answersLogoWhite

0

AllQ&AStudy Guides
Best answer

You need individualized expert legal help, and a great deal more understanding of what your saying.

For the creditors to own the assets, and/or the income, as your asking, you would need to set up another entity (NOT a trust), that the participating creditors would be the owners of and that entity would purchase what you are saying. (By the way, asset sales, just like selling the company as such, have serious and substantial tax ramifications).

The creditors committe, and the trust they frequently establish, done under BK, is done to satisfy the claims of those creditors in the BK and any action it takes is approved by the court and normally, by the BK itself.

The main Q really becomes, why not simply do it all under C-11, and avoid a bunch of problems, like taxable income from cancellation of debt, other creditor law suits claiming the transfer effected their ability to collect, and why would any senior, unsubordinated creditor, or secured one, sacrafice it's position and right to the business property to a trust it only gets a piece of? I gather you would expect the debtor to pay rent to continue to use the assets put in the trust..(actually required or imputed for tax purposes)....similar to common sale/ leaseback arrangements. Why would the Co that can't pay creditors now, be able to pay the rent - especially if you wan the creditors to get the income from the Co too (raising the question even more of how it would operate....even one that is solvent and successful can't last long if their income is taken by someone else?

This answer is:
Related answers

You need individualized expert legal help, and a great deal more understanding of what your saying.

For the creditors to own the assets, and/or the income, as your asking, you would need to set up another entity (NOT a trust), that the participating creditors would be the owners of and that entity would purchase what you are saying. (By the way, asset sales, just like selling the company as such, have serious and substantial tax ramifications).

The creditors committe, and the trust they frequently establish, done under BK, is done to satisfy the claims of those creditors in the BK and any action it takes is approved by the court and normally, by the BK itself.

The main Q really becomes, why not simply do it all under C-11, and avoid a bunch of problems, like taxable income from cancellation of debt, other creditor law suits claiming the transfer effected their ability to collect, and why would any senior, unsubordinated creditor, or secured one, sacrafice it's position and right to the business property to a trust it only gets a piece of? I gather you would expect the debtor to pay rent to continue to use the assets put in the trust..(actually required or imputed for tax purposes)....similar to common sale/ leaseback arrangements. Why would the Co that can't pay creditors now, be able to pay the rent - especially if you wan the creditors to get the income from the Co too (raising the question even more of how it would operate....even one that is solvent and successful can't last long if their income is taken by someone else?

View page
Featured study guide
📓
See all Study Guides
✍️
Create a Study Guide
Search results