Skip Navigation
Megan McArdle

Megan McArdle - Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics. She has worked at three start-ups, a consulting firm, an investment bank, a disaster recovery firm at Ground Zero, and The Economist. She is currently on leave.
More

Megan was born and raised on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and yes, she does enjoy her lattes, as well as the occasional extra-dry skim-milk cappuccino. Her checkered work history includes three start-ups, four years as a technology project manager for a boutique consulting firm, a summer as an associate at an investment bank, and a year spent as sort of an executive copy girl for one of the disaster-recovery firms at Ground Zero � all before the age of 30.

While working at Ground Zero, Megan started Live From the WTC, a blog focused on economics, business, and cooking. She may or may not have been the first major economics blogger, depending on whether we are allowed to throw outlying variables such as Brad Delong out of the set. From there it was but a few steps down the slippery slope to freelance journalism. She has worked in various capacities for The Economist, where she wrote about economics and oversaw the founding of Free Exchange, the magazine's economics blog. She has also maintained her own blog, Asymmetrical Information, which moved to The Atlantic, along with its owner, in August 2007.

Megan holds a bachelor's degree in English literature from the University of Pennsylvania and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. After a lifetime as a New Yorker, she now resides in northwest Washington, D.C., where she is still trying to figure out what one does with an apartment larger than 400 square feet.

How OJ Simpson may help keep Dick Fuld from stiffing his shareholders

By Megan McArdle
Jan 27 2009, 12:17 PM ET Comment

Paul Caron, the TaxProf, has a post on Dick Fuld's transparent attempt to shield his multimillion dollar home from any potential shareholder lawsuits by selling it to his wife for $10.

As you may or may not be aware, Florida is notorious among bankruptcy analysts because OJ Simpson bought a house there in the hopes of shielding his assets from the civil suit over the murder.  Florida is one of the few states with what is known as an "unlimited homestead exemption".  All states permit you to shield your primary residence from creditors in bankruptcy (though not from a mortgagor, as discussed in my previous post).  As long as you keep making any payments on loans secured by the house, you can keep it.  However, most states cap the value of the home you can thus shield.  Not Florida.  So OJ's strategy was, as far as we can tell:

1)  Buy enormous house worth zillions of dollars and move into it
2)  Wait until civil suit is over
3)  Declare bankruptcy
4)  Sell house for a zillion dollars; thumb nose at justice.



This probably wouldn't have any consequences, if he had not been so damn famous--though of course, many argue that if he had not been so famous, his primary residence at the time of the civil suit would have been the pokey.  At any rate, his case so outraged Congress that at the time of the 2005 bankruptcy reform, they wrote in provisions designed to prevent people from using Florida's ridiculously generous homestead provisions to shield assets from civil judgements.  You now cannot discharge debts incurred by court judgement from a willfully malicious action, and it's a lot harder to convert outside assets to protected Florida homesteads:

The legislation places limits on those who purchase new expensive homes within two years of filing bankruptcy, imposes a 40 month waiting period before those who relocate to a new state can avail themselves of the new state's homestead exemption, and finally, creates a 10 year reachback period to attack homesteads acquired to defraud creditors. Thus, whereas prior law permitted O.J. Simpson and WorldCom's Scott Sullivan to purchase mansions in Florida while leaving their creditors holding the bag, the bankruptcy reform legislation closes the most notorious homestead exemption loopholes.

The TaxProf post offers more details:


The new 2005 bankruptcy amendments may be an impediment to the Fulds' strategy. In the first place, Ms. Fuld might not be able to use Florida's homestead exemptions in bankruptcy. Under the 2005 amendments to the Bankruptcy Code, a debtor can only use a particular state's exemptions if the debtor has been continuously domiciled in the state for the 730 days immediately preceding bankruptcy. If the debtor was not domiciled in any one state continuously during the 730 day period, then the debtor would be eligible to use the exemptions from the one state in which the debtor was longest domiciled for the 180 day period preceding the 730 day period. 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(3)(A). The upshot is that Ms. Fuld might not be able to use the Florida exemptions at all if she has been domiciled in New York rather than Florida during the relevant time periods.

In addition, even if Ms. Fuld was sufficiently domiciled in Florida to be eligible to use the Florida exemptions in bankruptcy, Section 522(p) of the Bankruptcy Code limits any increase in the value of an exemption acquired during the 1215 day period preceding bankruptcy to $136,875. If Ms. Fuld's bankruptcy is filed within 1215 days of the transfer, it appears her homestead would be limited to $7,136,875, allowing the trustee to sell the homestead to realize the additional $6,863,125 in value for creditors (assuming the mansion is really worth $14 million).

So it would seem that Ms. Fuld would have to live in Florida for the 730 days preceding bankruptcy and would have to avoid bankruptcy for more than 1215 days after the transfer, in order to get the full benefit of the Florida homestead exemption in bankruptcy.

However, this all assumes that Ms. Fuld ends up in bankruptcy. The Fulds may be trying to shield Ms. Fuld's new interest outside of bankruptcy under Florida law. The Fulds may be expecting judgments against Mr. Fuld and not Ms. Fuld. To get at Ms. Fuld's property if she is not personally liable on any judgment, they would have to bring a fraudulent transfer action to avoid Mr. Fuld's gift transfer of the half interest in the mansion. There is an interesting question whether this gift transfer could be avoided under Florida law.

It seems amazing to me that this is even possible--it's so clearly a fraudulent conveyance designed to let the Fulds live well no matter what the court decides they owe their shareholders.  But Florida courts have been notoriously reluctant to change the system.  No matter what you think about the 2005 bankruptcy reform, it made this abuse a lot harder to get away with.


Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Watch and Buy: Kickstarter Is the Hipster Home Shopping Network Kickstarter Is the Hipster Home Shopping Network
Fact-Checking Claims on the Wonders of Pomegranate Juice Fact-Checking Claims on the Wonders of Pomegranate Juice
Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Used TV? Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Used TV?
'Men in Black 3': A Could-See 'Men in Black 3': A Could-See
The New Economics of Happiness The New Economics of Happiness

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Where in the World? Part 3: A Google Earth Puzzle

May 25, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

Megan McArdle
from the Magazine

Why You Can’t Get a Taxi

And how an upstart company may change that

Europe’s Real Crisis

The Continent’s problems are as much demographic as financial. They won’t go away soon.

Why Companies Fail

GM’s stock price has sunk by a third since its IPO. Why is corporate turnaround so difficult…