From the author of the long audio-visual law and no less comprehensive telecommunication law, Now comes the bankruptcy law with over 700 articles. Congress is set to approve the opinion of a rule this Thursday, through the Justice Commission, that has occupied its speakers for several weeks. There was a rush to include it in the Official State Gazette (BOE) and make it a reality, as the starting point was a European directive that had to be transposed. the process was not easyIt’s the legislature, like pretty much everything in the Lower House, but there’s finally a light at the end of the tunnel. The general assembly will give “ok” after seven days, and thereafter to the Senate and its usual quick procedures. This is how El Periódico de España publishes it.
Although the work was costly and the introduction of hundreds of amendments once again made lawyers shudder (this is customary in one of the most important services in Congress), the negotiation stumbled over and over again: public loan in case of company bankruptcy.
Before I do a retrospective that contextualizes why it’s here one of the most challenging aspects It is worth mentioning how the groups resolved the confusion during the negotiation process. Three of them succeeded, notably: United We Can, PNV and PDeCAT. The first, a partner of PSOE in the coalition, was the most ambitious and initially proposed a debt relief ceiling of 30,000 euros in case of bankruptcy, namely 15,000 euros for debts to the Treasury and 15,000 euros for debts to Social Security. . Then it went down before the impossibility of reaching a meeting point. The target, regardless of the limit amounts, widening the drafting threshold By the Government, which is only 1,000 euros if the debt belongs to the Treasury and 1,000 euros if it belongs to Social Security.
Finally, after several textual passages between political groups, the final article will show that the maximum amount that the self-employed and citizens whose companies have gone bankrupt can be saved will be no more than 20,000 Euros (10,000 to 10,000). Treasury and others 10,000 Social Security). The procedure will be as follows: exemption will be completed for the first 5,000 Euro debt; for the rest, the exemption will reach up to 50%up to a total maximum of 10,000 Euros.
Two examples to illustrate this. Example 1: If a businessman or business woman goes bankrupt and owes 8,000 euros to the Treasury, she can get rid of 5,000 euros and half of the remaining 3,000 euros in the first place; Total: 6,500 Euros laundered. Example 2: If the debt to the Treasury after bankruptcy is 12,000 Euro, the exemption may cover 5,000 Euro and half of the remaining 7,000 Euro; a total of 8500. And as long as the total amount the debtor can discharge does not exceed the 10,000 limit. Some limits to apply independently for accumulated debtswith the Treasury on the one hand and Social Security on the other.
The scope of the innovation introduced in the final text of the rule is not small, especially if it has been repaired in the back room. Initially, the Government was not in favor of acquittal; didn’t think of that in the draft. Entrepreneurs and self-employed people were mixed and demanded changes. There was one, but it was not enough. Already at the project stage, living amid these tensions, the Executive sent a text to Congress with an exemption cap of 1,000 euros for debts to the Treasury and 1,000 euros for debts to Social Security. A set of corporate representations of entrepreneurs and freelancers Meetings with parliamentary groups to check whether the area for improvement is broad, narrow, or simply non-existent..
The actors involved addressed two arguments. On the one hand, the European directive, where the norm came from, where businessmen said to suspend the debts of all kinds of creditors, was defended. They also reminded that the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of public debt laundering of the self-employed. This aspect was important because it’s about what Let the entrepreneur get a second chance if he fails an original project. Supporting a public debt over time complicates subsequent initiatives.
Multiplying the initial bounds by 10 is an undoubted success of the opposition, though not equally satisfying. According to sources from the three entities, United We Can, PNV and PDeCAT are happy with the result, conceding that a higher ceiling would be even more appropriate. Opinions are not shared in PP and C. “we do not support”, declare sources from both groups. “Insufficient” refers to a popular source.
United We Can print
Parliamentary sources informing El Periódico de España about the changes underline this other change: Creditor Tax Office, on the other hand, stated that “it will be understood that the company voted in favor of the continuation plan, which includes the following. a discount of not more than fifteen percent of the amount of their ordinary loan”. These resources affect 85% of large companies entering this disintegration phase. It is one of PDeCAT’s hardest working offerings.
The Catalan entity has become a leading parliamentary actor in the law of democratic memory, as well as in another law that started working this week, just in case. It is true that the support of PNV and PDeCAT is not enough, but the sources involved in the negotiations think: PP, Cs and ERC will promote consensus by moving between support and abstention.
However, the negotiations will continue until the moment of the expected vote at the end of the plenary meeting to be held this Thursday at the Justice Commission. Some aspects should be closed.
United We Can sources report that they are talking with the PSOE and other organizations of the progressive bloc about the inclusion of a number of social items in the event of the company’s bankruptcy. The basis on which they are working is the changes introduced by the “purple” group, which do not go hand in hand with the socialist here. Thus, these sources influence the formation. Yolanda Díaz insists on so-called “workers preference rule”.
It consists of the proposal that if there is more than one proposal for the acquisition of a company, the decision should be directed to the following proposal. propose a higher price, unless one of the proposals comes “from a group of workers in a productive unit organized in a workers’ company or related business cooperative to continue the exploitation of that person”. Therefore, they will have their preference as long as the difference in the purchase price does not exceed 30%.
“Purples” will accentuate this point. But the tentative wording of the report for the presentation, which will be amended this Thursday, seems to imply vaguely that the sources consulted are vague and unpretentious. “A binding written offer for purchase may be made by workers interested in the succession of the company through the establishment of a cooperative, employee, or subsidiary company,” the epigraph says.
A comprehensive, detailed and abundant law is about to come out of Congress. First stop this Thursday. Next Thursday is the second and final in the Room. The political pact has worked so far. In the PSOE, in their address, they say that the law is already in the legislative backpack.