(800) 341-2684

Call Toll Free

Contact us

Online Inquiries 24/7

Laura Anthony Esq

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

Smaller Reporting Company (SRC)

SEC、提出者ステータスの判定に関するCD&Iを公表

2025年8月27日、米国証券取引委員会(SEC)は、新たなコンプライアンスおよび情報開示に関する解釈指針(CD&I)を公表しました。本CD&Iは、発行体がスモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー(小規模報告会社)の資格を喪失した後、いつアクセラレーテッド・ファイラーまたはラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーに該当するようになるかについての判断基準を示すものです。

新しいCD&I

新たに追加されたCD&I質問130.05では、次のように示されています。

質問: ある発行体は、規則12b-2に定義される「スモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー(小規模報告会社)」のうち、パラグラフ(2)または(3)(iii)(B)の収益テストに基づき、小規模報告会社として扱われています。2025年度第2四半期の最終営業日に、当該発行体は毎年実施している小規模報告会社ステータスの判定を行い、その結果、もはや小規模報告会社の要件を満たしていないと判断しました。この場合、発行体が2025年度末にアクセラレーテッド・ファイラーまたはラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーのステータスを評価する際、当該発行体はアクセラレーテッド・ファイラーまたはラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーに該当することになりますか?

回答: いいえ。発行体が会計年度末時点でアクセラレーテッド・ファイラーまたはラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーに該当するかを判断する際には、他の要件とともに、規則12b-2に定義される「スモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー(小規模報告会社)」のパラグラフ(2)または(3)(iii)(B)に定める収益テストの下で、「小規模報告会社としての要件を利用できるかどうか」を評価する必要があります。該当する定義は、規則12b-2における「アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー」のパラグラフ(1)(iv)および「ラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー」のパラグラフ(2)(iv)に記載されています。このケースでは、発行体は2025年度末まで、そして2026年度第1四半期のForm 10-Qの提出時までは、小規模報告会社としての要件を引き続き利用することができます(規則12b-2における「スモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー」の定義のパラグラフ(3)(i)(C)を参照)。したがって、発行体は2025年度末時点では、「アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー」のパラグラフ(1)(iv)または「ラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー」のパラグラフ(2)(iv)の条件を満たしません。このため、発行体は2026年度に提出期限を迎える書類についてはノン・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーとして扱われ、2026年度第1四半期のForm 10-Qからは小規模報告会社の要件を利用できなくなります。

提出者ステータスに関する詳細情報

SECの開示要件は、企業規模に応じて段階的に設定されています。SECは2002年に企業をノン・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー、アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー、ラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーの3区分に分類し、2007年にはこれらの企業に対して規制負担を軽減する目的で「スモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー(小規模報告会社)」という区分を導入しました。スモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー、アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー、ラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーは、それぞれ定期報告書の提出期限が異なります。さらに、2012年には「エマージング・グロース・カンパニー(新興成長企業:EGC)」という新たな区分が導入され、小規模報告会社と同様に開示要件が緩和されています。ただし、EGCの定義には提出期限が含まれていないため、EGCは自社のファイラー区分(小規模報告会社、アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー、ラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー)を判断し、提出期限を特定する必要があります。

アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーおよびラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーは、SOX法(サーベンス・オクスリー法)第404条(b)の要件に基づき、独立監査人による経営陣の財務報告に係る内部統制(ICFR)の評価に関する証明および報告を受けることが義務付けられています。一方、ノン・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーは第404条(b)の要件の対象外です。SOX法第404条(a)では、SEC報告義務のあるすべての企業が、規模や区分にかかわらず、財務報告に係る内部統制(ICFR)を確立・維持し、その有効性を経営陣が評価するとともに、当該評価に関するCEOおよびCFOの証明書を提出することが求められています。CEOおよびCFOの証明に関する詳細は、以下の記事をご参照ください:https://securities-law-blog.com/2014/08/26/ceo-cfo-certifications-forms-10-q-10-k/ .

「スモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー(Smaller Reporting Company、略称SRC)」とは、以下のいずれかの条件を満たす企業を指します。(i) 公開持株額(パブリック・フロート)が2億5,000万ドル未満の企業、または(ii) 年間売上高が1億ドル未満で、かつ (x) 公開持株額がない、または (y) 公開持株額が7億ドル未満の企業です。公開持株額は、企業の会計年度第2四半期の最終営業日時点で算定され、年間売上高は、監査済み財務諸表が入手可能な直近の会計年度末日時点で判断されます。SRCステータスおよび2018年6月時点の段階的開示要件の一覧表などの詳細については、以下をご参照ください:https://securities-law-blog.com/2018/07/17/sec-amends-definition-of-a-smaller-reporting-company/?hilite=smaller+reporting.

「アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー(Accelerated Filer)」とは、以下の条件を満たす企業を指します。(i) 直近で完了した第2会計四半期の最終営業日時点において、非関係者が保有する議決権付きおよび議決権なし普通株式の世界全体での市場価値の合計が7,500万ドル以上7億ドル未満であること。(ii) 少なくとも過去12か月間、証券取引法(Exchange Act)の報告義務の対象であること。(iii) 証券取引法に基づく年次報告書を少なくとも1回提出していること。(iv) 売上高テストに基づくスモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー(SRC)の要件を満たしていないこと(すなわち、年間売上高が1億ドル未満ではないこと)。

「ラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラー(Large Accelerated Filer)」とは、以下の条件を満たす企業を指します。(i) 直近で完了した第2会計四半期の最終営業日時点において、非関係者が保有する議決権付きおよび議決権なし普通株式の世界全体での市場価値の合計が7億ドル以上であること。(ii) 少なくとも過去12か月間、証券取引法の報告義務の対象であること。(iii) 証券取引法に基づく年次報告書を少なくとも1回提出していること。(iv) 売上高テストに基づくスモーラー・レポーティング・カンパニー(SRC)の要件を満たしていないこと(すなわち、年間売上高が1億ドル未満ではないこと)。

アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーおよびラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーのステータス判定方法(該当区分への移行および該当区分からの除外を含む)に関する詳細については、以下をご参照ください:https://securities-law-blog.com/2020/07/14/sec-adopts-amendments-to-accelerated-and-large-accelerated-filer-definitions/?hilite=large+accelerated.

「エマージング・グロース・カンパニー(Emerging Growth Company、略称EGC)」とは、直近で完了した会計年度における年間総売上高が12億3,500万ドル未満の企業を指します。EGCは、以下のいずれかが先に発生した時点でそのステータスを失います。(i) 年間売上高が12億3,500万ドルを超えた会計年度の最終日。(ii) IPO後5年目の会計年度の最終日(例:発行会社の会計年度末が12月31日であり、2025年11月2日に有効な登録届出書に基づき株式を販売した場合、2030年12月31日にEGCステータスを喪失)。(iii) 直近3年間で10億ドルを超える非転換社債を発行した日。(iv) ラージ・アクセラレーテッド・ファイラーとなった日。EGCに関する詳細は以下をご参照ください:https://securities-law-blog.com/2017/11/07/emerging-growth-companies-will-start-grow/?hilite=emerging+growth.

著者

ローラ・アンソニー弁護士

設立パートナー

アンソニー、リンダー&カコマノリス

企業法務および証券法務事務所

LAnthony@ALClaw.com

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

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

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

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

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

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

© Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC

 

SEC Publishes CD&I On Filer Status Determination

On August 27, 2025, the SEC published a new compliance and disclosure interpretation (CD&I) providing guidance on when an issuer may become an accelerated or large accelerated filer after losing its status as a smaller reporting company.

New CD&I

New CD&I question 130.05 provides:

Question: An issuer is a smaller reporting company under the revenue test in paragraph (2) or (3)(iii)(B) of the “smaller reporting company” definition in Rule 12b-2. On the last business day of its second fiscal quarter of 2025, the issuer conducts its annual determination of smaller reporting company status and determines that it no longer qualifies as a smaller reporting company. When the issuer assesses its accelerated filer or large accelerated filer status, as of the end of fiscal year 2025, will this issuer become an accelerated filer or large accelerated filer?

Answer: No. When determining its accelerated filer or large accelerated filer status as of the end of its fiscal year, the issuer must

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

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

SEC Adopts Amendments To Management Discussion And Analysis

It has been a very busy year for SEC rule making, guidance, executive actions and all matters capital markets.  Continuing its ongoing disclosure effectiveness initiative on November 19, 2020, the SEC adopted amendments to the disclosures in Item 303 of Regulation S-K – Management’s Discussion & Analysis of Financial Conditions and Operations (MD&A).  The proposed rule had been released on January 30, 2020 (see HERE).  Like all recent disclosure effectiveness rule amendments and proposals, the rule changes are meant to modernize and take a more principles-based approach to disclosure requirements.  In addition, the rule changes are intended to reduce repetition and disclosure of information that is not material.

The new rules eliminate Item 301 – Selected Financial Data – and amend Items 302(a) – Supplementary Financial Information and Item 303 – MD&A.  In particular, the final rules revise Item 302(a) to replace the current tabular disclosure with a principles-based approach and revise MD&A to: (i) to

SEC Adopts Amendments To Disclosures Related To Acquisitions And Dispositions Of Businesses

One year after proposing amendments to the financial statements and other disclosure requirements related to the acquisitions and dispositions of businesses, in May 2020 the SEC adopted final amendments (see here for my blog on the proposed amendments HERE).  The amendments involved a long process; years earlier, in September 2015, the SEC issued a request for public comment related to disclosure requirements for entities other than the reporting company itself, including subsidiaries, acquired businesses, issuers of guaranteed securities and affiliates which was the first step culminating in the final rules (see HERE).

The amendments make changes to Rules 3-05 and 3-14, 8-04, 8-05, and 8-06 of Regulation S-x, as well as Article 11.  The SEC also amended the significance tests in the “significant subsidiary” definition in Rule 1-02(w), Securities Act Rule 405, and Exchange Act Rule 12b-2.  Like all recent disclosure changes, the proposed rules are designed to improve the information for investors while reducing complexity

SEC Adopts Amendments To Accelerated And Large Accelerated Filer Definitions

In March, 2020 the SEC adopted amendments to the definitions of an “accelerated filer” and “large accelerated filer.”  The amendments were adopted largely as proposed in May 2019 (see HERE).

A company that is classified as an accelerated or large accelerated filer is subject to, among other things, the requirement that its outside auditor attest to, and report on, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of the issuer’s internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) as required by Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX).  The JOBS Act exempted emerging growth companies (EGCs) from this requirement.  Moreover, historically the definition of a smaller reporting company (SRC) was set such that an SRC could never be an accelerated or large accelerated filer, and as such would never be subject to Section 404(b) of SOX.

In June 2018, the SEC amended the definition of an SRC to include companies with less than a $250 million public float (increased

SEC Proposes Amendments To Acquisitions And Dispositions Of Businesses

In May of this year, the SEC proposed amendments to the financial statements and other disclosure requirements related to the acquisitions and dispositions of businesses.  In September 2015, the SEC issued a request for public comment related to disclosure requirements for entities other than the reporting company itself, including subsidiaries, acquired businesses, issuers of guaranteed securities and affiliates.  See my blog HERE.  Taking into account responses to portions of that request for comment, in the summer of 2018, the SEC adopted final rules to simplify the disclosure requirements applicable to registered debt offerings for guarantors and issuers of guaranteed securities, and for affiliates whose securities collateralize a company’s securities.  See my blog HERE.

The SEC is now proposing amendments to Rules 3-05, 3-14, and Article 11 of Regulation S-X and adding new Rule 6-11.  The amendments would also make several related conforming rule and form changes.  Rule 3-05 was included in the September 2015 request for comment.  Like

The Under $300 Million Market Cap Class

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

S-3 Eligibility

The ability to use an S-3 registration statement is significant for exchange traded companies.  An S-3 allows forward incorporation by reference and can be used for a shelf registration among other benefits.  S-3 eligibility is comprised of both registrant or company requirements and transaction requirements.  In this blog I will discuss the general company and transaction requirements for a Form S-3.  In a separate blog I will drill down on shelf offerings.

Registrant Requirements

Companies that meet the following requirements are eligible to use a Form S-3 for a transaction that meets one of the transaction requirements:

                (1) The company must be organized under the laws of the United States and must have its principal business operations in the United States or its territories;

                (2) The company has a class of securities registered pursuant to either Section 12(b) or 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) or is required to file reports pursuant to Section 15(d)

SEC Updates CDI Related to Smaller Reporting Company Definition

On June 28, 2018, the SEC adopted the much-anticipated amendments to the definition of a “smaller reporting company” as contained in Securities Act Rule 405, Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 and Item 10(f) of Regulation S-K.  For more information on the new rules, see HERE

Among other benefits, it is hoped that the change will help encourage smaller companies to access US public markets. The amendment expands the number of companies that qualify as a smaller reporting company (SRC) and thus qualify for the scaled disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X. The SEC estimates that an additional 966 companies will be eligible for SRC status in the first year under the new definition.

As proposed, and as recommended by various market participants, the new definition of a SRC will now include companies with less than a $250 million public float as compared to the $75 million threshold in the prior definition. In addition, if a company does

SEC Amends Definition of “A Smaller Reporting Company”

On June 28, 2018, the SEC adopted the much-anticipated amendments to the definition of a “smaller reporting company” as contained in Securities Act Rule 405, Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 and Item 10(f) of Regulation S-K. The amendments come almost two years to the day since the initial publication of proposed rule changes (see HERE).

Among other benefits, it is hoped that the change will help encourage smaller companies to access US public markets. The amendment expands the number of companies that qualify as a smaller reporting company (SRC) and thus qualify for the scaled disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X. The SEC estimates that an additional 966 companies will be eligible for SRC status in the first year under the new definition.

As proposed, and as recommended by various market participants, the new definition of a SRC will now include companies with less than a $250 million public float as compared to the $75 million

SEC Advisory Committee On Small And Emerging Companies Holds Final Meeting

On September 13, 2017, the SEC Advisory Committee on Small and Emerging Companies (the “Advisory Committee”) held its final meeting and issued its final report. The Committee was organized by the SEC for a two-year term to provide advice on SEC rules, regulations and policies regarding “its mission of protecting investors, maintaining fair, orderly and efficient markets and facilitating capital formation” as related to “(i) capital raising by emerging privately held small businesses and publicly traded companies with less than $250 million in public market capitalization; (ii) trading in the securities of such businesses and companies; and (iii) public reporting and corporate governance requirements to which such businesses and companies are subject.”

As the two-year term is expiring, Congress has determined to establish an Exchange Act-mandated, perpetual committee to be named the Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee. The SEC is also setting up a new Office of Advocate for Small Business Capital Formation and is actively seeking to

Emerging Growth Companies Will Start To Grow Up

The first of emerging growth companies (“EGC’s”) will begin losing EGC status as the five-year anniversary of the creation of an EGC has now passed. Those companies that will lose status as a result of the passage of time are almost unilaterally not pleased with the impending change and concurrent increase in regulatory compliance.

Background

Title I of the JOBS Act, initially enacted on April 5, 2012, created a new category of issuer called an “emerging growth company” (“EGC”).  An EGC is defined as a company with total annual gross revenues of less than $1,070,000,000 during its most recently completed fiscal year that first sells equity in a registered offering after December 8, 2011. An EGC loses its EGC status on the earlier of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which it exceeds $1,070,000,000 in revenues; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth year after its IPO (for example, if the issuer has

SEC Proposes Rules To Modernize And Simplify Disclosures

On October 11, 2017, as part of the ongoing SEC Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative, the SEC published proposed rule amendments to modernize and simplify disclosure requirements for public companies, investment advisers, and investment companies. The proposed rule amendments implement a mandate under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (“FAST Act”).

The FAST Act, passed in December 2015, contains two sections requiring the SEC to modernize and simplify the requirements in Regulation S-K.  Section 72002 requires the SEC to amend Regulation S-K to “further scale or eliminate requirements… to reduce the burden on emerging growth companies, accelerated filers, smaller reporting companies, and other smaller issuers, while still providing all material information to investors.” In addition, the SEC was directed to “eliminate provisions… that are duplicative, overlapping, outdated or unnecessary.” In accordance with that requirement, On July 13, 2016, the SEC issued proposed rule change on Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X to amend disclosures that are redundant, duplicative, overlapping, outdated

The SEC Provides Further Guidance On Financial Statement Requirements In Registration Statements

On August 17, 2017, the SEC issued guidance on financial statement requirements for confidential and public registration statement filings by both emerging growth companies (EGC) and non-emerging growth companies. The new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DI’s) follow the SEC’s decision to permit all companies to submit draft registration statements, on a confidential basis (see HERE). The newest guidance is in accord with the SEC’s announced policy to take active measures to promote the U.S. IPO market and small business capital-raise initiatives.

Earlier in the summer, the SEC expanded the JOBS Act benefit available to emerging growth companies, to be able to file confidential draft registration statements, to all companies. Confidential draft submissions are now available for all Section 12(b) Exchange Act registration statements, initial public offerings (IPO’s) and for secondary or follow-on offerings made in the first year after a company becomes publicly reporting.

Title I of the JOBS Act initially allowed for confidential draft submissions of registration

SEC Announces Regulatory Agenda

In July 2017 the SEC posted its latest version of its semi-annual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking with the U.S. Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs. The agenda is as interesting for what’s on it, as for what isn’t. The semi-annual list only contains 33 legislative action items that the SEC intends to propose or finalize in the next 12 months. The fall 2016 list contained 62 items. As further discussed in this blog, the list does not include proposals on executive compensation, or many other Dodd-Frank mandated rules.

In the preamble to the list it indicates that it was completed in March, when Michael Piwowar was acting Chair of the SEC. Chair Jay Clayton and now Commissioner Michael Piwowar have been publicly like-minded, with a goal of directing the SEC towards assisting in small and emerging business growth and capital raise activities, while remaining tough on fraud. A summary of Chair Clayton’s first public speech as head of

SEC Expands Ability To File Confidential Registration Statements

Nominate Us For ABA Journal’s Top Blog- HERE

——————————————————————————————————

On June 19, 2017, the SEC announced that the Division of Corporation Finance will permit all companies to submit draft registration statements, on a confidential basis. Confidential draft submissions will now be available for all Section 12(b) Exchange Act registration statements, initial public offerings (IPO’s) and for secondary or follow-on offerings made in the first year after a company becomes publicly reporting.

The SEC has adopted the change by staff prerogative and not a formal rule change. On June 29, 2017, the SEC issued guidance on the change via new FAQs. The new policy is effective July 10, 2017.

Title I of the JOBS Act initially allowed for confidential draft submissions of registration statements by emerging growth companies but did not include any other companies, such as smaller reporting companies. Regulation A+ as enacted on June 19, 2015, also allows for confidential submissions of an offering circular by companies completing their

The Payment Of Finders’ Fees- An Ongoing Discussion

Introduction

As a recurring topic, I discuss exemptions to the broker-dealer registration requirements for entities and individuals that assist companies in fundraising and related services. I have previously discussed the no-action-letter-based exemption for M&A brokers, the exemptions for websites restricted to accredited investors and for crowdfunding portals as part of the JOBS Act and the statutory exemption from the broker-dealer registration requirements found in Securities Exchange Act Rule 3a4-1, including for officers, directors and key employees of an issuer. I have also previously published a blog on the American Bar Association’s recommendations for the codification of an exemption from the broker-dealer registration requirements for private placement finders. I’ve included links to each of these prior articles in the conclusion to this blog.

A related topic with a parallel analysis is the use of finders for investors and investor groups, an activity which has become prevalent in today’s marketplace. In that case the investor group utilizes the services

Financial Choice Act 2.0 Has Made Progress

On June 8, 2017, the U.S. House of Representative passed the Financial Creating Hope and Opportunity for Investors, Consumers and Entrepreneurs Act (the “Financial Choice Act 2.0” or the “Act”) by a vote of 283-186 along party lines. Only one Republican did not vote in favor of the Act. On May 4, 2017, the House Financial Services Committee voted to approve the Act. A prior version of the Act was adopted by the Financial Services Committee in September 2016 but never proceeded to the House for a vote.

The Financial Choice Act 2.0 is an extensive, extreme piece of legislation that would dismantle a large amount of the power of the SEC and strip the Dodd-Frank Act of many of its key provisions. The future of the Act is uncertain as it is unlikely to get through the Senate, although a rollback of Dodd-Frank remains a priority to the current administration. It is also possible that parts of the lengthy

SEC Issues New C&DI Clarifying The Use Of Form S-3 By Smaller Reporting Companies; The Baby Shelf Rule

The SEC has been issuing a slew of new Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (“C&DI”) on numerous topics in the past few months. I will cover each of these new C&DI in a series of blogs starting with one C&DI that clarifies the availability of Form S-3 for the registration of securities by companies with a public float of less than $75 million, known as the “baby shelf rule.”

The Baby Shelf Rule

Among other requirements, to qualify to use an S-3 registration statement a company must have filed all Exchange Act reports in a timely manner, including Form 8-K, within the prior 12 months and trade on a national exchange. An S-3 also contains certain limitations on the value of securities that can be offered. Companies that have an aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of $75 million or more, may offer the full amount of securities under an S-3 registration. For companies

Smaller Reporting Companies vs. Emerging Growth Companies

The topic of reporting requirements and distinctions between various categories of reporting companies has been prevalent over the past couple of years as regulators and industry insiders examine changes to the reporting requirements for all companies, and qualifications for the various categories of scaled disclosure requirements. As I’ve written about these developments, I have noticed inconsistencies in the treatment of smaller reporting companies and emerging growth companies in ways that are likely the result of poor drafting or unintended consequences. This blog summarizes two of these inconsistencies.

As a reminder, a smaller reporting company is currently defined as a company that has a public float of less than $75 million in common equity as of the last business day of its most recently completed second fiscal quarter, or if a public float of zero, has less than $50 million in annual revenues as of its most recently completed fiscal year-end. I note that on June 27, 2016, the SEC issued

Testing The Waters; Regulation A+ And S-1 Public Offerings – Part 2

The JOBS Act enacted in 2012 made the most dramatic changes to the landscape for the marketing and selling of both private and public offerings since the enactment of the Securities Act of 1933.  These significant changes include: (i) the creation of Rule 506(c), which came into effect on September 23, 2013, and allows for general solicitation and advertising in private offerings where the purchasers are limited to accredited investors; (ii) the overhaul of Regulation A, creating two tiers of offerings which came into effect on June 19, 2015, and allows for both pre-filing and post-filing marketing of an offering, called “testing the waters”; (iii) the addition of Section 5(d) of the Securities Act, which came into effect in April 2012, permitting emerging growth companies to test the waters by engaging in pre- and post-filing communications with qualified institutional buyers or institutions that are accredited investors; and (iv) Title III crowdfunding, which came into effect May 19, 2016, and allows

SEC Proposes Amendments To Definition Of “Small Reporting Company”

On June 27, 2016, the SEC published proposed amendments to the definition of “smaller reporting company” as contained in Securities Act Rule 405, Exchange Act Rule 12b-2 and Item 10(f) of Regulation S-K.  The amendments would expand the number of companies that qualify as a smaller reporting company and thus qualify for the scaled disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X.  The rule change follows the SEC concept release and request for public comment on sweeping changes to the business and financial disclosure requirements in Regulation S-K.  Throughout the SEC Concept Release, it referenced the scaled and different disclosure requirements for the different categories of company and affirmed that it was evaluating and considering changes to the eligibility criteria for each.

If the rule change is passed, the number of companies qualifying as a smaller reporting company will increase from 32% to 42% of all reporting companies.

The proposed rule change follows the SEC Advisory Committee on

SEC’s Financial Disclosure Requirements For Sub-Entities Of Registered Companies

As required by the JOBS Act, in 2013 the SEC launched its Disclosure Effectiveness Initiative and has been examining disclosure requirements under Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X and methods to improve such requirements. In September 2015, the SEC issued a request for comment related to the Regulation S-X financial disclosure obligations for certain entities other than the reporting entity. In particular, the SEC is seeking comments on the current financial disclosure requirements for acquired businesses, subsidiaries not consolidated, 50% or less owned entities, issuers of guaranteed securities, and affiliates whose securities collateralize the reporting company’s securities.

It is important to note that the SEC release relates to general financial statement and reporting requirements, and not the modified reporting requirements for smaller reporting companies or emerging growth companies. In particular, Article 8 of Regulation S-X applies to smaller reporting companies and Article 3 to those that do not qualify for the reduced Article 8 requirements. The SEC discussion and request for

Will the Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014 Simplify Reporting Requirements for ECG’s and Smaller Reporting Companies?

ABA Journal’s 10th Annual Blawg 100

——————————————————————————————————

In early December the House passed the Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014, which will now go to the Senate for action—or inaction, as the case may be.

The bill joins a string of legislative and political pressure on the SEC to review and modernize Regulation S-K to eliminate burdensome, unnecessary disclosure with the dual purpose of reducing the costs to the disclosing issuer and ensure readable, material information for the investing public.

The Disclosure Modernization and Simplification Act of 2014, if passed, would require the SEC to adopt or amend rules to: (i) allow issuers to include a summary page to Form 10-K; and (ii) scale or eliminate duplicative, antiquated or unnecessary requirements in Regulation S-K.  In addition, the SEC would be required to conduct yet another study on all Regulation S-K disclosure requirements to determine how best to amend and modernize the rules to reduce costs and burdens while

Say-On-Pay for Smaller Reporting Companies

Effective April 4, 2011, the SEC adopted final rules implementing shareholder advisory votes on executive compensation as required by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”).  Upon enactment smaller reporting companies were given a two-year exemption from the compliance requirements.  Smaller reporting companies are defined as entities which, as of the last business day of their second fiscal quarter, have a public float of less than $75 million.  Beginning in 2013, that exemption expired and now these smaller reporting companies are required to include say-on-pay voting.  Although smaller reporting companies have been subject to the rules for a year now, I still encounter questions from the entities as to their obligations and requirements under the rules.

The say-on-pay rules were implemented by adding Section 14A, which requires companies to conduct a separate shareholder advisory vote to approve the compensation of executives, which pay is disclosed pursuant to Item 402 (the “say-on-pay” vote).

Categories

Contact Author

Laura Anthony Esq

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?