Mexican law firm calls for creditor protection

Download Video: MP4, WebM, Ogg

Above: Oscos Abogados: Vitro bankruptcy case one year from final verdict

Oscos Abogados believes that Mexico’s insolvency legislation is currently too unforgiving, not allowing for the concepts of fresh starts or creditor protection, and that a system more like the one in the US would help foster growth

It’s easy to assume that the insolvency business is a gloomy Dickensian one, with serious-faced professionals presiding over the demise of the collapsed dreams of business success. Perhaps some insolvency practitioners are like that, but Dario Oscos, Senior Partner at boutique law firm Oscos Abogados (Oscos) of Mexico City, certainly isn’t.

A thoughtful, upbeat legal professional whose firm has been recognised by World Finance for the calibre of its insolvency work, Oscos sees insolvency not as a graveyard for commercial organisations, but rather as a vital dynamic in an economy. He regards well-regulated insolvency as allowing entrepreneurs to make a fresh start without being permanently burdened by debts incurred in good faith while they were pressing ahead with doing their utmost to make their business a success.

Of course, he also recognises the vital need to protect debtors. “At present, Mexican insolvency law – the ‘Ley de Concursos Mercantiles’ – is very unsatisfactory,” he says. “First enacted in 2000, it has so far been applied to a grand total of just 305 insolvency cases out of 906 insolvency filings, 134 voluntary and 772 involuntary. The law is so inadequate that in the vast majority of instances, debtors and creditors strive to avoid having to involve themselves with it, and settle out of court instead.”

Oscos concedes that there is a tradition in Mexico of out-of-court settlement of legal cases, but all the same he regards the nationwide aversion to taking insolvency actions through the courts as a symptom of a serious lack of faith in Mexican insolvency law.

Insolvency law in Mexico stipulates two phases of proceedings. Firstly, there is a phase known as ‘conciliation’, which can persist for as long as 185 calendar days and can be extended once or twice by 90 days, though only if the majority of creditors agree; and secondly, liquidation in bankruptcy. In December 2007, Mexican insolvency law was amended to allow courts to approve settlements or reorganisations if these were supported by a simple majority of creditors.

An inadequate legal framework
The law on insolvency in Mexico is claimed by its advocates to encourage settlements and reorganisations, but Oscos sees it as being too formulaic and too prescriptive, and he believes that this has the effect of discouraging debtors from making use of it. His evidence for this assertion includes the fact that during the decade since the law came into force, there have only been those 305 insolvency cases that have come under the law’s jurisdiction. When asked about this he communicates a sense of righteous indignation that the legal framework in his own country in his own profession is so inadequate. Overall, Dario Oscos is bullish about the future of Mexican economic life. “We have an open, dynamic and vibrant economy that has massive growth potential and which I think offers enormously exciting opportunities to both domestic and foreign investors, especially in areas such as infrastructure, tourism, telecoms and oil and gas.”

He adds: “Yes, of course at the start of this second decade of the 21st century, Mexico has been affected by the climate of financial distress that resulted from the world economic crisis. But I think it’s important to note that financial distress also creates its own opportunities, such as in the area of mergers and acquisitions, where domestic and foreign investors have great incentives to invest in new, leaner and more streamlined Mexican businesses. Today, the truly international nature of our economy is shown by the fact that 99 percent of our financial sector is foreign-owned, and the NAFTA market, Canada, the US and Mexico have grown three times.”

Oscos concedes that the period of financial distress has, naturally, placed considerable pressures on his organisation in its daily work in insolvency. “The financial crisis stemming from the international crisis and the consequent Mexican recession has led to many entrepreneurs, financial institutions, and commercial organisations from all sectors suffering serious financial distress; distress that of course affects their families and which can’t be kept out of their personal lives. We take our responsibility to help people suffering from financial problems very seriously, in particular those that have been caused by the economy. We want to find solutions for them, ideally through out-of-court settlements, that minimise stress and disruption and save time and money.”

Advice for broken businesses
In the light of the current insolvency legislation in Mexico, Dario Oscos and his firm pursue a policy of encouraging all parties involved in insolvency cases – whether they be debtors, creditors (including the government and tax creditors), people employed by large organisations, entrepreneurs or any ordinary person – to settle out of court as quickly as is feasible.

“We at Oscos Abogados greatly believe in the importance of keeping all enterprises viable as going concerns wherever this is feasible,” says Oscos. “This is important not only for the people involved, but also for the economy generally. After all, an organisation that ceases to be in business brings no benefit to anyone, least of all those who are making their living from it and the economy itself. But if it is clear that there is no way that the organisation can remain as a going concern, our advice – followed by hands-on help if required – is to liquidate assets in an orderly and efficient process, whether in ‘Concurso Mercantil’ (the Mexican term for commercial bankruptcy), or in an out-of-court procedure.”

Oscos adds: “We only recommend litigation as the very last resort. Our attitude in this respect may change as and when the highly unsatisfactory Mexican insolvency law is changed and brought properly up-to-date, but for the time being our recommendation is to avoid litigation if there is indeed any way that it can be avoided. I suppose it says a great deal about what we, as insolvency practitioners, think of our country’s insolvency legislation that we strive to advise our clients not to make use of it!”

As for the range of services that Oscos Abogados offers, this spans two main categories. The services associated with the contentious side of its business include the following:
- Domestic and international litigation in contract or tort, as well as civil and commercial matters, and litigation in the fields of banking, finance, securities, trust, corporate, construction, energy, oil and gas, shareholders’ disputes and conflicts of interest, leasing and intellectual property;
- Planning and implementation for insolvency, bankruptcy and restructuring;
- Corporate restructuring and reorganisation of groups of companies;
- Contracts and credit/financial operations;
- Arbitration and mediation, both national and international;
- International procedural cooperation as well as recognition and enforcement of  foreign judgements;
- Criminal law.

The services offered by the advisory and consulting side of the firm include:
- Civil and commercial;
- Corporate;
- Contracts and warranties;
- Real estate;
- Banking, finance and securities;
- Mergers and acquisitions.

Oscos believes that the biggest problem with the Ley de Consorsos Mercantiles is that it only provides for two polarisations – restructuring and liquidation – and nothing in between. As he points out, once an organisation has gone down the path of liquidation, it foregoes the restructuring option. As he puts it: “Our legal framework, which is partly designed to facilitate the restructuring of insolvent organisations if that’s feasible, itself needs completely restructuring. The rigid restructuring/liquidation polarisation makes no sense commercially as a tool to deal with real-life insolvency cases.”

A case for change
Oscos points in particular to the case of Vitro, the Mexican glass industrial corporation which ran up debts totalling more than $1bn with third parties and then created new subsidiaries to which it claimed it also owed a very great sum. By making these subsidiaries substantial creditors, Vitro in effect gained authority over a large proportion of its creditors. Oscos regards this as an unlawful abuse that would not be possible under the insolvency jurisdictions of Western countries.

Yet Oscos is not in business just to give debtors a tough time. On the contrary, he tends to see insolvency as an occupational hazard of business life; indeed, his thinking about his profession tends toward the conclusion that any energetic and dynamic business environment is bound to involve some organisations becoming insolvent.

Oscos is firmly behind the importance of giving entrepreneurs the opportunity to make what he describes as a “fresh start”. As he explains: “One of the many problems with Mexico’s current insolvency law is that it does not provide, inter alia, for pre-insolvency protection, groups of companies, intercompany debt, and the concept of discharge from debts. Mexican insolvency law does not recognise this idea, and so even if a debtor’s assets are liquidated, the debtor still remains liable for the debts. Obviously, this misjudgement in the law militates against the notion of the fresh start, and can’t be good for Mexican business and the Mexican economy. There’s an urgent need for Mexican insolvency law to provide protection for creditors, just as is provided under the legislation of countries such as the US. We in Mexico badly need a modern insolvency law for the 21st century.”

Tags:
Comments: 1
Join the discussion below
  • http://barristerdirect.co.uk/ Daniel J ShenSmith

    This is interesting because it is getting at the very heart of business growth, which is risk. The legal structures surrounding finance and borrowing do need to be very strict so that the creditors are protected, but there is also a great need for education of business owners using borrowed money wisely. No matter how much protection is offered to creditors, if the money is not used wisely it will always leads to chaos.

The May – June 2013 Issue

Highest corporate tax
rates in Europe

European countries are scrambling to raise every last penny of funds through taxes. But some countries may have gone too far...

Belgium

Though all business taxes in Belgium can be paid online with little effort and preparation, the rates are still sky-high at 57.7 percent, including a staggering 50.8 percent total rate on profits only in social security contributions.

Belarus

In Belarus, a company spends up to 338 hours annually preparing for and paying ten different taxes and duties. The total tax rate has incredibly been lowered to 60.7 percent, from 117.5 percent in 2008.

France

A company in France pays seven different taxes and duties, the sum of which can amount to 65.7 percent of profits; though President François Hollande has announced a wave of business tax rate cuts coming up.

Estonia

A business in Estonia pays 67.3 percent of profits in tax, 37.2 percent exclusively in social security contributions. The country has gone against the grain in Europe by raising businesses taxes from 48.6 percent in 2008 to the current rates.

Italy

While corporate income tax (IRES) in Italy is limited to 38 percent of taxable profit, a company operating in Italy can expect to pay 14 other taxes and duties, including social security contributions, bringing their total payable tax to 68.7 percent of profits, according to the World Bank.

Norway

Norway taxes motor fuels twice, with a road use tax and a CO2 emissions tax. Combined with strikes in the energy sector that have curbed output, the price of gas at a local pump has soared to $10.12 per gallon.

Turkey

Though Turkey sits on the Suez Canal and neighbours many oil rich countries, the price of a gallon of average gas clocks in at $9.41 in Turkish pumps, because of a 60 percent share of taxes. 

Israel

Like Turkey, Israel is surrounded by oil-rich neighbours, but drills very little itself. Gas prices are controlled by the government, so about half of the $9.28 per gallon goes to taxes.

Hong Kong

There are few gas stations in Hong Kong, but the ones available charge up to 76 percent more per gallon than mainland China, where the government caps the cost of fuel. A gallon at the pumps will cost around $8.61 on the island.

Netherlands

Expensive labour costs make the Dutch petrol prices the dearest in Europe, at $8.26 per gallon; though the 57 percent tax add-ons don’t help.

The credit crisis

8 February 2007
HSBC warns of subprime mortgage losses

2 April 2007
New Century goes bus

14 September 2007
Wholesale markets have dried up

17 March 2008
Rescue of Bear Stearns

7 September 2008
Rescue of Fannie Mae

15 September 2008
Lehman Brothers file for bankruptcy

3 October 2008
US congress approves $700bn bailout

14 February 2009
$787bn stimulus approved by congress

 

The effects of the current financial crisis are global and irrefutable. With the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the domino effect of irresponsible public monetary policies, huge levels of unsustainable debt, and a deregulated financial sector, has escalated to the point where no corner of the globe has been left untouched.

1973 oil crisis

October 1973
Syria and Egypt launch an attack on Israel on Yom Kippur and set off a twenty day war;

1977
US President Carter creates Department of Energy, which develops the US strategic petroleum reserve

 

The Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) used their oil reserves as a weapon with the Arab Oil Embargo against those who supported Israel. By January 1974, world oil prices were four times higher than they were at the start of the crisis, especially in the US, and the shock led to a huge drop in the stock market with NYSE losing $97bn in just six weeks.  The embargo lasted five months, and the effects are still seen today.

German hyperinflation

1922-1923

Hyperinflation
1923 – 1924
Stabilisation

 

The trouble began when Germany missed a repatriation payment, worth about one third of the German deficit in this period. Inflation was already high but by 1923 it was raging. Prices doubled within hours, and by late 1923, it cost 200bn marks to buy a single loaf of bread. People burned money as it was cheaper than buying firewood. Germany eventually regained control of its economy when it introduced the Rentenmark into circulation in 1923, and then the Reichmark in 1924.

The Great Depression

1929-1933
The Great Crash
1934-1939
Recovery and Recession

 

After the decadence of the Roaring Twenties, the 1930s saw the biggest economic slump of all time. The stock market crashed on 29 October 1929, and optimism and decadent living tumbled along with the figures. The GDP fell from $103.6bn in 1929, to $66bn in 1934 and the subsequent years of recovery were the most dramatic in US history.

1907 bankers’ panic

1907
Otto Heinze and his brother Augustus Heinze bought shares of United Copper.

 

The stock market was already cautious over the tight money supply, but the US was thrown into a depression after the stock market fell nearly 50 percent from its peak in 1906. The Heinze brothers thought they could influence market shares but ended up bankrupting lenders that provided the financing to buy the stock. A chain reaction left nine institutions bankrupt. By February 1908, the panic was over and the government created the Federal Reserve system, to prevent banks from exercising too much control over the economy.