(800) 341-2684

Call Toll Free

Contact us

Online Inquiries 24/7

Laura Anthony Esq

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

Nasdaq Listed Companies

Court Overrules Nasdaq Board Diversity Rule

The court has come to the rescue once again!  On December 11, 2024, the 5th Circuit held that the SEC exceeded its authority in approving Nasdaq’s board diversity rule finding the rule was far removed from the purposes of the Securities Exchange Act’s regulatory regime.  Rumor has it that the Nasdaq does not intend to appeal, meaning the board diversity rule may be DOA.

Background

On August 6, 2021, the SEC approved Nasdaq’s board diversity listing standards proposal adding new listing Rule 5606(a) (see HERE).

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;

Nasdaq Amends Bid Price Compliance Rules to Accelerate Delisting Process

On October 7, 2024 the SEC approved amendments to Nasdaq Rule 5810(c)(3)(A) to allow for an accelerated delisting process where a listed company uses a reverse split to regain compliance with the bid price requirement for continued listing, but that as a result of the reverse split, the company falls below other listing standards, such as the minimum number of round lot holders, or minimum number of shares in the publicly held float.  This new rule is separate from another pending rule change that would accelerate the delisting process for companies that fail to regain compliance with the minimum bid price requirements following a second compliance period and for securities that have had a reverse stock split over the prior one-year period.

These rule changes follow other recent rule changes meant to reduce the number of ultra micro-cap companies trading on the national exchange and tighten up compliance for those that do meet the standards.  In March 2024, Nasdaq amended

NASDAQ Amends Rules For Waivers To Code Of Conduct

On September 5, 2023, Nasdaq adopted amendments to Listing Rule 5610 and IM-5610 requiring listed companies to maintain a code of conduct and to disclose certain waivers.  This is also a good time to discuss the code of conduct/code of ethics requirements applicable to all companies subject to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) reporting requirements.

Code of Conduct/Code of Ethics

Section 406(c) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”) requires all companies that are subject to the Exchange Act reporting requirements to disclose whether they have adopted a code of ethics that applies to its principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions.  If the company has not adopted such a code, it must explain why it has not done so.

SOX defines a code of ethics as written standards reasonably designed to deter wrongdoing and to promote: (i) honest and ethical conduct including related to conflicts of

Nasdaq Listing Deficiencies And Delisting – Part 3

As 2022 and 2023 have continued to be extremely tough years for the capital markets many small cap companies find themselves failing to maintain the minimum continued listing requirements.  I’ve recently written about those continued listing requirements, see HERE, and Nasdaq’s proposed rule changes for reverse split notifications as companies struggle to maintain the $1.00 minimum bid price requirement, see HERE.

These blogs provide a perfect segue for a deep dive into the Nasdaq deficiency notice and delisting process.  In this first blog in the series, I provided an overview of deficiencies, deficiency notices, cure periods and compliance plans – see HERE.  In Part 2, I reviewed the hearing panel process – see HERE.  In this Part 3, I will review the appeals to the Nasdaq Listing and Hearing Review Council and delisting.  I note that the Nasdaq rules also contain administrative rules regarding the conduct of adjudicators and advisors and the adjudication process, which

Nasdaq Listing Deficiencies And Delisting– Part 2

As 2022 and 2023 have continued to be extremely tough years for the capital markets many small cap companies find themselves failing to maintain the minimum continued listing requirements.  I’ve recently written about those continued listing requirements, see HERE, and Nasdaq’s proposed rule changes for reverse split notifications as companies struggle to maintain the $1.00 minimum bid price requirement, see HERE.

These blogs provide a perfect segue for a deep dive into the Nasdaq deficiency notice and delisting process.  In this first blog in the series, I provided an overview of deficiencies, deficiency notices, cure periods and compliance plans – see HERE.  In this Part 2, I will review the hearing panel process followed by appeals and ultimately delisting.

Review of Deficiency Determinations by Hearing Panel

As noted in Part 1 of this series, Nasdaq deficiency notifications are one of four types:

  • Staff delisting determinations, which are notifications of deficiencies that, unless appealed, subject the Company to
Read More »

Nasdaq Listing Deficiencies And Delisting – Part 1

As 2022 and 2023 have continued to be extremely tough years for the capital markets, many small-cap companies find themselves failing to maintain the minimum continued listing requirements.  I’ve recently written about those continued listing requirements – see HERE – and Nasdaq’s proposed rule changes for reverse split notifications as companies struggle to maintain the $1.00 minimum bid price requirement – see HERE.

These blogs provide a perfect segue for a deep dive into the Nasdaq deficiency notice and delisting process.  In this first blog in the series, I provide an overview of deficiencies, deficiency notices, cure periods and compliance plans.  In the Part 2, I will review the hearing panel process followed by appeals and ultimately delisting.

Overview – Deficiency Notices

When the Nasdaq Listing Qualifications Department determines that a company does not meet a listing standard, it will immediately notify the company of the deficiency.  The notification will come in letter format, literally within a day

NASDAQ Continued Listing Requirements

Although I often write about initial listing standards, I realized that I have not yet blogged about the reduced ongoing listing standards for national exchanges.  In this blog, I will cover the continued listing requirements for Nasdaq listed companies and in next week’s blog I will cover the NYSE/NYSE MKT. For a review of initial listing requirements for the Nasdaq Capital Markets and NYSE MKT see HERE.

Nasdaq Capital Markets

To continue listing on Nasdaq Capital Markets, a company is required to meet certain ongoing quantitative and qualitative requirements.  NASDAQ also requires listed companies to meet stringent corporate governance standards.

In order to continue listing on Nasdaq Capital Markets a company must meet all of the following requirements: (i) at least 2 market makers; (ii) a $1 minimum bid price; (iii) at least 300 unrestricted round lot public shareholders; (iv) at least 500,000 publicly held shares; and (v) a market value of publicly held shares of at least $1

Nasdaq Board Diversity Matrix In Practice

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.

Compliance Deadlines For Nasdaq Board Diversity Rules

On August 6, 2021, the SEC approved Nasdaq’s board diversity listing standards proposal.  Nasdaq Rule 5605(f) requires Nasdaq listed companies, subject to certain exceptions, to: (i) to have at least one director who self-identifies as a female, and (ii) have at least one director who self-identifies as Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Asian, Native American or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, two or more races or ethnicities, or as LGBTQ+, or (iii) explain why the company does not have at least two directors on its board who self-identify in the categories listed above.  The rule changes also made headlines in most major publications.  One of the most common themes in the press was the lack of inclusion of people with disabilities in the definition of an “underrepresented minority” for purposes of complying with the new rules.

The original rules had tiered compliance deadlines which Nasdaq (and practitioners) found confusing and unnecessarily complicated.  On December 14,

Cannabis Trade Association Makes Plea For National Exchange Listings

The American Trade Association for Cannabis and Hemp (ATACH) has published a policy paper urging the Nasdaq and New York Stock Exchange to allow U.S. cannabis operators that “touch the plant” to list on their respective Exchanges.  The current prohibition to listing is purely discretionary and not because of any regulatory action by the SEC or any other U.S. regulatory authority.  The policy paper, published November 7, 2022, outlines very convincing arguments for allowing U.S. operators to list on the National Exchanges.

The policy paper notes that up until now, the National Exchanges have refused to list these companies while cannabis remains federally illegal out of concerns that they could be charged with aiding and abetting violations of the U.S. Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”) or with money laundering by the receipt of listing fees.  As of the time of the publication of the policy paper, cannabis is legal in 37 states, D.C. and U.S. territories.  The ATACH rightfully asserts that

Categories

Contact Author

Laura Anthony Esq

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?