Considerations for share capital reduction

Company Law

A company may reduce its share capital by either of the following methods unless provided otherwise in its constitution:
(i) A special resolution and confirmation by the Court (“Court Confirmation Procedure“); or
(ii) A special resolution supported by a solvency statement in accordance with section 117 of the Companies Act 2016 (“Solvency Statement Procedure“).

The Solvency Statement Procedure is faster and incurs less cost compared to the Court Confirmation Procedure. However, some companies may still choose Court Confirmation Procedure for their share capital reduction for the following reasons:

1. All directors of the company undertaking a share capital reduction by way of the Solvency Statement Procedure must make a solvency statement. If a director makes a solvency statement without having reasonable grounds for the opinion expressed in the statement, the director is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to a fine not exceeding RM500,000 or to both, on conviction.

A solvency statement, however, is not required where the reduction of share capital is solely by way of cancellation of any paid-up share capital which is lost or unrepresented by available assets.

2. Reduction of share capital by way of the Solvency Statement Procedure is not immune from objection by creditors. Any creditor of a company undertaking a reduction of share capital by way of the Solvency Statement Procedure may apply to the Court for the resolution reducing the share capital of the company to be cancelled within 6 weeks from the date of the resolution.

3. After proceedings for all applications by creditors to the Court have been brought to an end in favour of the company, the company must lodge with the Registrar of Companies, a statement made by the directors confirming that certain requirements under the Solvency Statement Procedure have been complied with.

If the confirmation statement is false or not believed by a director making the statement to be true, the director is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or to a fine not exceeding RM3 million or to both, on conviction.

The director’s personal liability as set out in items 1 and 3 above may not be so much of a concern to private companies where the directors and shareholders are the same persons. They are likely to be comfortable providing the necessary solvency statement and confirmation statement as they are involved in the day-to-day management of the companies.

#malaysiancorporatelawyer
#capitalreduction
#companiesact2016

This post was first posted on Linkedin on 28 June 2021.

Lawyering
The Kindness That Stays, 20 Years On

I last saw them in 2007. They are two kind souls who made my years studying in the UK such a beautiful chapter in my life. I have been thinking about them lately and finally reached out after all these years. Whenever I look back on my time in the …

Linkedin Post
Why M&A Deals Fail

As an M&A lawyer, most of my time goes into the legal documents – drafting and negotiating agreements, representations, warranties, conditions precedent, etc. However, the deals I have seen delayed or aborted were not because of legal documents. A deal was aborted when geopolitical tension escalated while parties were going …

Linkedin Post
When a Seller is Paid in Shares, Instead of Cash

In an M&A transaction, a buyer which is also a company may offer to pay by issuing its own shares to the seller, instead of paying in cash. How is this different compared to a cash deal? The seller is not just selling. The seller is also “buying” into the …