Failure to Respect Corporate Formalities and Piercing the Corporate Veil

by | Oct 25, 2021

piercing the corporate veil florida

Failure to Respect Corporate Formalities and Piercing the Corporate Veil

By: Barry E. Haimo, Esq.

October 25, 2021

When it comes forming your business, you have options: disregarded sole proprietorship, general partnership, limited partnerships, limited liability partnerships, limited liability limited partnerships, corporations and limited liability companies (LLCs). Most likely, you formed one of these entities for limited liability; mainly, to limit your investment to the amount you contributed as a shareholder. In most circumstances, the shareholders do enjoy limit liability from the liabilities, debts and creditors of the business. However, that is not always the case, especially if there is an intent to mislead or defraud creditors. When that happens, a court may disregard a corporation’s limited liability protection and hold the shareholders liable to the corporation’s liabilities. This is often referred to as piercing the corporate veil. In Florida, this can happen a number of ways. Let’s take a look.

 

Elements of Piercing the Corporate Veil in Florida

Piercing the corporate veil is an equitable remedy so you cannot plead it like you can plead breach of contract, negligence or fraud. It becomes an option to a creditor when it cannot satisfy a judgment against the corporation.

To successfully pierce the corporate veil of a corporation, a plaintiff must prove 3 elements.

First, the plaintiff must prove that:

 

1. Alter Ego / Mere Instrumentality

The first element requires that the plaintiff prove that the corporation was the alter ego or a mere instrumentality of its shareholder(s). “Alter ego” theory refers to when “the shareholders dominate and control the corporation to such an extent that the corporation’s independent existence, was in fact non-existent and the shareholders were in fact alter egos of the corporation.”

The “mere instrumentality” theory is another avenue to prove the first element required to pierce the corporate veil. Under this theory, a subsidiary corporation can be disregarded and the parent corporation’s assets reached if the plaintiff establishes that the parent corporation’s control is to such a degree that the subsidiary is a mere instrumentality of the parent.

 

Florida Court Factors

Below are a few nonexclusive factors that aid in piercing the corporate veil in Florida. Courts use them mostly with respect to alter ego/mere instrumentality element. The failure to respect corporate formalities alone is insufficient to pierce the corporate veil.

  • Domination by a single or few shareholder(s). This would include a wholly-owned subsidiary or a corporation with one or two individual shareholders). This is not conclusive though.
  • Failure to respect the corporate formalities (i.e., failure to issue stock, elect a board of directors, and keep corporate records).
  • Commingling of corporate and personal affairs (i.e., using the corporation as a personal piggy bank)
  • Inadequate capitalization

To expand on the first bullet point above, Florida courts also consider the following factors with respect to parent-subsidiary relationships:

  • Common Management: The same officers and directors manage the parent and subsidiary.
  • Business Discretion: The subsidiary displays very little business discretion.
  • Shared Facilities: The subsidiary and the parent share the same facilities, address, and telephone numbers.
  • Use of Parent’s Employees: The subsidiary’s contracts are performed by employees of the parent.
  • Shared Financial Accounts: The subsidiary shares bank accounts and financial obligations with the parent.
  • Payment of Debts and Obligations: The parent pays the salaries, expenses, or losses of the subsidiary.
  • Arms-Length Transactions: The subsidiary fails to deal with the parent at arms-length.
  • Financing: The parent finances the subsidiary.
  • Tax Treatment: The parent and subsidiary file consolidated income tax returns.
  • Independent Profit Centers: The parent and subsidiary are not treated as independent profit centers.

 

2. Unfair or Inequitable Conduct

Even if insufficient separateness, Florida courts are not likely to pierce the corporate veil unless there is deliberate wrongdoing beyond mere negligence or recklessness.

 

3. Proximate Cause

Even if the first two elements are proven, the plaintiff must prove that the improper conduct was the proximate cause of the harm. That means proving actual causation and legal causation.

 

Conclusion

Creditors may be successful at piercing the corporate veil in Florida, but it is a difficult journey to get there. It requires proving a lack of separateness and improper – even intentional – conduct that is directly responsible for the harm. It is better characterized as a remedy of last resort since it is not a direct cause of action. Seek competent counsel to advise you on the merits of the case before going down that path.

 

Originally published 02/19/2018. Updated 10/25/2021

 

Author:
Barry E. Haimo, Esq.
Haimo Law
Strategic Planning With Purpose®
Email: barry@haimolaw.com

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/user/haimolawtv

 

YOU ARE NOT OUR CLIENT UNLESS WE EXECUTE A WRITTEN AGREEMENT TO THAT EFFECT. MOREOVER, THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS INTENDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. EACH SITUATION IS HIGHLY FACT SPECIFIC AND EXCEPTIONS OFTEN EXIST TO GENERAL RULES. DO NOT RELY ON THIS INFORMATION, AS A CONSULTATION TO UNDERSTAND THE FACTS AND THE CLIENT’S NEEDS AND GOALS IS NECESSARY. ULTIMATELY WE MUST BE RETAINED TO PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE AND REPRESENTATION. THIS INFORMATION IS PROVIDED AS A COURTESY AND, ACCORDINGLY, DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE.

CALL NOW