Insights
Chapman wrote the book on the marketplace lending regulatory landscape that the entire industry has come to rely upon. First published in 2013, the 2024 update covers a vast array of topics affecting the marketplace lending industry.
The Division of Examinations of the Securities and Exchange Commission published its examination priorities for fiscal year 2025. The 2025 Exam Priorities reflect practices, products, and services the Division believes present heightened risks to investors and the U.S. capital markets.
-
There have been several recent notable enforcement actions, including continued enforcement by the SEC and CFTC against off-channel communications, as well as an SEC fraud settlement with Macquarie Investment Management Business Trust.
Chapman's quarterly Regulatory Update contains an overview of the latest regulatory actions, market happenings, and litigation and enforcement activity in the investment management space.
-
On September 12, 2024, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) adopted amendments to CFTC Regulation 4.7 (Reg. 4.7), a rule that provides exemptions from the broader compliance requirements under Part 4 of the CFTC regulations (Part 4) for registered commodity pool operators (CPOs) with respect to pools (4.7 pools) offered solely to “Qualified Eligible Persons” (QEPs) and registered commodity trading advisors (CTAs) that advise or manage commodity trading accounts of QEPs. The amendments (i) increase the financial thresholds in the “Portfolio Requirement” of the QEP definition and (ii) permit CPOs of fund of fund pools offered solely to QEPs to provide monthly account statements within 45 days of the month-end, rather than providing quarterly account statements within 30 days of the quarter-end. The CFTC chose not to adopt, at this time, the proposed minimum QEP disclosures.
A recognized securities and commodities regulatory authority, Peter’s practice focuses on the registration and regulation of investment advisers, broker-dealers, commodity trading advisors, commodity pool operators, and introducing brokers, as well as the formation and ongoing compliance obligations of registered and private investment companies.
Chapman's 2024 Social Impact and Sustainability report showcases our commitment to the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC).
On August 22, 2024, a proposed rule (the “Proposed Joint Rule”) mandated by the Financial Data Transparency Act of 2022 (the “FDTA”) and adopted by nine federal financial regulators, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” and, together with the other eight regulators, the “Covered Agencies”), was published in the Federal Register.
Chapman's white paper provides a summary of the interval fund and tender offer fund structures, including their basic legal framework, their investment restrictions, how they are distributed and how they facilitate redemptions. It also provides a comparison of interval funds and tender offer funds, both to each other and to other types of investment companies.
- Topic: Make-Whole Provisions
19 matches.
The success of Ultra Petroleum bondholders’ make-whole claims is grounded in the unusual circumstance of a solvent debtor, with the Fifth Circuit unambiguously holding that make-whole entitlements in non-solvent-debtor cases must be disallowed.
Chapman’s "Bankruptcy and Aircraft Finance" handbook details certain special rights afforded aircraft creditors and some of the strategies employed. With the airline industry suffering devastating losses as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we hope this will be a useful resource for creditors.
In a break from other recent circuit court decisions, the Fifth Circuit ruled that amounts due under a make-whole provision contained in a note purchase agreement constituted unmatured interest and were not permitted to be paid to a creditor under the Bankruptcy Code.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has affirmed the district court and the bankruptcy court’s determinations in MPM Silicones, LLC that Momentive’s senior noteholders are not entitled to recover any make-whole premium on account of the replacement of their notes.
- October 19, 2017 (Originally Published October 4, 2017)
On September 21, a Bankruptcy Court ruled that holders of notes issued pursuant to a Note Purchase Agreement entered into by a debtor’s operating subsidiary were entitled to what the court termed an ‘enormous’ make-whole payment, post-petition interest, and recovery of related fees and expenses.
- Law360
In a break from recent decisions, on November 17, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s decision in the Energy Future case, finding that make-whole premiums were in fact payable upon a “redemption” even if such redemption occurred after a bankruptcy filing and the automatic acceleration of the underlying debt where the applicable indentures did not otherwise provide.
On June 3, 2016, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware ruled that the intercreditor agreement between first lien noteholders and junior noteholders in In re Energy Future Holdings Corp. did not require the junior noteholders to bear the cost of a previously disallowed make-whole payment to the first lien noteholders.
On February 16, 2016, the District Court for the District of Delaware affirmed the decision of the Delaware bankruptcy court in In re Energy Future Holdings Corp., that noteholders’ claims for make-whole premiums may be blocked by the automatic stay of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code.
Recently, before awarding bondholders any amounts on account of a make-whole provision upon a debt prepayment, courts have repeatedly insisted on clear language in the credit documents requiring such payment notwithstanding a bankruptcy filling and a related automatic acceleration.
- July/August 2015Pratt's Journal of Bankruptcy Law
Pratt's Journal of Bankruptcy Law published an article written by Chapman attorneys.
- Client Alert
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently affirmed the Bankruptcy Court’s decision in In MPM Silicones, LLC, establishing Judge Drain’s “prime plus” formula as the appropriate interest rate required in connection with new notes issued to secured creditors under a cramdown plan of reorganization in the Southern District of New York.
- Client Alert
In order to avoid future intercreditor disputes, investors can learn from past mistakes and draft or revise their intercreditor agreements accordingly. In this Client Alert, we attempt to highlight a number of specific considerations that may improve intercreditor agreements, to better achieve their intended purpose of delineating the respective priorities and rights of senior and junior secured creditors while avoiding intercreditor conflict.
In order to maintain the global private placement market as an attractive market for both issuers and investors, the American College of Investment Counsel undertook to update its Model Form Note Purchase Agreement last year and released its Transaction Process Management Committee Updated Model X Form No. 2, draft dated April 15, 2014.
- January 2015Pratt's Journal of Bankruptcy Law
Pratt's Journal of Bankruptcy Law published an article based on a recent Chapman Sidebar.
Chapman and Cutler attorneys have been monitoring decisions and developments with respect to creditors' rights and have compiled the client alerts published to date that provide important insight regarding the implications of these decisions for holders of secured debt and highlight what every creditor should know in order to effect rights under its credit agreement.
- Client Alert
In an important bench ruling in the MPM Silicones case, Judge Robert Drain of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York has provided debtors with a potentially coercive tool to use as leverage against their secured creditors.
- Chapman Sidebar
As prices for distressed loans have risen, holders of secured claims are focusing not only on the recovery of principal but also on repayment of interest, fees and pre-payment-premiums or “make whole” payments.
- The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation
The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance and Financial Regulation posted an article based on a recent Chapman Sidebar.
- Chapman Sidebar
Given today’s low interest rate environment, the enforceability of make-whole provisions has been the subject of intense litigation as debtors seek to redeem and refinance debt entered into during periods of higher interest rates, and investors seek to maintain their contractual rates of return. This trend has come to the forefront most recently in two separate cases, one filed in Delaware and the other in New York.