What is Piercing the Corporate Veil? We Define It Here

If you absolutely have to withdraw funds from the business, make sure that you keep accurate records of how much was borrowed and when you paid it back. Charge yourself a reasonable interest rate for the loan. To establish an alter ego theory of liability and pierce the corporate veil in Arizona, the proponent of the theory must establish unity of control and that observance of corporate form would sanction a fraud or promote injustice.

While one consideration is whether the entity was formed to perpetrate a fraud or is being used for fraudulent purposes, this is not the only way to establish injustice or inequity. For example, in Gatecliff, the court held “observance of the corporate form could permit the two corporations to confuse plaintiffs and frustrate their efforts to protect their rights” while allowing the responsible party to “evade liability.” 170 Ariz. at 38, 821 P.2d at 729. Accordingly, the totality of the circumstances must demonstrate an “overall element of injustice or unfairness.” NetsJets Aviation, Inc., 537 F.3d at 176. One final note on piercing the corporate veil is that states often vary radically in the extent to which they are willing to go to protect the corporation as an entity. In several states, short of outright fraud and/or criminal conduct, the corporate existence will remain sacrosanct. See Consumer’s Co-op v. Olsen, 142 Wis. 2d 465 (Wis. Sup. Ct. 1988).

Definition and Examples of Piercing the Corporate Veil

Many cases involving voluntary dealings rely on the failure of the Corporation and the shareholder to follow corporate formalities as a basic for PCV. Many PCV cases involve attempts to hold shareholders who are individual liable for corporate obligations . One or two corporations are treated no differently than other corporations in PVC cases. While PVC is probably more likely to in small corporations’ with one or two shareholders than in corporations with more shareholders, essentially the same tests are applied, and in appropriate cases the separate existence of one two person corporations will be recognized. Do not verbally assure creditors that you will personally take on the obligations of the corporation if the company proves unable to do so. For example, if a business shuts down to avoid paying debts, this is fraud.

As you might imagine, courts are generally reluctant to do this, and are only likely to pierce the corporate veil in cases where there has been particularly egregious and unethical behavior. The most frustrating issue from a business owner’s perspective is that the rules are not hard and fast as to when a court will be able to pierce the veil. “There is neither a precise formula by which to predict when courts will pierce the corporate veil since each case is , nor a uniform standard to determine whether the evidence has sufficiently demonstrated unity of interest and ownership. In a solely-owned or family-owned corporation or LLC, it is very tempting for the president to pay for his grocery bills or even his child’s tuition bills from the business account. After all, it is easier to pay bills in this fashion than to write one check to cover the owner’s salary and then a second check from the owner’s account to pay the tuition or grocery bill. This is particularly true when the owner’s scheduled salary or draw will not be enough to cover the particular bill. Accordingly, any substantial intermingling of company assets and personal assets may result in the unsuspecting shareholders or members being subjected to personal liability for company debts.

Ahead of the Curve: Protecting Yourself from Personal Liability for Corporate Debts and “Veil Piercing”

These are both highly fact-based determinations requiring consideration of the totality of the circumstances. LEXIS (D. Ariz. February 27, 2012) quoting Legacy Wireless Services, Inc. v. Human Capital, LLC, 314 F. This sliding scale – sometimes harsh and sometimes forgiving – is based largely on the state’s view (and by that, we mean that state’s courts’ view) of the value of the corporation as a legal fiction.

When it comes to protecting the corporate veil, it’s better to be proactive than reactive. Hiring a reputable law firm sooner rather than later is in your best interest. Another way to protect your company and protect the corporate veil is by keeping a thorough paper trail. You should keep receipts of all transactions, invoices, and other relevant documents. You should also maintain detailed records of things like meeting minutes and bylaws. These are straightforward requirements for business owners to follow, but it’s easy to overlook them. Failure to abide by these requirements could expose a company to a piercing of the corporate veil.

The Standards for Piercing the Corporate Veil and Why they Vary

After studying the facts, the court found that this debtor LLC had an independent existing interest, as it owned property, conducted significant business, and maintained its own LLC bank account. The court rejected the creditor’s argument that the LLC was established for an improper purpose to protect the owner from personal liability because the creditor was not prohibited from requiring the https://quickbooks-payroll.org/ owner sign a separate personal guarantee. And, the court said that the creditor’s damages were caused by the LLC’s inability to pay a contracted LLC debt and not because of any of the owner’s improper use of an LLC to conduct business. The “corporate veil” protects business owners in a corporation or an LLC by shielding them from being held personally liable for their business activities.

As a business owner, it is very important that your corporation follows all of your state and local laws and requirements. We provide a way to incorporate, create bylaws, and ensure corporate compliance to reduce the possibility of piercing the corporate veil. One is insider reverse piercing — where it’s an insider of the parent corporation, or the parent itself, seeking to pierce the parent’s corporate veil. Although somewhat rare, there are instances where it would be to a parent’s advantage to pierce its own veil. For example, in workers’ compensation cases, where the subsidiary employer was immune from suit, and the employee sought to hold the parent corporation liable for additional damages, parents have sought to pierce their own veil to have the subsidiaries’ immunity imputed to them. Courts rarely reverse pierce where it is the parent requesting it, and some courts will not even entertain attempts to insider reverse pierce.

Popular articles from this firm

Importantly, the individual in control of the entity is not required to have ownership in the business. Many PCV cases involve shareholders who themselves are corporations. In other words, the issue involves the responsibility of a parent corporation for the actions of a subsidiary. Practically every publicly held corporation has numerous subsidiaries engaged in a variety of related or different businesses. Subsidiaries are usually wholly owned by the parent corporation but they may also be partially owned. It is often stated that courts are more likely to PCV when the shareholders is itself a corporation than when the share holders is an individual, but there is little empirical evidence supporting this assertion. Courts also look at whether a corporation or LLC is undercapitalized.

This process of seeking to hold shareholders and members personally responsible for the debts of the business entity is known as “piercing the corporate veil”-a term that barely hints at the damage it can do to an unsuspecting business owner. Piercing the corporate veil is the most litigated issue in corporate law. It is also one of the most confusing and least understood, according to at least one Illinois appellate court. Corporate veil piercing is an equitable doctrine by which a court can hold an individual or entity personally liable for the debts of a corporation . The typical situation in which a court resorts to veil piercing involves a closely held corporation with a single owner who has intentionally undercapitalized the corporation or failed to observe corporate formalities. In such instances, courts have found that the corporate entity is merely an “alter ego” of the individual and recognizing the corporate distinction would result in fraud or an unjust result. Under a line of cases from the Illinois First District Appellate Court, it may be possible to use the corporate veil piercing doctrine to hold an individual liable for a corporation’s debt even though the individual was not a shareholder, officer, or employee of the corporation.

CT Corporation

However, without a showing of wrongdoing, injustice, or violation of statute, a court cannot use the Doctrine as a remedy. A showing that the plaintiff is merely an unsatisfied creditor of a business venture that ultimately did not work out is not enough. Sonora Diamond Corp. v. Superior Court 83 Cal.App.4th 523, cited in Green v. UNITED FOOTBALL LEAGUE LLC Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate Dist., 1st Div.

This limited liability encourages individuals to invest their money to start a company—otherwise, potential business owners would subject themselves to unlimited personal financial risk when forming an LLC or corporation. Therefore, if the individual who is in control of a business uses business assets for personal purposes (i.e. buying groceries, cash withdrawals, etc.), a creditor may claim an interest in the assets of the business rather than just the shares of the business. One of the theories the plaintiffs prevailed on was their alter ego/veil piercing claim.

Services

The plaintiffs ultimately won a default judgment against Silver Fox Pastries in the amount of $421,582. Shareholders may be personally liable for corporate torts on theories other than PCV. The individual tort reason who actually caused the injury is personally liable whether or not he was acting as an agent corporation. If he was acting as a corporate agent, the corporation is also liable for the tort under the theory of respondent superior. If the tort reason and it is unnecessary r-to argue PCV. The circumstances in which the Pennsylvania courts have allowed creditors to pierce the corporate veil, recently articulated in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court case of Lumax Industries v. Aultman , 543 Pa. 38, 669 A.2d 893 , can be broken down into the categories that follow.

An accountant can help you ensure that you keep your books clean and separate. The subsidiary should have enough capital to stand on its own. If a company is not properly funded, it could be seen as merely siphoning money to the parent company. It is important to have separate bank accounts to cover operations and expenses and maintain funds in case a subsidiary is exposed to liability. Courts can pierce the corporate veil Piercing The Corporate Veil when the parent company dominates the subsidiary. A plaintiff bringing an action against a parent company hoping to hold the parent company liable for its subsidiaries must prove that some injustice or wrong will be done by not piercing the veil. An essential and valuable aspect of limited liability entities is that the owners and fiduciaries of the entity are not usually liable for the debts and obligations of the entity.

We’ll not only help you set up a corporate veil to limit your liabilities, but we’ll also help you set up a wealth planning blueprint to ensure your business is a success. Legal information and other services are delivered by or through Rocket Lawyer via RocketLawyer.com. Please note that Rocket Lawyer is not a “lawyer referral service,” “accountant referral service,” accounting firm, or law firm, does not provide legal or tax advice or representation , and is not intended as a substitute for an attorney, accountant, accounting firm, or law firm. If the parent loans money to the subsidiary, or vice versa, it should be recorded on the books as a loan. Transactions between the parent and subsidiary should be negotiated at arm’s length, and the terms should be fair to both corporations. Whether the subsidiary was adequately capitalized when formed and solvent enough to pay its anticipated debts when conducting business. Undercapitalization and insolvency are factors that indicate an alter-ego relationship.

• So if the court pierces the subsidiary’s veil, its activities or citizenship will be imputed to the parent, thereby giving the court personal jurisdiction over the parent.
• This allows trades and suppliers to secure payment through personal liability against a contractor, subcontractor or owner who breaches trust.
• Companies often enter new or related industries by creating corporate structures whereby a parent company forms and often largely owns the other entities.
• The use of the corporate identity to procure labor, services or merchandise for another entity.
• Without limited liability protection, the entire concept of the corporation or LLC as a separate legal entity is rendered useless.

Most courts appear to apply the same PCV principles to parent-subsidiary relationships as are applied to shareholders who are individuals. With the continued growth of corporate groups in the future, and the increased number of regulatory and environmental laws, it is possible that a unique set of principles for PCV in corporate groups will evolve. Mixing assets, such as having the subsidiary sign a pledge of assets to secure parental indebtedness, transferring funds informally from one entity to other without the formalities normally involved in a loan, or having a common bank account. V. The shareholder orally promises unconditionally to be personally responsible for the corporate obligations under circumstances where it is inequitable to permit the shareholder to rely on the statute of frauds. In most cases where a third person has dealt voluntarily with the corporation the third person should not be able to PCV and hold the shareholders personally liable. Absent unusual circumstances he has “assumed the risk” that the corporation will be unable to meet its obligations when he dealt voluntarily with the corporation and did not demand a personal guarantee from the shareholder. While the Texas legislature has curtailed the use of veil piercing principles in the absence of particular factors, other legal theories may allow a plaintiff to recover in a similar manner.

The entity can enter into contracts, purchase goods and services, take on debt, and file litigation against others. Legally, it has most of the same rights and powers that you have in your personal life. To impose personal liability on the owners, a plaintiff must pierce the so-called “corporate veil.” In California, this is done under what is called the Alter Ego Doctrine (the “Doctrine”). The Doctrine is used to make a corporation’s owner liable when the shareholder improperly uses the corporate entity to commit acts which improperly harmed the corporation, or third persons dealing with the corporation. Taking the proper steps to insulate personal liability could make the difference between the effective creation of a corporate structure versus the daunting effects of personal liability.

• Legal information and other services are delivered by or through Rocket Lawyer via RocketLawyer.com.
• With workflows optimized by technology and guided by deep domain expertise, we help organizations grow, manage, and protect their businesses and their client’s businesses.
• Delaware corporations should determine whether they should include a provision in their certificate of incorporation.
• States have similar laws for failure to pay withheld sales taxes.

The business maintains a separate and distinct identity from that of its owners or related entities. However, the mere shell of a corporate structure is not always enough to avoid personal liability. Many of you have heard of the term “pierce the corporate veil” but haven’t thought any more about it. This blog post will discuss the five most common ways to pierce the corporate veil and shatter the façade of protection that the entity creates. As it turned out, the shoe business went downhill shortly thereafter. Mr. Broderip was repaid his principal, but Mr. Saloman defaulted on portions of the loan interest.

How Often Does the Corporate Veil Get Pierced?

The concept of the corporate veil is important to the concept of limited liability. In general, if the corporation or LLC is considered completely separate from the individuals who own and manage the business, those owners/managers cannot be held responsible for the company’s actions.

Since the members undercapitalized the LLC and siphoned funds to avoid liability, the lender may argue that the veil should be pierced to prevent them from suffering an unjust loss. Finally, the plaintiff has to show that they would suffer an unjust loss as a result of the LLC’s actions if piercing the LLC veil is not permitted.