You searched for venture exchanges - Page 4 of 42

The SEC’S Spring 2024 Flex Regulatory Agenda

August 13, 2024

On July 9, 2024, the SEC published its semi-annual Spring 2024 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) Proposed Rule Stage; (ii) Final Rule Stage; and (iii) 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 34, down from 43 on the Fall 2023 Agenda and a whopping 55 on the Spring 2023 Agenda. Many

SEC Division Of Corporation Finance Statement On Disclosure Review

August 6, 2024

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

July 30, 2024

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

July 23, 2024

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

July 16, 2024

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

NASDAQ Issues New FAQ On MarketWatch News Submittals

July 9, 2024

In November 2023, Nasdaq added a new FAQ providing guidance on completing the electronic disclosure form to provide the required advance notice to Nasdaq’s MarketWatch Department when material non-public information is being announced, including news releases. I realized that while I have blogged about the Nasdaq notification requirements in general (see HERE), the recent changes to the Nasdaq reverse split rules, including MarketWatch notification (see HERE) and Nasdaq continued listing requirements (see HERE), I have not yet drilled down on the Nasdaq Rule 5250(b)(1) MarketWatch disclosure requirements, until now.

As an aside, Nasdaq Rule 5250 is a lengthy rule covering multiple facets of listed company obligations (including the reverse split and notification requirements and several of the corporate governance requirements in the blogs linked to above). This blog focuses on Rule 5250(b)(1) and its related IM discussions related to the disclosure of material non-public information.

Nasdaq Rule 5250(b)(1)

Nasdaq Rule 5250(b)(1) sets forth a listed company’s obligation

Supreme Court Decides MD&A Case

July 2, 2024

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

June 25, 2024

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

June 18, 2024

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

Delaware Court Of Chancery – M&A Transactions

June 11, 2024

The Delaware Chancery Court’s recent decisions in Crispo v. Musk, West Palm Beach Firefighters v. Moelis & Company, Chordia v. Lee, and Sjunde AP-fonden v. Activision Blizzard, Inc. have caused some angst for merger and acquisition (M&A) practitioners. This blog will summarize those opinions and the statutory changes proposed by the Delaware Bar in response.

Crispo v. Musk

In Crispo v. Musk, the court decided on the ambiguous issue of when a target may assert a claim for premium damages in the event of a default by a buyer in an acquisition agreement. In essence, when a public company is the target in an acquisition, the board of directors act as agents for the shareholders, who will ultimately receive the merger consideration. Moreover, that merger consideration is almost always at a premium to pre-merger market price. Unfortunately, this creates a contractual legal issue, whereby if the buyer breaches the agreement, the only damage claim by the target

1700 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd, Suite 820

(800) 341-2684

Contact us

MAKE VALUED ALLIANCES

Search Results for: venture exchanges – Page 4

SEC Division Of Corporation Finance Statement On Disclosure Review

SEC Publishes More New C&DI On Cybersecurity Rules

Free Writing Prospectus

F-3 Eligibility

NASDAQ Issues New FAQ On MarketWatch News Submittals

Supreme Court Decides MD&A Case

SEC Updates Guidance On Confidential Treatment Requests

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

Contact Information

Recent Posts

Nasdaq Amends Bid Price Compliance Rules to Accelerate Delisting Process

Market Wrap-Up

Nasdaq and NYSE Clawback Rules

SEC Adopts New EDGAR Rules

Legal Resources

Tweets

DEVELOPED AND MANAGED BY

Featured On

Contact Author

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?