Subchapter V Bankruptcy for Middle Market Debtors
Despite its formal name—the Small Business Reorganization Act—the statute colloquially known as "Subchapter V" may offer a streamlined reorganization vehicle for some middle market companies.
September 17, 2021 at 02:40 PM
8 minute read
What is the "middle market"? Typically, this segment of the U.S. economy is defined as businesses with annual revenues roughly in the range of $10 million to $1 billion. Collectively, they are an economic powerhouse: According to the National Center for the Middle Market, there are about 200,000 such businesses in the United States, with annual combined revenues exceeding $10 trillion. Of course, these businesses—larger than the typical "mom and pop" shop, but most still privately owned or closely held—are not immune from financial distress, whether COVID-19-19-induced or otherwise, and at some point in the corporate life cycle may need to undergo financial restructurings, loan workouts, or bankruptcy proceedings. Unfortunately, the middle market has been particularly hard-hit by the rising costs of Chapter 11 bankruptcy in recent years, to the point that for some companies, it has paradoxically become too expensive to go bankrupt.
In response to broad criticism that Chapter 11 had become too expensive and complex for all but the largest companies, Congress enacted the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), which went into effect in February 2020. The SBRA added "Subchapter V," 11 U.S.C. §§1181-95, to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. Despite its formal name—the Small Business Reorganization Act—the statute colloquially known as "Subchapter V" may offer a streamlined reorganization vehicle for some middle market companies.
Subchapter V Benefits
Subchapter V was intended to provide eligible debtors with a more efficient, less costly, and simpler path to a Chapter 11 restructuring. Among its key features, Subchapter V (1) eliminates the official committee of unsecured creditors; (2) eliminates a debtor's obligation to pay quarterly U.S. Trustee fees; (3) provides a reduced period (90 days) for the debtor (but no other party) to file a Chapter 11 plan; (4) permits a debtor to spread the payment of administrative expenses (including its attorneys' fees and that of the Subchapter V trustee) over the life of its plan—which can stretch up to five years following plan confirmation—as opposed to having all administrative expenses due at confirmation; and (5) relaxes the "absolute priority rule," which allows a debtor's equity holders to retain their ownership interests in the debtor without an infusion of new capital or the payment of all creditors in full. Subchapter V also permits a debtor to confirm a plan of reorganization without accepting votes, because the debtor can "cramdown" a plan on all creditors without the approval of an impaired, consenting class of creditors. See 11 U.S.C. §1191(b).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Uber Files RICO Suit Against Plaintiff-Side Firms Alleging Fraudulent Injury Claims
- 2The Law Firm Disrupted: Scrutinizing the Elephant More Than the Mouse
- 3Inherent Diminished Value Damages Unavailable to 3rd-Party Claimants, Court Says
- 4Pa. Defense Firm Sued by Client Over Ex-Eagles Player's $43.5M Med Mal Win
- 5Losses Mount at Morris Manning, but Departing Ex-Chair Stays Bullish About His Old Firm's Future
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250