankruptcy Court can determine at the status
conference an appropriate deadline for filing a plan and achieving
confirmation. Such has been the case in Northern California, where
Bankruptcy Judges and U.S. Trustees conscientiously monitor Chapter 11
cases and deadlines. The author discusses four recent cases
illustrating the need to eliminate deadlines for filing a
plan. | Mandatory deadlines for filing plans
should be eliminated. |
NBRC- 0185 | Terrance L. Stinnett | Attorney |
|
|
| Working group's proposed Special Extension Hearing is not an
appropriate mechanism for dealing with those cases where a feasible plan
cannot be proposed promptly. The Hearing would likely lead to
increased, unnecessary litigation early in the case, and will divert
counsel and the debtor from their efforts to maintain the business and
develop a realistic plan. Futhermore, logistical and administrative
details may prevent debtors from being able to demonstrate early in a
case that they can confirm a feasible plan. That debtor can often
develop a feasible plan if given additional time. Also, requiring this
Hearing will increase the cost of Chapter 11 cases, and will force
potential counsel to require higher retainers to cover the cost of the
Hearing, thereby depleting the debtor's limited
funds. | Opposes the Working Group's proposed
Special Extension Hearing. |
NBRC- 0185 | Terrance L. Stinnett | Attorney |
|
|
| Proposed provision regarding small business monitoring agent
would merely add expense to the Chapter 11 process, and the agent would
add little to the prospects for successful reorganization. A monitoring
agent would only be helpful in cases that are obviously hopeless from
the start and where there is little or no creditor interest. These
cases should be obvious to the court, and can be weeded out through the
status conference procedure. | Opposes
proposed creation of Small Business Monitoring Agent. |
NBRC- 0186 | Robert A. Goering | Attorney |
|
|
| Proposed 45 day deadline for filing a plan in the fast track
program does not provide the debtor enough time to get counsel, put the
numbers straight, develop an effective plan, and then file the petition
and plan together. Forty-five days is just too short to give a small
business a chance to put its best foot forward in the presentation of a
plan. | Opposes proposed 45 day deadline for
filing a plan in the fast track program. The 90 day period presently
provided "makes sense," and should not be
shortened. |
NBRC- 0186 | Robert A. Goering | Attorney |
|
|
| Proposed small business monitoring agent would be just another
layer of bureacracy and expense, and would not help debtors survive.
Rather, these layers would become impediments to the successful
conclusion of the debtor's case. | Opposes the
working group's proposal wtih regard to small business monitoring
agents. |
NBRC- 0200 | Kenneth N. Klee | Invited
participant |
| 101(51C) |
| Defining "small business" with a $10 million threshold
is "ill conceived." The definition would embrace many large
businesses that simply have large debts but little income. The NBRC
should "contact some big 6 accounting firms" to verify that
many start up ventures, high tech companies, and bio tech companies have
little or no gross income in the early years when products are still
under development. These companies should not be entitled to small
business treatment. | "Small
business" should not be defined by a $10 million threshold, but
rather by a requirement that the debtor have fewer than 25 employees, or
less than $10 million in assets (or liabilities), as well as having less
than $10 million gross income. |
NBRC- 0203 | Amy M. Tonti, on behalf of the Allegheny Co. Bar Assoc.'s
Bankruptcy & Commericial Law Section | Chair, Allegheny County Bar Assoc. (ACBA), Bankruptcy and
Commerical Law Section | Summary of ACBA's
recommendations |
|
| "[O]pposes the Small
Business Chapter 11 proposed modifications, but supports specialized
programs run by the U.S. Trustee's Office where there is no active
Creditors' Committee to review petitions and schedules. The author also
supports requiring "early status conferences in those cases that
the U.S. Trustees' Office believes are not appropriate Chapter 11
cases." | Same. |
NBRC- 0211 | Robert A. Greenfield | Conferee,
National Bankruptcy Conference | Proposed
amendment to the definition of "single asset real
estate" | 101(51B) |
| National Bankruptcy Conference
(NBC) opposes the so-called technical amendments bill that passed in the
Senate, but not the House, seeking the elimination the $4 million cap
from the § 101(51B) definition of single asset real estate. The
NBC is on record as opposing different treatment for single asset real
esate cases, any change in the definition of "single asset real
estate," and eliminating the $4 million cap. | If the $4 million cap were eliminated, the NBC is considering
additional amendments to the definition which would limit "single
asset real estate" to the smaller cases and those not likely to
involve an operating business. The author encloses a copy of the
proposed amendment which is presently being considered by the
NBC. |
NBRC- 0223 | Frank R. Kennedy | Professor, Michigan
Law School; former Executive Director, Commission on the Bankruptcy Laws
of the United States (1973) | Cover letter
discussing various areas of concern |
|
| Author provides a list of 30 "Topics for Consideration by
Commission on Bankruptcy Laws." The recommended topic relating to
partnerships is:
Revision of provisions governing partnerships and limited liability
companies. | None. |
NBRC- 0236 | Thomas E. Carlson | Chief Bankruptcy
Judge (N.D. Cal.) |
|
|
| Author attaches a copy of his report on the reactions of Ninth
Circuit Bankruptcy Judges who participated in the Ninth Circuit Judicial
Conference with regard to the working group proposals on small chapter
11 cases. | The results of the Judges'
dicussion and questionnaire responses can be summarized as follows:
1) Severnty-eight percent of the judges believe there should not be a
new chapter govering reorganization of small business debtors. The
judges believe the substantive provisions of chapter 11 should apply to
such cases.
2) Seventy-eight percent believe there should be fast-track procedures
to speed the resolution of small chapter 11 cases.
3) A plurality of the judges believe that the fast-track procedures
should apply to all cases in which the debtor's annual gross income is
less than $10 million.
4) Eighty-nine percent believe that the proposed plan-filing deadline
(45 days after the petition date) is too short. In oral and written
comments, several judges also stated that any statutory plan deadline
should be subject to extension in suitable cases.
5) Eighty-one percent believe that standard-form plans and disclosure
statements should be encouraged. There was more enthusiasm for
simplifying disclosure statements and eliminating disclosure hearings
than for combining the disclosure and confirmation hearings.
6) Only one-half of the judges believe a chapter 13-type trustee
(monitoring agent) should be appointed in small chapter 11 cases.
Author attaches questionnaire responses and a synopsis of the judges
written and oral comments. |
NBRC- 0252 | Thompson Coburn and David A. Lander | Attorneys |
|
|
| Proposed definition of small business, as an entity with $10
million or less in gross income, is too broad. This definition as it
now stands covers all cases except those would be considered very large
in the author's part of the country. | Proposed definition of small business should be reduced by at
least one third. |
NBRC- 0252 | Thompson Coburn and David A. Lander | Attorneys |
|
|
| Proposed 45-day deadline in the fast track program for the filing
of a plan is too short. Too short a deadline and will simlpy cause more
courts to extend the deadline, and the net effect will be contrary to
the purpose of this provision. | Fast track
plan filing deadline should be extended to either 60 or 75 days.
Likewise, the deadline for the Mandatory Status Conference No. 2 should
be extended to 15 days after the plan filing deadline. |
NBRC- 0252 | Thompson Coburn and David A. Lander | Attorneys |
|
|
| Establishment of a third party other than a Judge as a monitoring
agent who determines the viability of a business would be a serious
mistake. Problems that would arise include cost and the fact that each
side will still offer its own experts. If the agent were given
decision-making authority, the fact that the agent is not subject to the
same restrictions as a judge presents constitutional
concerns. | Opposes creation of small business
monitoring agents. |
NBRC- 0252 | Thompson Coburn and David A. Lander | Attorneys |
|
|
| Disclosure Statement Hearing should be a standardized and
inexpensive process, and the court should have discretion to determine
when a hearing is needed. | Supports third
proposed "alternative" regarding Disclosure Statement
Hearings: use as a baseline the mandatory use of a standard form without
a hearing, but give the court discretion to either dispense altogether
with the disclosure statement or to require a hearing and mandate
disclosure beyond the standard form. |
NBRC- 0252 | Thompson Coburn and David A. Lander | Attorneys |
|
|
| Bankruptcy system already supplies adequate remedies in cases
where reorganized debtors fail to perform as called for in the plan.
Additional safeguards in the form of deferred granting of discharges is
not necessary. | Opposes proposal concerning
deferred granting of the discharge. |
NBRC- 0252 | Thompson Coburn and David A. Lander | Attorneys |
|
|
| NBRC Subcommittee should revisit its decision regarding voting
and absolute priority in the context of a "very small
business" case. The only way that a very small business coud
effectively reorganize would be through a process similar to chapter 12.
In the event there are a few recalcitrant creditors that stand in the
way of an out-of-court workout, a chapter 12 process for businesses,
corporatations, partnerships, LLC's or individuals with limits slightly
above chapter 13 would be a useful vehicle that would benefit all
parties and the employees as well. | Establish
a definition for very small businesses and provide chapter 12-like rules
for the elimination of the absolute priority rule and
voting. |
NBRC- 0270 | Kenneth F. Mease | President, SELMAX
Corporation |
| 209, 547 |
| Code does not provide adequate protections for creditors who are
small businesses against "unethical business practices by those
[debtors] who deliberately mismanage their affairs." Sections 209
and 547 were amended in 1994 supposedly to "simplify" the
bankruptcy process, but in reality, both sections are used by
unscrupulous debtors against their creditors. | Code should offer more protections to creditors who are small
businesses by reducing unnecessary government regulations and preventing
debtors from manipulating the Code to avoid debts owed to these small
business creditors. |
NBRC- 0301 | National Bankruptcy Conference | National Bankruptcy Conference (NBC), Bernard Shapiro -
Chair |
|
|
|
National Bankruptcy Conference believes that the
following issue merits study by the NBRC: whether the law of
partnerships should be "totally
reconsidered." | NBC concludes that
partnership law should be "reconsidered." (No additional
details are provided. The NBC Report, however, which discusses this
position more thoroughly, has been "refined" and will be
available to the NBRC.) |
NBRC- 0303 | Commercial Law League of America | Commercial Law League of America (CLLA) |
|
|
| The Commerical Law League of
America believes that the following issue should be considered by the
NBRC: whether small businesses should be permitted to reorganize in
chapter 13. Or should business bankruptcies be handled in other
chapters | The CLLA believes that this issue
should receive top priority because this issue has become more important
with the increase in debt limitations for filing chapter 13,
particularly with the sole proprietorship and professionals who are
seeking relief under chapter 13. |
NBRC- 0303 | Commercial Law League of America | Commercial Law League of America (CLLA) |
|
|
| The Commerical Law League of
America believes that the following small business issues should be
considered by the NBRC:
1) How can reorganization under the Code be more effective,
inexpensive and expeditious for small businesses Should small
businesses have a "fast track" where absolute priority,
disclosure and committee appointment requirements are eased
Consideration of these issues should be based on the underlying premise
that these efficiencies need to be accomplished without sacrificing the
rights of the parties, other than the debtor, who are interested and
involved in the bankruptcy (CLLA believes these issues should receive
high priority).
2) What procedures would dispose of small business cases that do not
have a reasonable chance ot reorganization ("non-priority"
issue). | The CLLA believes that, with regard
to procedures that would dispose of small business cases that do not
have a reasonable chance ot reorganization, adequate mechansims already
exist to deal with business cases that do not have a reasonable chance
of reorgnization. |
NBRC- 0303 | Commercial Law League of America | Commercial Law League of America (CLLA) |
|
|
| The Commerical Law League of
America believes that the following partnership issues should be
considered by the NBRC:
1) Is a partnership agreement an executory contract (CLLA believes
this issues should receive high priority; no additional details are
provided)
2) Does the trustee exercise the rights of partners who are debtors or
are those rights reserved to the debtor ("high priority"
issue).
3) Are clauses automatically converting a general partner's interest
to a limited partnership enforceable in bankruptcy Are clauses
compelling the sale of the bankrupt partner's interest enforceable
("high priority" issue)
4) Under what circumstances may the bankrupt court stay creditor
actions against non-debtor partners for their liability for partnership
debts Are there differences during the pendency of the case and after a
plan is confirmed and the case is closed ("high priority"
issue)
5) Should the bankruptcy court have the power to prohibit general
partners of the bankruptcy partnership from transferring non-partnership
assets during the pendency of the case ("high priority" issue)
6) Should the bankruptcy court have the power to compel non-debtor
general partners to disclose information about their financial condition
Should this information be sealed ("high priority" issue)
7) What rights should the chapter 7 trustee have against general
partners What rights should the chapter 11 estate have against the
partners ("high priority" issue)
8) Should non-partnership creditors have priority over partnership
creditors as to non-partnership assets of general partners who are in
bankruptcy, or who are in bankruptcy ("high priority" issue)
9) Should § 1111 be calrified to provide that conversion of
non-recourse debt to recourse debt does not create general partner
liability on such debt ("high priority" issue)
10) Should the Code authorize creation of committees of partners
("high priority" issue)
11) What is the status of new partners, fomer partners, special
partners and partners by estoppel | The issue
of the status of new partners, fomer partners, special partners and
partners by estoppel should be a "non-priority" because it is
much too broad and probably could never be addressed effectively by
statutory enactment. |
NBRC- 0315 | Paul Mignini, Jr. and Gary White | President-National Association of Credit Management
("NACM"), and Chairman-NACM Government Affairs Committee,
respectively |
|
|
| The proposed definition of small business as a business with less
than $10 million in net income would effectively allow for over 90% of
all non-consumer filings to qualify for expedited treament. The
definition should be narrowed so that only true small businesses are
entitled to such treatment. | Small business
should be defined not be by income, a figure which is easily
manipulated, but by the amount of debt, a figure which more accurately
represents the debtor's financial position. |
NBRC- 0315 | Paul Mignini, Jr. and Gary White | President-National Association of Credit Management
("NACM"), and Chairman-NACM Government Affairs Committee,
respectively |
|
|
| NACM believes that the time frame for the filing of a plan by a
small business debtor must be viewed in relationship to the availability
of extensions on the period of exclusivity for the debtor. While the
proposed 45 day period for filing a plan is too short, NACM remains
equally concerned that the ability of the debtor to secure extensions of
the exclusivity period leads to abuses of the bankruptcy
system. | NACM recommends that the time in
which small businesses can file a plan should be kept to 120 days, and
that no extensions be granted. Failure to meet this deadline should
allow the creditors to either liquidate the business or dismiss the
case. |
NBRC- 0318 | Paul Mignini, Jr., Mary E. Wysocki and Charles M.
Tatelbaum | President-National Association of
Credit Management ("NACM"), Chair-NACM Government Affairs
Committee, and NACM Legislative and Bankruptcy Counsel,
respectively |
| 362(h) |
| NACM concludes that the current small business provisions in
chpater 11 do not provide sufficeint relief to debtors and creditors
involved with small business cases. | NACM's
Government Affairs Committee recommends that the NBRC review the
possibility of "reinstating the language which was contained in
Chapter 10 as passed by the U.S. Senate in 1992 and
1994." |
NBRC- 0320 | Robert M. Zinman, on behalf of the Bankruptcy
Institute | American Bankruptcy Institute
("ABI") | Numerous position papers,
memoranda and research material | 1304, 1321,
1102, 1103 |
| In order to make chapter 13 an alternative to chapter 11 for
small businesses, chapter 13 would need to be amended so that it is more
effective for small businesses. | To make
chapter 13 an effective alternative to chapter 11 for small businesses,
the Code should be amended as follows:broaden the eligibility limits;
increase the debt limit to $1.5 million; lengthen the period for payment
of non-consumer secured claims in order to accomodate commercial real
esate and equipment loans; § 1304, which defines "debtor
engaged in business," should be expanded to include corporations
and partnerships; the U.S. Trsutee should be given the power to appoint
a creditors committee for corporate and partnership debtors in the
manner provided for under §§ 1102 and 1103; finally, §
1321, which provides for the filing of plans, should require the debtor
engaged in business to file its plan within 60 days of filing the
petition, which period may be extended an additional 60 days upon
substantial justification. |
NBRC- 0320 | Robert M. Zinman, on behalf of the Bankruptcy
Institute | American Bankruptcy Institute
("ABI") | Numerous position papers,
memoranda and research material | 723 | Rule 1007(g) | The author observes that: (1) most courts have found that
partnership ageements are executory contracts; (2) that courts are split
as to whether the trustee exercises the rights of the partners who are
debtors, as opposed to those rights being reserved to the debtor; (3)
most courts have found that clauses automatically converting a general
partner's interest to a limited partnership enforceable in bankruptcy;
(4) the majority of courts have found that the automatic stay does not
protect non-debtor partners when the partnership files for bankruptcy
relief; and (5) The extent of a partner's liability for partnership
debts at state law determines whether, and to what extent, the partner
may be compelled to contribute to a deficiency under current §
723; | Code should be amended as follows: (1)
Clarify the provisions regarding the court's power to prohibit general
partners of the bankruptcy partnership from transferring non-partnership
assets during the pendancy of a case. Such amendments should allow both
partner and partner creditor requests for relief; (2) Provide the
bankruptcy court with the power to compel non-debtor general partners to
disclose information about their financial condition, as the information
is relevant to many issues in the liquidation or reorganization of the
debtor partnership; (3) Provide that the rights of the trustee contained
currently in § 723 of the Code should be equally available to
chapter 7 and chapter 11 trustees; (4) Give nonpartnership creditors and
partnership creditors equal priority claims on the assets of general
partners, and avoid return to the "jingle rule"; and (5)
Clarify that § 1111 to provide that conversion of non-recourse debt
to recourse debt does not create general partner liability on such debt;
(6) Permit creation, where necessary, of a committee of
partners; |
NBRC- 0340 |
A. Thomas Small |
Bankruptcy Jduge (E.D. NC) |
|
|
|
The author states that Chapter 11 cases can be managed
without elaborate and expensive conferences, and encloses a report on
four years of his bankruptcy cases which he believes demonstrates this
point. |
Any recommendation concerning small business should not
require numerous preconfirmation status conferences and hearings because
chapter 11 already provides adeqaute case management
procedures. |
NBRC- 0347 | Philip J. Hendel | Attorney |
|
|
| The author recommends using chapter 13 for small business cases.
He states that "this is truly a business recommendation" and
that he hopes that the NBRC will consider this recommendation as a
viable alternative to the other suggestions currently under
review. | Bankruptcy Code should be amended to
expand the use of chapter 13 to include closely held corporations and
other business entities. |
NBRC- 0348 |
Grant W. Newton |
Vice President of the Association of Insolvency
Accountants ("AIA") |
|
|
|
The AIA believes that the proposed definition of
"small business" will result in many of the larger companies
being forced to file under the small business provisions which would not
otherwise qualify as small businesses. |
A business debtor's last income tax return should be
used to establish whether the business is a small business. Also, while
AIA does not object to including provisions that reauire debtors to file
income tax returns, it is best not to establish or enforce this
provision through the definition of small business, but rather through
provisions. Suggested statutory language is provided. |
NBRC- 0348 | Grant W. Newton | Vice President of the
Association of Insolvency Accountants
("AIA") |
|
|
| AIA agrees with the Working Group proposal to consider affiliated
corporate debtors as a consoldated group, but recoomends that the word
"corporate" be deleted. There are cases where partnerships
have been consolidated with corporations and the combined entity should
be measured to determine the threshold test. | Bankruptcy Code should be amended to consider affiliated debtors
as a consoldated group. Also, AIA agrees that intecompany transactions
should be eliminated, and suggests basing the test on aggregate
amounts. |
NBRC- 0348 | Grant W. Newton | Vice President of the
Association of Insolvency Accountants
("AIA") |
|
|
| AIA fully supports requiring debtors to submit a uniform set of
operating reports. | AIA fully supports
requiring debtors to submit a uniform set of operating reports, but
suggests that the focus of the cash flow statements be on cash flow from
operating activities of the business, and should clearly distinguish
cash flows from operations from those related to liquidation and other
nonoperating, extraordinary activities. Section B should be expanded to
include all chapter 11 filings. |
NBRC- 0348 | Grant W. Newton | Vice President of the
Association of Insolvency Accountants
("AIA") |
|
|
| The Working Group's proposal for reducing the cost of
administering small business chapter 11 cases will help, but will not
solve all the problems associated with these cases because it would
never answer the question: Is this a viable
business | AIA believes that the U.S. Trustees
should appoint a small business examiner to determine the viability of
businesses. The examiner would have 15-20 days to make a visit to the
premises, complete his initial report and file it with the court and the
U.S. Trustee. The information from this report should be made available
in 30 days. |
NBRC- 0348 | Grant W. Newton | Vice President of the
Association of Insolvency Accountants
("AIA") |
|
|
| Status conferences should be held within 30 days to ascertain if
the business is viable or at least take action in the larger number of
cases where it is obvious reorganization is not an
alternative. | None (no additional comments
provided). |
NBRC- 0352 | Bernard Shapiro | Chair, National
Bankruptcy Conference |
| 28 U.S.C. §
586 | 1112 | The
Naitonal Bankruptcy Conference makes the following comments about the
Small Business Working Group proposals: (1) the use of a gross revenue
bright line definition for small business is "most
inappropriate," and $10 million is far too high (the author
attaches a copy of the IRS's definition of "gross income");
(2) requiring 4-5 status hearings complicates and adds unnecessary cost
to the bankruptcy process; (3) the proposed amendments to 28 U.S.C.
§ 586 and 11 U.S.C. § 1112 are well founded, but if the
proposeals are adopted, the "overlay of the balance of the small
business proposal" is unncessary; (4) the 45-day period for filing
a plan is far too short; (5) the court should have greater flexibility
to dispense with the disclosure statement altogether in cases where
there is no publically-held debt or equity; (6) the proposal with regard
to "designated real estate debtor" is "very bad"
because, if enacted, every lender would have the leverage to cause every
debtor to make such an election; and (7) NBC generally favors Bob
Maritn's proposal to modify the procedure for appointment of a trustee,
but is opposed to shifting the burden to the debtor to prove that the
appointment of a trustee would not be in the best interests of general
creditors because the provision would substantially change the Code and
goes beyond the objective of weeding out small business/abusive
cases. | Small business shold be defined as a
business with less than $4 miliion in debt, less than 10 employees, and
gorss revenues of less than $3 million; (2) Bankruptcy process should be
simplified to have less stautus conferences; (3) the time period for
filing a plan should be 60 days or more; (4) NBC generally favors Bob
Maritn's proposal to modify the procedure for appointment of a trustee,
but is opposed to shifting the burden to the debtor to prove that the
appointment of a trustee would not be in the best interests of general
creditors. |
NBRC- 0387 | National Association of Credit Management | National Association of Credit Management
("NACM") |
|
|
| In this statement entitled "Position on Small Businesses in
Bankruptcy," the NACM expresses concern about the cost, delay and
administration of small business bankruptcies. However, the NACM
concludes that "it is best for its members and the economy in
general for legitimate, honest businesses to be able to reorganize and
continue with operations, even if trade creditors are unable to receive
full payment of their debts." Also, more small businesses wold be
encouraged to use the reorganization process if there were procedures in
place which would facilitate their reorganization
cases. | Code should be amended to provide
sufficient guidelines to protect creditors from the dishonest or
unscrupulous business debtor seeking to manipulate the system at the
expense of creditors. |
NBRC- 0415 | Bernard Shapiro | Chair, National
Bankruptcy Conference (a voluntary organization of persons interested in
the improvement of the Bankruptcy Code and its
administration) |
|
|
| 1) "Although a bright line test for what is a small
business is a worthy goal, the use of a gross revenue definition from
the Internal Revenue Code is most inappropriate...and $10.0M is far too
high". 2) Instead of making small business Chapter 11s simpler
and cheaper, there would be 4-5 hearings in the first 90 days. 3) They
support modifications to §586 and §1112 giving more power to
U.S. Trustees to monitor Chapter 11 cases and seek dismissal or
conversion of abusive cases. With abusive cases weeded out, the small
business proposals make it more difficult for a small business to
survive Chapter 11. 4) The 45-day period for filing a plan is too
short. 5) see proposal below. 6) The proposal with respect to
"designated real estate debtor" is very bad. 7) Opposed to
shifting burden to debtor to prove that the appointment of a trustee
would not be in the best interests of general
creditors. | 1) If it is important to have a
revenue test, then gross revenues (as determined by GAAP) of less than
$3.0M would be be more appropriate for a small business. 2) Small
Business Chapter 11 process should be further simplified. 3) Small
Business proposals should make it easier for the small business to
confirm a plan. 4) Period for filing plan shoud be at least 60 days,
and likely more. 5) The court should have greater flexibiltiy to
dispense with the disclosure statement altogether in cases where ther is
no publicly-held debt or equity. 6) Drop this proposal 7) Drop this
proposal. |
NBRC- 0424 | Robert A. Greenfield | Attorney,
Conferee - National Bankruptcy Conference | Copy of proposed amendment to the single asset real estate
definition prepared by members of the Conference. | 101(51B) |
| National Bankruptcy Conference opposes different treatment for
single asset real estate cases, any change in the definition of
"single asset real estate," and eliminating the $4 million
cap. | If cap on single asset real estate
cases is eliminated, the National Bankruptcy Conference is considering
additional amendments to the definition which would limit "single
asset real estate" to the smaller cases and to the cases that are
not likely to involve an operating business. |
NBRC- 0429 | Mark Homan | England | Partner, Price Waterhouse,
UK |
|
| The number of DOA cases damages
the credibility of the Chapter 11 process. | Consider the introduction of "entry requirements," a
positive showing why Chapter 11 is preferable to Chapter 7. The party
applying to the Court should show that there is some prospect of
survival or reconstruction of the debtor, or a reason why administration
will be better than liquidation. Consider the use of quasi-judicial
officers to reduce the burden on the court. Consider making use of
qualified/licensed professionals. Identify businesses that are unlikely
to reconstruct before they become unsaleable and ensure a bonafide
attempt at a sale. Extend the range of companies to which new
procedures are applied up to $50 million turnover. Amend the reporting
requirements. |
NBRC- 0429 | Mark Homan | England | Partner, Price Waterhouse,
UK |
|
| In some cases the DIP in a
Chapter 11 case allows the assets to dwindle to a point where by the
time conversion takes place the trustee cannot do
anything. | Place the burden of proof on the
debtor to show why he should remain in Chapter 11 rather than Chapter 7
and require him to take steps to convert as soon as that burden is no
longer satisfied. |
NBRC- 0431 | Barbara J. Sellers | Bankruptcy Judge,
U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Sourthern District of Ohio, Eastern
Division |
|
|
| Author does not agree that the size of a company's debts or its
assets are the determinative factor in whether the case needs to be on
an expedited "track." The debt structure is more important.
The case most likely to get "stalled" is one with one greatly
undersecured creditor (usually with accounts receivable and inventory
collateral) and/or very large unpaid tax debt. | Don't "fast track" cases based on the size of company
debts or assets. |
NBRC- 0431 | Barbara J. Sellers | Bankruptcy Judge,
U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Sourthern District of Ohio, Eastern
Division |
|
|
| Mr. Williamson asked for input as to any major areas of the
Bankruptcy Code not currently under discussion. Author thinks the
entity/enterprise distinction may fit in here. "There are some
reforms being suggested in the partnership/partner area, but there are
other places where the Bankruptcy Code conceptually does not handle well
the enterprise business structure now so often used in this
country." | Author is "not
necessarily suggesting that the Bankruptcy Code go from an entity
concept to an enterprise one, but there are places where some elasticity
in concepts or provisions might better fit the way large businesses
operate." |
NBRC- 0433 | James Lawniczak |
| Attorney. Memo sent by E-mail,
no address given. |
|
| Disclosure statement procedure
is cumbersome. | Author agrees with Judge
Martin that the disclosure statement be simplified, although he would
not go so far as to say it should be eliminated. |
NBRC- 0433 | James Lawniczak |
| Attorney. Memo sent by E-mail,
no address given. |
|
| Disclosure statement requirement
is cumbersome. | A disclosure statement in a
small business case should have a short summary of the plan and a short
history of the debtor and the reasons for the case. |
NBRC- 0435 | William C. Beall | Attorney |
|
|
| For many small cases, confirmation of a Plan is not the answer.
In many small cases, an asset is sold or a pending litigation settled,
any stray unsecured creditors are paid, and the case is dismissed. The
requirement that a Plan be filed within 45 days will result in
nonsensical filings, will put a great burden on debtor and debtor's
counsel in the critical first days, and will ultimately not help the
creditors. | Do not require filing of a Plan
of reorganization within 45 days. |
NBRC- 0443 | Samuel J. Gerdano | Executive Director,
American Bankruptcy Institute | Partner and
Partnership Bankruptcy: A Survey and Analysis of Case Law and Proposed
Amendments to the Bankruptcy Code, by Robert J. Keach,
Esq. |
|
| Author of letter is forwarding
copy of "a detailed analysis and proposed amendments to the
Bankruptcy Code relating to partnerships" prepared by Robert J.
Keach, Esq., Chair of the Subcommittee on Partnerships of the ABI
Committee on Business Reorganization. |
|
NBRC- 0448 | Philip J. Hendel | Attorney, |
|
|
| Author replies on behalf of ABI Business Subcommittee with some
general and specific comments with respect to the proposal formulated
for the Commission's consideration by Steve Case et al, which led to the
white paper prepared by ABI on utilizing Chapter 13 for small business
cases. The author made comments under the following headings: 1)
General Comments on Small Business Working Group Suggestions; 2)
Definition of Small Business - author's group felt that the gross income
test is too liberal; 3) Small Business Monitoring Agent - negative
reaction to this proposal; 4) Disinterested - "This test strips
the debtor of professionals who know the debtor best."; 5) Fast
Track - proposed time line is too short, discourages the use of
alternative dispute resolution and negotiation techniques to settle
disputes. | Author makes the following
proposals under the headings given above: 1) None; 2) Most
participants felt that the parameters of "small business"
should be defined by debt rather than income. Perhaps all that is
needed is to provide for a quick status conference at the beginning of
the case where it can be determined whether or not the case should be
handled under a fast-track small business system.; 3) None; 4) The
disinterestedness rule should be relaxed in small business cases.
Section 327 (c) should be amended to allow general counsel for the
debtor to continue representation in the Chapter 11.; 5) "Why not
copy what works There are programs in place around the country which
have operated successfully for many years in small business cases and
with fast-track systems." |
NBRC- 0454 | Philip J. Hendel | Attorney | Draft of white
paper |
|
| Author previously submitted
white paper on expanded use of Chapter 13 to include closely held
corporations and other business entities. He has made extensive changes
and submits a new draft to be substituted for first one
submitted. | Substitute draft of white paper
included with this letter for draft previously submitted. |
NBRC- 0469 | Paul Mignini, Jr. and Gary White | President and Chairman, Government Affairs Committee,
respectively, of the National Association of Credit
Management |
|
|
| "There are two components of the proposed small business
expedited Chapter 11 filing that our members find troubling...the
definition of a small business and the time frame for the filing of a
plan by the debtor." | Author supports
the existing Code definition of small business as an entity with $2
million or less in debts, as presented in the initial filing. They also
recommend that the time in which a small business can file a plan should
be kept at the time allowed under the current code, which is 120
days. |
NBRC- 0471 | A. Thomas Small | United States
Bankruptcy Court, Eastern District of North
Carolina |
|
|
| "My concern is that the subcommittee's proposal is too
heavily weighted toward identifying the bad chapter 11 cases to the
detriment of those chapter 11 debtors who have a chance at
reorganization. What is needed are a few minor amendments to the
Bankruptcy Code to give bankruptcy judges the tools to better manage
their chapter 11 cases. What is not needed is unreasonably short
deadlines and a series of preconfirmation hearings..." Since 1987
the Eastern District of North Carolina has utilized a "fast
track" approach to small business chapter 11 cases that they call
"Chapter 11(a)", which the author goes on to
describe. | "The two specific changes
that I recommend are: 1) Amend §1121(e) to read "The court
many fix a date by which a plan shall be filed"; and, 2) Amend
§1125(f) to read "The court may conditionally approve a
disclosure statement subject to final approval after notice and a
hearing. A hearing on the disclosure statement may be combined with a
hearing on confirmation of a plan. Acceptances and rejections of a plan
may be solicited based on a conditionally approved disclosure
statement." Author feels that the burden of persuasion should not
be shifted to the debtor prior to confirmation. |
NBRC- 0479 | Lisa Hill Fenning | United States
Bankruptcy Judge | Copy of Draft of RAND
report: Just, Speedy, and Inexpensive: An Evaluation of Judicial Case
Management under the Civil Justice Reform Act. |
|
| Author is forwarding a RAND Corporation study of the Civil
Justice Reform Act and its effectiveness in reducing cost and delay in
the federal district courts. She believes that the report provides
valuable insights into the process and effectiveness of case management
reform efforts that bear upon the Small Business Working Group's pending
proposals for small Chapter 11 cases. The report's conclusions sound a
cautionary note with respect to the use of short, mandatory deadlines to
reduce delay: such dealines actually corollate with increased costs.
On the other hand, the overall import of the findings strongly suggests
that active judicial case management in general can effectively reduce
cost and delay. | "I urge that the
Commission take a close look at this experiment before embarking upon
another. You may even want to invite Dr. Deborah Hensler of the RAND
Institute to testify about the lessons of CJRA." |
NBRC- 0486 | A. Thomas Small | U.S. Bankruptcy
Court, Eastern District of North Carolina |
|
|
| Author previously sent a
memorandum concerning the small business proposal being considered by
the NBRC. "Chapter 11 cases can be managed without elaborate and
expensive conferences, and I believe that is demonstrated by the
following report of my chapter 11 cases from October 1992 to October
1996." There follows and extensive breakdown of authors cases for
the stated period. | Author's primary
recommendation is that any proposal with regard to small businesses not
include numerous mandatory preconfirmation status conferences and
hearings. |
NBRC- 0488 |
| Grant W.
Newton | Vice President of the Association of
Insolvency Accountants |
|
| Author is forwarding comments made by a committee of the Board of
the Association of Insolvency Accountants which, they believe, are
"consistent with the views adopted by the Board at is January
meeting, described to Steve Case and summarized in a memo he sent to the
Small Business Working Group." | Author
addresses, item by item, agreement with and suggestions for change in
the provisions of the February 20, 1997 memo to the Small Business
Working Group. |
NBRC- 0507 | Edward Rothberg |
|
|
|
| Author "reviewed the 'Small Business ' Report and determined
that a lot of it lacks reality, and appears to have been written by
creditors counsel whose clients are trying to put off the responsibility
of the case to others (i.e. the Judge and the U.S. Trustee)." The
government does not need to watch out for the creditor's money.
"The reason a creditor may be apathetic is because it simply does
not have enough at stake to warrant participating in the case. If this
is the case, so be it." "On the other hand, if the Code gave
creditors an incentive to participate, they would." "First,
the Code must be amended to provide that creditors who benefit the
estate in some way or another will be compensated. The current
'substantial contribution' rules are far too restrictive...why should a
creditor who may net 20 cents on the dollar risk incurring fees and
expenses to benefit other creditors and not be
reimbursed." | The Code must be
amended to provide that creditors who benefit the estate in sosmse way
or another will be compensated. |
NBRC- 0507 | Edward Rothberg |
|
|
|
| Author strongly disagrees with the fast track concept.
"Often times a small business has complex problem which cannot be
resolved in 90 or 120 days. I do, however, agree that the viability of
the debtor's operation should be tested early in the
case." | "I propose a simple test.
If the monthly operationg report shows that cash is increasing on a
month to month basis over the first few months (say 3), then the debtor
should be allowed the normal time frame to file and confirm a plan. On
the other hand, if cash is decreasing, the case should either be
converted, dismissed, or the debtor forced to file a very quick plan as
it won't be in business very long if cash is decreasing while under
protection of the automatic stay." |
NBRC- 0517 | Morris W. Macey | Attorney, Former
Chairman, Ad Hoc Committee of the ABA | Proposed amendment to §569 of the Code; copy of article by
author and Professor Kennedy from The Business Lawyer, May,
1995. | 569 |
| Author is forwarding copy of
Amendment to §569 of the Bankruptcy Code proposed by an Ad Hoc
Committee of the ABA. | Contained in proposed
amendment |
NBRC- 0522 | Richard S. Toder | Attorney, Zalkin,
Rodin & Goodman LLP | Copy of Focus
Group's report; letter to Steven H. Ancel from Kevin P. Dempsey dated
12/18/96 |
|
| Author sets forth his opinions
on the revised proposal of the Small Business Working
Group. | Author notes that "[t]he Revised
Proposal reflects significant salutary changes from the original Working
Group proposal" which he specifies. He then goes on to discuss
specific suggested changes. |
NBRC- 0544 | Paul Mignini, Jr. & Gary White | President and Chairman, Government Affairs Committee,
respectively, of the National Association of Credit
Management |
|
|
| With regard to the creation of a bright line test for eligibility
for an expedited small business Chapter 11 process, authors support the
current $2.5 million in debts. This assures that the debtor can't avail
himself of the expedited procedure through creative
bookkeeping. | Authors support an expedited
procedure for small businesses. |
NBRC- 0553 | Robert D. Martin | U.S. Bankruptcy
Judge, Western District of Wisconsin | A
second memorandum, 4 pages long, labled "Exhibit A", and a
Proposed Draft Statute. |
| <
|
|