(800) 341-2684

Call Toll Free

Contact us

Online Inquiries 24/7

Laura Anthony Esq

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

Securities Law

Concurrent Public and Private Offerings

Background

Conducting concurrent private and public offerings has historically been very tricky and limited, mainly as a result of the SEC’s position that the filing of an S-1 registration statement and unlimited ability to view such registration statement on the SEC EDGAR database in and of itself acted as a general solicitation and advertisement negating the availability of most private placement exemptions.  In addition to the impediment of finding a private exemption to rely on, concurrent private and public offerings raised concerns of gun jumping by offering securities for sale prior to the filing of a registration statement, as prohibited by Section 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.  However, with the enactment of the JOBS Act including its Rule 506(c) allowing general solicitation and advertising in an exempt offering, rules allowing the confidential submittal of registration statements for emerging growth companies (EGC) and rules permitting testing the waters communications prior to and after the filing of a

OTC Markets has Modified its OTCQB Eligibility Criteria Effective May 1, 2014

 OTC Markets has unveiled changes to be quoted on the OTCQB, which changes become effective May 1, 2014.  The OTC Markets changes are designed to attract venture investors to provide more information to investors and to improve such information with Real-Time Level 2 quotes.  The OTC Markets press and informational releases related to the change concentrate on the push to create a successful venture-stage marketplace by removing underperforming companies.

Background

The www.otcmarkets.com divides issuers into three (3) levels: OTCQX, OTCQB and OTC Pink.

Issuers on the OTCQX must be fully reporting and current in their reporting obligations with the SEC and also undergo a quality review by industry professionals.  Issuers on the OTCQB must be fully reporting and current in their reporting

Understanding Section 3(a)(9) Exchanges and Conversions as Related to Convertible Promissory Notes

As an attorney specializing in the representation of companies and investment funds in the micro, small and mid cap arena, we work on corporate financing transactions involving convertible debt almost daily.  These transactions provide a tremendous amount of benefit to these small cap companies, in that they obtain cash today that will be repaid with common stock tomorrow.  Financing using convertible instruments that are repaid with stock is one of the many reasons an entity may choose to go public.  However, the financing comes at a price including both dilution to existing stockholders and likely a reduced stock price resulting from the selling pressure when the debt is converted.  Of course, all financing has pros and cons and public entities need to consider

The SEC Establishes Key Exemption to the Broker-Dealer Registration Requirements for M&A Brokers

On January 31, 2014, the SEC Division of Trading and Markets issued a no-action letter in favor of entities effecting securities transactions in connection with the sale of equity control of private operating businesses (“M&A Broker”).  The SEC stated that it would not require broker-dealer registration for M&A Brokers arranging for the sale of private businesses, in accordance with the facts and circumstances set forth in the no action letter, as described below.

For many years the SEC has maintained a staunch view that any and all activities that could fall within the broker-dealer registration requirements set forth in Section 15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), require registration. See also the SEC Guide to Broker-Dealer Registration (2008) on the SEC website.

In accordance with the SEC Guide to Broker-Dealer Registration, providing any of the following services may require the individual or entity to be registered as a broker-dealer:

  • “finders,” “business brokers,” and
Read More »

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

Introduction

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

Beginning in 2009, the small-cap and reverse merger, initial public offering (IPO) and direct public offering (DPO) markets diminished greatly.  I can identify at least seven main reasons for the downfall of the going public transactions.  Briefly, those reasons are:  (1) the general state of the economy, plainly stated, was not good; (2) backlash from a series of fraud allegations, SEC enforcement actions, and trading suspensions of Chinese companies following reverse mergers; (3) the 2008 Rule 144 amendments including the prohibition of use of the rule for shell company and former shell company shareholders; (4) problems clearing penny stock with broker dealers and FINRA’s enforcement of broker-dealer and clearing house due diligence requirements related to penny stocks; (5) DTC scrutiny and difficulty in obtaining clearance following

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

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

Background

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

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

The SEC has Issued Proposed Rules Amending Regulation D, Form D and Rule 156 – Part I

On July 10, 2013, the same day the SEC adopted final rules eliminating the prohibition against general solicitation and advertising in Rules 506 and 144A offerings as required by Title II of the JOBS Act, and adopted new rules disqualifying felons and other bad actors from participating in Rule 506 offerings as required by Section 926 of the Dodd-Frank Act, the SEC issued proposed rules further amending Regulation D, Form D and Rule 156. 

Summary of Proposed Rule Changes

The proposed amendments will (i) require

SEC Issued Risk Alert on Options Trading Used to Evade Short Sale Requirements

On Friday August 9, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued a Risk Alert to help market participants detect and prevent options trading that circumvents an SEC short sale rule.

The SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) issued the alert after its examiners observed options trading strategies that appeared to evade certain requirements of the short-sale rule.  The alert describes and warns of the strategies used by some customers, broker-dealers and clearing firms, summarizes related enforcement actions, and makes suggestions regarding practices found to be effective in detecting and preventing trading intended to evade Regulation SHO.

Regulation SHO tightened requirements for short sales, which involve the selling of securities not already owned, usually by the borrowing of securities. Short sellers

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

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

Background

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

14C Information Statement Requirements for a Pre-Merger Recapitalization

Background on 14C Information Statements

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

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

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

SEC Announces it Will Seek an Admission of Fault to Settle Certain Cases

On June 18, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced a policy change related to its settlement of certain civil matters.  In particular, the SEC has stated that it will now require that the settling party admit wrongdoing as part of a settlement.  Previously the standard language for all settlements has been that the defendants “neither admit nor deny wrongdoing.”  Defendants, of course, cannot be required to make such an admission or settle a case, but the alternative is fighting it out in court, an expensive and risky process.

The change in policy began with a related change in which the SEC changed its policy to require admissions of wrongdoing to settle cases where the defendant had already admitted such wrongdoing in related criminal cases.  Mary Jo White has now announced that, even in cases where there is no parallel criminal case, the SEC will now require individuals and companies to admit liability in “cases where… it’s very important to

SEC Guidance On Social Media And Websites For Company Announcements And Communications- Part I

On April 2, 2013, the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued a report confirming that companies can use social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, to make company announcements in compliance with Regulation Fair Disclosure (Regulation FD) as long as investors are alerted as to which social media outlet is being used by the company.  The report was issued following an investigation into a Facebook posting made by Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix.  In the report the SEC stated that previously published guidance on the use of Company websites was applicable to the use of social media.  Accordingly, a review of the SEC guidance on the use of company websites is in order.

Background

Regulation FD requires that companies take steps to ensure that material information is disclosed to the general public in a fair and fully accessible manner such that the public as a whole has simultaneous access to the information.  Regulation FD is designed to ensure that

Structuring The Private Placement Or Venture Investment- Pre-Deal Considerations

I recently blogged about how to determine valuation in a start-up or development stage entity for purposes of structuring a prepackaged private placement, or for negotiating the venture capital transaction. I followed that blog with one explaining the various types of financial instruments that can be used for an investment.

Before a company can package a private placement offering or effectively negotiate with a venture or angel investor, it has to have its proverbial house in order. This blog circles back to the beginning discussing pre-deal considerations.

General

In order to successfully attract quality investors, a company must have its financial and legal house in order. I always advise my clients to act as if they are public, even if they never intend to go public. What is meant by that is to maintain proper corporate books and records. Draft and sign minutes of meetings of the board of directors, officers or committees. Keep systems in place to make

MARY JO WHITE HAS BEEN SWORN IN AS THE NEW CHAIR OF THE SEC

On April 10, 2013 Mary Jo White was sworn in as chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).  Ms. White was nominated by President Obama on February 7, 2008 and was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on April 8, 2013.

Chairman White is the first former prosecutor to lead the SEC.  Chairman White served as the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York from 1993 to 2002 where she specialized in prosecuting complex securities and financial institution frauds and international terrorism cases.  She is the only woman to ever have held that position.

As set forth on the SEC website, ” Prior to becoming the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Chairman White served as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney and later Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York from 1990 to 1993. She previously served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York from 1978

SEC Clears Social Media As An Acceptable Form For Company Announcements

On April 2, 2013, the Securities Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued a report confirming that companies can use social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, to make company announcements in compliance with Regulation Fair Disclosure (Regulation FD) as long as investors are alerted as to which social media outlet is being used by the company.  The report was issued following an investigation into a Facebook posting made by Reed Hastings, CEO of Netflix.  The SEC declined to pursue an enforcement action against Mr. Hastings.

Regulation FD requires that companies take steps to ensure that material information is disclosed to the general public in a fair and fully accessible manner such that the public as a whole has simultaneous access to the information.  Regulation FD is designed to ensure that all investors are on an even playing field in terms of access to material information.  Regulation FD ended the era of invitation-only conference calls between company management and a select group

Structuring The Private Placement Investment- The Form Of The Investment

I recently blogged about how to determine valuation in a start-up or development stage entity for purposes of structuring a prepackaged private placement, or for negotiating the venture capital transaction.   Determining a valuation is instrumental to answering the overriding questions of what percentage of a company is being sold and at what price. However, once you determine the value, you must determine what financial instrument is being sold, or put another way, what will be the form of the investment.

The world of financial instruments can appear daunting and complicated, and no entity should attempt to structure a private offering or enter into an investment agreement without the advice of competent counsel.  However, an understanding of the basic components of financial instruments will increase the efficiency of counsel and greatly add to the comfort level of all parties involved.  This blog is limited to a discussion of the basic components of financial instruments that would be used to finance

Structuring The Private Placement Investment- Development Stage Or Start Up Company Valuation

The question:

As the economy has been gaining strength, so have the number of entrepreneurs seeking private equity investments through pre-packaged structured private placement offerings, and negotiated venture and angel capital sources.  A question that arises almost daily in my practice is how to determine a valuation for a development stage or start-up venture.  Determining a valuation is instrumental to answering the overriding questions of what percentage of a company is being sold and at what price.

The Answer:

For business entities with operating history, revenue, profit margins and the like, valuation is determined by mathematical calculations and established mathematically based matrixes.  For a development stage or start-up venture, the necessary elements to complete a mathematical analysis simply do not exist.

In the case of a pre-packaged private placement offering for a development stage or start up venture, valuation is an arbitrary guess, a best estimate.  In the case of a negotiated investment with a venture capital or angel

How To Bring A Delinquent Exchange Act Reporting Company Current

SEC Delinquent Filers Program

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

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

Legal & Compliance, LLC Adds Lazarus Rothstein, Esq. as Of Counsel as Economic Confidence Builds in 2013 among its Clients

WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA (January 10, 2013) – Legal & Compliance, LLC is pleased to announce that Lazarus Rothstein, Esq. has recently joined the firm as Of Counsel to bring additional depth to its corporate and securities law practice.  Mr. Rothstein has been a legal and business executive for a wide variety of public and private companies based in South Florida with worldwide operations.

Mr. Rothstein has held senior legal positions at CD International Enterprises, a company that produces pure magnesium in China and provides business and financial corporate consulting services; Elizabeth Arden, a global prestige fragrance and beauty products company with operations in over 17 countries; Sports Authority, the nation’s largest full-line sporting goods retailer, operating over 385 stores throughout the United States; Daleen Technologies, a billing and customer care software provider; and Let’s Talk Cellular & Wireless, a specialty retailer of wireless communication products and services that operated over 270 stores in the United States. In his role

SEC Will Not Meet Deadline to Remove Ban on General Solicitation and Advertising in Private Offerings and Hedge Funds

The SEC won’t make the 90-day deadline to draft rules and enact Title II of the JOBS Act eliminating the ban on advertising and general solicitation for private placements and allowing advertising by hedge funds, Mary Schapiro, Securities and Exchange Commission chairman told a U.S. House oversight panel on June 27, 2012.  In prepared testimony, Mary Schapiro told a U.S. House oversight panel that certain rule writing deadlines imposed by the JOBS Act “are not achievable.”

Title II of the JOBS Act provides that, within 90 days of the passage of the JOBS Act (i.e. July 5, 2012), the SEC will amend Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Regulation D promulgated there under, to eliminate the prohibition on general solicitation and general advertising in a Rule 506 offering, so long as all purchasers in such offering are accredited investors. “The 90-day deadline does not provide a realistic timeframe for the drafting of the new rule, the preparation

SEC Grants Accelerated Approval to FINRA Rule Amendment Regarding Minimum Quotation Size Requirements for OTC Equity Securities

On June 15, 2012, the SEC granted accelerated approval to an amendment to FINRA rule 6433 related to the minimum quotation size for OTC equity securities.  Rule 6433 applies to all market makers.  Rule 6433 sets forth the specific minimum quotation size requirements in tiers that are based on the price of the OTC equity security being quoted by the market maker.  In addition, the rule change will require market makers to publish customer limit orders.

The new rule amends and lowers the current 9 tier quotation size requirements to 6 tiers as follows:

  • $175.00 per share and above, the minimum quotation size would be 1 share;
  • $1.00 through $174.99 per share, the minimum quotation size would be 100 shares;
  • $0.51 through $0.9999 per share, the minimum quotation size would be 1,000 shares;
  • $0.20 through $0.5099 per share, the minimum quotation size would be 2,500 shares;
  • $0.10 through $0.1999 per share, the minimum quotation size would be 5,000 shares;
Read More »

Crowdfunding Act – What about state securities laws?

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

Introduction

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

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

American Bar Association Comments On Title II Of The JOBS Act

Summary of Title II

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

CFIRA Submits Crowdfunding Letter to SEC

The CFIRA (Crowdfund Intermediaries Regulatory Advocates) was established by crowdfunding industry professionals for the purpose of working with the SEC and FINRA on establishing and maintaining crowdfunding rules and industry practices.  As I blogged in the past, I believed at one point, based on news and information released from the CFIRA, that the CFIRA intended to become a self regulatory organization (SRO) and register with the SEC under Section 15A. As of today, it appears that the CFIRA is still working towards the goal of becoming an SRO. In any event, I expect that the CFIRA will be an active participant in the crowdfunding industry and invaluable source of input and information.

CFIRA and the SEC

On May 15, 2012, the CFIRA submitted a comment letter to the SEC regarding the pending Crowdfunding regulations.  The comment letter specifically addressed issues regarding how the general solicitation rules will interact with social media and the internet.  The letter addressed the general solicitation

SEC Suspends Trading for Record Number of Shell Companies

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) today suspended the trading in 379 dormant shell companies.  This is the most trading suspensions in a single day in the history of the SEC.  The trading suspensions are part of an SEC initiative tabbed Operation Shell-Expel by the SEC’s Microcap Fraud Working Group.  Each of the companies was a dormant shell that was lacking any and all public disclosures.  That is, each of the companies failed to have adequate current public information available either through the news service on OTC Markets or filed with the SEC via EDGAR.

The federal securities laws allow the SEC to suspend trading in any stock for up to 10 business days. Once a company is suspended from trading, it cannot be quoted again until it provides updated information including complete disclosure of its business and accurate financial statements.  In addition to providing the necessary information, to begin to trade again, a company must enlist a market maker

THE JOBS ACT IMPACT ON HEDGE FUND MARKETING

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

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

Title II of the JOBS Act provides that, within 90 days of the passage of the JOBS Act (i.e. July 5, 2012), the SEC will amend Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Regulation D promulgated there under, to eliminate the prohibition on general solicitation and general advertising in a Rule 506 offering, so long as all purchasers in such offering are accredited investors.  The JOBS Act directs the SEC to make the same amendment to Rule 144A so long as all purchasers in the Rule

At-The-Market Offerings

Anyone that reads the trade journals knows that at-the-market offerings, or ATM’s as they are now known, have recently gained in popularity and are expected to continue to do so.  An ATM is the offering of securities by an Issuer either directly or through an underwriter, which securities are offered and distributed at the existing trading price.  In layman’s terms, an ATM occurs when an already public trading Issuer registers and sells additional securities to the public at the existing trading price, as opposed to a fixed price.  Accordingly, the price that shares sell at in an ATM will vary with the market price on any given day, or even throughout the day.

Under an ATM offering program, an exchange-listed company incrementally sells newly issued shares into the trading market through a designated broker-dealer at prevailing market prices, rather than via a traditional underwritten offering of a fixed number of shares at a fixed price all at once.  To

SEC Grapples With Crowdfunding Rulemaking

On April 5, 2012 President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law.

 

The SEC’s Rulemaking Duty

Some of the rules went into effect immediately; others are in the drafting process.   Within 90 days of the signing of the Act (i.e. mid July), the SEC is required to issue enabling rules as to other portions of the Act, including rules related to general solicitation and advertising of accredited investors under Rule 506 of Regulation D. For the SEC that is the easy part.

Finally, the SEC has up to 270 days (beginning of 2013) to release rules relating to the new crowdfunding exemption and crowdfunding platform portal regulations. That will be difficult part.  As a matter of background, the biggest opponents of the crowdfunding bill were the SEC and FINRA.  It is easy to see why, the SEC’s mission, direct from their website is:

“The mission of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is to protect investors, maintain fair, orderly,

Crowdfunding Act Signed Into Law

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

Opportunity For All Americans

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

Crowdfunding 101

As I recently blogged, the President has signed the Jobs Act including the much anticipated Crowdfunding bill.  Crowdfunding is a process whereby companies will be able to raise small amounts of money either directly off their own website or using intermediaries set up for the purpose.  The Securities Act of 1933, as amended, (Securities Act) prohibits the sale or delivery of any security unless such security is either registered or exempt from registration.  Crowdfunding will be an exemption from registration.  The exemption will likely be codified as a new and separate exemption likely under Regulation D and will include an overhaul of the current general provisions of Regulation D found in Rules 501-503.

Crowdfunding Exemption Possibilities

 

The exemption will likely be limited to $1 million in any twelve (12) month period, or up to $2 million if the company provides certain financial disclosure such as audited financial statements.  As proposed, each investor will be limited $10,000 or 10%

Big Changes Are Coming

I’ve been practicing securities law for 19 years this year (phew!) and for the first time in my career I am excited about changes, big changes, on the horizon for small businesses.  I’m talking about the JOBS Act and its ground breaking crowdfunding bill which has now been signed into law.

A Whole New Exemption

Over the years I have consistently received calls from potential clients that wish to use the exemptions provided for in Regulation D to raise money for small or start up ventures.  Many of these individuals believe, mistakenly, that Regulation D provides them with a method to raise money.  It does not.  Regulation D only lays out rules to follow to utilize an exemption from the registration requirements in the Securities Act of 1933.  These rules include such items as limitations on the dollar amount raised; who you can raise money from, how you can raise money, prohibitions on advertising and solicitation, disclosure documents required,

An Introduction to Promissory Notes

A promissory note is a written promise by a person, persons or entity to pay a specific amount of money (called “principal”) to another, usually to include a specified amount of interest on the unpaid principal amount.  In addition, a promissory note will include the basic specifics of the debt, including full names of both debtor and creditor and an address for making payments.  The specified time of payment may be written as: a) whenever there is a demand, b) on a specific date, c) in installments with or without the interest included in each installment, d) installments with a final larger amount (balloon payment).   In the event that the written note does not include language specifying the time of payment, the law assumes it is payable on demand by the creditor.

Terms of Payment

A promissory note may contain other terms such as the right of the promisee to order payment be made to another person, security or collateral,

S-8 Stock, Use and Misuse

A Form S-8 registration statement is popular with small business issuers as it becomes effective immediately upon filing and allows for incorporation by reference, both of which benefits are not always available to smaller public companies.  A Form S-8 registration statement can be used by Issuers to register securities to be offered to employees and certain consultants under certain employee benefit plans.

To qualify to use an S-8 registration statement the Issuer must: (i) be subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; (ii) have filed all reports required to be filed during the preceding 12 months, or such shorter period of time that the Issuer has been subject to the reporting requirements; (iii) is not a shell company and has not been a shell company for at least 60 calendar days previously; and (iv) if it has been a shell company at any time previously, has filed current Form 10 information with the

Filing Deadlines for Exchange Act Quarterly and Annual Reports

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

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

Form 10-K

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

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

Back To Basics – IPO Or Not To IPO?

Initial Public Offerings (IPO’s) are on the rise once again. I have potential clients calling me daily interested in going public through an IPO, most have little or no prior knowledge of the public company arena – so back to basics. An IPO is an initial public offering of securities. Prior to proceeding with an IPO, an Issuer should consider the advantages, disadvantages and alternatives.

The advantages of an IPO include:

  • Access to capital
  • Liquidity of stock
  • Public image and prestige; and
  • Ability to attract and retain better personnel

The disadvantages of an IPO include:

  • Expense – both of the initial transaction and ongoing compliance;
  • Public disclosure of business information – public companies are required to be transparent which can give private competitors an edge;
  • Limitations on long term strategic decisions
  • Civil and criminal liability of executive officers and directors; and
  • Takeover danger

The alternatives to an IPO for an Issuer seeking capital include:

  • A Section 4(2) and/or Regulation D
Read More »

Dodd-Frank Act Changes Definition Of Accredited Investor Effective Immediately

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act). After many revisions, the final Dodd-Frank Act has only minor effects on securities Issuers and their investors. The primary change, which takes effect immediately, is a modification to the definition of “accredited investor” contained in the Securities Act of 1933. In particular: (i) as it relates to natural persons, the $1,000,000 net worth standard must now be calculated excluding the value of the primary residence of such natural person; and (2) the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been mandated to review the entire accredited investor definition within four (4) years and make appropriate changes within that time, without additional act of Congress.

Increased Net Worth Requirements

This change effectively increases the net worth requirements for investors, whose largest asset is often their primary residence. Although the SEC has not yet issued any guidance or other information on the change,

Special Purpose Acquisition Companies (SPACs)

A SPAC is a company organized to purchase one or more operating businesses and which generally intends to raise capital through an initial public offering (IPO), direct public offering (DPO) or private offering.

IPO’s, DPO’s and Rule 419

SPAC’s that engage in either an IPO or DPO are subject to Rule 419 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. The provisions of Rule 419 apply to every registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933, by a blank check company.  Rule 419 requires that the blank check company filing such registration statement deposit the securities being offered and proceeds of the offering, less reasonable offering expenses, into an escrow or trust account pending the execution of an agreement for an acquisition or merger.  In addition, the registrant is required to file a post effective amendment to the registration statement containing the same information as found in a Form 10 registration statement, upon the execution of an agreement for

Section 4(6) Registration Exemption for Accredited Investors

Section 4(6) provides a registration exemption for offerings to accredited investors, if the aggregate offering amounts up to the dollar limit of Section 3(b) (currently $5,000,000), if there is no advertising or public solicitation in connection with the transaction by the Issuer or anyone acting on the Issuer’s behalf.

The term accredited investor is defined in section 2(a)(15) and generally includes:

  • Banks, insurance companies and pension plans;
  • Corporations, partnerships and business entities with over $5 million in assets;
  • Directors, executive officers and general partners of the issuer;
  • Natural persons with over $1 million net worth or over $200,000 in annual income for two years; and
  • Entities, all of whose equity owners are accredited.

In addition, the SEC has the power to define as an accredited investor any person, who, on the basis of such factors as financial sophistication, net worth, knowledge, and experience in financial matters, or amount of assets under management qualifies as an accredited investor.

Section 4(6) and

An In-Depth Review of Private Placements Under Section 4(2)

Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 provides that the registration requirements of Section 5 do not apply to “transactions by an issuer not involving any public offering.” The definition of an “issuer” is pretty straightforward as found in Section 2(a)(4) and includes, “the person who issues or proposes to issue” a security and is understood to mean the entity that originally sells the securities. However, not so straightforward is what constitutes a “public offering,” which term is not defined in the Securities Act. In reliance on Section 4(2) the SEC enacted Rule 506 as part of Regulation D.

Rule 506 as a Safe Harbor Provision

Rule 506 is a Safe Harbor. In other words, if all the conditions of Rule 506 are met, you can rest assured that the conditions of Section 4(2) have been satisfied. However, Section 4(2) can be satisfied as a standalone exemption separate from Rule 506. The importance of the distinction between Section 4(2)

Compliance When Conducting Concurrent Private and Public Offerings

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) integration guidance in Securities Act Release No. 8828 (August 3, 2007) sets forth a framework for analyzing potential integration issues in the specific situation of concurrent private and public offerings. The guidance clarifies that, under appropriate circumstances, there can be a side-by-side private offering under Securities Act Rule 4(2) or the Securities Act Rule 506 safe harbor, with a registered public offering.

Qualified Institutional Investors

Previously it was thought that a private offering could only take place concurrently with a public offering if limited to qualified institutional investors (must have at least $100 million under management) and two or three additional large institutional accredited investors as set forth in the Black Box no action letter (June 26, 1990), or to an Issuer’s key officers and directors. In addition, many practitioners previously utilized the integration rule set forth in Securities Act Rule 502 in determining whether a private and public offering should be integrated. In

A Comprehensive Analysis of Section 5

Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, contains the basic registration requirements for all offerings and rules of securities. Section 5(a) provides that “unless a registration statement is in effect as to a security, it shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly:

  1. …to sell such security through the use or medium of any prospectus or otherwise; or
  2. …to transmit through the mails or in interstate commerce any such security for the purpose of sale or for delivery after sale”

Section 5(b) provides that “it shall be unlawful for any person directly or indirectly:

  1. …to transmit through the mails or in interstate commerce, any prospectus relating to a security with respect to which a registration has been filed…., unless such prospectus meets the requirements of Section 10; or
  2. …to transmit through the mails or in interstate commerce any such security for the purpose of sale or for delivery after sale, unless accompanied or preceded by a
Read More »

Responsibilities of Independent Directors Increases in Response to Sarbanes Oxley

Serving as an independent director carries serious obligations and responsibilities.

Following the passage of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX), the role of independent directors has become that of securities monitor. They must be informed of developments within the company, ensure good processes for accurate disclosures and make reasonable efforts to assure that disclosures are adequate. Independent directors, like inside directors, should be fully aware of the company’s press releases, public statements and communications with security holders and sufficiently engaged and active to questions and correct inadequate disclosures.

Disclosure and Transparency

The basic premise of federal securities laws is disclosure and transparency. The theory behind this regulatory structure is that if a Company is forced to disclose information about particular transactions, plans or programs, the company and its officers and directors will take greater care in making business decisions. If a director knows or should know that his or her company’s statements concerning particular issues are inadequate or incomplete,

Securities Attorneys Must Self-Regulate to Avoid Potential Insider Trading Pitfalls

Attorneys who accept stock as compensation from public companies need to be aware of a vigilant regarding their insider trading obligations. Before analyzing the dynamics of proper compliance in stock compensation scenarios, it is assumed that the stock received by the attorney was issued pursuant to a registration statement or valid exemption and is being resold also pursuant to a registration statement or valid exemption to registration.

Insider Trading

Illegal insider trading refers generally to buying or selling a security, in breach of a fiduciary duty or other relationship of trust and confidence, while in possession of material, nonpublic information about the security. Insider trading violations may also include “tipping” such information, securities trading by the person “tipped,” and securities trading by those who misappropriate such information. Securities attorneys are in a unique position as they are often privy to material, non-public information regarding their public company clients.

The SEC prohibits insider trading in Rules 10b-5, 10b5-1 and 10b5-2 or

The Federalism of State Corporate Law

Historically the regulation of corporate law has been firmly within the power and authority of the states. However, over the past few decades the federal government has become increasingly active in matters of corporate governance. Typically this occurs in waves as a response to periods of scandal in specific business sectors or in the financial markets. Traditionally, when the federal government intervenes in these situations, they enact regulation either directly or indirectly by imposing upon state corporate regulations.

Specifically, the predominant method of federal regulation of corporate governance is through the enactment of mandatory terms that either reverse or preempt state laws on the same point. The most recently prominent example is the passing of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX).

Sarbanes Oxley (SOX)

SOX regulates corporate governance in five matters: (i) SOX prevents corporations from engaging the same accounting firm to provide both audit and specified non-audit services; (ii) SOX requires that audit committees of listed companies be

Five Essential Conditions for Unregistered Spin-Offs

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

In particular, the subsidiary shares (the shares distributed to the parent company shareholders) do not need to be registered if the following five conditions are met: (i) the parent shareholders do not provide consideration for the spun-off shares; (ii) the spin-off is pro-rata to the parent shareholders; (iii) the parent provides adequate information about the spin-off and the subsidiary to its shareholders and to the trading markets; (iv) the parent has a valid business purpose for the spin-off; and (v) if the parent spins-off restricted securities, it has held those securities for at least one year. Below is

The Demise of the Death Spiral – SEC Interpretation of Rule 415

Without fanfare, publications, or other notice, in mid 2006, PIPE investors and the Issuers that utilized them noticed a big difference in the way that the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) division of corporate finance reviewed and commented upon, resale registration statements. Although the SEC staff contended that its position on Rule 415 had not changed, there was, incontrovertibly, a dramatic impact felt by Issuers and PIPE investors.

For years, Issuers had relied upon Rule 415 in order to register the resale of shares issued in PIPE transactions (a “secondary offering”). Rule 415 governs the registration requirements for the sale of securities to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis, such as in the case of the take down or conversion of convertible debt and warrants. In the years prior to 2006, Issuers would register shares they sold in a PIPE transaction, which could represent in excess of 50% of their outstanding public float.

Convertible Debt and Subsequent Resale

Elements Constituting “Solicitation” Such that a 14A Proxy Solicitation is Required Instead of a 14C Information Statement Under the Section 14 Proxy Rules of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

If you are a private company looking to go public on the OTCBB, securities attorney Laura Anthony provides expert legal advice and ongoing corporate counsel. Ms. Anthony counsels private and small public companies nationwide regarding reverse mergers, corporate transactions and all aspects of securities law.

Companies with securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) are subject to the Exchange Act proxy rules found in Section 14 and the rules promulgated thereunder. The proxy rules govern the disclosure in materials used to solicit shareholders’ votes in annual or special meetings held for the election of directors and the approval of other corporate action.

The information contained in proxy materials must be filed with the SEC in advance of any solicitation to ensure compliance with the disclosure rules. Solicitations, whether by management or shareholder groups, must disclose all important facts concerning the issues on which holders are asked to vote. The disclosure information filed with

Analysis of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for Non-Accelerated Filers

On October 13, 2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) officially extended the date for non-accelerated filers to comply with Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX) until their fiscal years ending on or after June 15, 2010. Since the adoption of the rules implementing Section 404(b) on June 5, 2003, the time period for compliance by non-accelerated filers has been extended several times. It is widely believed that this extension, for six additional months, will be the last. Companies other than non-accelerated filers are already subject to Section 404 compliance. Although “non-accelerated” filers are not specifically defined, such filers include small business entities.

Among other things, Section 404(b) of SOX requires companies to include in their annual reports filed with the SEC, an accompanying auditor’s attestation report, on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. In other words, reporting companies must employ their auditor to audit and attest upon their financial internal control process,

Examination of Rule 144 and Potential Interpretations

The SEC revised Rule 144, effective February 15, 2008. Section 144 rules are used to ascertain if a company falls into an exemption from registration, because of non-underwriter status. But if securities, or the transaction, are registered as required, 144 doesn’t apply. The revisions aimed to reduce previous limits on resale of restricted securities by reporting companies. Unfortunately, a certain amount of ambiguity has also crept in.

The Rule had clearly required a one-year holding period. But included in the new Rule 144(i) is the following: (paraphrased) “if a company has ever been a shell company[1], past or present, then the company must be current on its periodic SEC filings for twelve months following the time it ceases to be a shell, before 144 is available.”

For non-affiliates of non-reporting companies, the one year holding period requirement remains.

Rule 144 thus allows non-affiliates of a reporting company to resell restricted securities after a six-month holding period,

Categories

Contact Author

Laura Anthony Esq

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?