You searched for FAST Act - Securities Law Blog

SEC Issues Final Rules Implementing The JOBS Act And Rules On The FAST Act

May 10, 2016

On May 3, 2016, the SEC issued final amendments to revise the rules related to the thresholds for registrations, termination of registration, and suspension of reporting under Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The amendments mark the final rule making and implementation of all provisions under the JOBS Act, and implement further provisions under the FAST Act.

The amendments revise the Section 12(g) and 15(d) rules to reflect the new, higher shareholder thresholds for triggering registration requirements and for allowing the voluntary termination of registration or suspension of reporting obligations. The new rules also make similar changes related to banks, bank holding companies, and savings and loan companies.

Specifically, the SEC has amended Exchange Act Rules 12g-1 through 12g-4 and 12h-3 related to the procedures for termination of registration under Section 12(g) through the filing of a Form 15 and for suspension of reporting obligations under Section 15(d), to reflect the higher thresholds set by the

SEC Issues Rules Implementing Certain Provisions Of The FAST Act

February 2, 2016

On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (the “FAST Act”) into law, which included many capital markets/securities-related bills. The FAST Act is being dubbed the JOBS Act 2.0 by many industry insiders. The FAST Act has an aggressive rulemaking timetable and some of its provisions became effective immediately upon signing the bill into law on December 4, 2015. Accordingly there has been a steady flow of new SEC guidance, and now implementing rules.

On January 13, 2016, the SEC issued interim final rules memorializing two provisions of the FAST Act. In particular, the SEC revised the instructions to Forms S-1 and F-1 to allow the omission of historical financial information and to allow smaller reporting companies to use forward incorporation by reference to update an effective S-1. This blog summarizes these rules.

On December 10, 2015, the SEC Division of Corporate Finance addressed the FAST Act by making an announcement with guidance and issuing

The SEC Issues Guidance On The FAST Act As It Relates To Savings And Loan Companies

January 19, 2016

On December 10, 2015, the SEC Division of Corporate Finance addressed the FAST Act by making an announcement with guidance and issuing two new Compliance & Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI). As the FAST Act is a transportation bill that rolled in securities law matters relatively quickly and then was signed into law even quicker, this was the first SEC acknowledgement and guidance on the subject.

My blog on the FAST Act and the first two C&DI on the Act can be read HERE.

On December 21, 2015, the SEC issued 4 additional C&DI on the FAST

The Fast Act (Fixing American’s Surface Transportation Act)

December 15, 2015

On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed the Fixing American’s Surface Transportation Act (the “FAST Act”) into law, which included many capital markets/securities-related bills. The FAST Act is being dubbed the JOBS Act 2.0 by many industry insiders. The FAST Act has an aggressive rulemaking timetable and some of its provisions became effective immediately upon signing the bill into law on December 4, 2015.

In July 2015, the Improving Access to Capital for Emerging Growth Companies Act (the “Improving EGC Act”) was approved by the House and referred to the Senate for further action. Since that time, this Act was bundled with several other securities-related bills into a transportation bill (really!) – i.e., the FAST Act.

In addition to the Improving EGC Act, the FAST Act incorporated the following securities-related acts: (i) the Disclosure Modernization and Simplifications Act (see my blog HERE ); (ii) the SBIC Advisers Relief Act; (iii) the Reforming Access for Investments in Startup Enterprises Act; (iv)

SEC Statement On Certain Protocol Staking Activities

October 28, 2025

On May 29, 2025, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance (“CorpFin”) issued a statement on certain protocol staking activities. In Particular, the statement addresses the staking of crypto assets that are intrinsically linked to the programmatic functioning of a public, permissionless network, and are used to participate in and/or earned for participating in such network’s consensus mechanism or otherwise used to maintain and/or earned for maintaining the technological operation and security of such network. The statement refers to proof-of-stake as “PoS” and the network as “PoS Networks.” The SEC previously issued a similar statement on proof-of-work mining activities – see HERE.

Protocol Staking

Networks rely on software programming (“protocols”) to reduce reliance on intermediaries, and which programming verifies transactions and provides settlement assurance to its users. Each protocol incorporates a “consensus mechanism” to enable unrelated computers on a network to agree on data and transactions on the network. Public, permissionless networks allow users to

SEC Statement On Proof-Of-Work Mining Activities

June 3, 2025

On March 20, 2025, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance (“CorpFin”) issued a statement on certain proof-of-work mining activities. Illustrating CorpFin’s evolving understanding of the digital world, the statement drills down to a very specific aspect of the crypto mining industry.

The CorpFin statement “addresses the mining of crypto assets that are intrinsically linked to the programmatic functioning of a public, permissionless network, and are used to participate in and/or earned for participating in such network’s consensus mechanism or otherwise used to maintain and/or earned for maintaining the technological operation and security of such network.” In the statement, CorpFin refers to these mined crypto assets as “Covered Crypto Assets” and the mining as “Protocol Mining.”

Protocol Mining

Networks utilizing Protocol Mining are governed by computer code eliminating the need for designated trusted intermediaries. The programmed software enforces certain network rules, technical requirements, and rewards distributions. Public, permissionless networks allow anyone to participate in the network’s operation, including the validation

New Guidance On Rule 14a-8 Shareholder Proposals And No Action Letter Process

May 20, 2025

On February 12, 2025, shortly after the inauguration, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance (“Corp Fin”) issued Staff Legal Bulletin 14M (“SLB 14M”) rescinding SLB 14L which had in turn rescinded prior SLBs 14I, 14J and 14K. As an aside, SLB 14L was issued under then new Chair Gary Gensler in 2021 following Biden’s election, and the prior three SLB’s had been issued under then Chair Jay Clayton, following President Trump’s first election. For more on SLB 14L see HERE.

New SLB 14M provides more of a middle ground to the prior 14L which had been designed to make it easier for environmental, social and governance (ESG) advocates to include their various proposals in company proxy materials.

Background – Rule 14a-8

The regulation of corporate law rests primarily within the power and authority of the states. However, for public companies, the federal government imposes various corporate law mandates including those related to matters of corporate governance. While state law

SEC Enforcement Actions For Late Form D Filings

January 21, 2025

In a first, the SEC settled three enforcement actions on December 20, 2024, for failing to timely file a Form D in connection with private offerings. The three companies included one private fund and two private operating businesses.

The SEC enforcement actions were solely related to a violation of Rule 503 (as described below) and did not include any charges of fraud or other nefarious activity. As a result of the settlements each of these companies are prohibited from relying on Regulation D in the future, unless specifically granted a waiver by the SEC.

In its release, the SEC stated that the SEC relies on Form D filings to assess the scope of the Regulation D market and whether the market is balancing the need for investor protection and the furtherance of capital formation, especially for smaller businesses. The SEC also relies on Form D to monitor compliance with the requirements of Regulation D. Likewise, state regulators rely on

Court Issues Nationwide Injunction on Corporate Transparency Act

January 7, 2025

On December 3, 2024, in what was not at all surprising, a Texas court issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement and staying the compliance date of the Corporate Transparency Act (CTA). The Court found that the CTA is unconstitutional as outside of Congress’s power.

A full discussion of the CTA is included below. The Texas court found that the CTA represents a federal attempt to monitor companies created under state law and eliminates the corporate anonymity feature designed by states charged with regulating corporate formation – both in violation of the U.S. Constitution and its explicit separation of powers.

The court’s opinion is strongly written, determining that the government could not justify the constitutionality of the law, regardless of every attempt. In particular, the Plaintiff’s contend that CTA violates: (i) the Ninth and Tenth Amendments by intruding on State’s rights; (ii) the First Amendment by compelling speech and burdening individuals’ rights of association; and (iii) the Fourth Amendment by

Related Party Transactions – Foreign Private Issuers

October 1, 2024

About a year ago, the SEC brought several enforcement proceedings targeting shortcomings in related party transactions disclosures, including by Lyft. The action provides a reminder that Item 404(a) is broadly construed and reminded me that related party transactions are a topic worthy of blogging about. Last week I published a blog on related party transaction disclosures for domestic companies (see HERE) and this week covers foreign private issuers (FPIs).

Item 404 of Regulation S-K sets forth the related party disclosure obligations for domestic companies that must be included in various periodic reports and registration statements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and in registration statements under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”). Foreign private issuers can comply with Item 404 by providing the information required by Item 7.B of Form 20-F plus any additional information required by its home.

Item 7.B of Form 20-F

General Disclosure

Item 7.B of Form 20-F requires certain disclosure

Related Party Transactions – Domestic Companies

September 24, 2024

About a year ago, the SEC brought several enforcement proceedings targeting shortcomings in related party transactions disclosures, including by Lyft. The action provides a reminder that Item 404(a) is broadly construed to require a description of transactions since the beginning of the registrant’s last fiscal year in excess of $120,000 in which it was or is to be a participant, and in which a related person had or will have a direct or indirect material interest. When the cases came out, I added related party transactions to my (very long) list of topics worthy of a blog and now is the time.

Delaware Court Of Chancery – M&A Transactions

June 11, 2024

The Delaware Chancery Court’s recent decisions in Crispo v. Musk, West Palm Beach Firefighters v. Moelis & Company, Chordia v. Lee, and Sjunde AP-fonden v. Activision Blizzard, Inc. have caused some angst for merger and acquisition (M&A) practitioners. This blog will summarize those opinions and the statutory changes proposed by the Delaware Bar in response.

Crispo v. Musk

In Crispo v. Musk, the court decided on the ambiguous issue of when a target may assert a claim for premium damages in the event of a default by a buyer in an acquisition agreement. In essence, when a public company is the target in an acquisition, the board of directors act as agents for the shareholders, who will ultimately receive the merger consideration. Moreover, that merger consideration is almost always at a premium to pre-merger market price. Unfortunately, this creates a contractual legal issue, whereby if the buyer breaches the agreement, the only damage claim by the target

NYSE Amends Shareholder Approval Requirements In Private Securities Transactions Involving Substantial Shareholders

February 6, 2024

On December 26, 2023, the SEC approved an NYSE rule change to make it easier for listed companies to raise money from existing substantial shareholders. In particular, the NYSE has amended Section 312.03(b) and 312.04 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual to modify the circumstances under which a listed company must obtain shareholder approval prior to the sale of securities below the Minimum Price to a substantial security holder.

Background

Section 312.03 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual lists the circumstances upon which shareholder approval must be obtained prior to the issuance of securities. Pre-amendment Section 312.03(b)(i) requires shareholder approval prior to the issuance of common stock, or of securities convertible into or exercisable for common stock, in any transaction or series of related transactions, to a director, officer or substantial security holder of the company (each a “Related Party”) if the number of shares of common stock to be issued, or if the number of shares of common stock

The Corporate Transparency Act – What You Need To Know

January 30, 2024

Since the January 1, 2024 compliance effective date for the Corporate Transparency Act, I have been inundated with compliance inquiries. Here is what you need to know.

Background

On January 1, 2021, Congress passed the Corporate Transparency Act (“CTA”). The CTA requires all business entities, subject to certain exceptions, to disclose information about the entity and the individual(s) who own such entity and/or have substantial control. The CTA was created to help the United States government combat money laundering, tax fraud and illegal foreign ownership of U.S. businesses. On September 30, 2022, the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) issued a Final Rule on the CTA, explaining what information needs to be disclosed in the form of a Beneficial Ownership Information Report (referred to as a “BOI Report”). For a review of the rule release, see HERE. The BOI Report will become part of a national database on corporate ownership.

The CTA specifically requires entities to file

SEC Adopts Revisions To The Privacy Act

December 5, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the SEC approved final revisions to the Privacy Act, governing the handling of personal information in the federal government (See HERE for a review of the proposed rules). The revisions codify current practices for processing requests for information made by the public under the Privacy Act and result in an entire re-write of the current rules. The SEC last updated the Privacy Act in 2011.

Background

The Privacy Act is the principal law governing the handling of personal information in the federal government, regulating the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of information about individuals that is maintained in systems of records by federal agencies. The Privacy Act also allows individuals to access information about them and provides a method to correct inaccurate records.

Final New Rules

The amended rules result in a complete rewrite of the Privacy Act to: (i) add a provision setting forth the process by which individuals may be provided with

Who Is An “Affiliate” And Why Does It Matter – Exchange Act; Determining Filer Status

August 22, 2023

The concept of affiliation resonates throughout the federal securities laws, including pertaining to both the Securities Act and Exchange Act rules, regulations and forms and Nasdaq and NYSE compliance. In this multi-part series of blogs, I am unpacking what the term “affiliate” means and its implications. The first blog in the series began with an analysis of the Securities Act definition of “affiliate” and the implications under Rule 144, Section 4(a)(7) and Form S-3 eligibility (see HERE). The second delved into the topic of a primary vs. secondary offering, which itself hinges on whether the offeror is an affiliate (see HERE). In this third part of the series, I will discuss the meaning and implications of an “affiliate” under the Exchange Act.

Exchange Act Definition of Affiliate

Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 defines an affiliate the same as the Securities Act, to wit: ‘An affiliate’ of, or a person “affiliated” with, a specified person, is a person that

Nasdaq Board Diversity Matrix In Practice

August 1, 2023

Although the compliance deadline for the requirement to add diverse directors was extended, the board diversity matrix disclosure form (“Board Diversity Matrix”) requirement is now in its second year.

Nasdaq Rule 5606(a) requires Nasdaq listed companies to publicly disclose, in an aggregated form, to the extent permitted by law (for example, some foreign countries may prohibit such disclosure), information on the voluntary self-identified gender and racial characteristics and LGBTQ+ status of the company’s board of directors as part of the ongoing corporate governance listing requirements. Each company must provide an annual Board Diversity Matrix disclosure, including: (i) the total number of directors; (ii) the number of directors based on gender identity (female, male or non-binary); (iii) the number of directors that did not disclose gender; (iv) the number of directors based on race and ethnicity; (v) the number of directors who self-identify as LGBTQ+; and (vi) the number of directors who did not disclose a demographic background.

Changes To FINRA’S Corporate Action Notification Process

May 9, 2023

Effective June 3, 2023, FINRA will be replacing and updating the system for filing a Company Related Action Notification form, which form begins the process with FINRA to effectuate a corporate action initiated by a company trading on OTC Markets. The new process allows companies to submit forms, get updates and respond to comments through an electronic FINRA gateway.

Background/Rule 6490

Effective September 27, 2010, the SEC approved FINRA Rule 6490 (Processing of Company Related Actions). Rule 6490 requires that corporations whose securities are trading on the OTC Markets notify FINRA in a timely manner of certain corporate actions, such as dividends, forward or reverse splits, rights or subscription offerings, symbol changes and name changes. The Rule grants FINRA discretionary power when processing documents related to the announcements.

Rule 6490 works in conjunction with Exchange Act Rule 10b-17. Rule 10b-17 states that “it shall constitute a manipulative or deceptive device or contrivance as used in section 10(b) of

SEC Proposes Revision To The Privacy Act

April 11, 2023

As anticipated, on February 14, 2023, the SEC proposed revisions to the Privacy Act, governing the handling of personal information in the federal government. The proposed revisions would codify current practices for processing requests for information made by the public under the Privacy Act and would result in an entire re-write of the current rules.

Background

The Privacy Act is the principal law governing the handling of personal information in the federal government regulating the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of information about individuals that is maintained in systems of records by federal agencies. The Privacy Act also allows individuals to access information about them and a method to correct inaccurate records.

The SEC is proposing a complete rewrite of the Privacy Act to: (i) add a provision setting forth the process by which individuals may be provided with an accounting of disclosures made by the SEC; (ii) add a provision to codify the existing practice of providing

Class Voting In Delaware And The Impact On SPACs

March 28, 2023

In December 2022, the Delaware Chancery Court entered a ruling sending the SPAC world spiraling, for what seems like the 10th time in the last couple of years. As is always the case in a SPAC (or at least 99% of the time), common stock is broken into two series, Class A and Class B. The Class A common stock is issued to the public shareholders in the underwritten initial public offering and the Class B common stock is issued to the sponsor. Upon closing a business combination transaction, the sponsor Class B common stock automatically converts into Class A common stock, leaving one Class of common stock. Also, in the majority of SPAC transactions, the shareholder approval for the business combination transaction involves other changes to the charter documents for the SPAC, including a name change, and changes in authorized capital stock, etc. The term “charter” in this blog refers to the certificate of incorporation and any amendments

Termination Of Registration Under Section 12 Of The Exchange Act

November 22, 2022

A public company with a class of securities registered under Section 12 or which is subject to Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) must file Section 13 reports with the SEC (10-K, 10-Q and 8-K). A company registers securities under Section 12 by filing an Exchange Act registration statement such as on Form 10, Form 20-F or Form 8-A. A company becomes subject to Section 15(d) by filing a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”) such as a Form S-1 or F-1. The Section 15(d) reporting requirements are scaled down from the full Exchange Act reporting requirements for a company with a class of securities registered under Section 12.

I have previously written about suspending the duty to file reports under Section 15(d) and the related question of determining voluntary reporting status (see HERE). This blog addresses the termination of registration under Section 12.

Terminating

Final Rules On The Foreign Companies Accountable Act; PCAOB Reached Deal WIth China And Hong Kong – Part III

October 4, 2022

The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (“HFCA”) was adopted on December 18, 2020, requiring both the SEC and the PCAOB to adopt rules and procedures implementing its provisions. The HFCA requires foreign-owned issuers to certify that the PCAOB has been able to audit specified reports and inspect their audit firm within the last three years. If the PCAOB is unable to inspect the company’s public accounting firm for three consecutive years, the company’s securities are banned from trading on a national exchange.

As part of the HFCA’s implementation, on November 5, 2021, the SEC approved PCAOB Rule 6100 establishing a framework for the PCAOB’s determination that it is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in foreign jurisdictions because of a position taken by an authority in that jurisdiction (see HERE) On December 2, 2021, the SEC adopted amendments to finalize rules implementing the submission and disclosure requirements in the HFCA (see HERE) and

Final Rules On The Foreign Companies Accountable Act; PCAOB Reached Deal WIth China And Hong Kong – Part II

September 27, 2022

As part of the HFCA’s implementation, on November 5, 2021, the SEC approved PCAOB Rule 6100 establishing a framework for the PCAOB’s determination that it is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in foreign jurisdictions because of a position taken by an authority in that jurisdiction (see HERE.) On December 2, 2021, the SEC adopted amendments to finalize rules implementing the submission and disclosure requirements in the HFCA and published a sample

Final Rules On The Foreign Companies Accountable Act; PCAOB Reached Deal WIth China And Hong Kong – Part I

September 20, 2022

As part of the HFCA’s implementation, on November 5, 2021, the SEC approved PCAOB Rule 6100 establishing a framework for the PCAOB’s determination that it is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in foreign jurisdictions because of a position taken by an authority in that jurisdiction (see HERE .) On December 2, 2021, the SEC adopted amendments to finalize rules implementing the submission and disclosure requirements in the HFCA and published a sample

The SEC Has Issued New Guidance On Shareholder Proposals And Updated The Rule 14a-8 No-Action Letter Process

January 25, 2022

On November 3, 2021, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance (“Corp Fin”) issued Staff Legal Bulletin 14L (“SLB 14L”) related to Rule 14a-8, rescinding prior Bulletins 14I, 14J and 14K and effectively destroying four years of interpretative guidance related to the exclusion of ESG related shareholder proposals from proxy statements. SLB 14L also provides interpretative guidance on the use of images in shareholder proponents’ supporting statements, proof of ownership, and the use of email for notices.

Following the issuance of Bulletin 14L, the SEC announced that it was reversing a 2019 policy change related to providing written responses to no-action letter requests in accordance with Rule 14a-8 in the proxy process. The earlier 2019 policy change provided that the SEC no longer had to provide written responses to company’s that sought to exclude a shareholder proposal. Rather, the SEC could inform the company and the proponent of its position (concurs, disagrees or declines to state a view) orally or

SEC Affirms PCAOB Rules Implementing The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act

November 30, 2021

On November 5, 2021, as part of the implementation of the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (“HFCA”), the SEC approved PCAOB Rule 6100. Rule 6100 establishes a framework for the PCAOB’s determination that it is unable to inspect or investigate completely registered public accounting firms located in foreign jurisdictions because of a position taken by an authority in that jurisdiction. The HFCA was adopted on December 18, 2020 and requires foreign-owned issuers to certify that the PCAOB has been able to audit specified reports and inspect their audit firm within the last three years. If the PCAOB is unable to inspect the company’s public accounting firm for three consecutive years, the company’s securities are banned from trading on a national exchange.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) mandates that the PCAOB inspect registered public accounting firms in both the United States and in foreign jurisdictions and investigate potential statutory, rule, and professional standards violations committed by such firms and

SEC Rules Requiring Disclosures for Resource Extraction Companies

July 6, 2021

As required by the Dodd-Frank Act, in December 2020, the SEC adopted final rules requiring require resource extraction companies to disclose payments made to foreign governments or the U.S. federal government for the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals. The last version of the proposed rules were published in December 2019 (see HERE )The rules have an interesting history. In 2012 the SEC adopted similar disclosure rules that were ultimately vacated by the U.S. District Court. In 2016 the SEC adopted new rules which were disapproved by a joint resolution of Congress. In December 2019, the SEC took its third pass at the rules that were ultimately adopted.

The final rules require resource extraction companies that are required to file reports under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to disclose payments made by it or any of its subsidiaries or controlled entities, to the U.S. federal government or foreign governments

SPAC Transactions Continue Amid SEC Cautionary Statements

April 13, 2021

Since I wrote about the SPAC IPO boom in June 2020 (HERE), the trend has not waned. However, as soon as celebrities like Jay-Z, Shaquille O’Neal, A-Rod and astronaut Scott Kelly jumped in, I knew the tide was shifting, and recent SEC alerts bring that to light. To be clear, SPACs have been used as a method for going public for years and will continue to do so in the future. In fact, I firmly believe that going public through a SPAC will continue and should continue to rival the traditional IPO. With so much SPAC money available in the market right now (an estimated $88 billion raised in 2021 so far already exceeding the estimated $83.4 billion raised in all of 2020) and the Dow and S&P beating historical records, SPACs are an excellent option as an IPO alternative.

However, SPACs should not be viewed as the trendy investment of the day and both investors and

SEC Adopts Amendments To Business Descriptions, Risk Factors And Legal Proceedings

November 3, 2020

Just eight months following the rule proposal (see HERE), on August 26, 2020, the SEC adopted final amendments to Item 101 – description of business, Item 103 – legal proceedings, and Item 105 – Risk Factors of Regulation S-K. The amendments make a more principles-based approach to business descriptions and risk factors, recognizing the significant changes in business models since the rule was adopted 30 years ago. The amendments to disclosures related to legal proceedings continue the current prescriptive approach. In addition, the rule changes are intended to improve the readability of disclosure documents, as well as discourage repetition and disclosure of information that is not material.

The Item 101 and Item 103 amendments only apply to domestic companies and foreign private issuer that elect to file using domestic company forms. The forms generally used by foreign private issuers (F-1, F-3, 20-F, etc.) do not have references to Items 101 and 103 of Regulation S-K but rather refer

SEC Enacts Temporary Expedited Crowdfunding Rules

May 5, 2020

Following the April 2, 2020 virtual meeting of the SEC Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee in which the Committee urged the SEC to ease crowdfunding restrictions to allow established small businesses to quickly access potential investors (see HERE), the SEC has provided temporary, conditional expedited crowdfunding access to small businesses. The temporary rules are intended to expedite the offering process for smaller, previously established companies directly or indirectly affected by Covid-19 that are seeking to meet their funding needs through the offer and sale of securities pursuant to Regulation Crowdfunding.

The temporary rules will provide eligible companies with relief from certain rules with respect to the timing of a company’s offering and the financial statements required. To take advantage of the temporary rules, a company must meet enhanced eligibility requirements and provide clear, prominent disclosure to investors about its reliance on the relief. The relief will apply to offerings launched between May 4, 2020 and August 31,

SEC Proposes Additional Disclosures For Resource Extraction Companies

February 25, 2020

In December 2019, the SEC proposed rules that would require resource extraction companies to disclose payments made to foreign governments or the U.S. federal government for the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals. The proposed rules have an interesting history. In 2012 the SEC adopted similar disclosure rules that were ultimately vacated by the U.S. District Court. In 2016 the SEC adopted new rules which were disapproved by a joint resolution of Congress. However, the statutory mandate in the Dodd-Frank Act requiring the SEC to adopt these rules requiring the disclosure remains in place and as such, the SEC is now taking its third pass at it.

The proposed rules would require domestic and foreign resource extraction companies to file a Form SD on an annual basis that includes information about payments related to the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals that are made to a foreign government or the U.S. federal government.

Proposed Rule

The

Are Smart Contracts Enforceable

July 30, 2019

I’ve mentioned the term “smart contract” numerous times in my blogs related to blockchain and distributed ledger technology. It seems worth drilling down on what exactly a “smart contract” is and whether such a “contract” is enforceable as a legally binding contract. Smart contracts are generally computer code designed to automatically execute all or part of an agreement that is stored on a blockchain, such as the automatic transfer of assets upon the completion of specific programmed criteria. A smart contract may be the only agreement between parties, or it may be used to implement all or part of the provisions of a separate written contract.

Since a smart contract is programmed code, it will only perform each step or item of execution when the pre-programmed criteria has been completed. That is, if “x” occurs, then the code will automatically execute step “y.” Accordingly, all contractual actions must be capable of being completed within

SEC Monitors Impact of Hurricanes On Capital Markets

September 19, 2017

As I wrote this blog I continued to have no power at my home after one week, though thankfully it has returned by publication date. Living in South Florida, our firm has felt and seen the devastating impact of Hurricane Irma on the state and send our thoughts and wishes to all affected by both Irma and Hurricane Harvey in Texas.

On September 13, 2017, the SEC issued a press release confirming that it is closely monitoring the effects of both Irma and Harvey on the capital markets. In particular, the SEC is working to make sure that investors have access to their securities accounts and evaluating the need for extending filing deadlines for reporting companies. Furthermore, the SEC is watching for and will keep investors updated via alerts on storm-related scams.

Despite the announcement that the SEC is monitoring the markets and considering extending filing deadlines, no specific broad-based relief has been granted. As has been done historically, I

Financial Choice Act 2.0 Has Made Progress

June 13, 2017

On June 8, 2017, the U.S. House of Representative passed the Financial Creating Hope and Opportunity for Investors, Consumers and Entrepreneurs Act (the “Financial Choice Act 2.0” or the “Act”) by a vote of 283-186 along party lines. Only one Republican did not vote in favor of the Act. On May 4, 2017, the House Financial Services Committee voted to approve the Act. A prior version of the Act was adopted by the Financial Services Committee in September 2016 but never proceeded to the House for a vote.

The Financial Choice Act 2.0 is an extensive, extreme piece of legislation that would dismantle a large amount of the power of the SEC and strip the Dodd-Frank Act of many of its key provisions. The future of the Act is uncertain as it is unlikely to get through the Senate, although a rollback of Dodd-Frank remains a priority to the current administration. It is also possible that parts of the lengthy

SEC Completes Inflation Adjustment Under Titles I And III Of The Jobs Act; Adopts Technical Amendments

April 25, 2017

On March 31, 2017, the SEC adopted several technical amendments to rules and forms under both the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to conform with Title I of the JOBS Act. On the same day, the SEC made inflationary adjustments to provisions under Title I and Title III of the JOBS Act by amending the definition of the term “emerging growth company” and the dollar amounts in Regulation Crowdfunding.

Title I of the JOBS Act, initially enacted on April 5, 2012, created a new category of issuer called an “emerging growth company” (“EGC”). The primary benefits to an EGC include scaled-down disclosure requirements both in an IPO and periodic reporting, confidential filings of registration statements, certain test-the-waters rights in IPO’s, and an ease on analyst communications and reports during the EGC IPO process. For a summary of the scaled disclosure available to an EGC as well as the differences in

The Acting SEC Chair Has Trimmed Enforcement’s Subpoena Power

April 4, 2017

In early February 2017, acting SEC Chair Michael Piwowar revoked the subpoena authority from approximately 20 senior SEC enforcement staff. The change leaves the Director of the Division of Enforcement as the sole person with the authority to approve a formal order of investigation and issue subpoenas. Historically, the staff did not have subpoena power; however, in 2009 then Chair Mary Shapiro granted the staff the power, in the wake of the Bernie Madoff scandal. Chair Shapiro deemed the policy to relate solely to internal SEC procedures and, as such, passed the delegation of power without formal notice or opportunity for public comment.

This is the beginning of what I expect will be many, many changes within the SEC as the new administration changes the focus of the agency from Mary Jo White’s broken windows policies to supporting capital formation. The mission of the SEC is to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly and efficient markets and facilitate capital formation. Although

The Financial Choice Act 2.0

March 28, 2017

On February 9, 2017, the Chair of the House Financial Services Committee issued a memo outlining changes to the Financial Choice Act, dubbing the newest version the Financial Choice Act 2.0. The memo was not intended for public distribution but found its way in any event, causing a great deal of anticipation as to the amended Act itself. The actual amended Act has not been released as of the date of this blog.

Introduction

As a reminder, the Financial Choice Act, which was passed by the House Financial Services Committee on September 13, 2016, is an extensive, extreme piece of legislation that would dismantle a large amount of the power of the SEC and strip the Dodd-Frank Act of many of its key provisions. As first written, it would not be feasible for the Act to pass into law, but it certainly illustrates the extreme views of members of the House on the state of current over-regulation.

Moreover,

House Passes Creating Financial Prosperity For Business And Investors Act

February 7, 2017

On December 5, 2016, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Creating Financial Prosperity for Businesses and Investors Act (H.R. 6427) (the “Act”), continuing the House’s pro-business legislation spree. The Act is actually comprised of six smaller acts, all of which have previously been considered and passed by the House in 2016. The Act is comprised of: (i) Title I: The Small Business Capital Formation Enhancement Act (H.R. 4168); (ii) Title II: The SEC Small Business Advocate Act (H.R. 3784); (iii) Title III: The Supporting American’s Innovators Act (H.R. 4854); (iv) Title IV: The Fix Crowdfunding Act (H.R. 4855); (v) Title V: The Fair Investment Opportunities for Professionals Experts Act (H.R. 2187); and (vi) Title VI: The U.S. Territories Investor Protection Act (H.R. 5322).

Title I: The Small Business Capital Formation Enhancement Act (H.R. 4168)

This Act requires the SEC to respond to the findings and recommendations of the SEC’s annual Government-Business Forum on Small Business Capital Formation, which

SEC Cracks Down On Failure To File 8-K For Financing Activities; An Overview Of Form 8-K

December 13, 2016

Introduction and Background

On September 26, 2016, and again on the 27th, the SEC brought enforcement actions against issuers for the failure to file 8-K’s associated with corporate finance transactions and in particular PIPE transactions involving the issuance of convertible debt, preferred equity, warrants and similar instruments. Prior to the release of these two actions, I have been hearing rumors in the industry that the SEC has issued “hundreds” of subpoenas (likely an exaggeration) to issuers related to PIPE transactions and in particular to determine 8-K filing deficiencies. Using this as a backdrop, this blog will also address Form 8-K filing requirements in general.

Back in August 2014, the SEC did a similar sweep related to 8-K filing failures associated with 3(a)(10) transactions. See my blog HERE for a discussion of those actions and 3(a)(10) proceedings in general. The 8-K filing deficiency actions were a precursor to a larger SEC investigation on 3(a)(10) transactions themselves which culminated in two well-known

House Passes Accelerated Access To Capital Act

November 15, 2016

On September 8, 2016, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Accelerating Access to Capital Act. The passage of this Act continues a slew of legislative activity by the House to reduce regulation and facilitate capital formation for small businesses. Unlike many of the House bills that have been passed this year, this one gained national attention, including an article in the Wall Street Journal. Although the bill does not have a Senate sponsor and is not likely to gain one, the Executive Office has indicated it would veto the bill if it made it that far.

Earlier this year I wrote about 3 such bills, including: (i) H.R. 1675 – the Capital Markets Improvement Act of 2016, which has 5 smaller acts imbedded therein; (ii) H.R. 3784, establishing the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation and Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee within the SEC; and (iii) H.R. 2187, proposing an amendment to the definition of accredited investor. See

Mergers And Acquisitions: Types Of Transactions

April 5, 2016

As merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions completed its most active year since the financial crisis, it is helpful to go back to basics. Activity has been prevalent in all market sectors, including large, mid and small cap and across all industries, including biotech, financial services, technology, consumer goods and services, food and beverage and healthcare, among others.

Although I’ve written about M&A transactions multiple times, this will be the first time I’ve given a broad overview of the forms that an M&A transaction can take.

Types of Mergers and Acquisitions

A merger or acquisition transaction is the combination of two companies into one resulting in either one corporate entity or a parent-holding and subsidiary company structure. Mergers can categorized by the competitive relationship between the parties and by the legal structure of the transaction. Related to competitive relationship, there are three types of mergers: horizontal, vertical and conglomerate. In a horizontal merger, one company acquires another that is in the

Mergers And Acquisitions – The Merger Transaction

October 20, 2015

Although I have written about document requirements in a merger transaction previously, with the recent booming M&A marketplace, it is worth revisiting. This blog only addresses friendly negotiated transactions achieved through share exchange or merger agreements. It does not address hostile takeovers.

A merger transaction can be structured as a straight acquisition with the acquiring company remaining in control, a reverse merger or a reverse triangular merger. In a reverse merger process, the target company shareholders exchange their shares for either new or existing shares of the public company so that at the end of the transaction, the shareholders of the target company own a majority of the acquiring public company and the target company has become a wholly owned subsidiary of the public company. The public company assumes the operations of the target company.

A reverse merger is often structured as a reverse triangular merger. In that case, the acquiring company forms a new subsidiary which merges with the

The Stronger Enforcement Of Civil Penalties Act; A Push For Higher SEC Penalties

September 22, 2015

In July a Democratic senator and a Republican senator together introduced the Stronger Enforcement of Civil Penalties Act of 2015 (SEC Penalties Act), which would give the SEC the ability to levy much heftier penalties for securities fraud, and against recidivists. The Act was referred to the Senate Baking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee for review and further action. The proposed SEC Penalties Act would increase the limits on civil monetary penalties and directly link the size of the penalty to the scope of harm and associated investor losses, and substantially increase the penalties for repeat offenders.

Background: A Trend Towards Increased Enforcement

The SEC Penalties Act continues a trend to deter securities law violations through regulations and stronger enforcement including the SEC Broken Windows policy, increased Dodd-Frank whistleblower activity and reward payments, and increased bad actor prohibitions. See my prior blog on bad actor prohibitions HERE.

The SEC Broken Windows policy is one in which the SEC is

Finders- The Facts Related To Broker-Dealer Registration Requirements

August 25, 2015

Introduction

As a recurring topic, I discuss exemptions to the broker-dealer registration requirements for entities and individuals that assist companies in fundraising and related services. I have previously discussed the no-action-letter-based exemption for M&A brokers, the exemptions for websites restricted to accredited investors and for crowdfunding portals as part of the JOBS Act and the statutory exemption from the broker-dealer registration requirements found in Securities Exchange Act Rule 3a4-1, including for officers, directors and key employees of an issuer. I have also previously published a blog on the American Bar Association’s recommendations for the codification of an exemption from the broker-dealer registration requirements for private placement finders. I’ve included links to each of these prior articles in the conclusion to this blog.

A related topic with a parallel analysis is the use of finders for investors and investor groups, an activity which has become prevalent in today’s marketplace. In that case the investor group utilizes the services of a finder

SEC Issues Guidance On “Voting Power” For Purposes Of Bad Actor Rules

July 21, 2015

The SEC has published clarifying guidance and information on defining “voting equity securities” for purposes of the application of the bad actor rules under Rule 506 of Regulation D of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). The clarifying language was contained within the SEC’s March 25, 2015 release of the final rules amending and adopting Regulation A+.

Rules 262 and 505 of the Securities Act disqualify the use of offerings under Regulation A and Rule 505 of Regulation D if an issuer, its predecessor, or an affiliate of the issuer is considered a “bad actor” as defined by such rules. In particular, the rules disqualify the issuer if the specified covered person is subject to certain administrative orders, industry bars, an injunction involving certain securities law violations or certain specified criminal convictions. “Covered persons” under the rules extends to the issuer, predecessor, affiliate, directors, officers, general partners, 20% or greater beneficial owners, promoters, underwriters, persons

More On Regulation A/A+; Thoughts On The Practical Effects And New SEC Guidance

July 14, 2015

On March 25, 2015, the SEC released final rules amending Regulation A. The new rules are commonly referred to as Regulation A+. The existing Tier I Regulation A, which does not preempt state law, has been increased to $20 million and the new Tier 2, which does preempt state law, allows a raise of up to $50 million. Issuers may elect to proceed under either Tier I or Tier 2 for offerings up to $20 million. The new rules went into effect on June 19, 2015.

On June 23, 2015, the SEC updated its Division of Corporation Finance Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) to provide guidance related to Regulation A/A+. The SEC published 11 new C&DI’s and deleted 2 related to forms and in particular, related to paper filings and annotations which are no longer relevant or applicable.

Practical Effects of New Regulation A/A+

I believe, and the feedback I hear supports, that new Regulation A+ will be widely

Going Public Transactions For Smaller Companies: Direct Public Offering And Reverse Merger

June 30, 2015

Introduction

One of the largest areas of my firms practice involves going public transactions. I have written extensively on the various going public methods, including IPO/DPOs and reverse mergers. The topic never loses relevancy, and those considering a transaction always ask about the differences between, and advantages and disadvantages of, both reverse mergers and direct and initial public offerings. This blog is an updated new edition of past articles on the topic.

Over the past decade the small-cap reverse merger, initial public offering (IPO) and direct public offering (DPO) markets diminished greatly. The decline was a result of both regulatory changes and economic changes. In particular, briefly, those reasons were: (1) the recent Great Recession; (2) backlash from a series of fraud allegations, SEC enforcement actions, and trading suspensions of Chinese companies following reverse mergers; (3) the 2008 Rule 144 amendments, including the prohibition of use of the rule for shell company and former shell company shareholders; (4) problems

SEC Division of Corporation Finance Issues Guidance On Bad Actor Waivers

April 21, 2015

Last month the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance issued guidance on the granting waivers for the bad actor disqualifications under Regulation A and Rules 505 and 506 of Regulation D.

The Dodd-Frank Act required the SEC to implement rules which disqualify certain Rule 506 offerings based on the individuals involved in the issuer and related parties. On July 10, 2013, the SEC adopted such rules by amending portions of Rules 501 and 506 of Regulation D, promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933. The new rules went into effect on September 23, 2013. The rule disqualifies the use of Rule 506 as a result of certain convictions, cease and desist orders, suspensions and bars (“disqualifying events”) that occur on or after September 23, 2013, and adds disclosure obligation in Rule 506(e) for disqualifying events that occurred prior to September 23, 2013.

On July 31, 2013, I summarized the final rules, which summary can be read HERE. On December 4,

SEC Supports FINRA’s Rule 6490 Authority Over Corporate Actions

March 10, 2015

In two recent administrative decisions, the SEC has upheld FINRA’s broad authority under Rule 6490 to approve and effectuate corporate actions by public companies trading on the OTC Markets. One of FINRA’s mandates is to protect investors and maintain fair and orderly markets and like broker-dealers, it acts as a gatekeeper in the small-cap industry. FINRA exercises its powers though the direct regulation of its member broker-dealer firms, but also through its Office of Fraud Detection and Market Intelligence, which monitors the trading activity and press releases of issues in the marketplace and conducts related investigations. FINRA works with the SEC as a front line in the detection, investigation and assistance with the prosecution of issuers.

Recently, through its power under Rule 6490, as more fully explained below, FINRA has, with the support of the SEC, expanded its impact on the small-cap marketplace by conducting in-depth reviews of issuers in conjunction with the processing of corporate actions, and denying such

SEC Issues Several Proposed Rule Changes Pertaining To JOBs Act

January 6, 2015

ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100

——————————————————————————————————

On December 18, 2014, the SEC published proposed rule amendments to implement portions of Title V and Title VI of the JOBS Act by amending rules promulgated under Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). The proposed amendments will revise the Section 12(g) rules to reflect the new, higher shareholder thresholds for triggering registration requirements and for allowing the voluntary termination of registration or suspension of reporting obligations. The proposed rules also make similar changes related to banks, bank holding companies, and savings and loan companies.

The proposed rules establish the time for determining accredited status for purposes of calculating shareholders of record and the corresponding application of the registration and deregistration rules. In particular, the proposed rules set the last day of the fiscal year as the relevant calculation moment effectively imposing an obligation on issuers to obtain, and investors to give, updated representations following an initial

Will the Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014 Simplify Reporting Requirements for ECG’s and Smaller Reporting Companies?

December 23, 2014

ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100

——————————————————————————————————

In early December the House passed the Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014, which will now go to the Senate for action—or inaction, as the case may be.

The bill joins a string of legislative and political pressure on the SEC to review and modernize Regulation S-K to eliminate burdensome, unnecessary disclosure with the dual purpose of reducing the costs to the disclosing issuer and ensure readable, material information for the investing public.

The Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014, if passed, would require the SEC to adopt or amend rules to: (i) allow issuers to include a summary page to Form 10-K; and (ii) scale or eliminate duplicative, antiquated or unnecessary requirements in Regulation S-K. In addition, the SEC would be required to conduct yet another study on all Regulation S-K disclosure requirements to determine how best to amend and modernize the rules to reduce costs and burdens while

Private Offering Rule Changes Since JOBS Act

December 2, 2014

ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100

——————————————————————————————————

As the end of 2014 approaches, I find myself reflecting on the significant successes and failures in the private offering arena since the enactment of the Jumpstart our Business Startups Act (“JOBS Act”) on April 5, 2012. Some provisions under the JOBS Act became law without further rule-making action on the part of the SEC; others took time to pass; and significantly, Title III Crowdfunding, the most anticipated change in capital market access, has completely stalled. This blog is a summary of the in-depth detailed blogs I’ve previously written on each of these topics with some added commentary.

506(c) – The Elimination of the Prohibition Against General Solicitation and Advertising in Private Offerings to Accredited Investors; Broker-Dealer Exemption for 506(c) Funding Websites

The enactment of new 506(c) resulting in the elimination of the prohibition against general solicitation and advertising in private offerings to accredited investors has been a slow but sure success. Trailblazers

Risk Factor Disclosures For Reporting Public Companies

November 18, 2014

ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100

——————————————————————————————————

A risk factor disclosure involves a discussion of circumstances, trends, or issues that may affect a company’s business, prospects, operating results, or financial condition. Risk factors must be disclosed in registration statements under the Securities Act and registration statements and reports under the Exchange Act. In addition, risk factors must be included in private offering documents where the exemption relied upon requires the delivery of a disclosure document, and is highly recommended even when such disclosure is not statutorily required.

The Importance of Risk Factors

Risk factors are one of the most often commented on sections of a registration statement. The careful crafting of pertinent risk factors can provide leeway for more robust discussion on business plans and future operations, and can satisfy a wide arrange of SEC concerns regarding existing financial and non-financial matters (such as potential default provisions in debt, dilution matters, inadvertent rule violations, etc.).

Although smaller reporting companies are

PCAOB Amends Auditing Standards For Related-Party And Significant, Unusual Transactions

November 11, 2014

ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100

——————————————————————————————————

On October 21, 2014, the SEC approved amendments to certain auditing standards that impact small cap companies that maintain GAAP compliant audits and file reports with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). The SEC Order approved proposed rule changes that had been submitted to by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (the “PCAOB”) regarding the auditing standards for related party transactions and the standards regarding significant unusual transactions.

The amended rules apply to all SEC audits including those for broker-dealers and go into effect for the audits for fiscal year ends beginning on or after December 15, 2014.

Related Party Transactions

The SEC has approved new Auditing Standard No. 18 (AU No. 18) setting forth guidance and procedures for auditors to use in identifying and evaluating related party transactions. AU No. 18 is intended to strengthen requirements for identifying, assessing and responding to the risks of material misstatement

SEC Filed Actions Against 19 Firms and One Individual Trader for Violation of Rule 105 of Regulation M

September 23, 2014

ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100

——————————————————————————————————

On September 16, 2014, the SEC filed actions against 19 firms and one individual trade for short selling violations in advance of public stock offerings in violation of Rule 105 of Regulation M. The SEC has actively enforced Regulation M since its enactment in 1996. Regulation M is designed to prevent stock manipulation during public offerings and Rule 105 particularly prohibits short selling of stock within five business days of participating in an offering for the same stock. That is, you cannot short stock and cover your short by buying the same stock from the underwriter in a public offering. Rule 105 prevents downward pressure on a company’s stock price during the offering process.

The SEC’s current investigation found that 19 firms and one individual trader charged in these latest cases engaged in short selling of particular stocks shortly before they bought shares from an underwriter, broker, or dealer participating in a follow-on

The Sale of Unregistered Securities Must Satisfy Form 8-K Filing Requirements In a 3(a)(10) Transaction

August 5, 2014

Introduction and Background

Recently the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has been taking action against public reporting companies for the failure to file a Form 8-K upon the completion of a transaction exempt under Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”). The SEC has served a Wells notice on numerous companies for the failure to file such Form 8-K without any prior communication with such companies. Since enforcement actions for the failure to file a Form 8-K are very rare, it is my view that the SEC is concerned with the 3(a)(10) transaction itself.

A Wells notice, often referred to as a Wells letter, is a notice delivered by the SEC to persons and entities under investigation providing the opportunity to such persons and entities to present their position to the SEC prior to the commencement of an enforcement proceeding. A Wells letter gives notice of the SEC’s intended charges and enforcement recommendation and

Section 16 Insider Reporting and Potential Liability for Short-Swing Trading Practices

June 30, 2014

A public company with a class of securities registered under Section 12 or which is subject to Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) must file reports with the SEC (“Reporting Requirements”). The required reports include an annual Form 10-K, quarterly Form 10Q’s and current periodic Form 8-K as well as proxy reports and certain shareholder and affiliate reporting requirements.

Last week, I wrote about the “certain shareholder” filing requirements under Sections 13d and 13g of the Exchange Act, Regulation 13D-G beneficial ownership reporting and related Schedules 13D and 13G. This blog is a summary of the “certain shareholder and affiliate” reporting and related requirements under Section 16 of the Exchange Act. In particular, all directors, executive officers and 10% stockholders (“Insiders”) of reporting companies are subject to the reporting and insider trading provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act. At the end of the blog is a reference chart related to the

Guide to Reverse Merger Transaction

March 18, 2014

What is a reverse merger? What is the process?

A reverse merger is the most common alternative to an initial public offering (IPO) or direct public offering (DPO) for a company seeking to go public. A “reverse merger” allows a privately held company to go public by acquiring a controlling interest in, and merging with, a public operating or public shell company. The SEC defines a “shell company” as a publically traded company with (1) no or nominal operations and (2) either no or nominal assets or assets consisting solely of any amount of cash and cash equivalents.

In a reverse merger process, the private operating company shareholders exchange their shares of the private company for either new or existing shares of the public company so that

SEC Guidance on Rules Disqualifying Bad Actors from Participating in Rule 506 Offerings

December 17, 2013

On December 4, 2013, the SEC updated its Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (“C&DI’s”) including new guidance on the rules disqualifying bad actors from participating in Rule 506 offerings.

Background

The Dodd-Frank Act required the SEC to implement rules which disqualify certain Rule 506 offerings based on the individuals involved in the Issuer and related parties. On July 10, 2013, the SEC adopted such rules by amending portions of Rules 501 and 506 of Regulation D, promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933. The new rules went into effect on September 23, 2013. The new rule disqualifies the use of Rule 506 as a result of certain convictions, cease and desist orders, suspensions and bars (“disqualifying events”) that occur on or after September 23, 2013, and adds disclosure obligation in Rule 506(e) for disqualifying events that occurred prior to September 23, 2013.

Rule 506 provides that disqualifying events committed by a list of specified “covered persons” affiliated with the Issuer or

SEC has Finalized Rules Disqualifying Felons and Other “Bad Actors” from Rule 506 Offerings

July 31, 2013

On July 10, 2013, the same day the SEC has adopted final rules eliminating the prohibition against general solicitation and advertising in Rules 506 and 144A offerings as required by Title II of the JOBS Act, the SEC adopted new rules disqualifying felons and other bad actors from participating in Rule 506 offerings as required by Section 926 of the Dodd-Frank Act.

Background

The Dodd-Frank Act required the SEC to implement rules which disqualify certain Rule 506 offerings based on the individuals involved in the

SEC Issues Guidance Regarding The Exemption From Broker-Dealer Registration In Title II Of The JOBS Act

March 12, 2013

Background

Title II of the JOBS Act, requires the SEC to amend Rule 506 of Regulation D to permit general solicitation and advertising in offerings under Rule 506, provided that all purchasers of the securities are accredited investors and such accredited status is reasonably verified by the Issuer.

In addition, Title II creates a limited exemption to the broker dealer registration requirements for certain intermediaries that facilitate these Rule 506 offerings. In particular, new Section 4(b) to the Securities Act of 1933, has added a new exemption to the broker dealer registration requirements for:

(A) a person that maintains a platform or mechanism that permits the offer, sale, purchase, or negotiation of or with respect to securities, permits general solicitations, general advertisements, or similar related activities by issuers of such securities, whether online, in person, or through any other means

(B) that person or any person associated with that person co-invests in such securities; or

Implementation Of The Elimination Of The Prohibition Against Advertising For Private Accredited Investor Offerings And The Crowdfunding Act, Continues To Be Delayed

February 27, 2013

The annual “SEC Speaks” conference, in which Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) representatives review the agency’s efforts over the past year and preview the year to come, was held on February 22-23, 2013.

During the conference the SEC laid out the numerous items on its agenda for the year to come and beyond. The list included the careful implementation of the various titles of the JOBS Act, including Title II and Title III.

Title II of the JOBS Act provides that the SEC will amend Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Regulation D promulgated there under, to eliminate the prohibition on general solicitation and general advertising in a Rule 506 offering, so long as all purchasers in such offering are accredited investors. Although on August 29, 2012 the SEC published proposed rules implementing Title II, those rules have been met with numerous comments and opposition and it is entirely unclear how the SEC shall proceed.

How To Bring A Delinquent Exchange Act Reporting Company Current

January 25, 2013

SEC Delinquent Filers Program

In 2004 the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) instituted the Delinquent Filers Program and created the Delinquent Filers Branch as part of its Division of Enforcement. The Delinquent Filers Branch was instituted to encourage publicly traded companies that are delinquent in the filing of their required periodic reports (Forms 10-K and 10-Q) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to provide investors with accurate financial information upon which to make informed investment decisions. The securities registrations of issuers that fail to make their required periodic filings are subject to suspension or revocation by the SEC and other enforcement proceedings.

Since it was instituted, the SEC Delinquent Filers Branch has suspended the trading and/or revoked the registration of hundreds of companies, often in sweeps of large groups of filers in a single day. Generally, a delinquent filer would receive a letter from the SEC giving the Company 10 days in which to make the

COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF TITLE I OF THE JOBS ACT AS RELATED TO EMERGING GROWTH COMPANIES

November 14, 2012

On April 5, 2012, President Obama signed the Jumpstart our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) into law. The JOBS Act was passed on a bipartisan basis by overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate. The Act seeks to remove impediments to raising capital for emerging growth public companies by relaxing disclosure, governance and accounting requirements, easing the restrictions on analyst communications and analyst participation in the public offering process, and permitting companies to “test the waters” for public offerings. The following is an in-depth review of Title I of the JOBS Act related to Emerging Growth Companies.

Introduction – What is an Emerging Growth Company?

The JOBS Act created a new category of company: an “Emerging Growth Company” (EGC). An EGC is defined as a company with annual gross revenues of less than $1 billion that first sells equity in a registered offering after December 8, 2011. In addition, an EGC loses its EGC status on the earlier

House Subcommittee Demands Explanation of SEC’s Delayed JOBS Act Rulemaking

August 27, 2012

Title II of the JOBS Act provides that, within 90 days of the passage of the JOBS Act (i.e. July 5, 2012), the SEC will amend Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Regulation D promulgated there under, to eliminate the prohibition on general solicitation and general advertising in a Rule 506 offering, so long as all purchasers in such offering are accredited investors. However, on June 27, 2012 Mary Schapiro, Securities and Exchange Commission chairman told the House Subcommittee on TARP, Financial Services and Bailouts of Public and Private Programs that the SEC would not meet the 90 day deadline. At that time, Ms. Schapiro told the U.S. House committee that the SEC expected the rules to be implemented by late summer 2012.

The SEC scheduled a hearing on the general solicitation rules for August 22, 2012, but then rescheduled the hearing for August 29, 2012. The House is not happy with the delay. In a

SEC Still on Track to Meet the 270 Deadline to Enact Crowdfunding Rules

July 10, 2012

The SEC is still on track and expects to meet the 270 day deadline to draft rules and enact Title III of the JOBS Act creating the new crowdfunding exemption.

As I wrote about before the July 4^th holiday, on June 25^th, in prepared testimony, Mary Schapiro told a U.S. House oversight panel that certain rule writing deadlines imposed by the JOBS Act “are not achievable.” In particular, the SEC could not meet the 90 day deadline to amend Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Regulation D promulgated there under, to eliminate the prohibition on general solicitation and general advertising in a Rule 506 offering, so long as all purchasers in such offering are accredited investors. “The 90-day deadline does not provide a realistic timeframe for the drafting of the new rule, the preparation of an accompanying economic analysis, the proper review by the commission, and an opportunity for public input,” she said.

However

Crowdfunding Act – What about state securities laws?

June 14, 2012

On April 5, 2012 President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law. Part of the JOBS Act is the Crowdfunding Act, the full title of which is the “Capital Raising Online While Deterring Fraud and Unethical Non-Disclosure Act of 2012”. The SEC has been mandated with the task of drafting the crowdfunding rules and regulations by early 2013.

Introduction

In addition to federal securities laws, each state has its own securities laws and governing body which oversees and enforces such laws. The individual state securities statutes are not uniform – every state is different. However, many aspects of federal securities law pre-empt state securities laws. This is a major advantage to issuers because abiding by the myriad of disclosure and pre and post-filing requirements of the federal statutes and individual state statutes concurrently is an arduous and expensive effort.

For instance federal law does not pre-empt state law for a Rule 505 offering, but it does for a Rule 506

American Bar Association Comments On Title II Of The JOBS Act

June 11, 2012

Summary of Title II

Title II of the JOBS Act provides that, within 90 days of the passage of the JOBS Act (i.e. July 5, 2012), the SEC will amend Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Regulation D promulgated there under, to eliminate the prohibition on general solicitation and general advertising in a Rule 506 offering, so long as all purchasers in such offering are accredited investors. The JOBS Act directs the SEC to make the same amendment to Rule 144A so long as all purchasers in the Rule 144A offering are qualified institutional buyers. Neither a Rule 506 offering nor a Rule 144A offering will be considered a public offering (i.e. will lose its exemption) by virtue of a general solicitation or general advertising so long as the issuer has taken reasonable steps to verify that purchasers are either accredited investors or qualified institutional buyers, respectively. Since it would be impossible to ensure that

The JOBS Act IPO On-Ramp

June 4, 2012

I’ve written extensively on the Crowdfunding Act, or Title III of the Jobs Act, and much less extensively on the other five titles of the Act. Today’s blog will focus on Title I of the Jobs Act – Reopening American Capital Markets to Emerging Growth Companies. Several industry types have been referring to Title I as the IPO On Ramp and so will I.

The Jobs Act

The JOBS Act created a new category of companies defined as “Emerging Growth Companies” (EGC). An EGC is defined as a company with annual gross revenues of less than $1 billion that first sells equity in a registered offering after December 8, 2011. In addition, an EGC loses its EGC status on the earlier of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which it exceeds $1 billion in revenues; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth year after its IPO; (iii) the date on which it

THE JOBS ACT IMPACT ON HEDGE FUND MARKETING

May 8, 2012

On April 5, 2012 President Obama signed the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) into law. The other day I blogged about the changes to the general solicitation and advertising rules brought about by the JOBS Act. Today I am focusing on the impact those rule changes will have on hedgefunds, and in particular, smaller hedgefunds.

Summary of JOBS Act Changes Effecting General Solicitation and Advertising of Private Offerings

JOBS Act Amendments to General Solicitation and Advertising of Private Offerings

May 3, 2012

Neither a Rule 506 offering nor a Rule 144A offering will be considered a public offering (i.e. will lose its exemption) by virtue of a general solicitation or general advertising so long as the issuer has taken reasonable steps to verify that purchasers are either accredited investors or qualified institutional buyers, respectively. Since it would be impossible to ensure that only accredited investors, or qualified institutional

SEC Issues Guidance on Title 1 of the JOBS Act

April 23, 2012

On April 5, 2012 President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law. Some of the rules went into effect immediately; others are busily in the drafting process. The SEC has begun issuing guidance and it is expected will continue to do so often.

On April 16, 2012, the SEC issued guidance on Title 1 of the JOBS Act. The full text of this guidance is available on the SEC website. Title 1 of the JOBS Act provides scaled- down business disclosure for Emerging Growth Companies (EGC’s) effectively treating them as small business issuers. In particular, EGC’s need only provide two years of audited financials (instead of 3) for a registration of an IPO; are treated as small businesses for the reporting of executive compensation; have no Sarbanes-Oxley Act 404(b) auditor attestation requirements and are able to test the waters with communications to QIB’s and institutional accredited investors prior to an offering.

Determining When and If a Company Qualifies As

SEC Issues Guidance on Registration and Deregistration Under Jobs Act

April 18, 2012

On April 5, 2012 President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law. Some of the rules went into effect immediately, such as the ability of an Emerging Growth Company to file a registration statement and seek confidential treatment during the review process. For this process the EGC would avail itself of the new Securities Act Section 6(e). The SEC issued, albeit limited, guidance on this process for EGC’s yesterday, April 10, 2012.

SEC Guidance on the JOBS Act

On April 11, 2012, the SEC issued guidance on the JOBS Act amendments to Section 12(g) and Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act). The full text of this guidance, and the guidance issued on new Section 6(e) is available on the SEC website.

The JOBS Act amends Section 12(g) and Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act as to threshold shareholder requirements and registration and deregistration requirements for banks and bank holding companies. This blog

The JOBS Act Is Not Just Crowdfunding

April 17, 2012

On April 5, 2012 President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law. In my excitement over this ground-breaking new law, I have been zealously blogging about the Crowdfunding portion of the JOBS Act. However, the JOBS Act impacts securities laws in many additional ways. The following is a summary of the many ways the JOBS Act will amend current securities regulations, all in ways to support small businesses.

A. The New “Emerging Growth Company” Category

The JOBS Act will create a new category of companies defined as “Emerging Growth Companies” (EGC). An EGC will be defined as a company with annual gross revenues of less than $1 billion, that has been public and reporting for a minimum of five years and whose non-affiliated public float is valued at less than $700 million. EGC’s will have reduced requirements associated with initial public offerings (IPO’s) and ongoing reporting requirements. For many purposes, EGC’s will be allowed to use the less

Crowdfunding Act Signed Into Law

April 16, 2012

On April 5, 2012 President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law. In accordance with the JOBS Act requirement that all crowdfunding platforms (i.e. websites and intermediaries) be a member of a national securities association, the new self regulatory organization (SRO), The Crowdfunding Intermediary Regulatory Association (CFIRA) has already been formed. The CFIRA will be charged with ensuring investor protection and market integrity. The CFIRA will have members from crowdfunding investor intermediaries as well as related industries such as venture capital firms. In addition to regulating its members, the CFIRA will provide investors with information such as learning about crowdfunding and its risks.

Opportunity For All Americans

Crowdfunding provides an opportunity for all Americans, whether accredited or not, and whether connected with an elite investment banking firm or not, to invest small amounts of money in small businesses that they know or just believe in. Small businesses provide jobs and sometimes small businesses become big businesses. For the first time

Filing Deadlines for Exchange Act Quarterly and Annual Reports

June 1, 2011

It should be noted that this article focuses specifically on non-accelerated filers.

Companies subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) are required to file quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and annual reports on Form 10-K. In additional articles, I will discuss in depth the contents and specific disclosure requirements of both forms. However, in summary, the quarterly report on 10-Q contains unaudited reviewed quarterly financial statements together with management discussion and analysis of those statements.

Form 10-K

The annual report on Form 10-K contains audited annual financial statements, together with management discussion and analysis of those statements as well as other disclosures including but not limited to management bios, management compensation, unregistered issuances of stock, generally background on the registrant, internal control reports, litigation matters and more.

Quarterly reports on form 10-Q are due 45 days from the end of the quarter and annual reports on Form 10-K are due

SEC Updates Guidance On Confidential Treatment Requests

June 25, 2024

For the first time since December 2019, the SEC has updated its guidance on the process associated with submitting a confidential treatment request (“CTR”). The March 2019 guidance update was triggered by the passing of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (“FAST Act”) which allows companies to redact confidential information from most material agreement exhibits without filing a CTR, including omitting schedules and exhibits to exhibits. The FAST Act also allows a company to redact information in material agreements that is both (i) not material, and (ii) competitively harmful if disclosed without the need for a CTR. For a discussion on the December 2019 guidance see HERE. At the end of this blog, I include a refresher on the streamlined, self-executing rules for omitting confidential information from material contract exhibits to SEC filings.

The latest updated guidance flows through the process in general, so the below discussion includes all such updates.

Confidential Treatment Requests Under Rules 406

Who Is An Affiliate And Why Does It Matter – Part 1

August 8, 2023

WHO IS AN “AFFILIATE” AND WHY DOES IT MATTER? PART 1

The concept of affiliation resonates throughout the federal securities laws, including pertaining to both the Securities Act and Exchange Act rules, regulations and forms and Nasdaq and NYSE compliance. In this multipart series of blogs, I will unpack what the term “affiliate” means and its implications. This first blog in the series begins with the Securities Act definition of an “affiliate” and the implications under Rule 144, Section 4(a)(7) and Form S-3 eligibility. In Part 2 of the series, I will delve into the meaty topic of a primary vs. secondary offering, which itself hinges on whether the offeror is an affiliate.

Securities Act Definition of Affiliate

The Securities Act provides a statutory definition of an “affiliate” to begin what is a facts and circumstances analysis (as is common in the federal securities laws). Rule 405 of the Securities Act defines an “affiliate” as “[A]n affiliate of, or

SEC Final Rule Changes For Exempt Offerings – Part 1

February 2, 2021

On November 2, 2020, the SEC adopted final rule changes to harmonize, simplify and improve the exempt offering framework. The SEC had originally issued a concept release and request for public comment on the subject in June 2019 (see HERE). For my five-part blog series on the proposed rules, see HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE and HERE. The new rules go into effect on March 14, 2021.

The 388-page rule release provides a comprehensive overhaul to the exempt offering and integration rules worthy of in-depth discussion. As such, like the proposed rules, I will break it down over a series of blogs, with this first blog focusing on integration.

Current Exemption Framework

As I’ve written about many times, the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) requires that every offer and sale of securities either be registered with the SEC or exempt from registration. The purpose of registration is to provide investors with full and fair disclosure

SEC Adopts Amendments To Management Discussion And Analysis

December 8, 2020

It has been a very busy year for SEC rule making, guidance, executive actions and all matters capital markets. Continuing its ongoing disclosure effectiveness initiative on November 19, 2020, the SEC adopted amendments to the disclosures in Item 303 of Regulation S-K – Management’s Discussion & Analysis of Financial Conditions and Operations (MD&A). The proposed rule had been released on January 30, 2020 (see HERE). Like all recent disclosure effectiveness rule amendments and proposals, the rule changes are meant to modernize and take a more principles-based approach to disclosure requirements. In addition, the rule changes are intended to reduce repetition and disclosure of information that is not material.

The new rules eliminate Item 301 – Selected Financial Data – and amend Items 302(a) – Supplementary Financial Information and Item 303 – MD&A. In particular, the final rules revise Item 302(a) to replace the current tabular disclosure with a principles-based approach and revise MD&A to: (i) to

Updated Guidance On Confidential Treatment In SEC filings

December 1, 2020

In March 2019, the SEC adopted amendments to Regulation S-K as required by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (“FAST Act”) (see HERE). Among other changes, the amendments allow companies to redact confidential information from most exhibits without filing a confidential treatment request (“CTR”), including omitting schedules and exhibits to exhibits. Likewise, the amendments allow a company to redact information that is both (i) not material, and (ii) competitively harmful if disclosed without the need for a confidential treatment request. The enacted amendment only applies to material agreement exhibits under Item 601(b)(10) and not to other categories of exhibits, which would rarely contain competitively harmful information.

After the rule change, the SEC streamlined its procedures for granting CTR’s and for applying for extended confidential treatment on previously granted orders. The amendments to the CTR process became effective April 2, 2019. See HERE for a summary of confidential treatment requests. In December 2019, the SEC issued new guidance on confidential

SEC Proposed Rule Changes For Exempt Offerings – Part 1

March 17, 2020

On March 4, 2020, the SEC published proposed rule changes to harmonize, simplify and improve the exempt offering framework. The SEC had originally issued a concept release and request for public comment on the subject in June 2019 (see HERE). The proposed rule changes indicate that the SEC has been listening to capital markets participants and is supporting increased access to private offerings for both businesses and a larger class of investors. Together with the proposed amendments to the accredited investor definition (see HERE), the new rules could have as much of an impact on the capital markets as the JOBS Act has had since its enactment in 2012.

The June concept release sought public comments on: (i) whether the exemptive framework as a whole is effective for both companies and investors; (ii) ways to improve, harmonize and streamline the exemptions; (iii) whether there are gaps in the regulations making it difficult for smaller companies to raise capital;

SEC Proposes Amendments To MD&A Disclosures

February 11, 2020

Continuing its disclosure effectiveness initiative, on January 30, 2020, the SEC proposed amendments to Management’s Discussion & Analysis of Financial Conditions and Operations (MD&A) required by Item 303 of Regulation S-K. In addition, to eliminate duplicative disclosures, the SEC also proposed to eliminate Item 301 – Selected Financial Data and Item 302 – Supplementary Financial Information. Like all recent disclosure effectiveness rule amendments and proposals, the rule changes are meant to modernize and take a more principles based approach to disclosure requirements. In addition, the proposed rule changes are intended to reduce repetition and disclosure of information that is not material.

On the same day the SEC issued an Interpretive Release on MD&A. A week earlier the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations on the subject.

Among the proposed changes, the new rule would add a new Item 303(a) to state the principal objectives of MD&A, replace the specific requirement to disclose off-balance-sheet arrangements with

SEC Fall 2019 Regulatory Agenda

January 28, 2020

In late 2019, the SEC published its latest version of its semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking with the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is an executive office of the President, publishes a Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (“Agenda”) with actions that 60 departments, administrative agencies and commissions plan to issue in the near and long term. The Agenda is published twice a year, and for several years I have blogged about each publication.

Like the prior Agendas, the spring 2019 Agenda is broken down by (i) “Pre-rule Stage”; (ii) Proposed Rule Stage; (iii) Final Rule Stage; and (iv) Long-term Actions. The Proposed and Final Rule Stages are intended to be completed within the next 12 months and Long-term Actions are anything beyond that. The number of items to be completed in a 12-month time frame has increased with 47 items as compared to 40 on the

Incorporation By Reference

October 29, 2019

During lulls in the very active rule changes and blog-worthy news coming from the SEC and related regulators, it is great to step back and write about basics that affect SEC attorneys and market participants on a daily basis. In the realm of securities laws, the concept of “incorporation by reference” is simple enough – information from another document, registration statement or filing is included in a current document, registration statement or filing by referring to the other without repeating its contents. Similarly, “forward incorporation by reference” means that a document is automatically updated with information contained in a future SEC filing.

Although the concepts are relatively straight forward, their application is complex with differing rules for different classes of companies (such as an emerging growth company, smaller reporting company, or well-known seasoned issuer) and different filings such as a registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) or a periodic report filed under the Securities

SEC Proposes Amendments To Acquisitions And Dispositions Of Businesses

September 10, 2019

In May of this year, the SEC proposed amendments to the financial statements and other disclosure requirements related to the acquisitions and dispositions of businesses. In September 2015, the SEC issued a request for public comment related to disclosure requirements for entities other than the reporting company itself, including subsidiaries, acquired businesses, issuers of guaranteed securities and affiliates. See my blog HERE. Taking into account responses to portions of that request for comment, in the summer of 2018, the SEC adopted final rules to simplify the disclosure requirements applicable to registered debt offerings for guarantors and issuers of guaranteed securities, and for affiliates whose securities collateralize a company’s securities. See my blog HERE.

The SEC is now proposing amendments to Rules 3-05, 3-14, and Article 11 of Regulation S-X and adding new Rule 6-11. The amendments would also make several related conforming rule and form changes. Rule 3-05 was included in the September 2015 request for comment. Like

Confidential Treatment In SEC Filings

August 27, 2019

Earlier this year the SEC adopted amendments to Regulation S-K as required by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (“FAST Act”) (see HERE). Among other changes, the amendments allow companies to redact confidential information from most exhibits without filing a confidential treatment request (“CTR”), including omitting schedules and exhibits to exhibits. Likewise, the amendments allow a company to redact information that is both (i) not material, and (ii) competitively harmful if disclosed without the need for a confidential treatment request. The enacted amendment only applies to material agreement exhibits under Item 601(b)(10) and not to other categories of exhibits, which would rarely contain competitively harmful information.

Since the rule change took effect, the SEC has streamlined its procedures for granting CTRs and for applying for extended confidential treatment on previously granted orders. The amendments to the CTR process became effective April 2, 2019.

This blog begins with a discussion of the procedures for seeking confidential treatment, followed by a

SEC Proposes Amendments To Regulation S-K

August 20, 2019

On August 8, 2019, the SEC canceled a public meeting which was slated to talk about proposed changes to disclosures related to business descriptions, legal proceedings and risk factors under Regulation S-K and instead, on the same day, issued proposed rule changes. The proposed changes continue the SEC’s ongoing disclosure effectiveness initiative. My ongoing running summary of proposed and implemented rule amendments, concept releases, reports and other relevant information related to disclosure changes can be found at the end of this blog.

The proposed changes take a more principles-based approach to business descriptions and risk factors, recognizing the significant changes in business models since the rule was adopted 30 years ago. The proposed amendments to disclosures related to legal proceedings continues the current prescriptive approach. In addition, the proposed rule changes are intended to improve the readability of disclosure documents, as well as discourage repetition and disclosure of information that is not material.

Item 101 – Description of Business

Item

SEC Spring 2019 Regulatory Agenda

July 9, 2019

In May 2019, the SEC published its latest version of its semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking with the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is an executive office of the President, publishes a Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (“Agenda”) with actions that 60 departments, administrative agencies and commissions plan to issue in the near and long term. The Agenda is published twice a year, and for several years I have blogged about each publication.

Like the prior Agendas, the Spring 2019 Agenda is broken down by (i) “Prerule Stage”; (ii) Proposed Rule Stage; (iii) Final Rule Stage; and (iv) Long-term Actions. The Proposed and Final Rule Stages are intended to be completed within the next 12 months and Long-term Actions are anything beyond that. The number of items to be completed in a 12-month time frame has increased again with 40 items as compared to 36 last

SEC Concept Release On Private Offerings

July 2, 2019

On June 18, 2019, the SEC issued a 211-page concept release and request for public comment on ways to simplify, harmonize, and improve the exempt (private) offering framework. The concept release seeks input on whether changes should be made to improve the consistency, accessibility, and effectiveness of the SEC’s exemptions for both companies and investors, including identifying potential overlap or gaps within the framework.

From a high level the SEC is seeking public comment on (i) whether the exemptive framework as a whole is effective for both companies and investors; (ii) ways to improve, harmonize and streamline the exemptions; (iii) whether there are gaps in the regulations making it difficult for smaller companies to raise capital; (iv) whether the limitations on who can invest and amounts that can be invested (i.e., accredited investor status) pose enough investor protection and conversely create undue obstacles to capital formation; (v) integration and transitioning from one offering exemption to another; (vi) the use of

SEC Adopts Rules to Amend Regulation S-K

April 2, 2019

On March 20, 2019 the SEC adopted amendments to Regulation S-K as required by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (“FAST Act”). The proposed amendments were first published on October 11, 2017 (see HERE). A majority of the amendments were adopted as proposed. As part of the SEC’s ongoing Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative, the amendments are designed to modernize and simplify disclosure requirements for public companies, investment advisers, and investment companies. For a detailed list of actions that have been taken by the SEC as part of its Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative, see my summary at the end of this blog.

The FAST Act, passed in December 2015, contained two sections requiring the SEC to modernize and simplify the requirements in Regulation S-K. Section 72002 required the SEC to amend Regulation S-K to “further scale or eliminate requirements… to reduce the burden on emerging growth companies, accelerated filers, smaller reporting companies, and other smaller issuers, while still providing all material

Updated Disclosures for Mining Companies

February 5, 2019

In the 4th quarter of 2018, the SEC finalized amendments to the disclosure requirements for mining companies under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). The proposed rule amendments were originally published in June 2016. In addition to providing better information to investors about a company’s mining properties, the amendments are intended to more closely align the SEC rules with current industry and global regulatory practices and standards as set out in by the Committee for Reserves International Reporting Standards (CRIRSCO). In addition, the amendments rescind Industry Guide 7 and consolidate the disclosure requirements for registrants with material mining operations in a new subpart of Regulation S-K.

The final amendments require companies with mining operations to disclose information concerning their mineral resources and mineral reserves. Disclosures on mineral resource estimates were previously only allowed in limited circumstances. The rule amendments provide for a two-year transition period with compliance beginning in

SEC Solicits Comment On Earnings Releases And Quarterly Reports

January 15, 2019

On December 18, 2018, the SEC published a request for comment soliciting input on the nature, content, and timing of earnings releases and quarterly reports made by reporting companies. The comment period remains open for 90 days from publication. The request is not surprising as earnings releases and quarterly reports were included in the pre-rule stage in the Fall 2018 SEC semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking.

The request for comment seek input on how the SEC can reduce burdens on publicly reporting companies associated with quarterly reports while maintaining disclosure effectiveness and investor protections. The SEC also seeks comment on how the existing reporting system, earnings releases and earnings guidance may foster an overly short-term focus by companies and market participants. In addition, the SEC is looking for input on how to make the reporting process less cumbersome to investors, such as by having to compare an earnings release and Form 10-Q for differences.

This has been a

SEC Fall 2018 Regulatory Agenda

November 27, 2018

In October 2018, the SEC posted its latest version of its semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking with the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is an executive office of the President, publishes a Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions (“Agenda”) with actions that 60 departments, administrative agencies and commissions plan to issue in the near and long term. The Agenda is published twice a year.

Like the Spring 2018 Agenda, the fall Agenda is broken down by (i) “Prerule Stage”; (ii) Proposed Rule Stage; (iii) Final Rule Stage; and (iv) Long-term Actions. The Proposed and Final Rule Stages are intended to be completed within the next 12 months and Long-term Actions are anything beyond that. The number of items to be completed in a 12-month time frame has jumped up with 36 items compared to 21 on the spring list.

Interestingly, following President Trump’s recent call to eliminate

Financial Statement Disclosure Relief Under Rule 3-13

November 6, 2018

Rule 3-13 of Regulation S-X allows a company to request relief from the SEC from the financial statement disclosure requirements if they believe that the financial information is burdensome and would result in disclosure of information that goes beyond what is material to investors. Consistent with the ongoing message of open communication and cooperation, the current SEC regime has been actively encouraging companies to avail themselves of this relief and has updated the CorpFin Financial Reporting Manual to include contact information for staff members that can assist.

As part of its ongoing disclosure effectiveness initiative, the SEC is also considering amendments to the financial statement disclosure process and the publication of further staff guidance. In addition to advancing disclosure changes, allowing for relief from financial statement requirements could help encourage smaller companies to access public markets, an ongoing goal of the SEC and other financial regulators. For a review of the October 2017 Treasury Department report to President Trump, including

SEC Adopts Amendments to Simplify Disclosure Requirements

October 16, 2018

In August the SEC voted to adopt amendments to certain disclosure requirements in Regulations S-K and S-X (the “S-K and S-X Amendments”) as well as conforming changes throughout the federal securities laws and related forms. The amendments are intended to simplify and update disclosure requirements that are redundant, duplicative, overlapping, outdated or superseded with the overriding goal of reducing compliance burdens on companies without reducing material information for investors. The new amendments finalize and adopt the proposed rules that had previously been issued on July 13, 2016. See my blog on the proposed rule change HERE. The final rule changes were substantially, but not entirely, as proposed.

The Regulation S-X and S-K Amendments come as a result of the Division of Corporation Finance’s Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative and as required by Section 72002 of the FAST Act. The proposing release also requested public comment on a number of disclosure requirements that overlap with, but require information incremental to, U.S. GAAP

SEC Amends Definition of “A Smaller Reporting Company”

July 17, 2018

On June 28, 2018, the SEC adopted the much-anticipated amendments to the definition of a “smaller reporting company” as contained in Securities Act Rule 405, Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 and Item 10(f) of Regulation S-K. The amendments come almost two years to the day since the initial publication of proposed rule changes (see HERE).

Among other benefits, it is hoped that the change will help encourage smaller companies to access US public markets. The amendment expands the number of companies that qualify as a smaller reporting company (SRC) and thus qualify for the scaled disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X. The SEC estimates that an additional 966 companies will be eligible for SRC status in the first year under the new definition.

As proposed, and as recommended by various market participants, the new definition of a SRC will now include companies with less than a $250 million public float as compared to the $75 million

SEC Spring 2018 Regulatory Agenda

June 26, 2018

On May 9, 2018, the SEC posted its latest version of its semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking with the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. According to the preamble, information in the agenda was accurate as of March 13, 2018. On April 26, 2018, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton gave testimony before the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations regarding the SEC’s requested fiscal year 2019 budget. This blog will summarize the newest regulatory agenda and SEC upcoming budgetary requests.

Usually the agenda is separated into two categories: (i) Existing Proposed and Final Rule Stages; and (ii) Long-term Actions. The Spring 2018 agenda is broken down by (i) “Prerule Stage”; (ii) Proposed Rule Stage; (iii) Final Rule Stage; and (iv) Long-term Actions. The Proposed and Final Rule Stages are intended to be completed within the next 12 months and Long-term Actions are anything beyond that. The number of items to be completed

ABA Comment Letter On Disclosures Under Regulation S-K

May 1, 2018

In December 2017, the American Bar Association (“ABA”) submitted its fourth comment letter to the SEC related to the financial and business disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K. Like the SEC’s ongoing Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative, the ABA has a Disclosure Effectiveness Working Group as part of its Federal Regulation of Securities Committee (of which I am a member) and its Law and Accounting Committee.

The ABA comment letter begins with a general discussion of the materiality concept, which is the underlying basis of disclosure, and then provides input on various specific areas of disclosure under Regulation S-K. The ABA comment letter specifically responded to the SEC concept release and request for public comment on sweeping changes to certain business and financial disclosure requirements issued on April 15, 2016. See my two-part blog on the S-K Concept Release HERE and HERE.

I’ve been writing about Regulation S-K and the SEC Disclosure Initiative since at least early 2015. Although consistently a

Regulation A+ Continues To Grow

April 17, 2018

The new Regulation A/A+, which went into effect on June 19, 2015, is now three years old and continues to develop and gain market acceptance. In addition to ongoing guidance from the SEC, the experience of practitioners and the marketplace continue to develop in the area. Nine companies are now listed on national exchanges, having completed Regulation A+ IPO’s, and several more trade on OTC Markets. The NYSE even includes a page on its website related to Regulation A+ IPO’s. As further discussed herein, most of the exchange traded companies have gone down in value from their IPO offering price, which I and other practitioners attribute to the lack of firm commitment offerings and the accompanying overallotment (greenshoe) option.

On March 15, 2018, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 4263, the Regulation A+ Improvement Act, increasing the Regulation A+ Tier 2 limit from $50 million to $75 million in a 12-month period. In September 2017 the House

The SEC’s 2018 Flex Regulatory Agenda

April 3, 2018

In December 2017, the SEC posted its latest version of its semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking with the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. Prior to issuing the agenda, SEC Chair Jay Clayton had promised that the SEC’s regulatory agenda’s would be “more realistic” and he seems to have been true to his word.

The agenda is separated into two categories: (i) Existing Proposed and Final Rule Stages; and (ii) Long-term Actions. The Existing Proposed and Final Rule Stages are intended to be completed within the next 12 months and Long-term Actions are anything beyond that. The semiannual list published in July 2017 only contained 33 legislative action items to be completed in a 12-month time frame, and the newest list is down to 26 items, whereas the prior fall 2016 list had 62 items.

The Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions

The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, which is an executive office of the

Guidance On New Exhibit Rules In SEC Filings

November 14, 2017

On March 1, 2017, the SEC passed a final rule requiring companies to include hyperlinks to exhibits in filings made with the SEC. The amendments require any company filing registration statements or reports with the SEC to include a hyperlink to all exhibits listed on the exhibit list. In addition, because ASCII cannot support hyperlinks, the amendment also requires that all exhibits be filed in HTML format. The rule change was made to make it easier for investors and other market participants to find and access exhibits listed in current reports, but that were originally provided in previous filings. A summary of the rule can be read HERE.

The new Rule went into effect on September 1, 2017, provided however that non-accelerated filers and smaller reporting companies that submit filings in ASCII may delay compliance through September 1, 2018.

In addition to the filing of exhibits and schedules, Item 601 of Regulation S-K requires each company to include an

Emerging Growth Companies Will Start To Grow Up

November 7, 2017

The first of emerging growth companies (“EGC’s”) will begin losing EGC status as the five-year anniversary of the creation of an EGC has now passed. Those companies that will lose status as a result of the passage of time are almost unilaterally not pleased with the impending change and concurrent increase in regulatory compliance.

Background

Title I of the JOBS Act, initially enacted on April 5, 2012, created a new category of issuer called an “emerging growth company” (“EGC”). An EGC is defined as a company with total annual gross revenues of less than $1,070,000,000 during its most recently completed fiscal year that first sells equity in a registered offering after December 8, 2011. An EGC loses its EGC status on the earlier of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which it exceeds $1,070,000,000 in revenues; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth year after its IPO (for example, if the issuer has

SEC Proposes Rules To Modernize And Simplify Disclosures

October 31, 2017

On October 11, 2017, as part of the ongoing SEC Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative, the SEC published proposed rule amendments to modernize and simplify disclosure requirements for public companies, investment advisers, and investment companies. The proposed rule amendments implement a mandate under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (“FAST Act”).

The FAST Act, passed in December 2015, contains two sections requiring the SEC to modernize and simplify the requirements in Regulation S-K. Section 72002 requires the SEC to amend Regulation S-K to “further scale or eliminate requirements… to reduce the burden on emerging growth companies, accelerated filers, smaller reporting companies, and other smaller issuers, while still providing all material information to investors.” In addition, the SEC was directed to “eliminate provisions… that are duplicative, overlapping, outdated or unnecessary.” In accordance with that requirement, On July 13, 2016, the SEC issued proposed rule change on Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X to amend disclosures that are redundant, duplicative, overlapping, outdated

NASDAQ Issues Report Advocating for The U.S. Public Markets

October 24, 2017

Before SEC Commissioner Michael Piwowar’s May 16, 2017, speech at the SEC-NYU Dialogue on Securities Market Regulation regarding the U.S. IPO Market (see summary HERE), and SEC Chair Jay Clayton’s July 12, 2017, speech to the Economic Club of New York (see summary HERE), the topic of the U.S. IPO market had already gained significant market attention. Earlier this year, NASDAQ issued a paper titled “The Promise of Market Reform: Reigniting American’s Economic Engine” with its views and position on how to revitalize the U.S. equities and IPO market (the “NASDAQ Paper”). This blog summarizes the NASDAQ Paper.

The NASDAQ Paper begins with a statement by Adena Friedman, President and CEO of NASDAQ. The statement begins with a decidedly positive outlook, noting that “The U.S. equities markets exist to facilitate job creation and wealth creation for millions of people, ultimately driving economic growth for our country.” Ms. Friedman adds that “[E]xceptional market returns in recent years

Updates On Regulation A+

October 10, 2017

On September 14, 2017, the SEC issued three new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) to provide guidance related to the filing of a Form 8-A in conjunction with a Tier 2 Regulation A offering. The new guidance addresses the timing of financial statements and subsequent reporting requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”).

Furthermore, earlier in September, the House passed the Improving Access to Capital Act, which would allow companies subject to the reporting requirements under the Exchange Act to use Regulation A, a change the entire marketplace is advocating for.

As I do with each blog on Regulation A, I have included an ongoing commentary, practice tips, and thoughts on Regulation A+, and a summary of the Regulation A+ rules, including interpretations and guidance up to the date of this blog.

New CD&I Guidance

As a reminder, Tier 2 issuers that have used the S-1 format for their Form 1-A filing are permitted

The SEC Provides Further Guidance On Financial Statement Requirements In Registration Statements

September 26, 2017

On August 17, 2017, the SEC issued guidance on financial statement requirements for confidential and public registration statement filings by both emerging growth companies (EGC) and non-emerging growth companies. The new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI’s) follow the SEC’s decision to permit all companies to submit draft registration statements, on a confidential basis (see HERE). The newest guidance is in accord with the SEC’s announced policy to take active measures to promote the U.S. IPO market and small business capital-raise initiatives.

Earlier in the summer, the SEC expanded the JOBS Act benefit available to emerging growth companies, to be able to file confidential draft registration statements, to all companies. Confidential draft submissions are now available for all Section 12(b) Exchange Act registration statements, initial public offerings (IPO’s) and for secondary or follow-on offerings made in the first year after a company becomes publicly reporting.

Title I of the JOBS Act initially allowed for confidential draft submissions of registration

SEC Announces Regulatory Agenda

September 12, 2017

In July 2017 the SEC posted its latest version of its semi-annual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking with the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The agenda is as interesting for what’s on it, as for what isn’t. The semi-annual list only contains 33 legislative action items that the SEC intends to propose or finalize in the next 12 months. The fall 2016 list contained 62 items. As further discussed in this blog, the list does not include proposals on executive compensation, or many other Dodd-Frank mandated rules.

In the preamble to the list it indicates that it was completed in March, when Michael Piwowar was acting Chair of the SEC. Chair Jay Clayton and now Commissioner Michael Piwowar have been publicly like-minded, with a goal of directing the SEC towards assisting in small and emerging business growth and capital raise activities, while remaining tough on fraud. A summary of Chair Clayton’s first public speech as head of

SEC Chair Jay Clayton Discusses Direction Of SEC

August 1, 2017

In a much talked about speech to the Economic Club of New York on July 12, 2017, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton set forth his thoughts on SEC policy, including a list of guiding principles for his tenure. Chair Clayton’s underlying theme is the furtherance of opportunities and protection of Main Street investors, a welcome viewpoint from the securities markets’ top regulator. This was Chair Clayton’s first public speech in his new role and follows Commissioner Michael Piwowar’s recent remarks to the SEC-NYU Dialogue on Securities Market Regulation largely related to the U.S. IPO market. For a summary of Commissioner Piwowar’s speech, read HERE.

Guiding Principles

Chair Clayton outlined a list of eight guiding principles for the SEC.

#1: The SEC’s Mission is its touchstone

As described by Chair Clayton, the SEC has a three part mission: (i) to protect investors; (ii) to maintain fair, orderly and efficient markets, and (iii) to facilitate capital formation. Chair Clayton stresses that it

SEC Expands Ability To File Confidential Registration Statements

July 25, 2017

Nominate Us For ABA Journal’s Top Blog- HERE

——————————————————————————————————

On June 19, 2017, the SEC announced that the Division of Corporation Finance will permit all companies to submit draft registration statements, on a confidential basis. Confidential draft submissions will now be available for all Section 12(b) Exchange Act registration statements, initial public offerings (IPO’s) and for secondary or follow-on offerings made in the first year after a company becomes publicly reporting.

The SEC has adopted the change by staff prerogative and not a formal rule change. On June 29, 2017, the SEC issued guidance on the change via new FAQs. The new policy is effective July 10, 2017.

Title I of the JOBS Act initially allowed for confidential draft submissions of registration statements by emerging growth companies but did not include any other companies, such as smaller reporting companies. Regulation A+ as enacted on June 19, 2015, also allows for confidential submissions of an offering circular by companies completing their

SEC Commissioner Piwowar Speaks On The IPO Market

July 18, 2017

Nominate Us For ABA Journal’s Top Blog- HERE

——————————————————————————————————

On May 16, 2017, SEC Commissioner Michael Piwowar gave the opening remarks to the SEC-NYU Dialogue on Securities Market Regulation. The focus of the SEC-NYU Dialogue was the current state of and outlook for the U.S. IPO market. Mr. Piwowar specifically spoke about reviving the U.S. IPO market.

The declining IPO market has been a topic of review lately, and was one of the main points discussed at the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee meeting held on June 22. SEC Chair Jay Clayton weighed in at the Investor Advisory Committee, stating that he is “actively exploring ways in which we can improve the attractiveness of listing on our public markets, while maintaining important investor protections.” Mr. Clayton’s words echoed his statements made to the Senate confirmation hearing prior to his swearing in as chair.

This blog summarizes Commissioner Piwowar’s speech and of course offers my views and commentary.

Commissioner Piwowar’s Opening

SEC Issues Additional Guidance on Regulation A+

June 20, 2017

On March 31, 2017, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance issued six new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) to provide guidance related to Regulation A/A+. Since the new Regulation A+ came into effect on June 19, 2015, its use has continued to steadily increase. In my practice it is the most popular method for a public offering under $50 million.

As an ongoing commentary on Regulation A+, following a discussion on the CD&I guidance, I have included practice tips, and thoughts on Regulation A+, and a summary of the Regulation A+ rules, including interpretations and guidance up to the date of this blog.

New CD&I Guidance

In the first of the new CD&I, the SEC clarifies the timing of the filing of a Form 8-A to register a class of securities under Section 12(b) or (g) of the Exchange Act. In particular, in order to be able to file a Form 8-A as part of the Regulation A+

SEC Issues Final Rules Requiring Links To Exhibits

April 11, 2017

The SEC first proposed the rule change on August 31, 2016, as discussed in my blog HERE. The new rule continues the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance’s ongoing Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative. I anticipate that this initiative will not only continue but gain traction in the coming years under the new administration as, hopefully, more duplicative, antiquated and immaterial requirements come

The SEC Has Issued New C&DI Guidance On Regulation A+

January 24, 2017

On November 17, 2016, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance issued three new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) to provide guidance related to Regulation A/A+. Since the new Regulation A+ came into effect on June 19, 2015, its use has continued to steadily increase. In my practice alone I am noticing a large uptick in broker-dealer-placed Regulation A+ offerings, and recently, institutional investor interest.

Following a discussion on the CD&I guidance, I have included some interesting statistics, practice tips, and thoughts on Regulation A+, and a refresher summary of the Regulation A+ rules.

New CD&I Guidance

In the first of the new CD&I, the SEC has clarified that where a company seeks to qualify an additional class of securities via post-qualification amendment to a previously qualified Form 1-A, Item 4 of Part I, which requires “Summary Information Regarding the Offering and Other Current or Proposed Offerings,” need only include information related to the new class of securities seeking

SEC Issues Report On Regulation S-K

January 3, 2017

As required by Section 72003 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (the “FAST Act”), on November 23, 2016, the SEC issued a Report on Modernization and Simplification of Regulation S-K (the “Report”) including detailed recommendations for changes.

The Report continues the ongoing review and proposed revisions to Regulations S-K and S-X as related to reports and registration statements filed under the Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”). Regulation S-K, as amended over the years, was adopted as part of a uniform disclosure initiative to provide a single regulatory source related to non-financial statement disclosures and information required to be included in registration statements and reports filed under the Exchange Act and the Securities Act. Regulation S-X contains specific financial statement preparation and disclosure requirements.

The Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative began in December 2013, when the SEC, as required by the JOBS Act, issued its first report on the Regulation S-K disclosure requirements. The

SEC Eliminates The “Tandy Letter”

December 20, 2016

On October 5, 2016, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance (CorpFin) announced that, effective immediately, it would no longer require companies to include “Tandy” letter representations in comment letter response or registration acceleration requests addressed to the SEC.

Background

Beginning in the 1970s the SEC began to require an affirmative statement from the company acknowledging that the company cannot use the SEC’s comment process as a defense in any securities-related litigation. Named after the first company required to provide the affirmations, this language is referred to as a “Tandy” letter. By 2004 the “Tandy” letter was required in all comment letter responses to the SEC as well as registration acceleration requests. The “Tandy” portion of a response was required to be agreed to by the company itself, so if the response letter was on attorney letterhead, a signature line was required to be included for the company or the company could submit a separate letter. The Tandy language for an

Yahoo Hacking Scandal And Obligations Related To Cybersecurity

December 6, 2016

On September 26, 2016, Senator Mark R. Warner (D-VA), a member of the Senate Intelligence and Banking Committees and cofounder of the bipartisan Senate Cybersecurity Caucus, wrote a letter to the SEC requesting that they investigate whether Yahoo, Inc., fulfilled its disclosure obligations under the federal securities laws related to a security breach that affected more than 500 million accounts. Senator Warner also requested that the SEC re-examine its guidance and requirements related to the disclosure of cybersecurity matters in general.

The letter was precipitated by a September 22, 2016, 8-K and press release issued by Yahoo disclosing the theft of certain user account information that occurred in late 2014. The press release referred to a “recent investigation” confirming the theft of user account information associated with at least 500 million accounts that was stolen in late 2014. Just 13 days prior to the 8-K and press release, on September 9, 2016, Yahoo filed a preliminary 14A filing with

SEC Issues Proposed Amendments To Item 601 Of Regulation S-K Related To Exhibits

September 20, 2016

On August 31, 2016, the SEC issued proposed amendments to Item 601 of Regulation S-K to require hyperlinks to exhibits in filings made with the SEC. The proposed amendments would require any company filing registration statements or reports with the SEC to include a hyperlink to all exhibits listed on the exhibit list. In addition, because ASCII cannot support hyperlinks, the proposed amendment would also require that all exhibits be filed in HTML format.

This newest proposed rule change to Regulation S-K is part of the SEC Division of Corporation Finance’s Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative. At the end of this blog, I include an up-to-date summary of the proposals and request for comment related to the ongoing Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative.

Background

SEC Requests Comment On Changes To Subpart 400 To Regulation S-K

September 13, 2016

On August 25, 2016, the SEC requested public comment on possible changes to the disclosure requirements in Subpart 400 of Regulation S-K. Subpart 400 encompasses disclosures related to management, certain security holders and corporate governance. The request for comment is part of the ongoing SEC Division of Corporation Finance’s Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative and as required by Section 72003 of the FAST Act.

Background

The topic of disclosure requirements under Regulations S-K and S-X as pertains to financial statements and disclosures made in reports and registration statements filed under the Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) has come to the forefront over the past couple of years. The purpose of the Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative is to assess whether the business and financial disclosure requirements continue to provide the information investors need to make informed investment and voting decisions.

Regulation S-K, as amended over the years, was adopted as part of a uniform disclosure initiative

Smaller Reporting Companies vs. Emerging Growth Companies

August 23, 2016

The topic of reporting requirements and distinctions between various categories of reporting companies has been prevalent over the past couple of years as regulators and industry insiders examine changes to the reporting requirements for all companies, and qualifications for the various categories of scaled disclosure requirements. As I’ve written about these developments, I have noticed inconsistencies in the treatment of smaller reporting companies and emerging growth companies in ways that are likely the result of poor drafting or unintended consequences. This blog summarizes two of these inconsistencies.

As a reminder, a smaller reporting company is currently defined as a company that has a public float of less than $75 million in common equity as of the last business day of its most recently completed second fiscal quarter, or if a public float of zero, has less than $50 million in annual revenues as of its most recently completed fiscal year-end. I note that on June 27, 2016, the SEC issued

SEC Issues Proposed Regulation S-K And S-X Amendments

August 9, 2016

On July 13, 2016, the SEC issued a 318-page proposed rule change on Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X to amend disclosures that are redundant, duplicative, overlapping, outdated or superseded (S-K and S-X Amendments). The proposed rule changes follow the 341-page concept release and request for public comment on sweeping changes to certain business and financial disclosure requirements issued on April 15, 2016. See my two-part blog on the S-K Concept Release HERE and HERE.

The proposed S-K and S-X Amendments are intended to facilitate the disclosure of information to investors while simplifying compliance efforts by companies. The proposed S-K and S-X Amendments come as a result of the Division of Corporation Finance’s Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative and as required by Section 72002 of the FAST Act. Prior to the issuance of these S-K and S-X Amendments, on June 27, 2016, as part of the same initiative, the SEC issued proposed amendments to the definition of “Small Reporting Company” (see

SEC Proposes Amendments To Definition Of “Small Reporting Company”

July 12, 2016

On June 27, 2016, the SEC published proposed amendments to the definition of “smaller reporting company” as contained in Securities Act Rule 405, Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 and Item 10(f) of Regulation S-K. The amendments would expand the number of companies that qualify as a smaller reporting company and thus qualify for the scaled disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X. The rule change follows the SEC concept release and request for public comment on sweeping changes to the business and financial disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K. Throughout the SEC Concept Release, it referenced the scaled and different disclosure requirements for the different categories of company and affirmed that it was evaluating and considering changes to the eligibility criteria for each.

If the rule change is passed, the number of companies qualifying as a smaller reporting company will increase from 32% to 42% of all reporting companies.

The proposed rule change follows the SEC Advisory Committee on

SEC Issues Concept Release On Regulation S-K; Part 1

May 3, 2016

On April 15, 2016, the SEC issued a 341-page concept release and request for public comment on sweeping changes to certain business and financial disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K (“S-K Concept Release”). This blog is the first part in a series discussing that concept release. The S-K Concept Release is part of the SEC Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative mandated by the JOBS Act.

The fundamental tenet of the federal securities laws is defined by one word: disclosure. In fact, the SEC neither reviews nor opines on the merits of any company or transaction, but only upon the appropriate disclosure, including risks, made by that company.

This is the first blog in a two-part series on the S-K Concept Release. In this Part I, I will discuss the background and general concepts for which the SEC provides discussion and seeks comment. In Part II of the series I will discuss the rules and recommendations made by the SEC and, in particular, those

NASDAQ Listing Requirements

April 26, 2016

This blog is the first in a two-part series explaining the listing requirements for the two small-cap national exchanges, NASDAQ and the NYSE MKT, beginning with NASDAQ. In addition to often being asked about the listing requirements on NASDAQ and the NYSE MKT, I am asked about the benefits of trading on such an exchange. Accordingly, at the end of this blog I have included a discussion on such benefits.

The NASDAQ Stock Market

The NASDAQ Stock Market currently has three tiers of listed companies: (1) The NASDAQ Global Select Market, (2) The NASDAQ Global Market and (3) The NASDAQ Capital Market. Each tier has increasingly higher listing standards, with the NASDAQ Global Select Market having the highest initial listing standards and the NASDAQ Capital Markets being the entry-level tier for most micro- and small-cap issuers. Keeping in line with the focus of my blogs and practice, this blog is focused on the NASDAQ Capital Market tier.

A company seeking

House Passes More Securities Legislation

March 15, 2016

In what must be the most active period of securities legislation in recent history, the US House of Representatives has passed three more bills that would make changes to the federal securities laws. The three bills, which have not been passed into law as of yet, come in the wake of the Fixing American’s Surface Transportation Act (the “FAST Act”), which was signed into law on December 4, 2015.

The 3 bills include: (i) H.R. 1675 – the Capital Markets Improvement Act of 2016, which has 5 smaller acts imbedded therein; (ii) H.R. 3784, establishing the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation and Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee within the SEC; and (iii) H.R. 2187, proposing an amendment to the definition of accredited investor. None of the bills have been passed by the Senate as of yet.

Meanwhile, the SEC continues to finalize rulemaking under both the JOBS Act, which was passed into law on April 5,

SEC Gives Insight On 2016 Initiatives

March 8, 2016

SEC Chair Mary Jo White gave a speech at the annual mid-February SEC Speaks program and, as usual, gave some insight into the SEC’s focus in the coming year. This blog summarized Chair White’s speech and provides further insight and information on the topics she addresses.

Consistent with her prior messages, Chair White focuses on enforcement, stating that the SEC “needs to go beyond disclosure” in carrying out its mission. That mission, as articulated by Chair White, is the protection of investors, maintaining fair, orderly and efficient markets, and facilitating capital formation. In 2015 the SEC brought a record number of enforcement proceedings and secured an all-time high for penalty and disgorgement orders. The primary areas of focus included cybersecurity, market structure requirements, dark pools, microcap fraud, financial reporting failures, insider trading, disclosure deficiencies in municipal offerings and protection of retail investors and retiree savings. In 2016 the SEC intends to focus enforcement on financial reporting, market structure, and the

SEC Proposes Transfer Agent Rules

February 23, 2016

On December 22, 2015, the SEC issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking and concept release on proposed new requirements for transfer agents and requesting public comment. The transfer agent rules were adopted in 1977 and have remained essentially unchanged since that time. An advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) describes intended new and amended rules and seeks comments on same, but is not in fact that actual proposed rule release. The SEC indicates that following the comment process associated with this ANPR, it intends to propose actual new rules as soon as practicable.

To invoke thoughtful comment and response, the SEC summarized the history of the role of transfer agents within the securities clearing system as well as the current rules and proposed new rules. In addition, the SEC discusses and seeks comments on broader topics that may affect transfer agents and the securities system as a whole. This blog gives a high level review of the whole APNR

SEC’s Financial Disclosure Requirements For Sub-Entities Of Registered Companies

February 16, 2016

As required by the JOBS Act, in 2013 the SEC launched its Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative and has been examining disclosure requirements under Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X and methods to improve such requirements. In September 2015, the SEC issued a request for comment related to the Regulation S-X financial disclosure obligations for certain entities other than the reporting entity. In particular, the SEC is seeking comments on the current financial disclosure requirements for acquired businesses, subsidiaries not consolidated, 50% or less owned entities, issuers of guaranteed securities, and affiliates whose securities collateralize the reporting company’s securities.

It is important to note that the SEC release relates to general financial statement and reporting requirements, and not the modified reporting requirements for smaller reporting companies or emerging growth companies. In particular, Article 8 of Regulation S-X applies to smaller reporting companies and Article 3 to those that do not qualify for the reduced Article 8 requirements. The SEC discussion and request for

NASDAQ Proposes Amendments To Allow For The Trading Of Digital Assets

December 9, 2025

On September 8, 2025, in the newest in a series of proposed rule amendments, Nasdaq has proposed amendments to enable the trading of digital assets, including tokenized securities. The purpose of the rule change is to clearly establish that brokers and investors can trade tokens on the Exchange. To effectuate the amendment, Nasdaq is proposing to (i) add blockchain backed equities, including tokenized securities, to the definition of a “security,” (ii) update order entry and routing procedures to include tokenized securities; and (iii) update book processing to align tokenized securities with the same clearance and settlement priority as traditional securities.

Background

Over the years, U.S. equity markets have transformed to support technological innovations including, for example, moving from paper to electronic securities, shortening settlement cycles, instant price dissemination, and allowing for algorithmic electronic trading. Tokenization, which involves recording securities transactions using digital ledger blockchain technology, is such an innovation. Nasdaq believes that as long as the use of

SEC Issues A Concept Release On The Definition Of Foreign Private Issuer – Part 2

December 2, 2025

In June 2025 the SEC published a concept release and request for comment on the definition of a foreign private issuer (“FPI”). For a review of the current definition, information regarding SEC registration and reporting and Nasdaq corporate governance related to FPIs, see my three part blog HERE; HERE; and HERE.

FPI’s face unique challenges when accessing U.S. capital markets and as such over years the SEC has developed regulatory flexibilities allowing FPIs to follow the corporate governance rules of their home country and providing them with a modified disclosure regime. However, the SEC has noticed that the composition of FPI’s has changed over the last few decades and that most FPI’s almost exclusively trade in the U.S.

That is, at the time the current definition and accommodations for FPIs was established, the SEC through that most eligible FPI’s would be subject to meaningful disclosure and other regulatory requirements in their home country jurisdictions and

SEC Issues A Concept Release On The Definition Of A Foreign Private Issuer – Part 1

November 25, 2025

NASDAQ Proposes To Modify Listing Standards For OTC Traded SPACS

November 18, 2025

On August 22, 2025, Nasdaq proposed a modification to the listing rules to allow delisted SPAC’s to relist in conjunction with a business combination without being subject to the seasoning rule. The amendment will correct a potential unintended consequence of the seasoning rule while giving credence to the investor protections offered by the new SPAC/de-SPAC rules.

Background – Seasoning Rule and New SPAC Rules

Nasdaq, NYSE and NYSE American, all have a listing standard known as the seasoning rule. The seasoning rule is substantially the same for each exchange and provides that (paraphrasing the rule which is written slightly differently for each exchange):

A company that is formed by a reverse merger with a shell company, other than a listed SPAC, will only be eligible to submit an application for initial listing and thereafter qualify to be listed if immediately preceding the filing of the initial listing application the post business combination company:

(i) Has traded

Market Wrap-Up – Q3 2025

November 11, 2025

This edition of my market recap covers the third quarter of 2025. For a review of November and December 2024 see HERE; for October 2024 see HERE; for Q1 2025 see HERE; and for Q2 2025 see HERE.

Forty small cap ($30,000,000 and under) IPOs priced in the second quarter of 2025 (17 in July, 16 in August and 7 in September) – an uptick from Q2 2025. Below is a chart of relevant deal information for the third quarter IPOs.

Exchange	Offer Amount	Domestic/Foreign Issuer	Banker(s)

Nasdaq Capital	$9,375.000	Foreign	Cathay Securities, Inc.
Nasdaq Capital	$27,500,000	Domestic	The Benchmark Company; Roth Capital Partners
Nasdaq Capital	$5,500,000	Foreign	R.F. Lafferty & Co., Inc.
Nasdaq Capital	$6,500,000	Foreign	Joseph Stone Capital, LLC
Nasdaq Capital	$8,960,000	Foreign	Bancroft Capital, LLC
Nasdaq Capital	$6,000,000	Foreign	D. Boral Capital; Benjamin Securities, Inc.
Nasdaq Capital	$5,000,000	Foreign	Eddid Securities USA, Inc.
Nasdaq Capital	$8,000,000	Foreign	Bancroft Capital, LLC
Nasdaq

SEC Publishes CD&I On Filer Status Determination

November 4, 2025

On August 27, 2025, the SEC published a new compliance and disclosure interpretation (CD&I) providing guidance on when an issuer may become an accelerated or large accelerated filer after losing its status as a smaller reporting company.

New CD&I

New CD&I question 130.05 provides:

Question: An issuer is a smaller reporting company under the revenue test in paragraph (2) or (3)(iii)(B) of the “smaller reporting company” definition in Rule 12b-2. On the last business day of its second fiscal quarter of 2025, the issuer conducts its annual determination of smaller reporting company status and determines that it no longer qualifies as a smaller reporting company. When the issuer assesses its accelerated filer or large accelerated filer status, as of the end of fiscal year 2025, will this issuer become an accelerated filer or large accelerated filer?

Answer: No. When determining its accelerated filer or large accelerated filer status as of the end of its fiscal year, the issuer must

NASDAQ Proposes To Modify Listing Standards For China Based Companies

October 21, 2025

On September 3, 2025, Nasdaq proposed to adopt additional listing criteria for companies primarily operating in China, including Hong Kong and Macau.

Background

Over the years U.S. capital markets regulators, including the SEC and Nasdaq, have been vocal about the risks in investing in China based companies due to poor disclosures and disclosure controls. In December 2020 the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (“HFCA”) was adopted requiring foreign-owned issuers to certify that the PCAOB has been able to audit specified reports and inspect their audit firm within the last three years. If the PCAOB is unable to inspect the company’s public accounting firm for three consecutive years, the company’s securities are banned from trading on a national exchange. For my three part blog on the HFCA see HERE; HERE and HERE.

Despite the HFCA, the SEC has remained concerned about the quality of disclosures, including specific risks, involved with China based companies. Back in July 2023, the

Nasdaq Proposes To Accelerate Delisting For Companies That Fall Below Any Liquidity Standard And Have A Market Value Of Listed Securities Below $5 million

October 14, 2025

On September 3, 2025, Nasdaq proposed amendments to accelerate the suspension and delisting of a company that falls below any of the numeric listing requirements, including the bid price, market value of public float, equity, income and total assets/revenue requirements, and that has a Market Value of Listed Securities (“MVLS”) below $5 million. On the same day, Nasdaq proposed amendments to its liquidity listing standards for the Nasdaq Capital Market and Nasdaq Global Market to increase the minimum Market Value of Unrestricted Publicly Held Shares (“MVUPHS”) requirement for those companies listing under the net income standard from $5 million to $15 million (see HERE).

This follows a series of final and proposed rule amendments increasing liquidity standards and accelerating delisting processes for small cap listed companies including: (i) an April rule amendment requiring that MVUPHS can only be satisfied through IPO proceeds and that shares registered for resale may no longer be counted (see HERE); (ii) a recent

Nasdaq Proposes To Accelerate The Delisting Of $0.10 Stocks

October 7, 2025

Nasdaq Proposes To Increase Liquidity Requirements Under Net Income Listing Standard

September 30, 2025

On September 3, 2025, Nasdaq proposed amendments to its liquidity listing standards for the Nasdaq Capital Market and Nasdaq Global Market to increase the minimum Market Value of Unrestricted Publicly Held Shares (“MVUPHS”) requirement for those companies listing under the net income standard from $5 million to $15 million. This follows the April rule amendment requiring that MVUPHS can only be satisfied through IPO proceeds and that shares registered for resale may no longer be counted (see HERE). In addition to making it more difficult for small cap companies to complete a Nasdaq IPO, the proposed rule would eliminate the only material distinction and benefit to listing using the net income standard.

Background

To list its securities on Nasdaq, a company is required to meet: (a) certain initial quantitative and qualitative requirements and (b) certain continuing quantitative and qualitative requirements. The quantitative listing thresholds for initial listing are generally higher than for continued listing, thus helping to

SEC Spring 2025 Regulatory Agenda

September 23, 2025

The SEC has published its semi-annual Spring 2025 regulatory agenda (“Agenda”) and plans for rulemaking. The Agenda is published twice a year, and for several years I have blogged about each publication. Although items on the Agenda can move from one category to the next, be dropped off altogether, or new items pop up in any of the categories (including the final rule stage), the Agenda provides valuable insight into the SEC’s plans and the influence that comments can make on the rulemaking process.

The Agenda is broken down by (i) Prerule Stage; (ii) Proposed Rule Stage; (iii) Final Rule Stage; and (iv) Long-term Actions. The Prerule, Proposed and Final Rule Stages are intended to be completed within the next 12 months and Long-term Actions are anything beyond that. In what is the shortest Agenda I have seen, the number of items to be completed in a 12-month time frame is 23, down from 30 on the Fall 2024 Agenda

Rule 144 – A Deep Dive – Part 6 – Manner Of Sale & Form 144 Notice Filings

September 16, 2025

In this sixth and final installment of my series on Rule 144, I will continue discussing the various conditions for the use of the Rule covering manner of sale requirements and the filing of a Form 144 for affiliates. In the first installment, I provided a high-level review of Rule 144 – see HERE ; in the second, I discussed definitions including the impactful “affiliate” definition – see HERE; in the third I reviewed the current public information requirements – see HERE; in the fourth I covered holding periods – see HERE; and in the fifth I covered limitations on the amount of securities that can be sold – see HERE.

Conditions for Use of Rule 144

General

Rule 144 – A Deep Dive – Part 5 – Limitations On Amount Of Securities Sold

September 9, 2025

In this fifth installment of my series on Rule 144, I will continue discussing the various conditions for the use of the Rule, covering limitations on the amount of securities that may be sold. In the first installment, I provided a high-level review of Rule 144 – see HERE ; in the second, I discussed definitions including the impactful “affiliate” definition – see HERE; in the third I reviewed the current public information requirements – see HERE; and in the fourth I covered holding periods – see HERE.

Conditions for Use of Rule 144

General

Rule 144 provides certain conditions that must be met by selling affiliates and selling non-affiliates which conditions vary depending on whether the Issuer of the securities is a reporting or non-reporting company and whether the Issuer is or ever has been a shell company. The high-level Rule 144 requirements for non-affiliates include: (i) holding period; (ii) availability of current public information; and

Rule 144 – A Deep Dive – Part 4 – Holding Period

September 2, 2025

In this fourth installment of my series on Rule 144, I will continue discussing the various conditions for the use of the Rule, including the meaty holding period requirements. In the first installment, I provided a high-level review of Rule 144 – see HERE; in the second, I discussed definitions including the impactful “affiliate” definition – see HERE; and in the third I reviewed the current public information requirements – see HERE.

Conditions for Use of Rule 144

General

Rule 144 – A Deep Dive – Part 3 – Current Public Information

August 26, 2025

In this third installment of my series on Rule 144, I will begin discussing the various conditions for the use of the Rule, including the current public information requirement. In the first installment, I provided a high-level review of Rule 144 – see HERE and in the second, discussed definitions including the impactful “affiliate” definition – see HERE.

Conditions for Use of Rule 144

General

As set out in the first blog in this series, Rule 144 provides certain conditions that must be met by selling affiliates and selling non-affiliates which conditions vary depending on whether the Issuer of the securities is a reporting or non-reporting company and whether the Issuer or ever has been a shell company. The high-level Rule 144 requirements for non-affiliates include: (i) holding period; (ii) availability of current public information; and (iii) no shell status ineligibility. The high-level Rule 144 requirements for affiliates (i.e. holders of control securities) include: (i) holding

Rule 144 – A Deep Dive – Part 2 – Definitions

August 19, 2025

Last week I published a high-level review of Rule 144 – see HERE. This week, I will begin the deep dive discussion of the numerous intricacies of this very important rule, starting with definitions.

Rule 144 Definitions

Rule 144 only has four definitions, but there is a lot to discuss on each of these definitions.

Affiliate

Rule 144 sets forth different conditions for sellers that are “affiliates” or a person that has been an affiliate in the past 90 days then for those that are non-affiliates. Sales by affiliates always require that a company have current public information, are subject to volume limitations (the drip rules), are subject to manner of sale requirements (sales must be made through a broker-dealer) and require the filing of a Form 144. Sales by non-affiliates only require current public information when effectuated after six months but prior to a one year holding period and are never subject to the volume limitations,

Rule 144 – A Deep Dive – Part 1

August 12, 2025

It has been ten years since I summarized Rule 144 (see HERE), and at that time it was a very high level overview, not a deep dive into the numerous intricacies of the rules application. Rule 144 is likely the most oft used rule by founders, private investors, early investors, affiliates and insiders, and merger/reverse merger participants, and as such deserves some focus.

I will start this blog series with a high-level overview of Rule 144 and then unpack the numerous individual requirements in the following editions.

Rule 144 – Basic Overview

As I repeat again and again, every offer or sale of securities must either be registered or have an available exemption from registration. Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) sets forth certain requirements for the use of Section 4(a)(1) for the sale of restricted or control securities by an existing shareholder. Control securities are those securities held by an affiliate of

SEC Publishes CD&I On Legal Proceeding Disclosures

August 5, 2025

On June 20, 2025, the SEC revised two, and withdrew one, CD&I related to disclosures on legal proceedings.

Revised CD&I 105.01 states:

Question: Are costs anticipated to be incurred under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (42 U.S.C. § 9601) (otherwise known as the “Superfund” law), pursuant to a remedial agreement entered into in the normal course of negotiation with the EPA, generally considered “sanctions” within Item 103(c)(3)(iii)?

Answer: No. Footnote 30 of Release No. 33-6835 (May 18, 1989) and the letter to Thomas A. Cole (Jan. 17, 1989) clarify that, while there are many ways a Superfund “potential monetary sanction” may be triggered, including the stipulated penalty clause in a remedial agreement, the costs anticipated to be incurred under Superfund, pursuant to a remedial agreement entered into in the normal course of negotiation with the EPA, generally are not “sanctions” within Item 103(c)(3)(iii).

Revised CD&I 105.03 states:

Question: Should a proceeding against an

SEC Publishes New CD&I On Schedule 13D-G

July 29, 2025

In October 2023, the SEC adopted final amendments to Sections 13(d) and 13(g) of the Exchange Act. To review the final amendments see HERE and HERE. In March 2025, the SEC published a few CD&I’s related to the new amendments (see HERE).

The amendments updated Sections 13(d), 13(g) and Regulation 13D-G to accelerate filing deadlines for both initial and amended reports; expand the timeframe within a business day in which filings may be timely made; clarify the Schedule 13D disclosure requirements with respect to derivative securities; and require that Schedule 13D and 13G filings be filed using XBRL.

On July 11, 2025, the SEC published 18 revised CD&Is on the filing of Schedules 13D and 13G. Many of the changes are clean-up, clarification and updates to align the guidance with the October 2023 amendments.

Section 13(d)

Two of the revised CD&I address Section 13(d) of the Exchange Act.

Revised CD&Is 101.01 and 103.01 confirm that when a company

SEC Publishes New CD&I On Compensation Clawbacks And De-SPAC C-Registrants

July 22, 2025

On April 11, 2025, the SEC published several updates to its compliance and disclosure interpretations (“CD&I”) related to compensation clawbacks and co-registrants in de-SPAC transactions.

De-SPAC Transactions

Under the new SPAC rules, a target company, or companies, are included as co-registrants on the S-4 (or other Securities Act registration statement) in association with the de-SPAC. Under Exchange Act rules, upon effectiveness of the S-4, each of the target co-registrants become separately subject to the Exchange Act reporting requirements. New C&DI 253.03 confirms that the SEC will not object if each target co-registrant files a Form 15, as long as they are wholly owned by the combined company and the combined company remains current in its Exchange Act reporting requirements.

For a review of the new de-SPAC rules see here – Part 1 – HERE; Part 2 – HERE; Part 3 – HERE; Part 4 – HERE; Part 5 – HERE;

Market Wrap-Up Q2 2025

July 15, 2025

This edition of my market recap covers the second quarter of 2025. For a review of November and December 2024 see HERE; for October 2024 see HERE; and for Q1 2025 see HERE.

Thirty-three small cap ($30,000,000 and under) IPOs priced in the second quarter of 2025 (20 in April, 5 in May and 8 in June) – a downtrend from Q1 2025. Below is a chart of relevant deal information for the second quarter IPOs.

Exchange	Offer Amount	Domestic/Foreign Issuer	Banker(s)

Nasdaq Global	$30,000,000	Foreign	Goldman Sachs (Asia) LLC, Citigroup, US Tiger Securities, CICC, Kingswood
Nasdaq Capital	$6,400,000	Foreign	D. Boral Capital
Nasdaq Capital	$5,000,000	Foreign	R.F. Lafferty & Co., Inc.
Nasdaq Capital	$7,200,000	Foreign	Craft Capital Management
NYSE MKT	$10,075,000	Foreign	Maxim Group, LLC
Nasdaq Capital	$6,000,000	Foreign	Dominari Securities, LLC; Revere Securities LLC
Nasdaq Capital	$7,000,000	Foreign	Craft Capital Management, LLC; Westpark Capital
Nasdaq Capital	$7,740,000	Domestic	The Benchmark Company; Axiom Capital Management,

SEC Officials Talk Tokenization

July 8, 2025

On May 12, 2025, SEC Chair Paul S. Atkins and Commissioner Mark T. Uyeda gave speeches at the crypto task force roundtable on tokenization.

Chair Atkins Speech

Techology is advancing such that securities are increasingly being moved from traditional databases (ledgers with the transfer agent, etc..) to blockchain based ledger systems. Atkins likens this change to the historical music industry which morphed from analog vinyl records to cassettes to digital software. The change in the music industry allowed streaming and an entirely new system of developing and listening to music.

Atkins notes that just as digitization revolutionized the music industry, the digitization (i.e. tokenization) of securities has the potential to “remodel aspects of the securities market by enabling entirely new methods of issuing, trading, owning, and using securities.” For example, the new technology will make the issuance of dividends (especially recurring dividends) automatic, allow for the trading of previously illiquid assets, and allow for the creation of new

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

Search Results for: FAST Act