Form 10

Direct Public Offering or Reverse Merger; Know Your Best Option for Going Public

Introduction

For at least the last twelve months, I have received calls daily from companies wanting to go public. This interest in going public transactions signifies a big change from the few years prior.

Beginning in 2009, the small-cap and reverse merger, initial public offering (IPO) and direct public offering (DPO) markets diminished greatly. I can identify at least seven main reasons for the downfall of the going public transactions. Briefly, those reasons are: (1) the general state of the economy, plainly stated, was not good; (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 clearing penny stock with broker dealers and FINRA’s enforcement of broker-dealer and clearing house due diligence requirements related to penny stocks; (5) DTC scrutiny and difficulty in obtaining clearance following

January 21, 2014

How to Complete an Unregistered Spin-Off

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

In particular, the subsidiary shares (the shares distributed to the parent company shareholders) do not need to be registered if the following five conditions are met: (i) the parent shareholders do not provide consideration for the spun-off shares; (ii) the spin-off is pro-rata to the parent shareholders; (iii)

October 22, 2013

SEC has Modified Policies on Offerings by Shell Companies

Recently, albeit not officially, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has materially altered its position on offerings by shell companies that are not blank-check companies. In particular, over the past year, numerous shell companies that are not also blank-check companies have completed offerings using an S-1 registration statement and successfully obtained market maker support and a ticker symbol from FINRA and are trading. As recently as 18 months ago, this was not possible.

Rule 419 and Blank-Check Companies

The provisions of Rule 419 apply to every registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, by a blank-check company. Rule 419 requires that the blank-check company filing such registration statement deposit the securities being offered and proceeds of the offering into

October 1, 2013

14C Information Statement Requirements for a Pre-Merger Recapitalization

Background on 14C Information Statements

All companies with securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (i.e., through the filing of a Form 10 or Form 8-A) are subject to the Exchange Act proxy requirements found in Section 14 and the rules promulgated thereunder. The proxy rules govern the disclosure in materials used to solicit shareholders’ votes in annual or special meetings held for the approval of any corporate action requiring shareholder approval. The information contained in proxy materials must be filed with the SEC in advance of any solicitation to ensure compliance with the disclosure rules.

Solicitations, whether by management or shareholder groups, must disclose all important facts concerning the issues on which shareholders are asked to vote. The disclosure information filed with the SEC and ultimately provided to the shareholders is enumerated in SEC Schedules 14A.

Where a shareholder vote is not being solicited, such as when a Company has obtained shareholder approval through written

July 10, 2013

SEC Issues Guidance on Registration and Deregistration Under Jobs Act

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

April 18, 2012

Why Rule 419 Companies May Revitalize the Small-Cap Market

Are Rule 419 Companies poised to be the next big thing in the small-cap sector?

Recently, the small-cap and reverse merger market has diminished substantially. Operating businesses are wary of completing reverse mergers, and PIPE investors are harder to come by. The reasons for this are easily identifiable.

First – The General State of the Economy

Simply stated, it’s not good.

Second – The Backlash from a Series of Fraud Allegations, SEC Enforcement Actions, and Trading Suspensions of Chinese Company’s Following Reverse Mergers

Chinese company reverse mergers dominated the shell company business for years; now there are none. Moreover, it is unlikely that this area will recover any time soon. The Chinese government and US regulators must reach agreement and a mutual understanding regarding PCAOB review of Chinese audits. Even then, it may take years for the stigma to fade.

Third – The Rule 144 Changes Enacted in 2008

As discussed in previous blogs Rule 144(i),

November 16, 2011

DTC Eligibility and the OTC Issuer (Part 3)

This is the third in a series of articles I am writing regarding DTC (Depository Trust Company) eligibility for OTC (Over the Counter) Issuers. OTC Issuers include all companies whose securities trade on the over the counter market, including the OTCBB, OTCQB and Pink Sheets. All technical information in this article comes from the DTC website.

DTC Eligibility

As detailed in my first two articles in this series, in order to become and remain DTC eligible, and Issuer must have a transfer agent that has completed and has on file with DTC a DTC Operational Arrangements Agent Letter. In addition, all Issuers must meet the requirements set forth in the DTC Operational Arrangements (OA). This article begins to discuss the OA necessary for an Issue to become and remain eligible for DTC service. Moreover, the OA rules relate to and regard all Issuers. This article will only discuss those rules and requirements for OTC Issuers.

The DTC OA states:

“Generally,

November 3, 2011

Form 10 Registration Statements

A Form 10 Registration Statement is a registration statement used to register a class of securities pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”). To explain a Form 10 registration statement, let’s start with what it isn’t. It is not used to register specific securities for sale or re-sale and does not change the transferability of any securities. That is, a Form 10 registration statement does not register a security for the purposes of Section 5[1] of the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) . Following the effectiveness of a Form 10 registration statement, restricted securities remain restricted and free trading securities remain free trading.

The Purpose of Form 10 Registration Statements

Now onto what a Form 10 registration is. As indicated above a Form 10 registration statement is used to register a class of securities. Any Company with in excess of $10,000,000 in total assets and 750 or more record shareholders

March 19, 2010

Rule 144 and the Evergreen Requirement Examined

Technically Rule 144 provides a safe harbor from the definition of the term “underwriter” such that a selling shareholder may utilize the exemption contained in Section 4(1) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, to sell their restricted securities. In addition, Rule 144 is used to remove the restrictive legend from securities in advance of a sale. In layman terms, Rule 144, allows shareholders to either remove the restrictive legend or sell their unregistered shares.

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

January 22, 2010

1700 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd, Suite 820

(800) 341-2684

Contact us

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

Form 10

Direct Public Offering or Reverse Merger; Know Your Best Option for Going Public

How to Complete an Unregistered Spin-Off

SEC has Modified Policies on Offerings by Shell Companies

14C Information Statement Requirements for a Pre-Merger Recapitalization

SEC Issues Guidance on Registration and Deregistration Under Jobs Act

Why Rule 419 Companies May Revitalize the Small-Cap Market

DTC Eligibility and the OTC Issuer (Part 3)

Form 10 Registration Statements

Rule 144 and the Evergreen Requirement Examined

Categories

Contact Information

Recent Posts

Court Overrules Nasdaq Board Diversity Rule

Court Strikes Down Recent Changes To Definition Of A Dealer

Understanding the Shareholder Meeting Timeline

Introducing The OTCID

Legal Resources

Tweets

DEVELOPED AND MANAGED BY

Featured On

Contact Author

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?