(800) 341-2684

Call Toll Free

Contact us

Online Inquiries 24/7

Laura Anthony Esq

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

NYSE

SEC、外国私募発行体の定義に関する概念リリースを発表 ― 第1部

2025年6月、SEC(米国証券取引委員会)は、外国私募発行体(“FPI”)の定義についての概念リリースおよびコメント募集を公表しました。現在の定義、SECへの登録・報告制度、そしてFPIsに関連するNasdaqのコーポレートガバナンスについての解説は、私の3部構成のブログをご参照ください:HERE ; HERE; および.

FPI(外国私募発行体)は、米国の資本市場へアクセスする際に独自の課題に直面します。そのため長年にわたり、SECはFPIが自国のコーポレートガバナンス規則に従うことを認め、さらに開示制度についても一定の緩和措置を設けるなど、柔軟な規制対応を整えてきました。しかしSECは、過去数十年の間にFPIの構成が変化し、その多くがほぼ米国市場のみで取引されていることに気付きました。

つまり、現在の定義やFPI向けの措置が制定された当時、SECは、対象となる多くのFPIが自国で重要な開示義務やその他の規制要件の対象となり、また外国市場で取引されることを想定していました。ところが下記のとおり、現在のFPIの大半は、米国でのみ取引される中国系企業が多く、平均時価総額も低い傾向があります。SECは、このような状況では、既存の規則は当初想定していた効果をもはや発揮していないと考え、概念リリースおよびコメント募集を発行しました。

本稿(第1回)では、概念リリースに関連して、FPIの現行の定義および規制枠組み、そしてFPIの構成に関するSECの一般的な見解について解説します。次回のブログでは、SECによるFPIの定義の再評価について取り上げます。

FPIの現行の定義および規制枠組み

1933年証券法(改正を含む、以下「証券法」)および1934年証券取引法(改正を含む、以下「証券取引法」)の双方において、「外国私募発行体」(FPI)の定義が規定されています。一般に、企業がFPIの定義を満たさない場合、米国企業と同様の登録義務および報告義務が課されます。

FPI資格の有無は、本拠地国だけで決まるものではありません(なお、米国法人は、事業・資産・経営陣・子会社の所在地にかかわらず、FPIとなることはできません)。FPIとして認められるかどうかは、通常、以下の2つの基準によって判断されます。(i) 米国における株式保有の相対的割合 (ii) 米国における事業活動・取引関係の程度 。

多くの証券法上の定義と同様に、外国私募発行体の定義はまず「すべての外国発行体」を包括的に対象とした上で、そこから例外を除外する形で構成されています。具体的には、FPIとは、以下の条件に該当する外国発行体を除いたものを指します(既存の発行体の場合は会計年度第2四半期末時点、初めてSECに登録する場合は、証券法または証券取引法のいずれかに基づく最初の登録届出書の提出日から30日以内に判定)。

(i) 外国政府

(ii) 議決権付証券の50%超が米国居住者により直接または間接的に保有されている場合、さらに次のいずれかに該当すること:(a) 取締役または執行役員の過半数が米国市民または米国居住者であること、(b) 資産の50%超が米国内に所在すること、または (c) 主たる事業が米国にある。主たる事業所の所在地は、会社の主な事業分野または業務、取締役会および株主総会、本社、および最も影響力のある主要役員を考慮して決定されます。

つまり、外国企業の株主の過半数が米国内に所在しない場合、その企業はFPIとして適格となります。一方、名義株主の50%超が米国に所在する場合には、企業は役員・取締役、資産、事業活動の所在地について、さらに検討する必要があります。

店頭市場に関する証券取引法規則12g3-2(b)の免除が適用される場合を除き、FPIが米国の証券取引所またはOTC Marketsでの取引を希望する場合には、証券取引法第12条(b)または第12条(g)に基づき、証券クラスを登録する必要があります。また、FPIの全世界の資産および全世界/米国の株主数が一定基準(資産1,000万ドル以上、かつ総株主数2,000人以上、または非適格投資家500人以上かつ米国株主300人以上)に達した場合には、すでに第12条(b)に基づき登録していない限り、証券取引法第12条(g)に基づくSEC登録が義務付けられます。

FPIは登録後、定期的に報告書を提出する必要があります。年次報告書にはForm 20-Fが使用され、会計年度末から4か月以内に提出しなければなりません。四半期報告書の提出義務はありません。また、Form 6-Kは定期報告書として使用され、以下の情報を含みます。(i) Form 8-Kで提出が義務付けられている事項、(ii) 企業が所在国の法令に基づき公表した、または公表を義務付けられている情報、(iii) 米国または海外の証券取引所に提出した、または提出を義務付けられている情報。

SECへのあらゆる提出書類は英語で作成しなければなりません。文書や契約書を他の言語から翻訳する場合、翻訳が公平かつ正確であることを担保するための規則がSECにより定められています。

SECはFPIのみに適用される複数の規則を採用しており、提出書類の審査や登録・報告に関する問い合わせに対応するため、国際企業財務室(Office of International Corporate Finance)を設置しています。特に重要な点としては、以下のとおりです。

(i) FPIは、財務諸表の作成および表示にあたり、米国会計基準(U.S. GAAP)、国際財務報告基準(IFRS)、または自国の会計基準(ただしU.S. GAAPとの調整注記が必要)のいずれかを選択できます。使用する会計基準にかかわらず、監査法人はPCAOBへの登録が必要です。

(ii) FPIは、証券取引法第14条の委任状ルールの適用が免除されます。

(iii) FPIの内部者は、証券取引法第16条の報告義務および短期売買規制の適用が免除されます。ただし、第13条の規制には従う必要があります。第13条の詳細については および  および  、また第16条については を参照してください。

(iv) FPIには四半期報告書の提出義務はありません(ただし、NasdaqおよびNYSEは、半期財務諸表をForm 6-Kで提出することを要求しています)。

(v) FPIの年次報告書の提出期限は、会計年度末から120日後となっています。

(vi) FPI は規制 FD の適用が免除されます (規制 FD の詳細については、 および  を参照してください)。

(vii) FPIは、登録届出書と報告届出書を別々のフォームで使用でき、四半期報告書の提出は義務付けられていません(例えば、登録届出書として様式F-1、年次報告書および定期報告書として様式20-Fおよび6-K)。さらに、登録届出書および報告書に関する開示規則では、Regulation S-KおよびS-Xの代替としてForm 20-Fの特定項目が参照されることが多く、FPIに適用される開示要件は一般的により緩やかです。

(viii) 開示義務がより緩やかな例としては、FPIには事業内容の説明に関して要求される具体的事項が少なく、役員報酬は総額で開示することが認められている場合があり、関連当事者取引の開示もはるかに容易です および);

(ixフォーム6-Kによる定期報告書は「提供(furnished)」されます(米国のフォーム8-Kは通常「提出(filed)」されます)(詳細については および) および) を参照してください)。

(x) FPIは、証券取引法第12条(g)に基づく登録要件について独自の免除規定(Rule 12g3-2(b))があり、SECによる報告義務を負うことなくOTC Marketsで証券を取引することができます。

(xi) FPIは、NasdaqやNYSEなどの全米証券取引所で取引する場合、異なる企業統治(コーポレート・ガバナンス)要件の適用を受けます。

(xii) FPIはセイ・オン・ペイ規則の適用除外となります。セイ・オン・ペイの詳細については をご参照ください。

(xiii) FPIの財務諸表は、米国企業よりも「期限切れ(stale)」となるまでの期間が長く認められています。米国企業の財務諸表は135日で期限切れとなりますが、FPIの場合、IPOでは財務諸表は9か月以内、監査報告書は12か月以内である必要があります。追加登録届出書の場合、監査報告書は15か月以内であれば有効とされます。また、中間財務諸表については、米国企業が3か月分で足りるのに対し、FPIは少なくとも6か月分を対象とする必要があります。

(xiv) FPIの非GAAP財務指標は、一定の条件を満たす場合、Regulation Gの適用が免除されます(非GAAP報告の詳細は をご覧ください)

(xv) FPIは、証券法に基づく登録届出書としてForm F-1、F-3、F-4(52)を提出することができ、これらのフォームは、それぞれ対応するForm S-1、S-3、S-4とは構造および開示要件が異なります。

(xvi) FPIは、Rules 801および802など、証券の募集および販売に関して追加の適用除外を有しています (を参照)。

(xvii) FPIは、証券取引法第15(d)条に基づく報告義務を終了させることができますが、米国企業(国内発行体)は、第15(d)条に基づく報告義務の提出を一時停止することしかできません。

SEC規則には、FPI向けのスケールされた開示要件はありません。つまり、企業規模にかかわらず、すべての企業が同じ情報を報告しなければなりません。スモール・レポーティング・カンパニー(SRC)やエマージング・グロース・カンパニー(EGC)に該当する可能性のあるFPIは、米国企業向けの通常の報告要件および登録・報告様式を使用し、それらの適用を受けるべきかどうかを検討する必要があります。

FPI人口の最近の動向

SECは最近、2003年から2023年までのForm 20-Fを提出しているFPIについて調査を実施しました(MJDSを利用するカナダ企業は除外されます)。この概要調査により、以下の点が明らかになりました。(i) FPIの総数は146社から967社へと増加したこと、(ii) 2023年に最も一般的な事業運営国は中国(ただし登記地はケイマン諸島)であり、2003年はカナダおよび英国であったこと、(iii) 中国系FPIの平均時価総額は全体平均よりも小さいこと。

また、SECは、米国で発生するグローバルな取引量に焦点を当て、2014年から2023年までを対象とした類似の調査も行いました。その結果、以下の点が判明しました。(i) FPIの株式のグローバルな取引は米国資本市場にますます集中しており、多くのFPIが株式をほぼ米国市場のみで取引していること、(ii) 米国のみで取引されるFPIは、時価総額がより小さい傾向にあること、(iii) 米国のみで取引されるFPIは、中国を拠点とする企業である傾向が強いこと。

著者

ローラ・アンソニー弁護士

設立パートナー

アンソニー、リンダー&カコマノリス

企業法務および証券法務事務所

LAnthony@ALClaw.com

証券弁護士ローラ・アンソニー氏とその経験豊富な法律チームは、中小規模の非公開企業、上場企業、そして上場予定の非公開企業に対して継続的な企業顧問サービスを提供しています。ナスダックNYSEアメリカン、または店頭市場(例えばOTCQBOTCQX)で上場を目指す企業も対象です。20年以上にわたり、Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC(ALC)は、迅速でパーソナライズされた最先端の法的サービスをクライアントに提供してきました。当事務所の評判と人脈は、投資銀行、証券会社、機関投資家、その他の戦略的提携先への紹介など、クライアントにとって非常に貴重なリソースとなっています。当事務所の専門分野には、1933年証券法の募集・販売および登録要件の遵守(レギュレーションDおよびレギュレーションSに基づく私募取引、PIPE取引、証券トークン・オファリング、イニシャル・コイン・オファリングを含む)が含まれますが、これに限定されません。規制A/A+オファリング、S-1、S-3、S-8フォームの登録申請、S-4フォームによる合併登録、1934年証券取引法の遵守(フォーム10による登録、フォーム10-Q、10-K、8-Kおよび14C情報・14A委任状報告書)、あらゆる形態の株式公開取引、合併・買収(リバースマージャーおよびフォワードマージャーを含む)、ナスダックやNYSEアメリカンを含む証券取引所のコーポレートガバナンス要件への申請および遵守、一般企業取引、一般契約および事業取引が含まれます。アンソニー氏と当事務所は、合併・買収取引において、買収対象企業と買収企業の双方を代理し、合併契約、株式交換契約、株式購入契約、資産購入契約、組織再編契約などの取引文書を作成します。ALC法務チームは、公開企業が連邦および州の証券法や

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

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; 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

ナスダック、店頭取引SPACの上場基準の改正を提案

この改正では、上場廃止となったSPAC(特別買収目的会社)が事業統合に際し、「シーズニング・ルール(一定期間の上場実績を求める規定)」の適用を受けずに再上場できるようにすることが提案されている。今回の修正は、シーズニング・ルールによる意図しない影響を是正するとともに、新たなSPAC/デSPAC規則が提供する投資家保護の趣旨を尊重する内容となっている。

背景シーズニング・ルールと新SPAC規則

ナスダック、NYSE(ニューヨーク証券取引所)、およびNYSEアメリカンは、いずれも「シーズニング・ルール」と呼ばれる上場基準を設けている。 このシーズニング・ルールは各取引所で文言に多少の違いはあるものの、基本的な内容はほぼ同一であり、以下のような趣旨を持つ(各取引所の規則を意訳)。

上場SPAC以外のシェルカンパニーとの逆合併によって設立された企業は、新規上場申請を行う資格を有し、その後、事業統合後の企業が新規上場申請の提出直前に以下の条件を満たしている場合にのみ、上場資格を得ることができます。

(i) SECまたはその他の監督当局に対し、当該取引に関する必要な情報(統合後企業の監査済み財務諸表を含む、いわゆる「スーパー8-K」)を提出した後、米国の店頭市場、他の国内証券取引所、または規制された外国取引所で少なくとも1年間取引実績を有していること。

(ii) リバース・マージャーの完了以降1年間、SECへの報告書を期限内に提出していること。

(iii) 事業統合完了後の企業の財務諸表について、少なくとも1会計年度分の監査済み年次報告書を提出していること。

(iv) 上場申請基準に適用される株価要件に相当する終値を一定期間維持していること。ただし、承認前直近60取引日のうち少なくとも30取引日間はその株価水準を満たしていなければならない。

このルールには、確定引受方式(firm commitment offering)による株式公開を実施し、純調達額が4,000万ドル以上となる企業に対する例外規定が含まれています。

シーズニング・ルールの目的は、企業が店頭(OTC)シェルとのリバース・マージャーを完了した後、引受証券会社を通じた資金調達やIPOを経ずに、直ちに国内証券取引所への上場(アップリスティング)を申請することを防ぐことにあります。このルールは、合併後の企業が市場での取引実績を有し、財務情報の信頼性が高まり、市場価格の安定性や適切なコーポレート・ガバナンスの履行実績を備えていることを確保することを目的としています。

上場SPACは本ルールの適用除外とされていますが、SPACブームの崩壊およびSPAC/デSPAC取引に関する新たな情報開示義務の強化を受けて、SPACが事業統合を完了するまでの期間が長期化しています。ナスダックの規則では、SPACは原則として36か月以内に事業統合(デSPAC)取引を完了しなければならず、期限内に完了できない場合は上場廃止となります。しかし、新たなSPAC/デSPAC規則の導入以降、多くのSPACが事業統合の完了を待つ間、一時的にOTCマーケットへ移行しており、こうしたSPACが、実質的に大規模なデSPAC取引を行い、新規則を遵守しているにもかかわらず、シーズニング・ルールの適用対象となるのかという疑問が生じています。

新しいSPAC/デSPAC規則は、デSPACに関連する情報開示および手続きを従来のIPOに合わせて整備し、IPOプロセスと同様の投資家保護を提供するものです。これには登録届出書(S-4/F-4)の提出が含まれ、シーズニング・ルールに関連する目的や懸念は事実上解消されます。 私のSPAC/デSPAC規則に関する10回シリーズのブログはこちらをご覧ください: を参照, を参照, を参照, を参照, を参照, を参照, を参照, を参照, を参照, & を参照

企業がシーズニング・ルールの対象となるかどうかの鍵は、リバース・マージャーの定義にあります。ナスダックは現在、リバース・マージャーを「営業会社が、直接的または間接的に、Exchange Actに基づく報告会社であるシェル・カンパニーとリバース・マージャー、株式交換、その他の方法で統合することにより、Exchange Act報告会社となる取引。ただし、IM-5101-2の要件を満たす上場企業による営業会社の取得、またはRule 5110(a)で規定される事業統合はリバース・マージャーに含まれない」と定義しています。IM-5101-2はSPACの上場要件を定めており、Rule 5110(a)は上場シェル以外の企業がリバース・マージャーを完了し支配権が変更される場合、株主承認および新規上場申請を求めています。リバース・マージャーにおけるシェル・カンパニーの定義の詳細については、こちらをご参照ください: を参照.

多くの上場廃止となったSPACは、事業統合(デSPAC)において「リバース・マージャー」の定義に該当しないように、統合後の企業を存続会社とする、三角合併などの構造、またはその他の法的手法を用いてシーズニング・ルールの技術的適用を回避する形で取引を組成してきました。こうしたデSPAC取引に対するルールの実効性の限界を理解したうえで、ナスダックは正当に、形式上の構造を認め、これらの企業が事業統合を完了した際に再上場できることを容認しています。

また、ナスダックの上場規則では、OTCマーケットからアップリスティングする企業は、上場直前30取引日の平均日次取引量(ADV)を最低2,000株以上維持することが求められています(「ADV要件」)。ただし、OTC企業が少なくとも500万ドルの確約引受方式による公募と併せて上場する場合には、ADV要件を満たす必要はありません。SPACは事業統合前の取引が薄く、また事業統合に確約引受方式による公募が含まれることは稀であるため、多くの上場廃止SPACはADV要件を満たすことに課題を抱えてきました。

提案されている新規則

ナスダックは、リバース・マージャーの定義を改正し、登録届出書(S-4/F-4)の効力発生日において、デSPAC取引に関連して上場するSPACを除外することを提案しています。また、ADV要件に関する上場規則についても、登録届出書(S-4/F-4)の効力発生日において、デSPAC取引に関連して上場する企業を除外する改正が提案されています。これらの変更により、OTC市場で取引されるSPACのデSPAC取引は、上場SPACによるデSPAC取引と同等に扱われることになります。

著者

ローラ・アンソニー弁護士

設立パートナー

アンソニー、リンダー&カコマノリス

企業法務および証券法務事務所

LAnthony@ALClaw.com

証券弁護士ローラ・アンソニー氏とその経験豊富な法律チームは、中小規模の非公開企業、上場企業、そして上場予定の非公開企業に対して継続的な企業顧問サービスを提供しています。ナスダックNYSEアメリカン、または店頭市場(例えばOTCQBOTCQX)で上場を目指す企業も対象です。20年以上にわたり、Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC(ALC)は、迅速でパーソナライズされた最先端の法的サービスをクライアントに提供してきました。当事務所の評判と人脈は、投資銀行、証券会社、機関投資家、その他の戦略的提携先への紹介など、クライアントにとって非常に貴重なリソースとなっています。当事務所の専門分野には、1933年証券法の募集・販売および登録要件の遵守(レギュレーションDおよびレギュレーションSに基づく私募取引、PIPE取引、証券トークン・オファリング、イニシャル・コイン・オファリングを含む)が含まれますが、これに限定されません。規制A/A+オファリング、S-1、S-3、S-8フォームの登録申請、S-4フォームによる合併登録、1934年証券取引法の遵守(フォーム10による登録、フォーム10-Q、10-K、8-Kおよび14C情報・14A委任状報告書)、あらゆる形態の株式公開取引、合併・買収(リバースマージャーおよびフォワードマージャーを含む)、ナスダックNYSEアメリカンを含む証券取引所のコーポレートガバナンス要件への申請および遵守、一般企業取引、一般契約および事業取引が含まれます。アンソニー氏と当事務所は、合併・買収取引において、買収対象企業と買収企業の双方を代理し、合併契約、株式交換契約、株式購入契約、資産購入契約、組織再編契約などの取引文書を作成します。ALC法務チームは、公開企業が連邦および州の証券法やSROs要件に準拠することを支援しており、15c2-11申請、社名変更、リバース・フォワードスプリット、本拠地変更などにも対応しています。アンソニー氏はまた、中堅・中小企業向けの業界ニュースのトップ情報源であるSecuritiesLawBlog.comの著者であり、企業財務に特化したポッドキャスト『LawCast.com: Corporate Finance in Focus』のプロデューサー兼ホストでもあります。当事務所は、ニューヨーク、ロサンゼルス、マイアミ、ボカラトン、ウェストパームビーチ、アトランタ、フェニックス、スコッツデール、シャーロット、シンシナティ、クリーブランド、ワシントンD.C.、デンバー、タンパ、デトロイト、ダラスなど、多くの主要都市でクライアントを代理しています。

アンソニー氏は、Crowdfunding Professional Association(CfPA)、パームビーチ郡弁護士会、フロリダ州弁護士会、アメリカ弁護士会(ABA)および連邦証券規制やプライベート・エクイティ・ベンチャーキャピタルに関するABA委員会など、さまざまな専門団体のメンバーです。パームビーチ郡およびマーティン郡のアメリカ赤十字社、スーザン・コーメン財団、オポチュニティ社(Opportunity, Inc.)、ニュー・ホープ・チャリティーズ、フォー・アーツ協会(Society of the Four Arts)、ノートン美術館、パームビーチ郡動物園協会、クラヴィス・パフォーミング・アーツ・センターなど、複数の地域社会慈善団体を支援しています。

アンソニー氏はフロリダ州立大学ロースクールを優秀な成績で卒業しており、1993年から弁護士として活動しています。

Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC にお問い合わせください。技術的な内容に関するご質問もいつでも歓迎いたします。

Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLCFacebookLinkedInYouTubePinterestTwitter でフォローしてください。

Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLCは、本情報を教育目的の一般情報として提供しています。本情報は一般的な内容であり、法的助言を構成するものではありません。さらに、本情報の利用や送受信は、当事務所との弁護士–依頼者関係を成立させるものではありません。したがって、本情報を通じて当事務所と行ういかなる通信も、特権または機密として扱われることはありません。

© Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC

 

 

 

NASDAQ Proposes To Modify Listing Standards For OTC Traded SPACS

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

NYSE Amends Listing Standards For Foreign Private Issuers And Listing Fees For All Issuers

In April the NYSE amended its listing fees for all issuers and in May 2025, amended the standards for foreign private issuers to meet the exchange’s minimum stockholder distribution requirements.  The new rules were enacted a few weeks before the SEC published a concept release and request for comment related to foreign private issuers in general (which will be the subject of an upcoming blog).

NYSE Listed Company Rule 902.03 – Fees for Listed Equity Securities

Effective April 1, 2025, the NYSE amended Listed Company Rule 902.03 to reduce the listed company fees for the first five years following an initial listing.  The amended rule provides that a company that lists on the exchange will only be charged the initial listing fee plus an annual fee calculated on an adjusted basis for any subsequent issuance or other corporate action (“Limited Fee Exemption Period”).

During the Limited Fee Exemption Period, an eligible company will not be charged any other listing fees

NYSE Amends Listing Standards Related To Reverse Splits To Meet Minimum Price

On January 15, 2025, the SEC approved amendments to NYSE Listed Company Manual Rule 802.01C 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.  In October 2024, the SEC approved a similar rule change for Nasdaq – see HERE.

The SEC also approved amendments to Rule 802.01C such that: (i) if a listed company has effected a reverse stock split over the prior one-year period; or (ii) has effected one or more reverse stock splits over the prior two year period with a cumulative ratio of 200:1 or more, the company shall not be eligible for any compliance period and will face immediate suspension and delisting.

Background

Market Wrap Up – November and December 2024

As promised, I am going to provide regular market wrap-ups for the IPO market as we move forward with the next administration and chapter for our U.S. capital markets.  This edition covers November and December 2024.  For a review of the Market Wrap-Up for October 2024 see HERE.

Nine small cap ($30,000,000 and under) IPOs priced in November 2024 and 12 in December 2024 (compared to 19 in October; 12 in September; 8 in August; 8 in July; 3 in June; 5 in May; 12 in April; 6 in March; 6 in February; and 8 in January). Below is a chart of relevant deal information for the November and December IPOs. In October I only included deals up to $25,000,000 but raised the cap to $30,000,000.  Normally, I would include all deals under $50,000,000 in this category, but the deal sizes remain very low.  As deal sizes return to pre 2022 normal levels, I will continue to

Introducing The OTCID

OTC Markets has announced the launch of a new market tier.  Effective July 2025, Pink Current will become the OTCID, a basic reporting market requiring companies to meet minimal current information disclosures and provide management certifications.  OTC Markets will still maintain the Pink Limited and Expert Market tiers for companies that do not qualify for the OTCID.  OTC Markets has not yet published all of the requirements for the OTCID, but I suspect they will be similar to the existing Pink Current, with the addition of the management certifications.

I support the change and new branding opportunity.  OTC Markets have struggled in recent years, primarily as a result of an inability for OTC Markets traded companies to obtain institutional financing or underwriter/placement agent banker support.  Forever the optimist, the change could be just what is needed to revitalize the OTC Markets as a venture market place for U.S. micro-cap companies.

OTCID

Currently, the OTC Markets divides issuers into

Nasdaq and NYSE Clawback Rules

On October 26, 2022, the SEC adopted final rules on listing standards for the recovery of erroneously awarded incentive-based executive compensation (“Clawback Rules”) (see HERE).  The Clawback Rules implement Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Act and require that national securities exchanges require disclosure of policies regarding and mandating the clawback of compensation under certain circumstances as a listing qualification.

I’ve written about the Clawback Rules a few times, including SEC guidance (see HERE) but have not detailed the final Nasdaq and NYSE rules, until now.

Nasdaq Clawback Rules

Nasdaq listing Rule 5608 sets forth the listing requirements related to the recovery of erroneously awarded compensation.  The language conforms closely to Rule 10D-1 and the SEC release, including explanations on materiality and “litter” restatements that are material based on facts and circumstances and existing judicial and administrative interpretations.

As allowed by Rule 10D-1, the Nasdaq rule provides that a company would not be required to pursue

Foreign Private Issuers – SEC Registration And Reporting And Nasdaq Corporate Governance – Part 1

Although many years ago I wrote a high-level review of foreign private issuer (FPI) registration and ongoing disclosure obligations, I have not drilled down on the subject until now.  While I’m at it, in the multi part blog series, I will cover the Nasdaq corporate governance requirements for listed FPIs.

Definition of a Foreign Private Issuer

Both the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) contain definitions of a “foreign private issuer” (“FPI). Generally, if a company does not meet the definition of an FPI, it is subject to the same registration and reporting requirements as any U.S. company.

The determination of FPI status is not just dependent on the country of domicile, though a U.S. company can never qualify regardless of the location of its operations, assets, management and subsidiaries. There are generally two tests of qualification as a foreign private issuer, as follows:

Related Party Transactions – Domestic Companies

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.

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

Terminating Reporting Obligations In An Abandoned IPO

It has been a tough few years for small cap (and all) initial public offerings (IPOs). Although I have been seeing a small up-tick in priced deals recently, we are not yet near the highs of 2020 – 2022. Among the various challenges facing IPO issuers, lengthy Nasdaq/NYSE review periods and trouble building out sufficient allocations have been especially difficult resulting in a lengthier IPO process than expected.
An increased IPO timeline adds significant expense to the process. A registration statement cannot go effective with stale financial statement. Financial statements for domestic issuers go stale every 135 days requiring either a new quarterly review or annual audit and an amended registration statement. Likewise, financial statements for foreign private issuers (FPIs) go stale every nine months. When an issuer is nearing the end date for financial statements, and it appears that a closing of an IPO may be imminent, they sometimes choose to go effective and rely on Rule 430A.

NYSE Approves Change To Delist Companies That Change Primary Business

On July 24, 2024, the SEC approved an NYSE rule change to allow for the delisting of companies that change their primary business.

NYSE Continued Listing Standards

As I wrote about in October 2023, the NYSE continued listing requirements as set forth in the Listed Company Manual section 802.01 include (pre-rule change) (see HERE):

  • Distribution of Capital Stock: (i) total stockholders of 400; or (ii) total stockholders of 1,200 and an average monthly trading volume of less than 100,000 shares; or (iii) total non-affiliated publicly held shares of 600,000.
  • Market Value: (i) average global market capitalization of less than $50 mil and stockholders equity is less than $50 mil for 30 consecutive trading days.
  • Disposal of Assets – Reduction of Operations: The NYSE will consider a suspension or delisting if: (i) the company has sold or otherwise disposed of its principal operating assets or has ceased to be an operating company or has discontinued a substantial portion of its
Read More »

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

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

NYSE/NYSE American 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. Last week I wrote about the Nasdaq continued listing requirements (see HERE) and this week I will cover the NYSE and NYSE American.  For a review of the initial listing requirements for the NYSE American see HERE.

NYSE American

The NYSE American prefaces it continued listing qualitative minimum standards with it high level discretionary authority.  The basis for continued listing is summed up in Section 1001 of the NYSE Company Guide as follows:

In considering whether a security warrants continued trading and/or listing on the Exchange, many factors are taken into account, such as the degree of investor interest in the company, its prospects for growth, the reputation of its management, the degree of commercial acceptance of its products, and whether its securities have suitable characteristics for auction market trading. Thus, any developments

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

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

Who Is An Affiliate And Why Does It Matter – Primary VS Secondary Offering

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 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).  In this Part 2 of the series, I am delving into the meaty topic of a primary vs. secondary offering, which itself hinges on whether the offeror is an affiliate.

Secondary/Resale Offerings vs. Primary Offerings

A secondary offering is an offering made by or on behalf of bona fide selling shareholders and not by or on behalf of the registrant company.  A secondary offering can only occur after a company is public.  That is, even if a company goes public

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

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

Nasdaq Amends Pricing Limitations Rules In A Direct Listing

The rules related to direct listings continue to evolve, with the latest Nasdaq rule change being approved on December 2, 2022, although their utilization has been slow to gain traction.  Despite the Exchange’s efforts to make the process more attractive and viable, based on a few articles on the subject, only 10 companies had gone public via direct listing as of December 31, 2021, and I could not find a single example of any others since that time.  Moreover, and certainly due to the elevated listing standards and arduous process, each of the companies have been much more mature such as Spotify, Slack, Palantir and Coinbase.

In any event, both Nasdaq and the NYSE continue with an “if we build it they will come” approach.  After multiple iterations with the SEC, both Nasdaq and the NYSE approved rules that allow a company to raise capital concurrently with a direct listing (see HERE).  The very handy Nasdaq Initial Listing Guide

SEC Continues It’s Crypto Focus

In the year and a half since Gary Gensler made it clear to the world that he intends to focus on the crypto “wild west” (see HERE) things have gone from bad to worse for the industry.  Of course, it is not all the SEC’s extreme crypto scrutiny that is causing problems, but the very real crypto winter including the collapse of the FTX exchange and its FTX Future Fund, and the realization that the metaverse of tomorrow, will actually not be here until… tomorrow have all added to industry problems.   Not to mention a slew of bankruptcy filings (FTX, Blockfi, Celsius and Voyager) and several other precarious financial positions (Blockchain.com, Coinbase, Crypto.com and Genesis, to name a few).

However, putting aside the crypto industry financial crisis, the U.S. regulators, including the SEC, FINRA and national exchanges, are scrutinizing any business with even a modicum of crypto focus to the point where it is almost impossible to move

Guidance On Executive Compensation Clawback Rules; NYSE And Nasdaq Issue Proposed Rules

On October 26, 2022, the SEC adopted final rules on listing standards for the recovery of erroneously awarded incentive-based executive compensation (“Clawback Rules”) (see HERE).  The Clawback Rules implement Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Act and require that national securities exchanges require disclosure of policies regarding and mandating clawback of compensation under certain circumstances as a listing qualification. The proposed rules were first published in July 2015 (see HERE) and have moved around on the SEC semiannual regulatory agenda from proposed to long-term and back again for years.

The Clawback Rules add a check box to Forms 10-K, 20-F and 40-F to indicate whether the form includes the correction of an error in previously issued financial statements and a related recovery analysis.  Although the check box has already been added to the Forms, the new Clawback Rules are not effective until November 28, 2023.  As such, the SEC has issued guidance regarding compliance with the check box in

NYSE Annual Compliance Guidance Memo 2022

In January, NYSE Regulation sent out its yearly Compliance Guidance Memo to NYSE American listed companies.  As discussed in the Compliance Memo, on October 26, 2022 the SEC adopted final rules on listing standards for the recovery of erroneously awarded incentive-based executive compensation (“Clawback Rules”).  The Clawback Rules implement Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Act and necessitate that national securities exchanges require disclosure of policies regarding and mandating the clawback of compensation under certain circumstances as a listing qualification.  Each listed issuer will be required to adopt a compensation recovery policy, comply with that policy, and provide the necessary compensation recovery policy disclosures. An issuer will be subject to delisting if it does not adopt and comply with a compensation recovery policy that satisfies the listing standards.  The NYSE must adopt the new listing standard by February 26, 2023.  For more on the clawback rules, see HERE.

Annual Compliance Guidance Memo

The NYSE Memo provides a list of important

Small-Cap IPO Volatility – The China Connection

Less than two months after the PCAOB and the China Securities Regulatory Commission and Ministry of Finance signed a Statement of Protocol reaching a tentative deal to allow the PCAOB to fully inspect and investigate registered public accounting firms headquartered in mainland China and Hong Kong, Nasdaq effectively halted all small-cap IPOs with a China connection.  This time, the issue is not audit-related.

During the week of September 19, one of our clients had a deal ready to be priced and begin trading on Nasdaq.  We had thought we cleared all comments when a call came from our Nasdaq reviewer – all small-cap IPOs were being temporarily halted while the Exchange investigated recent volatility.  The same day, an article came out on Bloomberg reporting on 2200% price swings (up and then steeply back down) on recent IPOs involving companies with ties to China – a repeat of similar volatility in the late ’80’s and early ’90’s despite three decades of

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

Update On Nasdaq And NYSE Direct Listings

The rules related to direct listings continue to evolve as this method of going public continues to gain in popularity.  The last time I wrote about direct listings was in September 2020, shortly after the SEC approved, then stayed its approval, of the NYSE’s direct listing rules that allow companies to sell newly issued primary shares on its own behalf into the opening trade in a direct listing process (see HERE). Since that time, both the NYSE and Nasdaq proposed rules to allow for a direct listing with a capital raise have been approved by the SEC.

The Nasdaq Stock Market  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. 

Public Market Listing Standards

One of the bankers that I work with often once asked me if I had written a blog with a side-by-side comparison of listing on Nasdaq vs. the OTC Markets and I realized I had not, so it went on the list and with the implementation of the new 15c2-11 rules, now seems a very good time to tackle the project.  I’ve added NYSE American to the list as well.

Quantitative and Liquidity Listing Standards

Nasdaq Capital Markets

To list its securities on Nasdaq Capital Markets, 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 ensure that companies have reached a sufficient level of maturity prior to listing.  NASDAQ also requires listed companies to meet stringent corporate governance standards.

Requirements Equity Standard  Market Value of

Listed Securities

Standard

Net
Read More »

NYSE Annual Compliance Guidance Memo And Amended Rules

In January, NYSE Regulation sent out its yearly Compliance Guidance Memo to NYSE American listed companies.  Although we are already halfway through the year, the annual letter has useful information that remains timely.  As discussed in the Compliance Memo, the NYSE sought SEC approval to permanently change its shareholder approval rules in accordance with the temporary rules enacting to provide relief to listed companies during Covid.  The SEC approved the amended rules on April 2, 2021.

Amendment to Shareholder Approval Rules

The SEC has approved NYSE rule changes to the shareholder approval requirements in Sections 312.03 and 312.04 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual (“Manual”) and the Section 314 related party transaction requirements.  The rule changes permanently align the rules with the temporary relief provided to listed companies during Covid (for more on the temporary relief, see HERE

Prior to the amendment, Section 312.03 of the Manual prohibited certain issuances to (i) directors, officers or substantial shareholders (related parties),

SPAC Transactions Continue Amid SEC Cautionary Statements

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

Audit Committees – NYSE American

Like Nasdaq, I’ve written several times about the NYSE American listing requirements including the general listing requirements (see HERE) and annual compliance guidelines (see HERE).  As an aside, although the Nasdaq recently enacted significant changes to its initial listing standards, the NYSE American has not done the same and no such changes are currently anticipated.  I suspect that the NYSE American will see a large uptick in new company applicants as a result.

I recently drilled down on audit committee requirements and director independence standards for Nasdaq and in this and the next blog, I will do the same for the NYSE American.  As required by SEC Rule 10A-3, all exchange listed companies are required to have an audit committee consisting of independent directors.  NYSE American Company Guide Rule 803 delineates the requirements independent directors and audit committees.  Rule 803 complies with SEC Rule 10A-3 related to audit committees for companies listed on a national securities exchange.

Finders – Part 2

Following the SEC’s proposed conditional exemption for finders (see HERE), the topic of finders has been front and center.  New York has recently adopted a new finder’s exemption, joining California and Texas, who were early in creating exemptions for intra-state offerings.   Also, a question that has arisen several times recently is whether an unregistered person can assist a U.S. company in capital raising transactions outside the U.S. under Regulation S.  This blog, the second in a three-part series, will discuss finders in the Regulation S context.

Regulation S

It is very clear that a person residing in the U.S. must be licensed to act as a finder and receive transaction-based compensation, regardless of where the investor is located.  The SEC sent a poignant reminder of that when, in December 2015, it filed a series of enforcement proceedings against U.S. immigration lawyers for violating the broker-dealer registration rules by accepting commissions in connection with introducing investors to projects relying

SEC Proposes Amendments To Rule 144

I’ve been at this for a long time and although some things do not change, the securities industry has been a roller coaster of change from rule amendments to guidance, to interpretation, and nuances big and small that can have tidal wave effects for market participants.  On December 22, 2020, the SEC proposed amendments to Rule 144 which would eliminate tacking of a holding period upon the conversion or exchange of a market adjustable security that is not traded on a national securities exchange.  The proposed rule also updates the Form 144 filing requirements to mandate electronic filings, eliminate the requirement to file a Form 144 with respect to sales of securities issued by companies that are not subject to Exchange Act reporting, and amend the Form 144 filing deadline to coincide with the Form 4 filing deadline.

The last amendments to Rule 144 were in 2008 reducing the holding periods to six months for reporting issuers and one year

SEC Proposed Conditional Exemption For Finders

Over the years I have written many times about exemptions to the broker-dealer registration requirements for entities and individuals that assist companies in fundraising and related services (see, for example: HERE). Finally, after years of advocating for SEC guidance on the topic, the SEC has proposed a conditional exemption for finders assisting small businesses in capital raising.  The proposed exemption will allow for the use of finders to assist small businesses in raising capital from accredited investors.

In its press release announcing the proposal, SEC Chair Clayton acknowledged the need for guidance, stating, “[T]here has been significant uncertainty for years, however, about finders’ regulatory status, leading to many calls for Commission action, including from small business advocates, SEC advisory committees and the Department of the Treasury.  If adopted, the proposed relief will bring clarity to finders’ regulatory status in a tailored manner that addresses the capital formation needs of certain smaller issuers while preserving investor protections.”

Separately, New York

NYSE Continues To Struggle With Direct Listing Rule Changes

Late last year, around the same time that the SEC approved Nasdaq rule changes related to direct listings on the Nasdaq Global Market and Nasdaq Capital Market (see HERE), the SEC rejected proposed amendments by the NYSE big board which would allow a company to issue new shares and directly raise capital in conjunction with a direct listing process.  Nasdaq had previously updated its direct listing rules for listing on the Market Global Select Market (see HERE).

The NYSE did not give up and in August of this year, after two more proposed amendments, the SEC finally approved new NYSE direct listing rules that allow companies to sell newly issued primary shares on its own behalf into the opening trade in a direct listing process.  However, after receiving a notice of intent to petition to prevent the rule change, the SEC has stayed the approval until further notice.  Still pushing forward, on September 4, the NYSE filed

Nasdaq Rule Amendments 2020

In addition to the temporary rule changes and relief that Nasdaq has provided this year for companies affected by Covid-19 (see HERE and HERE), the exchange has enacted various rule amendments with varying degrees of impact and materiality.

In particular, over the last year Nasdaq has amended its delisting process for low-priced securities, updated its definition of a family member for the purpose of determining director independence and has clarified the term “closing price” for purposes of the 20% rule.  This blog discusses each of these amendments.

Delisting Process

In April 2020, the SEC approved Nasdaq rule changes to the delisting process for certain securities that fall below the minimum price for continued listing.  The rule change modifies the delisting process for securities with a bid price at or below $0.10 for ten consecutive trading days during any bid-price compliance period and for securities that have had one or more reverse stock splits with a cumulative ratio of

SPAC IPOs A Sign Of Impending M&A Opportunities

The last time I wrote about special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) in July 2018, I noted that SPACs had been growing in popularity, raising more money in 2017 than in any year since the last financial crisis (see HERE).  Not only has the trend continued, but the Covid-19 crisis, while temporarily dampening other aspects of the IPO market, has caused a definite uptick in the SPAC IPO world.

In April, the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that SPACs are booming and that “[S]o far this year, these special-purpose acquisition companies, or SPACs, have raised $6.5 billion, on pace for their biggest year ever, according to Dealogic. In April, 80% of all money raised for U.S. initial public offerings went to blank-check firms, compared with an average of 9% over the past decade.”

I’m not surprised.  Within weeks of Covid-19 reaching a global crisis and causing a shutdown of the U.S. economy, instead of my phone

NYSE, Nasdaq And OTC Markets Offer Relief For Listed Companies Due To COVID-19

In addition to the SEC, the various trading markets, including the Nasdaq, NYSE and OTC Markets are providing relief to trading companies that are facing unprecedented challenges as a result of the worldwide COVID-19 crisis.

NYSE

The NYSE has taken a more formal approach to relief for listed companies.  On March 20, 2020 and again on April 6, 2020 the NYSE filed a notice and immediate effectiveness of proposed rule changes to provide relief from the continued listing market cap requirements and certain shareholder approval requirements.

Recognizing the extremely high level of market volatility as a result of the COVID-19 crisis, the NYSE has temporarily suspended until June 30, 2020 its continued listing requirement that companies must maintain an average global market capitalization over a consecutive 30-trading-day period of at least $15 million.  Likewise, the NYSE is suspending the requirement that a listed company maintain a minimum trading price of $1.00 or more over a consecutive 30-trading-day period,

Nasdaq Extends Direct Listings

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.  For a review of the Nasdaq Capital Market listing requirements, see HERE as supplemented and amended HERE.

On December 3, 2019, the SEC approved amendments to the Nasdaq rules related to direct listings on the Nasdaq Global Market and Nasdaq Capital Market. As previously reported, on February 15, 2019, Nasdaq amended its direct listing process rules for listing on the Market Global Select Market (see HERE).

Interestingly, around the same time as the approval of the Nasdaq rule changes, the SEC rejected amendments proposed by the NYSE big board which would have allowed

NYSE American Board Independence Standards

NYSE American Company Guide Rule 803 delineates the requirements independent directors and audit committees.  NYSE American Company Guide Rule 802 requires that a majority of the board of directors of a listed company be “independent.”  Rule 803 requires that all members of the audit committee be independent and defines independence and Rules 804 and 805 require that all directors on the nominating and compensation committees, if a company has such committees, be independent.

Under NYSE American Company Guide Rule 803, an “independent director” means a person other than an executive officer or employee of a company.  The board of directors must make an affirmative finding that a director does not have a relationship which would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director for that director to qualify as independent.  However, the NYSE American rules specify certain relationships that would disqualify a person from being considered independent.  Stock ownership is not on the

Nasdaq Board Independence Standards

Nasdaq Rule 5605 delineates the listing qualifications and requirements for a board of directors and committees, including the independence standards for board members.  Nasdaq requires that a majority of the board of directors of a listed company be “independent” and further that all members of the audit, nominating and compensation committees be independent.

Under Rule 5605, an “independent director” means a person other than an executive officer or employee of a company or any individual having a relationship which, in the opinion of the company’s board of directors, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director.  In other words, the question of independence must ultimately be determined by the board of directors who must make an affirmative finding that a director is independent.  However, the Nasdaq rules specify certain relationships that would disqualify a person from being considered independent.  Stock ownership is not on the list and is not enough, without

Nasdaq And NYSE MKT Voting Rights Rules

In a series of blogs, I detailed Nasdaq and NYSE American rules requiring listed companies to receive shareholder approval in particular instances, including prior to the issuance of certain securities.  In particular,  Nasdaq Rule 5635 sets forth the circumstances under which shareholder approval is required prior to an issuance of securities in connection with: (i) the acquisition of the stock or assets of another company (see HERE); (ii) equity-based compensation of officers, directors, employees or consultants (see HERE); (iii) a change of control (see HERE); and (iv) transactions other than public offerings (see HERE).  NYSE American Company Guide Sections 711, 712 and 713 have substantially similar provisions.

Each of these rules necessarily interacts with the Exchanges’ rules and policies related to voting rights.

Nasdaq Rule 5640 provides that “[V]oting rights of existing Shareholders of publicly traded common stock registered under Section 12 of the Act cannot be disparately reduced or restricted through any corporate action or

Nasdaq Direct Listing Rule Change

On April 3, 2018, Spotify made a big board splash by debuting on the NYSE without an IPO. Instead, Spotify filed a resale registration statement registering the securities already held by its existing shareholders. The process is referred to as a direct listing.  As most of those shareholders had invested in Spotify in private offerings, they were rewarded with a true exit strategy and liquidity by becoming the company’s initial public float.  On April 26, 2019, Slack Technologies followed suit, filing a resale Form S-1 with an anticipated direct listing on to the NYSE.

Around this time last year, I published a blog on the direct listing process focusing on the differences between a direct listing onto a national exchange and one onto OTC Markets – see HERE. As the process seems to be gaining in popularity, on February 15, 2019 Nasdaq amended its direct listing process rules. This blog is focused on the Nasdaq direct

The 20% Rule – Private Placements

Nasdaq and the NYSE American both have rules requiring listed companies to receive shareholder approval prior to issuing twenty percent (20%) or more of the outstanding securities in a transaction other than a public offering at a price less than the Minimum Price, as defined in the rule. Nasdaq Rule 5635 sets forth the circumstances under which shareholder approval is required prior to an issuance of securities in connection with: (i) the acquisition of the stock or assets of another company (see HERE); (ii) equity-based compensation of officers, directors, employees or consultants (see HERE); (iii) a change of control (see HERE); and (iv) transactions other than public offerings. NYSE American Company Guide Sections 711, 712 a 713 have substantially similar provisions.

Nasdaq and the NYSE recently amended their rules related to issuances in a private placement to provide greater flexibility and certainty for companies to determine when a shareholder vote is necessary to approve a transaction that

NASDAQ And NYSE American Shareholder Approval Requirement – Equity Based Compensation

Nasdaq and the NYSE American both have rules requiring listed companies to receive shareholder approval prior to issuing securities when a stock option or purchase plan is to be established or materially amended or other equity compensation arrangement made or materially amended, pursuant to which stock may be acquired by officers, directors, employees, or consultants. Nasdaq Rule 5635 sets forth the circumstances under which shareholder approval is required prior to an issuance of securities in connection with: (i) the acquisition of the stock or assets of another company (see HERE); (ii) equity-based compensation of officers, directors, employees or consultants; (iii) a change of control (see HERE); and (iv) transactions other than public offerings (see HERE). NYSE American Company Guide Sections 711, 712 and 713 have substantially similar provisions.

In this blog I am detailing the shareholder approval requirements related to equity-based compensation of officers, directors, employees or consultants.  Other Exchange Rules interplay with the rules requiring shareholder

NASDAQ And NYSE American Shareholder Approval Requirements– Change Of Control

Nasdaq and the NYSE American both have rules requiring listed companies to receive shareholder approval prior to issuing securities in an amount of 20% or more of their outstanding common stock or voting power or prior to completing transactions which will result in a change of control of the company.  Nasdaq Rule 5635 sets forth the circumstances under which shareholder approval is required prior to an issuance of securities in connection with: (i) the acquisition of the stock or assets of another company; (ii) equity-based compensation of officers, directors, employees or consultants; (iii) a change of control; and (iv) transactions other than public offerings (see HERE related to Rule 5635(d)).  NYSE American Company Guide Sections 711, 712 and 713 have substantially similar provisions.

In a series of blogs I will detail these rules and related interpretative guidance.  In the first blog in this series I detailed the 20% Rule related to acquisitions, and its cohort, the Acquisition Rule.  In this

The 20% Rule- Acquisitions

Nasdaq and the NYSE American both have “20% Rules” requiring listed companies to receive shareholder approval prior to issuing unregistered securities in an amount of 20% or more of their outstanding common stock or voting power. Nasdaq Rule 5635 sets forth the circumstances under which shareholder approval is required prior to an issuance of securities in connection with: (i) the acquisition of the stock or assets of another company; (ii) equity-based compensation of officers, directors, employees or consultants; (iii) a change of control; and (iv) transactions other than public offerings (see HERE related to Rule 5635(d)). NYSE American Company Guide Sections 711, 712 and 713 have substantially similar provisions.

In a series of blogs I will detail these rules and related interpretative guidance. Many other Exchange Rules interplay with the 20% Rules; for example, the Exchanges generally require a Listing of Additional Securities (LAS) form submittal at least 15 days prior to the issuance of securities in the same transactions

The Under $300 Million Market Cap Class

Depending on whom you ask, a public company with less than $300 million market cap could be considered a micro-cap company, a penny stock (unless their share price is over $5.00), a lower middle market company or even middle market.  Divestopedia defines “lower middle market” as “the lower end of the middle market segment of the economy, as measured in terms of annual revenue of the firms. Firms with an annual revenue in the range of $5 million to $50 million are grouped under the lower middle market category.”  Wikipedia defines “middle market” as “companies larger than small businesses but smaller than big businesses that account for the middle third of the U.S. economy’s revenue. Each of these companies earns an annual revenue of between $100 million and $3 billion.” In a speech to the Greater Cleveland Middle Market Forum, SEC Commissioner Robert J. Jackson, Jr. defined a middle market company as those with trailing twelve-month sales of $50 million

NYSE American Compliance Guidance MEMO

In January, NYSE Regulation sent out its yearly Compliance Guidance Memo to NYSE American listed companies. The annual letter updates companies on any rule changes from the year and reminds companies of items the NYSE deems important enough to warrant such a reminder.

The only new item in this year’s letter relates to advance notice of stock dividends and distributions. Effective February 1, 2018, the NYSE requires listed companies to provide ten minutes’ advance notice to the exchange of any announcement with respect to a dividend or stock distribution, whether the announcement is during or outside exchange traded hours. This change is consistent with other NYSE and Nasdaq rules which generally require notifications of announcements, including press releases, that could impact trading, at least 10 minutes prior to such notification.

The NYSE letter also provides a list of important reminders to all exchange listed companies, starting with the requirement to provide a timely alert of all material news. Part 4

SEC Cautionary Statement on Audits of Public Companies Operating in China

Eight years following the crash of the Chinese reverse merger boom and a slew of SEC enforcement proceedings, the SEC is once again concerned with the financial reporting by U.S. listed companies with operations based in China. In December 2018, the SEC issued a cautionary public statement from SEC Chair Jay Clayton, SEC Chief Accountant Wes Bricker and PCAOB Chairman William D. Duhnke III entitled “Statement on the Vital Role of Audit Quality and Regulatory Access to Audit and Other Information Internationally – Discussion of Current Information Access Challenges with Respect to U.S.-listed Companies with Significant Operations in China.”

Just reading the title reminded me of the boom in China-based reverse mergers around 2009-2010 followed by the trading halts or delistings of at least 50 companies in 2011 and 2012. In the summer of 2010, the SEC launched an initiative to determine whether certain companies with foreign operations—including those that were the product of reverse mergers—were accurately reporting their

An IPO Without The SEC

On January 23, 2019, biotechnology company Gossamer Bio, Inc., filed an amended S-1 pricing its $230 million initial public offering, taking advantage of a rarely used SEC Rule that will allow the S-1 to go effective, and the IPO to be completed, 20 days from filing, without action by the SEC.  Since the government shutdown, several companies have opted to proceed with the effectiveness of a registration statement for a follow-on offering without SEC review or approval, but this marks the first full IPO, and certainly the first of any significant size. The Gossamer IPO is being underwritten by Bank of America Merrill Lynch, SVB Leerink, Barclays and Evercore ISI. On January 24, 2019, Nasdaq issued five FAQ addressing their position on listing companies utilizing Section 8(a).  Although the SEC has recommenced full operations as of today, there has non-the-less been a transformation in the methods used to access capital markets, and the use of 8(a) is just

Proposed SPAC Rule Changes

With the growing popularity of special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), both the Nasdaq and NYSE have proposed rule changes that would make listings easier, although on June 1, 2018, the Nasdaq withdrew its proposal. SPACs raised more money last year than any year since the financial crisis. The SEC has been delaying action on the proposed rule changes, now pushing off a decision until at least August 2018.

A company that registers securities as a blank check company and whose securities are deemed a “penny stock” must comply with Rule 419 and thus are not eligible to trade. A brief discussion of Rule 419 is below. A “penny stock” is defined in Rule 3a51-1 of the Exchange Act and like many definitions in the securities laws, is inclusive of all securities other than those that satisfy certain delineated exceptions. The most common exceptions, and those that would be applicable to penny stocks for purpose of the SPAC, include: (i)

SEC Continues to Review, And Delay, Crypto Funds

On January 18, 2018, the SEC issued a letter to the Investment Company Institute and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) explaining why the SEC could not approve a cryptocurrency-related exchange traded fund (ETF) or mutual fund. The letter, authored by SEC Division of Investment Management director Dalia Blass, explains the SEC’s reservations and concerns about approving a crypto-related mutual fund or ETF. The letter advised against seeking registration of funds that invest heavily in cryptocurrency-related products until the raised questions and concerns can be properly addressed.

The SEC letter comes a year after the SEC rejected a proposal by Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, famously linked to the founding of Facebook, to create a bitcoin-tracking ETF. Since that time the SEC has privately rejected several similar requests. Many in the industry appreciate the SEC letter as it offers specific guidance and concrete issues to be addressed as the march towards the eventual approval of a crypto-related fund

Going Public Without An IPO

On April 3, 2018, Spotify made a big board splash by debuting on the NYSE without an IPO. Instead, Spotify filed a resale registration statement registering the securities already held by its existing shareholders. The process is referred to as a direct listing. As most of those shareholders had invested in Spotify in private offerings, they were rewarded with a true exit strategy and liquidity by becoming the company’s initial public float.

In order to complete the direct listing process, NYSE had to implement a rule change. NASDAQ already allows for direct listings, although it has historically been rarely used. To the contrary, a direct listing has often been used as a going public method on the OTC Markets and in the wake of Spotify, may gain in popularity on national exchanges as well.

As I will discuss below, there are some fundamental differences between the process for OTC Markets and for an exchange. In particular, when completing a direct

SEC Chief Accountant Speaks On Financial Reporting

Nominate Us For ABA Journal’s Top Blog- HERE

——————————————————————————————————

On June 8, 2017, the SEC Chief Accountant, Wesley R. Bricker, gave a speech before the 36th Annual SEC and Financial Reporting Institute Conference. The speech, which this blog summarizes, was titled “Advancing the Role of Credible Financial Reporting in the Capital Markets.” As usual, I’ve included commentary throughout.

Introduction and Role of the PCAOB

The speech begins with some general background comments and a discussion of the role of the PCAOB. Approximately half of Americans invest in the U.S. equity markets, either directly or through mutual funds and employer-sponsored retirement plans. The ability to judge the opportunities and risks and make investment choices depends on the quality of information available to the public and importantly, the quality of the accounting and auditing information. Mr. Bricker notes that “[T]he credibility of financial statements have a direct effect on a company’s cost of capital, which is reflected in the price that

SEC Adopts The T+2 Trade Settlement Cycle

Introduction and brief summary of the rule

On March 22, 2017, the SEC adopted a rule amendment shortening the standard settlement cycle for broker-initiated trade settlements from three business days from the trade date (T+3) to two business days (T+2). The change is designed to help enhance efficiency and reduce risks, including credit, market and liquidity risks, associated with unsettled transactions in the marketplace.

Acting SEC Chair Michael Piwowar stated, “[A]s technology improves, new products emerge, and trading volumes grow, it is increasingly obvious that the outdated T+3 settlement cycle is no longer serving the best interests of the American people.” The SEC originally proposed the rule amendment on September 28, 2016. My blog on the proposal can be read HERE. In addition, for more information on the clearance and settlement process for U.S. capital markets, see HERE.

The change amends Rule 15c6-1(a) prohibiting a broker-dealer from effecting or entering into a contract for the purchase or sale

The U.S. Capital Markets Clearance And Settlement Process

Within the world of securities there are many sectors and facets to explore and understand.  To be successful, a public company must have an active, liquid trading market.  Accordingly, the trading markets themselves, including the settlement and clearing process in the US markets, is an important fundamental area of knowledge that every public company, potential public company, and advisor needs to comprehend.  A basic understanding of the trading markets will help drive relationships with transfer agents, market makers, broker-dealers and financial public relations firms as well as provide the knowledge to improve relationships with shareholders.  In addition, small pooled funds such as venture and hedge funds and family offices that invest in public markets will benefit from an understanding of the process.

This blog provides a historical foundation and summary of the clearance and settlement processes for US equities markets.  In a future blog, I will drill down into specific trading, including short selling.

History and Background

The Paperwork Crisis

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

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)

Categories

Contact Author

Laura Anthony Esq

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?