(800) 341-2684

Call Toll Free

Contact us

Online Inquiries 24/7

Laura Anthony Esq

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

SEC

Disclosures On Offerings And Registrations Of Securities In The Crypto Asset Markets

On April 10, 2025, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance (“CorpFin”) issued a statement on disclosurs in offerings and registrations of securities in the crypto asset markets.  This is the third statement issued by CorpFin on various topics dealing with cryptocurrencies and digital assets in a matter of weeks.  For a review of CorpFin’s statement on certain proof of work mining activities see HERE and on stablecoins, see HERE.

The statement is meant to give guidance related to specific disclosure topics when either registering crypto assets or when filing a registration statement for an issuer in the crypto asset business.  The guidance cuts across all Regulation S-K disclosures whether in a Securities Act form (S-1; F-1; etc..) or an Exchange Act form (10-K; 20-F etc..).

Description of Business – Item 101 of Regulation S-K

Item 101 of Regulation S-K – Description of Business – requires an issuer to provide detailed background information material to understanding the general development

SEC Statement On Stablecoins

On April 4, 2025, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance (“CorpFin”) issued a statement on stablecoins.  In Particular, the statement addresses stablecoins that are designed to maintain a stable value relative to the United States Dollar (“USD,”) on a one-for-one basis, can be redeemed for USD on a one-for-one basis (i.e., one stablecoin to one USD), and are backed by assets held in a reserve that are considered low-risk and readily liquid with a USD-value that meets or exceeds the redemption value of the stablecoins in circulation (“Covered Stablecoins”).

Stablecoins Generally

A stablecoin is a type of crypto asset designed to maintain a stable value relative to a reference asset, such as USD, another fiat currency, a commodity like gold, or a pool or basket of assets.  Stablecoins usually track with the underlying asset on a one-to-one basis (for example, one stablecoin for $1 USD).  Stablecoins can maintain their value in different ways, including through a set reserve

SEC Statement On Proof-Of-Work Mining Activities

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

SEC Withdraws Statement On Broker Dealer Custody Of Digital Asset Securities

On May 15, 2025, the SEC Division of Trading and Markets and Office and FINRA’s Office of General Counsel withdrew their joint statement on broker dealer custody of digital asset securities.  The original joint statement had been issued on July 8, 2019 (see HERE).  This original statement has oft been thought of as the reason that broker dealers have not (could not) adopt any broad ranging policies or procedures related to digital assets.

The withdrawal of the joint statement, together with the slew of other recent activity from the SEC related to digital assets, (see HERE for example) is an important step towards more widespread adoption of digital asset trading, allowing retail investors to aggregate their investments with their trusted broker dealer advisors.

Refresher On Original Joint Statement/Concerns

Broker-dealers that hold funds and securities must comply with Exchange Act Rule 15c3-3 (the “Customer Protection Rule”), which generally requires the broker to maintain physical possession or control over

SEC Publishes CD&I On Mergers And Acquisitions, Form S-4 And Tender Offers

On March 6, 2025, the SEC published several updates to its compliance and disclosure interpretations (“CD&I”) related to mergers and acquisitions, Form S-4 and tender offers.

Rule 145(a)/Form S-4

Revised CD&Is 239.13 and 225.10 address the circumstances upon which seeking commitments for favorable votes, in advance of a merger/acquisition transaction, would be deemed an “offer or sale” of securities under Section 5, requiring either registration or an exemption from registration by the soliciting party.

Acquiring companies often seek management and principal shareholder commitments to vote in favor of a transaction as part of the negotiations associated with a merger/acquisition prior to soliciting such favorable votes from the shareholders at large such as by filing a Form S-4.  The SEC recognizes that by executing these agreements, those management and shareholders have made investment decisions, prior to the transaction being presented to non-affiliate shareholders, in violation of Rule 145(a).  However, the SEC also recognizes the legitimate reasons an acquiring company

SEC Publishes CD&I On Form S-3, Regulation S-K, Form 20-F, And Section 13

On March 20, 2025, the SEC published several updates to its compliance and disclosure interpretations (“CD&I”) related to Forms S-3 and 20-F, and Regulation S-K. The new CD&I importantly allow all issuers, not just well-known seasoned issuers (“WKSIs”) to go effective on Form S-3 registration statements between the filing of a Form 10-K and the filing of the proxy statement containing Form 10-K Part III disclosures.

Earlier, on February 11, 2025, the SEC published one revised and one new CD&I related to Section 13 filings on Schedules 13D and 13G.

Form S-3/Securities Act Rules

Revised CD&Is 114.05 and 198.05 confirm that a Form S-3 ASR and a non-automatically effective Form S-3 may be filed and declared effective after a company files its Form 10-K but prior to filing its Part III information in either a proxy statement or amended Form 10-K.  However, the SEC notes that companies are responsible for ensuring that any prospectus used in connection with

SEC Publishes CD&I On Exempt Offerings; Accredited Investor Guidance – Part 2

On March 12, 2025, the SEC published several updates to its compliance and disclosure interpretations (“CD&I”) related to exempt offerings.  Two of the new C&DI clarify acceptable processes for verifying accredited investor status in a Rule 506(c) offering.  On the same day the SEC issued no-action relief providing further detail on affirming accredited investor status.  Part 1 of this blog series discussed the two rule 506(c) C&DI and no action letter – see HERE.   This Part 2 will continue a review of the remaining substantive CD&I.

Confidential Filing of Form 1-A

Modified CD&I question 182.01 confirms that when a confidentially filed Form 1-A is made public by choosing “Disseminate Draft Offering Statement” in the EDGAR database, it will have satisfied the requirements to make prior confidential information public.  The prior CD&I on this topic required an issuer to file, as an exhibit to its public Form 1-A, any related non-public correspondence.  The SEC will now undertake to make

SEC Publishes CD&I On Exempt Offerings; Accredited Investor Guidance – Part 1

On March 12, 2025, the SEC published twenty-four new or revised compliance and disclosure interpretations (“CD&I”) related to exempt offerings.  Two of the new C&DI clarify acceptable processes for verifying accredited investor status in a Rule 506(c) offering.  On the same day the SEC issued no-action relief providing further detail on affirming accredited investor status.  The new guidance should make the use of Rule 506(c) offerings much easier and more palatable.  This blog will address the C&DI directed to Rule 506(c) and the no-action letter, and Part 2 will unpack the rest.  I’ve included a refresher on Rule 506(c) at the end of this blog.

New C&DI

Question 256.35 asks “[I]f an issuer does not satisfy any of the verification safe harbors in Rule 506(c)(2)(ii), are there other methods an issuer can use that will satisfy the requirement to take reasonable steps to verify accredited investor status?”

Answering in the affirmative, the SEC confirms that the verification methods listed in

Crypto Industry Gets A Second Chance

The last time I substantively wrote about cryptocurrencies and the crypto industry was in April 2023, when the SEC was firmly hostile against the industry and a slew of negative events (FTX collapse, etc..) pretty well eliminated crypto as an active element in the capital markets (see HERE).  That has changed!

Here is a recap of the newly regenerated crypto capital markets initiatives:

Digital Asset Executive Order

On January 23, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order entitled “Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology” supporting the growth of the digital asset industry in the U.S.  The order specifically:

  • Protects and promotes the ability of individual citizens and private-sector entities to access and use open blockchain including the ability to develop and deploy software to participate in mining and validating crypto assets;
  • Allow individual citizens and private-sector entities to self-custody digital assets;
  • Promotes and protects the U.S. dollar through the development and growth of dollar backed stablecoins;
Read More »

SEC Further Expands Ability To File Confidential Registration Statements

The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance has expanded the ability to file non-public confidential registration statements to include all registration statements.

In 2012, the JOBS Act created a path for emerging growth companies to file draft registration statements (DRS) on a confidential basis when completing an initial public offering.  In 2017 the Division of Corporation Finance expanded the DRS filing option to include all Section 12(b) Exchange Act registration statements (but not 12(g) registrations), all registration statements for initial public offerings, and follow on offerings completed within 12 months of an initial public offering, for all class of issuers.  See – HERE.

On March 3, 2025, the Division of Corporation Finance announced that it has further expanded the ability to utilize a DRS filing to include:

  • Initial registrations under the Exchange Act, including both Sections 12(b) and 12(g) including Forms 8-A, 10, 20-F and 40-F;
  • All Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act) registration statements regardless of the amount of
Read More »

Widespread “Dealer” Litigation Is Almost Over!

In August 2024, then SEC Commissioner Mark T. Uyeda made a public statement against the rampant enforcement proceedings against small cap investors claiming violations of the dealer registration requirements (see HERE).  Fast forward to today, now Chair of the SEC, Mr. Uyeda, is sticking by his contentions and finally, after eight long years of numerous enforcement proceedings, is directing the SEC to roll back its position.

What Happened

This week, the SEC enforcement division entered into two joint motions halting ongoing litigation claiming violations of the dealer registration rules.  The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts entered an order in the case involving Auctus Fund Management staying the case while the parties wrap up an agreement to end the litigation.  Under the agreement Auctus will not seek attorney fees from the government or pursue a review of the enforcement action.

In the filing, Auctus said “[T]he parties have reached an agreement in principle to dismiss this

SEC Chair Uyeda Talks SEC Priorities

Just a few weeks after SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce gave some insight into the SEC’s priorities (see HERE), acting SEC Chair Mark Uyeda got more granular on what we can expect under his regime.  Commissioner Uyeda drilled down on particular SEC goals while giving a speech at the Florida Bar’s Annual Federal Securities Institute and M&A Conference.

The overarching goal of the SEC over the next few years will be to foster innovation, job creation and economic growth by maintaining cost effective regulations throughout a business’s life cycle.  To accomplish these goals, the SEC intends to “return normalcy” to the SEC by being cognizant of its legal authority, policy priorities and enforcement initiatives, all of which have gone awry over the last few years.

Commissioner Uyeda highlights some of the actions already taken to facilitate these goals, including rescinding Staff Legal Bulletin 14 related to shareholder proposals and proxy statements (for more on Staff Legal Bulletin 14 see

Commissioner Peirce Gives A Sneak Peak At SEC Priorities

At the end of January 2025, SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce, who finally is not on an island alone within the SEC top brass, gave a speech at the Northwestern Securities Law Institute giving some insight into what we can expect from the SEC under the new administration.

Commissioner Peirce has been vocal over the years about her disdain for bringing political and social issues into SEC reporting and compliance management for public companies, however now, working with like-minded executives, she has solid ideas for a path forward.  First and foremost, a public company should have the goal of maximizing value for its shareholders as a group.  Unfortunately, in today’s world, public companies are often forced to answer to activists, non-shareholder “stakeholders” and the like, forcing executives to utilize company resources to further these groups (or individual’s) favorite cause.  Commissioner Peirce notes that “[D]irectors and executive officers serve shareholders and society best by keeping the companies they guide focused on

Climate Disclosure Rules On The Way Out

On February 11, 2025 SEC Chairman Mark T. Uyeda issued a statement on the Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosure for Investors rule (“Climate Disclosure Rule”) adopted by the SEC on March 6, 2024 and later stayed as a result of ongoing litigation.

Commissioner Uyeda reiterated both he and Commissioner Peirce’s consistent view that the current disclosure rules are sufficient to cover any material climate related disclosures.  Furthermore, the Climate Disclosure Rule lacks statutory authority, SEC expertise and goes beyond the SEC’s arena of capital market regulation.

Commissioner Uyeda points out (and I whole-heartedly agree) that the Climate Disclosure Rule would require a large volume of financially immaterial information overstepping the SEC’s authority.

The Rule is currently preparing for oral argument in front of the Eighth Circuit based on briefs submitted by the prior administration.  Commissioner Uyeda has instructed the SEC litigation team to inform the Court that the SEC’s previously submitted briefs do not reflect the SEC’s

NASDAQ Finalizes Amendments To Accelerate Delisting Process

On January 17, 2025 the SEC approved Nasdaq’s rule change to 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.  The final rule was passed as last submitted by Nasdaq, though in between the SEC required substantial additional analysis delaying the process on 3 occassions.

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 October 2024, Nasdaq amended 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

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

SEC Enforcement Actions For Late Form D Filings

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

NASDAQ Proposes Amendment To Liquidity Listing Standard

On December 12, 2024, Nasdaq proposed an amendment to its liquidity listing standards for the Nasdaq Capital Market and Nasdaq Global Market such that the market value of unrestricted publicly held shares requirement could only be satisfied from the proceeds of the initial public offering.  That is, Nasdaq would no longer count shares registered for re-sale by existing shareholders towards satisfying this listing standard.  Nasdaq is also proposing to make similar changes affecting companies the uplist onto the Nasdaq from OTC Markets.

To list its securities on Nasdaq Capital Market or Nasdaq Global Market, 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.

Listing

Registration Statement Undertakings

Every four years we go through a regulatory dead zone as the SEC prepares for a change in administration with new priorities, new interpretations, and a whole new rulemaking agenda, including the potential unwinding of the prior administration’s rules.  While waiting for the significant changes to come, I’ll continue to dive into the endless detailed topics of disclosure and other requirements of the federal securities laws.  This week I’ll cover the ongoing requirements associated with an effective registration statement – known as “Undertakings.”

Every registration statement filed pursuant to the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”), whether by a domestic company or foreign private issuer (“FPI”) requires the registrant to include a statement as to certain affirmative undertakings by such company.  Item 512 of Regulation S-K sets forth the undertakings, and registration statements on Forms S-1, S-3, F-1 and F-3 must include all items set forth in Item 512.  Registration Statements on Form S-8 need only include the undertakings in

Internet Availability of Proxy Materials

A few weeks ago, I wrote about shareholder meeting timelines, which included a brief discussion as to how a company can increase, or decrease, a meeting timeline by delivering proxy materials by making them available on the internet – see HERE.  This week I am going to drill down on Rule 14a-16 including disclosure obligation and technical requirements for utilizing “Internet Availability of Proxy Materials.”

Rule 14a-16 – Internet Availability of Proxy Materials             

Rule 14a-16 governs a company’s ability to make proxy materials available over the internet, as opposed to printing and mailing, which can be expensive and time consuming.  Rule 14a-16 provides that when a company is making proxy materials available over the internet, it must mail a notice to all security holders a minimum of 40 calendar days before the meeting, or if there is no meeting, before the consents or authorizations may be used to affect the consented upon corporate action.

Companies may not

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;

Court Strikes Down Recent Changes To Definition Of A Dealer

In a big win for hedge funds and the crypto industry, on November 21, 2024, a Texas federal judge overturned the recent SEC rule that expanded the definition of “dealer” under the Exchange Act.  For a review of the final rule see HERE.

The amendments were intended to require certain proprietary or principal traders and liquidity providers to register as either a dealer or government securities dealer as applicable.  The rules amended Exchange Act Rules 5a5-4 and 3a44-2 to enhance the definition of “as part of a regular business” in Sections 3(a)(5) and 3(a)(44) of the Exchange Act.

In a legal challenge, the Crypto Freedom Alliance of Texas and Blockchain Association sued the SEC claiming that the rule amendments radically expanded the definition of a “dealer” in a way that could encompass digital asset industry participants (and hedge funds) that do not engage in any conduct resembling “dealing” as that term has ever been

Understanding the Shareholder Meeting Timeline

Proxy season is fast approaching.  Whether it is for an annual meeting or special shareholder meeting, clients are always asking how quickly they can schedule a shareholder meeting, or where action is taken by consent, how quickly the company can effectuate such consented upon action.  The answer depends on several factors, including whether the meeting is a special or annual meeting, if annual, whether there are any “non-routine” items on the agenda, and whether the company intends to mail out all proxy materials or just a notice of internet availability of such materials.  Although I have written about the proxy rules many times, this is the first blog where I drill down and focus on the timeline.

The federal proxy rules can be found in Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and the rules promulgated thereunder.  The rules apply to any company which has securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act. Section 14

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 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

SEC Adopts New EDGAR Rules

A year after publishing proposed rules, on September 27, 2024, the SEC adopted rule and form amendments to the EDGAR system dubbing the updates as EDGAR Next (for a review of the proposed rules see HERE).   The rule changes are meant to enhance security and improve access to the EDGAR system.  My view is that will accomplish the former and not the latter. The changes require EDGAR filers to authorize identified individuals who are responsible for managing the filers’ EDGAR accounts. Individuals acting on behalf of filers on EDGAR will need individual account credentials to access those EDGAR accounts and make filings.

The new rules amend Rules 10 and 11 of Regulation S-T and amend Form ID.  Only the identified authorized individuals will be able to access a filer’s EDGAR account.  The authorized individual(s) need not be an employee of the filer, but the filer needs to provide a notarized power of attorney to appoint someone.

Through the

Foreign Private Issuers – SEC Registration And Reporting And Nasdaq Corporate Governance – Part 3

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.

In Part 1 in this series, I covered the definition of a foreign private issuer (FPI), registration and ongoing reporting requirements – see HERE.  In Part 2 I covered Rules 801 and 802 of the Securities Act, which give FPI’s registration exemptions for rights offerings and exchange offers, respectively – see HERE.  In this Part 3, I discuss the Nasdaq corporate governance requirements for FPIs.

Nasdaq Corporate Governance

In addition to its quantitative listing standards, Nasdaq imposes certain corporate governance and board composition requirements as part of its listing standards.  FPIs, however, are exempt from numerous of these standards and may instead opt to comply with home

Foreign Private Issuers – SEC Registration And Reporting And Nasdaq Corporate Governance – Part 2

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.

In Part 1 in this series, I covered the definition of a foreign private issuer (FPI), registration and ongoing reporting requirements – see HERE.  In this Part 2 I will cover Rules 801 and 802 of the Securities Act, which give FPI’s registration exemptions for rights offerings and exchange offers, respectively.

Rule 801 – Exemption in Connection with Rights Offerings

Rule 801 provides an exemption from registration for certain rights offerings by FPIs.  A “rights offering” is defined for these purposes as the sale for cash of equity securities in which existing securities holders of a particular class (including holders of ADRs) are

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 – Foreign Private Issuers

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

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 »

Supreme Court Strikes Down Chevron Deference

In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a decades old judicial precedent that provided guidance as to when judges could defer to a federal agencies’ interpretation of a law.  The original precedent derived from the 1984 case Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which gave deference to federal agencies’ interpretations of a law over the judicial system.  Although Chevron applied to all federal agencies, in light of a slew of recent litigation by and against the SEC related to rule making and interpretations (for example related to who is a “dealer” – see HERE) I decided to cover it in a blog.

Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council

Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (“Chevron”) held that a government agency must conform to any clear legislative statements when interpreting and applying a law, but courts will give the agency deference in ambiguous situations if its interpretation is reasonable.  In other words, if

Commissioner Uyeda’s Statement On Dealer Litigation

On August 19, 2024, SEC Commissioner Mark T. Uyeda published a statement regarding one of the numerous defendants in SEC initiated enforcement proceedings claiming unlicensed dealer activity.  The statement resonates with the sentiments of most of my colleagues, peers and clients.

Background

In November 2017 the SEC shocked the industry when it filed an action against Microcap Equity Group, LLC and its principal alleging that its investing activity required licensing as a dealer under Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act.  Since that time, the SEC has filed numerous additional cases with the sole allegation being that the investor acted as an unregistered dealer.  In each case, the investor entity purchased convertible promissory notes from micro-cap OTC Markets issuers (or other existing note holders), which, after the applicable Rule 144 holding period, were converted into shares of common stock and sold on the open market.  As the securities were generally low priced, the conversions resulted in large quantities of additional

SEC Division Of Corporation Finance Statement On Disclosure Review

On June 24, 2024, Erik Gerding the Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance made a statement regarding the SEC’s state of disclosure review.  In fiscal year 2023 and continuing into 2024, the top areas of review and comment by the SEC were China-related matters, artificial intelligence, non-GAAP disclosures, management’s discussion and analysis, revenue recognition and financial statement presentation.  In addition, disruptions in the banking industry, cybersecurity risks, the impact of inflation and disclosure related to or as a result of newly adopted rules (such as pay versus performance) are gaining attention by SEC review teams.

The director’s statement gives some insight into the SEC’s focus and serves as a reminder to our clients and us practitioners alike to be sure we are staying abreast of the ever-changing capital markets environment.

China Related Disclosures

A few years ago, the SEC enacted the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act and approved rules implementing same (see HERE).   The SEC continues to

SEC Publishes More New C&DI On Cybersecurity Rules

On June 24, 2024 the SEC published five (5) new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DI) on cybersecurity incident disclosures supplementing the C&DI published in December 2023 (see HERE).

Cybersecurity

In July, 2023 the SEC adopted final new rules requiring disclosures for both domestic and foreign companies related to cybersecurity incidents, risk management, strategy and governance (see HERE for a review of the new rules).

The cybersecurity rules add new Item 1.05 to Form 8-K requiring disclosure of a material cybersecurity incident including the incident’s nature, scope, timing, and material impact or reasonably likely impact on the company.  An Item 1.05 Form 8-K is due within four business days following determination that a cybersecurity incident is material. Given the sensitive nature of cybersecurity crimes, the SEC has added a provision allowing an 8-K to be delayed if it is informed by the United States Attorney General, in writing, that immediate disclosure would pose a substantial risk to national security or

Free Writing Prospectus

I’m finding a lot of good segues recently – flowing from my discussion on the definition and implications of shell company status in a reverse merger (see HERE) is the topic of a free writing prospectus (“FWP”).  In particular, what is a free writing prospectus, when and how is it used, and what companies are eligible for its use.

Communications during a registered offering are strictly regulated, including communications before the filing of a registration statement, after filing and before effectiveness, and after effectiveness – for more on communications during the offering process see HERE.  An FWP is a written communication other than the prospectus filed with the SEC, used to make offers, or to market an offering.

An FWP is one of the few writings, beyond the prospectus itself, that may be used to market an offering.  However, its use is limited to eligible companies, or in securities law parlance – those that are not ineligible.  Accordingly,

F-3 Eligibility

The ability to utilize a shelf registration statement on Form F-3 or S-3 offers significant advantages to publicly traded companies.  A Form F-3/S-3 allows for variably priced offerings – that is offerings made either at-the-market or at other than fixed prices.  Only companies that are eligible for F-3/S-3 can complete primary (or indirect primary) offerings at prices other than a fixed price (for more on primary offerings see HERE).

I have previously written a detailed blog related to S-3 eligibility (see HERE) and although the requirements for an F-3 are substantially similar, there are some key differences due to the different regulatory framework applicable to foreign private issuers (“FPIs”) – i.e. “F Filers.” Like an S-3, F-3 eligibility is comprised of both registrant or company requirements and transaction requirements.

Moreover, like Form S-3, a Form F-3 specifies generally that the Form may not be used for an offering of asset-backed securities.

Registrant Requirements

Companies that meet the

Supreme Court Decides MD&A Case

It is not often that the U.S. Supreme Court weighs in on the specific disclosure requirements under the federal securities laws, but in the case of Macquarie Infrastructure Corp. v. Moab Partners, L.P., they had occasion to do so in the context of a Rule 10b-5 fraud claim.

Macquarie owned a subsidiary that operates terminals to store bulk liquid commodities including No. 6 fuel oil.  In 2016 the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization formally adopted IMO 2020, a regulation capping the sulfur content of fuel oil used in shipping.  In the ensuing years, Macquarie did not discuss IMO 2020 in its public offering documents or SEC periodic reports.  In February 2018, however, Macquarie announced a drop in the amount of storage contracted for use by its subsidiary due in part to the decline in the No. 6 fuel oil market. Macquarie’s stock price fell 41%.

Plaintiff Moab Partners sued Macquarie and various officers alleging, among other things, that

SEC Updates Guidance On Confidential Treatment Requests

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

SEC Provides Guidance On Sell To Cover Exception In Rule 10b5-1

On December 14, 2022, the SEC adopted amendments to Rule 10b5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to enhance disclosure requirements and investor protections against insider trading.  The amendments include updates to Rule 10b5-1(c)(1), which provides an affirmative defense to insider trading liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. For a review of the Rules see HERE and HERE.

Updated Rule 10b5-1 adds conditions to the affirmative defense to insider trading. The Rule now has cooling-off periods before trading can commence under a Rule 10b5-1 plan and adds a condition that all persons entering into a Rule 10b5-1 plan must act in good faith with respect to the plan. The Rule also requires directors and officers to include representations in their plans certifying at the time of the adoption of a new or modified Rule 10b5-1 plan that: (i) they are not aware of any material nonpublic information about the issuer or its securities; and

SEC Publishes New C&DI On Filing Fee Table And Inline XBRL

Back in fourth quarter 2023, the SEC published several new compliance and disclosure interpretations on various topics including cyber incident disclosure, proxy and information statements, the inclusion of securities in the filing fee exhibit, and Inline XBRL.  This blog is the last in a series of three covering the plethora of new C&DI.

Related to the filing fee table:

Question 239.02 and 240.17 – A well-known seasoned issuer registers securities on an automatic shelf registration statement and elects to defer payment of filing fees pursuant to Rule 456(b). The issuer subsequently files a prospectus supplement in connection with a pay-as-you-go deferred fee payment under Rules 456(b) and 457(r) that includes the required filing fee exhibit. Must the filing fee exhibit’s Table 1 list all the securities listed in the initial filing of the related registration statement or is Table 1 permitted to list only the securities being offered by the prospectus supplement as to which the fees are

SEC Publishes New C&DI On Proxy Rules

Back in fourth quarter 2023, the SEC published several new compliance and disclosure interpretations on various topics including cyber incident disclosure, proxy and information statements, the inclusion of securities in the filing fee exhibit, and Inline XBRL.  As my blog topic list tends to be very long, I am finally getting to this and will cover the various new C&DI topics over the next few weeks.

Proxy Rules

The federal proxy rules can be found in Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) and the rules promulgated thereunder.  The rules apply to any company which has securities registered under Section 12 of the Act. Section 14 of the Exchange Act and its rules govern the timing and content of information provided to shareholders in connection with annual and special meetings with a goal of providing shareholders meaningful information to make informed decisions, and a valuable method to allow them to participate in the shareholder voting

SEC Publishes New C&DI On Cybersecurity Rules

Back in fourth quarter 2023, the SEC published several new compliance and disclosure interpretations on various topics including cyber incident disclosure, proxy and information statements, the inclusion of securities in the filing fee exhibit, and Inline XBRL.  As my blog topic list tends to be very long, I am finally getting to this and will cover the various new C&DI topics over the next few weeks.

Cybersecurity

In July, 2023 the SEC adopted final new rules requiring disclosures for both domestic and foreign companies related to cybersecurity incidents, risk management, strategy and governance (see HERE for a review of the new rules).  The SEC has published three new C&DI directly related to the Form 8-K reporting requirements and ability to delay reports based on national security concerns.

The cybersecurity rules add new Item 1.05 to Form 8-K requiring disclosure of a material cybersecurity incident including the incident’s nature, scope, timing, and material impact or reasonably likely impact on the

SEC Adopts Changes To The Definition Of A “Dealer”

Two years after proposing rule changes (see HERE) the SEC has adopted final new rules amending the definition of a “dealer” under the Exchange Act.  Although the rule change comes after years of a continuous stream of litigation against small-cap and penny stock convertible debt lenders, the new rules specifically fail to provide regulatory clarity to this sector of the marketplace.

The amendments are intended to require certain proprietary or principal traders and liquidity providers to register as either a dealer or government securities dealer as applicable.  The rules amend Exchange Act Rules 5a5-4 and 3a44-2 to enhance the definition of “as part of a regular business” in Sections 3(a)(5) and 3(a)(44) of the Exchange Act.  The enhancement, however, is as to large proprietary traders and government securities dealers, leaving small cap traders to continue with rule making through judicial precedence.

Background

Although the amended rules are not limited to participants in the U.S. Treasury markets,

Definition Of A Shell Company In A Reverse Merger

Ten weeks of blogs on the new SPAC and shell company rules provides the perfect segue to discuss exactly what is a “shell company” in the context of a reverse merger and its implications – including one heartburn inducing unintended consequence. As I have been discussing over the past weeks, the new rules specifically apply to any reverse merger with a shell company, not just a SPAC shell company.

New Rule 145a deems any business combination of a reporting shell company involving another entity that is not a shell company to entail a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders. Nothing in Rule 145a would prevent or prohibit the use of a valid exemption, if available, for the deemed sale of securities; however, I know of no such available exemption and the SEC rule release not only does not suggest one but specifically clarifies that Section 3(a)(9) would not be available.

As a result, the SEC release suggests

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACs, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 9

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.  The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.

In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  The second blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE.  The third blog in the series continued the summary of Subpart 1600 and in particular the new dilution disclosure requirements – see HERE.  Part 4 continued a review of

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 8

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.  The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.

In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  The second blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE.  The third blog in the series continued the summary of Subpart 1600 and in particular the new dilution disclosure requirements – see HERE.  Part 4 continued a

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 7

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.  The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.

In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  The second blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE.  The third blog in the series continued the summary of Subpart 1600 and in particular the new dilution disclosure requirements – see HERE.  Part 4 continued a review of

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 6

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.  The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.

In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  The second blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE.  The third blog in the series continued the summary of Subpart 1600 and in particular the new dilution disclosure requirements – see HERE.  Part 4 continued a review

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 5

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.  The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.

In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  Last week’s blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE.  The third blog in the series continued the summary of Subpart 1600 and in particular the new dilution disclosure requirements – see HERE.  Part 4 continued a

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 4

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.  The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.

In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  Last week’s blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE.  The third blog in the series continued the summary of Subpart 1600 and in particular the new dilution disclosure requirements – see HERE.  This week’s blog will

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 3

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.  The compliance date for the new rules is July 1, 2025.

In the first blog in this series, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  Last week’s blog began a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release starting with partial coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions – see HERE.  This week’s blog will continue a review of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K.

New Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K

The SEC has adopted new Subpart 1600 to

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 2

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.

In last week’s blog, I provided background on and a summary of the new rules – see HERE.  This week’s blog begins a granular discussion of the 581-page rule release and its vast implications to not only the SPAC market, but shell company reverse mergers in general.  This week in particular, I will begin coverage of new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K related to disclosures in SPAC IPO’s and de-SPAC transactions.

New Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K

The SEC has adopted new Subpart 1600 to Regulation S-K to: (i) set forth disclosure obligations for

SEC Adopts Final Rules On SPACS, Shell Companies And The Use Of Projections – Part 1

On January 24, 2024, the SEC adopted final rules enhancing disclosure obligations for SPAC IPOs and subsequent de-SPAC business combination transactions.  The rules are designed to more closely align the required disclosures and legal liabilities that may be incurred in de-SPAC transactions with those in traditional IPOs.  The new rules spread beyond SPACs to shell companies and blank check companies in general.

The SEC is specifically requiring enhanced disclosures with respect to compensation paid to sponsors, conflicts of interest, dilution, and the determination, if any, of the board of directors (or similar governing body) of a SPAC regarding whether a de-SPAC transaction is advisable and in the best interests of the SPAC and its shareholders.  The SEC has also adopted rules that deem any business combination transaction involving a reporting shell company, including a SPAC, to involve a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders, and has amended several financial statement requirements applicable to transactions involving

Section 13 – Beneficial Shareholder Reporting Requirements – Part II

As discussed last week, the SEC has adopted final amendments to Sections 13(d) and 13(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”).  The amendments were first proposed in February, 2022 – see HERE.

The amendments update 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; and require that Schedule 13D and 13G filings be filed using XBRL.

The final rules do not adopt proposed changes to determine beneficial ownership where a person holds cash settled derivative securities but rather refer to guidance on the subject.  Likewise, the final rules do not adopt many changes that had been proposed to clarify the circumstances under which two or more persons have formed a “group” that would be subject to beneficial ownership reporting obligations; or to provide new exemptions to permit certain persons to communicate and consult with one

Section 13 – Beneficial Shareholder Reporting Requirements – Part 1

Barely two weeks after the SEC charged six officers, directors and five percent (5%) or greater shareholders with failing to timely file reports, the SEC adopted final amendments to Sections 13(d) and 13(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”).  The amendments were first proposed in February, 2022 – see HERE.

The amendments update 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.  I’ve included a chart of the amendments to Schedules 13D and 13G at the end of this blog.

The final rules do not adopt changes that had been proposed to clarify the circumstances under which two or more persons have formed a “group” that would be subject to beneficial ownership reporting

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

SEC Issues Staff Report On Accredited Investor Definition

On December 15, 2023, the SEC issued a staff report on the accredited investor definition.  The report comes three years after the most recent amendments to the accredited investor definition (see HERE).

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”) requires the SEC to review the accredited investor definition, as relates to natural persons, at least once every four years to determine whether the definition should be modified or adjusted.  The last two reports can be read HERE and HERE.

The current report focuses on the composition of the accredited investor demographic, including since the last definition amendments; the extent to which accredited investors have the financial sophistication, ability to sustain the risk of loss of investment, and access to information that have traditionally been associated with an ability to fend for themselves; and accredited investor participation in exempt offerings.

I’ve included the complete current accredited investor definition at the end of this blog.

Background

All

What Is Regulation M?

Regulation M, which was adopted in 1996, is designed to prevent market manipulation by participants in a securities offering by regulating certain activities.  In general, Regulation M restricts distribution participants (underwriters, placement agents and their affiliates), issuers, selling security holders and their affiliates, from bidding for, purchasing, or attempting to induce other to bid for or purchase, certain securities during an applicable restricted period.  Regulation M also prohibits any person that has sold short a security that is the subject of a registered offering from purchasing securities in the offering from an underwriter, or broker or dealer participating in the offering if the short sale took place during a specified period prior to the pricing of the registered offering.

Although a large part of Regulation M relates to underwriter and broker dealer conduct and due diligence obligations, it is helpful for issuers and selling security holders to understand the rules as pertains to them.  Regulation M consists of six

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

SEC Suspends New Share Repurchase Disclosure Rules

In a win for conservatives, the recent amendments to the share repurchase rules are officially on hold.  Adopted on May 3, 2023 (see HERE) the new disclosure requirements would have taken effect for inclusion in the upcoming 10-K season.  Following a successful court challenge, on November 22, 2023, the SEC issued an order postponing the effective date of the new rules pending further SEC action.

Background

On May 3, 2023, the SEC adopted amendments to Securities Exchange Act Rule 10b-18, which provides issuers and affiliates with a non-exclusive safe harbor from liability for market manipulation under Sections 9(a)(2) and 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) when issuers bid for or repurchase their common stock.

The SEC allows for limited methods that an issuer can utilize to show confidence in its own stock and assist in maintaining or increasing its stock price.  One of those methods is Exchange Act Rule

Nasdaq Adopts New Reverse Split Rule Change

On November 1, 2023, the SEC approved Nasdaq’s rule changes to the notification and disclosure requirements for reverse splits.  The new rules went effective immediately upon approval.  For the proposed rule changes see HERE.

Background

After the market highs of the second half of 2020 and all of 2021, we have all witnessed the general decline, including noticeably depressed valuations and market price, especially in the small cap space.  In 2022, Nasdaq processed 196 reverse stock splits, compared to 31 in 2021 and 94 in 2020. As of June 23, 2023, Nasdaq has processed 164 reverse stock splits, and projects significantly more throughout 2023. The majority of reverse splits are completed by companies that trade on the Nasdaq Capital Market tier of the exchange and are completing the split to maintain the minimum $1.00 bid price to avoid delisting.

In response to concerns by Nasdaq that market participants do not have enough visibility on these companies or their

SEC Adopts Revisions To The Privacy Act

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

SEC Proposes New EDGAR Rules

On September 13, 2023, the SEC proposed rule and form amendments to the EDGAR system dubbing the updates as EDGAR Next.  The rule changes are meant to enhance security and improve access to the EDGAR system.  My view is that will accomplish the former and not the latter. The changes would require EDGAR filers to authorize identified individuals who would be responsible for managing the filers’ EDGAR accounts. Individuals acting on behalf of filers on EDGAR would need individual account credentials to access those EDGAR accounts and make filings. As part of the proposed rule changes, the SEC is making a beta software public for testing and feedback which software would eventually be used by filers if the proposed new rules are implemented.

The proposed rules would amend Rules 10 and 11 of Regulation S-T and amend Form ID.  Only the identified authorized individuals would be able to access a filer’s EDGAR account.  The authorized individual(s) need not be

SEC Publishes Sample Comment Letter Regarding XBRL Disclosure

Back in June, 2018, the SEC adopted the Inline XBRL requirements (see HERE) and since that time almost all new disclosure rules require either XBRL tagging or Inline XBRL.  In December 2022 a new law was passed requiring the SEC to “establish a program to improve the quality of the corporate financial data filed or furnished by issuers under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Securities Act”) and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”),” causing the SEC to focus even more on XBRL use.  As a result, in September 2023, the SEC published a sample letter to companies regarding their XBRL disclosures.

The sample letter consists of six comments, which I have included in full below followed by a short commentary on the point.

  1. Your filing does not include the required Inline XBRL presentation in accordance with Item 405 of Regulation S-T. Please file an amendment to the filing to include the required Inline XBRL presentation.
Read More »

SEC Publishes New C&DI On Pay Versus Performance Rules

For the second time since the adoption of the pay versus performance rules (Pay vs. Performance) in August, 2022 (see HERE), the SEC has published guidance via new compliance and disclosure interpretations (“C&DI”).  The SEC previously published 15 C&DI on the subject in February 2023 – see HERE.

The Pay vs. Performance rules require companies to provide a tabular disclosure of specified executive compensation and financial performance measures for their five most recently completed fiscal years in any proxy or information statement filed under Section 14 of the Exchange Act. With respect to the measures of performance, a company is required to report its total shareholder return (TSR), the TSR of companies in the company’s peer group, its net income, and a financial performance measure chosen by the company itself. Using the information presented in the table, companies are required to describe the relationships between the executive compensation actually paid and each of the performance measures, as well

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

SEC Chair Gary Gensler’s Annual Congressional Testimony

On September 12, 2023, Gary Gensler gave his annual testimony to the United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs and then on September 27th to the United States House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services (for a review of last year’s testimony see HERE).  Both appearances included the same prepared remarks followed by robust Q&A from the lawmakers.

This year Chair Gensler’s prepared remarks focused on: (i) rule amendments and updates; (ii) improving efficiency in equity markets; (iii) disclosure matters and related enforcement including related to cryptocurrency; and (iv) general updates on the SEC and capital markets.

Prepared Remarks

We shouldn’t expect the busy SEC rule making agenda to slow down any time soon.  Chair Gensler prioritizes updating rules for technology, business and market changes.  Although Gensler’s speech focuses on rule changes to make the markets more efficient and resilient and lower costs, the reality is that not all rule changes will accomplish

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

SEC Publishes New Sample Comment Letter To China Based Companies

Continuing its concerns over the quality of disclosures from companies based in or with a majority of their operations in the People’s Republic of China, in July 2023, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance published yet another sample comment letter to China-based companies.

Back in April 2020, former SEC Chairman Jay Clayton and a group of senior SEC and PCAOB officials issued a joint statement warning about the risks of investing in emerging markets, especially China, including companies from those markets that are accessing the U.S. capital markets (see HERE).  Before that, in December 2018, Chair Clayton, SEC Chief Accountant Wes Bricker and PCAOB Chairman William D. Duhnke III issued a similar cautionary statement, also focusing on China (see HERE).

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

NASDAQ Proposes Reverse Split Rule Changes

In July Nasdaq filed a proposed rule change with the SEC to establish listing standards related to notification and disclosure requirements of reverse splits.  As of the writing of this blog, the proposed rule change has received only a single comment, which supported the change.

Background

After the market highs of the second half of 2020 and all of 2021, we have all witnessed the general decline, including noticeably depressed valuations and market price, especially in the small cap space.  In 2022, Nasdaq processed 196 reverse stock splits, compared to 31 in 2021 and 94 in 2020. As of June 23, 2023, Nasdaq has processed 164 reverse stock splits, and projects significantly more throughout 2023. In its rule proposal, Nasdaq notes that the majority of reverse splits are effectuated by smaller companies that do not have broad media or research coverage.  These companies generally trade on the Nasdaq Capital Market tier of the exchange and are completing reverse splits

SEC Publishes New C&DI On Rule 10b5-1

On August 25, 2023, the SEC published five new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) on the recently effective Rule 10b5-1 amendments.  The new rules were adopted on December 14, 2022 (see HERE) to enhance disclosure requirements and investor protections against insider trading.  The amendments include updates to Rule 10b5-1(c)(1), which provides an affirmative defense to insider trading liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. This is the second time the SEC has published guidance on the rules having issued three C&DI in May – see HERE.

The rule amendments updated the conditions to satisfy the 10b5-1 affirmative defense, including adding cooling-off periods before trading can commence under a Rule 10b5-1 plan and a condition that all persons entering into a Rule 10b5-1 plan must act in good faith with respect to the plan. The amendments also require directors and officers to include representations in their plans certifying at the time of the adoption of

SEC Adopts Final New Rules On Cybersecurity Disclosures

On July 26, 2023, the SEC adopted final new rules requiring disclosures for both domestic and foreign companies related to cybersecurity incidents, risk management, strategy and governance.  The proposed rules were published in March 2022 (see HERE).  In response to numerous comments, the final rules made several changes to the proposal, including narrowing the disclosures in both the Form 8-K/6-K and annual reports on Form 10-K and 20-F.

The final rules add new Item 1.05 to Form 8-K requiring disclosure of a material cybersecurity incident including the incident’s nature, scope, timing, and material impact or reasonably likely impact on the company.  An Item 1.05 Form 8-K will be due within four business days following determination that a cybersecurity incident is material. Given the sensitive nature of cybersecurity crimes, the SEC has added a provision allowing an 8-K to be delayed if it is informed by the United States Attorney General, in writing, that immediate disclosure would pose a substantial

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

Regulation FD

In addition to the rules and regulations governing the numerous mandatory disclosure obligations under the federal securities laws, the SEC also has several rules governing a company’s obligations vis-a-vis voluntary disclosures.  I have written several times about the use of non-GAAP financial measures (see HERE and the imbedded links therein), but it has been several years (10!) since I wrote about the rules and regulations that form a part of Regulation Fair Disclosure (“Regulation FD”).

Regulation FD, comprised of Exchange Act Rules 100-103, was first adopted in the year 2000 in response to concerns about selective disclosure to certain market participants, including a practice of having private calls with analysts, institutional shareholders and traders.  Regulation FD requires a company to make public disclosure in advance of an intentional disclosure of material non-public information or immediately following an inadvertent disclosure of such material information.

Regulation FD Rules

Exchange Act Rule 100 mandates that whenever a company or any person acting

Furnish VS. Filed

Over the years I’ve noted that information required pursuant to various disclosure obligations, or new or amended rules, may be “furnished” versus “filed” with the SEC, but I realize in a “let’s get back to basics” moment, I have not yet (until now) provided a detailed explanation of what that means.  In summary, information that is “filed” with the SEC carries Section 18 liability, only “filed” information can be incorporated by reference into other filings, such as an S-3 registration statement, and only “filed” SEC reports affect S-3 eligibility.

Section 18

Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) imposes liability on any person that makes or causes to be made any statement in any application, report or document “filed” pursuant to the Exchange Act or any rule thereunder which statement was at the time and in the light of the circumstances under which it was made false or misleading with

SEC Spring 2023 Regulatory Agenda

On June 13, 2023, the SEC published its semiannual Spring 2023 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) “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 is 55, which is in-line with the average items under Gary Gensler’s regime (and much higher than

SEC Publishes Guidance On Rule 10b5-1 Amendments

On May 25, 2023, the SEC published three new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) on the recently effective Rule 10b5-1 amendments.  The new rules were adopted on December 14, 2022 (see HERE) to enhance disclosure requirements and investor protections against insider trading.  The amendments include updates to Rule 10b5-1(c)(1), which provides an affirmative defense to insider trading liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5.

The changes updated the conditions that must be met for the 10b5-1 affirmative defense, including adding cooling-off periods before trading can commence under a Rule 10b5-1 plan and a condition that all persons entering into a Rule 10b5-1 plan must act in good faith with respect to the plan. The amendments also require directors and officers to include representations in their plans certifying at the time of the adoption of a new or modified Rule 10b5-1 plan that: (i) they are not aware of any material nonpublic information about the issuer

FINRA Approves OTC Markets To Trade Digital Securities

As the SEC continues its onslaught against the crypto industry, including the filing of high-profile actions against Binance, which operates the largest crypto asset trading platform in the world, and Coinbase, a multi-billion-dollar crypto trading platform, FINRA has quietly approved OTC Markets to provide trading services for digital asset securities.

OTC Markets announced the approval in early May but don’t expect any activity in the near future.  Concurrent with announcing the approval, OTC Markets CEO, R. Cromwell Coulson, stated:

We also recently received FINRA approval to permit digital asset securities to be traded by broker-dealers on OTC Link ATS. This approval furthers our mission of operating regulated markets for broker-dealers and issuers of securities. While it will be some time until the regulatory framework and infrastructure develop, we believe our markets are well-positioned to be part of new trading, data, and disclosure solutions for these securities.

OTC Markets is clearly putting itself in a position to

SEC Adopts New Share Repurchase Disclosure Rules

On May 3, 2023, the SEC adopted amendments to Securities Exchange Act Rule 10b-18, which provides issuers and affiliates with a non-exclusive safe harbor from liability for market manipulation under Sections 9(a)(2) and 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) when issuers bid for or repurchase their common stock.  The proposed rules were part of a broader SEC initiative aimed at market manipulation and insider trading, including the recently adopted amendments related to Rule 10b5-1 Insider Trading Plans (see HERE).

Following publishing the proposed rules, on December 7, 2022, the SEC re-opened the comment period for an additional 30 days after publication in the federal register.  The reason for re-opening the comment period was that the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 added a corporate non-deductible excise tax equal to one percent of the fair market value of any stock of the corporation repurchased by such corporation during the taxable year (see

XBRL – Covered Forms

The last time I wrote about XBRL was related to the 2018 adoption of Inline XBRL which is now fully effective for all companies (see HERE).  Although I gave an overview of Inline XBRL, that blog did not cover exactly what SEC forms need to be edgarized using XBRL.   I’ll cover that now.

XBRL Requirements

XBRL requirements currently apply to operating companies that prepare their financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) or in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”).  Operating companies (as opposed to a new initial public offering) are required to submit financial statements and any applicable financial statement schedules in XBRL with certain Exchange Act reports and Securities Act registration statements. The 2018 adoption of inline XBRL allowed companies to embed XBRL data directly into an HTML document, eliminating the need to tag a copy of the information in a separate XBRL exhibit. Inline XBRL is both human-readable and machine-readable

SEC Issues Guidance On New Pay Versus Performance Disclosure Rules

On February 10, 2023, the SEC published 15 new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) related to the pay versus performance (“Pay vs. Performance”) disclosure rules which were, in turn, adopted in August, 2022 (see HERE) after seven years in the process.

The rules require companies to provide a table disclosing specified executive compensation and financial performance measures for their five most recently completed fiscal years in any proxy or information statement filed under Section 14 of the Exchange Act. With respect to the measures of performance, a company will be required to report its total shareholder return (TSR), the TSR of companies in the company’s peer group, its net income, and a financial performance measure chosen by the company itself. Using the information presented in the table, companies will be required to describe the relationships between the executive compensation actually paid and each of the performance measures, as well as the relationship between the company’s TSR and the

SEC To Shorten Settlement Cycle

On February 15, 2023, the SEC adopted final rules shortening the standard settlement cycle from two business days (T+2) to one business day (T+1).  A shorter settlement cycle will reduce the credit, market and liquidity risks in securities transactions.  The SEC previously shorted the standard cycle from three days (T+3) to T+2 in 2017 (see HERE) and at that time, and in speeches and rule making agendas since then, has consistently indicated efforts to move to T+1.

In addition to shortening the standard settlement cycle, the new rules also shorten the standard settlement cycle for firm commitment offerings priced after 4:30 p.m. from four business days (T+4) to T+2.   However, the rules do allow for underwriters and issuers to agree to an alternative settlement date, which is helpful in completing the numerous closing documents and processing steps that occur between the pricing and closing of deals.

The final rules will improve the processing of institutional trades by requiring

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

Changes To FINRA’S Corporate Action Notification Process

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 Issues Additional C&DI On Use Of Non-GAAP Measures

On December 13, 2022, the SEC issued seven new Compliance & Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI) related to the use of non-GAAP financial measures, the first new C&DI on the subject since 2018. Several of the new C&DI update or replace the language of prior existing C&DI.  The C&DI cover revenue recognition, misleading information and GAAP reconciliation, in some cases replacing a principles-based response with a more prescriptive approach.

The SEC permits companies to present non-GAAP financial measures in their public disclosures subject to compliance with Regulation G and Item 10(e) of Regulation S-K.  Regulation G and Item 10(e) require reconciliation to comparable GAAP numbers, the reasons for presenting the non-GAAP numbers, and govern the presentation format itself including requiring equal or greater prominence to the GAAP financial information.

GAAP continues to be and has consistently been criticized by the marketplace in general, with many institutional investors publicly denouncing the usefulness of the accounting standard.  Approximately 90% of companies provide

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

SEC Proposes Revision To The Privacy Act

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

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

Financial Reporting Manual Updated

On January 30, 2023, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance updated its Financial Reporting Manual (“Manual”).  The latest update is dated as of December 31, 2022.  Although we attorneys like to leave the accounting to the accountants, the Financial Reporting Manual is a go to resource for all practitioners and is generally one of the many resources always open on my desktop.

As the preamble to the Manual states, it was originally created as internal guidance to the SEC staff.  In 2008, in an effort to increase transparency of informal staff interpretations, the SEC posted a version of the Manual to its website.  The SEC continues with its usual disclaimers that the manual is not formal guidance and that they can change their interpretations or views at any time, etc.  Regardless, we all use it as a resource and in my years of experience, have never had the SEC take a counter-position to the Manual’s guidance unless there has been

SEC Issues Additional Guidance Through New C&DI On The Use Of Universal Proxy Cards

On November 17, 2021, the SEC adopted final rules requiring parties in a contested election to use universal proxy cards that include all director nominees presented for election at a shareholder meeting (see HERE).  The original rules were proposed on October 16, 2016 (see HERE) with no activity until April, 2021, when the SEC re-opened a comment period (see HERE).

The rule adoption came with a flurry of rule amendments, proposals and guidance related to the proxy process, some of which reverses recent rules on the same subject, including amendments to the rules governing proxy advisory firms (see HERE) and additional proposed amendments to Rule 14a-8 governing shareholder proposals (see HERE).

The final rules require dissident shareholders and registrants to provide shareholders with a proxy card that includes the names of all registrant and dissident nominees. The rules apply to all non-exempt solicitations for contested elections other than those involving registered investment companies and business

The 211 Rules And Shell Companies

In September 2020, the SEC adopted a complete overhaul of the 15c2-11 rules, the new rules of which went into effect on September 28, 2021.  From a very high level, the new 211 rules: (i) require that information about the company and the security be current and publicly available in order to initiate or continue to quote a security; (ii) limit certain exceptions to the rule including the piggyback exception where a company’s information becomes unavailable to the public or is no longer current; (iii) limit certain exceptions to the rule including the piggyback exception where a company becomes and remains a shell company for a period of 18 months; (iv) reduce regulatory burdens to quote securities that may be less susceptible to potential fraud and manipulation; (v) allow OTC Markets itself to evaluate and confirm eligibility to rely on the rule; and (vi) streamline the rule and eliminate obsolete provisions.  For an in-depth discussion on the 15c2-11 rules,

SEC Reopens The Comment Period On Proposed New Share Repurchase Disclosure Rules

On December 15, 2021, the SEC proposed amendments to Securities Exchange Act Rule 10b-18, which provides issuers and affiliates with a non-exclusive safe harbor from liability for market manipulation under Sections 9(a)(2) and 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“Exchange Act”) when issuers bid for or repurchase their common stock.  The proposed amendments are intended to improve the quality, relevance, and timeliness of information related to issuer share repurchases.

The proposed new rules were part of a broader SEC initiative aimed at market manipulation and insider trading, including the recently adopted amendments related to Rule 10b5-1 Insider Trading Plans (see HERE).

On December 7, 2022, the SEC re-opened the comment period on the proposed new rules for an additional 30 days after publication in the federal register.  The reason for re-opening the comment period is that the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 added a corporate non-deductible excise tax equal to one

M&A Broker Dealer Registration

On December 29, 2022, President Biden signed H.R. 2617, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (“Appropriations Act”) into law.  As sometimes happens in these voluminous bills, a nugget affecting our industry is buried.  After about 2,600 pages of text we get to Title V – Small Business Mergers, Acquisitions, Sales and Brokerage Simplification.  This short provision codifies into law the broker-dealer registration requirements for entities effecting securities transactions in connection with the sale of equity control in private operating businesses (“M&A Broker”).  Previously the industry has been relying on a no-action letter issued by the SEC Division of Trading and Markets on January 31, 2014, for liability protection involving these transactions (see HERE).

Background

Section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) requires securities brokers to register with the SEC and Section 15(b) prescribes the manner of registration. Section 3(a)(4) of the Exchange Act defines a “broker” as “any person engaged in the business

SEC Adopts Amendments To Rule 10b5-1 Insider Trading Plans

On December 14, 2022, the SEC adopted amendments to Rule 10b5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to enhance disclosure requirements and investor protections against insider trading.  The amendments include updates to Rule 10b5-1(c)(1), which provides an affirmative defense to insider trading liability under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5. The proposed rules were published in HERE.  Although there is a statutory framework, the laws surrounding insider trading are largely based on judicial precedence and are difficult to navigate.  The rule amendments are intended to provide clarity to the marketplace.

Since the adoption of Rule 10b5-1, courts, commentators, and members of Congress have expressed concern that the affirmative defense under Rule 10b5-1(c)(1)(i) has allowed traders to take advantage of the liability protections provided by the rule to opportunistically trade securities on the basis of material nonpublic information. Furthermore, some academic studies of Rule 10b5-1 trading arrangements have shown that corporate insiders trading pursuant to

2022 Annual Report Of The Office Of The Advocate For Small Business Capital Formation

The Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation (“Office”) has published its Annual Report for fiscal year 2022 (“Report”).  The Report is delivered to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the U.S. Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the U.S. House of Representatives directly by the Office, without review or input from the SEC at large.

Background

The SEC’s Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation launched in January 2019 after being created by Congress pursuant to the Small Business Advocate Act of 2016 (see HERE).  The mission of the Office is to advocate for pragmatic solutions to accessing capital markets and business growth.

The Office has the following functions: (i) assist small businesses (privately held or public with a market cap of less than $250 million) and their investors in resolving problems with the SEC or self-regulatory organizations; (ii) identify and propose regulatory changes that would benefit small businesses

Human Capital Disclosures

In August 2020, the SEC adopted final amendments to Item 101 of Regulation S-K including adding a requirement for disclosures related to “human capital” (see HERE).  The new rule applies to Form 10-Ks and registration statements filed after November 8, 2020.  This blog will not only discuss how companies are navigating their human capital disclosures, but also the push to add more prescriptive disclosure requirements to the rules, which the SEC is considering.  Amendments to the rule are currently included on the SEC’s regulatory agenda although as of now, the SEC has not published a proposal.

Drill Down on Human Capital Disclosure

Item 101(c)(2) of Regulation S-K now requires that a company discuss, in its Form 10-K and in registration statements, the following information to the extent material to an understanding of the business: “[A] description of the registrant’s human capital resources, including the number of persons employed by the registrant, and any human capital measures or objectives that

Proposed Rules On Cybersecurity Disclosure

Earlier this year, the SEC published proposed rules on cybersecurity risk management, strategy, governance and incident disclosure by public companies.  Although the comment period has passed, a final rule has not yet been issued.  As of now, cybersecurity disclosures are encompassed within the general anti-fraud provisions including the requirement to disclose “such further material information, if any, as may be necessary to make the required statements, in light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading” as well SEC guidance last updated in 2018 (see HERE).

The proposed amendments would require, among other things, current reporting about material cybersecurity incidents and updates about previously reported cybersecurity incidents. The proposal also would require periodic reporting about a company’s policies and procedures to identify and manage cybersecurity risks; the company’s board of directors’ oversight of cybersecurity risk; and management’s role and expertise in assessing and managing cybersecurity risk and implementing cybersecurity policies and procedures. The proposal would further

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

Termination Of Registration Under Section 12 Of The Exchange Act

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

SEC Adopts Final Executive Compensation Clawback Rules

One year after reopening the comment period, and seven years after first publishing 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”).  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 final rules require a listed issuer to file the policy as an exhibit to its annual report and to include disclosures related to its recovery policy and recovery analysis where a recovery is triggered. New Exchange Act Rule 10D-1 directs national securities exchanges and associations to establish listing standards that require a listed company to: (i) adopt

SEC Proposed Changes To The Definition Of A “Dealer”

Following a continuous stream of litigation against small-cap and penny stock convertible debt lenders, the SEC has proposed some statutory changes to the definition of a “dealer” under the Exchange Act.  The SEC’s enforcement attack on convertible debt lenders began in 2017 and has been decried by industry participants as regulation by enforcement which, unfortunately, is not resulting in judicial orders or settlements offering clear guidance (see HERE).  Also, unfortunately, the proposed new rules, which were published in March 2022 and are likely to reach final rule stage this year, still do not help small-cap investors navigate the regulatory highway.

The rule is intended to require certain proprietary or principal traders and liquidity providers to register as either a dealer or government securities dealer as applicable.  The proposed rules would amend Exchange Act Rules 5a5-4 and 3a44-2 to enhance the definition of “as part of a regular business” in Sections 3(a)(5) and 3(a)(44) of the Exchange Act.

Proposed Rules

The SEC Drafts Strategic Plan For Fiscal Years 2022-2026

On August 24, 2022, the SEC released its draft strategic plan for the fiscal years 2022 to 2026 and sought public comment on same.  The three primary goals set forth in the plan include: (i) protecting working families against fraud, manipulation, and misconduct; (ii) developing and implementing a robust regulatory framework that keeps pace with evolving markets, business models, and technologies; and (iii) supporting a skilled workforce that is diverse, equitable, inclusive, and is fully equipped to advance agency objectives.

To achieve these goals, the SEC intends to use of market and industry data to prevent, detect, and prosecute improper behavior.  The SEC also seeks to modernize design, delivery, and content of disclosures to investors so they can access consistent, comparable, and material information while making investment decisions.

These statements are very broad, but even at face value, the different focus of the SEC as compared to the last plan published in 2018 is clear.  In 2018 the three primary

SEC Adopts Pay Versus Performance Disclosure Rules

Following seven years of “will they or won’t they,” on August 25, 2022, the SEC adopted final rules requiring information reflecting the relationship between executive compensation actually paid by a company and the company’s financial performance (“Pay vs. Performance”).  The rules were initially proposed in April 2015, and then languished for years (see HERE). On January 27, 2022, the SEC re-opened the comment period and expanded the proposal to include additional performance metrics (see HERE).

The SEC administration under Gary Gensler has been actively tackling compensation and insider trading related issues, including re-visiting executive compensation clawback rules (see HERE); publishing new guidance on disclosures and accounting for spring-loaded compensation awards (see HERE); proposing amendments to Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans (see HERE); and proposing new share repurchase program disclosure rules (see HERE).

The amendments require companies to provide a table disclosing specified executive compensation and financial performance measures for their five most recently completed

SEC Issues C&DI On The Use Of Proxy Cards

Days before the universal proxy compliance deadline, the SEC issued 3 new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DI) addressing issues raised by the new rules.

BACKGROUND

On November 17, 2021, the SEC adopted final rules requiring parties in a contested election to use universal proxy cards that include all director nominees presented for election at a shareholder meeting (see HERE).  The original rules were proposed on October 16, 2016 (see HERE) with no activity until April, 2021, when the SEC re-opened a comment period (see HERE).

The rule adoption came with a flurry of rule amendments, proposals and guidance related to the proxy process, some of which reverses recent rules on the same subject, including amendments to the rules governing proxy advisory firms (see HERE) and additional proposed amendments to Rule 14a-8 governing shareholder proposals (see HERE).

The final rules require dissident shareholders and registrants to provide shareholders with a proxy card that includes the

SEC Chair Gary Gensler Testifies To Senate Banking Committee

On September 15, 2022, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler gave his yearly testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs highlighting his priorities for the SEC.  This year Mr. Gensler kept his testimony extremely short, allowing more time for questions and answers.

Last year, Chair Gensler gave lengthy testimony on his four key priorities: (i) market structure; (ii) predictive data analytics; (iii) issuers and issuer disclosure (including SPACs); and (iv) funds and investment management (see HERE).

This year Gensler again focused on market structure as a priority, noting that many aspects of the national market system rules have not been updated since 2005.  Though not using the same topic subtitles as last year, SPACs, insider trading and investment funds remain top of list, as does crypto.  Other priorities include shorting the settlement cycle to T+1, increasing central clearing in the treasury markets (rules were recently proposed), cybersecurity, and private funds.

Repeating his mantra, Chair

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

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

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 and published a sample

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

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 and published a sample

2022 Delaware Corporate Law (DGCL) Amendments

Each year the Delaware legislature passes several amendments to the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL) which impact public and private companies incorporated in Delaware, and elsewhere, as many states follow the DGCL. Effective August 1, 2022, the DGCL has been amended to: (i) add certain exculpation provisions in favor of senior officers; (ii) reduce the voting rights necessary to convert a corporation to another type of business entity; (iii) require a dissolution filing upon expiration of a corporate existence; (iv) update signature affirmations; (v) eliminate the requirement to make a stockholder list available during a stockholder meeting; (vi) clarify the method of notice for a stockholder meeting; (vii) increase insurance protections; (viii) update three important provisions related to stockholder appraisal rights; (ix) provide technical updates to the requirements for equity issuances; (x) broaden the ability to complete advance stockholder consents; (xi) improve the method of effectuating a domestication; and (xii) clarify annual franchise tax reports.

Stockholder Appraisal Rights

Appraisal

SEC Adopts Amendments To Rules Governing Proxy Advisory Firms

On July 13, 2022, the SEC adopted amendments to the rules governing proxy voting advice, in essence undoing material provisions in the new rules that had been adopted in July 2020.  The newest rules were proposed in November 2021 but had effectively been in place since June 2021 when SEC Chair Gary Gensler issued a statement making it clear that the SEC would not be enforcing the 2020 amendments to certain rules governing proxy advisory firms or the SEC guidance on those new rules.

The final rules rescind two of the rules adopted in 2020 and specifically, the conditions to the availability of two exemptions from the proxy rules’ information and filing requirements on which proxy voting advice businesses may rely. Those conditions require that: (i) companies that are the subject of proxy voting advice have such advice made available to them in a timely manner; and (ii) clients of proxy voting advice businesses are provided with a means of

SEC Proposes Amendments To The Shareholder Proposal Submission Process

On July 13, 2022, the SEC proposed amendments to Rule 14a-8 governing the process for including shareholder proposals in a company’s proxy statement.  The proposed amendment would narrow three of the provisions that a company can rely upon to exclude a shareholder proposal from its proxy statement including: (i) substantial implementation – i.e., the elements of the proposal have already been substantially implemented; (ii) duplication – the proposal substantially duplicates another proposal already submitted for the same meeting; and (iii) resubmission – the proposal substantially duplicates another proposal previously submitted for the same company’s prior shareholder meetings.

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 may dictate that shareholders have the right to elect directors, the minimum and maximum time allowed for notice of shareholder 

Report Of Government-Business Forum On Small Business Capital Formation

On July 28, 2022, the SEC released its report from the 41st Annual Government-Business Forum on Small Business Capital Formation.  The report provides a summary of the forum proceedings, including the recommendations developed by participants for changes needed to the capital raising framework and the SEC’s responses to the recommendations.  The forum featured panelists and discussions on (i) empowering entrepreneurs with tools to navigate capital raising; (ii) hometown entrepreneurship, including how entrepreneurs can thrive outside of traditional capital raising hubs; (iii) how emerging fund managers are diversifying capital; and (iv) what to know and how to think ahead in the small cap world.  The forum had a focus on diversity, including panel speakers and discussion topics.  A clear message across the board is that women- and minority-owned businesses face the biggest challenges in the capital markets.

Background

The SEC’s Office of the Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation launched in January 2019 after being created by Congress pursuant

SEC Proposes Amendments To Beneficial Ownership Reporting Rules

On February 10, 2022, the SEC announced proposed rule amendments governing beneficial ownership reporting under Exchange Act Sections 13(d) and 13(g).  The proposed amendments would accelerate the filing deadlines for Schedules 13D beneficial ownership reports from 10 days to 5 calendar days and require that amendments be filed within one business day; generally accelerate the filing deadlines for Schedule 13G beneficial ownership reports (which differ based on the type of filer); extend the filing deadline to 10:00 p.m. EST; expand the application of Regulation 13D-G to certain derivative securities; clarify the circumstances under which two or more persons have formed a “group” that would be subject to beneficial ownership reporting obligations; provide new exemptions to permit certain persons to communicate and consult with one another, jointly engage issuers, and execute certain transactions without being subject to regulation as a “group;” and require that Schedules 13D and 13G be filed using XBRL.

Final rules have yet to be published, but the

Russia-Ukraine Disclosures And Supply Chain Issues

Supply chain issues continue to plague just about every industry and the continuing attack by Russia against the Ukraine, gives little hope of a respite in the near future.  The recent easing of congestion at the handful of U.S. ports big enough to accommodate container ships is likely more a result of inflation and a summer slowdown than effective logistical management.  Amid the ongoing difficulties, the SEC has published a sample letter to companies regarding disclosures pertaining to Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine and related supply chain issues.

SEC Sample Comment Letter

The SEC is of the view that companies should provide detailed disclosure, to the extent material or if required by a prescriptive rule, regarding: (i) direct or indirect exposure to Russia, Belarus, or Ukraine through their operations, employee base, investments in Russia, Belarus, or Ukraine, securities traded in Russia, sanctions against Russian or Belarusian individuals or entities, or legal or regulatory uncertainty associated with operating in or exiting

Form 144 Must Now Be Filed Electronically

On June 3, 2022, the SEC adopted amendments to the EDGAR filing rules, including requiring the electronic filing of Form 144.  This is not something that I would normally blog about; however, as the change will directly impact securities counsel, it is worth a short explanation.  Also, since the original amendment to require the electronic filing of Form 144 was part of a proposed Rule 144 amendment that would have eliminated tacking in calculating the holding period for variable rate convertible instruments, it is definitely newsworthy.

Form 144

Rule 144 requires the filing of a Form 144 – Notice of Proposed Sale – by affiliates when the amount to be sold under Rule 144 by the affiliate during any three-month period exceeds 5,000 shares or units or has an aggregate sales price in excess of $50,000.  A person filing a Form 144 must have a bona fide intention to sell the securities referred to in the form within a

The SEC Is Seeking An 8% Budget Increase

On May 17, 2022, SEC Chair Gary Gensler gave testimony before the Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government U.S. House Appropriations Committee asking for an 8% budget increase for the SEC and outlining his priorities.  Although Chair Gensler expressed a desire to update rules for modern markets and technologies, his main focus is to “ensure that the SEC is adequately resourced so we can remain the cop on the beat.”  As the cyclical nature of the SEC continues, it seems we are moving back towards the era of “broken windows” shepherded in by former Chair Mary Jo White in 2013 and ended in 2017 by former Chair Jay Clayton.

Reminding us of the reach of our capital markets, Gensler points out that the SEC oversees 24 national securities exchanges, 99 alternative trading systems, nine credit rating agencies, seven active registered clearing agencies, five self-regulatory organizations and other external entities. They look after the accounting and auditing functions of

The SEC’S Spring 2022 Flex Regulatory Agenda

On June 22, 2022, the SEC published its semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking.  The Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions contains the Regulatory Plans of 28 federal agencies and 68 federal agency regulatory agendas.  As expected, the Spring 2022 Agenda (“Agenda”) met with criticism from Commissioner Hester M. Peirce.  Commissioner Peirce rips the newest Agenda as being disconnected with the SEC’s core mission and as being focused on special interest groups instead of a broad range of market participants.  I’ll include her comments throughout this blog.  The Agenda is published twice a year, and for several years I have blogged about each publication.

The 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

SEC Proposes New Rules For SPACs – Part 6

On March 30, 2022, the SEC proposed rules related to SPAC and de-SPAC transactions including significantly enhanced disclosure obligations including related to financial projections, making a target company a co-registrant when a SPAC files an S-4 or F-4 registration statement associated with a business combination, and aligning de-SPAC transactions with initial public offering rules.  In addition, the SEC has also proposed rules that would deem any business combination transaction involving a reporting shell company, including but not limited to a SPAC, to involve a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders.  The new rules would amend a number of financial statement requirements applicable to transactions involving shell companies.

In addition, the SEC has proposed a new safe harbor under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (‘40 Act’) that would provide that a SPAC that satisfies the conditions of the proposed rule would not be an investment company and therefore would not be subject to regulation under the

SEC Proposes New Rules For SPACs – Part 5

On March 30, 2022, the SEC proposed rules related to SPAC and de-SPAC transactions including significantly enhanced disclosure obligations, expanding the scope of deemed public offerings in these transactions, making a target company a co-registrant when a SPAC files an S-4 or F-4 registration statement associated with a business combination, and aligning de-SPAC transactions with initial public offering rules.  In addition, the SEC has also proposed rules that would deem any business combination transaction involving a reporting shell company, including but not limited to a SPAC, to involve a sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s shareholders.  The new rules would amend a number of financial statement requirements applicable to transactions involving shell companies.

In addition to proposing new rules for SPAC and de-SPAC transactions, the SEC is proposing new Securities Act Rule 145a that would deem all business combinations with an Exchange Act reporting shell to involve the sale of securities to the reporting shell company’s

SEC Proposes New Rules for SPACs- Part 4

On March 30, 2022, the SEC proposed rules enhancing disclosure requirements associated with SPAC initial public offerings (IPOs) and de-SPAC merger transactions; requiring that a private operating company be a co-registrant when a SPAC files an S-4 or F-4 registration statement associated with a business combination; requiring a re-determination of smaller reporting company status within four days following the consummation of a de-SPAC transaction; amending the definition of a “blank check company” to make the liability safe harbor in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 for forward-looking statement such as projections, unavailable in filings by SPACs and other blank check companies; and deeming underwriters in a SPAC IPO to be underwriters in a de-SPAC transaction when certain conditions are met.

The proposed rules would require specialized disclosure with respect to compensation paid to sponsors, conflicts of interest, dilution and the fairness of business combination transactions.  Further disclosures will also be required in connection with the use of projections. 

SEC Proposes New Rules for SPACs- Part 3

On March 30, 2022, the SEC proposed rules enhancing disclosure requirements associated with SPAC initial public offerings (IPOs) and de-SPAC merger transactions; requiring that a private operating company be a co-registrant when a SPAC files an S-4 or F-4 registration statement associated with a business combination; requiring a re-determination of smaller reporting company status within four days following the consummation of a de-SPAC transaction; amending the definition of a “blank check company” to make the liability safe harbor in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 for forward-looking statement such as projections, unavailable in filings by SPACs and other blank check companies; and deeming underwriters in a SPAC IPO to be underwriters in a de-SPAC transaction when certain conditions are met.

The proposed rules would require specialized disclosure with respect to compensation paid to sponsors, conflicts of interest, dilution and the fairness of business combination transactions.  Further disclosures will also be required in connection with the use of

SEC Proposes New SPAC Rules – Part 2

On March 30, 2022, the SEC proposed rules enhancing disclosure requirements associated with SPAC initial public offerings (IPOs) and de-SPAC merger transactions; requiring that a private operating company be a co-registrant when a SPAC files an S-4 or F-4 registration statement associated with a business combination; requiring a re-determination of smaller reporting company status within four days following the consummation of a de-SPAC transaction; amending the definition of a “blank check company” to make the liability safe harbor in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 for forward-looking statement such as projections, unavailable in filings by SPACs and other blank check companies; and deeming underwriters in a SPAC IPO to be underwriters in a de-SPAC transaction when certain conditions are met.

The proposed rules would require specialized disclosure with respect to compensation paid to sponsors, conflicts of interest, dilution and the fairness of business combination transactions.  Further disclosures will also be required in connection with the use of projections. 

SEC Proposes New SPAC Rules – Part 1

As I wrote about last week, the SEC has had a very busy rule-making few weeks.  In addition to issuing six new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DI) for merger and acquisition transactions, most of which directly impact SPAC business organization transactions, it also proposed new rules on SPACs and all shell companies in a 372-page release. The new C&DI were the topic of last week’s blog (HERE) and in a multi-part blog series, I am delving into the proposed new SPAC rules.

On March 30, 2022, the SEC proposed rules enhancing disclosure requirements associated with SPAC initial public offerings (IPOs) and de-SPAC merger transactions; requiring that a private operating company be a co-registrant when a SPAC files an S-4 or F-4 registration statement associated with a business combination; requiring a re-determination of smaller reporting company status within four days following the consummation of a de-SPAC transaction; amending the definition of a “blank check company” to make the

SEC Issues New Mergers And Acquisitions Related C&DI

Last week was a very busy regulatory week for the SEC, including issuing six new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DI) for merger and acquisition transactions, most of which directly impact SPAC business organization transactions; proposed rules on SPACs’ shell companies and the use of financial projections; proposed rules to modify the definition of “dealer” for purposes of broker-dealer registration requirements; and a new accounting bulletin impacting the accounting treatment of cryptocurrencies by exchanges.  This blog will discuss the new C&DI.

Background

The rules related to disclosure obligations, including in Forms 8-K, S-4 registration statements and proxy materials, and the filing of exhibits associated with a material contract, including merger agreements, have evolved over the past few years (see here related to confidential treatment of material contracts – HERE).  In March 2021, the SEC issued a statement discussing certain legal specifics associated with a SPAC, including expressing concerns regarding disclosures associated with a de-SPAC transaction (i.e., a business

Regulation By Enforcement

The SEC is well known for, and often criticized for, its practice of regulation by enforcement.  In recent years the SEC has been more willing to regulate by enforcement, propounding novel and new interpretations to longstanding rules and regulations.  Market participants have taken notice, and offense.  Advocacy groups have been very vocal against the practice including the Financial Services Institute and Small Public Company Coalition (SPCC).

Although not limited to matters involving cryptocurrencies, blockchain and all things Web3, is the area that garners the most attention for the SEC’s enforcement-based guidance, probably because it is undeniably the topic that is in the most need of actual rule-based regulation.  Starting with the SEC’s 2017 Section 21(a) Report stemming from the enforcement action against the DAO, Slock.it (see HERE), almost all substantive regulatory prescription related to the world of crypto has come from enforcement actions.

Rather than heed the calls for rules and regulations over the years, the SEC has

The BSTX

On January 27, 2022, the SEC approved the country’s 17th stock exchange, the first one of which will utilize blockchain technology.  The new BSTX is a subsidiary of the Boston BOX Exchange and is a joint venture with tZero, which is providing the blockchain technology.  The BSTX is expected to begin operations sometime after June 2022 and will initially only trade securities that first list directly on the BSTX.  Once listed on the BSTX, a security can dual trade on other exchanges.

To begin, the BSTX will trade traditional securities but intends to move into tokenized securities and intends to brand itself with the look and feel of a digital asset exchange as opposed to the more traditional Nasdaq look.  In December 2020, the SEC rejected the Exchange’s original plan to exclusively trade tokenized securities.  The BOX then filed new proposed rules in May 2021 which, after 3 amendments, were approved by the SEC on January 27th.

Non-Fungible Tokens

This one has been on my list for a while and I’m finally ready to dive in – non-fungible tokens (NFTs).  In July 2017, the world of digital assets and cryptocurrency literally became an overnight business sector for corporate and securities lawyers, shifting from the pure technology sector, when the SEC issued its Section 21(a) Report on the DAO investigation finding that a cryptocurrency is, in most cases, a security HERE.  The SEC’s Section 21(a) Report relied on the analysis in SEC v. W.J. Howey Co. to determine when a crypto is a security, building the guardrails to conclude that all, or almost all, cryptocurrencies at that time were/are indeed a security.  For more on the Howey analysis, see HERE.

Later in June 2018, the SEC gave some relief to the crypto world by announcing that Bitcoin and Ether were likely decentralized enough as to no longer be considered a security, hedging on the conclusion as

Disclosure Considerations Related To The Conflict In The Ukraine

In addition to being a tragedy, the Russian attack on the Ukraine has disrupted businesses around the world, caused a spike in oil prices and raised disclosure issues for public companies as we are firmly in 10-K and proxy season..  In addition to the obvious disruption of business in both the Ukraine and Russia, the U.S. and many other European countries have imposed significant sanctions against Russia that may also impact companies and U.S. capital market participants.  No fewer than three of my clients have been directly affected by the conflict from the extreme of having to close an entire division to the less impactful certain non-collectability of receivables.

Disclosure requirements will depend upon the specific facts and circumstances of a particular company, but key areas that may need attention are risk factors, description of business and management’s discussion and analysis (MD&A).

Risk Factors

In August 2020, the SEC adopted final amendments to Item 105 – Risk Factors

SEC Proposes Rules Related To Securities Lending Market

In November 2021, the SEC proposed new Exchange Act Rule 10c-1, which would require lenders of securities to provide the material terms of securities lending transactions to a registered national securities association (RNSA), such as FINRA.  FINRA would then make the information publicly available.  The proposed rules are part of an initiative by the SEC and FINRA to increase public access to information on short positions and borrowing related to short positions.

Although the rule would definitely provide an improved level of transparency to market participants regarding short positions, it will also add a significant compliance burden to broker dealers and clearing agencies.

Consistent with recent SEC proposals, the comment period was only open for 30 days following publication in the federal registrar and as such comments closed January 7, 2022.

Background

Securities lending is the market practice by which securities are transferred temporarily from one party, a securities lender, to another, a securities borrower, for a fee.  Most

SEC ReOpens Comment Period For Pay Versus Performance

On January 27, 2022, the SEC re-opened the comment period on proposed rules under the Dodd-Frank Act requiring disclosure of information reflecting the relationship between executive compensation actually paid by a company and the company’s financial performance (“Pay vs. Performance”).  The rules were previously proposed in April 2015, and have languished since then (see HERE).  In addition to re-opening the comment period on the 2015 proposed rules, the SEC has expanded the proposal to include additional performance metrics.

The SEC administration under Gary Gensler has been actively tacking compensation and insider trading related issues recently including re-visiting executive compensation clawback rules (see HERE); publishing new guidance on disclosures and accounting for spring-loaded compensation awards (see HERE); proposing amendments to Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans (see HERE); and proposing new share repurchase program disclosure rules (see HERE).

Background

Section 953(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act added Section 14(i) to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

SEC Fall 2021 Regulatory Agenda

In mid-December, the SEC published its semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking.  The Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions contains the Regulatory Plans of 28 federal agencies and 68 federal agency regulatory agendas. The Fall 2021 Agenda (“Agenda”) met with criticism from Commissioner Hester M. Peirce and now former Commissioner Elad L. Roisman as failing to provide any items intended to facilitate capital formation – one of the main tenets of the SEC.  The Agenda is published twice a year, and for several years I have blogged about each publication.

The 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 jumped up to 52 items since Spring, which had only 45

Categories

Contact Author

Laura Anthony Esq

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?