Categories: Articles

Wisconsin Repeals Bulk Transfer Law

Wisconsin has finally joined the vast majority of states who have repealed bulk transfer laws. The repeal of Wisconsin’s bulk transfer law, Chapter 406 of the Wisconsin statutes, became effective February 5, 2010. Forty-five states have now dropped their bulk transfer requirements, according to the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (“NCCUSL”). Wisconsin was late to join the club. The NCCUSL and the American Law Institute initially recommended repeal or revision of the bulk transfers law in 1989.

Chapter 406 of the Wisconsin Statutes required a business to notify all creditors before transferring a major part of the business’s inventory outside of the ordinary course of business. Chapter 406 applied only to sellers whose primary business was the sale of inventory, such as convenience store and liquor store retailers.

Wisconsin’s bulk transfer law, initially enacted in 1901, had become obsolete. Bulk transfer laws were intended to address concerns near the end of the 19th century that merchants would frequently buy inventory on credit, sell the entire bulk of inventory and disappear with the proceeds of the sale, leaving creditors with little recourse. The NCCUSL, recommended that Wisconsin repeal its bulk transfer law because today creditors can better assess the creditworthiness of a buyer and can obtain a security interest in the assets of a buyer, which was not an option for creditors when Wisconsin’s bulk transfer law was enacted. In addition, creditors are better positioned today to collect amounts owed to them, including through fraudulent transfer laws and state long-arm jurisdiction statutes.

Wisconsin’s bulk transfer law was also impractical. Buyers and sellers of businesses often waived compliance with the bulk transfer law and relied upon the indemnification provisions in the purchase agreement. Neither party wanted notice of the proposed sale of the business to be sent to third parties weeks before the transaction had closed and been announced.

Published by
O'Neil, Cannon, Hollman, DeJong & Laing S.C.

Recent Posts

The WiLaw Quarterly Newsletter

Newsletter Article Highlights: A Beginner’s Guide to Trademarks: Part One—Trademark Basics Wisconsin Expands Child and…

22 hours ago

Employment LawScene Alert: FTC Bans Employee Non-Competes, but Legal Challenges Expected

The administrative agencies are having a busy week! In addition to the DOL issuing an…

7 days ago

Employment LawScene Alert: DOL Issues Final Overtime Rule with Significant Salary Threshold Increase

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, non-exempt employees are entitled to overtime pay at 1.5…

1 week ago

A Beginner’s Guide to Trademarks: Part One—Trademark Basics

What is a Trademark? A trademark can be any mark representing words, phrases, symbols, designs,…

2 weeks ago

Employment LawScene Alert: Biden Proposed Budget Has Labor and Employment Signals

On March 11, 2024, President Biden released the Budget of the U.S. Government for Fiscal…

2 months ago

O’Neil Cannon Serves as Legal Advisor to Engendren Corporation in its Sale to Cummins Inc.

O’Neil Cannon advised Engendren Corporation in its recent sale to Cummins Inc., a global powertrain…

2 months ago