CNBC Badge
Bloomberg Tax
Barron's
Coindesk
Business Insider
FOX Business
Market Watch
ThinkAdvisor
Wealth Management Magazine
Advisor Hub
Financial Advisor IQ
Financial Planning
Investment News
W Radio
Chicago Tribune
PG Pittsburg Gazette

How to Use State Fraudulent Transfer Law to “Claw Back” Certain Prebankruptcy Payments

Bragança Law LLC
tug of war dogs

In a bankruptcy proceeding, trustees can use state fraudulent transfer law to “claw back” certain prebankruptcy payments made by the debtor. Those funds are then available for distribution to creditors as part of the debtor’s estate. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently held that the IRS is not exempt from these clawback claims. In re DBSI, Inc., No. (Aug. 31, 2017) In addressing this issue a few years ago, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals reached the opposition conclusion. In re Equipment Acquisition Resources, Inc. (“EAR”), 742 F.3d 743 (7th Cir. 2014). It looks like this is an issue that the US Supreme Court will need to resolve.

DBSI, Inc. and its affiliates were a Ponzi scheme. They engaged in the acquisition, development, management, and sale of commercial real estate properties throughout the United States. They used new investor funds to meet existing obligations. This scheme eventually caught up with them. Several of the company insiders were indicted and later convicted of fraud.

The DBSI trustee obtained a bankruptcy court order directing the IRS to return approximately $13.4 million of tax payments that DBSI made on behalf of the fraudsters. The IRS appealed that order to the district court.

While the IRS’s appeal was pending, the Seventh Circuit addressed the exact same issue and came to the opposite conclusion as the bankruptcy court. The district court was not persuaded by the Seventh Circuit’s reasoning, and affirmed the bankruptcy court’s ruling. Nor was the Ninth Circuit.

The Ninth Circuit did not agree with the IRS and Seventh Circuit’s position that a clawback of the IRS tax payments runs afoul not only of sovereign immunity, but also potentially of the Appropriations Clause and the Supremacy Clause. EAR, 742 F.3d at 747–48. The Ninth Circuit’s decision is consistent with the majority of district and bankruptcy courts that have addressed this issue.

The Ninth Circuit’s decision is available here.

Client Reviews

Thank Goodness for Lisa Braganca...Words I never thought I would say about an attorney – understanding, caring, compassionate and empathetic. Lisa Braganca is all of these and so much more. Best of all, she is...

Anonymous

Amazing experience!!! Hello I hired Lisa because my previous company I was working with put me in a very bad position and was looking at getting banned from selling securities and possibly much worse. Lisa took...

Anonymous

Lisa made it very clear from the beginning that her goal was to be the best attorney I ever had. She manabed to do just that. Never before had I experienced a combination of such genuine care, knowledge and...

Anonymous

When you are faced with the SEC looking at you for possible violations it can be one of the most unpleasant experiences. Working with Lisa Braganca made our situation 1000x easier. She worked with other...

Anonymous

I cannot recommend Celiza (Lisa) Braganca enough for the tireless work she's done for me, my partner, and our business. Facing potential SEC questioning is incredibly overwhelming and daunting, but Lisa brings...

Anonymous

I had the unpleasant experience of receiving a call from the SEC informing me that I was the target of an investigation. Having never dealt this with before, I was unsure of how to proceed. I was fortunate...

Anonymous

Our firm came under an SEC investigation for a $12m+ crypto offering. Despite some muddy waters, and internal shareholder concerns, Ms. Braganca kept me clear of the SEC enforcement actions on account of her...

Anonymous

Contact Us for a Free Consultation

Fill out the contact form or call us at (847) 906-3460 to schedule your free consultation.

Leave Us a Message