Mobi­li­zing cri­sis respon­se forces: agre­e­ing con­trac­tu­al pled­ges of rights

Any com­pa­ny can be hit by cri­ses. It is essen­ti­al to pro­tect yours­elf in advan­ce with pled­ges of rights and to expand your risk manage­ment sys­tem so that it acts cor­rect­ly in the event of an emer­gen­cy. Alter­na­ti­ves for mana­ging pay­ment risks are indis­pensable.

The agree­ment of con­trac­tu­al pled­ges of rights is not a for­ma­li­ty — pled­ges are a stra­te­gic instru­ment for acti­ve risk manage­ment.

The once excel­lent pay­ment beha­vi­or of Ger­man com­pa­nies is dwind­ling. Ger­many’s com­pa­nies are pay­ing their invoices later and later — or not at all. Accor­ding to cre­dit insurer Atra­di­us, only 33% of all receiv­a­bles bet­ween com­pa­nies will be paid on time in 2024. This means that 67 per­cent of invoices were over­due. In ten per­cent of cases, out­stan­ding debts remain­ed uncoll­ec­ti­ble. This is an omi­nous ear­ly indi­ca­tor that sets off a dan­ge­rous chain reac­tion.

This trend is also con­firm­ed by the new Coface Pay­ment Sur­vey 2025: 81% of Ger­man com­pa­nies reportthat they are now affec­ted by late pay­ments — a dra­stic increase com­pared to pre­vious years. Coface indi­ca­tes the pro­por­ti­on of com­pa­nies that are con­fron­ted with late pay­ments at all — i.e. almost 4 out of 5 com­pa­nies. It is not only the num­ber of late pay­ments that is incre­asing, but also their dura­ti­on: pay­ment terms are being met less and less fre­quent­ly, and many com­pa­nies now have to wait signi­fi­cant­ly lon­ger for their money than just a few years ago. The eco­no­mic pres­su­re runs through the enti­re sup­p­ly chain — if you don’t get paid on time, you in turn pay late.

An ongo­ing increase in over­due noti­fi­ca­ti­ons is expec­ted for Ger­ma­ny.

Ger­ma­ny is expe­ri­en­cing a quiet indus­tri­al decli­ne. The trans­por­ta­ti­on and logi­stics sec­tor is par­ti­cu­lar­ly hard hit with 55%, steel and metal pro­ces­sing with 25% and mecha­ni­cal engi­nee­ring with 45% of pay­ments over­due. The increase is slight­ly lower in the house­hold goods and fur­ni­tu­re, auto­mo­ti­ve and con­s­truc­tion mate­ri­als sec­tors, at 16% each.

The con­s­truc­tion and real estate sec­tor is facing a mas­si­ve reces­si­on, not least due to plan­ning uncer­tain­ty trig­ge­red by the Hea­ting Act and hig­her inte­rest rates. The exces­si­ve regu­la­to­ry fren­zy con­ti­nues to weigh hea­vi­ly on the sec­tor and is also pre­ven­ting the urgen­tly nee­ded con­s­truc­tion of new homes: the Colo­gne Insti­tu­te of the Ger­man Eco­no­my recor­ded 3,300 stan­dards that app­ly nati­on­wi­de. Added to this are the requi­re­ments of the fede­ral sta­tes and local aut­ho­ri­ties. The Cen­tral Real Estate Com­mit­tee, which repres­ents the inte­rests of lar­ge real estate com­pa­nies and asso­cia­ti­ons, cal­cu­la­tes a total of around 20,000 buil­ding regu­la­ti­ons. The result: We have four times more bureau­cra­cy than in 1990, when the regu­la­ti­ons were alre­a­dy much more num­e­rous than in other Euro­pean count­ries.

This means not­hing other than that the eco­no­mic acti­vi­ty rate is on a down­ward trend never befo­re expe­ri­en­ced in the Fede­ral Repu­blic of Ger­ma­ny.

Howe­ver, if invoices that are due are not paid as agreed, this trig­gers liqui­di­ty pro­blems, espe­ci­al­ly for small and medi­um-sized com­pa­nies. In the end, they lack the funds to meet their own pay­ment obli­ga­ti­ons.

Almost a quar­ter of com­pa­nies doubt whe­ther they are still finan­ci­al­ly robust enough to face the cur­rent chal­lenges. Banks are now respon­ding to requests for short-term finan­cing in a noti­ce­ab­ly more rest­ric­ti­ve man­ner when gran­ting loans — kno­wing full well that more com­pa­ny insol­ven­ci­es are lea­ding to a signi­fi­cant increase in non-per­forming loans and loan defaults. This is under­stan­da­ble as, accor­ding to the ban­king super­vi­so­ry aut­ho­ri­ty, bad loans have more than dou­bled com­pared to the pre­vious year.

In 2025 and 2026, entre­pre­neurs are likely to be con­fron­ted with the reces­si­on and expen­si­ve inte­rest rates, a shorta­ge of raw mate­ri­als and sup­p­ly chain pro­blems, ongo­ing geo­po­li­ti­cal cri­ses and a con­trac­tion in the sup­p­ly of cre­dit. Many com­pa­nies in Ger­ma­ny are ina­de­qua­te­ly pre­pared for this com­plex situa­ti­on.

View­ed sober­ly, the­re is no reason to be opti­mi­stic that the con­stel­la­ti­on curr­ent­ly ent­rus­ted with govern­ment respon­si­bi­li­ty will be able to deal with even a small part of the pro­blems in the fore­seeable future. The situa­ti­on is pre­ca­rious and is beco­ming incre­asing­ly pre­ca­rious.
For small and medi­um-sized busi­nesses, this means If you want your com­pa­ny to sur­vi­ve, you need to be fle­xi­ble in the way you set up your accounts receiva­ble manage­ment. The ans­wers alre­a­dy exist. The legis­la­tor pro­vi­des them.

Most entre­pre­neurs are awa­re that soo­ner or later a wave of slug­gish pay­ment beha­vi­or, inclu­ding pay­ment defaults and insol­ven­ci­es, can ine­vi­ta­b­ly over­whelm almost any com­pa­ny. It is the­r­e­fo­re high time to read­just inter­nal deb­tor manage­ment for sub­or­di­na­ted receiv­a­bles.

Ano­ther dri­ver of this deve­lo­p­ment is the poli­ti­cal­ly desi­red expro­pria­ti­on of cre­di­tors legi­ti­mi­zed by the legis­la­tor and dri­ven for­ward step by step by inte­res­ted par­ties. Many entre­pre­neurs con­sider it an unac­cep­ta­ble under­mi­ning of the pro­per­ty rights enshri­ned in the Ger­man Basic Law if they are unin­ten­tio­nal­ly cal­led upon to reor­ga­ni­ze and res­truc­tu­re their defaul­ting deb­tors by means of ongo­ing amend­ments to insol­ven­cy law such as the Sta­RUG, ESUG and the Insol­ven­cy Code. This is also per­cei­ved as unfair if not even the impli­ed pro­mi­se is kept that cre­di­tors will at least retain the res­truc­tu­red deb­tor as a cus­to­mer after the end of the insol­ven­cy pro­cee­dings.

In prac­ti­ce, howe­ver, com­pa­nies that are no lon­ger sol­vent are res­truc­tu­red by means of chan­ge manage­ment and then released back onto the mar­ket, often with a com­ple­te­ly new busi­ness model. The bene­fi­ci­a­ries of this sys­tem are the con­sul­ting indus­try, inte­rim mana­gers, insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tors and their spe­ci­al­ly instal­led and some­ti­mes owned liqui­da­ti­on com­pa­nies. The pos­si­bi­li­ty of insol­ven­cy under self-admi­nis­tra­ti­on opens the door to moral hazard.

Infor­med entre­pre­neurs use alter­na­ti­ve cour­ses of action:

In their risk manage­ment, for­ward-loo­king SMEs are now using new­ly deve­lo­ped instru­ments to hedge receiv­a­bles for lar­ger cre­dit expo­sures or trade receiv­a­bles.

This is based on the appli­ca­ti­on of con­trac­tual­ly agreed pled­ges of rights.

This pro­vi­des addi­tio­nal plan­ning secu­ri­ty and opens up the oppor­tu­ni­ty to react imme­dia­te­ly at the first sign of a breach of con­tract. Secu­ring receiv­a­bles via agreed pled­ges of rights to com­pa­ny shares or other rights (licen­se rights, trade­mark rights, domains, IP rights or patents) is par­ti­cu­lar­ly advan­ta­ge­ous.

If the con­tract is draf­ted in advan­ce (by a lawy­er spe­cia­li­zing in this field), the cre­di­tor will be in an advan­ta­ge­ous posi­ti­on vis-à-vis the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor in the event of insol­ven­cy.

In the case of non-per­forming loan com­mit­ments, the­re are always infor­ma­ti­on defi­ci­ts and loss of con­trol, some­ti­mes even dri­ven by cri­mi­nal ener­gy. Trans­pa­ren­cy and new opti­ons for action vis-à-vis the pre­vious manage­ment, also with regard to pos­si­ble cri­mi­nal mis­con­duct, ari­se when chan­ging from cre­di­tor to acti­ve owner. This can be com­pen­sa­ted for by the time­ly, com­ple­te take­over of the bor­ro­wers by way of a public auc­tion, which the len­der is entit­led to do in accordance with Sec­tion 1239 of the Ger­man Civil Code (co-bid­ding by cre­di­tors and owners).

The acqui­si­ti­on of pled­ged com­pa­ny shares incurs mana­ge­ab­ly low cos­ts for the cre­di­tor. Con­trol is obtai­ned by acqui­ring the debtor’s shares by public auc­tion. The cre­di­tor can off­set the purcha­se pri­ce cal­led in the auc­tion against his pro rata cla­im to repay­ment of his cla­im, i.e. he does not have to pay the purcha­se pri­ce as long as his bid does not exceed the cla­im. The purcha­se pri­ce is irre­vo­ca­bly and defi­ni­tively deter­mi­ned by public auc­tion. A fidu­cia­ry model is also con­ceiva­ble if the cre­di­tor wants to gain con­trol indi­rect­ly and does not want to acqui­re the shares hims­elf.

It is very important to have the right part­ner on board for the time­ly and legal­ly com­pli­ant auc­tion of pled­ged com­pa­ny shares or rights.

The gene­ral­ly publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eers of Deut­sche Pfand­ver­wer­tung spe­cia­li­ze in the liqui­da­ti­on of pled­ged com­pa­ny shares.

For many years, we have suc­cessful­ly con­duc­ted auc­tions of all kinds of rights such as GmbH shares or other com­pa­ny shares as well as secu­ri­ties, patents, IP rights, licen­se rights, trade­mark rights and domains. As gene­ral­ly publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eers, we are aut­ho­ri­zed by the Ger­man sta­te to car­ry out this sove­reign act as an organ of the admi­nis­tra­ti­on of jus­ti­ce.

In the event that the cre­di­tor does not wish to take over the com­pa­ny shares pled­ged to him, Deut­sche Pfand­ver­wer­tung has cont­acts to inte­res­ted risk inves­tors.

Act now for the future of your com­pa­ny.

Dis­co­ver trans­for­ma­ti­ve opti­ons for action that rede­fi­ne receiv­a­bles manage­ment.

If you have a spe­ci­fic case, plea­se do not hesi­ta­te to cont­act us: Cont­act form

Fur­ther infor­ma­ti­on on com­mis­sio­ning: Ever­y­thing cli­ents need to know explai­ned

Fur­ther infor­ma­ti­on on the topic: Auc­tion of com­pa­ny shares

Pic­tu­re cre­dits: Pho­to­grapher hasky2, enva­to ele­ments D6L439BR87

Share post:

Facebook
X
LinkedIn

Further contributions: