Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Marcell Sihombing, Fitri N. Heriani
The government has been intending to revise controversial Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 1 of 2013 on Guidelines for Determining Service Fees for Receivers and Administrators (2013 Regulation) for a while now. The government’s ultimate goal is to improve the ease of doing business within Indonesia and this plan is also supported by a Supreme Court ruling which approved the judicial review of the 2013 Regulation and which mandates for its revision.
Daulat P. Silitonga, Director of Civil Law Affairs at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Ministry), recently commented on this matter at a seminar entitled “Discourse for the Revision of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and the Postponement of Debt Settlement Obligations.” The event was held at Sentul in West Java on Friday, 11 March 2016.
In his statement, Mr. Silitonga asserted that the deliberation process and formulation of the new ministerial regulation, which will revise the 2013 Regulation, was almost complete. A series of deliberation meetings has already been held, and Mr. Silitonga is hopeful that a new ministerial regulation will be issued as soon as possible.
“A draft regulation has already been formulated, and hopefully it will be issued in the near future. The new ministerial regulation should be able to conform to the most recent economic developments, and should not excessively overburden receivers, but rather be fair minded in its approach.
Mr. Silitonga asserted that the main reason behind the revision was the government’s policy of improving the ease of doing business within Indonesia. Apparently, businesses have complained that receivers’ fees are currently too high. The government has therefore been planning to reduce receivers’ fees so that they don’t place an undue burden upon businesses, either financially or bureaucratically.
Mr. Silitonga further revealed that two mechanisms will be used in order to determine receivers’ fees. Firstly, fees will be based upon a percentage, as with the current mechanism, however a smaller percentage level will be set in comparison with the current rate. Secondly, fees will be based on an hourly payment system.
This second mechanism will only apply in certain situations, based on a receivers’ or administrators’ work-load, and will use the value of a business’s debt as a baseline for determining receivers’ fees, instead of the value of a business’s assets. For example, in situations where a business’s reconciliation proposal is approved, this will mean that the business in question will not end up having to file for bankruptcy.
Heru Pramono, an appellate judge from the Jakarta Court of Appeal, has also offered input to the Ministry regarding receivers’ fees. Mr. Pramono’s suggestion is that the payment of receivers’ fees must also take a receivers’ professionalism into consideration.
This recommendation, however, is considered to be not very applicable, due to the fact that the Ministry has yet to formulate anything approximating a receiver professionalism standard and its corresponding measurement mechanism. Nevertheless, the Ministry has accepted this input from the Court of Appeal and will deliberate further upon it.
“Professionalism is something that that is ultimately quite vague and difficult to measure. There have been cases where a so-called ‘newbie’ receivers already possesses an extraordinary level of professionalism and vice versa. The difficulty in measuring levels of professionalism then has forced us to consider different formulas, such as the more-flexible hourly basis formula, which is also able to ensure legal certainty,” asserted Mr. Silitonga.
Imran Nating, Secretary General of the Indonesian Receivers and Administrators Association (Asosiasi Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia – AKPI), stated that his association had been invited to several meetings in order to assist the Ministry in formulating the new receivers’-fee provision. Mr. Nating also confirmed that he was aware of the two mechanisms set out by Mr. Silitonga. However, Mr. Nating added that the hourly basis formula would only apply to administrators, and not to receivers.
“Basically, we [the AKPI] agree with them [the mechanisms set out by the Ministry], even though the percentages will be reduced. However, the hourly basis fee will only be applicable to administrators of postponements of debt-settlement obligations (PKPU), whereby a business’s PKPU application can be accepted within three meetings, or a bankruptcy status can be cancelled. In cases where a business has been declared bankrupt and its bankruptcy assets are being managed by a receiver, the fee must be determined based on a percentage of the total assets,” Mr. Nating concluded.
Daulat P. Silitonga, Director of Civil Law Affairs at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Ministry), recently commented on this matter at a seminar entitled “Discourse for the Revision of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and the Postponement of Debt Settlement Obligations.” The event was held at Sentul in West Java on Friday, 11 March 2016.
In his statement, Mr. Silitonga asserted that the deliberation process and formulation of the new ministerial regulation, which will revise the 2013 Regulation, was almost complete. A series of deliberation meetings has already been held, and Mr. Silitonga is hopeful that a new ministerial regulation will be issued as soon as possible.
“A draft regulation has already been formulated, and hopefully it will be issued in the near future. The new ministerial regulation should be able to conform to the most recent economic developments, and should not excessively overburden receivers, but rather be fair minded in its approach.
Mr. Silitonga asserted that the main reason behind the revision was the government’s policy of improving the ease of doing business within Indonesia. Apparently, businesses have complained that receivers’ fees are currently too high. The government has therefore been planning to reduce receivers’ fees so that they don’t place an undue burden upon businesses, either financially or bureaucratically.
Mr. Silitonga further revealed that two mechanisms will be used in order to determine receivers’ fees. Firstly, fees will be based upon a percentage, as with the current mechanism, however a smaller percentage level will be set in comparison with the current rate. Secondly, fees will be based on an hourly payment system.
This second mechanism will only apply in certain situations, based on a receivers’ or administrators’ work-load, and will use the value of a business’s debt as a baseline for determining receivers’ fees, instead of the value of a business’s assets. For example, in situations where a business’s reconciliation proposal is approved, this will mean that the business in question will not end up having to file for bankruptcy.
Heru Pramono, an appellate judge from the Jakarta Court of Appeal, has also offered input to the Ministry regarding receivers’ fees. Mr. Pramono’s suggestion is that the payment of receivers’ fees must also take a receivers’ professionalism into consideration.
This recommendation, however, is considered to be not very applicable, due to the fact that the Ministry has yet to formulate anything approximating a receiver professionalism standard and its corresponding measurement mechanism. Nevertheless, the Ministry has accepted this input from the Court of Appeal and will deliberate further upon it.
“Professionalism is something that that is ultimately quite vague and difficult to measure. There have been cases where a so-called ‘newbie’ receivers already possesses an extraordinary level of professionalism and vice versa. The difficulty in measuring levels of professionalism then has forced us to consider different formulas, such as the more-flexible hourly basis formula, which is also able to ensure legal certainty,” asserted Mr. Silitonga.
Imran Nating, Secretary General of the Indonesian Receivers and Administrators Association (Asosiasi Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia – AKPI), stated that his association had been invited to several meetings in order to assist the Ministry in formulating the new receivers’-fee provision. Mr. Nating also confirmed that he was aware of the two mechanisms set out by Mr. Silitonga. However, Mr. Nating added that the hourly basis formula would only apply to administrators, and not to receivers.
“Basically, we [the AKPI] agree with them [the mechanisms set out by the Ministry], even though the percentages will be reduced. However, the hourly basis fee will only be applicable to administrators of postponements of debt-settlement obligations (PKPU), whereby a business’s PKPU application can be accepted within three meetings, or a bankruptcy status can be cancelled. In cases where a business has been declared bankrupt and its bankruptcy assets are being managed by a receiver, the fee must be determined based on a percentage of the total assets,” Mr. Nating concluded.
(rfs/sp)
Marcell Sihombing, Fitri N. Heriani
The government has been intending to revise controversial Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation No. 1 of 2013 on Guidelines for Determining Service Fees for Receivers and Administrators (2013 Regulation) for a while now. The government’s ultimate goal is to improve the ease of doing business within Indonesia and this plan is also supported by a Supreme Court ruling which approved the judicial review of the 2013 Regulation and which mandates for its revision.
Daulat P. Silitonga, Director of Civil Law Affairs at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Ministry), recently commented on this matter at a seminar entitled “Discourse for the Revision of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and the Postponement of Debt Settlement Obligations.” The event was held at Sentul in West Java on Friday, 11 March 2016.
In his statement, Mr. Silitonga asserted that the deliberation process and formulation of the new ministerial regulation, which will revise the 2013 Regulation, was almost complete. A series of deliberation meetings has already been held, and Mr. Silitonga is hopeful that a new ministerial regulation will be issued as soon as possible.
“A draft regulation has already been formulated, and hopefully it will be issued in the near future. The new ministerial regulation should be able to conform to the most recent economic developments, and should not excessively overburden receivers, but rather be fair minded in its approach.
Mr. Silitonga asserted that the main reason behind the revision was the government’s policy of improving the ease of doing business within Indonesia. Apparently, businesses have complained that receivers’ fees are currently too high. The government has therefore been planning to reduce receivers’ fees so that they don’t place an undue burden upon businesses, either financially or bureaucratically.
Mr. Silitonga further revealed that two mechanisms will be used in order to determine receivers’ fees. Firstly, fees will be based upon a percentage, as with the current mechanism, however a smaller percentage level will be set in comparison with the current rate. Secondly, fees will be based on an hourly payment system.
This second mechanism will only apply in certain situations, based on a receivers’ or administrators’ work-load, and will use the value of a business’s debt as a baseline for determining receivers’ fees, instead of the value of a business’s assets. For example, in situations where a business’s reconciliation proposal is approved, this will mean that the business in question will not end up having to file for bankruptcy.
Heru Pramono, an appellate judge from the Jakarta Court of Appeal, has also offered input to the Ministry regarding receivers’ fees. Mr. Pramono’s suggestion is that the payment of receivers’ fees must also take a receivers’ professionalism into consideration.
This recommendation, however, is considered to be not very applicable, due to the fact that the Ministry has yet to formulate anything approximating a receiver professionalism standard and its corresponding measurement mechanism. Nevertheless, the Ministry has accepted this input from the Court of Appeal and will deliberate further upon it.
“Professionalism is something that that is ultimately quite vague and difficult to measure. There have been cases where a so-called ‘newbie’ receivers already possesses an extraordinary level of professionalism and vice versa. The difficulty in measuring levels of professionalism then has forced us to consider different formulas, such as the more-flexible hourly basis formula, which is also able to ensure legal certainty,” asserted Mr. Silitonga.
Imran Nating, Secretary General of the Indonesian Receivers and Administrators Association (Asosiasi Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia – AKPI), stated that his association had been invited to several meetings in order to assist the Ministry in formulating the new receivers’-fee provision. Mr. Nating also confirmed that he was aware of the two mechanisms set out by Mr. Silitonga. However, Mr. Nating added that the hourly basis formula would only apply to administrators, and not to receivers.
“Basically, we [the AKPI] agree with them [the mechanisms set out by the Ministry], even though the percentages will be reduced. However, the hourly basis fee will only be applicable to administrators of postponements of debt-settlement obligations (PKPU), whereby a business’s PKPU application can be accepted within three meetings, or a bankruptcy status can be cancelled. In cases where a business has been declared bankrupt and its bankruptcy assets are being managed by a receiver, the fee must be determined based on a percentage of the total assets,” Mr. Nating concluded.
Daulat P. Silitonga, Director of Civil Law Affairs at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Ministry), recently commented on this matter at a seminar entitled “Discourse for the Revision of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and the Postponement of Debt Settlement Obligations.” The event was held at Sentul in West Java on Friday, 11 March 2016.
In his statement, Mr. Silitonga asserted that the deliberation process and formulation of the new ministerial regulation, which will revise the 2013 Regulation, was almost complete. A series of deliberation meetings has already been held, and Mr. Silitonga is hopeful that a new ministerial regulation will be issued as soon as possible.
“A draft regulation has already been formulated, and hopefully it will be issued in the near future. The new ministerial regulation should be able to conform to the most recent economic developments, and should not excessively overburden receivers, but rather be fair minded in its approach.
Mr. Silitonga asserted that the main reason behind the revision was the government’s policy of improving the ease of doing business within Indonesia. Apparently, businesses have complained that receivers’ fees are currently too high. The government has therefore been planning to reduce receivers’ fees so that they don’t place an undue burden upon businesses, either financially or bureaucratically.
Mr. Silitonga further revealed that two mechanisms will be used in order to determine receivers’ fees. Firstly, fees will be based upon a percentage, as with the current mechanism, however a smaller percentage level will be set in comparison with the current rate. Secondly, fees will be based on an hourly payment system.
This second mechanism will only apply in certain situations, based on a receivers’ or administrators’ work-load, and will use the value of a business’s debt as a baseline for determining receivers’ fees, instead of the value of a business’s assets. For example, in situations where a business’s reconciliation proposal is approved, this will mean that the business in question will not end up having to file for bankruptcy.
Heru Pramono, an appellate judge from the Jakarta Court of Appeal, has also offered input to the Ministry regarding receivers’ fees. Mr. Pramono’s suggestion is that the payment of receivers’ fees must also take a receivers’ professionalism into consideration.
This recommendation, however, is considered to be not very applicable, due to the fact that the Ministry has yet to formulate anything approximating a receiver professionalism standard and its corresponding measurement mechanism. Nevertheless, the Ministry has accepted this input from the Court of Appeal and will deliberate further upon it.
“Professionalism is something that that is ultimately quite vague and difficult to measure. There have been cases where a so-called ‘newbie’ receivers already possesses an extraordinary level of professionalism and vice versa. The difficulty in measuring levels of professionalism then has forced us to consider different formulas, such as the more-flexible hourly basis formula, which is also able to ensure legal certainty,” asserted Mr. Silitonga.
Imran Nating, Secretary General of the Indonesian Receivers and Administrators Association (Asosiasi Kurator dan Pengurus Indonesia – AKPI), stated that his association had been invited to several meetings in order to assist the Ministry in formulating the new receivers’-fee provision. Mr. Nating also confirmed that he was aware of the two mechanisms set out by Mr. Silitonga. However, Mr. Nating added that the hourly basis formula would only apply to administrators, and not to receivers.
“Basically, we [the AKPI] agree with them [the mechanisms set out by the Ministry], even though the percentages will be reduced. However, the hourly basis fee will only be applicable to administrators of postponements of debt-settlement obligations (PKPU), whereby a business’s PKPU application can be accepted within three meetings, or a bankruptcy status can be cancelled. In cases where a business has been declared bankrupt and its bankruptcy assets are being managed by a receiver, the fee must be determined based on a percentage of the total assets,” Mr. Nating concluded.
(rfs/sp)