Create a personalised content profile. Measure ad performance. Select basic ads. Create a personalised ads profile. Select personalised ads. Apply market research to generate audience insights. Measure content performance.
Develop and improve products. List of Partners vendors. A leveraged buyout LBO is the acquisition of another company using a significant amount of borrowed money to meet the cost of acquisition. The assets of the company being acquired are often used as collateral for the loans, along with the assets of the acquiring company. LBOs have garnered a reputation for being an especially ruthless and predatory tactic as the target company doesn't usually sanction the acquisition.
Aside from being a hostile move, there is a bit of irony to the process in that the target company's success, in terms of assets on the balance sheet, can be used against it as collateral by the acquiring company. The purpose of leveraged buyouts is to allow companies to make large acquisitions without having to commit a lot of capital. LBOs are conducted for three main reasons:. The notion of this prohibition is aimed to prevent the buyer, who wants to acquire the shares of the joint stock company, from receiving any financial assistance from the company.
As a matter of fact, considering that the registering collaterals from the Target Company for the people who plans to acquire a small share is very rare in practice, the financial assistance prohibition is also referred to as leveraged buyout prohibition in the doctrine. As clearly stated in the TCC, there are two exceptions to this provision, although the legal transactions that the company makes with another person for the purpose of acquiring its shares are subject to advance, loan or collateral.
The first one is the transactions that are included in the businesses of credit and financial institutions. The second is the legal procedures regarding the advances, loans and collateral to the employees of the company or its affiliated companies so that they can acquire the shares of the company. In the presence of these two types of transactions, it is not possible to claim the invalidity of these transactions based on financial assistance prohibition. As a final remark in this context; considering that leveraged buyouts improve the economic structure of the Target Company and to encourage and facilitate investments in the market; and therefore due to the overall improvement of national economies; some jurisdictions including the European Union has moderated the financial assistance prohibition; resulting leveraged buyouts to be permitted under certain conditions.
Furthermore; this prohibition was never regulated in some countries including the United States. When the letter of law regarding the financial assistance prohibition is examined; it is clearly understood that financial assistance transactions made without complying with this prohibition shall be void. Since there is no explicit legislative provision on the subject and the relevant issue has not been subject to judicial decisions in practice; causes of the financing process being void on the share purchase agreement is not yet clarified; as a result, in the doctrine there are conflicting views if the promissory transaction financing through collateral and act of disposition share transfer compile a compound agreement or not.
The importance of this distinction in practice is critical because according to this distinction; it will be determined whether the resulting share transfer is valid or not. However; since a dispute on the financial assistance prohibition has not been subject to the decisions of the high judicial authorities in practice, a uniform conclusion cannot be reached in this regard. Mezzanine debt is usually provided in a relatively small tranche in order to plug a funding gap.
If a bank is unable to lend a sufficient amount of senior debt, it may be able to provide additional funds on a mezzanine basis. As the mezzanine debt is higher risk, the rewards are commensurately increased, usually by an inflated interest rate.
Mezzanine debt is typically secured on a second-ranking basis behind senior lenders, and ahead of any quasi-equity instruments. Mezzanine lenders are sometimes issued warrants options to buy equity, usually for nominal consideration only.
A warrant allows the mezzanine provider to share in any increase in value of the equity of the borrower, and provides a higher potential return on investment in order to compensate for the subordinated nature of the debt. High yield debt.
High yield debt is a form of debt instrument usually bonds or notes issued by a sub-investment grade entity, sometimes called junk bonds.
The poor credit rating of the issuer, together with the fact that such instruments are usually offered on a subordinated basis ranking behind senior and mezzanine debt , makes high yield debt very high risk. The high risk is rewarded by the high yield in the form of a significantly inflated rate of interest.
Payment-in-kind PIK notes. PIK securities are the most junior form of debt before equity in the capital structure. PIKs allow the issuer to delay interest and capital repayment for several years. Instead of interest being paid at regular intervals throughout the life of the loan, it is paid in the form of more debt in the form of bonds or notes , and in this way interest is rolled over and paid in one lump sum at the end of the term of the notes.
The deferral of returns to the end of the term of the PIK notes, and the fact that investors are the last to receive interest and capital in the capital structure mean that PIK notes are high-risk investments akin to equity.
Despite the high risk and price, PIK notes have several advantages:. Deferral of payment allows borrowers to invest their cashflow in the business.
Borrowers can take on more debt without changing the terms of the senior debt facilities since holders of PIK notes are at the bottom of the capital structure, interest and capital is paid after the other lenders.
PIK notes are very costly, due to the high interest, and are not very attractive for mainstream companies. However they are attractive for private equity groups who are increasingly funding their investments by issuing PIKs, as they allow the issuer time to improve the business, and possibly float or sell the company, before the PIK notes fall due.
The major investors in PIK notes are hedge funds eager to claim high returns. The PIKs were secured against Glazer family assets, which meant that the hedge funds could take control of the Glazer family's stake in Manchester United in the event of default. This takes the form of ordinary shares, preference shares and so on. They are an unsecured equity investment and therefore rank last in the capital structure. Security There are several reasons why lenders require security:.
Security provides the lender with a degree of protection on the insolvency of the company and ensures that its charge is prior to any interests of other creditors such as trade creditors. The secured lender with a floating charge over all, or substantially all, of the assets of a company will have greater control over any restructuring, as they can appoint an administrator over the assets of the target company.
The security will be structured to allow the sale of the entire business as a going concern so as to maximise recoveries on enforcement. As the borrower in an LBO is often a newly-formed shell company with no assets of its own, lenders will seek security over the assets or shares of the target company and the SPV. It is common for the target company to guarantee the obligations of the SPV and to secure these guarantees by granting a charge over its own assets.
This raises financial assistance questions see below, Areas of interest in UK leveraged deals: Financial assistance. Security over all, or substantially all, of the assets of the SPV and the target company will be required by providers of senior and mezzanine debt.
Security will normally also be granted to subordinated lenders to give them priority over unsecured creditors. The debt providers usually enter an inter-creditor agreement which prioritises the rights of the creditors to receive interest or dividends and to have principal and capital amounts repaid or redeemed. Areas of interest in UK leveraged deals There are some particular areas of potential difficulty in UK leveraged deals:.
Directors' duties. Directors' duties Under UK common law, directors of a target have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of the target at all times. In exercising their fiduciary duties to the target, target directors should have regard to the interests of the target shareholders as a whole, not the interests of individual shareholders.
This includes balancing the interests of current and future shareholders. If the bid is for a company to which the UK Takeover Code Code applies, the target board is required to circulate its views on an offer to the company's shareholders. The Code's General Principles require the directors to consider the current shareholders' interests as a whole, together with those of employees and creditors. Normally, target directors will not face any conflict when considering their Code duties and their common law fiduciary duties.
However, this will not always be the case as it is possible for the interests of the existing shareholders to diverge from those of the future shareholders. For example, the leveraged bid by Malcolm Glazer for Manchester United involved a highly-geared bid vehicle which needed to extract a high return from its investment in Manchester United in order to service its debt obligations. The Manchester United board attempted to reconcile its two duties as follows:.
The directors considered that the company and the club would be damaged by the bid for example, as a result of a restriction on the ability to sign new players which might flow from the bid's financing arrangements. However, they nevertheless believed that the bid offered fair value for their current shareholders and the Code obliged them to say so.
CH Beck, The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. All Rights Reserved. Password Passwords are Case Sensitive. Forgot your password? Free, unlimited access to more than half a million articles one-article limit removed from the diverse perspectives of 5, leading law, accountancy and advisory firms.
We need this to enable us to match you with other users from the same organisation. It is also part of the information that we share to our content providers "Contributors" who contribute Content for free for your use.
Learn More Accept. Finance and Banking. The Romanian Legal Perspective. To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq. Our view is that this extension should not apply with respect to financial assistance rules, based on the following arguments: 1. Merger with Debt Push-Down The financing structure of LBOs may include the immediate merger of the Target company into the acquisition vehicle or, if suitable, and depending on the specifics of each transaction, sometimes it is the acquisition vehicle that is merged into the Target.
Under the Romanian Fiscal Code, a merger is a tax neutral event, from a corporate income tax perspective, if it meets certain requirements, in brief: It has economic substance and is not performed with the purpose of tax avoidance or tax evasion; The fiscal value of the shares received by the shareholders of the absorbed company in the absorbing entity is equal to the fiscal value of the shares held in the absorbed company prior to the merger; The fiscal value of any assets transferred in the merger process is preserved at the level of the absorbing company.
Looking to a More Permissive Future? Footnotes 1 This calculation is based on the Miller-Modigliani propositions, developed by the Nobel laureates Morton Miller and Franco Modigliani in their papers published in and Gabriela Anton.
Raluca Sanucean. The FCA Fine relates to the long-running "tuna bonds" case, which has embroiled the Bank and other parties in multiple sets of criminal, regulatory and civil proceedings. From the regulatory and tax environment to the fund formation, get a comprehensive overview of the Luxembourg investment funds market. Matheson Horizon Tracker Autumn Matheson. This Horizon Tracker provides a snapshot of a selection of current, upcoming and proposed Irish and EU legislation.
Sign Up for our free News Alerts - All the latest articles on your chosen topics condensed into a free bi-weekly email. Register For News Alerts. Article Tags.
0コメント