Business Credit Magazine May 2014 | Page 19

Safe Harbors It’s not hard to see why some would think that it’s not such a great idea to suggest that a procedure that has a hard time reorganizing companies should also be used to reorganize SIFIs when their holding companies go bankrupt. But the reality might be even worse, as the Bankruptcy Code includes certain provisions that can make it even more difficult for SIFIs and their regulated bank properties to make it through reorganization. Each witness referred to three specific goals that resolution of [SIFIs] should be done in a manner that “(i) maximizes value for stakeholders, (ii) minimizes systemic disruption and moral hazard, yet (iii) protects taxpayers from loss.” “A group of provisions in the Bankruptcy Code referred to as safe harbor provisions permit (generally) counterparties to short-term repossess financings, swaps and other derivatives to terminate agreements, set off obligations and seize collateral,” Vris said, meaning that entities party to such transactions can take action against the SIFI to reclaim what’s theirs in the instance of a bankruptcy filing. “Ordinarily, once a company becomes a debtor, the automatic stay under the Bankruptcy Code prevents parties from taking any of these actions, preserving asset value for the benefit of all creditors ratably in accordance with legal priorities,” she added. “Actions by counterparties to derivatives or qualified financial contracts (QFCs), a term used elsewhere but not in the Bankruptcy Code, are to a meaningful degree exempt from the automatic stay.” mizes systemic disruption and moral hazard, yet (iii) protects taxpayers from loss.” The NBC was referring specifically to SIFIs, but the three goals were what everyone at the hearing, and what everyone else agrees are the greatest priorities of any resolution of any entity, company, bank, financial institution or otherwise. Regulators will continue to debate the merits of different ways to create a system that can accomplish those three goals, but in some ways they’re working to build a regulatory structure that, at its best, aims to prevent another crisis and, at its worst, cements companies’ and financial institutions’ right to shortsightedness. The financial sector will always be ahead of its regulatory scheme for the most part, but the FDIC’s requirements that a company have a plan in place to resolve itself are important in the sense that they at least place some value on the concept of planning ahead, and planning for the worst. New capital reserve requirements for financial institutions are also a step in this direction, designed to require banks to consider the worst possible consequences. The global financial market is considerably more complex than simply telling all banks and companies to think ahead, and in order to remain competitive all entities in the business economy must continue to take risks, but the point is to take them deliberately, rather than taking them as though the safety net is a certainty. Jacob Barron, CICP, NACM staff writer can be reached at [email protected]. This is not to say pity the SIFIs, for they have a hard time of reorganizing even when they accumulated enough debt that, to a large extent, formerly tossed the global economy into recession. The point is that the current structure is not designed to properly handle companies and SIFIs as they operate in today’s financial market. Innovations in financial products and activity have advanced so quickly that the structures the US has in place to contain them when things go awry need to be amended in order for them to fit the new reality. NACM’s Throughout the Judiciary Committee’s Chapter 11 hearing, each witness referred to three specific goals of any reorganization proceeding. Vris put it best, quoting from a letter NBC wrote to Senators John Cornyn (R-TX) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) regarding a bill they wrote that would create a new wind-down procedure for SIFIs: “The NBC generally supports the idea that resolution of [SIFIs] should be done in a manner that (i) maximizes value for stakeholders, (ii) mini- Convenient, Affordable and Relevant Continuing Education Audio Teleconferences & Professional Education Webinars www.nacm.org B usiness C redit ma y 2 0 1 4 17