In a typical “equity line” financing arrangement, an investor and an Issuer enter into a written agreement whereby the Issuer has the right to “put” its securities to the investor. That is, the Issuer has the right to tell the investor when to buy securities from the Issuer over a set period of time and the investor has no right to decline to purchase the securities (or a limited right to decline). Generally the dollar value of the equity line is set in the written agreement, but the number of securities varies based on a formula tied to the market price of the securities at the time of each “put”.

Similar to PIPE Transactions

Most equity line financing arrangements are similar to a PIPE (private investment into public entity) transaction such that the Issuer relies on the private placement exemption from registration to sell the securities under the equity line and then files a registration statement for the re-sale of such securities by the investor. However, where in a PIPE transaction the investor bears the risk, in an equity line transaction, the investor often bears little risk due to the delayed nature of the puts coupled with the price of the securities being a formula tied to market price. Accordingly, the SEC views equity line financing registrations as indirect primary offerings.

Although the SEC views the equity line as an indirect primary offering, it allows the filing of re-sale type registrations if the following conditions are met:

• The Issuer must have completed the private transaction prior to filing the registration statement (i.e. both parties must be fully contractually bound with all material points agreed upon)
• The “resale” registration statement must be on the form that the Issuer is eligible to use for a primary offering; and
• In the prospectus the investors must be identified as both underwriter(s) and selling shareholder(s).

Investors Must Be Bound to Purchase All Securities

In order for the first condition to be met, the Investor must be irrevocably bound to purchase all the securities. That is, only the Issuer can have the right to exercise the put and, except for conditions outside the investor’s control, the investor must be irrevocably bound to purchase the securities once the Issuer exercises the put. In addition, the obligations of the Investor must be non-assignable to meet the “irrevocably bound” condition.

Investors May Not Possess Ability to Make Investment Related Decisions

Moreover, if the Investor has the ability to make investment related decisions under the terms of the contract, they will not be deemed to be irrevocably bound allowing for the filing of a re-sale registration statement. Examples of investment decisions that would viewed by the SEC as creating a continuing transaction (and not a completed transaction allowing for the filing of a registration statement), include:

• Agreements that give the Investor the right to acquire additional securities (including through warrants) at the same time or after the Issuer exercises a put;
• Agreement that permit the Investor to decide when or at what price to purchase the securities underlying the put;
• Agreements with termination provisions that have the effect of causing the Investor to no longer be irrevocably bound to purchase the securities; and
• Agreements that allow the Investor to exercise a “due diligence out”.

However, the Agreements may allow for customary “bring downs” as conditions to closing such as customary representations and warranties and customary clauses regarding no material adverse changes affecting the Issuer that would be within the Investors control.

Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel to small public Companies as well as private Companies seeking to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board Exchange (OTCBB). Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public Companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, due diligence on public shells, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.

Ms. Anthony is the Founding Partner of Legal & Compliance, LLC, a national corporate, securities and civil litigation law firm based in West Palm Beach, Florida. The firm’s corporate and securities attorneys provide technical legal services to small and mid-size private and public (OTCBB) Companies, entrepreneurs, and business professionals nationwide. Contact us today for a FREE consultation!

The provisions of Rule 419 apply to every registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, by a blank check company. Rule 419 requires that the blank check company filing such registration statement deposit the securities being offered and proceeds of the offering into an escrow or trust account pending the execution of an agreement for an acquisition or merger.

In addition, the registrant is required to file a post effective amendment to the registration statement containing the same information as found in a Form 10 registration statement, upon the execution of an agreement for such acquisition or merger. The rule provides procedures for the release of the offering funds in conjunction with the post effective acquisition or merger. The obligations to file post effective amendments are in addition to the obligations to file Forms 8-K to report both the entry into a material non-ordinary course agreement and the completion of the transaction. Rule 419 applies to both primary and re-sale or secondary offerings.

Investors Must Be Notified in Timely Fashion

Within five (5) days of filing a post effective amendment setting forth the proposed terms of an acquisition, the Company must notify each investor whose shares are in escrow. Each investor then has no fewer than 20 and no greater than 45 business days to notify the Company in writing if they elect to remain an investor. A failure to reply indicates that the person has elected to not remain an investor. As all investors are allotted this second opportunity to determine to remain an investor, acquisition agreements should be conditioned upon enough funds remaining in escrow to close the transaction.

Intended Purposes

For purposes of Rule 419 as defined within the Rule, the term “blank check company” means a company that:

1. Is a development stage company that has no specific business plan or purpose or has indicated that its business plan is to engage in a merger or acquisition with an unidentified company or companies, or other entity or person; and
2. Is issuing “penny stock,” as defined in Rule 3a51-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Definition of a Shell Company

The definition of “shell company” as set forth in Rule 405 of the Securities Act (and Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) means a Company that has:

1. No or nominal operations; and
2. Either:
   1. No or nominal assets;
   2. Assets consisting solely of cash and cash equivalents; or
   3. Assets consisting of any amount of cash and cash equivalents and nominal other assets.

Although the definitions do not appear to be the same, as per the definitions a “shell company” may have nominal operations and may have a specific business plan, the SEC has firmly held the position that Rule 419 applies equally to shell and development stage companies. Although the SEC position may be subject to challenge by a willing challenger and federal court judge, to date, none of have taken up the fight.

Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel to small public Companies as well as private Companies seeking to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board Exchange (OTCBB). Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public Companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, due diligence on public shells, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.

Ms. Anthony is the Founding Partner of Legal & Compliance, LLC, a national corporate, securities and civil litigation law firm based in West Palm Beach, Florida. The firm’s corporate and securities attorneys provide technical legal services to small and mid-size private and public (OTCBB) Companies, entrepreneurs, and business professionals nationwide. Contact us today for a FREE consultation!

Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, contains the basic registration requirements for all offerings and rules of securities. Section 5(a) provides that “unless a registration statement is in effect as to a security, it shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly:

(1) …to sell such security through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise; or
(2) …to transmit through the mails or in interstate commerce any such security for the purpose of sale or for delivery after sale”

Section 5(b) provides that “it shall be unlawful for any person directly or indirectly:

(1) …to transmit through the mails or in interstate commerce, any prospectus relating to a security with respect to which a registration has been filed…., unless such prospectus meets the requirements of Section 10; or
(2) …to transmit through the mails or in interstate commerce any such security for the purpose of sale or for delivery after sale, unless accompanied or preceded by a prospectus that meets the requirements of subsection (a) of Section 10”

Section 5(c) provides that “it shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, … to offer to sell or to offer to buy through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise any security, unless a registration statement has been filed as to such security…”
In order to understand just what Section 5 covers, one must look to the definitions contained in

Section 2. Section 2 defines a “sale” to include “every contract of sale or disposition of a security, or an interest in a security, for value.” An “offer to sell” and “offer for sale” are defined to include “every attempt to offer or dispose of, or solicitation of an offer to buy, a security or an interest in a security, for value.” Finally, a “security” is defined to include, among other items, any “note, stock, bond, debenture or evidence of indebtedness; any investment contract (including real estate for investment); any security future, put, call, straddle or option on a security; any fractional undivided interest in oil, gas or other mineral rights; any certificate of deposit; and any group or index of securities.”

Literally read, Section 5 of the Securities Act applies to every sale of every security by every person, with a security including almost anything. Literally read, Section 5 requires a registration statement to be filed before any offer to sell a security could be made. Obviously, the business world could not function within such strict confines and accordingly congress enacted Sections 3 and 4 of the Securities Act to provide exemptions to the strict and all encompassing confines of Section 5.

However, the business world does have to operate within and understand that Section 5 is all encompassing and that only if a transaction falls within a specifically enumerated exemption in Sections 3 or 4 or the rules and regulations of the SEC, can the requirements of Section 5 be avoided.

Accordingly, prior to entering into business discussions which could be interpreted as falling under Section 5 of the Securities Act, it is important to consult with and retain the services of experienced securities counsel.

Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel to small public Companies as well as private Companies seeking to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board Exchange (OTCBB). Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public Companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, due diligence on public shells, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.

Ms. Anthony is the Founding Partner of Legal & Compliance, LLC, a national corporate, securities and civil litigation law firm based in West Palm Beach, Florida. The firm’s corporate and securities attorneys provide technical legal services to small and mid-size private and public (OTCBB) Companies, entrepreneurs, and business professionals nationwide. Contact us today for a FREE consultation!

A Form S-8 registration statement is popular with small business issuers because it becomes effective immediately upon filing and allows for incorporation by reference, two benefits not always available to smaller public companies. A Form S-8 registration statement can be used by Issuers to register securities to be offered to employees under certain employee benefit plans.

To qualify to use an S-8 registration statement the Issuer must: (i) be subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; (ii) have filed all reports required to be filed during the preceding 12 months, or such shorter period of time that the Issuer has been subject to the reporting requirements; (iii) is not a shell company and has not been a shell company for at least 60 calendar days previously; and (iv) if it has been a shell company at any time previously, has filed current Form 10 information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) at least 60 days previously reflecting that it is no longer a shell company.

S-8 Stock, Employees and Consultants

An S-8 registration statement is used to register securities to be offered to employees under certain employee benefit plans. For purposes of an S-8 the term employee benefit plan means any written purchase, savings, option, bonus, appreciation, profit sharing, thrift, incentive, pension or similar plan or written compensation contract solely for employees, directors, general partners, trustees (where the registrant is a business trust), officers, or consultants or advisors.

Form S-8 is available for the issuance of securities to consultants or advisors only if: (i) they are natural persons; (ii) they provide bona fide services to the registrant; and (iii) the services are not in connection with the offer or sale of securities in a capital raising transaction, and do not directly or indirectly promote or maintain a market in the Issuer’s securities. Accordingly, the SEC has taken the position that Form S-8 cannot be used to register an employee benefit plan that allows for the issuance of securities to unqualified consultants or advisors, even if the Issuer does not intend to issue such securities under the plan following registration.

S-8 and Employee Benefit Options

The Form S-8 is also available for the exercise of employee benefit plan options and the subsequent resale of the underlying securities by an employee’s family member who has acquired the options from the employee through a gift or a domestic relations order. The payment of compensation by the family member will disqualify the use of Form S-8. The S-8 registration is strictly for use by qualifying individuals. If an employee transfers options received under a benefit plan, to a non-employee other than a family member, such recipient may not use the S-8 registration to exercise the option and receive registered shares. Accordingly, upon exercise of the option, the third party would receive restricted, unregistered shares.

Form S-8 and Bad Boy Provisions

Form S-8 is also subject to the Securities Act of 1933 bad boy provisions. That is, any Issuer or any entity that at the time was a subsidiary of the issuer, that within the past three years “was convicted of any felony or misdemeanor described in paragraphs (i) through (iv) of [S]ection 15(b)(4)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934” if ineligible to use Form S-8. The described wrongdoings include convictions which: (i) involves the purchase or sale of any security, the taking of a false oath, the making of a false report, bribery, perjury, burglary, any substantially equivalent activity however denominated by the laws of the relevant foreign government, or conspiracy to commit any such offense; (ii) arises out of the conduct of the business of a broker, dealer, municipal securities dealer, government securities broker, government securities dealer, investment adviser, bank, insurance company, fiduciary, transfer agent, nationally recognized statistical rating organization, foreign person performing a function substantially equivalent to any of the above, or entity or person required to be registered under the Commodity Exchange Act (7 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) or any substantially equivalent foreign statute or regulation; (iii) involves the larceny, theft, robbery, extortion, forgery, counterfeiting, fraudulent concealment, embezzlement, fraudulent conversion, or misappropriation of funds, or securities, or substantially equivalent activity however denominated by the laws of the relevant foreign government; or (iv) involves the violation of section 152, 1341, 1342, or 1343 or chapter 25 or 47 of Title 18, or a violation of a substantially equivalent foreign statute.

Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel to small public Companies as well as private Companies seeking to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board Exchange (OTCBB). Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public Companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, due diligence on public shells, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.

Ms. Anthony is the Founding Partner of Legal & Compliance, LLC, a national corporate, securities and civil litigation law firm based in West Palm Beach, Florida. The firm’s corporate and securities attorneys provide technical legal services to small and mid-size private and public (OTCBB) Companies, entrepreneurs, and business professionals nationwide. Contact us today for a FREE consultation!

One of the most common inquiries received by securities attorneys today involves Issuers wanting to know when they and their shareholders can sell their shares on the open market following a merger with a Pink Sheet shell. In many cases, the answer they get is not the answer they want; twelve months after the Pink Sheet Company becomes a fully reporting entity.

If a private entity has merged with a Pink Sheet shell under the assumption that they can avoid the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reporting requirements, this revelation is devastating. As a result of the amendments to Rule 144 and Rule 145, enacted in February, 2009, private companies that wish to go public on the Pink Sheets are advised to do so directly, and not through a reverse merger with a shell company.

Rule 144

Technically Rule 144 provides a safe harbor from the definition of the term “underwriter” such that a selling shareholder may utilize the exemption contained in Section 4(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, to sell their restricted securities. In layman terms, Rule 144, allows shareholders to sell their unregistered shares. When a private entity merges with a Pink Sheet shell, the shareholders of the private entity receive restricted shares. Historically, other than registration, Rule 144 provided the only method for such shareholders to sell their shares on the open market. The February 2009 amendment eliminated this ability.

Rule 144(i), as amended, provides in pertinent part that the Rule is unavailable to issuers with no or nominal operations or no or nominal non-cash assets. That is the rule is unavailable for the use by shareholders of any company that is or was at any time previously, a shell company. A shell company is one with no or nominal operations and either no or nominal assets, assets consisting solely of cash and cash equivalents or assets consisting of any amount of cash and cash equivalents and nominal other assets.

When a Shell is No Longer a Shell

In order to use Rule 144, a Company must have ceased to be a shell company, be subject to the reporting requirements of section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; filed all reports and other materials required to be filed by section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as applicable, during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the issuer was required to file such reports and materials), other than Form 8-K reports; and have filed current “Form 10 information” with the Commission reflecting its status as an entity that is no longer a shell company, then those securities may be sold subject to the requirements of Rule 144 after one year has elapsed from the date that the issuer filed “Form 10 information” with the SEC.

Lastly, Rule 145, which is the rule that addresses the issuance of securities in mergers, consolidations and reclassifications, was amended to provide an analogous provision.

Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel to small public Companies as well as private Companies seeking to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board Exchange (OTCBB). Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public Companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, due diligence on public shells, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.

Ms. Anthony is the Founding Partner of Legal & Compliance, LLC, a national corporate, securities and civil litigation law firm based in West Palm Beach, Florida. The firm’s corporate and securities attorneys provide technical legal services to small and mid-size private and public (OTCBB) Companies, entrepreneurs, and business professionals nationwide. Contact us today for a FREE consultation!

A spin-off occurs when a parent company distributes shares of a subsidiary to the parent company’s shareholders such that the subsidiary separates from the parent and is no longer a subsidiary. In Staff Legal Bulletin No. 4, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) explains how and under what circumstances a spin-off can be completed without the necessity of filing a registration statement.

In particular, the subsidiary shares (the shares distributed to the parent company shareholders) do not need to be registered if the following five conditions are met: (i) the parent shareholders do not provide consideration for the spun-off shares; (ii) the spin-off is pro-rata to the parent shareholders; (iii) the parent provides adequate information about the spin-off and the subsidiary to its shareholders and to the trading markets; (iv) the parent has a valid business purpose for the spin-off; and (v) if the parent spins-off restricted securities, it has held those securities for at least one year. Below is a discussion of each of the five conditions.

Essential Conditions

The first condition is that the parent shareholders do not provide consideration for the spun-off shares. This is because if value is provided, a “sale” has occurred and a “sale” requires registration under Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, unless an exemption is available. In a spin-off, an exemption is rarely available due to the wide variety of shareholders receiving the spun-off shares.

The second condition is that the spin-off must be pro rata. When the spin-off is pro rata, the parent shareholders have the same proportionate interest in the parent and the subsidiary both before and after the spin-off. If a spin-off is not pro rata, the shareholders’ relative interests change and some shareholders give up value for the spun-off shares, requiring registration pursuant to the first condition.

The third condition requires that adequate information be provided to the shareholders. If the subsidiary is a non-reporting company it can satisfy this condition by providing the shareholders with an information statement which satisfies the Section 14 proxy rules of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 prior to or contemporaneously with providing the spun-off shares. In addition, the non-reporting subsidiary must file a Form 10 registration statement, which can be accomplished after the spin-off but prior to trading on the spun-off subsidiary, begins. A reporting subsidiary is deemed to have satisfied its information requirements as long as it is current in its reporting obligations, plus provides any pertinent information directly related to the spin-off itself.

Adequate Information Requirement

Where both the parent company and the subsidiary are non-reporting, the adequate information requirement is met if the by the date of the spin-off: (i) the parent provides the shareholders with an information statement which satisfies the Section 14 proxy rules of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934’ (ii) the shares are restricted until such time as a Form 10 is filed; and (iii) the transfer restrictions are enforced such as by means of stop transfer instructions to the transfer agent.

The fourth condition is that there is a valid business purpose for the spin-off. Although there may be many valid business purposes, the SEC specifically recognizes the following as valid: (i) allowing management of each business to focus solely on that business; (ii) providing employees of each business stock-based incentives linked solely to her or her employer; (iii) enhancing access to financing by allowing investments into each business separately; and (iv) enabling the companies to do business with each other’s competitors.

Invalid Purposes

Likewise, although there are numerous purposes that would not be valid, the SEC specifically lists the following as not valid: (i) creating a market in the spun-off securities without providing adequate information and (ii) creating a public market in a shell or development stage company.

Finally, the last condition is that the parent has held the shares for a minimum of one year. This is so the receiving shareholder may tack with the parent’s holding period and thereby satisfy the holding period requirements of Rule 144.

The SEC has also taken the position, that as long as all the above conditions have been satisfied, the spin-off will not require registration under Rule 145 merely because the shareholders have voted on the spin-off and/or assets are transferred into the subsidiary as part of the spin-off. Furthermore, except where specifically delineated above (non-reporting parent and subsidiary) as long as all the above conditions are satisfied, the shares issued in the spin-off are not restricted securities.

Securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel to small public Companies as well as private Companies seeking to go public on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board Exchange (OTCBB). Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public Companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, due diligence on public shells, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.

Ms. Anthony is the Founding Partner of Legal & Compliance, LLC, a national corporate, securities and civil litigation law firm based in West Palm Beach, Florida. The firm’s corporate and securities attorneys provide technical legal services to small and mid-size private and public (OTCBB) Companies, entrepreneurs, and business professionals nationwide. Contact us today for a FREE consultation!