Bankruptcy Beat: Decision Approves Cramdown of Secured Creditors in Chapter 11 With Sub-Market Interest Rate And Disallows Lender's Make-Whole Premium

by Pullman & Comley, LLC
Contact

On May 4, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York affirmed the controversial and widely discussed decision of the Bankruptcy Court in In re MPM Silicones, LLC, 2014 WL 4436335 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Sept. 9, 2014) (Drain, J.), better known as the Momentive decision,[1] which addressed the cramdown rate of interest in a Chapter 11 case and whether the voluntary filing of a Chapter 11 case resulted in a secured lender forfeiting its right to payment of a make-whole premium.[2]

In the cramdown attempted in Momentive, the secured creditors were given replacement notes for their debt carrying a seven-year maturity and bearing interest at the Treasury bill rate plus a risk premium.   A cramdown plan of this type requires that the secured creditor receive a stream of payments over time which, when discounted back to present value, will equal the total secured claim.  The present value requirement is what requires interest on the notes, but the Bankruptcy Code does not specify the rate.

The secured creditors in Momentive argued for a market rate of interest based on what  the market would require for a new loan to a borrower in the Debtors’ circumstances, which is known as the “forced loan” approach.  The Debtors, on the other hand, urged the Court to approve their much lower interest rate, which was based on a risk-free rate plus a risk premium – known as the “formula approach.”

The “formula approach,” which was endorsed by the U.S. Supreme Court in Till v. SCS CreditCorp., 541 U.S. 465 (2004), as the proper cramdown rate for consumer debtors in Chapter 13 cases, takes a risk-free rate and adds to it a risk premium to account for the risk of nonpayment in the particular case.  The Till decision instructed that in general, the risk adjustment should be between 1 and 3 percent, although the Bankruptcy Court and District Court in Momentive stated that it could be increased above 3 percent for “extreme risks.”  The famous footnote 14 in Till, however, hinted that a different calculation of the cramdown interest rate might be required for Chapter 11 cases if there were determined to be an efficient market for Chapter 11 financing.  This footnote was the basis upon which the secured creditors in Momentive argued for a market rate of interest.

As affirmed by the District Court, the Bankruptcy Court approved the use of a formula approach which computed the interest rate on the notes by first taking the 7-year Treasury bill rate as the risk-free base rate and then adding to it a risk premium of 2 percent for one set of secured creditors and 2.75 percent for a second set of secured creditors.   The efficient market or “forced loan” approach was rejected because any market rate would include a component for profit and transaction costs to the lender.  This was viewed as inconsistent with the present-value function of the cramdown interest rate, which is meant to “put the creditor in the same economic position that it would have been in had it received the value of its claim immediately.  The purpose is not to put the creditor in the same position it would have been in had it arranged a ‘new’ loan.”  (Momentive District Court Mem. Decision at 17-18) (quoting In re Valenti, 105 F.3d 55, 63 (2d Cir. 1997)).

The Supreme Court in Till, however, used the national prime rate as the risk-free rate and then added on to it a risk premium, whereas Momentive started with a much lower risk-free rate by using the Treasury bill rate. Both the Bankruptcy Court and District Court in Momentive reasoned that the T-Bill rate could be used instead because the prime rate may be “a more appropriate rate for consumers,” and because Till does not require a bankruptcy court to choose the national prime rate as the risk-free base.  To compensate for the use of the lower base rate, the Bankruptcy Court added .5 percent and .75 percent, respectively, to the replacement notes as an additional risk premium. 

The secured creditors suffered a second loss when they were denied a so-called “make-whole” premium that was required to be paid under their loan documents upon an early redemption or payment of their debt.  Such a premium, in general, is an extra payment that is  required when a loan is paid off early, and is intended to compensate a secured lender for the loss of future interest it would suffer by the early payoff and a reinvestment of the payment proceeds at a lower interest rate. 

The denial of the make-whole premium was based entirely on an interpretation of the loan documents, which made the filing of a voluntary Chapter 11 case an event of default that automatically accelerated the entire debt.  The loan provision at issue stated that the accelerated debt would consist of “the principal of, premium, if any, and interest on all the Notes.” (emphasis added).

Both the Bankruptcy Court and District Court cited the familiar rule that an acceleration of the debt advances the maturity date of the loan, so that any subsequent payment by definition cannot be a prepayment entitling the lender to a make-whole premium, except if there is “clear and ambiguous clause…[that] calls for payment of the prepayment premium.”  The bottom line of the Momentive decisions on this issue was that neither the Bankruptcy Court nor the District Court read the pertinent loan provision as clearly and unambiguously providing for payment of the make-whole premium on acceleration by its use of the words, “premium, if any.”  Thus, on this issue, the decisions are more of a lesson on future drafting for secured lenders.


[1] Momentive Performance Materials Inc. was one of a number of affiliates of the principal debtor, MPM Silcones, LLC, and thus, the decision became known as the Momentive decision.

[2] The Momentive decision also dealt in large part with an issue of whether the Debtor’s plan of reorganization could be considered “fair and equitable,” and therefore, forced upon the holders of certain subordinated notes over their objection, when they were receiving nothing under the plan while a class of Second Lien Noteholders that was arguably junior to the subordinate noteholders was to receive substantial consideration under the plan.  That aspect of the decision, however, was for the most part based on the unique and highly specialized contractual provisions that were at issue in the case.

[View source.]

Written by:

Pullman & Comley, LLC
Contact
more
less

Pullman & Comley, LLC on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.