Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Hiding Assets in California
The vicissitudes of consumer fortune appear to have led to the “asset protection” industry. A cursory Internet search of the phrase, “asset protection” produces pages of advice for “protecting” assets from creditors and, ostensibly, from bankruptcy trustees. Often, asset protection advice is bereft of any discussion of California exemption statutes — which often provide the most efficient and safest asset protection — and fails to admonish the unwary of powerful creditor rights. Most asset protection discussion forums ignore the consequences of a Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing should asset protection counter-measures be deployed in response to a creditor's asset-hungry appetite. Ironically, some asset protection tools leave assets completely naked, and strip them of any protection afforded under exemption statutes.
As a preliminary matter, it may be useful to understand a common pitfall of most asset protection tools used in California. If a transfer of property of a debtor is actually or constructively fraudulent, it is recoverable by a bankruptcy trustee if made within two years of a bankruptcy filing pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548, or within four years of a bankruptcy filing under California Civil Code (Cal. Civ. Code) §§ 3439.04 or 3439.05. If, however, the debtor owes the IRS back taxes, the reach-back period for a bankruptcy trustee could be 10 years depending on the length of delinquency to the IRS. Mukamal v. Citibank NA (In re Kipnis), 16-1045 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. Aug. 31, 2016)
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
How AI Has Affected PR
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.