Värdering av tillgångar i tvångsmässiga situationer

Sammanfattning: Valuation of assets is important in several aspects. This essay has aimed to investigate how the valuation is done in compulsory situations and to identify the criteria’s that affect the valuation process in compulsory situations. I have chosen to examine five different compulsory situations, namely bankruptcy, corporate reorganization, foreclosure, expropriation and the preparation of a control balance sheet in the event of compulsory liquidation. Several of these situations are relatively unregulated with regard to the valuation of assets, at the same time as the valuation in many cases plays an extremely large role. Valuation of assets is a practically regulated issue and therefore it seems to be a need for a theoretical presentation and a comparison of the valuation process in these different procedures. The questions that have been answered in the essay are which criteria’s should be used as a basis for the assessment of valuation of assets in compulsory valuation situations, and also to what extent the different criteria’s are given the same importance in compulsory valuation situations. There is some guidance in the law on how the valuation should be done, but this is very vague and general. There is some literature in the field but not much. The issues have been analyzed from a rule of law perspective and to some extent an EU legal perspective regarding the new Insolvency Directive, which has led to some changes, especially in the area of corporate reorganization. This directive has not yet been transposed into Swedish law. What the investigation has concluded is that there are five different criteria’s that form the basis for the assessment of valuation of assets in compulsory situations. These are value term, valuation method, the purpose of the procedure, type of asset and time of valuation. Market value is a term used in almost all the described valuation situations. This term has different, especially accounting related definitions. These definitions are not ultimate, for example, insolvency law situations. The value term must first be defined, in order to then apply the term in a valuation method. The investigation also concludes that both value terms and valuation methods are criteria’s that are given equal importance in all procedures. The purpose of the different procedures is also a criterion that is given equal importance in all procedures, but the importance of the valuation of assets in each procedure does not. Type of asset and time of valuation are criteria’s that are not given the same importance in the different procedures.