Podcasts about Insolvency

At the beginning of April, US President Donald Trump made the announcement of his much-threatened 25% tariffs on Canadian imports.Later in April, the rest of the world felt the brunt of Trump's desire for tariffs, with the EU and Ireland being hit with a 20% tariff on imports to the US.Despite Trump's dialing back for the sake of negotiations, is it time now to forge new relationships and for Ireland and Canada businesses to join forces in a more meaningful way?Joining Kieran in Toronto to discuss is Gemma Healy Murphy, Partner, Litigation & Dispute Resolution Lawyer at McMillan LLP in Toronto and Craig Sowman, Partner and Co-Head of Restructuring & Insolvency at Addleshaw Goddard Ireland.

In this week's Breakroom episode, Lynn Nonnemaker joins Maddie News to discuss the Congressional Budget Office's recent projection of when the Medicare Part A Trust Fund will run out of money, and what stakeholders should be on the lookout for.

We unravel the rise & fall of Rahul Yadav's 4B Networks. Uncovering Info Edge's ₹288 crore write-off, proptech's insolvency, multiple FIRs & lessons for founders!

Points of Interest1:02 – 1:38 – Intro: Marcel introduces the session as a condensed version of his All-in Agency Summit talk, aimed at equipping agencies with the key levers to diagnose and improve profitability.3:05 – 3:18 – 80/20 Profitability Focus: The goal is to give agencies 20% of the knowledge that provides 80% of the insight needed to take control of profitability, regardless of market conditions.4:28 – 6:27 – The Growth Trap Cycle: Agencies often get stuck in a cycle of hiring during growth, losing profitability, scaling again, and repeatedly encountering the same financial challenges at larger scales.6:42 – 7:01 – Identifying the Real Problem: Founders are urged to identify whether their agency's issue is inefficient delivery (indigestion) or lack of revenue (starvation) to avoid insolvency.9:01 – 10:06 – Financial Metrics Foundation: Understanding core financial metrics—especially agency gross income (AGI)—is essential to making better business decisions beyond tax reporting.14:24 – 18:05 – Delivery Margin as the Core Metric: Agencies should aim for delivery costs to stay under 50% of AGI, enabling better spending on overhead and stronger profitability.21:44 – 26:44 – Lever 1: Average Cost Per Hour: Lowering the average cost of labor through delegation and improved processes helps reduce delivery costs and increase profitability.28:03 – 31:55 – Lever 2: Average Billable Rate (ABR): Maximizing revenue per hour of delivery time, regardless of billing model, improves margins—either by pricing higher or working more efficiently.34:17 – 38:24 – Lever 3: Utilization Rate: Utilization measures how much team capacity is spent on client work; improving it by selling more work or adjusting staff size directly affects profitability.42:01 – 44:45 – Utilization Benchmarks: Weekly and annual utilization targets vary by role; producers should aim for 75%+ weekly, and teams should average 50–65% annually including all roles.45:27 – 49:26 – Impact of Levers on Profit: A case study illustrates how modest gains in utilization and ABR can shift profit margins from 10% to 40%, increasing valuation by up to 500% without hiring or cutting overhead.Show NotesAll-in Agency SummitChris Dubois & Dynamic Agency OSFree Agency Profit ToolkitFree access to our Model PlatformParakeeto Foundations CourseLove the PodcastLeave us a review here.

When financial trouble hits, personal and corporate insolvency can put your wealth and legacy at risk. In this episode, host Stefan Manche is joined by Senior Associate Charlie Clark to unpack how insolvency affects individuals, company directors, and estates. From director duties and personal guarantees to strategies like testamentary trusts and asset restructuring, learn how to safeguard your assets from creditors, liquidators, and future disputes.

In this episode, we dive into the complexities of insolvency in the property and construction sector with special guest Jonathon McRostie, Special Counsel in Clayton Utz's Restructuring and Insolvency team. We explore key terms and definitions - liquidation, bankruptcy, receivership, DOCA, safe harbour provisions, and directors' duties - breaking down what they mean for businesses and individuals in the industry. Jonathon shares insights on what's happening on the ground, the challenges currently facing the sector, as well as the critical lessons stakeholders need to be aware of to navigate financial distress effectively.Based in Melbourne, Jonathon specialises in complex litigation, with a focus on corporate insolvency and reconstruction matters. He advises insolvency practitioners, banks, company officers and creditors on a broad range of commercial litigation issues. Recognised as "One to Watch" in Insolvency and Reorganisation Law and Litigation (Best Lawyers Australia), Jonathon brings a wealth of expertise in navigating financial challenges in the property and construction space.Tune in for expert insights on the evolving insolvency landscape and what industry players need to know.EPISODE LINKSJonathon McRostie Clayton Utz We'd love your feedback, send us a message today.LET'S CONNECT SubscribeInstagram Website LinkedIn Email > podcast@charterkc.com.au This podcast is for educational purposes only and should not be considered investment or financial advice. This podcast is not intended to replace or supplement professional investment, financial or legal advice. Please seek professional advice based upon your personal circumstances. The views expressed by our podcast guests may not represent those of Charter Keck Cramer. This podcast may not be copied, reproduced, republished or posted in whole or in part without the prior written consent of Charter Keck Cramer.

The number of companies going into insolvencies fell in the first quarter of this year. And according to PwC creditors are more patient these days than banks or the taxman. They are just 2 of the findings in the latest insolvency report, which also found that not as many retailers went bust this year than last year just after Christmas. Ken Tyrell is the Business Recovery Partner with PwC and joined Joe Lynam on the show this morning.

With the cost of materials high, running a business in construction might feel a lot harder than it ever did before. And with construction topping the business insolvency table in 2024 it's clear how hard it is to keep your business afloat. So today we talked about insolvency and more importantly how to prevent it!!!I was asking what you've done to protect your business. We were joined by Joel Cooke from Rendervate and Rick Smith, founder and MD of Forbes Burton who gave some great ideas to keep your business from going under! Plus theres also pub lunch quiz for your chance to grab yourself 6 points and you'll hear the very best messages that we received.

When a business faces insolvency, one of the most overlooked yet critical aspects is ensuring that administrators and receivers are legally and correctly appointed. In this episode of The Cut, expert insolvency lawyer Nick Christiansen from Sparke Helmore joins the conversation with host Simon Cathro, to break down valid vs. invalid appointments, the risks insolvency practitioners face, and what business owners need to know before making any decisions. From understanding how appointments are challenged in court to why remuneration is such a hot topic in insolvency, this discussion sheds light on the legal and financial pitfalls that can make or break a business in distress. If you're a business owner, creditor, or insolvency professional, this episode is packed with insights that could save you from costly mistakes. ⁠Key points discussed in this episode: Valid vs. Invalid Appointments Matter – Administrators and receivers must conduct due diligence to ensure legal appointments; mistakes can result in personal liability. Remuneration Isn't Always Guaranteed – Insolvency professionals must prove their fees are reasonable, and creditors can challenge them in court. Creditors Have More Power Than They Think – From challenging fees to influencing court decisions, creditors play a bigger role in insolvency than most realize. Links: Nick Christiansen's Linkedin Simon Cathro's Linkedin Sparke Helmore Lawyers official website ASIC   Cathro & Partners are experts in providing insolvency and restructuring services that help to create and preserve business value and to enable individuals to make a fresh start. The firm specialises in restructuring, turnaround, personal and corporate insolvency, safe harbour, secured enforcement services, government advisory services and pre-lending services. For a confidential discussion on any of the above, please reach out to one of our experts.

While business insolvencies have been on the rise, Australia has not been hit with a wave of personal bankruptcies yet.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Social Security's looming solvency issues have been a well known creeping crud for decades.

In this episode, author and journalist Puja Mehra speaks to economist Rajeswari Sengupta to scrutinize the government's fiscal strategy in the latest budget. Sengupta offers candid insights on how the shift from transparent fiscal deficit targets to a more opaque debt-to-GDP approach—coupled with expenditure cuts and generous tax reliefs—is unlikely to spur growth. Tune in for a discussion that goes into the arithmetic of fiscal management, the risks of masking structural weaknesses, and the broader implications for India's economic future.ABOUT RAJESWARI SENGUPTARajeswari Sengupta is currently an associate professor of economics at Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research (IGIDR). Her research focuses on policy-relevant issues of emerging economies in general and India in particular, in the fields of empirical macroeconomics, international finance, monetary policy, banking and financial institutions, firm financing and national accounts measurement.In the past she has held research positions at the Institute for Financial Management and Research (IFMR) in Chennai, San Francisco Federal Reserve, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in Washington DC and Reserve Bank of India, Delhi. She was a member of the research secretariat to the Bankruptcy Law Reforms Committee that drafted India's Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC, 2016). She has published in reputed international journals such as Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Economic Policy, Journal of International Money and Finance, The World Economy, Emerging Markets Review, Pacific Economic Review, Open Economies Review as well as the Economic and Political Weekly in India. She has also written chapters in various books published by the Asian Development Bank, G20, the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), among others.For more of our coverage check out⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠thecore.in⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Subscribe to our Newsletter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow us on:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Instagram⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Facebook⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Linkedin⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ |⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Youtube

Sovereign debt crises have surged since the end of the Bretton Woods system and currently threaten a lost decade for many countries across the world. Indermit Gill, in the World Bank Group's 2024 International Debt Report, describes the situation in many of the poorest countries as a ‘metastasising solvency crisis that continues to be misdiagnosed as a liquidity problem'. Despite their severe socioeconomic consequences, no comprehensive legal framework exists to address these crises—arguably the most significant gap in international economic law.This lecture, based on Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima's forthcoming book Governing Sovereign Debt Crises: The Case for International Sovereign Insolvency Law (Hart Publishing), makes the case for creating such a mechanism under international law. The book challenges prevailing narratives that attribute sovereign debt crises solely to debtor states' mismanagement or misfortunes, instead arguing that sovereign insolvency is a systemic feature of the international monetary system. Current solutions—voluntary, ad hoc, and fragmented—fail to equitably allocate losses across an increasingly diversified sovereign creditor base, leaving many creditors worse off. At the same time, debtor states and their populations remain vulnerable to macroeconomic crises and enduring austerity, which often lead to long-term economic stagnation.The book adopts a legal political economy approach to illustrate how power asymmetries among stakeholders and the absence of enforceable rules perpetuate inefficiencies and inequities in resolving sovereign debt crises. Drawing on the legal theory of finance, insolvency law, and common resource governance theory, it illustrates how these governance failures result in a dual tragedy: a tragedy of the commons and a tragedy of the anticommons. The lecture will also examine the growing complexity of sovereign debt markets, including the diversification of creditor types, the erosion of ‘gentlemen's agreements,' and the limitations of initiatives like the Paris Club and the G20's Common Framework for debt treatments. It concludes by arguing that only international sovereign insolvency rules can resolve the delays, inefficiencies, and inequities that plague sovereign debt restructuring, while exploring avenues for implementing such a proceeding and discussing the role of domestic law in a well-functioning international sovereign debt architecture.Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Leeds. Her research focuses on the intersection of law, finance, and sovereign debt within the broader context of global economic governance. Her research portfolio covers the legal governance of sovereign debt crises, the law and policy of international financial institutions, and the macroeconomic impact of financial law and regulation.Dr Patrício advises public entities, NGOs, and leading law firms on various aspects of financial and monetary law, including sovereign debt restructuring, financial regulation, and the governance of international financial institutions. Her work has been recognised with prestigious awards, including the 2022 Society of International Economic Law-Hart Prize and the 2022 John H. Jackson Prize, conferred by the Journal of International Economic Law. She also serves as a peer reviewer for top law and social sciences journals globally.

Sovereign debt crises have surged since the end of the Bretton Woods system and currently threaten a lost decade for many countries across the world. Indermit Gill, in the World Bank Group's 2024 International Debt Report, describes the situation in many of the poorest countries as a ‘metastasising solvency crisis that continues to be misdiagnosed as a liquidity problem'. Despite their severe socioeconomic consequences, no comprehensive legal framework exists to address these crises—arguably the most significant gap in international economic law.This lecture, based on Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima's forthcoming book Governing Sovereign Debt Crises: The Case for International Sovereign Insolvency Law (Hart Publishing), makes the case for creating such a mechanism under international law. The book challenges prevailing narratives that attribute sovereign debt crises solely to debtor states' mismanagement or misfortunes, instead arguing that sovereign insolvency is a systemic feature of the international monetary system. Current solutions—voluntary, ad hoc, and fragmented—fail to equitably allocate losses across an increasingly diversified sovereign creditor base, leaving many creditors worse off. At the same time, debtor states and their populations remain vulnerable to macroeconomic crises and enduring austerity, which often lead to long-term economic stagnation.The book adopts a legal political economy approach to illustrate how power asymmetries among stakeholders and the absence of enforceable rules perpetuate inefficiencies and inequities in resolving sovereign debt crises. Drawing on the legal theory of finance, insolvency law, and common resource governance theory, it illustrates how these governance failures result in a dual tragedy: a tragedy of the commons and a tragedy of the anticommons. The lecture will also examine the growing complexity of sovereign debt markets, including the diversification of creditor types, the erosion of ‘gentlemen's agreements,' and the limitations of initiatives like the Paris Club and the G20's Common Framework for debt treatments. It concludes by arguing that only international sovereign insolvency rules can resolve the delays, inefficiencies, and inequities that plague sovereign debt restructuring, while exploring avenues for implementing such a proceeding and discussing the role of domestic law in a well-functioning international sovereign debt architecture.Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Leeds. Her research focuses on the intersection of law, finance, and sovereign debt within the broader context of global economic governance. Her research portfolio covers the legal governance of sovereign debt crises, the law and policy of international financial institutions, and the macroeconomic impact of financial law and regulation.Dr Patrício advises public entities, NGOs, and leading law firms on various aspects of financial and monetary law, including sovereign debt restructuring, financial regulation, and the governance of international financial institutions. Her work has been recognised with prestigious awards, including the 2022 Society of International Economic Law-Hart Prize and the 2022 John H. Jackson Prize, conferred by the Journal of International Economic Law. She also serves as a peer reviewer for top law and social sciences journals globally.

Sovereign debt crises have surged since the end of the Bretton Woods system and currently threaten a lost decade for many countries across the world. Indermit Gill, in the World Bank Group's 2024 International Debt Report, describes the situation in many of the poorest countries as a ‘metastasising solvency crisis that continues to be misdiagnosed as a liquidity problem'. Despite their severe socioeconomic consequences, no comprehensive legal framework exists to address these crises—arguably the most significant gap in international economic law.This lecture, based on Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima's forthcoming book Governing Sovereign Debt Crises: The Case for International Sovereign Insolvency Law (Hart Publishing), makes the case for creating such a mechanism under international law. The book challenges prevailing narratives that attribute sovereign debt crises solely to debtor states' mismanagement or misfortunes, instead arguing that sovereign insolvency is a systemic feature of the international monetary system. Current solutions—voluntary, ad hoc, and fragmented—fail to equitably allocate losses across an increasingly diversified sovereign creditor base, leaving many creditors worse off. At the same time, debtor states and their populations remain vulnerable to macroeconomic crises and enduring austerity, which often lead to long-term economic stagnation.The book adopts a legal political economy approach to illustrate how power asymmetries among stakeholders and the absence of enforceable rules perpetuate inefficiencies and inequities in resolving sovereign debt crises. Drawing on the legal theory of finance, insolvency law, and common resource governance theory, it illustrates how these governance failures result in a dual tragedy: a tragedy of the commons and a tragedy of the anticommons. The lecture will also examine the growing complexity of sovereign debt markets, including the diversification of creditor types, the erosion of ‘gentlemen's agreements,' and the limitations of initiatives like the Paris Club and the G20's Common Framework for debt treatments. It concludes by arguing that only international sovereign insolvency rules can resolve the delays, inefficiencies, and inequities that plague sovereign debt restructuring, while exploring avenues for implementing such a proceeding and discussing the role of domestic law in a well-functioning international sovereign debt architecture.Dr Karina Patrício Ferreira Lima is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Leeds. Her research focuses on the intersection of law, finance, and sovereign debt within the broader context of global economic governance. Her research portfolio covers the legal governance of sovereign debt crises, the law and policy of international financial institutions, and the macroeconomic impact of financial law and regulation.Dr Patrício advises public entities, NGOs, and leading law firms on various aspects of financial and monetary law, including sovereign debt restructuring, financial regulation, and the governance of international financial institutions. Her work has been recognised with prestigious awards, including the 2022 Society of International Economic Law-Hart Prize and the 2022 John H. Jackson Prize, conferred by the Journal of International Economic Law. She also serves as a peer reviewer for top law and social sciences journals globally.

In this episode, we pinpoint the business trends and legal issues that will shape the UK’s construction landscape in 2025. From challenges and risks to opportunities and innovations, our expert panel covers a range of ground. Insolvency risk. Legislative developments. Labour shortages. Difficulties like these made 2024 a challenging year for many in the UK’s construction sector. So what can we expect in 2025? In this episode, we tackle a number of topics. Ashurst colleagues Sadia McEvoy, Chris Whitehouse and Matt Pearson discuss the still-unfolding impacts of the Building Safety Act, the warning signs of construction insolvencies, the sector’s bid to meet net-zero targets, how modular construction might address productivity and labour issues, the legislative changes to watch, and the potential upside of more collaborative procurement strategies. To hear this episode search for “Ashurst Legal Outlook” on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast player. And to find out more about the full range of Ashurst podcasts, visit ashurst.com/podcasts. The information provided is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all developments in the law and practice, or to cover all aspects of those referred to. Listeners should take legal advice before applying it to specific issues or transactions.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome to Top of the Morning by Mint, your weekday newscast that brings you five major stories from the world of business. It's Thursday, January 30, 2025. This is Nelson John, let's get started. Last week, Wingify, a SaaS company, was acquired by Everstone Capital for $200 million, and Minimalist, a skincare brand, was bought by Hindustan Unilever Ltd for nearly ₹3,000 crore. These significant acquisitions highlight that Indian startups can indeed generate substantial wealth, not just through IPOs but also as targets for major acquisitions. Soumya Gupta writes. Notably, Wingify's founder retained a major stake of 84%, allowing him to benefit greatly from the sale, similar to Minimalist's founders, who owned over 61%. The common narrative in the Indian startup ecosystem often involves founders diluting their equity to raise capital from venture capitalists and private equity firms to fuel growth, leading to reduced ownership. However, these two cases illustrate that substantial ownership can lead to lucrative exits. Companies like Zoho and Zerodha showcase that bootstrapping, or growing without external capital, allows founders to maintain control and potentially lead to high profitability without the pressures from external investors. Indian companies are increasingly implementing strategies to retain junior employees for at least a year to ensure their investment in training isn't lost to high turnover rates. Instead of using the term 'bond', which has legal limitations, firms are incorporating 'commitment periods' into employment contracts. These stipulate that employees must reimburse the company for training and development costs if they leave within a year. Law firms Devina Sengupta spoke to, note that these contracts don't prevent employees from joining other companies but do require them to pay back training costs if they leave prematurely. This method is seen as a more legally tenable and employee-friendly approach than traditional bonds. Training costs, which can range from ₹1 lakh to ₹5 lakh depending on the industry, are now more frequently detailed in contracts to avoid disputes. Sectors like IT, pharmaceuticals, financial services, aviation, and telecom are observing shorter commitment periods, now typically one year instead of two, to adapt to the high churn rates among junior staff. Netweb Technologies, an AI cloud services firm based in Delhi, has been in the news lately after its stock price took a sharp 48% hit. The company quickly reached out to investors, explaining that this drop was just a temporary setback and emphasized their readiness to capitalize on the latest AI developments, especially with China's DeepSeek shaking up the market. Their investor note, though lacking specific growth details, seemed to do the trick, reports Shouvik Das. The stock price rebounded, hitting a 10% upper circuit early in the trading session following the note's release. The reaction from the industry has been a bit of a mixed bag. Some experts are optimistic, pointing out that while current global policy changes and market disruptions present challenges, they also open doors for Indian AI firms to innovate and grow. However, others are more cautious, noting that Indian companies are heavily dependent on technologies like Nvidia's processors. This makes them vulnerable if access to these critical technologies is restricted. 2024 turned out to be a strong year for soybean yields in India, with significant improvements in production due to favourable weather conditions. Despite this, India continues to face challenges with cooking oil shortages. The government has attempted to boost local oilseed production by increasing import duties by 22% to encourage more domestic farming and reduce dependency on imported oils, particularly palm oil, which has seen prices surge due to international market dynamics. India imports about 65% of its cooking oil needs, with palm oil making up over half of this due to its lower costs historically. However, international issues like Indonesia diverting palm oil to biodiesel production have driven up prices, impacting both consumers and industries reliant on these oils. Sayantan Bera examines India's cooking oil woes, in today's Long Story. The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has dealt a major blow to Byju's by reinstating Glas Trust Co. Llc and Aditya Birla Finance Ltd as financial creditors, giving them significant influence over the company's insolvency proceedings. This move came after the tribunal found Byju's interim resolution professional, Pankaj Srivastava, unfit for his role and directed the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) to initiate disciplinary action against him. The NCLT also dismissed the newly formed Committee of Creditors (CoC) and reinstated the previous one from August 21, 2024, which will now appoint a new resolution professional. This decision stemmed from allegations of fraudulent creditor classification by Byju's lenders, US-based Glas Trust Company and Aditya Birla Finance Ltd. They argued that they were wrongly classified, impacting their rights and the integrity of the insolvency process.

Stephen Grootes speaks to Dr Eric Leventein, Head of Insolvency and Business Rescue at Werksmans Attorneys, about the dangers of delaying business rescue for struggling companies and their directors.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Company liquidations are at a 10 year high. Data from the Companies Office shows there were 2,500 liquidations last year – the highest since 2014. Company receiverships are also the highest they've been since 2012, at 186. BWA Insolvency's principal Bryan Williams told Ryan Bridge he doesn't think it's as bad as the Global Financial Crisis. He says how the geopolitical environment will change and impact New Zealanders may alter things. LISTEN ABOVE See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

1UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISIONIn re:INTRUM AB, et al.,1Debtors.Chapter 11Case No. 24-90575 (CML)(Jointly Administered)NOTICE OF APPEALPursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002 and 8003,notice is hereby given that the Ad Hoc Committee of holders of 2025 notes issued by Intrum AB(the “AHC”) hereby appeals to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texasfrom (i) the Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262) (the “Motion to Dismiss Order”) and (ii) theOrder (I) Approving Disclosure Statement and (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor (Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263) (the“Confirmation Order”). A copy of the Motion to Dismiss Order is attached as Exhibit A and acopy of the Confirmation Order is attached as Exhibit B. Additionally, the transcript of theBankruptcy Court's oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and ConfirmationOrder (ECF No. 275) is attached as Exhibit C.Below are the names of all parties to this appeal and their respective counsel:1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors'service address in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, Ste 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 62I. APPELLANTA. Name of Appellant:The members of the AHC include:Boundary Creek Master Fund LP; CF INT Holdings Designated Activity Company; CaiusCapital Master Fund; Diameter Master Fund LP; Diameter Dislocation Master Fund II LP; FirTree Credit Opportunity Master Fund, LP; MAP 204 Segregated Portfolio, a segregated portfolioof LMA SPC; Star V Partners LLC; and TQ Master Fund LP.Attorneys for the AHC:QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLPChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comB. Positions of appellant in the adversary proceeding or bankruptcy case that isthe subject of this appeal:CreditorsCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 2 of 63II. THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPEALA. Judgment, order, or decree appealed from:The Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262); the Order (I) Approving Disclosure Statementand (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor(Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263); and the December 31, 2024 Transcript of OralRuling Before the Honorable Christopher M. Lopez United States Bankruptcy Court Judge (ECFNo. 275).B. The date on which the judgment, order, or decree was entered:The Motion to Dismiss Order and the Confirmation Order were entered on December 31,2024. The Court issued its oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and theConfirmation Order on December 31, 2024.III. OTHER PARTIES TO THIS APPEALIntrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLCMILBANK LLPDennis F. Dunne (admitted pro hac vice)Jaimie Fedell (admitted pro hac vice)55 Hudson YardsNew York, NY 10001Telephone: (212) 530-5000Facsimile: (212) 530-5219Email: ddunne@milbank.comjfedell@milbank.com–and–Andrew M. Leblanc (admitted pro hac vice)Melanie Westover Yanez (admitted pro hac vice)1850 K Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20006Telephone: (202) 835-7500Facsimile: (202) 263-7586Email: aleblanc@milbank.commwyanez@milbank.com–and–PORTER HEDGES LLPJohn F. Higgins (SBN 09597500)Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 3 of 64Eric D. Wade (SBN 00794802)M. Shane Johnson (SBN 24083263)1000 Main Street, 36th FloorHouston TX 77002Telephone: (713) 226-6000Facsimile: (713) 226-6248Email: jhiggins@porterhedges.comewade@porterhedges.comsjohnson@porterhedges.comIV. OTHER PARTIES THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS APPEALThe following chart lists certain parties that are not parties to this appeal, but that may havean interest in the outcome of the case. These parties should be served with notice of this appealby the Debtors who are aware of their identities and best positioned to provide notice.All Other Creditors of the Debtors, Including, But Not Limited To:• Certain funds and accounts managed by BlackRock Investment Management (UK)Limited or its affiliates;• Capital Four;• Davidson Kempner European Partners, LLP;• Intermediate Capital Managers Limited;• Mandatum Asset Management Ltd;• H.I.G. Capital, LLC;• Spiltan Hograntefond; Spiltan Rantefond Sverige; and Spiltan Aktiefond Stabil;• The RCF SteerCo Group;• Swedbank AB (publ).Any Holder of Stock of the Debtors• Any holder of stock of the Debtors, including their successors and assigns.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 4 of 65Respectfully submitted this 13th day of January, 2025.QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLP/s/ Christopher D. PorterChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comCOUNSEL FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE OFINTRUM AB 2025 NOTEHOLDERSCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 5 of 6CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI, Christopher D. Porter, hereby certify that on the 13th day of January, 2025, a copy ofthe foregoing document has been served via the Electronic Case Filing System for the UnitedStates Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas./s/ Christopher D. PorterBy: Christopher D. PorterCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 6 of 6EXHIBIT ACase 24-90575 Document 296-1 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 31IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB, et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))Jointly AdministeredDebtors. ))ORDER DENYING MOTION OF THE AD HOCCOMMITTEE OF HOLDERS OF INTRUM AB NOTES DUE 2025TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASES PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1112(B) ANDFEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 1017(F)(1)(Related to Docket No. 27)This matter, having come before the Court upon the Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee ofHolders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) [Docket No. 27] (the “Motion toDismiss”); and this Court having considered the Debtors' Objection to the Motion of the Ad HocCommittee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (the “Objection”) andany other responses or objections to the Motion to Dismiss; and this Court having jurisdiction overthis matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and the Amended Standing Order; and this Court havingfound that this is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2); and this Court having foundthat it may enter a final order consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution; and thisCourt having found that the relief requested in the Objection is in the best interests of the Debtors'1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f2 32estates; and this Court having found that the Debtors' notice of the Objection and opportunity fora hearing on the Motion to Dismiss and Objection were appropriate and no other notice need beprovided; and this Court having reviewed the Motion to Dismiss and Objection and havingheard the statements in support of the relief requested therein at a hearing before this Court; andthis Court having determined that the legal and factual bases set forth in the Objectionestablish just cause for the relief granted herein; and upon all of the proceedings had beforethis Court; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is HEREBYORDERED THAT:1. The Motion to Dismiss is Denied for the reasons stated at the December 31, 2024 hearing.2. This Court retains exclusive jurisdiction and exclusive venue with respect to allmatters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.DAeucegmubste 0r 23,1 2, 0210294CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f2 3EXHIBIT BCase 24-90575 Document 296-2 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 135IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))(Jointly Administered)Debtors. ))ORDER (I) APPROVINGDISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND(II) CONFIRMING JOINT PREPACKAGED CHAPTER 11PLAN OF INTRUM AB AND ITS AFFILIATEDDEBTOR (FURTHER TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS)The above-captioned debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the“Debtors”), having:a. entered into that certain Lock-Up Agreement, dated as of July 10, 2024 (asamended and restated on August 15, 2024, and as further modified,supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time in accordance with itsterms, the “the Lock-Up Agreement”) and that certain Backstop Agreement,dated as of July 10, 2024, (as amended and restated on November 15, 2024 andas further modified, supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time inaccordance with its terms), setting out the terms of the backstop commitmentsprovided by the Backstop Providers to backstop the entirety of the issuance ofNew Money Notes (as may be further amended, restated, amended and restated,modified or supplemented from time to time in accordance with the termsthereof, the “Backstop Agreement”) which set forth the terms of a consensualfinancial restructuring of the Debtors;b. commenced, on October 17, 2024, a prepetition solicitation (the “Solicitation”)of votes on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of IntrumAB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (asthe same may be further amended, modified and supplemented from time totime, the “Plan”), by causing the transmittal, through their solicitation andballoting agent, Kroll Restructuring Administration LLC (“Kroll”), to theholders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of, among other things: (i) the1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these chapter 11 cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2102, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f1 133452Plan, (ii) the Disclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate (as the same may befurther amended, modified and supplemented from time to time, the“Disclosure Statement”), and (iii) the Ballots and Master Ballot to vote on thePlan (the “Ballots”), (iv) the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7];c. commenced on November 15, 2024 (the “Petition Date”), these chapter 11 cases(these “Chapter 11 Cases”) by filing voluntary petitions in the United StatesBankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court”or the “Court”) for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code(the “Bankruptcy Code”);d. Filed on November 15, 2024, the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7] (the “Solicitation Affidavit”);e. Filed, on November 16, 2024 the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 16] and theDisclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB andits Debtor Affiliate [Docket No. 17];f. Filed on November 16, 2024, the Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of ofthe Debtors' Chapter 11 Petitions and First Day Motions [Docket No. 14] (the“First Day Declaration”);g. Filed on November 17, 2024, the Declaration of Alex Orchowski of KrollRestructuring Administration LLC Regarding the Solicitation of Votes andTabulation of Ballots Case on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code [Docket No. 18] (the “Voting Declaration,” andtogether with the Plan, the Disclosure Statement, the Ballots, and theSolicitation Affidavit, the “Solicitation Materials”);h. obtained, on November 19, 2024, the Order(I) Scheduling a Combined Hearingon (A) Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and (B) Confirmation of the Plan,(II) Approving Solicitation Procedures and Form and Manner of Notice ofCommencement, Combined Hearing, and Objection Deadline, (III) FixingDeadline to Object to Disclosure Statement and Plan, (IV) Conditionally (A)Directing the United States Trustee Not to Convene Section 341 Meeting ofCreditors and (B) Waiving Requirement to File Statements of Financial Affairsand Schedules of Assets and Liabilities, and (V) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 71] (the “Scheduling Order”), which, among other things: (i)approved the prepetition solicitation and voting procedures, including theConfirmation Schedule (as defined therein); (ii) conditionally approved theDisclosure Statement and its use in the Solicitation; and (iii) scheduled theCombined Hearing on December 16, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing CentralCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f1 133453Time) to consider the final approval of the Disclosure Statement and theconfirmation of the Plan (the “Combined Hearing”);i. served, through Kroll, on November 20, 2025, on all known holders of Claimsand Interests, the U.S. Trustee and certain other parties in interest, the Noticeof: (I) Commencement of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Cases; (II) Hearing on theDisclosure Statement and Confirmation of the Plan, and (III) Certain ObjectionDeadlines (the “Combined Hearing Notice”) as evidence by the Affidavit ofService [Docket No. 160];j. caused, on November 25 and 27, 2024, the Combined Hearing Notice to bepublished in the New York Times (national and international editions) and theFinancial Times (international edition), as evidenced by the Certificate ofPublication [Docket No. 148];k. Filed and served, on December 10, 2024, the Plan Supplement for the Debtors'Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization [Docket 165];l. Filed on December 10, 2024, the Declaration of Jeffrey Kopa in Support ofConfirmation of the Joint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum ABand its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code [DocketNo. 155];m. Filed on December 14, 2024, the:i. Debtors' Memorandum of Law in Support of an Order: (I) Approving, on aFinal Basis, Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement; (II) Confirming theJoint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization; and (III) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 190] (the “Confirmation Brief”);ii. Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of Confirmation of the JointPrepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate.[Docket No. 189] (the “Confirmation Declaration”); andiii. Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and itsDebtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (FurtherTechnical Modifications) [Docket No. 191];n. Filed on December 18, 2024, the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Further Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 223];CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 3 4 o of f1 133454WHEREAS, the Court having, among other things:a. set December 12, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) as the deadlinefor Filing objection to the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and/orConfirmation2 of the Plan (the “Objection Deadline”);b. held, on December 16, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) [andcontinuing through December 17, 2024], the Combined Hearing;c. heard the statements, arguments, and any objections made at the CombinedHearing;d. reviewed the Disclosure Statement, the Plan, the Ballots, the Plan Supplement,the Confirmation Brief, the Confirmation Declaration, the SolicitationAffidavit, and the Voting Declaration;e. overruled (i) any and all objections to approval of the Disclosure Statement, thePlan, and Confirmation, except as otherwise stated or indicated on the record,and (ii) all statements and reservations of rights not consensually resolved orwithdrawn, unless otherwise indicated; andf. reviewed and taken judicial notice of all the papers and pleadings Filed(including any objections, statement, joinders, reservations of rights and otherresponses), all orders entered, and all evidence proffered or adduced and allarguments made at the hearings held before the Court during the pendency ofthese cases;NOW, THEREFORE, it appearing to the Bankruptcy Court that notice of theCombined Hearing and the opportunity for any party in interest to object to the DisclosureStatement and the Plan having been adequate and appropriate as to all parties affected or to beaffected by the Plan and the transactions contemplated thereby, and the legal and factual bases setforth in the documents Filed in support of approval of the Disclosure Statement and Confirmationand other evidence presented at the Combined Hearing establish just cause for the relief grantedherein; and after due deliberation thereon and good cause appearing therefor, the BankruptcyCourt makes and issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, and orders for thereasons stated on the record at the December 31, 2024 ruling on plan confirmation;2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have meanings given to them in the Plan and/or theDisclosure Statement. The rules of interpretation set forth in Article I.B of the Plan apply to this CombinedOrder.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 4 5 o of f1 133455I. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAWIT IS HEREBY FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT:A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.1. The findings and conclusions set forth herein and in the record of theCombined Hearing constitute the Bankruptcy Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law underRule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable herein by Bankruptcy Rules7052 and 9014. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact,or vice versa, they are adopted as such.B. Jurisdiction, Venue, Core Proceeding.2. This Court has jurisdiction over these Chapter 11 Cases pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334. Venue of these proceedings and the Chapter 11 Cases in this district is properpursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 157(b)(2) and this Court may enter a final order hereon under Article III of the United StatesConstitution.C. Eligibility for Relief.3. The Debtors were and continue to be entities eligible for relief under section109 of the Bankruptcy Code and the Debtors were and continue to be proper proponents of thePlan under section 1121(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.D. Commencement and Joint Administration of the Chapter 11 Cases.4. On the Petition Date, the Debtors commenced the Chapter 11 Cases. OnNovember 18, 2024, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 51] authorizing the jointadministration of the Chapter 11 Case in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 1015(b). The Debtorshave operated their businesses and managed their properties as debtors in possession pursuant toCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 5 6 o of f1 133456sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee, examiner, or statutory committeehas been appointed in these Chapter 11 Cases.E. Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement.5. The Disclosure Statement and the exhibits contained therein (i) containssufficient information of a kind necessary to satisfy the disclosure requirements of applicablenonbankruptcy laws, rules and regulations, including the Securities Act; and (ii) contains“adequate information” as such term is defined in section 1125(a)(1) and used in section1126(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, with respect to the Debtors, the Plan and the transactionscontemplated therein. The Filing of the Disclosure Statement satisfied Bankruptcy Rule 3016(b).The injunction, release, and exculpation provisions in the Plan and the Disclosure Statementdescribe, in bold font and with specific and conspicuous language, all acts to be enjoined andidentify the Entities that will be subject to the injunction, thereby satisfying Bankruptcy Rule3016(c).F. Solicitation.6. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, the Solicitationand the transmittal and service of the Solicitation Materials were: (i) timely, adequate, appropriate,and sufficient under the circumstances; and (ii) in compliance with sections 1125(g) and 1126(b)of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules 3017 and 3018, the applicable Local Bankruptcy Rules,the Scheduling Order and all applicable nonbankruptcy rules, laws, and regulations applicable tothe Solicitation, including the registration requirements under the Securities Act. The SolicitationMaterials, including the Ballots and the Opt Out Form (as defined below), adequately informedthe holders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of the procedures and deadline for completingand submitting the Ballots.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 6 7 o of f1 1334577. The Debtors served the Combined Hearing Notice on the entire creditormatrix and served the Opt Out Form on all Non-Voting Classes. The Combined Hearing Noticeadequately informed Holders of Claims or Interests of critical information regarding voting on (ifapplicable) and objecting to the Plan, including deadlines and the inclusion of release, exculpation,and injunction provisions in the Plan, and adequately summarized the terms of the Third-PartyRelease. Further, because the form enabling stakeholders to opt out of the Third-Party Release (the“Opt Out Form”) was included in both the Ballots and the Opt Out Form, every known stakeholder,including unimpaired creditors was provided with the means by which the stakeholders could optout of the Third-Party Release. No further notice is required. The period for voting on the Planprovided a reasonable and sufficient period of time and the manner of such solicitation was anappropriate process allowing for such holders to make an informed decision.G. Tabulation.8. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, (i) the holders ofClaims in Class 3 (RCF Claims) and Class 5 (Notes Claims) are Impaired under the Plan(collectively, the “Voting Classes”) and have voted to accept the Plan in the numbers and amountsrequired by section 1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and (ii) no Class that was entitled to vote on thePlan voted to reject the Plan. All procedures used to tabulate the votes on the Plan were in goodfaith, fair, reasonable, and conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of theBankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, the Disclosure Statement, theScheduling Order, and all other applicable nonbankruptcy laws, rules, and regulations.H. Plan Supplement.9. On December 10, 2024, the Debtors Filed the Plan Supplement with theCourt. The Plan Supplement (including as subsequently modified, supplemented, or otherwiseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 7 8 o of f1 133458amended pursuant to a filing with the Court), complies with the terms of the Plan, and the Debtorsprovided good and proper notice of the filing in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, theBankruptcy Rules, the Scheduling Order, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases.All documents included in the Plan Supplement are integral to, part of, and incorporated byreference into the Plan. No other or further notice is or will be required with respect to the PlanSupplement. Subject to the terms of the Plan and the Lock-Up Agreement, and only consistenttherewith, the Debtors reserve the right to alter, amend, update, or modify the Plan Supplementand any of the documents contained therein or related thereto, in accordance with the Plan, on orbefore the Effective Date.I. Modifications to the Plan.10. Pursuant to section 1127 of the Bankruptcy Code, the modifications to thePlan described or set forth in this Combined Order constitute technical or clarifying changes,changes with respect to particular Claims by agreement with holders of such Claims, ormodifications that do not otherwise materially and adversely affect or change the treatment of anyother Claim or Interest under the Plan. These modifications are consistent with the disclosurespreviously made pursuant to the Disclosure Statement and Solicitation Materials, and notice ofthese modifications was adequate and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the Chapter11 Cases. In accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 3019, these modifications do not require additionaldisclosure under section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code or the resolicitation of votes under section1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and they do not require that holders of Claims or Interests beafforded an opportunity to change previously cast acceptances or rejections of the Plan.Accordingly, the Plan is properly before this Court and all votes cast with respect to the Plan priorto such modification shall be binding and shall apply with respect to the Plan.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 8 9 o of f1 133459J. Objections Overruled.11. Any resolution or disposition of objections to Confirmation explained orotherwise ruled upon by the Court on the record at the Confirmation Hearing is herebyincorporated by reference. All unresolved objections, statements, joinders, informal objections,and reservations of rights are hereby overruled on the merits.K. Burden of Proof.12. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have met their burden of provingthe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code by a preponderance of theevidence, the applicable evidentiary standard for Confirmation. Further, the Debtors have proventhe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) by clear and convincing evidence. Each witness whotestified on behalf of the Debtors in connection with the Confirmation Hearing was credible,reliable, and qualified to testify as to the topics addressed in his testimony.L. Compliance with the Requirements of Section 1129 of the BankruptcyCode.13. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of section 1129 of theBankruptcy Code as follows:a. Section 1129(a)(1) – Compliance of the Plan with Applicable Provisions of theBankruptcy Code.14. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122 and 1123, as required by section 1129(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.i. Section 1122 and 1123(a)(1) – Proper Classification.15. The classification of Claims and Interests under the Plan is proper under theBankruptcy Code. In accordance with sections 1122(a) and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code,Article III of the Plan provides for the separate classification of Claims and Interests at each Debtorinto Classes, based on differences in the legal nature or priority of such Claims and Interests (otherCaCsaes e2 42-49-09507557 5 D oDcoucmumenetn 2t 9266-32 FFiilleedd iinn TTXXSSBB oonn 1021//3113//2245 PPaaggee 91 0o fo 1f 3143510than Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, and Priority Tax Claims, which areaddressed in Article II of the Plan and Unimpaired, and are not required to be designated asseparate Classes in accordance with section 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code). Valid business,factual, and legal reasons exist for the separate classification of the various Classes of Claims andInterests created under the Plan, the classifications were not implemented for any improperpurpose, and the creation of such Classes does not unfairly discriminate between or among holdersof Claims or Interests.16. In accordance with section 1122(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, each Class ofClaims or Interests contains only Claims or Interests substantially similar to the other Claims orInterests within that Class. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of sections 1122(a),1122(b), and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Codeii. Section 1123(a)(2) – Specifications of Unimpaired Classes.17. Article III of the Plan specifies that Claims and Interests in the classesdeemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan. Holders of Intercompany Claims andIntercompany Interests are either Unimpaired and conclusively presumed to have accepted thePlan, or are Impaired and deemed to reject (the “Deemed Rejecting Classes”) the Plan, and, ineither event, are not entitled to vote to accept or reject the Plan. In addition, Article II of the Planspecifies that Administrative Claims and Priority Tax Claims are Unimpaired, although the Plandoes not classify these Claims. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 101 o of f1 1334511iii. Section 1123(a)(3) – Specification of Treatment of Voting Classes18. Article III.B of the Plan specifies the treatment of each Voting Class underthe Plan – namely, Class 3 and Class 5. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code.iv. Section 1123(a)(4) – No Discrimination.19. Article III of the Plan provides the same treatment to each Claim or Interestin any particular Class, as the case may be, unless the holder of a particular Claim or Interest hasagreed to a less favorable treatment with respect to such Claim or Interest. Accordingly, the Plansatisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code.v. Section 1123(a)(5) – Adequate Means for Plan Implementation.20. The Plan and the various documents included in the Plan Supplementprovide adequate and proper means for the Plan's execution and implementation, including: (a)the general settlement of Claims and Interests; (b) the restructuring of the Debtors' balance sheetand other financial transactions provided for by the Plan; (c) the consummation of the transactionscontemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement, the Restructuring Implementation Deed andthe Agreed Steps Plan and other documents Filed as part of the Plan Supplement; (d) the issuanceof Exchange Notes, the New Money Notes, and the Noteholder Ordinary Shares pursuant to thePlan; (e) the amendment of the Intercreditor Agreement; (f) the amendment of the FacilityAgreement; (g) the amendment of the Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement; (h) theconsummation of the Rights Offering in accordance with the Plan, Rights Offering Documentsand the Lock-Up Agreement; (i) the granting of all Liens and security interests granted orconfirmed (as applicable) pursuant to, or in connection with, the Facility Agreement, the ExchangeNotes Indenture, the New Money Notes Indenture, the amended Intercreditor Agreement and theCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 112 o of f1 1334512Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement pursuant to the New Security Documents (including anyLiens and security interests granted or confirmed (as applicable) on the Reorganized Debtors'assets); (j) the vesting of the assets of the Debtors' Estates in the Reorganized Debtors; (k) theconsummation of the corporate reorganization contemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement,the Agreed Steps Plan and the Master Reorganization Agreement (as defined in the RestructuringImplementation Deed); and (l) the execution, delivery, filing, or recording of all contracts,instruments, releases, and other agreements or documents in furtherance of the Plan. Accordingly,the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Codevi. Section 1123(a)(6) – Non-Voting Equity Securities.21. The Company's organizational documents in accordance with the SwedishCompanies Act, Ch. 4, Sec 5 and the Plan prohibit the issuance of non-voting securities as of theEffective Date to the extent required to comply with section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.vii. Section 1123(a)(7) – Directors, Officers, and Trustees.22. The manner of selection of any officer, director, or trustee (or any successorto and such officer, director, or trustee) of the Reorganized Debtors will be determined inaccordance with the existing organizational documents, which is consistent with the interests ofcreditors and equity holders and with public policy. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies therequirements of section 1123(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.b. Section 1123(b) – Discretionary Contents of the Plan23. The Plan contains various provisions that may be construed as discretionarybut not necessary for Confirmation under the Bankruptcy Code. Any such discretionary provisionCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 123 o of f1 1334513complies with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and is not inconsistent with the applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan satisfies section 1123(b).i. Section 1123(b)(1) – Impairment/Unimpairment of Any Class of Claims orInterests24. Article III of the Plan impairs or leaves unimpaired, as the case may be,each Class of Claims or Interests, as contemplated by section 1123(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.ii. Section 1123(b)(2) – Assumption and Rejection of Executory Contracts andUnexpired Leases25. Article V of the Plan provides for the assumption of the Debtors' ExecutoryContracts and Unexpired Leases as of the Effective Date unless such Executory Contract orUnexpired Lease: (a) is identified on the Rejected Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease List;(b) has been previously rejected by a Final Order; (c) is the subject of a motion to reject ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases that is pending on the Confirmation Date; or (4) is subject to amotion to reject an Executory Contract or Unexpired Lease pursuant to which the requestedeffective date of such rejection is after the Effective Date. Thus, the Plan satisfies section1123(b)(2).iii. Compromise and Settlement26. In accordance with section 1123(b)(3)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code andBankruptcy Rule 9019, and in consideration for the distributions and other benefits provided underthe Plan, the provisions of the Plan constitute a good-faith compromise of all Claims, Interests,and controversies relating to the contractual, legal, and subordination rights that all holders ofClaims or Interests may have with respect to any Allowed Claim or Interest or any distribution tobe made on account of such Allowed Claim or Interest. Such compromise and settlement is theproduct of extensive arm's-length, good faith negotiations that, in addition to the Plan, resulted inCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 134 o of f1 1334514the execution of the Lock-Up Agreement, which represents a fair and reasonable compromise ofall Claims, Interests, and controversies and entry into which represented a sound exercise of theDebtors' business judgment. Such compromise and settlement is fair, equitable, and reasonableand in the best interests of the Debtors and their Estates.27. The releases of the Debtors' directors and officers are an integral componentof the settlements and compromises embodied in the Plan. The Debtors' directors and officers: (a)made a substantial and valuable contribution to the Debtors' restructuring, including extensive preandpost-Petition Date negotiations with stakeholder groups, and ensured the uninterruptedoperation of the Debtors' businesses during the Chapter 11 Cases; (b) invested significant timeand effort to make the restructuring a success and maximize the value of the Debtors' businessesin a challenging operating environment; (c) attended and, in certain instances, testified atdepositions and Court hearings; (d) attended and participated in numerous stakeholder meetings,management meetings, and board meetings related to the restructuring; (e) are entitled toindemnification from the Debtors under applicable non-bankruptcy law, organizationaldocuments, and agreements; (f) invested significant time and effort in the preparation of the Lock-Up Agreement, the Plan, Disclosure Statement, all supporting analyses, and the numerous otherpleadings Filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, thereby ensuring the smooth administration of the Chapter11 Cases; and (g) are entitled to all other benefits under any employment contracts existing as ofthe Petition Date. Litigation by the Debtors or other Releasing Parties against the Debtors'directors and officers would be a distraction to the Debtors' business and restructuring and woulddecrease rather than increase the value of the estates. The releases of the Debtors' directors andofficers contained in the Plan have the consent of the Debtors and the Releasing Parties and are inthe best interests of the estates.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 145 o of f1 1334515iv. Debtor Release28. The releases of claims and Causes of Action by the Debtors, ReorganizedDebtors, and their Estates described in Article VIII.C of the Plan in accordance with section1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Debtor Release”) represent a valid exercise of the Debtors'business judgment under Bankruptcy Rule 9019. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuitof any such claims against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates' variousconstituencies because the costs involved would outweigh any potential benefit from pursuingsuch claims. The Debtor Release is fair and equitable and complies with the absolute priority rule.29. The Debtor Release is (a) an integral part of the Plan, and a component ofthe comprehensive settlement implemented under the Plan; (b) in exchange for the good andvaluable consideration provided by the Released Parties; (c) a good faith settlement andcompromise of the claims and Causes of Action released by the Debtor Release; (d) materiallybeneficial to, and in the best interests of, the Debtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and isimportant to the overall objectives of the Plan to finally resolve certain Claims among or againstcertain parties in interest in the Chapter 11 Cases; (e) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (f) given andmade after due notice and opportunity for hearing; and (g) a bar to any Debtor asserting any claimor Cause of Action released by the Debtor Release against any of the Released Parties. Theprobability of success in litigation with respect to the released claims and Causes of Action, whenweighed against the costs, supports the Debtor Release. With respect to each of these potentialCauses of Action, the parties could assert colorable defenses and the probability of success isuncertain. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuit of any such claims or Causes ofAction against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates or the Debtors' variousCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 156 o of f1 1334516constituencies because the costs involved would likely outweigh any potential benefit frompursuing such claims or Causes of Action30. Holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote have overwhelmingly votedin favor of the Plan, including the Debtor Release. The Plan, including the Debtor Release, wasnegotiated before and after the Petition Date by sophisticated parties represented by able counseland advisors, including the Consenting Creditors. The Debtor Release is therefore the result of ahard fought and arm's-length negotiation process conducted in good faith.31. The Debtor Release appropriately offers protection to parties thatparticipated in the Debtors' restructuring process, including the Consenting Creditors, whoseparticipation in the Chapter 11 Cases is critical to the Debtors' successful emergence frombankruptcy. Specifically, the Released Parties, including the Consenting Creditors, madesignificant concessions and contributions to the Chapter 11 Cases, including, entering into theLock-Up Agreement and related agreements, supporting the Plan and the Chapter 11 Cases, andwaiving or agreeing to impair substantial rights and Claims against the Debtors under the Plan (aspart of the compromises composing the settlement underlying the revised Plan) in order tofacilitate a consensual reorganization and the Debtors' emergence from chapter 11. The DebtorRelease for the Debtors' directors and officers is appropriate because the Debtors' directors andofficers share an identity of interest with the Debtors and, as previously stated, supported and madesubstantial contributions to the success of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Cases, and operation of theDebtors' business during the Chapter 11 Cases, actively participated in meetings, negotiations, andimplementation during the Chapter 11 Cases, and have provided other valuable consideration tothe Debtors to facilitate the Debtors' successful reorganization and continued operation.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 167 o of f1 133451732. The scope of the Debtor Release is appropriately tailored under the factsand circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases. In light of, among other things, the value provided bythe Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and the critical nature of the Debtor Release to thePlan, the Debtor Release is appropriate.v. Release by Holders of Claims and Interests33. The release by the Releasing Parties (the “Third-Party Release”), set forthin Article VIII.D of the Plan, is an essential provision of the Plan. The Third-Party Release is: (a)consensual as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object or properly optout from the Third-Party Release; (b) within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334; (c) in exchange for the good and valuable consideration provided by theReleased Parties; (d) a good faith settlement and compromise of the claims and Causes of Actionreleased by the Third-Party Release; (e) materially beneficial to, and in the best interests of, theDebtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and is important to the overall objectives of the Planto finally resolve certain Claims among or against certain parties in interest in the Chapter 11Cases; (f) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (g) given and made after due notice and opportunity forhearing; (h) appropriately narrow in scope given that it expressly excludes, among other things,any Cause of Action that is judicially determined by a Final Order to have constituted actual fraud,willful misconduct, or gross negligence; (i) a bar to any of the Releasing Parties asserting anyclaim or Cause of Action released by the Third-Party Release against any of the Released Parties;and (j) consistent with sections 105, 524, 1123, 1129, and 1141 and other applicable provisions ofthe Bankruptcy Code.34. The Third-Party Release is an integral part of the agreement embodied inthe Plan among the relevant parties in interest. Like the Debtor Release, the Third-Party ReleaseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 178 o of f1 1334518facilitated participation in both the Debtors' Plan and the chapter 11 process generally. The Third-Party Release is instrumental to the Plan and was critical in incentivizing parties to support thePlan and preventing significant and time-consuming litigation regarding the parties' respectiverights and interests. The Third-Party Release was a core negotiation point in connection with thePlan and instrumental in developing the Plan that maximized value for all of the Debtors'stakeholders and kept the Debtors intact as a going concern. As such, the Third-Party Releaseappropriately offers certain protections to parties who constructively participated in the Debtors'restructuring process—including the Consenting Creditors (as set forth above)—by, among otherthings, facilitating the negotiation and consummation of the Plan, supporting the Plan and, in thecase of the Backstop Providers, committing to provide new capital to facilitate the Debtors'emergence from chapter 11. Specifically, the Notes Ad Hoc Group proposed and negotiated thepari passu transaction that is the basis of the restructuring proposed under the Plan and provideda much-needed deleveraging to the Debtors' business while taking a discount on their Claims (inexchange for other consideration).35. Furthermore, the Third-Party Release is consensual as to all parties ininterest, including all Releasing Parties, and such parties in interest were provided notice of thechapter 11 proceedings, the Plan, the deadline to object to confirmation of the Plan, and theCombined Hearing and were properly informed that all holders of Claims against or Interests inthe Debtors that did not file an objection with the Court in the Chapter 11 Cases that included anexpress objection to the inclusion of such holder as a Releasing Party under the provisionscontained in Article VIII of the Plan would be deemed to have expressly, unconditionally,generally, individually, and collectively consented to the release and discharge of all claims andCauses of Action against the Debtors and the Released Parties. Additionally, the release provisionsCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 189 o of f1 1334519of the Plan were conspicuous, emphasized with boldface type in the Plan, the DisclosureStatement, the Ballots, and the applicable notices. Except as set forth in the Plan, all ReleasingParties were properly informed that unless they (a) checked the “opt out” box on the applicableBallot or opt-out form and returned the same in advance of the Voting Deadline, as applicable, or(b) timely Filed an objection to the releases contained in the Plan that was not resolved beforeentry of this Confirmation Order, they would be deemed to have expressly consented to the releaseof all Claims and Causes of Action against the Released Parties.36. The Ballots sent to all holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote, aswell as the notice of the Combined Hearing sent to all known parties in interest (including thosenot entitled to vote on the Plan), unambiguously provided in bold letters that the Third-PartyRelease was contained in the Plan.37. The scope of the Third-Party Release is appropriately tailored under thefacts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases, and parties in interest received due and adequatenotice of the Third-Party Release. Among other things, the Plan provides appropriate and specificdisclosure with respect to the claims and Causes of Action that are subject to the Third-PartyRelease, and no other disclosure is necessary. The Debtors, as evidenced by the VotingDeclaration and Certificate of Publication, including by providing actual notice to all knownparties in interest, including all known holders of Claims against, and Interests in, any Debtor andpublishing notice in international and national publications for the benefit of unknown parties ininterest, provided sufficient notice of the Third-Party Release, and no further or other notice isnecessary. The Third-Party Release is designed to provide finality for the Debtors, theReorganized Debtors and the Released Parties regarding the parties' respective obligations underthe Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary, anyparty who timely opted-out of the Third-Party Release is not bound by the Third-PartyRelease.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 290 o of f1 133452038. The Third-Party Release is specific in language, integral to the Plan, andgiven for substantial consideration. The Releasing Parties were given due and adequate notice ofthe Third-Party Release, and thus the Third-Party Release is consensual under controllingprecedent as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object. In light of,among other things, the value provided by the Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and theconsensual and critical nature of the Third-Party Release to the Plan, the Third-Party Release isappropriatevi. Exculpation.39. The exculpation described in Article VIII.E of the Plan (the “Exculpation”)is appropriate under applicable law, including In re Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P., 48 F. 4th 419(5th Cir. 2022), because it was supported by proper evidence, proposed in good faith, wasformulated following extensive good-faith, arm's-length negotiations with key constituents, and isappropriately limited in scope.40. No Entity or Person may commence or continue any action, employ anyprocess, or take any other act to pursue, collect, recover or offset any Claim, Interest, debt,obligation, or Cause of Action relating or reasonably likely to relate to any act or commission inconnection with, relating to, or arising out of a Covered Matter (including one that alleges theactual fraud, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of a Covered Entity), unless expresslyauthorized by the Bankruptcy Court after (1) it determines, after a notice and a hearing, such Claim,Interest, debt, obligation, or Cause of Action is colorable and (2) it specifically authorizes suchEntity or Person to bring such Claim or Cause of Action. The Bankruptcy Court shall have soleand exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether any such Claim, Interest, debt, obligation or Causeof Action is colorable and, only to the extent legally permissible and as provided for in Article XI,CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 201 o of f1 1334521shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate such underlying colorable Claim, Interest, debt, obligation, orCause of Action.vii. Injunction.41. The injunction provisions set forth in Article VIII.F of the Plan are essentialto the Plan and are necessary to implement the Plan and to preserve and enforce the discharge,Debtor Release, the Third-Party Release, and the Exculpation provisions in Article VIII of thePlan. The injunction provisions are appropriately tailored to achieve those purposes.viii. Preservation of Claims and Causes of Action.42. Article IV.L of the Plan appropriately provides for the preservation by theDebtors of certain Causes of Action in accordance with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Causes of Action not released by the Debtors or exculpated under the Plan will be retained by theReorganized Debtors as provided by the Plan. The Plan is sufficiently specific with respect to theCauses of Action to be retained by the Debtors, and the Plan and Plan Supplement providemeaningful disclosure with respect to the potential Causes of Action that the Debtors may retain,and all parties in interest received adequate notice with respect to such retained Causes of Action.The provisions regarding Causes of Action in the Plan are appropriate and in the best interests ofthe Debtors, their respective Estates, and holders of Claims or Interests. For the avoidance of anydoubt, Causes of Action released or exculpated under the Plan will not be retained by theReorganized Debtors.c. Section 1123(d) – Cure of Defaults43. Article V.D of the Plan provides for the satisfaction of Cure Claimsassociated with each Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease to be assumed in accordance withsection 365(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. Any monetary defaults under each assumed ExecutoryCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 212 o of f1 1334522Contract or Unexpired Lease shall be satisfied, pursuant to section 365(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode, by payment of the default amount in Cash on the Effective Date, subject to the limitationsdescribed in Article V.D of the Plan, or on such other terms as the parties to such ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases may otherwise agree. Any Disputed Cure Amounts will bedetermined in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article V.D of the Plan, and applicablebankruptcy and nonbankruptcy law. As such, the Plan provides that the Debtors will Cure, orprovide adequate assurance that the Debtors will promptly Cure, defaults with respect to assumedExecutory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in accordance with section 365(b)(1) of theBankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan complies with section 1123(d) of the Bankruptcy Code.d. Section 1129(a)(2) – Compliance of the Debtors and Others with the ApplicableProvisions of the Bankruptcy Code.44. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have complied with all applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code as required by section 1129(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, and 1128, and Bankruptcy Rules 3017, 3018,and 3019.e. Section 1129(a)(3) – Proposal of Plan in Good Faith.45. The Debtors have proposed the Plan in good faith, in accordance with theBankruptcy Code requirements, and not by any means forbidden by law. In determining that thePlan has been proposed in good faith, the Court has examined the totality of the circumstancesfiling of the Chapter 11 Cases, including the formation of Intrum AB of Texas LLC (“IntrumTexas”), the Plan itself, and the process leading to its formulation. The Debtors' good faith isevident from the facts and record of the Chapter 11 Cases, the Disclosure Statement, and the recordof the Combined Hearing and other proceedings held in the Chapter 11 CasesCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 223 o of f1 133452346. The Plan (including the Plan Supplement and all other documents necessaryto effectuate the Plan) is the product of good faith, arm's-length negotiations by and among theDebtors, the Debtors' directors and officers and the Debtors' key stakeholders, including theConsenting Creditors and each of their respective professionals. The Plan itself and the processleading to its formulation provide independent evidence of the Debtors' and such other parties'good faith, serve the public interest, and assure fair treatment of holders of Claims or Interests.Consistent with the overriding purpose of chapter 11, the Debtors Filed the Chapter 11 Cases withthe belief that the Debtors were in need of reorganization and the Plan was negotiated and proposedwith the intention of accomplishing a successful reorganization and maximizing stakeholder value,and for no ulterior purpose. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(3) of the BankruptcyCode are satisfied.f. Section 1129(a)(4) – Court Approval of Certain Payments as Reasonable.47. Any payment made or to be made by the Debtors, or by a person issuingsecurities or acquiring property under the Plan, for services or costs and expenses in connectionwith the Chapter 11 Cases, or in connection with the Plan and incident to the Chapter 11 Cases,has been approved by, or is subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable. Accordingly, thePlan satisfies the requirements of section 1129(a)(4).g. Section 1129(a)(5)—Disclosure of Directors and Officers and Consistency with theInterests of Creditors and Public Policy.48. The identities of or process for appointment of the Reorganized Debtors'directors and officers proposed to serve after the Effective Date were disclosed in the PlanSupplement in advance of the Combined Hearing. Accordingly, the Debtors have satisfied therequirements of section 1129(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 234 o of f1 1334524h. Section 1129(a)(6)—Rate Changes.49. The Plan does not contain any rate changes subject to the jurisdiction of anygovernmental regulatory commission and therefore will not require governmental regulatoryapproval. Therefore, section 1129(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code does not apply to the Plan.i. Section 1129(a)(7)—Best Interests of Holders of Claims and Interests.50. The liquidation analysis attached as Exhibit D to the Disclosure Statementand the other evidence in support of the Plan that was proffered or adduced at the CombinedHearing, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases are (a) reasonable, persuasive,credible, and accurate as of the dates such analysis or evidence was prepared, presented orproffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c) have not beencontroverted by other evidence; and (d) establish that each holder of Allowed Claims or Interestsin each Class will recover as much or more value under the Plan on account of such Claim orInterest, as of the Effective Date, than the amount such holder would receive if the Debtors wereliquidated on the Effective Date under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or has accepted the Plan.As a result, the Debtors have demonstrated that the Plan is in the best interests of their creditorsand equity holders and the requirements of section 1129(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.j. Section 1129(a)(8)—Conclusive Presumption of Acceptance by UnimpairedClasses; Acceptance of the Plan by Certain Voting Classes.51. The classes deemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan andare deemed to have accepted the Plan pursuant to section 1126(f) of the Bankruptcy Code. EachVoting Class voted to accept the Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, however, even if section1129(a)(8) has not been satisfied with respect to all of the Debtors, the Plan is confirmable becausethe Plan does not discriminate unfairly and is fair and equitable with respect to the Voting Classesand thus satisfies section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code with respect to such Classes as describedCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 245 o of f1 1334525further below. As a result, the requirements of section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code are alsosatisfied.k. Section 1129(a)(9)—Treatment of Claims Entitled to Priority Pursuant to Section507(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.52. The treatment of Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, andPriority Tax Claims under Article II of the Plan satisfies the requirements of, and complies in allrespects with, section 1129(a)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.l. Section 1129(a)(10)—Acceptance by at Least One Voting Class.53. As set forth in the Voting Declaration, all Voting Classes overwhelminglyvoted to accept the Plan. As such, there is at least one Voting Class that has accepted the Plan,determined without including any acceptance of the Plan by any insider (as defined by theBankruptcy Code), for each Debtor. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(10) of theBankruptcy Code are satisfied.m. Section 1129(a)(11)—Feasibility of the Plan.54. The Plan satisfies section 1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code. Thefinancial projections attached to the Disclosure Statement as Exhibit D and the other evidencesupporting the Plan proffered or adduced by the Debtors at or before the Combined Hearing: (a)is reasonable, persuasive, credible, and accurate as of the dates such evidence was prepared,presented, or proffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c)has not been controverted by other persuasive evidence; (d) establishes that the Plan is feasibleand Confirmation of the Plan is not likely to be followed by liquidation or the need for furtherfinancial reorganization; (e) establishes that the Debtors will have sufficient funds available tomeet their obligations under the Plan and in the ordinary course of business—including sufficientamounts of Cash to reasonably ensure payment of Allowed Claims that will receive CashCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 256 o of f1 1334526distributions pursuant to the terms of the Plan and other Cash payments required under the Plan;and (f) establishes that the Debtors or the Reorganized Debtors, as applicable, will have thefinancial wherewithal to pay any Claims that accrue, become payable, or are allowed by FinalOrder following the Effective Date. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code.n. Section 1129(a)(12)—Payment of Statutory Fees.55. Article XII.C of the Plan provides that all fees payable pursuant to section1930(a) of the Judicial Code, as determined by the Court at the Confirmation Hearing inaccordance with section 1128 of the Bankruptcy Code, will be paid by each of the applicableReorganized Debtors for each quarter (including any fraction of a quarter) until the Chapter 11Cases are converted, dismissed, or closed, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, the Plan satisfiesthe requirements of section 1129(a)(12) of the Bankruptcy Code.o. Section 1129(a)(13)—Retiree Benefits.56. Pursuant to section 1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code, and as provided inArticle IV.K of the Plan, the Reorganized Debtors will continue to pay all obligations on accountof retiree benefits (as such term is used in section 1114 of the Bankruptcy Code) on and after theEffective Date in accordance with applicable law. As a result, the requirements of section1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.p. Sections 1129(a)(14), (15), and (16)—Domestic Support Obligations, Individuals,and Nonprofit Corporations.57. The Debtors do not owe any domestic support obligations, are notindividuals, and are not nonprofit corporations. Therefore, sections 1129(a)(14), 1129(a)(15), and1129(a)(16) of the Bankruptcy Code do not apply to the Chapter 11 Cases.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 267 o of f1 1334527q. Section 1129(b)—Confirmation of the Plan Over Nonacceptance of VotingClasses.58. No Classes rejected the Plan, and section 1129(b) is not applicable here,but even if it were, the Plan may be confirmed pursuant to section 1129(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode because the Plan is fair and equitable with respect to the Deemed Rejecting Classes. ThePlan has been proposed in good faith, is reasonable, and meets the requirements and all VotingClasses have voted to accept the Plan. The treatment of Intercompany Claims and IntercompanyInterests under the Plan provides for administrative convenience does not constitute a distributionunder the Plan on account of suc

Headlines: - Mubadala Overtakes PIF as World's Top Wealth Fund Spender- Neom's Air Taxi Partner Volocopter Files for Insolvency- Adnoc to Boost UAE Economy with $54 Billion Investment Plan

As 2024 comes to an end, Doug Hoyes and Ted Michalos revisit their past predictions to see what they nailed—and what surprised them. They cover everything from inflation and insolvency to unemployment and real estate and, using the latest economic data and trends, share their evidence-based predictions for 2025. Do you agree with Doug and Ted, or do you have a different perspective to share? Let us know in the comments! Timestamps: (2:00) – Doug and Ted's 2024 predictions on inflation (6:00) – Insolvency trends and forecasts from 2024 (10:00) – Returning to pre-pandemic insolvency numbers and trending upward (10:50) – Discussion on unemployment rates (14:20) – A closer look at rising credit card debt (15:15) – Real estate, homeownership, and pre-construction agreements (19:00) – Is Canada in a recession? Examining GDP trends (23:00) – Doug's take: Why Canada is already in a recession (24:00) – Predictions for 2025 in key economic areas (26:00) – Wildcard topic: Should Canada be concerned about tariffs? (27:00) – Insolvency Predictions for 2025 Learn more from Hoyes Michalos: Debt Repayment Calculator Debt To Income Ratio Calculator FREE Credit Rebuilding Course Sign Up for Our Newsletter HERE Hoyes Michalos YouTube Channel Hoyes Michalos Instagram Hoyes Michalos Facebook Hoyes Michalos TikTok Hoyes Michalos Twitter (X) Hoyes Michalos LinkedIn Straight Talk on Your Money by Doug Hoyes Find a Hoyes Michalos Office in Your Area Here Disclaimer: The information provided in the Debt Free in 30 Podcast is for entertainment and informational purposes only and is not intended as personal financial advice. Individual financial situations vary and may require personalized advice from a qualified financial advisor. Always consult with a financial professional. The views expressed in this episode do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Hoyes, Michalos & Associates, or any other affiliated organizations. We do not endorse or guarantee the effectiveness of any specific financial institutions or strategies discussed.

How do you balance financial well-being with the responsibility of supporting aging parents? This important episode tackles the complexities of financial caregiving, highlighting the challenges of the "sandwich generation"—those caring for both children and elderly parents—all while managing personal debt. Doug and Ted cover the pros and cons, from government benefits to taxes to practical steps for initiating conversations with your parents; you'll learn essential tools and strategies for confidently navigating financial caregiving. Timestamps: (0:40) – What's the Average Age for Insolvency? (2:00) – Understanding the “Sandwich” Generation: Caught Between Debt and Aging Parents (5:00) – Financial Caregiving Explained: What Does It Entail? (8:00) – Should You Prioritize Paying Off Debt or Helping Your Parents? (9:45) – Sidebar: Why Ted Hates Reverse Mortgages (14:00) – Government and Community Benefits for Caregivers and Their Aging Parents (16:00) – The Impacts and Downsides of Financial Caregiving (19:20) – Why Filing Taxes Is Crucial for Caregivers (22:30) – Making Tough Decisions on Behalf of Your Parents (24:00) – Practical Advice: Preparing for Financial Caregiving (28:00) – How to Start the Money Conversation with Your Parents   Learn more from Hoyes Michalos: Cosigned Debt in a Consumer Proposal Power of Attorney – Can I Deal With My Parents Debts? Debt Repayment Calculator Debt To Income Ratio Calculator FREE Credit Rebuilding Course Sign Up for Our Newsletter HERE Hoyes Michalos YouTube Channel Hoyes Michalos Instagram Hoyes Michalos Facebook Hoyes Michalos TikTok Hoyes Michalos Twitter (X) Hoyes Michalos LinkedIn Straight Talk on Your Money by Doug Hoyes Find a Hoyes Michalos Office in Your Area Here Disclaimer: The information provided in the Debt Free in 30 Podcast is for entertainment and informational purposes only and is not intended as personal financial advice. Individual financial situations vary and may require personalized advice from a qualified financial advisor. Always consult with a financial professional. The views expressed in this episode do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Hoyes, Michalos & Associates, or any other affiliated organizations. We do not endorse or guarantee the effectiveness of any specific financial institutions or strategies discussed.  

This Day in Legal History: Teddy Roosevelt, Trust BusterOn December 3, 1901, President Theodore Roosevelt delivered his first State of the Union address, where he boldly called for the dissolution of powerful business trusts. These trusts, large corporate conglomerates dominating key sectors like railroads, oil, and steel, were widely criticized for stifling competition and exploiting workers. Roosevelt argued that unchecked corporate power threatened the economic and political freedoms of ordinary Americans. This speech marked the beginning of Roosevelt's aggressive antitrust campaign, which sought to enforce the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890—a law that had been largely dormant due to weak enforcement. During his presidency, Roosevelt initiated lawsuits against 44 trusts, targeting entities like the Northern Securities Company, a massive railroad monopoly, and Standard Oil. His administration's victory in the 1904 Northern Securities case was a landmark decision, affirming the federal government's authority to regulate monopolies. Roosevelt's efforts earned him the nickname "Trust Buster," though he preferred to describe his approach as ensuring a "square deal" for all, rather than dismantling every large corporation indiscriminately. The 1901 address and the actions that followed redefined the federal government's role in economic regulation, setting a precedent for progressive reforms. Roosevelt's trust-busting legacy laid the groundwork for future antitrust policies and established the President as a central figure in addressing economic inequality and corporate overreach.Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell sharply criticized two federal judges for reversing their retirement plans, a move he claims prevents Donald Trump from filling their vacancies when he returns to the White House. Referring to the judges as "partisan Democrat district judges," McConnell accused them of undermining the electoral mandate by remaining active after the November election results. Though he didn't name them, McConnell's comments were aimed at U.S. District Judges Algenon Marbley and Max Cogburn, appointees of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, respectively, who had previously indicated they would take senior status—a semi-retirement—pending Senate confirmation of successors. McConnell labeled the judges' decisions as partisan interference, urging the incoming administration to consider recusal options for them. He also claimed their actions reflect a “political finger on the scale,” though no historical precedent or formal violation underpins his accusations. Notably, judicial replacements for both seats faced delays during Biden's administration due to Senate procedural traditions and partisan gridlock, complicating the nomination process.McConnell's critique appears selective, given his own record of partisanship in judicial confirmations. Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin countered by highlighting McConnell's refusal to advance Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination during Obama's presidency—a move widely criticized as unprecedented gamesmanship. McConnell also criticized appellate judges who announced retirements contingent on successor confirmations, calling potential reversals "unprecedented," despite the lack of ethical violations or rule breaches. Critics argue McConnell's remarks exemplify a strategic focus on judiciary control rather than a genuine concern for ethics or impartiality.McConnell Blasts Judges Who Reversed Retirement Post-Trump WinElon Musk's $56 billion Tesla compensation package was invalidated by Delaware Chancery Court Judge Kathaleen McCormick, marking a significant legal setback for the billionaire. The judge ruled that Tesla's board had been improperly influenced by Musk when it approved the plan in 2018, describing the arrangement as excessive and criticizing the board for capitulating to Musk's demands. This decision upheld her earlier January ruling, rejecting arguments from Musk and Tesla shareholders who had voted to revive the package.The ruling not only voids the record-setting payout but also requires Tesla's board to propose a new compensation plan, though the company has announced plans to appeal. Musk, the world's richest person, reacted by labeling the decision “absolute corruption” on his social media platform, X. The court also awarded $345 million in attorney fees to the shareholder lawyers who challenged the package, marking one of the largest legal payouts in U.S. shareholder litigation.The compensation case stemmed from a lawsuit alleging that Tesla's board failed to act independently and allowed Musk to orchestrate the details of his pay package. McCormick dismissed arguments that shareholder approval could override her judicial findings, emphasizing the limits of post-trial actions in reversing decisions. Tesla shares fell after the ruling, and the decision could prompt further scrutiny of corporate governance at the company.Musk's Multibillion-Dollar Tesla Payout Gutted by Delaware JudgeDelaware judge rejects Musk's $56 billion Tesla pay - again | ReutersCalifornia Governor Gavin Newsom has proposed a $25 million legal fund to prepare for potential conflicts with President-elect Donald Trump's administration. Announced during a special legislative session, the fund aims to bolster the state's ability to challenge federal policies on issues like reproductive rights, immigration, and environmental protection. Newsom emphasized that the initiative seeks to protect critical state resources, such as disaster relief and health care, while safeguarding civil rights and reproductive health care access.The funding would enable the California Department of Justice and other state agencies to swiftly respond to federal actions, with Attorney General Rob Bonta planning to expand staffing for legal battles. California has a history of such litigation, having spent $42 million during Trump's first term and filing over 120 lawsuits against his administration. Newsom cited past successes in securing funding and reversing federal actions as evidence of the strategy's effectiveness.The proposal also aligns with new legislative measures to protect abortion rights, including access to medication and enforcement of the state's Reproductive Privacy Act. Newsom's office expects the budget measure to pass before Trump's inauguration on January 20, ensuring California's readiness to counter any federal policies that could impact the state's economy or public services.California governor proposes $25 million war chest for legal fights with Trump | ReutersMy column for Bloomberg this week tackles the looming funding crisis facing Social Security, one of America's most vital anti-poverty programs. Without intervention, the program will face a shortfall by 2035, jeopardizing benefits millions of Americans rely on. To avert this crisis, I propose two practical and politically feasible solutions: raising the cap on taxable income and expanding Social Security taxes to include investment income.Currently, income above $168,600 is exempt from Social Security taxes, creating a regressive structure where high earners contribute a smaller share of their total income. Eliminating or significantly increasing this cap would not only generate substantial revenue but also ensure a fairer tax burden. Public opinion overwhelmingly supports this approach, favoring tax adjustments over benefit cuts or increasing the retirement age.Beyond raising the cap, policymakers should modernize the tax base by including investment income such as capital gains, dividends, and interest. In 2024, Americans earned $3.7 trillion in investment income, much of it untaxed for Social Security purposes. Even modest taxation on this income, especially above high thresholds like $400,000, could secure the program's solvency while reflecting the realities of modern wealth generation.Opponents might argue that taxing investments could harm economic growth, but careful, incremental adjustments would likely have minimal impact on investor behavior. Acting now allows for gradual changes and avoids drastic measures later, ensuring Social Security continues to deliver on its promise of financial security for all contributors.Social Security Faces a Crisis, but Sound Tax Policy Can Help This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.minimumcomp.com/subscribe

The countercyclical practice area of restructuring and insolvency has experienced a hugely busy calendar year, with the volume of work not expected to dissipate anytime soon. With that is coming renewed interest from the emerging generation for such legal work, says one BigLaw partner. In this episode of The Lawyers Weekly Show, host Jerome Doraisamy speaks with Clayton Utz partner Maria O'Brien about her longstanding interest in restructuring and insolvency, how and why practising in this space feeds into one's sense of self as a lawyer, responding to various market conditions, and why corporate insolvency has “really taken off this year”. O'Brien also discusses how regulatory scrutiny and parliamentary inquiries are impacting the landscape, the sectors that are being hit hardest and why, the experience of lawyers in this space in recent times, why new lawyers are more interested in working in restructuring and insolvency, and how to ensure best practice for clients in such interesting yet challenging times. If you like this episode, show your support by  rating us or leaving a review on Apple Podcasts (The Lawyers Weekly Show) and by following Lawyers Weekly on social media: Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. If you have any questions about what you heard today, any topics of interest you have in mind, or if you'd like to lend your voice to the show, email editor@lawyersweekly.com.au for more insights!

Stephen Grootes speaks to Duncan McLeod, TechCentral's Founder and Editor, about South Africa's Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition, Parks Tau, appealing the Competition Tribunal's decision to block Vodacom's R13.2-billion deal to acquire a stake in Remgro's fibre businesses.    In other interviews on the Money Show, Ntlhane Makena, head of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Business Rescue practice at ENS talks about the surprising spike in company liquidations in October, following a notable decline in the first nine months of 2024.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Stephen Grootes speaks to Ntlhane Makena, head of the Insolvency, Restructuring and Business Rescue practice at ENS, about the surprising spike in company liquidations in October, following a notable decline in the first nine months of 2024.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is the Catchup on 3 Things by The Indian Express and I'm Flora Swain.Today is the 07th of November and here are the headlines.The Bandra police in Mumbai received a threatening call demanding Rs 50 lakh from Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan. The caller, who threatened to kill Khan, was identified as Faizan Khan from Raipur, Chhattisgarh. An FIR has been registered under sections related to extortion and criminal intimidation. Police teams have been dispatched to Raipur for his arrest. The call was made on Tuesday evening, and the investigation is ongoing.The Supreme Court of India ordered the liquidation of Jet Airways under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), overturning a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) decision that approved the transfer of ownership to the Jalan KalRock Consortium. The bench, led by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud ruled in favor of the lenders, including the State Bank of India. The consortium had proposed an Rs 4783 crore payment, but the liquidation order now takes precedence.The Goa government issued a clarification responding to criticism of its tourism infrastructure, including comparisons to international destinations like Sri Lanka. The Department of Tourism emphasized that Goa is a state within India, and comparing it to foreign countries may give an inaccurate perspective. The clarification follows public discussions about the state's tourism sector and infrastructure, defending Goa's position while addressing concerns raised about its current tourism offerings.A Hindu temple priest in Brampton, Canada, has been suspended for spreading violent rhetoric during clashes between Khalistani supporters and other temple attendees. The incident, which occurred on November 3 at the Hindu Sabha temple, saw protestors carrying Khalistani flags clashing with attendees, leading to fistfights and pole strikes. Unverified videos circulating on social media show the altercations disrupting a consular event co-organized by the temple and the Indian Consulate.Chinese President Xi Jinping congratulated Donald Trump on his election victory, urging China and the US to improve dialogue and manage differences. Despite past tensions, including Trump labeling China as a “strategic rival,” Xi emphasized communication. Trump's administration had imposed tariffs on Chinese imports, a policy he has indicated will continue in his new term. Both nations are expected to navigate complex trade and diplomatic challenges as they continue to assert their global positions.This was the Catch Up on 3 Things by The Indian Express.

If Donald Trump is allowed to move forward with his plan for the economy, nonpartisan budget watchdog group “The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget” says it would push Social Security to insolvency three years earlier than expected and would cut benefits by nearly a third.  Between Trump's plans for mass deportations, tariffs and tax cuts, the Social Security program's trust fund would dry up by 2031  unless Congress refunds it. While Social Security is in trouble, Trump's plan would hasten its demise.We'll run it past Pulitzer Prize winning author and investigative journalist David Cay Johnston.The Mark Thompson Show 10/22/24Patreon subscribers are the backbone of the show! If you'd like to help, here's our Patreon Link:https://www.patreon.com/themarkthompsonshowMaybe you're more into PayPal.  https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=PVBS3R7KJXV24And you'll find everything on our website: https://www.themarkthompsonshow.com#DavidCayJohnston #Trump #TrumpEconomy #TrumpSocialSecurity #SocialSecurity #PresidentialElection #PresidentialPolitics #Election2024 #Politics #Political #PoliticalAnalysis #InvestigativeJournalist #Technology #Tuesday #JeffersonGraham

October 22, 2024 ~ Former President Donald Trump's plan for social security would have the fund run out of money within six years. Guy, Lloyd, and Jamie talk with Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget president Maya MacGuineas about his proposals, as well as Trump's and Kamala Harris' tax plans.

Hi Enjoy LISTEN TO SOLVE INSOLVENCY Subscribe, Unite & ACT as the ONLY PROVE THAT YOU WANT PEACE from October 18 Set up your alarm clock every day for 19.00 to Unlock God's most POWERFUL Unlimited Daily Miracles for YOU, your Friends, Family, Organizations, Leaders and Presidents UNITE all together & Pray 1 minute+ in #GlobalPrayersChain for Ultimate Global Peace by 2027: WATCH Today's 1161TH Most Powerful Summit in direct presence of God    • RESOLVING INSOLVENCY   IMMEDIATELY DONATE for your peace https://www.1gpb.net/en/donate

As Social Security's Old Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund approaches potential exhaustion in 2033, a critical debate emerges about how to address this looming crisis. Instead of across-the-board benefit reduction, an alternative approach proposes leveraging presidential discretion to protect the most vulnerable recipients. Andrew Biggs from American Enterprise Institute helps answer how we can balance legislative action and executive authority in addressing one of America's economic challenges.

Rugby podcasters Brett McKay and Harry Jones are back with the final Rugby Championship edition of their end-of-week offering, Games of the Week, coming after a weekend where the guys survived each other's close companies, and have emerged out the other side to explore the final weekend of Test rugby in the southern hemisphere for 2024. Plus, it's a return to the original Games of the Week format, with the guys pulling out the best games to watch in various competitions back underway, or in their final stages, around the rugby world. This week's Games of the Week: • Australia v New Zealand in Sydney • Argentina v South Africa in Santiago del Estero • URC: Bulls v Edinburgh in Pretoria • Premiership: Leicester v Bath at Welford Road • Top 14: Racing 92 v La Rochelle in Paris • NPC: North Harbour v Canterbury in Albany Brought to you by Chasing the Sun 2 available NOW on RugbyPass TV – head to rugbypass.tv and sign up for FREE, to watch wherever you are in the rugby world! Social media: #89Combo Twitter: https://twitter.com/89combo YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@8-9Combo Brett: https://twitter.com/BMcSport Harry: https://twitter.com/HaribaldiJones Make sure you SUBSCRIBE on Spotify! https://open.spotify.com/show/1BcKhb24YOtwQhKc0S3sDm Find Brett and Harry's written work on RugbyPass and The Roar: Brett: https://www.rugbypass.com/plus/contributor/brett-mckay/ Harry: https://www.theroar.com.au/author/haribaldi/ Music from Uppbeat: https://uppbeat.io/track/oakvale-of-albion/extreme Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

There were 238 corporate insolvencies in Q3 2024, up 60% compared to the same quarter in 2023, according to new figures published by Deloitte. This brings the total number of insolvencies in the first three quarters of 2024 to 650, up by 36% compared to the same period in 2023. Commenting on the latest statistics, James Anderson, Turnaround & Restructuring Partner, Deloitte Ireland, said: "In Deloitte's last quarterly update we forecasted that Ireland was on course for more than 800 insolvencies in 2024, but it is now likely that it will be closer to 900. At the current activity level, corporate insolvencies in 2024 are on track to be 30% greater than in 2023, with forecasted activity to be in line with 2017, which had 874 appointments. SMEs continue to be disproportionately affected, accounting for 98% of activity levels. The hospitality and retail sectors accounted for 28% of activity levels in 2024 both of which significantly increased from the same period in 2023. These stark figures reinforce how the cost of doing business in Ireland in recent years has significantly increased. More tailored supports and reliefs are required to support SMEs in Ireland." The increase in insolvencies year-to-date Q3 2024 is driven by Creditor's Voluntary Liquidation (CVL) activity, which saw a 38% increase compared with the same period last year. Nearly all insolvencies in Q3 2024 were SMEs (98%), which is the same as H1 2024 corporate insolvency figures. Small Companies Administrative Rescue Process (SCARP) There have been 9 SCARP appointments in Q3, bringing the total to 22 in 2024 and saving 272 jobs. The number of appointments is the same as 2023. Since its introduction, there have been 77 SCARP appointments. Anderson said: "I would encourage SMEs (and their advisors) to consider SCARP as a viable option to supporting businesses and saving jobs. The low number of companies using the process does not align with the positive impact and outcomes that the scheme has had." Sector focus As in previous periods, the wide-ranging services sector accounts for the highest proportion of corporate insolvencies by the end of Q4 2023 with 237 insolvencies, representing 36% of total insolvencies recorded in the first 9 months of the year. Within the services sector, financial services and holding companies account for the highest incidence of insolvencies with 76 so far in 2024. Other notable services sub-sectors were Technical and Professional Services with 41 Insolvencies, real estate with 30 insolvencies and Entertainment with 20 insolvencies. The hospitality sector continues to see significant increases in insolvencies - with 108 so far in 2024, which is 61% up from the same period in 2023 (67) and significantly higher than the same periods in 2021 and 2022 when there were just 26 hospitality insolvencies. This is likely due to similar trends seen throughout the year, including increased labour and energy costs, as well as the VAT rate at 13.5% and insurance costs. The remainder of the insolvencies were spread amongst the other sectors, with 74 in Retail, 67 in Construction, 33 in Manufacturing, 29 in Transport, 28 in IT, 19 in wholesale and the remainder in other business sectors. Regional focus Leinster had the highest number of insolvencies in 2024 to date with 504 (78% of all insolvencies), as expected. There were 82 (13%) in Munster, 55 (8%) in Connacht, and 9 in Ulster (Republic of Ireland only). Notes Industry Number of insolvencies in YTD Q3 2024 Construction 67 Hospitality 108 Manufacturing 33 IT & Other 28 Retail 74 Services 237 Other Business activities 55 Transport 29 Wholesale 19 Creditors' Voluntary Liquidation (CVLs) is a terminal insolvency procedure whereby the directors of a company instruct a Licensed Insolvency Practitioner to act as a liquidator to wind up the company's affairs because it has become insolvent and unable to continue to trade. Small Companies Administrative Rescue Process (SCARP) was introduced at the end of 2...

Curious about the secrets of thriving in the micromobility sector amidst geopolitical upheavals? This episode of RiskCellar promises to unravel the journey of Wiz's Mike Peregudov, who relocated from Russia to New York in early 2022 and successfully launched a micromobility business. Alongside sipping Phantom Proprietary Red wine and guava raw kombucha, we delve into the practicalities and hurdles of funding a startup through equity and debt, emphasizing the importance of operational precision and strategic financing. Ever wondered how to break into a highly regulated market like New York City? We dissect the complexities of navigating regulatory landscapes and using them as strategic barriers to fend off competitors. Mike shares insights into launching a subscription-based service for delivery bikes, a game-changer for immigrants and delivery workers, allowing access to essential transportation without the burden of credit scores. We also talk about innovative tech solutions to tackle theft and fraud, and the adventurous tales of our repossession team retrieving bikes from unexpected places. From wine tasting notes to policy debates on e-bike safety regulations, this episode covers it all. Enjoy light-hearted exchanges about fraternity stories and cooking mishaps, and get your weekly dose of industry updates with our Recall of the Week segment. Plus, stay tuned for a deep dive into the insurance industry's latest challenges and the intriguing intersection of health risks and legal battles involving everyday products. Join us for a dynamic blend of professional insights and engaging personal anecdotes that you won't want to miss! Timestamps 2:32 Today's wine (and kombucha): Bogle Phantom proprietary red 6:20 Introducing Mike and Whizz 9:51 The process of fundraising in 2022 for a micromoblity company 14:19 Biggest challenges in owning a business like Whizz in USA versus in Russia 17:36 Whizz's business model, market, and target customer 21:49 Marketing strategy for Whizz 25:24 The problem with tires 27:36 What surprised Mike about the USA after coming from Russia 30:17 Issues that arise when working in a highly regulated market like NY 32:32 What made Whizz successful when other competitors failed 34:38 One crazy story and one repo story that happened at Whizz 42:03 Mike's favorite city in the US so far 45:45 Ted Cruz Blocks Bipartisan Bill on E-Bike Battery Safety 51:09 Trojan condoms contain ' forever chemicals' , class action claims 54:16 Lloyd's CEO Neal extending prediction for the hard market 56:53 New York City's Biggest Taxi Insurer Is Insolvent 1:01:23 Recall of the week: AirJet and HydroJet spa pumps 1:03:11 True or false quiz Connect with RiskCellar: Website: https://www.riskcellar.com/ Mike Peregudov: Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mike-peregudov/ Personal Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/mike.peregudov/ business Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/getwhizz/ Brandon Schuh: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61552710523314 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/brandon-stephen-schuh/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/schuhpapa/ Nick Hartmann: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nickjhartmann/

Learn more about the guys: J Scott: https://linktr.ee/jscottinvestor Mauricio Rauld: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnPedp0WHxpIUWLTVhNN2kQ AJ Osborne:  https://www.ajosborne.com/ Kyle Wilson:  https://www.bardowninvestments.com/

High interest rates, escalating costs, and rising vacancy rates have taken a toll on real estate assets, particularly in the office sector, with buildings in key markets selling at significant discounts. At the same time, refinancing options have become increasingly elusive. How can those interested in acquiring distressed assets capitalize on current market conditions? In this episode, Jason DeJonker, partner in Seyfarth's Corporate department and chair of the firm's Restructuring & Insolvency practice, joins hosts Eric Greenberg and James O'Brien to discuss the process of buying distressed real estate, including initial best practices, key players, and opportunities to gain a competitive advantage.

Softest Continent, Kermit Thinking Man's Jordan Peterson, Saved By Twiddling Thumbing Climate Scientists, Oversixties New Powers when Told I Love You Over the Phone, Identity Thief Freaky Friday, Killing Babies by not making babies, Italian Pepperoni relax eyes, Bakruptcy For Fun and Profit, The Teenagers are Bankrupting again.There's never been a better time to order Gustav & Henri from Andy and Pete's very own online shop.You can support the pod by chipping in to our patreon here (thank you!)Join the other TITTT scholars on the TITTT discord server hereHey, why not listen to Al's meditation/comedy podcast ShusherDon't forget TITTT Merch is now available on Red Bubble. Head over here and grab yourselves some material objectsYou can find us on twitter at @twointankAndy Matthews: @stupidoldandyAlasdair Tremblay-Birchall: @alasdairtb and instaAnd you can find us on the Facebook right here Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In our latest podcast episode, Freshfields partner Lindsay Hingston hosts a candid discussion on the subject of women in restructuring, featuring Katharina Crinson, counsel at Freshfields, and Jo Hewitt, managing director at Alvarez & Marsal. Drawing on personal experience as well as insights from Katharina and Jo's former and current leadership roles for the London chapter of the International Women's Insolvency and Restructuring Confederation (IWIRC London), they explore their career journeys in a field where women are still under-represented, the importance of gender diversity, and strategies for promoting an inclusive industry. Stay tuned for more insights into the world of restructuring and thank you for listening to “No Worse Off”.

The Covid-19 pandemic that hit in March 2020 hammered the Irish hospitality and retail sectors.One company that was directly in the firing line was Moriarty's a family run craft shop and restaurant in the Gap of Dunloe in Kerry that was largely dependent on American visitors for its business.The company survived this near-death experience by becoming one of the first SMEs in Ireland to use a new small company rescue process called Scarp, introduced by the Government at the end of 2021.Having wiped out substantial debts, Moriarty's is once again thriving, and looking to expand its business beyond the Gap of Dunloe.Denis Pio Moriarty is a son of the founders and runs the business with other family members. He joined host Ciarán Hancock in studio to tell his company's story of surviving the pandemic.He began by recalling Moriarty's early days, from its opening in 1964 and its growth story up to when the pandemic hit in early 2020.Produced by John Casey. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Christopher Hunter is a seasoned entrepreneur best known for creating Four Loko, a caffeinated alcoholic beverage that caused a stir across college campuses and beyond. Currently, he serves as the CEO of Koia, a leading plant-based protein drink company that has achieved over $100 million in annual retail sales nationwide. In this episode of DTC Pod, we uncover tactics for rapid growth in the CPG space. Christopher highlights the importance of adapting to market shifts and consumer demands, which steered his brand from a costly initial direct-to-consumer model to a more sustainable retail focus, eventually re-introducing multi-packs for platforms like Instacart and launching shelf-stable products on Amazon. With Koia now available in approximately 30,000 retail locations—including a recent nationwide partnership with Starbucks—Christopher reflects on the brand's product development and scale-up process.Shop Koia on Amazon.Interact with other DTC experts and access our monthly fireside chats with industry leaders on DTC Pod Slack.On this episode of DTC Pod, we cover:1. Startup Challenges and Solutions2. Retail Partnerships and Scaling3. Adaptation to Regulations4. Four Loko's Market Evolution5. Koya's Strategic Growth6. Distribution and Manufacturing Strategies7. Direct-to-Consumer Shifts and TrendsTimestamps01:48 Christopher Hunter's background, how Four Loko and Koia started07:14 From managing Phusion Projects to investing in Raw Nature 5 to creating Koia09:28 How a partnership helped launch and scale Koia12:12 Troubleshooting initial production challenges at Koia14:41 Starting with natural retailers, then going to specialty and conventional ones17:23 The evolution of Koia's supply chain and operations19:57 Moving from DTC to retail, addressing customer requests, discovering an opportunity to sell on Amazon22:22 Expectations for Koia's launch on Amazon, looking at product competition25:41 Lessons learned from Four Loko, product iteration and scaling31:16 Dealing with government agencies, building a solid business foundation33:56 Consumer research and how it factors in making business decisions like product line expansionShow notes powered by CastmagicPast guests & brands on DTC Pod include Gilt, PopSugar, Glossier, MadeIN, Prose, Bala, P.volve, Ritual, Bite, Oura, Levels, General Mills, Mid Day Squares, Prose, Arrae, Olipop, Ghia, Rosaluna, Form, Uncle Studios & many more.  Additional episodes you might like:• #175 Ariel Vaisbort - How OLIPOP Runs Influencer, Community, & Affiliate Growth• #184 Jake Karls, Midday Squares - Turning Your Brand Into The Influencer With Content• #205 Kasey Stewart: Suckerz- - Powering Your Launch With 300 Million Organic Views• #219 JT Barnett: The TikTok Masterclass For Brands• #223 Lauren Kleinman: The PR & Affiliate Marketing Playbook• ​​​​#243 Kian Golzari - Source & Develop Products Like The World's Best Brands-----Have any questions about the show or topics you'd like us to explore further?Shoot us a DM; we'd love to hear from you.Want the weekly TL;DR of tips delivered to your mailbox?Check out our newsletter here.Projects the DTC Pod team is working on:DTCetc - all our favorite brands on the internetOlivea - the extra virgin olive oil & hydroxytyrosol supplementCastmagic - AI Workspace for ContentFollow us for content, clips, giveaways, & updates!DTCPod InstagramDTCPod TwitterDTCPod TikTok  Christopher Hunter - Co-Founder of Phusion Projects and KoiaBlaine Bolus - Co-Founder of CastmagicRamon Berrios - Co-Founder of Castmagic

June 6, 2024 - A state fund designed to limit malpractice insurance costs for hospitals is headed toward financial insolvency, according to Maya Kaufman, health care reporter for Politico New York.

In this episode of CafeBitcoin, we had the pleasure of hosting Jeremy from Cloaked Wireless to discuss their innovative eSIM product. Jeremy shared insights into the challenges of running a telecom business and the importance of privacy in the digital age. Cloaked Wireless offers a solution to SIM swap attacks, allowing users to have secure and private connectivity. The company provides the option to use a second SIM for enhanced security and privacy, with the convenience of using it indefinitely. Additionally, Jeremy highlighted the ease of transitioning to Cloaked Wireless from traditional providers and the seamless integration with iPhones. The discussion also touched on the simplicity of setting up the service and the benefits of dual SIM functionality. Overall, the episode provided valuable information on the importance of privacy and security in the wireless industry.Connect with "Cloaked Wireless" - https://www.cloakedwireless.com“Use discount code “Swan” at checkout for 25% off of your first months service”Timestamps:00:00:00 - Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Stock Plunge00:05:22 - Software Glitch Impacting Stock Exchange00:06:29 - Australia's First Bitcoin ETF Launch00:10:30 - Implications of Warren Buffett's Treasury Bill Holdings00:20:26 - Dante's Insights from Business Group Meeting00:26:13 - Introduction to Cloaked Wireless00:33:08 - Challenges of Running a Telecom Business00:40:13 - Ownership of Data on Wireless Devices00:46:24 - Duration and Flexibility of Cloaked Wireless Numbers Use code “CAFE” for a discount to ⁠https://www.pacificbitcoin.com⁠⁠ "Welcome to Bitcoin" A FREE 1-hour course hosted by Natalie Brunell, perfect for helping you to orange-pill family members over the holidays at https://Swan.com/welcome ⁠⁠ Swan Team Members:Sam Callahan: https://twitter.com/samcallahTomer Strolight: https://twitter.com/TomerStrolightJohn Haar Twitter: ⁠https://twitter.com/john_at_swanDante Cook: https://twitter.com/Dante_Cook1Produced by: https://twitter.com/Producer_Jacob Swan Bitcoin is the best way to accumulate Bitcoin with automatic recurring buys and instant buys from $10 to $10 million. Get started in just 5 minutes. Your first $10 purchase is on us: https://swanbitcoin.com/yt Download the all new Swan app! iOS: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/swan-bitcoin/id1576287352 Android: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.swanbitcoin.android&pli=1 Are you a high net worth individual or do you represent corporation that might be interested in learning more about Bitcoin? Swan Private guides corporations and high net worth individuals toward building generational wealth with Bitcoin. Find out more at https://swan.com/private Get paid to recruit new Bitcoiners: https://swan.com/enlist Connect with Swan on social media: Twitter: ⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/Swan

Dive into this week's hot economic topics in just 12 minutes on "This Week's Economy"!

Stormy Daniels faces off with Donald Trump in a New York courtroom, Israeli officials claim the U.S. kept them in the dark regarding the latest hostage deal, and a new report puts an expiration date on Social Security funding. Get the facts first with Morning Wire.Fast Growing Trees: Get 15% off your entire order. Use Promo Code ‘WIRE' at http://www.fastgrowingtrees.com Shopify: "Get a $1 per month trial at https://www.shopify.com/morningwire"

Can you help me make more podcasts? Please consider supporting this show on Patreon as the service is 100% funded by those who watch & listen: https://EVne.ws/patreon You can read all the latest news on the blog here: https://EVne.ws/blog Subscribe for free and listen to the podcast on audio platforms: https://EVne.ws/apple https://EVne.ws/googlepods https://EVne.ws/spotify https://EVne.ws/tunein https://EVne.ws/iheart   GM Launches Bidirectional Chargers for Home Energy Management https://www.autonews.com/mobility-report/gm-vehicle-home-chargers-launch-chevy-silverado-ev Tritium's Insolvency and Administration Appointment https://thedriven.io/2024/04/19/australia-ev-fast-charging-tritium-says-it-is-insolvent-appoints-administrators/ Kia Sets New Record in Global EV Sales for March 2024 https://insideevs.com/news/716620/kia-global-ev-retail-sales-march2024/ Tesla Model 3 Performance Upgrade Revealed in Website Leak https://insideevs.com/news/716542/2024-tesla-model-3-performance-specs-leak/ Xiaomi's Electric Car Sales Exceed Expectations https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/xiaomi-says-sales-its-new-ev-have-been-3-5-times-higher-than-expected-2024-04-18/ Mexico Withdraws Incentives for Chinese EV Companies Amid U.S. Concerns https://www.autonews.com/china/mexico-facing-us-pressure-will-halt-incentives-chinese-ev-makers Electric Vehicle Savings Up To $2,200 Annually https://www.energy.gov/policy/articles/save-2200-year-driving-electric-vehicle Colorado's EV Exchange Program Boosts Affordability for Low-Income Residents https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2024/04/exchange-program-make-ev-ownership-more-affordable-for-low-income-colorado-residents/ Shortage of EV Mechanics Leads to Increased Vehicle Write-offs https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-04-13/ev-mechanic-shortage-inflates-uk-repair-costs-sends-cars-to-junkyard Cadillac Optiq Debuts Interior Design Ahead of Beijing Auto Show https://www.autoblog.com/2024/04/14/cadillac-optiq-interior-revealed-before-beijing-auto-show-debut/ Porsche Taycan's Unexpected Swim in Dubai Floods https://x.com/eljaboom/status/1780447536672583862?s=12

It's EV News Briefly for Friday 19th April, everything you need to know in less than 5 minutes if you haven't got time for the full show. I'll be back later but Patreon supporters get the episodes as soon as they're ready AND ad free. You can be like them by clicking here. ➤ GM Launches Bidirectional Chargers for Home Energy Management ➤ Tritium's Insolvency and Administration Appointment ➤ Kia Sets New Record in Global EV Sales for March 2024 ➤ Tesla Model 3 Performance Upgrade Revealed in Website Leak ➤ Xiaomi's Electric Car Sales Exceed Expectations ➤ Mexico Withdraws Incentives for Chinese EV Companies Amid U.S. Concerns ➤ Electric Vehicle Savings Up To $2,200 Annually ➤ Colorado's EV Exchange Program Boosts Affordability for Low-Income Residents ➤ Shortage of EV Mechanics Leads to Increased Vehicle Write-offs ➤ Cadillac Optiq Debuts Interior Design Ahead of Beijing Auto Show ➤ Porsche Taycan's Unexpected Swim in Dubai Floods