Conditions to Obligations of Buyer
What are the Conditions to Obligations of Buyer? This provision contains a comprehensive list of requirements that must be completed by the Seller or waived by the Buyer in order for the Buyer to be obligated to complete the purchase. If the Seller fails to fulfill any condition included in the list, the Buyer can walk away from the deal without penalty.
The Middle Ground: Typically, the list states that:
(1) the Seller’s representations and warranties are true in all material respects at the time of the signing of the Agreement and the Closing;
(2) the Seller has complied with the Agreement and any other Transaction Documents in all material respects;
(3) no legal action has been taken that would prevent the transaction;
(4) all third-party approvals, consents, and waivers listed in the Disclosure Schedules relating to the Seller’s representations and warranties have been obtained;
(5) nothing has occurred that would constitute or cause a Material Adverse Effect;
(6) all Closing Deliverables and Transaction Documents have been signed by the Seller (as applicable) and delivered to the Buyer;
(7) the Buyer has received all Permits necessary to conduct the Business as conducted by the Seller;
(8) the Seller has provided the Buyer with title insurance and a Land Title Survey (or other appropriate deliverables) for each piece of Owned Real Property;
(9) written evidence has been provided to the Buyer that all Encumbrances, other than Permitted Encumbrances, have been released;
(10) the Buyer has received a signed copy of the Seller Closing Certificate;
(11) the Buyer has received a signed copy of the Seller’s Secretary’s Certificate;
(12) the Buyer has received a FIRPTA Certificate relating to the Business; and
(13) the Seller has delivered any other documents or instruments reasonably requested by the Buyer that are reasonably necessary to consummate the transaction.
Purpose: This provision provides numerous “outs” for the Buyer that create a relatively painless path out of the deal if the Seller does not meet its obligations, including some obligations that are relatively minor. The fact that the Buyer can walk away without penalty if a condition is not met means the risk of the Seller’s failure to deliver is shifted entirely to the Seller, who is obviously in a much better position to control that risk.
Buyer Preference: In addition to the conditions listed above, any number of requirements can be added to this section through negotiation among the parties. Common additional conditions sought by the Buyer include: (a) a “due diligence out” that allows the Buyer to walk away if it cannot complete due diligence to its satisfaction; (b) a “financing out” that conditions the Buyer’s obligation to close on it being able to obtain financing to fund the deal; and (c) financial or operating targets, such as sales or working capital, that, if not met, provide the Buyer with a way out of the deal. If the Seller operates in a highly-regulated industry, the Buyer may also require a legal opinion from the Seller’s legal counsel regarding the Business’s compliance with applicable laws. In addition to these general additional conditions, the Buyer also has certain preferences regarding the listed conditions, such as:
(1) The Buyer will likely include a materiality qualifier but will not want that qualifier to apply to any representation or warranty that already contains a materiality qualifier (i.e. the Buyer does not want a “double materiality” standard). Some exceptions for which the Buyer will want no materiality qualifier whatsoever include the representation regarding the organization and authority of the Seller, any monetary obligations, and financial statements. The Buyer will typically want this condition to Closing to be satisfied both at the time of signing the Agreement and at the Closing so that it can walk away if it receives materially inaccurate information at either time.
(2) Here, the Buyer once again wants to avoid a double materiality standard.
(3) The Buyer does not want any materiality qualifiers whatsoever in this “litigation out.” The Buyer will want to include any actions brought against it in addition to those brought against the Seller.
(4) The Buyer wants all third-party consents to be obtained as a condition to Closing, not just specifically-identified material consents.
(5) The Buyer may want to eliminate the Material Adverse Event condition altogether and replace it with specific event-based conditions, such as operational or financial benchmarks. Or, it may want to keep the Material Adverse Event condition and merely supplement it with specific benchmarks. In either case, the Buyer should be aware when selecting such benchmarks that financials usually lag behind operations and it is easier to manipulate the financial measurements than to inaccurately represent that an operational benchmark was met.
(8) To determine which conditions relating to real property need to be included here, the Buyer should consult a real estate attorney. If the transaction involves Leased Real Property, the Buyer will seek estoppel certificates from the landlord of the property.
(9) If the Buyer knows which documents are necessary to release Encumbrances associated with the Seller’s property, it will want to specify the documents and include a general statement like the one seen above to cover any documents needed but not listed. If the only way the Seller can have the Encumbrances released is to pay the creditor using the Closing payment, the Buyer will want to have the release documents placed in escrow until the creditor is paid.
Seller Preference: In general, the Seller wants to avoid allowing any conditions in this section that are not within its control, such as a due diligence out and a financing out. More specifically, the Seller will generally have the following preferences regarding the listed conditions:
(1) The Seller wants to go beyond a general materiality standard and require that, in order for the Buyer to walk away, a false representation or warranty must have a Material Adverse Effect on the Business. The Seller also wants this condition to apply only at the Closing so that it can cure any inaccuracies that exist when the Agreement is signed.
(3) The Seller wants to limit this condition to legal actions that are reasonably likely to succeed on the merits as a way of excluding frivolous claims that do not have any practical chance of preventing the transaction. Regarding any legal actions taken by a Governmental Authority, the Seller will want only those that prevent a material transaction contemplated by the Agreement to qualify as a litigation out for the Buyer.
(4) The Seller wants to limit this condition to specifically-identified material third-party consents, especially if there are a significant number of third-party consents to be obtained.
(5) Because it is difficult to prove that an event had a Material Adverse Effect on the Business, and because the burden is on the Buyer to prove a Material Adverse Effect, the Seller wants that standard to be applied here, rather than using specific financial or operational benchmarks. If the Buyer insists on specific benchmarks, the Seller will likely favor financial metrics over operational ones.
(8) The party customarily held responsible for paying survey and title insurance costs varies by jurisdiction, but regardless of convention the Seller will want the parties to split any costs related to these items (unless, of course, local custom says the Buyer pays).
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: In a stock sale, the Buyer wants any representations and warranties relating to the shares of the Seller to be true and correct in all respects or, in other words, not subject to any sort of materiality qualifier. If the Buyer in a stock purchase is going to replace the directors and/or officers of the Business, receipt of their resignations should be included as a condition to the Buyer’s obligation to close. The Buyer in a stock purchase will also need a certificate of good standing for the Business from the appropriate Governmental Authority in the company’s state of organization.
Conditions to Obligations of All Parties
What are Conditions to Obligations of All Parties? Certain events will make a transaction impractical or even impossible, and this clause is included to give both parties a legal “out” of the deal if one of those events occurs.
The Middle Ground: This provision lists the conditions that must be met at or prior to Closing for both sides to be obligated to move forward with the transaction. The conditions include: (1) all required filings under the HSR Act have been made and any applicable waiting periods have expired (if the Act applies to the transaction); (2) no Governmental Authority has taken any action that would cause the transaction to be illegal or that would otherwise prevent it from becoming and remaining effective; and (3) all consents, authorizations, etc. required to be obtained by either party from any Governmental Authorities were received and have not been revoked.
Purpose: The intent of this provision is to allow both sides to walk away from the deal without penalty if the government interferes with the transaction (or if their approval is required but not given). While there is a very low probability that any Governmental Authority would implement a law or ruling preventing an acquisition in the lower middle market, if it were to happen it would certainly put an end to the transaction. Similarly, it is highly unlikely that either side would fail to obtain a necessary authorization or consent absent sheer incompetence or severe procrastination. Yet, if such failure were to occur it would also be an almost-certain death knell for the deal. Because of the low probability, high magnitude dynamic at play, the provision is worth paying attention as the Closing approaches, but it is not something that is likely to eat up negotiation time or cause significant disagreement.
Buyer and Seller Preference: None, other than deleting certain inapplicable conditions such as the HSR Act filing requirements or obtaining governmental approvals.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: None.
Governmental Approvals and Consents
What are Governmental Approvals and Consents? The lack of an important governmental approval or third-party consent can kill a deal despite the Buyer and Seller both wanting to move forward. To avoid that situation, the parties list out the necessary consents and approvals and split up the work in a way that makes sense for both sides. They also use this covenant to set boundaries around how far they must go in order to obtain a consent or approval.
The Middle Ground: This covenant requires both the Buyer and Seller to make all filings necessary to consummate the transaction, and to use their reasonable best efforts to obtain all the requisite consents from governmental authorities and third parties (e.g. customers and suppliers). It then lists out specific actions that the parties must carry out or avoid in order to obtain the necessary consents, such as litigating any order blocking the transaction, again modified by a reasonable best efforts standard. It also requires the parties to share certain information regarding communications with Governmental Authorities. Lastly, it expressly states that the Buyer is not required to sell off any part of its business or change the terms and conditions of the transaction to appease a Governmental Authority seeking to halt the transaction based on antitrust concerns.
Purpose: Once a potential deal reaches the exclusivity stage, it’s unlikely that a third party will prevent it from going through unless that third party is the government or has an important contract with the Seller and won’t consent to a change of control. This covenant seeks to deal with those two threats by allocating the serious risks they present between the parties.
Buyer Preference: The Buyer’s main concern with this clause is the application of the “reasonable best efforts” standard. The Buyer wants the standard included, but in defining what it means the Buyer needs to be aware of what it is willing (and unwilling) to do to close the transaction. For anything that it is unwilling to do, the Buyer will want an express statement to that effect included in the definition of reasonable best efforts. Given that the Seller will be the one that has the pre-existing relationships with important third parties other than the government, the Buyer generally wants the risk of not obtaining a third-party consent to fall on the Seller, with the risk of not obtaining Governmental Approval shared equally.
Seller Preference: The Seller wants to place the risk of not obtaining necessary Governmental Approvals on the Buyer, and it can do so by replacing the reasonable best efforts standard with a more demanding one. The Seller’s main concern is avoiding governmental interference with the deal, so it wants to place the burden relating to any such interference on the Buyer. The Seller can allocate that risk to the Buyer by requiring the Buyer to either divest assets to satisfy regulators or litigate any Governmental Order blocking the transaction. If the Buyer objects, the Seller can suggest putting caps on the amount of assets the Buyer must divest or that the parties list out specifically which assets would be subject to divestiture.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: None.
Employees and Employee Benefits
What is the Employees and Employee Benefits section? Transferring employees and their benefit plans from the Seller’s business entity to the Buyer’s is a process that involves quite a few underlying issues that must be worked out between the parties. This covenant lays out how the parties have answered questions such as which employees will be transferred, what benefits they will receive, and who is responsible for employee-related issues that pop up after the Closing.
The Middle Ground: In this covenant, the Seller promises to terminate its employees on the Closing Date so the Buyer can hire some or all of them on its own terms. Next, the Seller agrees to be responsible for all compensation (including benefits) owed to its employees up to the Closing Date, and to pay out that compensation by the Closing Date. The Seller also agrees to remain responsible for all insurance, disability, and workers’ compensation claims that are based on events that occur on or prior to the Closing Date. For those employees of the Seller that the Buyer does hire, the Buyer typically agrees to offer them substantially similar compensation and benefits as previously offered by the Seller or as offered to Buyer’s similarly situated employees. Finally, the Buyer agrees to give the employees it hires from the Seller “service credit” under the Buyer’s health and retirement benefits plans according to their length of service with the Seller.
Purpose: The most important feature of this covenant is the Buyer’s promise to hire the Seller’s employees because it can be used to maintain employee stability and quell any panic that may arise after the acquisition is announced. It is something the Seller can point to in order to assure its employees that the sale of the company does not automatically translate to a loss of their jobs. In other words, it is a wonderful risk management tool. However, the Buyer retains the discretion not to hire employees as it sees fit and the other promises made by the Buyer relate only to the employees it ends up hiring. Thus, the covenant does not guarantee that no employees will be worse off after the sale, but if the Buyer agrees to include it that is a good signal that its intent is to disrupt normal operations of the Business as little as possible.
Buyer Preference: The Buyer wants to retain as much discretion as possible, especially with regard to who it must hire and the level of compensation it must provide. While stability is typically in the Buyer’s best interest, some buyers may use the transition as an opportunity to cut costs by selectively reducing the number of employees, and it is not unreasonable for the Buyer to want to maintain the discretion to do so. Also, if the Seller is subject to the WARN Act (or any state-level corollaries), the Buyer wants to ensure that the Seller takes responsibility for any resulting liabilities.
Seller Preference: The Seller will typically seek a promise from the Buyer to hire all or most of the Seller’s employees at comparable compensation and benefit levels. The desire for the Buyer to hire as many employees as possible is even stronger when the Seller is subject to the WARN Act or a similar state law, since liability under the Act can be minimized or avoided entirely if enough employees are hired by the Buyer. Another tactic for the Seller to avoid WARN Act liability is to explicitly shift that liability to the Buyer in the Agreement, but that will likely take significant negotiation leverage.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: This covenant is not included in a stock sale because the target company remains intact so there is no need to transfer employees to a new entity.
Taxes
What are Taxes? In this section, the Seller provides information regarding tax-related matters of the Business. It is part of the Representations and Warranties of the Seller section.
The Representations and Warranties of Seller portion of the Agreement is used to save the Buyer time and money. Rather than require the Buyer to go through third parties to find certain information, the Seller provides the information and must reimburse the Buyer for any Losses it suffers if the information is false or misleading.
The Middle Ground: The content in this section is based on the assumption that the Business is organized as a stand-alone C Corp that does not operate outside the United States. With that in mind, the typical tax representations include:
(1) All the Seller’s Tax Returns for any pre-Closing period are true and complete, have been, or will be, timely filed, and all related payments have been, or will be, paid by their respective due dates;
(2) Seller has withheld and paid each Tax required to be withheld in connection with its employees, independent contractors, customers, or any other party and has complied with reporting and backup withholding provisions of applicable law;
(3) No extensions or waivers of statutes of limitations have been requested or provided in connection with the Taxes payable by Seller;
(4) Seller has fully paid all deficiencies asserted and/or assessments made against it by any taxing authority;
(5) Seller is not a party to any Action by any taxing authority and there are no pending or threatened Actions of that nature in connection with the Business;
(6) There are no Tax-related Encumbrances upon any of the Purchased Assets nor, to Seller’s knowledge, is any taxing authority in the process of imposing such Encumbrances;
(7) Seller is not a “foreign person” as defined in Treasury Regulation §1.1445-2; and
(8) Seller is not, and has never been, party to or a promoter of a “reportable transaction” within the meaning of Code §6707A(c)(1) and Treasury Regulations §1.6011 4(b).
Additional tax-related representations may be required depending on the nature of the Business (e.g. if the Business engages in “safe harbor lease” transactions), so both parties should consult a tax expert to determine which representations should be included in the Agreement.
Purpose: Tax-related liabilities are generally part of the Excluded Liabilities in an asset purchase, so the purpose of this section is to ensure that all such liabilities, including those that may be imposed in the future based on the Seller’s pre-Closing actions or inaction, stay with the Seller. Including specific tax-related representations also gives the Buyer a better understanding of the Seller’s past behavior in terms of its desire and ability to comply with legal requirements. That information can be a valuable source of risk assessment for the Buyer, and it becomes especially important if the Seller will remain actively involved in the Business following the sale.
Buyer Preference: The Buyer wants these representations to survive for 60 days after expiration of the applicable statute of limitations for enforcement of tax deficiencies. It also wants the representations to remain as broad as possible to cover all taxes owed or paid by the Seller, although, for the sake of clarity, it may want to specifically list as examples the tax categories it is most concerned about (e.g. sales tax for an e-commerce business). The representation regarding withholding tax is not a necessity in this section, but is generally preferred by the Buyer because it provides specific information about withholding taxes that may not otherwise be disclosed (because the “Withholding Tax” provision is not typically accompanied by related Disclosure Schedules). The Buyer also wants to exclude knowledge qualifiers in representations (5) and (6) if it can do so without giving up something of greater significance. Lastly, the Buyer may want to consult a tax expert who is familiar with the Business to determine whether additional representations should be included.
Seller Preference: The Seller can narrow these representations by limiting them to “Taxes (and Tax Returns) with respect to the Business” rather than referencing the Taxes (and Tax Returns) of the Seller. The Seller may also seek knowledge and/or materiality qualifiers where it would make sense to do so. A more aggressive approach would be to limit the Tax Returns to Income Tax Returns, but most Buyers will resist this since income taxes are not the only source of tax liability for businesses. If the representations would not be completely accurate as written, the Seller will want to include a corresponding section in the Disclosure Schedules rather than risk breaching its representations. Much like the Buyer, the Seller may want to consult with a tax expert regarding the scope of the representations to ensure that it is not taking responsibility for any liability that should be taken on by the Buyer.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: These representations are more critical for the Buyer if the transaction is structured as a stock sale because, in that context, the Buyer inherits the Seller’s tax liabilities. That means the Buyer would be managing much more risk and, consequently, would need to include more extensive representations than those listed here.
Employee Benefit Matters
What are Employee Benefit Matters? In this section, the Seller provides information regarding employee benefits. It is part of the Representations and Warranties of the Seller section.
The Representations and Warranties of Seller portion of the Agreement is used to save the Buyer time and money. Rather than require the Buyer to go through third parties to find certain information, the Seller provides the information and must reimburse the Buyer for any Losses it suffers if the information is false or misleading.
The Middle Ground: The disclosures and representations made by the Seller in this section include:
(1) The disclosure of all Benefit Plans, written or unwritten, to which the Seller has contributed or under which the Seller or Buyer may have (or reasonably expect to have) any liability;
(2) That the Seller has provided to the Buyer, for each Benefit Plan, accurate and complete copies of the following: (i) the plan documents and amendments for plans that are in writing; (ii) for unwritten plans, a written summary of the material plan terms; (iii) copies of trust agreements or other funding arrangements, insurance contracts, administration agreements, investment agreements, and custodial agreements that are currently in effect or required in the future; (iv) written communications relating to any Benefit Plan, including summaries of plan descriptions and any material modifications to the plan; (v) correspondence from the IRS regarding any Benefit Plan that is intended to be qualified under Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”) §401(a); (vi) a copy of the two most recently filed Form 5500s (if applicable), with attached schedules and financial statements; (vii) recent actuarial valuations for applicable Benefit Plans; (viii) the most recent nondiscrimination tests performed under the Code; and (x) copies of material notices and correspondence from any Governmental Authority relating to the Seller’s Benefit Plans;
(3) Each Benefit Plan (and any related trusts) has been established and maintained in compliance with all applicable laws; nothing has occurred that has subjected or reasonably could subject the Seller or any of its ERISA Affiliates, or the Buyer or its Affiliates, to a penalty or tax under ERISA or the Code; all benefits, contributions, and premiums have been timely paid; and all benefits accrued under any unfunded Benefit Plan have been paid or accrued and reserved for in accordance with GAAP, if the Business follows GAAP;
(4) Neither the Seller nor any of its ERISA Affiliates has (i) incurred any material liability with respect to Title I or Title IV of ERISA or any related Code provisions or local laws; (ii) failed to timely pay premiums to the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation; (iii) withdrawn from a Benefit Plan; or (iv) engaged in any transaction that would give rise to liability under §4069 or 4212(c) of ERISA;
(5) With respect to each Benefit Plan: (i) any Multiemployer Plans in which the Seller participates have been disclosed, all premiums have been timely paid, and no withdrawal liability is outstanding or will be incurred upon a future withdrawal from the plan; (ii) no plan is considered a “multiple employer plan” under §413(c) of the Code or a “multiple employer welfare arrangement” under ERISA; or (iii) the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation has not taken any action to terminate or appoint a trustee to any such plan; (iv) no such plan is subject to the minimum funding standards or ERISA and none of the Purchased Assets are, or may reasonably be expected to become, subject to a lien arising under ERISA or the Code; and (v) no “reportable event” as defined in ERISA §4043 has occurred with respect to any such plan;
(6) Except as disclosed, no Benefit Plan or other arrangement involving the Seller requires it to provide post-termination or retiree welfare benefits to any individual;
(7) Except as disclosed, there is no pending or, to Seller’s knowledge, threatened Action relating to a Benefit Plan (other than routine benefits claims), and no Benefit Plan has been the subject of an examination or audit by a Governmental Authority or is involved in an amnesty or similar compliance program sponsored by any Governmental Authority;
(8) There has been no change in relation to any Benefit Plan, and Seller has not agreed to make any change in the future with respect to any such plans, that would increase the annual expense of maintaining such plan in comparison to the most recently completed fiscal year. Furthermore, neither Seller nor its Affiliates have committed to adopt, modify, or terminate any Benefit Plan currently in effect;
(9) Each Benefit Plan that is subject to §409A of the Code has been administered in accordance with that section of the Code and Seller does not have any monetary obligations to any third party in relation to §409A;
(10) Except as disclosed, execution of the Agreement or any transactions pursuant to the Agreement will not materially alter the Business’s obligations arising out of any Benefit Plan.
Purpose: By making these representations, the Seller is accepting the risk of any outstanding liabilities under its benefit plans, including the risk of non-compliance with ERISA or the Code. However, the representations do not relieve the Buyer from potential liability for ongoing violations that persist after the sale, so it should pay special attention to the disclosures made in this section of the Disclosure Schedules if it is adopting the Seller’s plan(s). In terms of deal value, the transaction costs of both parties will increase based on this section because it requires review by a benefits plan expert (or, more accurately, an expert review is highly recommended). However, the experts’ review will limit the risk associated with the Benefit Plan(s), making it a sound investment for both sides.
Buyer Preference: The Buyer may want to retain an employee benefits specialist to determine which of these representations need to be included for each specific situation. In general, the Buyer wants robust disclosure requirements and comprehensive representations that do not include knowledge or materiality qualifiers.
Seller Preference: The Seller may want to retain an employee benefits specialist to assess whether the Seller has been compliant with its plans and to advise as to which representations should and should not be included in the Agreement. In most situations, its interests will be the opposite of the Buyer’s; the Seller will want limited representations that ignore immaterial issues and that are based on the Seller’s knowledge.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: The Buyer will typically want more comprehensive disclosures and representations in a stock sale because the Buyer is assuming the Seller’s liabilities. In an asset acquisition, liabilities relating to any Benefit Plan of the Seller are usually expressly excluded from the transaction.
Environmental Matters
What are Environmental Matters? In this section, the Seller provides information regarding environmental issues relating to the Business. It is part of the Representations and Warranties of the Seller section.
The Representations and Warranties of Seller portion of the Agreement is used to save the Buyer time and money. Rather than require the Buyer to go through third parties to find certain information, the Seller provides the information and must reimburse the Buyer for any Losses it suffers if the information is false or misleading.
The Middle Ground: Here, the Seller makes comprehensive representations regarding its compliance with Environmental Laws. Those representations include:
(1) The Business is and always has been in compliance with applicable environmental laws and the Seller has not received notice of an Environmental Violation or Claim, or a request for information pursuant to Environmental Law that remains unresolved;
(2) The Seller has obtained all Environmental Permits necessary to conduct the Business or use the Purchased Assets as currently conducted or used and all such Environmental Permits are in full force and effect. Nothing has occurred, to the Seller’s knowledge, that would interfere with the validity of the Environmental Permits after the Closing Date, and the Seller has undertaken all measures necessary to transfer the Environmental Permits on the Closing Date;
(3) None of the Purchased Assets or any real property used or formerly used (whether owned or leased) by the Business have been listed on, or proposed for listing on, the National Priorities List under CERCLA or any similar state list;
(4) There has been no Release of Hazardous Materials in violation of Environmental Law with respect to the Business or the Purchased Assets, including on any real property currently or formerly used by the Business. Furthermore, the Seller has not received any notice that it violated an Environmental Law or the terms of an Environmental permit, or that could reasonably be expected to result in an Environmental Claim against the Seller, the Business, or the Purchased Assets;
(5) The Disclosure Schedules contain a complete and accurate list of all active or abandoned storage tanks owned or operated by Seller in connection with the Business or the Purchased Assets;
(6) The Disclosure Schedules contain a complete and accurate list of all off-site facilities or locations for the treatment, storage, or disposal of Hazardous Materials used by the Seller, and any predecessor to the extent the Seller may retain liability, in connection with the Business or Purchased Assets. No such facilities or locations have been placed on or proposed for placement on the National Priorities List under CERCLA, or any similar state list, and the Seller has not received any Environmental Notice of potential liability with respect to any such facilities or locations;
(7) The Seller has not retained or assumed any liabilities or obligations from third parties with respect to Environmental Laws (whether by contract or operation of law);
(8) The Seller has provided Buyer with (i) all material documents in Seller’s possession or control relating to compliance with Environmental Laws, Claims, or Notices in connection with the Business or Purchased Assets, or any real property used by the Business at any time, and (ii) all material documents relating to actual or potential capital expenditures made to ensure current or future compliance with Environmental Laws; and
(9) The Seller is not aware of and does not reasonably anticipate, as of the Closing Date, any condition or event relating to Hazardous Materials that may, after the Closing Date, prevent, impede, or materially increase the costs associated with performance of the Business or use of the Purchased Assets as currently conducted or used.
Purpose: The importance of this section depends largely on the Business and the industry in which it operates, as well as the location of the properties utilized by the Business. If the Business uses Hazardous Materials as part of its normal operations, this section is essential for the Buyer. Likewise, if the Business’s real property is adjacent to another business that uses Hazardous Materials, these representations lessen the risk that the Buyer will have to pay for the environmental violations of others. However, if the Business itself does not use any materials that are subject to environmental regulation and there is no similar threat posed by neighboring landowners, the scope of representations contained here may not be necessary. In the event that the Seller only used Hazardous Materials at a specific point in time or at one specific location, the parties can agree to limit the Seller’s representations to address those situations without including the entire set of representations listed above.
Buyer Preference: Due to the potential magnitude of penalties related to environmental violations, the Buyer wants to include the most comprehensive set of environmental representations that will be acceptable to the Seller and may also want to exclude environmental matters from any limits on its indemnification rights. If there are identifiable environmental issues and the Seller wants to limit the representations to those situations, the Buyer has a number of options. It may insist on the Seller correcting those issues prior to the sale or require a portion of the Purchase Price to be placed in escrow until the problems are remedied. A more conservative Buyer might seek to exclude the property from the transaction or lower the Purchase Price based on projected remediation costs. Another option would be to purchase environmental insurance. Still, the Buyer will want representations that apply to the entire Business and all properties utilized by the Seller. The Buyer prefers specific, material exceptions to the representations listed in the Disclosure Schedules, but nothing more, since it wants the representations to be as widely applicable as possible. Lastly, if the Business operates in an industry that interacts with climate change regulation (e.g. the energy, utility, and manufacturing industries), the Buyer may want to include a representation that speaks to the validity and transferability of “Environmental Attributes” (e.g. emissions allowances or renewable energy credits).
Seller Preference: If real property is not involved in the purchase and/or the Business does not utilize Hazardous Materials, the Seller may want this section to be excluded in its entirety. If that is not the case and these representations are included, the Seller can try to limit the environmental representations to this section by including a statement to that effect. As for the representations themselves, the Seller will want them to be qualified using a materiality or Material Adverse Effect standard, and/or with knowledge qualifiers. It may also want to limit them to cover specific properties or time frames if it can identify specific situations that are more likely to result in environmental-related costs for the Buyer. If the Seller agrees to deal with the Buyer’s environmental concerns prior to the sale, it can include those terms in a separate agreement and limit the representations to exclude the subject matter of the separate agreement. Because the Seller is most likely to provide an incomplete or misleading representation when instances or exceptions are listed with specificity in the Disclosure Schedules, it will want to make broad disclosures to avoid unintentionally breaching a representation.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: Since the Buyer inherits all the liabilities of the Business in a stock sale, the environmental representations are likely to be more comprehensive under that structure than in an asset sale.
Compliance with Laws; Permits
What is the Compliance with Laws; Permits section? In this section, the Seller provides information regarding the Business’s compliance with legal requirements. It is part of the Representations and Warranties of the Seller section.
The Representations and Warranties of Seller portion of the Agreement is used to save the Buyer time and money. Rather than require the Buyer to go through third parties to find certain information, the Seller provides the information and must reimburse the Buyer for any Losses it suffers if the information is false or misleading.
The Middle Ground: The Seller represents that it is currently in compliance with all laws applicable to the Business and that it has previously complied with all such laws for a specified period (e.g. the previous three years). The Seller also represents that it has all permits necessary to conduct the Business, all fees related to those permits are paid, the permits are in full force and effect, and nothing has occurred that would result in their limitation or revocation.
Purpose: The Seller’s current and past compliance with laws applicable to the Business is obviously a significant issue; the Buyer will not want to purchase a business operating outside the confines of the law or be stuck with liabilities created by the Seller. However, whether the parties will spend a substantial amount of time during due diligence and negotiations to cover legal compliance depends largely on the industry in which the Business operates. In a highly regulated industry, the Buyer will find it worth the time to inquire about specific laws and negotiate over the extent of the Seller’s compliance representations. On the other hand, if any potential penalties are minuscule and/or the chances of enforcement are remote, the parties may insert this clause into the Agreement and leave it at that.
Buyer Preference: The Buyer wants a clause that does not limit the Seller’s representation regarding past compliance. Regardless of when the bad act occurred, the Buyer does not want to be liable for someone else’s misconduct. The Buyer also wants to avoid materiality qualifiers for both sets of representations included here.
Seller Preference: The Seller wants to limit this representation to current compliance only, especially if past violations have already been cured. It can also limit its risk by inserting some sort of materiality qualifier (e.g. requiring a violation or lack of a permit to have a Material Adverse Effect on the Business before indemnification applies). Finally, the Seller may seek to exclude entire areas of law from these representations because they are dealt with elsewhere in the Agreement (e.g. environmental laws and permits).
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: None.
Intellectual Property
What is Intellectual Property? In this section, the Seller provides information regarding the intellectual property used by the Business. It is part of the Representations and Warranties of the Seller section.
The Representations and Warranties of Seller portion of the Agreement is used to save the Buyer time and money. Rather than require the Buyer to go through third parties to find certain information, the Seller provides the information and must reimburse the Buyer for any Losses it suffers if the information is false or misleading.
The Middle Ground: This section requires the Seller to make a number of disclosures and representations relating to the Intellectual Property (“IP”) used in the Business. Specifically, the Seller will be asked to provide lists in the Disclosure Schedules of:
Registered IP;
Unregistered IP Assets;
All IP Agreements; and
All joint owners of IP Registrations and/or IP Assets;
The Seller will be asked to represent that:
All required filing fees and administrative tasks relating to the Registered IP have been taken care of;
It has provided all documentation relating to the Registered IP to the Buyer;
Each IP Agreement is valid, binding, and is currently in full force and effect;
It is not in breach or default of any IP Agreement and, to its knowledge, neither is any other party to those agreements;
No party to the Seller’s IP Agreements have indicated a desire to terminate those agreements;
No events have occurred that would cause default of, result in termination of, or otherwise alter the rights of any party to any of the Seller’s IP Agreements;
It is the sole owner of all IP Registrations and IP Assets used in the Business, other than those disclosed in the Disclosure Schedules;
It has the right to use the IP disclosed in the Disclosure Schedules in the Business, free and clear of Encumbrances other than Permitted Encumbrances;
It has entered into written agreements with every current and former employee and independent contractor to (i) assign to the Seller any rights related to IP used in the Business, and (ii) acknowledge the Seller’s exclusive ownership in any such IP;
The IP Assets and the IP licensed under the IP Agreements, taken together, constitute all the IP necessary to conduct the Business as previously conducted;
The transaction does not create additional requirements for the Buyer to use the IP as it is currently used to conduct the Business;
Its rights in the IP Assets are valid and enforceable, and it has taken all reasonable steps to protect the confidentiality of all IP Assets, including requiring all Persons with access to trade secrets to sign written non-disclosure agreements;
The Business’s use of IP does not violate the IP rights of any Person, and no Person has violated the Business’s IP rights;
There are no settled, pending, or threatened Actions (i) alleging infringement by the Seller of third party IP, (ii) challenging the validity or enforceability of the IP Assets or the Seller’s rights to the IP Assets, or (iii) brought by the Seller alleging infringement or any other violation of the IP Assets; and
There is no outstanding or prospective Governmental Order restricting the Seller’s use of the IP Assets in any way.
Purpose: Much like real property, intellectual property can drive the value of a business or it can be next to irrelevant. Without its famous trade secret protections, Coca-Cola would have lost its main competitive advantage (its distinctive taste) long ago. Disney relies heavily on copyright protection to maximize the profits from its most famous characters, which is why they have repeatedly sought to extend the term for copyright protection. Any company that relies on its brand name or logo as a source of competitive advantage is enjoying the protections of trademark law, even if their trademark is not registered. On the other hand, some businesses rely almost entirely on product or service quality to succeed. If their quality drops for any significant period of time, their competitors will simply eat up their share of the market. Therefore, in some transactions the parties will rightly spend extensive time and money to make sure the Seller’s IP is protected and properly transferred. In others, the topic will be an afterthought.
Buyer Preference: The Buyer wants these representations to be as broad as possible to encompass all IP used by the company. On the whole, and particularly with respect to infringement, the Buyer also wants to exclude knowledge or materiality qualifiers. If the Seller’s statements and disclosures are qualified, the Buyer either has to expend extra resources to verify ownership and/or non-infringement, or it has to live with a significant amount of additional risk. From the Buyer’s perspective, the risk of IP infringement or non-ownership should rest with the one who created and/or has controlled the IP.
Seller Preference: The Seller wants to include a materiality qualifier for these disclosures, and it may also want its representations in this section to include a knowledge qualifier. Both approaches help the Seller limit its costs, while providing the Buyer with the information necessary to operate the business. As a minimum precaution, the Seller wants to limit the third-party infringement representation using a knowledge qualifier, as conclusively verifying that no third-party infringement has occurred may be practically impossible.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: The representations relating to intellectual property will not be as extensive in a stock sale as in an asset acquisition. For example, the Seller’s ability to assign the IP it uses is not an issue in a stock sale because there is no need to transfer the IP to a new entity.
Real Property
What is Real Property? In this section, the Seller provides information regarding the real property used by the Business. It is part of the Representations and Warranties of the Seller section.
The Representations and Warranties of Seller portion of the Agreement is used to save the Buyer time and money. Rather than require the Buyer to go through third parties to find certain information, the Seller provides the information and must reimburse the Buyer for any Losses it suffers if the information is false or misleading.
The Middle Ground: In the Real Property representation and the corresponding Disclosure Schedules, the Seller discloses the Owned Real Property and Leased Real Property used by the Business and represents that: (1) it has not received notice of any building code violations, zoning ordinance violations, or violations of any other laws or governmental restrictions; (2) there are no existing, pending, or threatened condemnation proceedings affecting Real Property used by the Business; (3) the disclosed Real Property is sufficient to conduct the Business as conducted prior to the Closing; and, (4) no other real property is necessary to conduct the Business as conducted prior to the Closing.
With respect to the Owned Real Property, the Seller represents that it has marketable fee simple title free of any Encumbrances other than those listed in the Disclosure Schedules and the Permitted Encumbrances, that it has not leased the property or given anyone permission to use it (other than as disclosed in the Disclosure Schedules), and that no one holds any option rights on the property (e.g. rights of first refusal or rights of first offer).
With respect to the Leased Real Property and each individual lease, the Seller represents that the lease is valid and possession of the property is undisturbed, all rent due has been paid and nothing has occurred that would result in breach or default, there has been no notice given regarding termination of the lease, and the Seller has not created an Encumbrance on its interest in the property.
Purpose: For some businesses, real property such as office space is merely a necessary but fungible tool. With a little planning, the business could easily move down the street or to another part of town without breaking stride. For other companies, the real property they own or lease is itself the business, and the company would not be nearly as valuable if that specific property was not included in the transaction. The result is that some acquisition negotiations will focus heavily on real property and will require the input of real property experts, while others will deal with real property issues quickly and move on.
Buyer Preference: If the Real Property held by the Business is an important aspect of the deal, the Buyer will want to consult a real property attorney regarding the content of the Seller’s representations, the mechanics of transfer, and necessary due diligence procedures. Generally, as the importance of property to the Business increases, the Seller’s representations and Buyer’s property-focused due diligence will increase as well.
Seller Preference: The Seller wants to limit its representations as much as possible. For example, the representation regarding notice of building code or zoning ordinance violations is arguably covered by the more general “Compliance with Laws” representation, so the Seller may try to exclude the more specific representation contained in this section. The Seller can also constrain its representations by adding materiality or knowledge qualifiers, and by limiting its title representation to “valid” or “insurable” title rather than “marketable” title.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: Because a transfer of property is not necessary in a stock sale, representations regarding Owned and Leased Real Property are included with the Title to Purchased Assets representation (i.e. the property is treated, for the most part, as just another asset). There are a few representations that pertain only to the Seller’s Owned Real Property, but they are more focused on providing the administrative information necessary to operate the Business rather than focusing on the transferability of the property.
Third Party Consents
What are Third Party Consents? Many times, businesses (or governmental entities) other than the Buyer and Seller will need to provide consent to some aspect of the transaction. This section lays out the consents that are required, which side is responsible for obtaining them, and addresses what happens if they’re not obtained.
The Middle Ground: In written legal agreements there is often language that either allows or prohibits unilateral assignment of the contract or a change of control with regard to a contracting party (such as the sale of a controlling interest of their business). A contract typically contains one or the other, and each has different legal consequences, but for ease of discussion we’ll refer to them collectively as “assignment” unless an explicit distinction is made between the two. In agreements that explicitly allow assignment or are silent on the issue, the Buyer will assume the place of the Seller. In agreements that explicitly prohibit it, the Buyer still needs to take the place of the Seller. In such cases, the Third Party Consents provision states that the Seller must use its reasonable best efforts to obtain the third party’s consent to an assignment. If the third party refuses to grant an assignment, the Seller is required to remain a party to the contract and act on behalf of the Buyer, to the extent the law and the contract at issue allow such an arrangement. Finally, the provision explicitly states that the Buyer retains its right to abandon the transaction if a third-party consent is not obtained, unless the Buyer waives that right in writing or moves forward with the Closing despite the absence of such consent.
Purpose: The Third Party Consents provision determines, where applicable, how third parties will be handled in transitioning contractual relationships. Some industries function almost entirely on the basis of formal contracts that prohibit assignments, while other industries involve few, if any, written agreements. When the target company operates in the former category, this provision is an important element of the Agreement because of its impact on the value of the deal to the Buyer. If the target company is in an industry involving few written agreements, and leased real estate is not an issue, a formal conversation on the issue of third-party consents is likely unnecessary.
Buyer Preference: For the Buyer, the two most important aspects of this clause are the ability to abandon the transaction if third-party consents are not obtained and the standard of effort the Seller must put forth to obtain them. In certain companies and industries, one contract may contribute a significant amount of value to the Business, and if the Buyer cannot benefit from that contract the Business is not worth the contemplated Purchase Price. In that situation, the Buyer must be able to walk away with impunity. By setting an effort standard for obtaining third-party consents, the Buyer has some assurance that the time and money spent on due diligence is not being wasted and that the Seller will attempt to procure the consents even after the Purchase Price has been paid (if the parties have mutually agreed to allow consents to be obtained after Closing). The Buyer wants to set a high effort standard, but one that is within the Seller’s ability to meet. Furthermore, if obtaining third-party consents is critical to the success of the Business moving forward the Buyer may require the Seller to represent that all such consents have been obtained (with any exceptions listed in the Disclosure Schedules).
Seller Preference: The Seller has numerous options for altering this provision to reduce its level of risk. First, it wants to negotiate an effort standard it is confident of being able to meet, which may be something less than “reasonable best efforts.” In lieu of a general standard, it might prefer to set out specific actions it must take to comply with this clause. Other options for controlling the risk presented by this provision include setting an end date for obtaining consents and setting a cap on expenses incurred as a result of trying to comply with this section.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: In a stock sale, no assignment of contracts is necessary since the Business is the party bound by the contract both before and after the acquisition. However, change of control provisions are specifically intended to prevent the Buyer taking the Seller’s place in a contract without the third party’s consent. Therefore, this provision is still necessary in a stock purchase to address the transfer of the Seller’s contracts that contain change of control language.
Purchase Price Allocation
What is the Purchase Price Allocation? The Buyer and Seller are both taxed on the sale of the Business. As part of the taxation process, they must match (or allocate) the Purchase Price and the value of Assumed Liabilities to different asset classes. Both parties must report the same allocation, so they typically agree on it shortly after Closing in accordance with this provision.
The Middle Ground: This section indicates where the Allocation Schedule can be found, which party is responsible for preparing it, when it must be completed, and a dispute resolution procedure in case the parties cannot agree on the allocation scheme. It also states that the tax returns of both parties must be filed in accordance with the Allocation Schedule.
Purpose: How the Purchase Price is allocated directly affects the taxes paid by both parties, and allocations that benefit the Seller typically work against the Buyer (and vice versa). While this dynamic can cause some tension and lead to a lengthy negotiation, the issue is unlikely to derail the entire transaction. That is, in part, because the parties do not have the ability to allocate the Purchase Price as they see fit; their allocation must be within the bounds of the law, which essentially means it must reflect the reality of the situation. Each party has some latitude to negotiate, but neither party will get a “perfect scenario,” and disagreements can usually be resolved by making the allocation that most closely mirrors the actual value of the assets.
Buyer Preference: One of the major benefits of an asset sale is the Buyer’s ability to receive a “stepped-up” tax basis in depreciable and amortizable assets. A higher tax basis on those assets means greater depreciation and/or amortization, which translates to a lower tax bill. Thus, allocating the bulk of the Purchase Price to those assets effectively lowers the price paid for the Business.
Seller Preference: The Seller wants the same benefit from the allocation as the Buyer hopes to achieve – a lower tax bill. In order for the Seller to accomplish that, it will want to allocate as much of the Purchase Price as possible to capital assets (such as land) so that it is taxed at the capital gains rate rather than the ordinary income rate.
Differences in a Stock Sale Transaction Structure: This section is not necessary in a stock sale structure (unless the parties opt to make a 338(h)(10) election) because the Purchase Price will be treated as capital gains to the Seller and the Buyer will assume the Seller’s tax basis in the assets, which limits the benefits it receives from depreciation and amortization.