Understanding the differences between receivership and bankruptcy is crucial for businesses facing financial distress. A receivership involves the appointment of an independent third party by a court to manage and preserve a business’s assets, primarily to maximize the value of the secured lender’s collateral. In contrast, bankruptcy generally benefits the borrower who has become insolvent and is governed by the Bankruptcy Code, allowing existing management to maintain control and potentially discharge debts.

The Treasury Department has taken initial steps to implement the Trump administration’s “total elimination” policy directed at certain drug trafficking cartels. Most recently, on May 1, Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) issued an alert advising about a rising trend of oil smuggling from Mexico across the U.S. border led by several cartels.

On April 10, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Division of Corporation Finance (the Division) issued a statement aimed at providing greater clarity on the application of federal securities laws to crypto assets. These offerings may involve equity or debt securities of issuers whose operations relate to networks, applications, and/or crypto assets. The offerings may also relate to crypto assets offered as part of or subject to an investment contract (such a crypto asset, a “subject crypto asset”). The statement does not modify or amend existing rules, but instead tries to translate the traditional disclosure requirements for the unique realities of the crypto asset universe. Notably, the statement also does not address whether or not crypto assets are deemed securities for purposes of federal securities laws, rather, the statement addresses disclosure requirements for those issuers offering crypto assets as part of or subject to an investment contract.

For companies in financial distress, retaining key employees during a Chapter 11 restructuring can be crucial for success. Key Employee Retention Plans (KERPs) and Key Employee Incentive Plans (KEIPs) are tools used to incentivize employees to stay and perform. KERPs are typically designed for non-insider employees and offer bonuses tied to restructuring milestones, while KEIPs target senior management with performance-based bonuses. Both plans aim to mitigate the uncertainty and disruption of working at a company in bankruptcy.

In the Spotlight

Troutman Pepper Locke’s Securities Investigations + Enforcement Practice

Our Securities Investigations + Enforcement practice has expanded significantly due to our recent merger, enhancing our capabilities nationwide, including in our San Francisco, Dallas, and New York offices. We counsel and defend clients throughout all stages of securities enforcement proceedings, representing a diverse range of clients, including major financial institutions, senior corporate executives, boards of directors, and various entities in the financial services industry. Our team handles investigations by regulatory bodies such as the SEC, FINRA, and the Department of Justice. Leveraging decades of experience and including former key government officials, we develop informed and effective strategies tailored to each client’s unique needs. To read more about our capabilities, please click here.

James Stevens, co-leader of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Financial Services Industry Group, was quoted in the April 11, 2025 The Financial Brand article, “They’re Back: Fintech Banking Is Suddenly Advancing on Multiple Fronts.”

As written, “it’s a very limited charter,” explains James Stevens, partner and co-leader of the financial services group of Troutman Pepper…

On April 8, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) officially notified Congress of a significant information security incident involving its email system. This notification, mandated by the Federal Information Security Modernization Act, follows the discovery of unauthorized access to OCC emails and attachments that included highly sensitive information related to the financial condition of federally regulated financial institutions.

Structured dismissals have emerged as a viable alternative for Chapter 11 debtors seeking to exit bankruptcy without the high costs and complexities associated with confirming a Chapter 11 plan or converting to Chapter 7. This approach is particularly useful when a debtor’s assets have been sold, and the remaining funds are insufficient to justify a full plan process but can still provide some distribution to creditors. Unlike a straight dismissal, a structured dismissal offers a more controlled exit, ensuring that the interests of the debtor, creditors, and third parties are adequately protected.

Guest contributors: Ashley Harris, Thomas Scott, and Isabelle Corbett Sterling, BakerHostetler

This is the final article in our three-part series focused on a key question: as bank-fintech partnerships continue to play a vital role in driving financial services, how does the industry make this system safer and better?

In this final part of our series, we propose a DLT-based account ledgering model designed to prevent failures like Synapse while offering broader benefits. Previously, we examined Synapse’s collapse, the misplaced trust in its ledgers, and potential regulatory responses,[1] including concerns about the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) proposed recordkeeping rule (Records NPR).[2]