DOCSLIB.ORG

Choice of Entity for a New Subsidiary of an S Corporation

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Choice of Entity for a New Subsidiary of an S Corporation BUSINESS LAW U P D A T E A Publication of the Los Angeles County Bar Association Business & Corporations Law Section Fall 2006 [Article reprint] CHOICE OF ENTITY • The valuable asset could be FOR A NEW SUBSIDIARY distributed to the shareholders. This OF AN S CORPORATION would insulate it, but the sharehold- ers would pay tax on the apprecia- By William C. Staley tion in the asset.3 If the built-in gain Law Office of William C. Staley1 tax applied, the corporation would also pay a tax.4 Also, it might not be When an S corporation wants to convenient for the shareholders to create a wholly-owned subsidiary, it hold the assets as tenants in com- has three choices: a C corporation, mon. a qualified subchapter S subsidiary (a “QSub”) or a limited liability com- • The S corporation could form a pany (“LLC”). This article explains subsidiary and transfer the valuable why an LLC is usually the best asset to the new subsidiary. How- choice. ever, a claim against the parent corporation could be satisfied with Alternative Structures. An existing the stock of a corporate subsidiary S corporation might operate a busi- holding the valuable asset. If the ness and also own a valuable asset subsidiary holding the valuable asset (examples: real estate, art or another is an LLC, the result might be differ- business operated as a division). ent. Although a judgment creditor Management will want to insulate of an LLC member (in this case, the the valuable asset from catastrophic parent corporation) is generally lim- claims that might arise in the opera- ited to a charging order or becom- tion of the corporation’s primary ing a holder of an economic interest business.2 There are various ways to – not a voting membership interest – accomplish this: in the LLC, many doubt that a judg- ment creditor of a single-member (footnote continued) 1 Mr. Staley practices law in Woodland Hills, other liabilities and also its insurance cover- advising businesses and nonprofit organiza- age. tions. www.staleylaw.com 3 I.R.C. § 311. 2 This would be a judgment that exceeded 4 I.R.C. § 1374. the value of the corporation’s assets less its (footnote continued…) BUSINESS LAW U P D A T E LLC would be prevented from ob- elect to be an S corporation and taining the LLC’s assets.5 must elect to treat the old corpora- tion/new subsidiary as a QSub.8 A • The primary business could be QSub is disregarded for tax purposes transferred to a subsidiary and the and its assets are treated as assets of valuable asset could be held in the its S corporation parent.9 Because parent corporation.6 This would be the QSub is “disregarded’ for tax satisfactory if the valuable asset was (but not liability) purposes, it could art or another asset that would not be merged into a limited liability generate liabilities, because the sub- company wholly-owned by the par- sidiary stock would be subject to ent corporation. A single-member claims against the parent corpora- LLC is also disregarded for federal tion. To preserve the benefits of S tax purposes.10 Consequently, this corporation status7 the parent must merger would have no effect for federal tax purposes – the assets and 5 Cal. Corp. Code § 17302 (no charging or- liabilities of the parties to the merger der exception for single-member LLCs); but would be the assets and liabilities of see In re A-Z Electronics, 2006 Bankr. LEXIS 2105 (Bankr. D. Idaho, February 23, 2006) the parent (for tax purposes) before (bankruptcy trustee of sole member and not and after the merger. member-manager entitled to file bank- ruptcy petition on behalf of the LLC); In re • A new holding company Albright, 291 B.R. 538 (Bankr. D. Colo. 2003) could be organized with two sub- (allowing a bankruptcy trustee to reach the assets in the debtor’s single-member LLC). See also J. Stein, Building Stumbling Blocks, (footnote continued) BUSINESS ENTITIES (September/October 2006) holders. For a mature business with substan- 28, 34-36. tial cash flow, S corporation status allows the business to distribute profits to shareholders 6 This could be accomplished by creating a with one level of tax. new corporation and issuing its shares to the existing shareholders in exchange for their 8 I.R.C. § 1361(b)(3)(B); Treas. Reg. § 1.1361- shares of the existing corporation. The old 3. corporation would become a subsidiary of 9 I.R.C. § 1361(b)(3)(A); Treas. Reg. § 1.1361- the new corporation. The subsidiary would 4(a). Because the separate existence of the distribute its valuable asset to the parent QSub is disregarded, the transfer of assets corporation. between the parent and subsidiary has no 7 The principal benefit of S corporation status effect for tax purposes. To avoid piercing is the ability to sell the business assets and to the corporate veil, the transfers must be pay one level of tax, with the goodwill taxed properly documented and properly re- as capital gain so that the favorable tax flected on the accounting records of both rates for long-term capital gain can apply. entities. An S corporation that is not subject to the 10 Treas. Reg. § 301.7701-3(b)(1) (the built-in gain tax can accommodate the “check-the-box” rules for entity classification buyer’s wish to buy assets (not stock) without for federal tax purposes). creating a double tax for the selling share- (footnote continued…) 2 BUSINESS LAW U P D A T E sidiaries: the existing corporation choice is between a QSub or a sin- and a new subsidiary. The existing gle-member LLC. corporation would transfer its valu- able asset to the new subsidiary. The QSub. For a subsidiary to be a QSub, holding company would own only the parent must (1) be an S corpora- the stock or other ownership interests tion, (2) own 100% of the outstanding in the subsidiaries. A claim against shares of the QSub and (3) file an one subsidiary could not be satisfied election.13 If the election is not filed with the stock or assets of the other or shares are acquired by anyone subsidiary or with the stock or assets other than the S corporation parent, of the holding company.11 the subsidiary ceases to be a QSub and becomes a C corporation – sub- C Corporation. In these examples ject to a double tax when it sells its the subsidiaries hold valuable assets assets. When the subsidiary ceases and businesses. If the value of the to be QSub, a special tax fiction ap- asset or business exceeds its tax basis plies to the “transformation.” The as- – or is likely to exceed its tax basis in sets of the subsidiary are treated as if the future – it generally should not be the parent contributed them to the held in a C corporation. When the subsidiary on the transformation asset is sold by a C corporation, the date in exchange for stock of the corporation will pay tax on the gain subsidiary. The liabilities of the sub- and the shareholders will pay tax sidiary are treated as if the subsidiary again when the after-tax sale pro- assumed them from the parent on ceeds are distributed to them. This the transformation date.14 Gener- rules out a C corporation as a sub- ally, the deemed exchange of assets sidiary in many situations.12 So the for subsidiary stock will be tax-free under Section 351 of the Internal 11 In this article we assume that the entities Revenue Code (the “IRC”). How- would be organized and operated in way ever, to the extent that liabilities of that would prevent a creditor from piercing the subsidiary exceed the tax basis the corporate veil of any entity. of its assets, gain will be recognized 12 If the parent corporation is a C corpora- by the parent on the “transforma- tion – not what we assume in this article – it might make sense for its subsidiary to be a C corporation and to use the consolidated (footnote continued) return rules and the dividends-received de- for subsidiaries structured as “disregarded” duction to minimize taxes on transfers within single-member LLCs. the consolidated group. I.R.C. §§ 1501- 1564. However, using a “disregarded” sin- 13 I.R.C. § 1361(b)(3)(B); Treas. Reg. § 1.1361- gle-member LLC will often involve less com- 2. plication than the consolidation rules. For 14 I.R.C. § 1361(b)(3)(C); Treas. Reg. § example, there is no deferred inter- 1.1361-5(b)(1)(i). company gain and no excess loss account (footnote continued…) 3 BUSINESS LAW U P D A T E tion” of the subsidiary.15 It is also pos- Liability Protection. The reason to sible that the transformation will not use a subsidiary is to isolate liabilities, satisfy the requirements of a Section so it is necessary to go beyond tax is- 351 tax-free exchange and therefore sues and consider the liability protec- will be taxable.16 tion that the entities provide. Courts have respected the limited liability of Single-Member LLC. In contrast, an shareholders for many years in doz- LLC will never become a ens of alter ego cases. The Califor- C corporation unless it files a C cor- nia LLC statute provides that a poration tax return. If the number of member of an LLC will have limited members exceeds one, it will “trans- liability to the extent that sharehold- form” into a partnership for tax pur- ers of corporations have limited li- poses.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Foreign Direct Investment and Keiretsu: Rethinking U.S. and Japanese Policy
    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: The Effects of U.S. Trade Protection and Promotion Policies Volume Author/Editor: Robert C. Feenstra, editor Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-23951-9 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/feen97-1 Conference Date: October 6-7, 1995 Publication Date: January 1997 Chapter Title: Foreign Direct Investment and Keiretsu: Rethinking U.S. and Japanese Policy Chapter Author: David E. Weinstein Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c0310 Chapter pages in book: (p. 81 - 116) 4 Foreign Direct Investment and Keiretsu: Rethinking U.S. and Japanese Policy David E. Weinstein For twenty-five years, the U.S. and Japanese governments have seen the rise of corporate groups in Japan, keiretsu, as due in part to foreign pressure to liberal- ize the Japanese market. In fact, virtually all works that discuss barriers in a historical context argue that Japanese corporations acted to insulate themselves from foreign takeovers by privately placing shares with each other (See, e.g., Encarnation 1992,76; Mason 1992; and Lawrence 1993). The story has proved to be a major boon for the opponents of a neoclassical approach to trade and investment policy. Proponents of the notion of “Japanese-style capitalism” in the Japanese government can argue that they did their part for liberalization and cannot be held responsible for private-sector outcomes. Meanwhile, pro- ponents of results-oriented policies (ROPs) can point to yet another example of how the removal of one barrier led to the formation of a second barrier.
    [Show full text]
  • Essay on Anti-Takeover Provisions and Corporate Spin-Offs Wei Du Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected]
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Doctoral Dissertations Graduate School 2015 Essay on Anti-takeover Provisions and Corporate Spin-offs Wei Du Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations Part of the Finance and Financial Management Commons Recommended Citation Du, Wei, "Essay on Anti-takeover Provisions and Corporate Spin-offs" (2015). LSU Doctoral Dissertations. 3901. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/3901 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Doctoral Dissertations by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please [email protected]. ESSAY ON ANTI-TAKEOVER PROVISIONS AND CORPORATE SPIN-OFFS A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agriculture and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in The Interdepartmental Program in Business Administration by Wei Du B.S., Tongji University, 2008 M.S., Illinois Institute of Technology, 2010 May 2016 Acknowledgements This paper could not be written to its fullest without the help, support, guidance and efforts of a lot of people. First of all, I would like to express my deepest sense of gratitude to my research advisor and dissertation chair Dr. Gary C. Sanger, for his guidance, encouragement and support throughout the time of my dissertation research, even in the week before his surgery. I admire his wisdom deeply and regard him as my lifelong role model to follow.
    [Show full text]
  • Latin American Companies Circle
    LATIN AMERICAN COMPANIES CIRCLE Corporate Governance Recommendations for Company Groups Based on Experiences from the Latin American Companies Circle November 2014 Sponsoring Institution: Supported by: INDEX I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND 2 II. CHALLENGES OF COMPANY GROUPS 2 III. GENERAL PRACTICES a) Related Party Transactions 3 a.1) Shared Services 4 IV. WHOLLY-OWNED SUBSIDIARIES a) Incorporation or acquisition 4 b) Control 4 b.1) Reporting Framework 4 b.2) Appointment of Directors 5 b.3) Internal Controls 5 V. PARTIALLY-OWNED SUBSIDIARIES a) Incorporation or Acquisition 6 b) Shareholders Agreement 6 c) Shareholder Activism 7 c.1) Share Voting 7 c.2) Appointment of Directors 7 c.3) Reporting 8 VI. FINAL COMMENTS 8 1 I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND These set of corporate governance recommendations for group of companies has been developed by the Latin American Companies Circle. The Circle is a group of Latin American firms that have demonstrated leadership in advocating and practicing governance improvements for companies throughout Latin America. The Circle is sponsored by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) and supported by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and is presently composed of 14 companies: Los Grobo from Argentina; Grupo Algar, CPFL Energia, Embraer, Natura and Ultrapar from Brazil; Grupo Argos, Carvajal and ISA from Colombia; Florida Ice from Costa Rica; Grupo Gentera from Mexico; Buenaventura, Ferreycorp and Grupo Graña y Montero from Peru. This document is based on experiences of the Circle member companies and takes into consideration limited analysis of the companies’ own practices and covers areas related with wholly- and partially-owned subsidiaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Equity Method and Joint Ventures Topic Applies to All Entities
    A Roadmap to Accounting for Equity Method Investments and Joint Ventures 2019 The FASB Accounting Standards Codification® material is copyrighted by the Financial Accounting Foundation, 401 Merritt 7, PO Box 5116, Norwalk, CT 06856-5116, and is reproduced with permission. This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication. As used in this document, “Deloitte” means Deloitte & Touche LLP, Deloitte Consulting LLP, Deloitte Tax LLP, and Deloitte Financial Advisory Services LLP, which are separate subsidiaries of Deloitte LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of our legal structure. Certain services may not be available to attest clients under the rules and regulations of public accounting. Copyright © 2019 Deloitte Development LLC. All rights reserved. Other Publications in Deloitte’s Roadmap Series Business Combinations Business Combinations — SEC Reporting Considerations Carve-Out Transactions Consolidation — Identifying a Controlling Financial Interest
    [Show full text]
  • Limited Liability with One-Man Companies and Subsidiary Corporations
    LIMITED LIABILITY WITH ONE-MAN COMPANIES AND SUBSIDIARY CORPORATIONS Bm Nmw F. CATALDO* Limited liability, usually regarded as the most significant feature of corporate enterprise, has received extravagant praise. Among those who have paid verbal homage to the concept of limited liability are two former university presidents who cut a large figure in the intellectual manners of the nation during the last half century. President Eliot of Harvard regarded limited liability as "the corporation's most precious characteristic" and "by far the most effective legal invention ... made in the nineteenth century."' President Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia made the pronouncement in i91: "I weigh my words when I say that in my judg- ment the limited liability corporation is the greatest single discovery of modern times.... Even steam and electricity are far less important than the limited liability corporation, and they would be reduced to comparative impotence without it."' Our courts have rested-unnecessarily, it is believed 3 -the concept of limited lia- bility on the legal entity theory. This theory, familiar to every elementary student of corporation law and finance, treats the corporation as a legal persona or juristic person constituting an entity in itself separate and distinct from the members. The essence of this theory, stated in stark terms, is that the shareholders own "the corporation" and the latter owns and operates the assets and the business. The questionable4 but judicially accepted reasoning which regards limited liability as a * A.B. 1929, LL.B. 1932, LL.M. 1936, University of Pennsylvania. Member of Philadelphia bar; Special Attorney, Department of Justice, Washington, D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Valuation of Conglomerate Companies Approved
    THE VALUATION OF CONGLOMERATE COMPANIES APPROVED: Graduate Committee: Committee Member Committee Member Committee MemSer Dean of the Softool "of Busine Dean of th£ Graduate School THE VALUATION OF CONGLOMERATE COMPANIES DISSERTATION Presented to the Graduate Council of the North Texas State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements ^or the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY By Winfield P. Betty, B. B. A., M. B. A, Denton, Texas May, 1969 Copyright by Winfield P. Betty 1969 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES V LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION 1 Statement of the Problem Hypotheses Sources of Data Significance of the Investigation Approach II. SIMPLE RELATIONSHIPS UNDERLYING ACQUISITIONS . 15 Equations for Growth Trends of Earnings per Share Effects of Multiple Acquisitions III. ADDITIONAL BACKGROUND MATERIAL, MOTIVES, AND POSSIBLE EFFICIENCIES UNDERLYING THE GROWTH OF CONGLOMERATE COMPANIES 33 The Attitude of the Supreme Court and Regulatory Agencies toward Conglomerate Companies Possible Efficiencies Released in Mergers Definition of a Conglomerate Merger Possible Motives of Stockholders and Manage- ment Leading to the Growth of Conglomerate Companies IV. THEORIES OF VALUE AND THEIR IMPLEMENTATION ... 52 Theories of Value Investment and Speculative Theories of Value Decision Models Decision-Making Situations Generation of the Relevant States of the World Basic Models Used by Fundamentalists Conflicting Theories of Value The Decision Environment Surrounding Conglomerate Companies in XV Page Problems Introduced
    [Show full text]
  • Multiple Step Acquisitions: Dancing the Tax-Free Tango©
    MULTIPLE STEP ACQUISITIONS: DANCING THE TAX-FREE TANGO© Linda Z. Swartz © Copyright 2011, L. Z. Swartz All rights reserved TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................1 II. TWO STEP TRIANGULAR REORGANIZATIONS ...........2 A. Tender Offers and Back End Mergers ..............................2 B. Double Mergers ................................................................6 1. Second Step Upstream Mergers ..................................6 C. Variations on Double Mergers ........................................10 1. No First Step Qualified Stock Purchase ...................10 2. Second Step Liquidations .........................................12 3. Second Step Disregarded Entity Mergers .................15 4. Second Step Sideways Mergers ................................17 D. A Single Rule for all Double Mergers ............................18 III. DROPDOWNS AND PUSHUPS AFTER TAX-FREE REORGANIZATIONS .........................................................20 A. COBE Requirement ........................................................21 1. Dropdowns to Qualified Group Members ................22 2. Dropdowns to Partnerships .......................................24 B. -2k Safe Harbors and Other Guidance ............................27 1. Current State of the Law ...........................................27 2. Dropdown Rules .......................................................29 3. Pushup Rules.............................................................34 C. A Single Rule for
    [Show full text]
  • A Roadmap to Accounting for Noncontrolling Interests
    A Roadmap to Accounting for Noncontrolling Interests July 2020 The FASB Accounting Standards Codification® material is copyrighted by the Financial Accounting Foundation, 401 Merritt 7, PO Box 5116, Norwalk, CT 06856-5116, and is reproduced with permission. This publication contains general information only and Deloitte is not, by means of this publication, rendering accounting, business, financial, investment, legal, tax, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such professional advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified professional advisor. Deloitte shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person who relies on this publication. The services described herein are illustrative in nature and are intended to demonstrate our experience and capabilities in these areas; however, due to independence restrictions that may apply to audit clients (including affiliates) of Deloitte & Touche LLP, we may be unable to provide certain services based on individual facts and circumstances. As used in this document, “Deloitte” means Deloitte & Touche LLP, Deloitte Consulting LLP, Deloitte Tax LLP, and Deloitte Financial Advisory Services LLP, which are separate subsidiaries of Deloitte LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/us/about for a detailed description of our legal structure. Copyright © 2020 Deloitte Development LLC. All
    [Show full text]
  • Bfm Sem – Vi Corporate Restructuring
    BFM SEM – VI CORPORATE RESTRUCTURING Multiple Questions:- 1. _________ merger involves firm engaged in unrelated types of activities. a. Vertical b. Horizontal c. Conglomerate d. Demerger 2. When existing company is dissolved to form few new companies, it is called as ________ a. Sin off b. Split off c. Split up d. All of the above 3. __________means an acquirer takes over the control of the target company. a. Joint Venture b. Takeover c. Disinvestment d. Demerger 4. The ___________means changing the structure of an organization such as reducing the hierarchical levels. a. Financial Restructuring b. Organizational Restructuring c. Corporate Restructuring d. All of the above 5. ________parties work together or a single project for a finite period of time. a. Strategic Alliance b. Joint Venture c. Disinvestment d. Franchising 6. __________means the action of an organization or government selling or liquidating an asset or subsidiary. a. Merger b. Joint Venture c. Takeover d. Disinvestment 7. __________ is an arrangement whereby the assets of two or more companies come under the control of one company. a. Merger b. Buyout c. Joint Venture d. Demerger 8. ________may be defined as an arrangement where one party grants another party the right to use trade name. a. Alliance b. Franchising c. Slump sale d. Joint Venture 9. ________merger is a merger of two or more companies that compete in the same industry. a. Vertical b. Horizontal c. Co generic d. Conglomerate 10. ____________ helps a firm to grow and expand. a. Corporate Restructuring b. Merger c. Takeover d. Demerger 11. In _________, company distributes its shareholding in subsidiary to its shareholders thereby not changing the ownership pattern.
    [Show full text]
  • Subsidiary Management: a Guide for the Corporate Secretary™
    Subsidiary Management: A Guide for the Corporate Secretary™ About the Society Founded in 1946, the Society of Corporate Secretaries and Governance Professionals, Inc. (the “Society”) is a Section 501(c)(6) non-profit organization comprised principally of corporate secretaries and business executives in governance, ethics and compliance functions at public, private and not-for-profit organizations. Members are responsible for supporting their board of directors and executive management in matters such as board practices, compliance, regulation and legal matters, shareholder relations and subsidiary management. Society Mission: Shaping governance through education, collaboration and advocacy Society Vision: Creating long-term shareholder value through better governance Society of Corporate Secretaries and Governance Professionals, Inc. 240 West 35th Street, Suite 400 New York. NY 10001 © Copyright 2016 All Rights Reserved Acknowledgment May 2016 The Corporate Practices Committee is pleased to offer an updated edition of Subsidiary Management: A Guide for the Corporate Secretary. The Committee would like to thank the following individuals who contributed to the 2016 update: Kari Endries, Assistant Secretary & Managing Counsel, Chevron Corporation Faraz Choudhry, Associate General Counsel, UnitedHealth Group Incorporated Stacey K. Geer, Executive Vice President, Chief Governance Officer, Deputy General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, Primerica, Inc. Jeffrey Iredell, Director of Sales, CT Corporation Mary Kullman, Former SVP, Chief Administrative
    [Show full text]
  • Keiretsu: Past, Present and Future
    World Applied Sciences Journal 26 (12): 1569-1573, 2013 ISSN 1818-4952 © IDOSI Publications, 2013 DOI: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2013.26.12.13592 Keiretsu: Past, Present and Future Natalia Victorovna Kuznetsova Far Eastern Federal University, v. Ayaks, Russkii Island, Russia Submitted: Oct 24, 2013; Accepted: Nov 30, 2013; Published: Dec 4, 2013 Abstract: This article presents the questions about changing of the integrative Japanese corporate structures - keiretsu, which is now a topic for many discussions. It was analyzed a number of Japanese and European economist’s points of view about the influence of keiretsu on the economic development. It is proved in this article that even in the conditions of increasing instability of the economic environment; the vertical keiretsu structure is more efficient form of organization than the vertically integrated corporations in the United States. Key words: Keiretsu Inter-company mergers Integrated corporate structure The vertical keiretsu economic development Competition Management structures Corporate governance INTRODUCTION Nobuaki considered that "Toyota group" can be refer to "vertical keiretsu" and "Mitsubishi" and "Sumitomo" calls The Japanese model is characterized by a long-term "horizontal keiretsu" [2, p.3]. R. Hart and S. Kawasaki investment strategy in the industry and the close believe that development of keiretsu systems allowed to relations between the industrial and financial sectors. reduce the costs of transactions of inter-firm interaction The distinctive feature is a tendency for cooperation. arising from natural and specially supported the Economic units are closely connected to each other asymmetry of information [3]. K. Miyashita and D. W. through the mechanism of cross-shareholding, forming a Russell said that the distinguishing feature of the keiretsu corporate group.
    [Show full text]
  • Chaebol Restructuring and Family Business in Korea
    Chaebol Restructuring and Family Business in Korea Kim KyWon Department of Economics, Korea National Open University KOREA I . Introduction The purpose of this paper is to examine tbe restructuring process of the Korean chaebol (family-managed conglomerates) and its impact on family business practices since the outbreak of the 1997 financial crisis in Korea. In November of that year, the financial crisis forced the Korean government lo ask the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for an emergency bailout loan. Since then, the restructuring of the corporate sector, particularly the chaebol, has been an u(gent lask for the Korean economy. This task was necessitated by market forces, and there was also a strong demand by the majority of the Korean public. Furthermore, it was onc of the conditionalities of the IMF loan. Michel Camdessus, managing director of the IMF at the time, once called for the dismantling of the chaebol, even though he later toned down his statement. Deeper analy.sis has yet to be made about the underlying causes of the Korean financial crisis, the relative irnporlance of each cause, and the relationships among 3 them. However, a consensus is now made among economists that extemally, the hastily implemented financial liberalization, including capitnl ularket opening, was responsible for the crisis, and that internally, structural defects in the corporate sector were also to blame. In 1997, Korea was experiencing 11 series of chaebol bankruptcies running up to the crisis. That is why virtua:Jy everyone accepted tile necessity of chaebol restructuring when it was proposed. In this regard, however, it is worth mentioning that the chaebol were principal engines that had powered the rapid economic groVvih of the past several decades and had their own raison d'etre in internal and external contexts, which \cd to tbe serious controversies, with respect to the details of the restructuring, such as the goals, methods, and pace.
    [Show full text]