Bankruptcy is a
legal proceeding in which you put your money in your pants pocket and give your
coat to your creditors.
The nexus between
better insolvency laws and economic growth is forthright. It has been
established beyond doubt that the fierce and detrimental bankruptcy
laws which ensures to protect the rights of borrowers and lenders, promote
predictability, clarify the risks associated with lending, and make the
collection of debt through bankruptcy proceedings more effective and pragmatic.
India witnessed an
era of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (SICA) and
Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) as a failed mechanism
for regulating bankrupt companies. The Indian laws are often termed as the
toughest laws for the running of businesses in India.
The World Bank has
ranked India at 142 out of 189 countries in 'resolving insolvency,' estimating
that it takes 4.3 years on average in Mumbai to settle a case. In reality
it takes much longer than that. To improve business condition in the country,
Bankruptcy Law Reform Committee was setup by the government in Aug, 2014
I. Key reforms
The
Bankruptcy Law Reform Commission headed by former law secretary TK Viswanathan
has proposed the following key reforms:
1 Early recognition of financial distress in company and timely
intervention by the government to rescue the organization. The first important
suggestion is one that allows secured creditors to initiate rescue proceedings
if a borrower fails to make good on any of its dues within a month of such a
demand being made. The current rules under the Companies Act say that a
borrower should be unable to repay 50% (or more) of its debt before debtors can
initiate rescue proceedings. As the committee argues, waiting for a stage where
a company has defaulted on 50% of its debt is probably waiting too long. By
such time, the company would probably have turned unviable and a rescue would
be unlikely. Act early, is the message.
2. One of the most prominent and paramount feature of The Bill is that it
proposes insolvency resolution within 180 days and a new regulator to oversee
the process. It's also laid down a clear and speedy system for early
identification of financial distress and revival of companies. The
prescribed resolution timeline of 180 days can be cut further to 90 days from
the trigger date for key categories. The proposed insolvency regulator will
cover professionals and agencies specialising in the field.
3. Liquidate non viable company at the earliest.
4. Permitting secured creditors to apply for the rescue of the company, as
per the current law it was filled after the company had defaulted by 50 per
cent of its outstanding debt.
5. Another feather in the cap was introduced by allowing unsecured
creditors representing 25 per cent of the debt to initiate rescue proceedings
against the debtor company.
6. The committee has been prudent enough to recommend individual solvency.
The report incorporates provision on individual insolvency, a crucial area
covering sole proprietorships and small and medium enterprises in India.
II. Crucial benefits
1. Improve the rank of India on ease of doing business
2. The Bill has proposed a number of changes to the liquidation regime,
including changes for increased protection of creditor rights, maximisation of
asset value and better management of the company in liquidation. Simplifying
exit policy is one of the criteria considered by entrepreneurs before setting
any organization.
3. It is also proposed that an early intervention by the government could
salvage the entity from liquidation.
III. Shortfall
1. We have witnessed that several provisions which deal with the early
intervention by the government to save organization from being defaulted are
already available under various laws and have failed to resolve the issue
further, ineffective implementation of existing laws are major problems.
2. There is lack of awareness, knowledge and information pertaining to the
laws amongst the people who run and manage small businesses and micro
enterprises, further they are managed by people who do not have much knowledge
about laws and are largely illiterate thus, without required knowledge of existing
laws, proper implementation seems to be a distant dream.
3. We anticipate that in lieu of getting subsidies and tax benefits through
state intervention, there will be an tendency amongst the entrepreneurs to show
a well running organization as a sick organization.
4. Although this may sound like an good news for creditors, on the flip
side one needs to tread cautiously in giving the creditors unbridled power and
leaving companies with fewer options to protect themselves.
III Conclusion
The Industry
sentiments about the proposed law seems that it will create a robust and
globally competitive insolvency regime.
However lets not
get carried away as if one recollects substantial opinions were offered about
the state of the debt recovery tribunals. On paper, these were meant to speed
up recoveries, but in practice, have done anything but that. Until this
judicial bottleneck is cleared, little may change on the ground.
The present laws do
not either help a sick industrial unit to revive itself or assist financial
institutions to recover their money. A transparent bankruptcy law is overdue,
getting a new bankruptcy law in place is critical in sending a message to
promoters that the erosion of the sanctity of the debt contract, as it’s been
termed by the RBI governor, must be reversed.
Further a new
bankruptcy law, coupled with practical changes, removal of judicial bottlenecks
and curbing delays will be crucial to the reform process.
No comments:
Post a Comment