Four years have now passed since the insolvency reform came into effect. For the Association of Insolvency Administrators and Experts in Restructuring and Insolvency, ASPAC, this anniversary is an opportunity to take stock of a rule that introduced significant changes to the Spanish insolvency system, but that still requires developments and adjustments to fully achieve its objectives.
Since its effective date in September 2022, the reform has brought about a significant shift in how insolvency situations are addressed, especially through the incorporation of restructuring plans as a tool to act in early stages and prevent viable companies from ending up in bankruptcy proceedings. This instrument has demonstrated its usefulness in certain cases, offering greater flexibility and enabling solutions that are less judicialized.
The Second Insolvency Directive Takes Effect
This anniversary also coincides with the entry into force of the Directive 2026/799, known as the Second Insolvency Directive, which member states must transpose by January 22, 2029. The regulation aims to advance the harmonization of certain aspects of insolvency law within the European Union and introduces a common framework in areas such as avoidance actions, asset tracing, prenegotiated sale procedures, creditors’ committees, and transparency of national legislation.
The entry into force of this directive comes at a moment when Spain already has four years of experience applying the 2022 insolvency reform, which allows for a broader perspective on its practical functioning and the developments that remain to be addressed.
However, ASPAC contends that the system’s functioning remains constrained by several pending challenges. Among them are the evolution of no-asset insolvencies, the practical application of the special procedures for microenterprises, the need for a fully operational digital platform, and the absence of approval for the Insolvency Administrator Statute, a long-standing demand of the profession.
“Four years after the reform took effect, we have enough experience to identify which aspects have worked and which issues remain outstanding. It is time to move forward with a more effective, transparent, and professional framework that strengthens legal certainty and better reflects the reality of insolvency proceedings,” says Manuela Serrano, president of ASPAC.
One of the points that continues to generate the greatest concern is the handling of no-asset insolvencies. For ASPAC, its current configuration may limit professional oversight in proceedings where there are significant creditor and debtor interests, making it necessary to strengthen control, transparency, and prior analysis mechanisms.
The Association also continues to focus on the special procedures for microenterprises, regulated in Book Three of the Insolvency Law. Its practical deployment remains tied to the need for fully operational digital tools and a framework that guarantees agility, efficiency, and legal certainty. In ASPAC’s view, the widespread exclusion of the insolvency administrator from these procedures remains one of the elements that hinders sound and balanced management of insolvency for smaller companies.
In this context, ASPAC regards advancing the approval of the Insolvency Administrator Statute as a priority, intended to regulate essential aspects such as access to the profession, training, remuneration, liability, and the scope of action for these professionals. For the Association, this development is key to consolidating a more specialized, transparent insolvency administration aligned with the system’s real needs.
“The approval of the Insolvency Administrator Statute remains a key piece for consolidating a stronger, more specialized system that is comparable with the standards in countries within our legal sphere. You cannot move toward a more effective insolvency model without equipping its professionals with a clear, stable framework appropriate to the responsibilities they assume,” concludes Serrano.
Four years on, the objective should be to move toward a more effective, professionalized, and balanced insolvency framework capable of preserving viable businesses, offering a real second chance, and adequately protecting the interests of creditors, debtors, and professionals, in line with the evolution of European insolvency law. In this path, ASPAC also considers it necessary to revisit issues such as the legal provision for a tariff-backed guarantee account funded by the professionals’ own fees, as well as move toward a unified national profile of insolvency professionals who can address liquidity challenges across pre-insolvency stages and, if those do not resolve the situation, into the bankruptcy phases.
