映射债务重组的危险外文翻译

毕业论文外文翻译原文：Mapping the dangers of debt restructuringMany banks and companies are now engaged in debt restructuring negotiations but are unaware of the minefield through which they walk.Many debt restructurings involve something as simple as an extension in the repayment schedule. The interest rate could change. Other terms could be relaxed to enable the borrower to repay rather than force the borrower into default. The borrower might have to post additional security. Affiliates of the borrower could be required to guarantee repayment.DEBTOR CONCERNSDebtors - especially those whose debt is publicly trading below face value - need to approach a potential restructuring by first considering whether it will create taxable COD income.Unfortunately, this inquiry is more complicated than simply comparing the principal amount of the old debt to that of the new. The amount of COD income is measured by comparing the issue prices of the old and new debt. The issue price of a debt instrument is a number that most accurately reflects the instruments true value. In determining the consequences of all exchange, the idea is to compare the true values of both instruments to each other, and the issue price of a debt instrument provides a better reflection of its value than its face or principal amount does. To make a borrowers analysis even more difficult, different rules apply to determine the issue prices of the old and new instruments.Starting with the old debt, its issue price in many cases should equal its face amount. However, if the debt was issued at a discount, then its issue price is equal to the price at which the debt was issued, increased by the amount of the discount that has accrued to date on the debt. For example, a company may borrow $700 but promise to repay the lender $1,000 in 10 years when the loan matures. The debt has $300 of original issue discount (OLD). The issue price of that debt is $700. The $300 discount accrues over the life of the loan. The issue price is adjusted over time to include such accruals. Thus, on any given date, the issue price of the old debt is $700 plus the discount that has accrued up to that date.The issue price of the old debt must be compared to the issue price of the restructured debt to determine whether the borrower has COD income. It does if the issue price of the restructured debt is less.The issue price of the restructured debt depends on whether either it or the old debt is traded publicly on an established securities market. If either debt is publicly traded, then the issue price of the restructured debt will be its fair market value. This is because that value should be easy to determine by checking the market listings on the date the debt restructuring is concluded. However, if neither debt instrument is publicly traded, then the issue price of the restructured debt is its face, or principal, amount. (The face amount is used only if the interest rate charged on the restructured debt is at least equal to the applicable federal rate.)In practice, COD income is not a problem in debt restructurings where neither of the debt instruments is publicly traded, unless the lender agrees to write off some of the loan principal.POSSIBLE RELIEFThe borrower can avoid some or all of the COD income in such situations if it can show it is insolvent or by waiting to restructure the debt until it has filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy.An insolvent debtor for this purpose is a debtor whose liabilities exceed the fair market value of its assets. An insolvent debtor does not have to report COD income, up to the amount of its insolvency. However, there is a tax cost: the debtor is required to reduce certain tax attributes for every dollar of COD income that escapes taxation. Tax attributes are particular types of tax benefits that the debtor may have, such as net operating losses, tax credits, and capital losses carried forward from previous years. The debtor must reduce any of these items it has in a certain order until the forgiven COD income has been fully absorbed. A debtor may elect to apply the reduction first against its tax basis in any depreciable property it owns. Although this may seem like an obvious choice to make, a lower tax basis will mean lower depreciation deductions going forward, as well as greater taxable gain if the assets are sold.LENDER CONCERNSLenders need to be careful that a restructuring does not create taxable gain. This could occur if the restructuring increases the value of the debt. The analysis is the same as for the borrower. A mismatch between issue prices of the old debt and restructured debt is unlikely in practice unless at least one of the debt instruments is publicly traded. A debt restructuring might be structured in form as a tax-free recapitalization of the borrower. A lender facing a potential loss might prefer a taxable transaction so that it can claim the loss.Even if a lender gives up more than it gets in return and thus has an economic loss, it may have to report taxable income from the restructuring. If a debt is restructured between interest dates or in any other situation where accrued interest has not yet been included by the lender in income, a portion of the consideration paid to the lender as part of the restructuring will be treated as the interest on the original debt that has accrued but has not yet been paid. Any such amount is taxable as ordinary income. It will increase the lenders tax basis in the original debt for purposes of determining its overall gain or loss on the restructuring. (Since the loss may be a capital loss, the lender could be whip-sawed because that capital loss cannot be used to offset the ordinary income.) A lender may have an argument that no portion of the consideration should be allocable to interest if the debtor is in a questionable financial position and the collectibility of the interest is doubtful. This is an especially important point to keep in mind in cases where the restructuring is prompted by the debtors current inability to make payments on the old debt.CONVERSION INTO EQUITYOne option for a struggling debtor with little cash today but decent growth prospects is to offer its creditors stock in exchange for their debt instruments. Some debtors might prefer this route because it can improve a companys balance sheet at the same time as it reduces interest expense, without any up-front cash outlay. The tax consequences are similar to those of a debt-for-debt exchange (or debt modification): the debtor might have COD income and the lender might have a gain or loss.The key question is how to value the stock received in the exchange for the purposes of calculating the debtors COD income and the lenders gain or loss. The debtor is treated as having satisfied the debt with an amount of money equal to the fair market value of the stock. Therefore, if the stock is worth less than the principal amount of the debt, then the debtor will have COD income.The lender does the same calculation to figure out whether it has a gain or loss on the exchange. It compares the market value of the shares it received to its tax basis in the debt instrument. If it acquired the debt at a discount from the face amount, it could have a gain. The lender will have to report part of the stock value as ordinary income to the extent there was accrued, unpaid interest on the debt instrument that the lender has not yet included in income at the time of the exchange.TAX-FREE RECAPITALIZATIONSThe parties to a debt restructuring might try to structure it as a tax-free recapitalization. This only works if the borrower is a corporation. It will not spare the debtor from having to report any COD income, and it may only limit the amount of gain the lender must recognize as taxable income.A recapitalization can take many forms, but it is generally described as a reshuffling of a corporations capital structure. Examples include an exchange of new debt instruments for old ones, or the issuance of corporate stock in exchange for the cancellation of an old debt instrument. As long as a transaction is motivated by business - as opposed to tax avoidance - concerns, many structures are acceptable. One exception is that a stockholder cannot convert its shares into debt and call it a recapitalization (it will be viewed as an outright sale of the shares). Another requirement is that the instruments being exchanged must either be corporate stock or securities. Although the definition is not precise, securities are generally understood to be obligations of a corporation to pay a certain sum of money. Generally, a debt must have a term of at least five years to be considered a security, but other terms of the instrument are important as well.A debtor reaps no benefit from structuring an exchange as a tax-free recapitalization; it can only benefit the lenders. 资料来源：Klumpp, Helena. International Tax Review,2002：P2729.译文：映射债务重组的危险许多银行和公司目前正在开展的债务重组谈判，但都是通过这些雷区行走而并不知情。许多债务重组涉及一些简单的作为一个还款计划的延伸。利率可能会改变。其他条款可放宽，以使借款人偿还，而不是用武力的办法。借款人可能要追加保证金。借款人可能被要求以保证还款。债务人关注债务人处理那些债务低于面值的公开交易，首先要考虑是否会造成债务取消的应税收入的潜在重组。不幸的是，这项调查比简单的比较新旧债务本金金额要复杂得多。通过比较新旧债务的发行价格来确认债务重组后的的债务取消的应税收入金额。债券的发行价格最准确的反映了债务工具的真正价值。在确定所有交易结果后，比较两个债务工具的真正价值，债务工具的发行价格比面值更好的反映了价值。为了使借款人的分析更加困难，不同的规则决定了新旧债务工具的发行价格。在许多情况下，发行价格应等于其票面金额。但是，如果债券是以贴现方式发行，那么它的发行价格等于债务发布后的价格，累计债务折扣金额增加。例如，一家公司借入700美元，承诺贷款人10年后到期还款1000美元。该债务的原始发行折价为300美元，该债券的发行价为700美元。累计300美元以上的优惠贷款期限。发行价随着时间的推移调整，包括应计项目。因此，在任何给定的日期，旧债务的发行价是700美元加上已累积至该日期的折扣。债务重组前后的价格必须比一下，以确定借款人是否有债务重组收入。重组后债权的发行价格依赖于证券市场上的公开交易，如果是任一上市公司的债务，那么，重组后债务的发行价格将受到其公平市场价值的影响。这是因为它的市场价值很容易被确定。但是，如果不是上市公司的债务，那么重组后债务的发行价格是其面值或本金金额。在实践中，债务取消的应税收入并不存在，不管是不是上市公司的债务，除非贷款人同意核销部分贷款本金。公开交易的债务缔约方应该非常小心重组债务工具时是低于面值的买卖。可能的救济债务人的负债超过其资产的公允市场价值，破产债务人不必报告债务重组收入的入息，直至其破产。然而，有一个税收成本：债务人必须减少一定的税收。税务属性是特定类型的纳税优惠，债务人可能有这样的净经营亏损，税收减免，资本损失从往年结转。债务人必须以一定的顺序减少这些项目，直到债务重组收入得到充分吸收。债务人可以选择计税基础减少。虽然这可能看起来是一个明显的抉择，如果资产出售，较低的税收基础，将意味着较低的折旧扣除，以及更大的应税所得。贷款人关注贷款人必须小心，重组不会产生应课税收益。如果重组后债务的价值