Saks Global: $1.24B DIP Plan Confirmed, Debt Cut Nearly 75%

Saks Global filed chapter 11 petitions on January 13, 2026, in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (lead case 26-90103), bringing the combined luxury retail platform -- Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, Bergdorf Goodman, and the off-price Saks OFF 5TH banner -- into a freefall restructuring with no pre-negotiated plan. The filing followed a late-2025 liquidity spiral tied to inventory disruption, tightening ABL availability covenants, and debt-service pressure after HBC's $2.65 billion acquisition of Neiman Marcus Group. Bankruptcy filings describe approximately $3.4 billion of prepetition funded debt for the Global Debtors, a multi-facility DIP package, and distress driven by borrowing base compression, a $550 million-plus inventory receipt shortfall, and stepped-up availability thresholds. The company described securing $1.75 billion of committed capital at filing.

The case has now reached confirmation. At the combined hearing on June 5, 2026, Judge Alfredo R. Perez approved the Global Debtors' reorganization plan, and the company announced it had secured court approval of the plan of reorganization, cutting its funded debt by nearly 75%. The plan is anchored by a "DIP Conversion" that hands majority ownership of the reorganized company to consenting DIP term-loan lenders, while general unsecured creditors are routed into a funded litigation trust. The SO5 Digital Debtors' separate plan of liquidation winds down the off-price Saks OFF 5TH business through a liquidation trust and plan administrator.

Debtor(s)	Saks Global Enterprises LLC et al. (100+ jointly administered entities)
Court	U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Texas
Case Number	26-90103
Judge	Hon. Alfredo R. Perez
Petition Date	January 13, 2026
Prepetition Funded Debt	~$3.4 billion (Global Debtors)
DIP Facility	Multi-facility package: $1.5B ABL DIP, ~$2.56B SGUS delayed draw term DIP, ~$1.75B intercompany OpCo DIP; $1.24B of new money equitized under the plan
Plan Status	Plan confirmed June 5, 2026; debt cut nearly 75%; DIP term-loan lenders to take majority ownership
Claims Agent	Stretto

Research Saks Global with ElevenFlo

View case record

Formation and Causes of Distress

Saks Global was formed through HBC's acquisition of Neiman Marcus Group, announced in July 2024 at a described transaction value of $2.65 billion and completed in December 2024. The combination brought together Saks Fifth Avenue (33 stores), Neiman Marcus (36 stores), Bergdorf Goodman (2 stores), Saks OFF 5TH (81 stores), and Last Call (5 stores) under a single platform with approximately 14,610 full-time and 2,220 part-time employees. The First Day Declaration states the 2024 transaction was intended to create a multi-brand luxury platform and had already produced roughly $300 million of run-rate synergies, but the integration also exposed the business to merchandising-system friction at a critical seasonal moment.

The declaration attributes the filing to a chain reaction in 2025: merchandising-system issues disrupted inventory receipts at Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf Goodman ahead of the holiday season; consolidated revenue for the fiscal year ended February 1, 2025 fell 13.6% year over year; and the company received more than $550 million less inventory in the second half of 2025 than forecast. Vendor confidence deteriorated as payment delays increased, with brand partners imposing credit caps that forced the debtors to pay faster than negotiated terms to keep inventory moving, further constraining working capital.

Liquidity pressure also tightened through the prepetition ABL structure. The declaration states the minimum excess-availability threshold stepped up from $200 million to $375 million on December 1, 2025 and then to $500 million on December 16, 2025, while discretionary reserves exceeded $50 million and the ABL agent triggered account-control rights on December 4, 2025. Interest costs were a separate constraint: Saks Global reported making approximately $130 million of interest payments in June 2025, then being unable by late December 2025 to cover roughly $126 million of interest due across the FILO loan, NPC on-loan, SPV notes, and OpCo notes. A December 2025 analysis framed bankruptcy as an increasingly discussed outcome as the company's capital constraints tightened.

Prepetition Capital Structure

Bankruptcy filings describe approximately $3.4 billion of prepetition funded debt for the Global Debtors across multiple secured layers with different collateral and priority profiles.

TopCo senior secured term loan	~$275M principal (~$310M including PIK interest); matures February 3, 2026
ABL facility	$442.16M drawn plus $56.6M in undrawn letters of credit; matures December 23, 2029
SPV Notes	$762.5M; matures December 15, 2029
2O Notes	$1.439B; matures December 15, 2029
3O Notes	$440.8M; matures December 15, 2029
Old Notes	$51.2M; matures December 15, 2029

The near-term TopCo maturity on February 3, 2026 -- roughly three weeks after the petition date -- was a binding constraint on the restructuring timeline. The ABL facility is borrowing-base driven, and the First Day Declaration describes the reserve and covenant mechanics as central to the availability compression that led to the filing.

DIP Financing Structure

The DIP Motion describes a three-part postpetition financing architecture, with each facility tied to a separate segment of the capital stack. The structure includes a $1.5 billion ABL DIP tied to a borrowing base, a ~$2.56 billion delayed draw term DIP (the SGUS DIP) with roll-up components, and a ~$1.75 billion intercompany operating-company DIP (the OpCo DIP) that moves funds through the corporate structure. Mark Weinsten's supporting declaration states the debtors could not maintain key vendor relationships or acquire sufficient inventory without immediate access to the facilities. Jamie Baird's declaration states the debtors and PJT Partners solicited multiple financing alternatives, but the lender package was the only executable path that could deliver enough liquidity without destabilizing the cases through priming litigation or delay.

ABL DIP Facility ($1.5 billion). The ABL DIP was designed to provide approximately $240 million of incremental availability over the prepetition facility through reduced reserves and covenant thresholds, while also refinancing letters of credit and rolling prepetition ABL revolving exposure into the DIP through a creeping roll-up. Pricing was set at Term SOFR + 2.75% cash-pay.

SGUS Delayed Draw Term Loan DIP (~$2.56 billion). The SGUS DIP includes $1.0 billion of first-out new money available in three draws, up to $808.1 million of second-out roll-up loans tied to prepetition SGUS notes, and up to $751 million of third-out loans linked to participation in second-out notes. Pricing was differentiated by tranche: Term SOFR + 11.00% PIK for first-out, Term SOFR + 12.50% PIK for second-out, and Term SOFR + 10.00% PIK for third-out.

OpCo Intercompany DIP (~$1.75 billion). The OpCo DIP pairs $1.0 billion of new money with a cashless roll-up of approximately $752.5 million of prepetition intercompany FILO and NPC on-loan debt at Term SOFR + 10.00% PIK. All facilities carried a six-month maturity from closing, subject to earlier triggers and case milestones around plan and disclosure-statement progress.

Judge Perez approved interim DIP financing at the first-day hearing on January 14, 2026. Amazon and Axonic both objected to the DIP arrangement, with Amazon seeking an adjournment for additional litigation time. The court denied the adjournment, with Judge Perez finding the proposed DIP the "only actionable financing available" and that the alternative would be liquidation.

Final DIP Approval and Contested Matters

The Final DIP Order, entered on February 20, 2026, approved the same three-part structure: up to $2,559,128,755.07 under the SGUS DIP, up to $1,752,465,541 under the OpCo DIP, and the ABL DIP credit agreement with its creeping roll-up mechanics. The final order authorized up to $449 million of additional second-out SGUS DIP loans to refinance remaining prepetition SGUS notes, preserved the $395 million FILO plus $357.5 million NPC OpCo roll-up components, and maintained siloed recourse limitations so SGUS DIP lenders did not gain recourse to OpCo or ABL assets.

Lender protections included superpriority administrative-expense claims under section 364(c)(1), DIP liens on DIP collateral subject to a carve-out, and adequate-protection liens and claims for prepetition secured parties. One negotiated protection elevated postpetition consignment and concession arrangements above DIP and prepetition secured claims for the amounts covered in the order.

The financing package drew objections from landlords, consignment and concession vendors, jewelry vendors, taxing authorities, and the official committee of unsecured creditors. The debtors' omnibus reply states most objections were resolved through negotiated revisions to the final order. Landlords focused on stub-rent treatment, and the final order required payment of unpaid stub-rent claims within 10 business days after entry. Consignment and concession vendors objected to any implication that their goods would become DIP collateral; the final order clarified that postpetition consignors could perfect first-priority interests and that concession merchandise remained vendor property. Amazon withdrew its objection prior to final approval. The unsecured creditors' committee ultimately supported final DIP approval after preserving vendor and estate rights.

At the final hearing, Benjamin Butterfield of Morrison & Foerster, representing the unsecured creditors' committee, described the DIP as "hard-fought" and stated the facility provided over $1 billion in new liquidity, with nearly $600 million slated for prepetition vendor claims including $330 million released within two weeks of the final order.

SO5 Digital cash collateral. The SO5 Digital Debtors operated on a separate cash-collateral track rather than through the main DIP facility. The final SO5 Digital cash-collateral order, entered the same day as the final DIP order, authorized continued use of cash collateral while granting adequate protection to prepetition secured parties. That separation preserved distinct collateral pools and creditor priorities between the Global and SO5 Digital debtor groups.

Simon Property Group settlement. Simon Property Group, Saks Global's largest landlord, filed an automatic-stay dispute motion seeking to terminate two leases -- a Neiman Marcus in Palo Alto, California and a Saks OFF 5TH at Woodbury Commons Premium Outlets in New York -- and seeking $7 million in back rent. Simon had invested $100 million to help fund the Neiman Marcus acquisition and wrote off that investment in the fourth quarter. Saks Global opposed the lease terminations, arguing that losing those locations would prevent it from selling the leases to repay creditors. Multi-day evidentiary hearings on Simon's recapture and termination rights over the Stanford Shopping Center and Woodbury leases ran February 24 through 27, 2026, with closing arguments on March 2; the dispute turned on the notice-of-default and cure mechanics of a December 2024 letter agreement, with Simon claiming roughly $4 million of payments were not made when due.

On May 18, 2026, Judge Perez entered an order approving a settlement agreement between the Global Debtors and Simon Property Group, L.P. The settlement authorizes the debtors to assume certain Simon leases, as amended under the settlement terms, and to reject terminated leases as listed in a settlement exhibit. Cure amounts for the assumed leases are specified in the settlement agreement. Simon agreed to withdraw its prior stay-relief motion with prejudice, and the court approved mutual releases between the parties. The order took effect immediately upon entry.

De minimis settlement procedures. On May 19, 2026, Judge Perez entered an order establishing procedures for the compromise and settlement of de minimis claims. Under the order, the Global Debtors may settle individual claims of $50,000 or less without advance notice to other parties, provided the aggregate of such no-notice settlements does not exceed $500,000 without the written consent of the Required SGUS DIP Lenders. For claims greater than $50,000 and up to $3 million, the debtors must give at least ten calendar days' advance written notice to specified notice parties, with a ten-day objection period. The procedures streamline routine claims resolution without requiring separate court approval for each settlement.

Store Closures and Operational Restructuring

Saks Global is closing locations across all banners. The SO5 Digital Debtors, which operated as a standalone company since 2021, filed a closing-sales motion and moved to close 57 Saks OFF 5TH stores and all five Last Call locations. A&G Real Estate Partners, retained as real estate consultant, began marketing 59 Saks OFF 5TH and Last Call leases totaling approximately 1.7 million square feet across 19 states.

For the full-line banners, Saks Global initially announced nine store closures -- eight Saks Fifth Avenue locations and one Neiman Marcus -- followed by a second wave of 15 additional closures on March 9, 2026, comprising 12 Saks Fifth Avenue and three Neiman Marcus locations. The remaining footprint is approximately 13 Saks Fifth Avenue locations and 32 Neiman Marcus stores, plus two Bergdorf Goodman locations in New York City. One distribution center was closed, leaving three operating. The company also cut more than 1,200 jobs as part of the restructuring, reflecting the consolidation of duplicative functions across the legacy Saks and Neiman Marcus organizations.

Key professionals. Willkie Farr & Gallagher serves as lead debtor counsel, with Debra Sinclair leading the engagement, and Haynes and Boone, LLP, with Kelli Norfleet, as co-counsel. PJT Partners acts as investment banker, Accordion Partners, LLC as financial advisor, and Stretto serves as the claims, noticing, and solicitation agent. The official committee of unsecured creditors retained Morrison & Foerster as counsel, with Benjamin Butterfield representing the committee at hearings, alongside Cole Schotz and Milbank LLP. Paul Hastings LLP, through Nathaniel Ward, served as the debtors' lease-litigation counsel in the Simon dispute. The court approved retention of A&G Realty Partners as real estate consultant on March 4, 2026.

Vendor Restoration and the Reorganization Plan

The First Day Declaration describes a cycle where payment delays caused brand partners to impose credit caps, which reduced inventory, impaired sales, and further weakened borrowing availability. The final DIP order addressed that dynamic: postpetition vendors received liens on proceeds of goods senior to DIP obligations (other than ABL), and concession merchandise that had not been sold remained vendor property. Debra Sinclair stated at the final hearing that more than 100 brands had either executed or were close to executing trade agreements. By March 9, 2026, the number of vendors that had resumed shipping rose to 500, up from 400 reported earlier that month.

CEO Geoffroy van Raemdonck stated in a March 13 interview that brands had committed to close to $1.3 billion of inventory, representing approximately 80% of the spring season target, with monthly receipts up 63% compared to the prior year. The company reported exceeding both its DIP revenue budget and inventory receipt projections.

Saks Global filed an initial plan of reorganization on April 6, 2026, supported by a Restructuring Support Agreement with its DIP term loan lenders. The plan proposes a debt-for-equity swap that would hand equity in the reorganized "New Saks" entity to DIP term loan lenders and create a litigation trust to pursue estate causes of action. The disclosure statement contemplates a summer 2026 emergence supported by $500 million in exit financing committed by senior secured bondholders. Bondholders driving the plan include Pentwater Capital and Bracebridge Capital, who are expected to take ownership of Reorganized Saks; existing equity stakes held by HBC, Amazon, Authentic Brands Group, and G-III are expected to be eliminated through the chapter 11 process.

In parallel with the plan, Saks Global announced it would close the majority of its Saks OFF 5TH stores and all remaining Last Call locations, pivoting away from off-price retail entirely. Liquidation sales at the closing OFF 5TH locations began on April 11, 2026. The pivot leaves Saks Global concentrated on the full-line luxury banners -- Saks Fifth Avenue, Neiman Marcus, and Bergdorf Goodman. On April 14, 2026, the court entered an order authorizing the sale of Saks Global's corporate Gulfstream aircraft to Jones Aviations LLC for approximately $6 million plus broker fees, part of a broader corporate-asset rationalization running alongside the store-footprint reduction.

Plan Solicitation and the Dual-Track Confirmation Calendar

On May 1, 2026, the court entered two parallel orders conditionally approving the adequacy of the disclosure statements, approving solicitation procedures and the solicitation package, and scheduling a combined hearing on plan confirmation and final disclosure statement approval. One order governs the Global Debtors' Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan; the other governs the SO5 Digital Debtors' Modified Joint Plan of Liquidation. The conditional approval lets the debtors begin soliciting creditor votes before the court rules finally on disclosure adequacy at confirmation. A disclosure statement hearing and status conference was held before Judge Perez on May 1, 2026; the transcript of that hearing was filed on May 5, 2026.

Solicitation calendar. The Global Debtors' conditional approval order set a voting record date of April 28, 2026; a May 20, 2026 deadline to file claims objections for plan-voting purposes; a May 22, 2026 deadline for Bankruptcy Rule 3018 voting motions; a May 26, 2026 plan supplement deadline; and a voting deadline and combined plan-objection deadline of June 1, 2026 at 4:00 p.m. Central. The solicitation agent's plan voting report was due June 4, 2026, ahead of the combined confirmation hearing on June 5, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. Central. Stretto, Inc. served as solicitation agent. The SO5 Digital Debtors' order tracked the same record date, June 1 voting and objection deadline, and June 5 combined hearing.

Global Debtors' reorganization plan. The Global Debtors' Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan places its impaired, recovering classes -- Classes 3-A through 3-C, 4-A through 4-G, and 5-A through 5-D -- in the voting pool. Classes 1 and 2 are unimpaired and presumed to accept. Classes 6-A, 6-B, 8, and 9 are impaired and deemed to reject because they receive no recovery, and Classes 7 and 10 hold intercompany claims and interests and do not vote. The plan carries a third-party release. Saks Global characterized the milestone as advancing toward a summer emergence with $700 million in liquidity and $500 million in committed exit financing.

SO5 Digital plan of liquidation. On May 4, 2026, the SO5 Digital Debtors filed the solicitation version of their Modified Joint Plan of Liquidation and accompanying disclosure statement. The plan is a joint chapter 11 plan of liquidation covering four entities -- Saks OFF 5TH Holdings LLC, Saks OFF 5TH LLC, Saks OFF 5TH Midco Partner Inc., and Luxury Outlets USA, LLC -- winding down the off-price business rather than reorganizing it. It establishes a two-vehicle wind-down: a Plan Administrator, appointed on the effective date to implement the plan, make distributions, and pursue or settle causes of action; and a Liquidation Trust, governed by a Liquidation Trustee, created on the effective date to hold and liquidate transferred assets, including retained causes of action, for the benefit of holders of allowed claims. The trust is intended to be treated as a "liquidating trust" for federal income tax purposes. A Wind-Down Budget funds the fees and expenses of the Plan Administrator and the Wind-Down Debtors, and "Distributable Cash" is cash remaining after funding the reserves and the Wind-Down Budget and paying priority claims. The SO5 Digital Debtors went to confirmation on a Second Amended Plan of Liquidation filed June 4, 2026.

The SO5 Digital plan classifies claims into seven classes. Class 1 holds Secured Lender Claims; Class 2 holds Other Secured Claims, rendered unimpaired through delivery of collateral value; Class 3 holds Other Priority Claims, paid in full in cash; Class 4 holds Consignor Claims, paid from a dedicated Consignor Claims Reserve; Class 5 holds General Unsecured Claims, which receive a pro rata share of Distributable Cash remaining after higher-priority obligations are satisfied; Class 6 holds Intercompany Claims, generally subordinated or treated as the Plan Administrator determines; and Class 7 holds the SO5 Digital Debtor Interests, which are cancelled and extinguished on the effective date. The plan does not state projected recovery percentages by class.

Plan Voting and the Class 4-G Cramdown

Solicitation closed at the June 1, 2026 voting deadline, and Stretto filed its tabulation, the Declaration of Leticia Sanchez, on June 4. Nearly all voting classes accepted. According to Stretto's voting and tabulation declaration, the First Out DIP Term Loan Facility (Class 3-A) carries a claim of $981,018,578.05, the Second Out facility (Class 3-B) $724,573,145.09, and the Third Out facility (Class 3-C) $708,726,212.73 -- and all three DIP tranches voted to accept the plan at 100% by both number and amount. Class 4-G, the prepetition initial notes claims, rejected the plan, voting 46.7% in favor by number and 3.1% by amount. Classes 6-A, 6-B, 8, and 9 were deemed to reject, leaving confirmation to proceed by cramdown of the dissenting classes.

Class	Description	Accept (No. / Amount)	Result
3-A	First Out DIP Term Loan	100% / 100%	Accept
3-B	Second Out DIP Term Loan	100% / 100%	Accept
3-C	Third Out DIP Term Loan	100% / 100%	Accept
4-A	Prepetition SGUS Notes	98.2% / 91.3%	Accept
4-B	Prepetition FILO / NPC	100% / 100%	Accept
4-C	Prepetition OpCo Second Out Notes	97.6% / 97.1%	Accept
4-D	Go-Forward OpCo Trade	100% / 100%	Accept
4-E	OpCo General Unsecured	93.6% / 84.2%	Accept
4-F	Prepetition OpCo Third Out Notes	93.8% / 97.7%	Accept
4-G	Prepetition Initial Notes	46.7% / 3.1%	Reject
5-A	HoldCo II SGUS Guarantee	100% / 100%	Accept
5-B	Axonic Guarantee	100% / 100%	Accept
5-C	Go-Forward HoldCo II Trade	100% / 100%	Accept
5-D	HoldCo II General Unsecured	No votes cast	Presumed accept

The debtors' brief in support of confirmation carried the cramdown showing and the response to the remaining objections. The official committee of unsecured creditors filed a recommendation to accept the plan, describing it as embodying the most favorable settlement attainable for unsecured creditors, preserving the litigation trust's retained causes of action, and avoiding costly litigation that could delay emergence.

In his declaration supporting confirmation, chief restructuring officer Mark Weinstein framed the stated objectives of the cases as a need to right-size the capital structure and strengthen vendor relationships, and put the new-money DIP financing at $1.24 billion by the plan stage. Through the bankruptcy-era operating period, Saks Global generated roughly $1.6 billion in sales and logged $422.6 million of revenue in April as it neared exit.

Confirmation Objections

Entering the June 5 confirmation hearing, the debtors' confirmation brief reported 12 formal objections to confirmation, of which two were resolved and 10 remained unresolved as of June 4, with the debtors continuing to engage the remaining objectors as additional withdrawals were filed. The objection wave spanned landlords, vendors, and individuals. A group of landlords led by GGP Services, Aventura Fashion Island, and Regency raised adequate-assurance and cure objections and asserted an allowed general unsecured claim of $20,604,924, while Bal Harbour Shops and BP Prucenter Acquisition lodged related cure and assumption objections.

Among the individual objectors, Saks founder and executive Richard A. Baker objected over a separation agreement and indemnification rights that he argued could not be rejected, a dispute over preserving his indemnification under a prior agreement. Louis Vuitton USA objected over the assumption and treatment of a concession-type agreement, Teamsters Local 210 and its pension fund filed a labor and pension reservation, and People Center, Inc. doing business as Rippling lodged a confirmation objection. Cure and assumption disputes active at the confirmation stage included objections from Salesforce, Tata Consultancy Services, Westfield, and an insurance-related objection by Chubb joined by Safety National.

Confirmation: Litigation Trust and Third-Party Releases

At the combined hearing on June 5, 2026, the court approved the Global Debtors' reorganization plan, and the company announced court approval of the plan as paving the way for emergence with funded debt cut by nearly 75%. The reorganization is anchored by a "DIP Conversion": on the effective date, certain consenting DIP term-loan lenders become the majority owners of the reorganized Global Debtors. Emergence is funded in part by $500 million in new-money exit financing committed by the New Capital Commitment Parties, alongside new exit facilities including an exit ABL facility.

The plan embodies a global settlement among the Global Debtors, the creditors' committee, and the ad hoc group, with a separate plan settlement that resolves the claims of Axonic Coinvest II, LP, a prepetition secured creditor. Central to the settlement is a funded litigation trust that pursues the "Litigation Trust Retained Causes of Action" -- claims identified by the creditors' committee against certain officers, directors, and third parties that were expressly not released under the plan and carved out of the plan and confirmation-order releases. Holders of general unsecured claims receive interests in the trust, the Litigation Trust Class B Interests, with no fixed recovery percentage -- distributions depend on the amount of allowed claims and the proceeds the trust realizes, distributed under a waterfall set out in the settlement term sheet and the plan. Holders of go-forward trade claims may receive a pro rata share of cash-pool distributions if their classes vote to accept the plan, in addition to the litigation trust interests.

The plan otherwise contains broad third-party releases with a ballot opt-out. The defined "Released Parties" reach the Global Debtors and estates, the reorganized debtors and specified related parties, the DIP agents and DIP lenders, the New Capital Commitment Parties, the creditors' committee and its members, the ad hoc group and its members, the prepetition trustees and agents, and the litigation trustee -- subject to a proviso that an entity is not released unless it is also a releasing party. The releases include an explicit carve-out for Ian Putnam, who is not a Released Party. Verve Culture Inc., objecting to confirmation, challenged the plan injunction and exculpation provisions as functionally permanent, noting that pursuing a claim against an exculpated party would require a court determination of a "colorable claim."

Neiman Marcus Adversary Proceeding

On May 9, 2026, Judge Perez entered a Memorandum Opinion granting The Neiman Marcus Group, LLC's motion to dismiss the adversary complaint filed by plaintiff Andrei Rus in Adversary Proceeding No. 26-3032. Rus's complaint asserted three claims: postpetition spoliation and violation of court authority under 11 U.S.C. section 105; an administrative expense claim under section 503(b); and failure to preserve and turn over estate property under sections 542 and 1106.

The court dismissed all three claims under Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. It found the section 105 claim did not identify a substantive Bankruptcy Code provision the requested relief would carry out and that the litigation-hold allegations were insufficient to support an abuse-of-process theory; the section 503(b) claim did not allege an actual, necessary cost that benefited the estate and its creditors; and the section 542 and 1106 turnover claims failed because Rus is not a trustee and did not allege the requisite facts or duties. The dismissal was without prejudice -- the court applied Fifth Circuit precedent giving a pro se plaintiff an opportunity to file an amended complaint, while noting it found it "hard to believe" the allegations could state a claim. The same day, the court entered an order granting defendant Littler Mendelson, P.C.'s motion to join NMG's motion to dismiss in the same adversary proceeding. On May 22, 2026, the court entered a formal order of dismissal for Adversary Proceeding No. 26-3032.

Key Timeline

July 2024	HBC announces acquisition of Neiman Marcus Group for $2.65 billion
December 2024	Saks Global completes Neiman Marcus acquisition
2H 2025	Inventory receipts fall more than $550 million below forecast
December 2025	Minimum excess availability covenant steps up to $500 million; missed interest obligations reach ~$126 million
January 13, 2026	Saks Global files chapter 11 petitions in the Southern District of Texas
January 14, 2026	First-day hearing; Judge Perez approves interim DIP financing
January 22, 2026	SO5 Digital files closing-sales motion; Simon Property files stay-relief dispute
February 20, 2026	Court enters final DIP order and final SO5 Digital cash-collateral order; $330 million released for past-due vendors
February 24-27, 2026	Evidentiary hearing on Simon Property Group lease recapture (Stanford Shopping Center and Woodbury); closing arguments March 2
March 4, 2026	Court approves retention of A&G Realty Partners as real estate consultant
March 9, 2026	15 additional store closures announced; vendor base reaches 500
April 6, 2026	Initial plan of reorganization filed; majority of OFF 5TH stores and all remaining Last Call locations announced for closure
April 14, 2026	Court approves $6M Gulfstream jet sale to Jones Aviations LLC
May 1, 2026	Disclosure statement hearing and status conference; court conditionally approves Global Debtors' and SO5 Digital Debtors' disclosure statements and solicitation procedures
May 4, 2026	SO5 Digital Debtors file solicitation version of Modified Joint Plan of Liquidation and disclosure statement
May 9, 2026	Court grants Neiman Marcus Group's motion to dismiss the Rus adversary complaint and Littler Mendelson's motion to join
May 18, 2026	Court approves Simon Property Group settlement; Global Debtors assume certain Simon leases and reject terminated leases; Simon withdraws its stay-relief motion with prejudice
May 19, 2026	Court enters order establishing de minimis claims settlement procedures (up to $3M per claim with notice; up to $50K without advance notice)
May 22, 2026	Court enters formal dismissal order for Adversary Proceeding No. 26-3032 (Rus v. Neiman Marcus Group)
June 1, 2026	Plan voting and combined objection deadline; formal confirmation objections filed
June 4, 2026	Confirmation papers filed: confirmation brief, CRO declaration, vote tabulation, and SO5 Second Amended Plan of Liquidation
June 5, 2026	Combined hearing; court approves the Global Debtors' reorganization plan

Frequently Asked Questions

When did Saks Global file for chapter 11? Saks Global filed chapter 11 petitions on January 13, 2026 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, under lead case 26-90103. The case is assigned to Judge Alfredo R. Perez.

Has the plan been confirmed? Yes. At the combined hearing on June 5, 2026, the court approved the Global Debtors' reorganization plan after a cramdown of the dissenting classes, and the company announced court approval of the plan with funded debt cut by nearly 75%.

Who will own Saks Global after bankruptcy? Under the confirmed reorganization plan, certain consenting DIP term-loan lenders become the majority owners of the reorganized Global Debtors through a "DIP Conversion" on the effective date. Bondholders driving the plan include Pentwater Capital and Bracebridge Capital; existing equity stakes held by HBC, Amazon, Authentic Brands Group, and G-III are eliminated through the chapter 11 process.

What is the difference between the two Saks Global plans? The Global Debtors pursued an Amended Joint Chapter 11 Plan that reorganizes the full-line luxury business through a debt-for-equity swap. The SO5 Digital Debtors, tied to the Saks OFF 5TH off-price business, pursued a separate Modified Joint Plan of Liquidation that winds the off-price entities down through a Plan Administrator and a Liquidation Trust. Both shared the June 5, 2026 combined confirmation hearing.

What happens to unsecured creditors? General unsecured creditors receive interests in a funded litigation trust rather than a fixed recovery percentage. The trust pursues retained causes of action against certain officers, directors, and third parties, and distributions depend on allowed claim amounts and the proceeds the trust recovers.

When will Saks Global emerge from bankruptcy? The confirmed plan targets emergence in summer 2026 as a deleveraged "New Saks" entity, supported by $500 million in committed exit financing and $700 million in liquidity.

How much debt does Saks Global have? Bankruptcy filings describe approximately $3.4 billion of prepetition funded debt for the Global Debtors, including a $442 million ABL facility, $762.5 million in SPV Notes, $1.439 billion in 2O Notes, $440.8 million in 3O Notes, and a $275 million TopCo term loan. The confirmed plan cuts that funded debt by nearly 75%.

What is the DIP financing structure? The DIP package includes a $1.5 billion ABL DIP, a ~$2.56 billion delayed draw term loan DIP, and a ~$1.75 billion intercompany OpCo DIP. Judge Perez approved final DIP financing on February 20, 2026, and the plan converts $1.24 billion of new-money DIP loans into equity in the reorganized company.

What caused the filing? Bankruptcy filings attribute the filing to borrowing base pressure, a $550 million-plus inventory receipt shortfall in the second half of 2025, stepped-up availability covenants, discretionary reserves, and missed interest obligations.

Who is the claims agent for Saks Global? Stretto serves as the claims and noticing agent. The firm maintains the official claims register and distributes case notifications to creditors and parties in interest.

For more bankruptcy case coverage, visit the ElevenFlo bankruptcy blog.