Protecting What You've

Worked Hard to Earn.

News and Research

Bulletproof Veil: How it works.
 
Member Newsletters
Free Newsletter Example
 
Case Studies
University of Hard Knocks
 
The White Paper
The Myth of Corporate Veil Protection
 
Additional Evaluations
Protect Against Veil Piercing
 
 
 

Your name
 

Your email address
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
July 2008  
 

Dear Current and Future Bulletproof Veil Subscribers,

As crude oil prices continue to skyrocket, a debate is raging in the United States over whether to change the federal government's policy of barring oil exploration and production on most federally-owned land. Supporters of domestic drilling argue that the US possesses billions of barrels of crude oil reserves, and tapping them would reduce US dependence on foreign oil and lower fuel prices. One of the primary arguments made by opponents is that domestic oil development would damage the environment.

The United States has rigorous environmental liability laws. The most significant is the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as Superfund. This 1980 law gives the federal government broad authority to assign liability for hazardous waste releases. CERCLA allows liability to be imposed retroactively for activities that may have occurred decades earlier. As a result, the responsible corporate entity may no longer exist. When this happens, plaintiffs attempt to impose liability on a successor business entity. Corporate veil piercing and successor liability arguments have been used extensively in efforts to “tag” businesses and their owners with environmental liability.

Bulletproof Veil can help you avoid environmental liability arising from corporate governance failures. Enroll now or contact your Bulletproof Veil representative for more information.

 

The Oil Industry, CERCLA, and Corporate Veil Piercing

Basics of CERCLA

CERCLA provides for the liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at designated “Superfund” sites. Under CERCLA, four classes of parties, termed "potential responsible parties," may be liable for contamination at a Superfund site:

  • the current owner or operator of the site;
  • the owner or operator of a site at the time that disposal of a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant occurred;
  • a person who arranged for the disposal of a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant at a site; and
  • a person who transported a hazardous substance, pollutant or contaminant to a site; that transporter must have also selected that site for the disposal of the hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants.

Business owners can run into CERCLA whenever they are involved with real estate that has been contaminated or may become contaminated by hazardous substances. Cleaning up contaminated land can be difficult, lengthy, and expensive. Via CERCLA, the federal government can force businesses to bear the cost of contamination cleanup. Veil piercing is often the method the government uses.

The US Supreme Court clarified the linkage between CERCLA law and corporate veil piercing in US v. BestFoods, 524 U.S. 51 (1998). This lawsuit showed that CERCLA can be used to apply indirect liability via a veil piercing action.

Veil Piercing Liability

Many small business operations consist of a parent corporation with separate incorporated subsidiaries. Often an individual entrepreneur or family will operate several separate businesses, each as a separate corporation.

In the Bestfoods case, the Supreme Court said that a parent company could be held indirectly liable for the actions of its subsidiary via a veil piercing action. As the court said, “operator liability may attach to a parent corporation both indirectly, when the corporate veil can be pierced under state law, and directly, when the parent has exerted power or influence over its subsidiary by actively participating in, and exercising control over, the subsidiary's business during a period of hazardous waste disposal.” (United States v. Bestfoods, 118 S.Ct. 1876, 141 L.Ed.2d 43)

Successor Liability

Many small businesses grow by purchasing the assets or equity of other businesses. These purchases could expose the buyer to environmental liability if the transaction is considered a "de facto merger" or if the purchasing company is considered a successor of the purchased company.

A de facto merger or successor relationship is found when:

  • there is a continuation of the enterprise of the seller in terms of continuity of management, personnel, physical location, assets and operations;
  • there is a continuity of shareholders;
  • the seller ceases operations, liquidates and dissolves as soon as legally and practically possible;
  • the purchasing corporation assumes the obligations of the seller necessary for uninterrupted continuation of business operations.

(Louisiana-Pacific Corp., 909 F.2d at 1264; In Re Acushnet River, 712 F. Supp. at 1014; Ametek, 709 F. Supp. at 559).

If you buy a business or assets such as real estate and continue to use the same locations, name, or equipment, you may make yourself liable for any environmental issues created by that business.

Oil Companies and CERCLA Liability

Oil companies are in the business of finding and extracting oil from the ground, and processing it into various items for sale. Virtually everything that comes out of the ground in drilling operations is considered hazardous waste. As a result, any energy-related business needs to be very mindful of its responsibilities under CERCLA law.

If you are a current or past owner or operator of a hazardous waste site, or an arranger or transporter of hazardous wastes, you are potentially responsible for any environmental liability costs that arise. For businesses facing the high cost of environmental liability, the key is to identify any other parties that should also share a liability burden.

A recent US Supreme Court case provides good news. In the case, U.S. v. Atlantic Research Corp., the Court ruled unanimously that potentially responsible parties (PRPs) for cleanup liability can pursue other PRPs for cost recovery. Sharing cleanup costs is very important because cleanup can be so costly that, without a legal mechanism to share costs, there is little incentive for voluntary cleanup efforts.

Summary & Conclusion

Corporate governance is critical because liability threats usually strike without warning. This is particularly true of environmental liabilities. Maintaining a compliant business entity can save you from expensive problems if you come up against any environmental problems.

Bulletproof Veil can help you avoid parent-subsidiary and successor liability claims. Enroll today and contact your Bulletproof Veil Representative for more information.

Bulletproof Veil can help keep you avoid parent-subsidiary and successor liability claims. Enroll today and contact your Bulletproof Veil Representative for more information.

 

Material discussed is meant for illustration and/or informational purposes only and it is not to be construed as tax or legal advice. Although the information has been gathered from sources believed to be reliable, note that individual situations can vary.

  • September 2008 - You Can Be Liable for the Debts of Someone Else's Business
  • August 2008 - Litigation on the Rise: How to Solve Disputes Outside the Courtroom
  • July 2008 - The Oil Industry, CERCLA, and Corporate Veil Piercing
  • June 2008 - Take Care Before You Invest IRA Money in a Private Buisness
  • May 2008 - Wesley Snipes and the IRS "Dirty Dozen"
  • April 2008 - Bear Stearns, Subprime Mortgage Loans, and Veil Piercing
  • March 2008 - The Supreme Court Just Made Your Retirement Plan MoreRisky
 

Understand How to Gift Equity in Your Privately Held Business

Business owners often need to transfer equity in their business to new investors or partners. Equity transfers can be done via either gifts or sales. A sale requires an exchange of consideration (e.g. money, other assets, services) for the equity. A gift involves no exchange of consideration, which is often the business owner’s desire if the recipient is a family member or loved one. This month we look at how to properly gift equity. Next month we’ll look at issues involved in selling equity.

If you want to gift equity in a privately held business, understand that the United States imposes a gift tax on any transfer of property by gift. This tax on the donor is based on the gift’s fair market value. Currently you can transfer up to $12,000 per person per year without incurring any gift taxes. This is the “annual exclusion.” In addition to the annual exclusion, everyone has a lifetime exclusion that they can use as they wish until it runs out. As of 2008 this amount is $1,000,000. Any amount you use out of your lifetime gift tax exclusion counts against your estate tax exclusion, so use the gift tax exclusion wisely.

If you want to gift equity in a business to someone, how should you do it?

1. If it is an existing business entity, you should set up an annual gifting program utilizing the annual gift tax exclusion. Begin by getting a valuation for the business that can withstand IRS scrutiny. For larger businesses, it may require multiple years of gifting before your beneficiary has any meaningful ownership in the business. It’s important to start early and stay consistent. If your situation won’t allow a multi-year gifting schedule, you can also make use of your lifetime exemption. Remember that any equity transaction must be properly documented via equity certificates and ledger updates, and should be formally voted on and approved in advance during a corporate meeting.

2. If you have not yet formed the business entity, be careful. There is a particular sequence of steps you must take. First establish the business entity, with only those who will contribute assets to the business (usually Mom and Dad) as shareholders. Then transfer assets into the business via a properly documented capitalization transaction. Now you can begin to make gifts of equity as described above. Don’t get this sequence wrong! If you make your loved ones shareholders before transferring assets into the business, you may create a serious “gift on formation” tax problem under I.R.C. §704(e). This is a very common and potentially costly tax problem.

3. Be sure you don’t make the gift a “future interest”. Ownership of an asset is legally considered a future interest if it is “limited to commence in use, possession, or enjoyment at some future date or time.” Future interests of business equity are not eligible for the gift tax exclusion. If you give away equity but maintain restrictive control of all business decisions, you probably have a future interest problem. Bulletproof Veil can diagnose this problem by examining the language in your bylaws or operating agreement.

Once you have begun gifting equity, you may be able to make use of valuation discounts allowed by the IRS to achieve significant tax benefits. Examples include minority interest and lack of marketability discounts.

Bulletproof Veil helps you make sure any business transactions involving equity transfers are done in a compliant fashion. Contact your Bulletproof Veil representative for more information.

 

States ponder strict liability for companies guilty of data breaches

Instances of customer information theft, loss, or accidental distribution, including the mass data compromise of over 46 million credit and debit cards used at TJX Companies stores, are raising questions of liability for data security breaches. A recent Minnesota data security case highlights this issue. At least six states - California, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Texas - may soon enact legislation applying strict liability to merchants for security breaches within their systems. Strict liability would make companies liable regardless of their intentions or lack of negligence.

Illegal immigration prosecutions up 73%

If you don’t know whether your business may have a problem with illegal immigrants working as employees or contractors, now would be the time to make sure. According to a report from the Transactional Records Clearinghouse at Syracuse University, the number of 2008 prosecution filings by the US government is up 72.7% compared with the same period in 2007. Overall, prosecutions of this type are up 193.1% from levels reported in 2003. The charges of "Reentry of deported alien" and "Bringing in and harboring certain aliens" were the two most commonly brought by the government.

84% of U.S. workers expect employers to help offset the rising cost of gas

According to a report by Opinion Research Corporation, high gas prices are changing employees’ expectations for their employer’s assistance. Employees want employers to help by instituting or expanding car pooling programs, providing incentives for the use of mass transit, permitting working from home, or providing a gasoline allowance to cover additional commuting costs. Also, 11% of respondents are now considering leaving their jobs as a result of rising gas costs, suggesting employers should pay attention to employees’ expectations.

Tennessee adopts medical liability reforms (AMA News)

For the first time in 30 years, Tennessee enacted reforms to the state's medical liability system. Physicians praised the law, saying it will help reduce frivolous lawsuits and keep medical liability costs in check. The measure requires plaintiffs to give defendant doctors written notice at least 60 days before filing a lawsuit. Plaintiff lawyers must include a certificate of merit from a qualified medical expert showing the basis for the claim. Attorneys who fail to comply with the certification process face penalties, including possible case dismissal.

Sales of existing-U.S. homes rose in May from the lowest level in nine years

According to the National Association of Realtors, existing-home sales increased 2.0% to an annual rate of 4.99 million units in May, but are 15.9% below the 5.93 million-unit pace in May 2007. NAR President Richard Gaylord says “home buyers are starting to get off the fence and into the market, drawn by drops in home prices in many areas and armed with greater access to affordable mortgages.” Lawrence Yun, NAR chief economist, said there’s still a lot of inventory in the market. “The large supply clearly favors buyers, and it should take several months to draw the inventory down.”