DOCSLIB.ORG

Limiting Liabilities Structuring Holding Companies to Withstand Insolvency

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Limiting Liabilities Structuring Holding Companies to Withstand Insolvency Limiting Liabilities Structuring holding companies to withstand insolvency Virtual Round Table Series Insolvency Working Group 2018 Virtual Series |Limiting Liabilities IR Virtual Series, issue #35. First published September 2018. irglobal.com | page 3 Limiting Liabilities Structuring holding companies to withstand insolvency The concept of limited liability is one well A good example of best practice technique, As another example, if a subsidiary fails to meet known in the international corporate lexicon. is the development of separate corporate its obligations to the tax authorities for sales tax Companies are organised to minimise their governance, ensuring that different directors sit or employee contributions, the directors of the liability for the actions of related but legally on the board of a subsidiary than sit on the holding company can be held personally liable separate entities, be they partners, suppliers or board of a holding company. If it appears that if it can be determined that they influenced customers. the subsidiary is fully under the control of the those decisions. In extreme cases, money used parent company it is harder to resist liability for for mortgage payments or children’s tuition fees These divisions are generally fairly clear, but its actions. has been reclaimed. they become less so when applied to groups of companies, with subsidiaries and holding Another would be the rigorous maintenance of It is clear that correct corporate structuring and companies legally bound to each other via board minutes, financial accounts, and appro- governance are required at the formation of ownership. In these situations, under certain priate documentation of intercompany transac- a company group to avoid any future liability circumstances, a holding company and its tions. This helps to rebuff accusations of prefer- issues in the event of insolvency. The behaviour directors may be held liable for the actions or ential transactions. of directors and responsible employees during performance of a subsidiary despite the fact and immediately prior to an insolvency is also Failure to adhere to these best practices can the subsidiary is a separate business. critical to the outcome of any liability claims be easily tested under the insolvency laws of outside the immediate legal entity. Insolvency is one such circumstance when various jurisdictions around the world. The liabilities within a group of companies are Instrumentality Test and the Identity Theory, for The following feature draws upon the expertise examined forensically. The insolvency or bank- example, are used by courts in the US when of five insolvency practitioners from around the ruptcy of a subsidiary will usually leave a range deciding whether to pierce the corporate veil in world who are members of IR Global. Each of creditors out of pocket and practitioners pursuit of damages. of them gives a unique perspective from his employed by those creditors will make every or her jurisdiction on the issues to consider In the event of a subsidiary insolvency, the effort to recover losses, including exploring the when attempting to limit holding companies’ behaviour of holding companies and their potential liability of a holding company and its liability during the insolvency of a subsidiary directors can have a significant bearing on directors. in a company group and further considers liability. In some jurisdictions, related party the possible damages and defences available As a consequence, it is imperative that transactions (between a subsidiary and a should the worst happen. corporate structures are maintained using holding company) made up to five years prior best practice techniques, prior to any future to the insolvency could be examined. If any are insolvency, to make it as difficult as possible found to have been made at an undervalue, the for creditors to ‘pierce the corporate veil’ and holding company can, in some cases, be forced make charges against assets held outside the to repay the entire consideration received by insolvent business. the transferee for distribution to creditors. The View from IR Thomas Wheeler Each discussion features just one represent- Founder ative per jurisdiction, with the subject matter Our Virtual Series publications bring together a chosen by the steering committee of the number of the network’s members to discuss a relevant working group. The goal is to provide different practice area-related topic. The partic- insight into challenges and opportunities iden- ipants share their expertise and offer a unique tified by specialist practitioners. perspective from the jurisdiction they operate in. We firmly believe the power of a global network This initiative highlights the emphasis we place comes from sharing ideas and expertise, on collaboration within the IR Global community enabling our members to better serve their and the need for effective knowledge sharing. clients’ international needs. irglobal.com | page 3 Virtual Series |Limiting Liabilities ITALY ENGLAND CANADA EAST Massimo Boni David Foster S. Fay Sulley Partner, Ferrari Pedeferri Boni Partner, Barlow Robbins Partner, Torkin Manes LLP 39 02 72 73 061 44 1483 464243 1 416 777 5419 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Massimo Boni is the founding partner of FPB David is the Head of Dispute Resolution at Fay is a partner at Torkin Manes, and head of Legal, an Italian business law firm with offices in Barlow Robbins, a leading UK law firm. His areas the Banking, Finance and Insolvency Group. Milan and Trieste, and focuses his practice on of practice include insolvency, professional negli- She acts extensively for institutional and private three main areas: corporate and commercial liti- gence, commercial litigation, property disputes lenders and borrowers in a wide range of gation; insolvency and corporate restructuring; and inheritance disputes. financing transactions, derivative products, corporate and commercial contracts. factoring arrangements, asset securitisations and David regularly handles cases in the higher securitised loans. Over the years, he has acted for Italian and courts for clients of all sizes, including banks, foreign companies, but also international organ- insurers and educational institutions. He has She advises banks with respect to regulatory isations (either UN or non-UN agencies), before handled more than 200 mediations across the and other issues that may arise under the Bank Italian Courts and arbitrators or prominent inter- UK with a success rate of over 90%. Act, or other similar legislation, including a broad national arbitration institutions. range of issues of concern, such as cost of David is a member of the Commercial Liti- borrowing disclosures, privacy, identification of Massimo has gained a significant expertise gation Association, the Professional Negligence clients, money laundering, electronic banking in the highly specialised field of corporate liti- Lawyers’ Association, the Institute of Directors, and other day-to-day issues affecting banks and gation, handling disputes among shareholders and the International Bar Association. other financial institutions. for winning the control of the company or among He is also a member of the standing conference companies and their directors and statutory Fay is involved in corporate restructurings, insol- of Mediation Advocates and a mediator member auditors for liability for mismanagement and vency and related litigation of a number of mediation groups including the fraud or among sellers and purchasers following ADR Group, Expedite Resolution and Law South matters of all sizes. She offers expertise under M&A transactions. Mediators. He is actively involved in a number of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, Companies Massimo is regularly involved in insolvency charities and organisations, including as trustee. Creditors Arrangement Act, Personal Property matter cases, either defending and representing Securities Act, and Financial Administration Act. A recent independent guide to the UK Legal companies, directors and auditors from claims Profession named him as a ‘very good lawyer’ Fay works closely with other members of her brought by bankruptcy trustees (directors liability, who ‘gets down to the heart of an issue’. Karen firm’s Banking, Finance and Insolvency Group to claw-back actions, parent company liability, Schuman, Counsel of 1 Chancery Lane said that assure clients that someone is always available etc.) or counselling and representing distressed David has a ‘calm authority’ and can ‘find the to provide the advice they need, when they need companies throughout their restructuring phase. solution’ in a difficult case. it. He also assists Italian and foreign investors purchasing businesses and assets from insol- vency procedures. irglobal.com | page 5 AUSTRALIA U.S – WASHINGTON, D.C. James Conomos Trevor (Ted) Swett Founder and Principal Partner, Member, Caplin & Drysdale, James Conomos Lawyers Chartered 61 7 3004 8200 1 202 862-5081 [email protected] [email protected] James was admitted as a solicitor in 1987, Trevor (Ted) Swett is a Member in Caplin & Drys- having completed a year in 1986 as associate dale's Washington, D.C., office. He was elected to to the then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court membership in 1989, having joined the firm as of Queensland, The Honourable DG Andrews. In an associate in 1985. Mr. Swett has been recog- his early years, he gained experience in a wide nised as a "Leading Lawyer" by Chambers USA, range
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Creditors' Challenges to Administrators and Liquidators
    CREDITORS’ CHALLENGES TO ADMINISTRATORS AND LIQUIDATORS – AN OVERVIEW REPRINTED FROM: CORPORATE DISPUTES MAGAZINE OCT-DEC 2018 ISSUE ���������corporate ��������disputes ������������ C��D www.corporatedisputesmagazine.com ������������������ ������� ������������������������������� ������������ �������������������� ��������� ����������������������������� ���������������������� ����������������� www.corporatedisputesmagazine.com Visit the website to request a free copy of the full e-magazine Published by Financier Worldwide Ltd corporatedisputes@financierworldwide.com © 2018 Financier Worldwide Ltd. All rights reserved. corporate CDdisputes www.corporatedisputesmagazine.com 2 CORPORATE DISPUTES Oct-Dec 2018 www.corporatedisputesmagazine.com PERSPECTIVES PERSPECTIVES CREDITORS’ CHALLENGES TO ADMINISTRATORS AND LIQUIDATORS – AN OVERVIEW BY ASHKHAN CANDEY, NICK WRIGHT AND JAMES PARTRIDGE > CANDEY nsolvency practitioners occupy a powerful and was simply wrong, with the Court also having a responsible role in administrations and liquidations. general ability to interfere where office holders have IThey are often a major force for good, tackling misapplied the law as Neuberger J, as he then was, those who have raided companies for their own made clear in CE King Ltd. personal benefit to the unlawful detriment of creditors As well as being the arbiter of their decisions at law, and shareholders. Their decisions may be based on a the court also has an inherent jurisdiction to control misunderstanding of the law, and they could (rarely) administrators
    [Show full text]
  • Partnerships Alan J.B
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository William & Mary Annual Tax Conference Conferences, Events, and Lectures 1978 Choice of Entities for Holding Real Estate: Partnerships Alan J.B. Aronsohn Repository Citation Aronsohn, Alan J.B., "Choice of Entities for Holding Real Estate: Partnerships" (1978). William & Mary Annual Tax Conference. 482. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/tax/482 Copyright c 1978 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/tax CHOICES OF ENTITIES FOR HOLDING REAL ESTATE: PARTNERSHIPS By ALAN J. B. ARONSOHN The widespread utilization in recent years of the partnership form for holding real estate has been attributable to a beneficient combination of local and federal income tax laws. In earlier, simpler days, title to real estate beneficially owned by groups of individuals was more likely to be vested in a corporation or some form of trust. The primary reason for the conveyancer's preference for corporate or trust ownership of record title, as opposed to vesting title in multiple owners as tenants- in-common or as partners, was the increased ease and certainty of dealing with real property title complexities where title to the real property was vested in a separate entity (i.e., a corporation or trustee) insulated from the infirmities which might affect individual owners, such as the death, bankruptcy or incompetency of one or more of them. While the corporate or trust form retains these advantages, the increasing burden of income taxation upon the ownership of all invest- ment property and, particularly upon corporate investments, has induced the real property lawyers to search for alternatives to corporate and trust ownership which satisfy both the requirements of the practical conveyancer and at the same time ameliorate the tax burdens im- posed upon corporations.
    [Show full text]
  • Bankrupt Subsidiaries: the Challenges to the Parent of Legal Separation
    ERENSFRIEDMAN&MAYERFELD GALLEYSFINAL 1/27/2009 10:25:46 AM BANKRUPT SUBSIDIARIES: THE CHALLENGES TO THE PARENT OF LEGAL SEPARATION ∗ Brad B. Erens ∗∗ Scott J. Friedman ∗∗∗ Kelly M. Mayerfeld The financial distress of a subsidiary can be a difficult event for its parent company. When the subsidiary faces the prospect of a bankruptcy filing, the parent likely will need to address many more issues than simply its lost investment in the subsidiary. Unpaid creditors of the subsidiary instinctively may look to the parent as a target to recover on their claims under any number of legal theories, including piercing the corporate veil, breach of fiduciary duty, and deepening insolvency. The parent also may find that it has exposure to the subsidiary’s creditors under various state and federal statutes, or under contracts among the parties. In addition, untangling the affairs of the parent and subsidiary, if the latter is going to reorganize under chapter 11 and be owned by its creditors, can be difficult. All of these issues may, in fact, lead to financial challenges for the parent itself. Parent companies thus are well advised to consider their potential exposure to a subsidiary’s creditors not only once the subsidiary actually faces financial distress, but well in advance as a matter of prudent corporate planning. If a subsidiary ultimately is forced to file for chapter 11, however, the bankruptcy laws do provide unique procedures to resolve any existing or potential litigation between the parent and the subsidiary’s creditors and to permit the parent to obtain a clean break from the subsidiary’s financial problems.
    [Show full text]
  • Banking & Finance
    BANKING & FINANCE ALERT DEFINITIONS OF ENTITIES OPERATING IN THE FINANCIAL SECTOR FEBRUARY 2016 A number of parent companies of industrial and • Parent Undertaking which: commercial groups have recently been notified by undertaking - has a majority of the the ACPR of their status as a "mixed-activity Article 4, point 15 shareholders' or members' holding company", thereby discovering the jungle of the CRR voting rights in an of statuses related to financial activities. undertaking (subsidiary), - or has the right to appoint or Context and scope of the memorandum remove a majority of the members of the The "CRD IV Package", composed of Directive No. administrative, 2013/36/EU of June 26, 2013 (hereinafter the management or supervisory CRD IV Directive), and EU Regulation No. 575/2013 body of the subsidiary, and of June 26, 2013 (hereinafte r C RR), has modified is at the same time a the definitions of the different entities carrying out shareholder in or member of an activity in the financial sector, either directly or that subsidiary, through companies controlled or in which they hold - or has the right to exercise a a stake. dominant influence over the The purpose of this alert is to review these new subsidiary pursuant to a definitions, often little known, and the scope of contract or to a provision in these statuses. its articles of association, - or is a shareholder or Definitions resulting from the CRD IV member and a majority of Package the members of the administrative, These definitions can be found both in the CRR management or supervisory bodies of the subsidiary Regulation and in the Monetary and Financial Code have been appointed solely (MFC).
    [Show full text]
  • Unit : V (Accounts of Holding Company) Holding Company
    Unit : V (Accounts of Holding Company) Holding Company : Section 2(46) of the Companies Act, 2013 defines Holding Company. The company is said to be the holding company if that particular company holds/owns at least 50% of the other companies and has the authority to make management decisions, influences and controls the company’s board of directors. A holding company may exist for the sole purpose of controlling and managing subsidiary companies. Subsidiary Company : Section 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 defines the Subsidiary Company. The subsidiary company is the company that is controlled by the holding or parent company. It is defined as a company/body corporate where the holding company controls the composition of the Board of Directors. As per the Companies Amendment Act, 2017, Section 2(87)(ii), if the holding company have control over more than one-half of the voting power of another company, that particular company will be identified as the subsidiary company. Advantages of holding company : 1. Benefits of Amalgamation : The group as a whole benefited by reaping the fruits of amalgamation keeping their separate entity and goodwill of the individual companies. 2. Benefits of Decentralization : By opening subsidiaries in different areas, a holding company reap the benefits of decentralization. 3. Benefits of Monopolies : Fruits of monopoly or near monopoly can be enjoyed without making the public aware of the existence of combination of the units. 4. Tax benefits : Subsidiary companies maintain their separate identities; therefore, loss can be carried forward for the income tax purpose. 5. Effective utilization of Resources : A holding company holding different subsidiary companies may evaluate the functions of each company and takes actions on the basis of their performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Interpretations (Bhc Act)
    BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF'THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM WASHINGTON, O. Co 20551 SCOTT G. ALVAREZ GENERAL COUNSEL May 10, 2010 Michael N. Delune, Esq. Aldrich & Bonnefin Box 19686 Irvine, CA 92623-1029 Dear Mr. Delune: This is in response to your letter regarding whether a proposed assignment of an economic interest in the partnership interests of a partnership that is a qualified family partnership ("QFP") under section 2(0)(10) of the Bank Holding Company Act ("BHC Act") would cause the partnership to lose its status as a QFP.l C ] a QFP under the BHC Act, indirectly controls [ J("( JBank")? One of the partners of( J is the r .. ::l Trust ("Trust"). t ], a Trust beneficiary, has passed away, and you have inquired as to whether the assignment of an economic interest in t J interests that are held by the Trust to a third party who is not a related family member would cause [ J to lose its status as a QFP. You have indicated that such an assignment would not include the voting interests in such!: ] partnership interests. 1 12 U.S.C. § 1841(0)(10). 2 [ J 2 Under the BRC Act, any "company" (including a partnership) that controls a bank is considered a BRC.3 The BRC Act, however, provides a limited exemption from the definition of company for a QFP, and accordingly a partnership that qualifies as a QFP is not considered a BRC under the BRC Act.4 In order to qualify under the BRC Act as a QFP, all the partners of a QFP must be "individuals related to each other by blood, marriage ...or adoption" or "trusts for the primary benefit of' such individuals (collectively, "qualified parties").
    [Show full text]
  • Contracting out of Secondary Insolvency Proceedings: the Main Liquidator's Undertaking in the Meaning of Article 18 In
    Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law Volume 9 | Issue 1 Article 12 2014 Contracting Out of Secondary Insolvency Proceedings: The ainM Liquidator's Undertaking in the Meaning of Article 18 in the Proposal to Amend the EU Insolvency Regulation Bob Wessels Follow this and additional works at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjcfcl Recommended Citation Bob Wessels, Contracting Out of Secondary Insolvency Proceedings: The Main Liquidator's Undertaking in the Meaning of Article 18 in the Proposal to Amend the EU Insolvency Regulation, 9 Brook. J. Corp. Fin. & Com. L. (2014). Available at: https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjcfcl/vol9/iss1/12 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at BrooklynWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law by an authorized editor of BrooklynWorks. CONTRACTING OUT OF SECONDARY INSOLVENCY PROCEEDINGS: THE MAIN LIQUIDATOR’S UNDERTAKING IN THE MEANING OF ARTICLE 18 IN THE PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE EU INSOLVENCY REGULATION Prof. Dr. Bob Wessels* INTRODUCTIOn The European Insolvency Regulation1 aims to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of insolvency proceedings having cross-border effects within the European Union. For that purpose, the Insolvency Regulation lays down rules on jurisdiction common to all member states of the European Union (Member States), rules to facilitate recognition of insolvency judgments, and rules regarding the applicable law. The model of the Regulation will be known. It allows for one main proceeding, opened in one Member State, with the possibility of opening secondary proceedings in other EU Member States. The procedural model can only be successful if these proceedings are coordinated: Main insolvency proceedings and secondary proceedings can…contribute to the effective realization of the total assets only if all the concurrent proceedings pending are coordinated.
    [Show full text]
  • Group Governance Structure on the Implementation of Best Practice 15
    The information contained in this King IV Practice Note is of a general nature and is not intended to address the circumstances of any particular individual or entity. The views and opinions do not necessarily represent the views of the King Committee and/or individual members. Although every endeavour is made to provide accurate and timely information, there can be no guarantee that such information is accurate as of the date it is received or that it will continue to be accurate in the future. The Institute of Directors in Southern Africa shall not be liable to any loss or damage whether direct, indirect, and consequential or otherwise which may be suffered, arising from any cause in connection with anything done or not done pursuant to the information presented herein. As copyright subsists in this paper, extracts of this paper may only be reproduced with acknowledgement to the Institute of Directors in Southern Africa. Table of contents Executive summary 3 1. Introduction 5 2. Current challenge 5 3. Addressing the challenge: best practice guidelines 6 3.1. Role clarity 6 3.2. Group corporate governance 8 3.3. Authority and reserved powers 11 3.4. Operating across jurisdictions 13 4. Impact of group governance structure on the implementation of best practice 15 4.1. 50% Joint Venture 16 4.2. Company with minority shareholders 16 4.3. Non-Profit Organisation and Non-Profit Company 16 4.4. Public-Private Partnership 17 4.5. Dual board vs. unitary board structures 18 5. Conclusion 17 Appendix 1: Guidance on content of a framework for group governance 19 Note: Unless otherwise indicated, or the contrary appears from the context, the words and phrases used herein have the meanings ascribed to them in the glossary of the King IV Report on Corporate Governance™ in South Africa 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Restructuring & Insolvency
    GETTING THROUGH THE DEAL Restructuring & Insolvency Restructuring & Insolvency Restructuring Contributing editor Bruce Leonard 2017 2017 © Law Business Research 2016 Restructuring & Insolvency 2017 Contributing editor Bruce Leonard The International Insolvency Institute Publisher Law The information provided in this publication is Gideon Roberton general and may not apply in a specific situation. [email protected] Business Legal advice should always be sought before taking Research any legal action based on the information provided. Subscriptions This information is not intended to create, nor does Sophie Pallier Published by receipt of it constitute, a lawyer–client relationship. [email protected] Law Business Research Ltd The publishers and authors accept no responsibility 87 Lancaster Road for any acts or omissions contained herein. The Senior business development managers London, W11 1QQ, UK information provided was verified between Alan Lee Tel: +44 20 3708 4199 September and October 2016. Be advised that this is [email protected] Fax: +44 20 7229 6910 a developing area. Adam Sargent © Law Business Research Ltd 2016 [email protected] No photocopying without a CLA licence. Printed and distributed by First published 2008 Encompass Print Solutions Dan White Tenth edition Tel: 0844 2480 112 [email protected] ISSN 2040-7408 © Law Business Research 2016 CONTENTS Global overview 7 Cyprus 129 Richard Tett Lia Iordanou Theodoulou, Angeliki Epaminonda
    [Show full text]
  • Prime Meridian Holding Company Charter of The
    PRIME MERIDIAN HOLDING COMPANY CHARTER OF THE EXECUTIVE, NOMINATING, AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE Article I – Preface The Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Prime Meridian Holding Company (the “Company”) has established an Executive, Nominating, and Corporate Governance Committee (this “Committee”) and has adopted this Charter of the Executive, Nominating, and Corporate Governance Committee (this “Charter”) on this 20th day of August, 2020. Article II – Purpose The Board has established and empaneled this Committee to act on behalf of the Board by identifying, evaluating, and recommending qualified individuals for nomination as directors. This Committee shall also review from time to time the nature, size, and composition of the Board and its committees and make recommendations to the Board with respect thereto. This Committee shall also consider and recommend for adoption by the Board policies, procedures, or guidelines related to the corporate governance of the Company. This Committee shall also have such other duties, powers, and responsibilities as are described in this Charter. The Board may also delegate to this Committee certain additional responsibilities or authorities, provided that such responsibilities and authorities shall not exceed the limits established by Section 607.0825, Florida Statutes, or other applicable law. Article III – Size and Membership This Committee shall consist of at least three Company directors, a majority of which must meet the independence requirements of the Nasdaq Marketplace Rules. The size of this Committee shall be established, and the members of this Committee shall be appointed, by the Board. Committee members are subject to removal by the Board. Any vacancy on this Committee may be filled by the Board.
    [Show full text]
  • Uniform Commercial Real Estate Receivership Act
    UNIFORM COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE RECEIVERSHIP ACT drafted by the NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS and by it APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED FOR ENACTMENT IN ALL THE STATES at its ANNUAL CONFERENCE MEETING IN ITS ONE-HUNDRED-AND-TWENTY-FOURTH YEAR WILLIAMSBURG, VIRGINIA JULY 10 - JULY 16, 2015 WITH PREFATORY NOTE AND COMMENTS Copyright © 2015 By NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS September 22, 2015 ABOUT ULC The Uniform Law Commission (ULC), also known as National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL), now in its 124th year, provides states with non-partisan, well-conceived and well-drafted legislation that brings clarity and stability to critical areas of state statutory law. ULC members must be lawyers, qualified to practice law. They are practicing lawyers, judges, legislators and legislative staff and law professors, who have been appointed by state governments as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands to research, draft and promote enactment of uniform state laws in areas of state law where uniformity is desirable and practical. • ULC strengthens the federal system by providing rules and procedures that are consistent from state to state but that also reflect the diverse experience of the states. • ULC statutes are representative of state experience, because the organization is made up of representatives from each state, appointed by state government. • ULC keeps state law up-to-date by addressing important and timely legal issues. • ULC’s efforts reduce the need for individuals and businesses to deal with different laws as they move and do business in different states.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing the Federal Reserve's Proposed Rules Limiting Physical Commodities Activities of Financial Holding Companies Patrick Conlon
    NORTH CAROLINA BANKING INSTITUTE Volume 22 | Issue 1 Article 19 3-1-2018 Grandfathered into Commerce: Assessing the Federal Reserve's Proposed Rules Limiting Physical Commodities Activities of Financial Holding Companies Patrick Conlon Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/ncbi Part of the Banking and Finance Law Commons Recommended Citation Patrick Conlon, Grandfathered into Commerce: Assessing the Federal Reserve's Proposed Rules Limiting Physical Commodities Activities of Financial Holding Companies, 22 N.C. Banking Inst. 351 (2018). Available at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/ncbi/vol22/iss1/19 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in North Carolina Banking Institute by an authorized editor of Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Grandfathered into Commerce: Assessing the Federal Reserve’s Proposed Rules Limiting Physical Commodities Activities of Financial Holding Companies I. INTRODUCTION When the Deepwater Horizon’s oil pipe broke open in the Gulf of Mexico, millions of people watched the underwater camera showing BP’s oil pumping into the ocean.1 BP neither owned, nor operated the rig that exploded and sank after killing eleven people.2 Still, that oil spill has gone down in history as the “BP Oil Spill.”3 BP spent nearly $62 billion to resolve the legal claims associated with the event and to restore goodwill and its reputation.4 But what if instead of the BP Oil Spill, it had been the Morgan Stanley Oil Spill?5 Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are the only two financial holding companies (“FHCs”) who benefit from a provision of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”), which allows qualifying FHCs to engage in the extraction and transport of physical commodities.6 In general, commodities trading by FHCs must be deemed 1.
    [Show full text]