Corporate Director and Shareholder Liability for Unlawful Distributions in Vermont

Short answer A director who votes for or assents to a distribution violating Vermont’s distribution rule or articles can owe the corporation the excess payment if the director failed the statutory conduct standard. A liable director may obtain contribution from other liable directors and from shareholders who knowingly accepted the unlawful payment. A proceeding under the liability section must begin within six years after the distribution-effect measurement date.

State

Vermont

Statute checked

September 27, 2026

Sources

11 statutes

Survey

Compare all 49 jurisdictions covered

At a glance

Law, transactions, and persons	11A V.S.A. §§ 6.40, 8.33; director vote/assent to shareholder distribution, including purchase, redemption, or other share acquisition; knowing recipient contribution.
Underlying prohibited distribution	Distribution violating § 6.40 or articles; § 6.40(c) addresses debts coming due and asset/liability plus superior-preference limits (§ 8.33(a)).
Director conduct and defenses	Vote or assent and failure to perform under § 8.30; good faith, prudent-person care, corporate-interest belief, and qualified reliance (§ 8.33(a)).
Amount, interest, and shared liability	Personally liable to corporation for excess over amount allowed by § 6.40 or articles; § 8.33 gives no separate interest or joint-and-several formula.
Who may enforce	Director liability runs to corporation (§ 8.33(a)); this section gives no express direct creditor enforcement route.
Recipient shareholder recovery	Liable director gets contribution from each shareholder for amount accepted knowing violation of § 6.40 or articles (§ 8.33(b)(2)).
Contribution and dissent	Contribution from every other director who could be held liable under § 8.33(a); compliance with § 8.30 defeats the conduct-failure element.
Filing periods	A proceeding under § 8.33 is barred after 6 years from date distribution effect was measured under § 6.40(e); no separate later contribution trigger is stated.
Related remedies and limits of this comparison	§ 6.40 states financial distribution limits and § 8.33 states statutory recovery; other remedies and case-specific liability require separate analysis.

Requirements one by one

Director conduct and excess recovery

Under 11A V.S.A. § 8.33(a), a director must have voted for or assented to a payment violating § 6.40 or the articles, and the claimant must establish failure to comply with § 8.30. That conduct standard requires good faith, ordinarily prudent care, and a reasonable belief in the corporation's interests. Section 8.30(b)-(c) allows specified professional, officer, and committee reliance when the director lacks knowledge making reliance unwarranted. The amount owed to the corporation is the excess over what could lawfully have been distributed.

Contribution from directors and knowing recipients

Section 8.33(b) entitles a liable director to contribution from every other director who could be liable for the distribution. It also permits contribution from each shareholder for the amount that shareholder accepted knowing the payment violated § 6.40 or the articles. That wording makes knowledge material to the recipient contribution route; it does not assign the director's liability merely because a shareholder received a payment.

Six-year period

A proceeding under § 8.33 is barred unless commenced within six years after the date the effect of the distribution was measured under § 6.40(e). For a purchase, redemption, or other share acquisition, § 6.40(e)(1) uses the earlier transfer/debt or end-of-shareholder-status date; other kinds of payment have different dates in subsections (e)(2)-(3).

What trips people up

Section 6.40(a) makes the authorization subject to articles restrictions as well as the financial limit in subsection (c). A claim can therefore turn on a charter restriction even if the financial tests are not the disputed point. Section 6.40(d) lets the board use financial statements, appraisals, or another reasonable method in evaluating the financial limit; whether directors met § 8.30 remains a separate question.

Common questions

Does every approving director owe the full payment?

No. Section 8.33(a) measures recovery by the amount above the lawful distribution and requires proof of the director's failure to meet § 8.30.

Does the statute give contribution against every recipient?

Section 8.33(b)(2) applies to a shareholder who accepted the amount knowing the distribution violated § 6.40 or the articles.

Statutes and sources

11A V.S.A. § 6.40, accessed September 27, 2026.
11A V.S.A. §§ 8.30 and 8.33, accessed September 27, 2026.

Source links

Every statute quoted above, linked, with the date we checked it.

11A V.S.A. § 6.40 · accessed 2026-09-27

11A V.S.A. § 8.30 · accessed 2026-09-27

11A V.S.A. § 8.33 · accessed 2026-09-27

This page gives general legal information about statutory recovery for an unlawful distribution by an ordinary domestic business corporation. It is not legal or financial advice. The corporation's governing documents, financial records, transaction terms, board records, and current statute determine which rules apply. The table does not decide whether a distribution is unlawful or whether any director or shareholder is liable. Separate creditor, fraudulent-transfer, bankruptcy, fiduciary-duty, and tax rules may apply. Confirm current official law and obtain licensed advice for a specific dispute or transaction.

What does Vermont law mean for your facts?

You just read the general rule. Ask your own question and see which parts of current Vermont law apply to your situation, with citations you can check.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

Starts from the statutes this survey is built on
Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
Chat, drafting and research in one workspace