[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 138 (Wednesday, October 26, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11919-S11922]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Ms. SNOWE (for herself, Mr. Talent, and Mr. Bond):
S. 1923. A bill to address small business investment companies
licensed to issue participating debentures, and for other purposes; to
the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship.
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise to support the ``Small Business
Investment and Growth Act of 2005,'' which I have introduced today to
facilitate increased investments in small businesses throughout this
country. I am pleased to be joined by my esteemed colleagues from
Missouri, Senator Jim Talent and Senator Kit Bond, in sponsoring this
bill.
As Chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship, I am committed to supporting our Nation's small
businesses by increasing their access to capital. Small businesses
comprise 99.7 percent of all businesses in the United States. Moreover,
small businesses employ more than half, 57 percent, of the total
private-sector workforce, and are responsible for the creation of more
than two-thirds of all new jobs. Clearly, increasing investments in
small businesses is crucial to our on-going economic success.
This bill will reform and enhance the Small Business Administration's
SBIC program, a program that is vital to fostering innovation, growth,
and job creation in small businesses throughout our country. Small
Business Investment Companies (SBICs) are privately-owned and managed
venture capital investment companies that are licensed and regulated by
the SBA. SBICs use their own capital, combined with funds borrowed from
other private investors and supported by an SBA guarantee, to make
equity and debt investments in qualifying small businesses. The SBA
shares in the profits of SBICs. The structure of the program is unique
and has been a model for similar public-private partnerships around the
world.
[[Page S11920]]
The program has been successful in mobilizing private venture capital
investment, and leveraging that private investment with additional
funds supported by SBA guarantees. According to the SBA's annual
reports to Congress, the SBIC program has provided over $17.2 billion
in financing to small businesses since the beginning of Fiscal Year
1999. Each year, this financing allows small businesses to create or
retain tens of thousands of jobs. For instance, according to the SBA's
Office of Advocacy, in 2004 alone SBIC investments helped small
businesses create or retain approximately 81,042 jobs.
There are currently two types of SBIC Programs, the Participating
Securities Program and the Debenture Program. Unfortunately, the
Participating Securities Program stopped issuing new financing to SBICs
at the beginning of FY 2005 because the program had ceased to be a
zero-subsidy program, and there were no Federal appropriations to
support the program. The Debenture Program has not suffered similar
losses, and is unaffected by this bill.
This bill would create a third type of SBIC program, the
``Participating Debenture'' SBIC Program, that would replace the
Participating Securities program. This new program would be a ``zero-
subsidy'' program, with no Federal appropriations necessary, that would
provide financing with equity characteristics to small businesses. In
response to two major problems suffered by the Participating Securities
Program, the new Participating Debenture program would seek to a,
ensure that a participating debenture is considered a debt instrument
for Federal budgetary purposes, and b, prevent financial losses by the
SBA by increasing the SBA's share of SBICs' profits.
Together with Senator Talent and Senator Bond, I plan to foster a
debate in the Small Business Committee about this bill and move toward
a successful rejuvenation of the equity portion of the SBIC program. I
believe that a full discussion about the proposal by the SBA, the
SBICs, and experts in the venture capital industry will be necessary to
achieve this progress.
In July 2005 a bill, H.R. 3429, was introduced in the House that
would also create a new program to replace the Participating Securities
program. The bill we are introducing has some elements in common with
that House bill, but goes further to clarify the manner in which the
SBIC program would operate, and to bring the program into greater
compliance with budgetary guidelines.
This bill will allow the SBA to guarantee the repayment of the
redemption price, principal, and interest for a new type of security, a
``participating debenture,'' issued by a SBIC. This type of guarantee
(of principal and interest for a security issued by an SBIC) existed in
the two other SBIC programs, and for those other two programs it was
explicitly authorized in the Small Business Investment Act of 1958 (the
SBIA). This bill will also authorize the SBA to guarantee the repayment
to an ``interim funding provider'' (an IFP) of any funds lost by the
IFP because of the default of an SBIC during the period after the IFP
has advanced monies to the SBIC, and before the IFP has been repaid for
those funds. This type of guarantee existed in practice in the two
other SBIC programs, but was not authorized by the SBIA Thus, this
provision rectifies that problem and brings the new program into
compliance with the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990 (the FCRA).
Another section of the bill authorizes the SBA to guarantee the
payment of the redemption price and interest for a trust certificate
issued by a trustee of a pool of PDs. This type of guarantee existed in
the two prior SBIC programs, but was not authorized by the SBIA.
Similar to the current Participating Securities and Debenture SBIC
programs, the Participating Debenture (PD) program will raise funds by
pooling the securities issued by SBICs into a pool and selling trust
certificates that represent interests in that pool. Thus, this
provision rectifies that problem and brings the new program more into
compliance with the FCRA.
Our bill includes all of the provisions of H.R. 3429 that address
redemption and interest, and also includes several additional
provisions. First, the bill includes repayment in default. It
authorizes the SBA to guarantee repayment to IFPs for funds lost due to
the default of an SBIC. The bill also authorizes the SBA to guarantee
the payment of the redemption price and interest for trust certificates
issued by a trustee of a pool of PDs. For each of the guarantees
authorized here, the SBA is empowered to charge a fee.
The fee authorized above will be sufficient to reduce to zero the net
cost to the SBA of each guarantee. For the other two SBIC programs, the
SBIA only explicitly authorized such a fee for the first guarantee,
mentioned above, and did not authorize such a fee for the other two
types of guarantees. Thus, this provision rectifies that problem and
brings the new program into compliance with the FCRA. This section is
not found in H.R. 3429.
The obligations that each SBIC hold to repay the SBA will be
identical, or ``matched'', in both size and timing to the obligations
that the SBA holds to repay to the trust certificate holders that have
purchased trust certificates in the pool that holds that particular
SBICs' PDs. For advancing funds to an SBIC in accordance with the
SBIC's license agreement with the SBA, an IFP shall have the right to
receive interest from the SBIC. The manner of calculating and
collecting this interest is specified. These sections is not found in
H.R. 3429. The aggregate unpaid principal balance of the PDs issued by
a SBIC must not exceed 200 percent of that company's private capital.
In other words, the maximum ratio of the SBA's outstanding investment
in the SBIC, when compared to the private investors' investment, is
2:1. This method would be identical to the two current SBIC programs.
The bill permits the SBA may authorize a trust or pool acting on
behalf of the SBA to purchase PDs from an SBIC. This practice occurs in
the other two SBIC programs, but is not explicitly authorized by the
SBIA. The principal balance of each PD will be payable in full not
later than the tenth anniversary of the date of issuance of that PD. If
a SBIC fails to make this payment they default immediately and are
liquidated. This was not the case in the other two SBIC programs. Thus,
both of these provisions bring this new program more into compliance
with the FCRA.
Our bill, unlike the House bill, adds that if an SBIC fails to repay
the required principle and interest by a date no later than the tenth
anniversary of the original issuance, the SBIC defaults immediately and
must be liquidated. Beginning on the date of issuance, interest on the
principal balance outstanding of a PD shall accrue on a daily basis,
and unpaid accrued interest shall compound every six months. There are
no interest payments during the first five years of a PD. All unpaid
interest on a PD accruing during the first five years will be due and
payable in full out of gross receipts on the fifth anniversary.
Interest accruing on a PD after the fifth anniversary will be due and
payable semi-annually. Interest payments used to be contingent on a
SBIC's profitability. In this proposal, the payments are due regardless
of a SBIC's financial situation and if a payment is missed the SBA has
the right to liquidate the SBIC. Thus, this provision brings this new
program more into compliance with the FCRA.
In addition, the SBA is authorized to charge an additional fee, as
necessary to reduce the cost of the program to zero, as that term is
defined in the FCRA, but the fee is capped at 1.5 percent, this may
need to be adjusted. This type of fee existed in the other two SBIC
programs. If a SBIC fails to pay any principal or interest on a PD when
due, the Administration, in addition to any other remedies that it may
have, can demand immediate repayment of the principal balance and all
accrued interest on all outstanding PDs of that SBIC. This was not the
case in the other two programs; thus, this provision brings the new
program more into compliance with the FCRA. If a default occurs, the
SBA has the right to charge a default rate of interest. Again, this is
an improvement on the existing program. Finally, if a default occurs,
the SBA may apply the SBIC's private collateral, its private
investments, to pay any interest or principal that the SBIC owes the
SBA. Again, this is an improvement (a crucial improvement) on the
existing program.
[[Page S11921]]
The bill offers several additions, in this regard, to the House bill.
If default occurs, the SBA can charge a default rate of interest. The
SBA can also make use of private investments to pay any interest or
principle owed to the SBA by the SBIC. In the event of a SBIC's
liquidation, a PD will be senior in priority for all purposes to any
equity interests, in other words, the SBA will have first priority to
reimbursement. Also, the SBIC's private collateral may, at the option
of the SBA, be applied to pay accrued interest and principal of
outstanding PDs.
In the event of a default by an SBIC, a PD will be senior in priority
for all purposes to any equity interests, in other words, the SBA will
have first priority to reimbursement. Also, the SBIC's private
collateral may, at the option of the SBA, be applied to pay accrued
interest and principal of outstanding PDs. The bill has an additional
section for the defaults of the SBIC. The section creates rights for
the SBA, in case of default, that are the same as the SBA's rights in
liquidation. An SBIC also commits to invest private equity in small
businesses, to match the capital raised by its PDs. An SBIC in this
program shall have no other debt other than financing obtained pursuant
to this program.
Unless otherwise allowed by the SBA, an SBIC may used the proceeds of
a PD issued by the company to pay the principal and interest due on
outstanding Pds issued by that company, if the SBIC has outstanding
private equity capital invested in an amount equal to that being
refinanced. This section of the Senate bill adds that an SBIC may use
proceeds of a PD if it has outstanding private equity capital invested
in an amount equal to that be refinanced.
Unless otherwise provided, an SBIC's gross receipts shall be used
first for the payment of accrued interest on PDs, and then for
repayment of PD principal and private investments into the SBIC, and
then for profit distributions. Gross Receipts means all cash received
by a SBIC, including proceeds of the sale of securities, management or
other fees, and cash representing return of invested capital, other
than capital contributed by partners, the proceeds of the issuance of
PDs, and money borrowed from other sources, if any. Marketable
Securities that the company distributes in kind will be distributed as
if they were Gross Receipts.
When an SBIC misses a payment, the SBA may choose not to liquidate
the SBIC and the SBIC may continue to operate. In such a case, a SBIC
must use Gross Receipts within 10 days after receipt to repay any
outstanding past due interest and past due principal. If a SBIC has no
outstanding past due interest or principal, it must use Gross Receipts
to prepay accrued interest. Such prepayment will be due not later than
the end of the calendar quarter during which such Gross Receipts were
received. Failure to prepay accrued interest will be deemed a Payment
Default. At such time as there is no unpaid, accrued interest or past
due principal outstanding on a SBIC's PDs, the SBIC may use Gross
Receipts to prepay PD principal that is not past due. If any Gross
Receipts remain, they may be paid to private investors to repay their
investments. As long as there are any outstanding PDs, a SBIC may
distribute Gross Receipts to its limited partners but only if they
distribute at least a pro-rata share simultaneously to the
administration.
If Gross Receipts remain after the payment of all required payments,
remaining funds can be used for profit distributions. When all PD
principal and all private capital has been repaid in full, post-
amortization payments may made be made to the administration. The
payments are 25 precent of their pro-rata share until private investors
have received 100 percent of their principal; and thereafter, 50
percent of their pro-rata share. The order of payments are: interest
payments, principal payments, pre-payments, pre-amortization payments,
and post-amortization payments. This provision provides for tax
distributions that are required by law, as necessary. No distribution
may violate liquidity requirements or other restrictions imposed by the
SBA's regulations or any State's law.
At any time a SBIC is in restricted operation or liquidation by
reason of capital impairment or regulatory violation, the maturity date
of the SBIC's PDs, including principal and accrued interest, is subject
to acceleration at the option of the administration, and whether or not
there has been such an acceleration, up to 100 percent of all Gross
Receipts and unfunded private investor commitments may, at the option
of the administration, be required to be distributed to the
administration until all accrued interest and principal on the SBIC's
PDs have been paid in full. No distributions will be made to limited
partners when a SBIC is in restricted operations or liquidation due to
capital impairment or regulatory violation. This section of the bill
details the procedures and requirements that would apply if an SBIC
provided a partial repayment to the SBA in the form of securities,
rather than cash.
Another section details the schedule under which payments will be
made to the SBA by an SBIC. Subject to SBA regulations and the
permission of private investors, an SBIC may reinvest Gross Receipts
back into small businesses. In addition, the bill provides that after
re-payments have occurred in this program, the SBA's share of such re-
payments shall not be reduced or recalculated. This section does not
create any ownership interest for the SBA in any SBICs. Rather, the
relationship is one of lender-borrower.
I urge my colleagues to support this bill. Too much is at stake for
small businesses, and the economy as a whole, to allow this critical
legislation to languish. Congress must find essential agreement and
fulfill its obligation to America's small businesses. Failing to
advance this bill would diminish our chances for innovation, and stifle
the entrepreneurial opportunities this program will produce. Instead,
we have an opportunity to support these key attributes of American
small businesses.
______
By Mr. DURBIN:
S. 1924. A bill to strengthen civil-military relationships by
permitting State and local governments to enter into lease purchase
agreements with the United States Armed Forces; to the Committee on
Armed Services.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I have often said here on the floor of the
Senate that by working together, we in America can build a better
future for all of us. Rather than limit our potential with an every-
man-for-himself philosophy, we should find ways to work together.
Anyone who has ever played sports can recall their coach's
encouragement to use teamwork. That was good advice for athletics and
it's a good idea in public policy too. America could use a little bit
more of a teamwork society.
Today I rise to introduce the Base and Community Lease-Purchase
Expansion Act. The purpose of this bill is to provide more opportunity
for military bases to enter into cooperative agreements with the
governments of the communities in which they are located.
One of the options available to the military for obtaining the
facilities and office space it needs is the lease-purchase agreement.
In this sort of arrangement, the military service contracts with an
entity that agrees to construct a building on military land. The
military then makes lease payments over a term of several years. At the
end of that term the building becomes the property of the government.
Current law says that the military services may enter into an agreement
such as this only with a ``private contractor.''
The bill I offer today expands the range of entities with which the
military can enter into these agreements so that the door can be opened
to cooperative lease-purchase arrangements between the military and
governments at the local and State level.
We know from the recent round of base closures and realignments that
communities across the Nation are closely connected to the military
installations situated nearby. The health and prosperity of one has a
direct effect on the health and prosperity of the other. It is only
prudent to allow the two to work together when it will benefit both the
base and the community to do so. And what more stable partner could a
military base have than the local government that welcomes its presence
and role in the local community?
In my own State of Illinois, for example, we are very proud to be
host to
[[Page S11922]]
Scott Air Force Base, home to the United States Transportation Command,
the Air Force's Air Mobility Command, and some tireless flying units
that move troops and materials all over the world in defense of our
Nation. St. Clair County, where Scott Air Force Base is located, has
for some time been willing to discuss with the Air Force the idea of
working together on a lease-purchase agreement. That idea cannot get
off the ground; much less take flight, however, so long as the current
law strictly limits such agreements to private contractors.
This is just one example from my own State of Illinois. I expect
there may be other military installations and their neighboring
jurisdictions that also might like to work together in a similar
fashion. The Base and Community Lease-Purchase Expansion Act which I
introduce today will help open the door to that sort of teamwork.
America is strongest when the military and civilian parts of our
society work together in partnership on projects of mutual benefit. To
that end we must work to reduce barriers and seize opportunities to
foster cooperation between military installations and the states and
local jurisdictions in which they are located. In so doing, we lay the
foundation for mutual understanding, a strong military and enduring
communities.
____________________