Corporate Restructuring under Relative and Absolute Priority Default Rules: A Comparative Assessment

J. Seymour, S. Schwarcz
{"title":"Corporate Restructuring under Relative and Absolute Priority Default Rules: A Comparative Assessment","authors":"J. Seymour, S. Schwarcz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3498611","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The European Union recently adopted a Restructuring Directive intended to facilitate the reorganization of insolvent and other financially troubled firms. Although the central goal of the Directive parallels that of Chapter 11 of U.S. bankruptcy law — to protect and maximize the value of financially distressed but economically viable enterprises by consensually reorganizing their capital structure — the Directive introduces an innovative but controversial option: that EU Member States can decree that reorganization negotiations should be subject to a relative priority default rule, in contrast to the type of absolute priority default rule used by Chapter 11. EU officials argue that relative priority is not only fair but also provides the flexibility that is needed pragmatically to restructure a troubled firm. This article explains why relative priority inadvertently can undermine the incentives needed to achieve a successful restructuring, and why absolute priority provides a more effective default rule for reaching a negotiated consensus. Additionally, the article illustrates why the Directive’s standard not only may be unfair to creditors but also might discourage debt investments in the European Union.","PeriodicalId":296326,"journal":{"name":"International Institutions: European Union eJournal","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Institutions: European Union eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3498611","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The European Union recently adopted a Restructuring Directive intended to facilitate the reorganization of insolvent and other financially troubled firms. Although the central goal of the Directive parallels that of Chapter 11 of U.S. bankruptcy law — to protect and maximize the value of financially distressed but economically viable enterprises by consensually reorganizing their capital structure — the Directive introduces an innovative but controversial option: that EU Member States can decree that reorganization negotiations should be subject to a relative priority default rule, in contrast to the type of absolute priority default rule used by Chapter 11. EU officials argue that relative priority is not only fair but also provides the flexibility that is needed pragmatically to restructure a troubled firm. This article explains why relative priority inadvertently can undermine the incentives needed to achieve a successful restructuring, and why absolute priority provides a more effective default rule for reaching a negotiated consensus. Additionally, the article illustrates why the Directive’s standard not only may be unfair to creditors but also might discourage debt investments in the European Union.
相对优先违约规则与绝对优先违约规则下的公司重组:比较评估
欧洲联盟最近通过了一项重组指令,旨在促进破产和其他财政困难公司的重组。尽管该指令的核心目标与美国破产法第11章相似,即通过双方同意重组资本结构来保护陷入财务困境但经济上可行的企业并使其价值最大化,但该指令引入了一个创新但有争议的选择:欧盟成员国可以颁布法令,规定重组谈判应遵循相对优先违约规则,而不是第11章所使用的绝对优先违约规则。欧盟官员认为,相对优先权不仅公平,而且为重组陷入困境的公司提供了务实所需的灵活性。本文解释了为什么相对优先级会在不经意间破坏实现成功重组所需的激励,以及为什么绝对优先级为达成协商一致提供了更有效的默认规则。此外,文章说明了为什么指令的标准不仅可能对债权人不公平,而且可能阻碍在欧盟的债务投资。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信