Business relationships fail for a lot of reasons. Even if a business is successful, its owners may clash over any number of issues. Oftentimes, business divorce results.
Breaking up is hard to do, but there are things business owners can do to prepare themselves–just in case. In this article, we’ll cover:
Conflicts between the owners of closely held businesses are common, at least relative to many other business structures.
[Editor’s Note: To learn about cutting ties with employees, check out our webinar, “It’s So Hard To Say Goodbye: Minimizing Risk When Terminating Employees”]
One cause of internal strife, particularly in family-owned businesses, is concentration of control. Another factor is lack of effective corporate governance structures. Lack of liquidity to deal with owners wishing to exit can also cause friction.
Closely held businesses must contend with minimal distinction between owners and the business. This is true both legally and operationally. Finally, many closely held businesses fail to clearly state withdrawal and dissolution rights.
Businesses fall apart for a multitude of reasons—you cannot safeguard against all of them all of the time. Start by understanding the most common problems, and then guard against them. Read on for a breakdown of the issues:
In many businesses, one owner (or group of owners) controls a majority of the business’ equity. This division of power is particularly prevalent in closely held companies.
Often times, this creates a situation in which one decision-maker wields more influence than the many minority shareholders. Such concentration of power can lead to oppression of the minority shareholders by the majority owner.
A majority group of shareholders may breach its fiduciary duty if it uses its voting power to withhold dividends inappropriately. Often, this is a tactic to force minority shareholders to redeem their shares (i.e., force them out at a low buy-back price).
On the flip side, the majority may also breach their fiduciary duty by declaring an unreasonable dividend that depletes the corporation’s cash reserves.
A majority may breach its fiduciary duty if it hinders the sale of the corporation inappropriately. The duty is breached if it does so without considering, or in frustration of, the liquidity needs of the minority.
If a minority shareholder is an employee of the business, he may have a reasonable expectation of employment. A majority shareholder may breach her or his fiduciary duty by terminating that employee.
The expression “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” is apt.
Conflicts between business partners are nearly inevitable. Thankfully, there are some creative ways for parties to negotiate up-front. Precautionary agreements give you space to resolve issues. At the very least, they provide a picture of what the result will be when resolution is not possible.
IMPORTANT: Discussion should happen early, preferably at formation. Always memorialize these discussions in a written agreement.
To analogize, think of these discussions as a prenuptial agreement; a business divorce is often similar to a marital divorce. A well-drafted partnership, shareholder or operating agreement can prevent—or even resolve—a deadlock.
Provisions to include in such agreements:
A buy-sell agreement typically obligates the company or remaining its majority owners to purchase the minority’s stock in certain events. Negotiating one, however, is often difficult.
[Editor’s Note: to learn more about buy-sell agreements, read, “The Advantages of a Buy-Sell Agreement for Business Transitions”]
When a business has two owners, one common solution is a “shotgun” provision. This provision triggers a mandatory sale in the event of disagreement and deadlock.
Getting more granular, you could also provide both shareholders the right to offer a specific price per share for the other shareholder’s shares. The other shareholder then has the option of accepting the offer or buying the offering shareholder’s shares at the price offered.
State laws provide a variety of options to help shareholders address their disagreements.
Delaware, for example, permits a court to appoint a custodian for a solvent corporation when:
Mediation and arbitration are options that enable a neutral third party (other than a court) to resolve or help resolve disputes.
Finally, as a last resort, a company can be dissolved because of disputes that cannot be resolved. Indeed, a dissolution provision may be included in a company’s articles of incorporation or operating agreement.
You have a dispute and the other strategies haven’t worked. What next? You can always take the legal route, but litigation is expensive and time-consuming.
Settlement is often possible and is always the better route in such cases.
Any good professional will advise that where a dispute can be settled without litigation, it should be.
Which path you take will, in large part, be a function of whether you can trust your partner. Where reasonable people disagree, but neither party doubts the other party’s honesty and reasonableness, there may be hope. Settlement is often possible and is always the better route in such cases.
On the other hand, if you believe the other party is objectively unreasonable or dishonest, then trying to settle with that person is likely to be a waste of money and time.
While the end of a business relationship isn’t usually a goal of any business, it isn’t the end of the world either. There are strategies that can be employed both at the front end to avoid issues, and at the back end to facilitate the break-up.
[Editor’s Note: Common Issues and Strategies in Business Breakups is a Financial Poise Webinar that can goes into much more detail about this topic.]
Then sign up to receive our weekly Financial Poise newsletter, our take on the most relevant and topical business, financial and legal issues affecting investors and small business owners.
Always Plain English. Always Objective. Always FREE.
Michele has been a director with Financial Poise since 2012. View her LinkedIn profile here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michele-schechter-46b9824a/
Why Is It So Hard For Leaders To (Shut Up And) Listen?
This Lawsuit Goes to 11: Fraud and the Economic Loss Rule
Understanding “Reasonable Cybersecurity Measures” to Safeguard Data
The NYC Bar Versus the Litigation Funding Industry
Business Valuation Tax Act of 2017: Comparability and Calculation
Understanding the Language of the American Federal Legal System
Please log in again. The login page will open in a new window. After logging in you can close it and return to this page.