Thai Airways - Negative Equity Until 2030

Thai Airways is in the midst of its rehabilitation plan with a creditors' vote on the plan scheduled for 12 May 2021.

THAI's balance sheet insolvency has forced it to make a further disclosure to the Stock Exchange of Thailand as it faces delisting.

In their SET notice on 26 March 2021, THAI indicates that it will remain balance sheet insolvent until 2030. Given that THAI has a three year period to remedy its negative equity position, it admits that the Company may be delisted in due course from the SET.

THAI also gives further insight into its rehabilitation plan, disclosing that it expects a capital increase and creditors will have the option of a debt to equity swap.

It is not clear whether the Thai Government will participate in any capital increase or debt to equity conversion in order to maintain its shareholding in THAI,

Also unclear is whether creditors will accept equity in what may become a non-listed entity.

Meanwhile THAI is disputing around half of its liabilities by claiming that these amounts relate to future expenses and were incurred after the airline entered rehabilitation proceedings.

THAI is disputing around 192 billion baht (USD 6.3 billion) claimed by 48 lessors including BOC Aviation Ltd and SMBC Aviation Capital Ltd, and another 33 billion baht (USD 1.1 billion) that Rolls-Royce says it is owed for maintenance services.

The Thai Bankruptcy Act provides for disputed claims to be resolved by the Official Receiver with a right of appeal to the Bankruptcy Court for any aggrieved party.

THAI - SET Notice - 26 March 2021

Thai Airways disputes $7.4bn of aircraft lessor claims

March 2021

© PELEN 2021

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

Is The Thai Airways Rehabilitation Plan A Missed Opportunity?

Media reports indicate that THAI's plan submitted on 2 March 2021 to the Bankruptcy Court in Bangkok does not deal with its massive debt burden. The plan apparently contemplates increasing THAI's debts.

THAI has around THB 410 billion (USD 13.5b) in debt.

It needs to raise around THB 50 billion (USD 1.65b) over the next two years.

This may be achieved through “borrowing, investment or debt to equity conversion” according to THAI. (Any debt/equity conversion would not raise new funds.)

The plan does not require haircuts or debt reductions, apparently out of fear that creditors may not approve the plan. Instead, THAI has asked for a three-year debt moratorium after which the debt will be repaid.

THAI's plan is to create a three year debt time out during which it will attempt to turn around the airline. It plans to achieve this via four steps including making it the airline of choice, expanding services, upgrading digital capabilities and improving operational and cost efficiencies.

The lack of balance sheet reform under the plan will remain an IED with a three year fuse. Worse, it looks like a missed opportunity.

There are two main reasons for using court-sanctioned rehabilitation proceedings in Thailand:

1. To protect a company from creditors while it restructures.

2. To implement balance sheet reform using the Bankruptcy Act's plan voting procedures to cram down creditors.

No doubt there are political issues at work but not using the Act's provisions to implement balance sheet reform does seem like a missed opportunity.

THAI's financial woes preceded Covid-19 and it seems unlikely that THAI will have such a change in its fortunes that, in three years, its debt burden becomes sustainable.

THAI has long been burdened by its vast array of aircraft and engine types so plans to reduce its types of aircraft from twelve to five and types of aircraft engines from nine to four are a step in the right direction.

THAI's creditors will meet on 12 May 2021 to vote on the plan.

Thai Airways seeks to raise B50bn

THAI - SET Notice Re Plan

March 2021

© PELEN 2021

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.

Why Smaller Companies Choose Formal Rehabilitation Proceedings

The rehabilitation proceedings under Ch. 3/1 of the Thai Bankruptcy Act have generally been utilised by larger companies. Think TPI, NTS Steel and, more recently, Pace Development and Thai Airways.

Given costs and time frames involved, why would a smaller company choose this restructuring route?

First, an automatic stay applies.

Under S. 90/12, all existing court proceedings are stayed and no new proceedings may be commenced. Property essential to business operations cannot be recovered. This may be critical to survival of the business. For smaller companies, this means essential leased equipment or factories cannot be seized.

Second, formal proceedings offer a new investor a clean slate.

Under Ch. 3/1, all creditors must file claims for repayment which are dealt with under the plan. Any investor then has a clear understanding of the business's liabilities. This may favour a company acquisition rather than an asset acquisition where 7% VAT would apply.

Third, debt to equity conversions are permitted.

As a general rule, the Thai Civil and Commercial Code (for limited companies) and the Thai Public Limited Companies Act (for public limited companies) prohibit debt to equity conversions. The exceptions under S. 90/42 of the Bankruptcy Act allow for an easier clean up of the balance sheet, subject to sufficient creditor approval when voting on the plan.

Where existing management does most of the work, including acting as the planner, it may be possible to keep the rehabilitation costs as low as possible. Limited numbers of creditors and general consensus between debtor and creditors would also limited rehabilitation costs.

November 2020

© PELEN 2020

The content of this publication is intended to provide a general overview on matters which may be of interest. It is not intended to be comprehensive. It does not constitute advice in relation to particular circumstances nor does it constitute the provision of legal services, legal advice or financial product advice.