Home > Legal Library > Article




Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected


SBA Issues Proposed Rule Permitting SBICs to Invest in Double Holding Companies




by:
Christopher J. Douglass
Alan B. Roth
Michael R. Wilson
Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP - Chicago Office

 
January 3, 2014

Previously published on December 26, 2013

On December 23, 2013, the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”) issued a proposed rule to revise the Small Business Investment Company (“SBIC”) regulations regarding investments in passive businesses and the use of double holding companies in structuring SBIC investments.

Currently, SBIC investments in passive businesses (those that are not operating companies) are generally prohibited. The SBIC regulations include limited exceptions to this general prohibition, including an exception for situations where the passive small business passes through the investment proceeds to one or more non-passive small business subsidiaries or uses the investment process for the purpose of acquiring a majority ownership interest in a non-passive business.

The proposed rule expands this exception to permit SBICs to structure investments using two holding companies, as opposed to only a single holding company as permitted by the current rule. In such a circumstance, the passive business that is the direct recipient of the SBIC investment must indirectly, through the second passive business, own at least 50% of the non-passive small business. The proposed rule does not allow more than two holding companies.

This modification has been proposed to give SBICs greater flexibility in structuring investments and to help SBICs take advantage of a double holding company structure that is frequently utilized by non-SBICs in the venture capital and private equity sectors. Double holding company structures can address a number of concerns, including (1) simplifying the process of allocating income to different classes of investors in a syndicated transaction involving a number of participants, (2) accommodating investors’ needs for a mix of taxable and non-taxable entities, and (3) taking advantage of favorable tax treatment under Internal Revenue Code section 338(h)(10) in transactions involving the purchase of s corporation stock.

Comments on the proposed rule must be received by January 22, 2014.



 

The views expressed in this document are solely the views of the author and not Martindale-Hubbell. This document is intended for informational purposes only and is not legal advice or a substitute for consultation with a licensed legal professional in a particular case or circumstance.
 

View More Library Documents By...

 
Author
 
Christopher J. Douglass
Alan B. Roth
Michael R. Wilson
 
Edwards Wildman Palmer LLP Overview


 

Practice Area Resource Centers
Visit our Practice Area Resource Centers to view practice area specific content compiled from a variety of legal sources. Find related articles, podcasts, industry leader insights and much more. We currently offer the following Practice Areas:Litigation;Intellectual Property;Real Estate;Corporate Law;Criminal Law;Bankruptcy;Immigration;Business Law;Insurance;Taxation;Labor & Employment;Commercial Law;Medical Malpractice;Trusts & Estates;Securities;International Law ;Health Care;Environmental Law;Construction Law;Workers' Compensation