nyse Archives - Securities Law Blog

テキサス証券取引所（TXSE）

2025年10月、SECは新たな全米証券取引所であるテキサス証券取引所（TXSE）を承認しました。TXSEは、ここ数十年でSECの承認を受けた初の完全統合型の全米証券取引所です。TXSEは、2026年にETP（上場取引型商品）およびSPACを含む企業の上場を開始する予定です。

TXSEはプレスリリースで、「業界でも最高水準の定量的基準を維持しつつ、上場および上場維持の負担を軽減することで、数十年にわたる米国の上場企業数の減少を反転させることを使命としている」と述べています。TXSEは、テキサス州が親ビジネス施策、企業本社（参照）、上場市場、そして現在では取引所運営に至るまで、ビジネス分野でのリーダーとなることを目指す統合的な取り組みの一環です。

TXSE上場プロセスと基準

NYSEやナスダックのように小規模発行体に対応する複数層の制度とは異なり、TXSEは中堅から大規模企業を対象とした単一層の取引所として運営されます。TXSEへの証券上場を希望する企業は、財務、流動性、コーポレートガバナンスなどの指定された最低上場要件を満たす必要があります。TXSEは上場プロセスに関して広範な裁量を有しており、技術的要件を満たしていても、投資家や公益を保護するために必要と判断される場合には申請を却下することがあります。上場後は、継続上場基準を満たす義務があります。

すべての初回上場申請企業は、正式な上場申請を行う前に、必須の非公開事前申請レビューを完了しなければなりません。この事前申請レビューは無料で提供され、TXSEによれば、プロセスの早期段階で問題を特定し、企業が本格的な上場手続きに投資する前により高い確実性を得られることを目的としています。

事前申請レビューの後、TXSEは有効期間9か月のクリアランスレターを発行します。企業がその期間内に上場を完了しない場合、事前申請プロセスを再度行う必要があります。TXSEは、新規上場（IPO）および既に他の全国証券取引所で取引されている企業のデュアル上場の両方を認めます。

TXSEに証券を上場するには、企業は以下を満たす必要があります：（a）一定の初回定量・定性要件、（b）一定の継続的定量・定性要件。初回上場の定量的基準は、継続上場基準よりも一般的に高く設定されており、上場前に企業が十分な成熟度に達していることを確認するのに役立ちます。

TXSEの上場基準（および継続上場基準）は、ナスダックの基準とほぼ同等です。

財務および流動性要件。 一般的に、企業は以下の基準を満たす必要があります。なお、TXSEは外国籍のプライベート発行体およびSPACに対して異なる基準を設けています。

要件	IPO上場	ダイレクト上場	他取引所からの移管
公開株式の時価総額	4,000万ドル	1億ドル	4,000万ドル
公開株式数	110万株	110万株	110万株
売買価格（株価）	4ドル	4ドル	4ドル
コーポレートガバナンス	あり	あり	あり
単元株主数	400	400	400*
マーケットメイカー	4**	4**	4**

* 他取引所から移管する場合、企業は次のいずれかを満たすことで上場資格を得ることができます：総株主数2,200人かつ平均月間取引量10万株、または総株主数500人かつ平均月間取引量100万株。

** 企業は、以下のいずれかの条件を満たす場合、マーケットメイカー3社のみで上場することが可能です：(i) 過去3会計年度のうち直近2年度で年間収益100万ドル以上、株主持分1,500万ドル以上、公開株式の時価800万ドル以上；または (ii) 株主持分3,000万ドル以上、2年間の営業実績、公開株式の時価1,800万ドル以上。

加えて、企業は次のいずれかの財務基準を満たす必要があります：

収益テスト

グローバル市場テスト

他取引所からの移管

過去3会計年度の合計税引前利益が1,000万ドルで、直近2会計年度それぞれで最低200万ドルを確保し、過去3年間すべてで利益が出ている場合；または、過去3会計年度の合計で少なくとも1,200万ドルを確保し、直近年度で最低500万ドル、次の直近年度で最低200万ドルを確保している場合。

新興成長企業（EGC）は、過去2会計年度の合計で1,000万ドル、かつ両年度で最低200万ドルを確保していれば上場資格を得ることができます。

2億ドルのグローバル時価総額

400万ドル

シーズニング規則

シーズニング規則は、公開企業のシェルとのリバースマージャーを完了した企業が、リバースマージャー取引に関するすべての必要書類（監査済み財務諸表を含む）を提出した後、合併後の企業が米国店頭市場、他の全国証券取引所、または規制された外国取引所で少なくとも1年間取引されるまで、上場申請を行うことを禁止しています。さらに、この規則では、新たなリバースマージャー企業が1年間の期間において、少なくとも1回の年次報告書を含め、すべての必要報告書を適時に提出していることも求められます。

加えて、シーズニング規則では、リバースマージャー企業が「上場資格を得るために適用される初回上場基準における株価要件を、持続的に維持すること。ただし、直近60取引日のうち少なくとも30取引日分は維持していること」が求められます。

この規則には、企業がファームコミットメント方式での公募を完了し、公開株式の最低時価総額（4,000万ドル）以上の純収益を得た場合の例外も含まれています。

コーポレートガバナンス要件

TXSEルールシリーズ16.300に定められた定量的要件を満たすことに加え、上場申請企業および既上場企業は、TXSEルールシリーズ16.400に記載された定性的要件を満たす必要があります。これらの要件には、取締役会に関する規則（監査委員会や、役員報酬および取締役指名プロセスの独立取締役による監督を含む）、誤って支払われた報酬の回収、行動規範、株主総会（委任状の勧誘および定足数を含む）、関連当事者取引のレビュー、株主承認（議決権を含む）などが含まれます。これらの規則の適用除外や段階的適用スケジュールについては、TXSEルール16.407に定められています。これらの規則は、ナスダックの規則とほぼ同等です。

申請および必要書類

クリアランスレターを受領した後、企業は正式な上場申請を行う必要があります。TXSEの申請パッケージには以下が含まれます：（i）銘柄予約フォーム、（ii）上場申請書（補足書類が必要）、（iii）上場契約書、（iv）コーポレートガバナンス証明書、（v）初回申請料（小切手または送金により支払い）、および（vi）ロゴ提出フォーム。すべての申請書類は、TXSEウェブサイトのリスティングセンターで入手可能です。

著者

ローラ・アンソニー弁護士

設立パートナー

アンソニー、リンダー＆カコマノリス

企業法務および証券法務事務所

LAnthony@ALClaw.com

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

In October 2025, the SEC approved the Texas Stock Exchange (“TXSE”), a new national securities exchange. The TXSE is the first fully integrated national securities exchange to receive SEC approval in decades. The TXSE is expected to launch ETP and corporate listings, including SPACs in 2026.

In its press release the TXSE states that its “mission is to reverse the decades-long decline in the number of U.S. public companies by reducing the burden of going and staying public while maintaining some of the highest quantitative standards in the industry.” The TXSE is part of an integrated push by Texas to be a leader in pro-business initiatives, corporate headquarters (see HERE), listings and now an exchange operator.

TXSE Listing Process and Criteria

Unlike NYSE and Nasdaq’s multi‑tier systems that accommodate smaller issuers, TXSE will operate as a single‑tier exchange targeting mid‑ to large‑cap companies. A company seeking to list securities on TXSE must meet minimum listing requirements, including specified financial,

米国での新規株式公開（IPO）を検討する日本企業にとって、最初期かつ極めて重要なストラクチャリング上の判断は、米国預託証券（ADR）を通じて上場するか、あるいは日本の普通株式を直接上場するかという点です。歴史的には、ADRが事実上の標準的手法であり、場合によっては唯一の現実的な選択肢とされてきました。しかし、現在はもはやそうした状況ではありません。

本稿では、ADRの仕組みを解説するとともに、ADRによる上場と日本の普通株式の直接上場それぞれのメリット・デメリットを比較検討します。また、近年の制度的・市場環境の変化により、米国上場を目指す日本企業にとって利用可能な選択肢がどのように大きく拡大しているのかについても考察します。

ADRとは何か、どのように機能するのか

ADRとは、外国企業の一定数の原株式に対する権利を表章する米国市場で取引される証券であり、米国の預託銀行によって発行されるものです。預託銀行は、発行体の本国（本件では日本）に所在する保管機関を通じて原株式を保有し、それを裏付けとして米国市場で取引されるADRを発行します。

米国投資家の観点から見ると、ADRは国内株式とほぼ同様に機能します。すなわち、米ドル建てで取引され、DTC（米国証券保管振替機関）を通じて決済され、米国証券法の適用を受けます。他方、発行者の観点から見ると、ADRは追加的なストラクチャー上の層を伴います。具体的には、預託契約、預託手数料、議決権行使の仕組み、ならびに発行者・預託銀行・外国の保管機関（カストディアン）間の調整などが関与します。

ADRは、米国市場のインフラに適合していること、また米国の取引所、決済制度および投資家に広く理解されてきたことから、歴史的に魅力的な手法とされてきました。

ADRが日本の発行会社によって伝統的に利用されてきた理由

長年にわたり、米国取引所への上場を目指す日本企業にとって、実質的にADRの利用が必須とされてきました。特に、発行体が日本でも上場を維持する、あるいは日本での上場を目指す場合にはなおさらです。日本の普通株式を直接用いた二重上場は、米国の決済・清算システムの下では現実的な手法とはみなされませんでした。

ADRには以下のような利点もありました：

米国の投資家やアナリストにとって馴染みがある
DTCおよび米国の証券仲介システムとの互換性がある
規制面および運用面で確立されたフレームワークがある

その結果、ADRは米国で上場する日本企業にとって標準的な手法となりました。

ADRに伴う実務上の課題の増大

しかし近年、ADRは日本企業にとって実務的に導入がますます難しくなっています。多くの米国預託銀行や日本の保管機関は、特に中小型企業に対して、もはや日本企業向けのADRプログラムのサポートを行わない傾向にあります。

こうした状況の背景には、以下のような複合的な要因があります：

規制およびコンプライアンス上の負担の増加
預託銀行や保管機関にとってのコストとメリットのバランス
日本企業特有の運用上の複雑さ

その結果、ADRは依然として利用可能ではあるものの、商業的に妥当な条件で利用できない場合が多く、必ずしも必要ではないケースも増えています。

別の選択肢の検討：日本の普通株式を直接上場する方法

数年前、これらのADRに伴う課題を踏まえ、ある日本のクライアントとともに、ADRを使わずに日本の普通株式を米国の証券取引所に直接上場するという代替手法を検討しました。

当時、この手法は従来の慣例に反するものであり、ほとんど前例のない試みでした。米国の市場インフラ、特にDTCは、日本の普通株式を米国取引所で直接取引するオファリングをこれまで処理したことがなかったのです。

私たちは日本側の法律顧問と密に連携し、日本法（会社法および外国為替及び外国貿易法）上、このようなストラクチャーに法的な障害がないことを詳細に確認しました。同時に、米国側の決済・保管・清算上の課題についても検討し、対応策を検討しました。

DTCオピニオンと市場準備までの長い道のり

このプロセスにおける重要なステップの一つが、DTC向けの特別な法律意見書の作成でした。これは、日本の普通株式が米国のシステムを通じて取引・決済・清算可能であることの法的妥当性を確認するものであり、米国側の法律顧問、日本側の法律顧問、市場参加者、インフラ提供者との綿密な調整が求められました。

当初は進捗が遅かったものの、最終的にDTCの承認を得ることができました。

画期的な達成：日本の普通株式のNYSE初上場

長年の準備期間を経て、昨年、私たちは重要な節目を迎えました。ニューヨーク証券取引所（NYSE）への日本株の直接上場に成功し、続いてナスダックへの上場も果たしました。

この進展は、日本の発行体にとって可能性の枠組みを根本的に変えるものです。これにより、日本企業は初めてADRを介さず、既存の米国市場インフラを活用して主要米国証券取引所に普通株式を直接上場できるようになったのです。

今日の日本企業にとっての意義

この画期的な出来事は、実務上、重要な意味を持ちます。

日本の発行体は、もはや利用できない、あるいは実務上非現実的なADR構造に縛られる必要がなくなります。
企業は、日本の普通株式をナスダックやニューヨーク証券取引所に直接上場することを検討できるようになります。
さらに重要なのは、この構造により、真の二重上場、すなわち同一の日本の普通株式を米国の証券取引所と東京証券取引所の両方に上場できる可能性が開かれた点です。真の二重上場には規制上のハードルがありますが、私たちはそれらを克服するため、積極的に取り組んでいます。

市場間の流動性の確保、株主基盤の整合性、構造の簡素化を重視する企業にとって、これは大きな前進と言えるでしょう。

ADRと日本の普通株式：主要な考慮点

ADRと日本の普通株式のいずれを選択するかを決める際、発行体は以下の点を考慮する必要があります：

預託銀行や保管機関の利用可能性およびコスト
上場戦略の方針（単一市場上場か二重市場上場か）
投資家層および流動性の目標
継続的な管理およびコンプライアンスの複雑性

ADRは、特に大規模な発行体で既存の預託銀行との関係が確立している場合など、一定の状況下では依然として適切な手段となり得ます。しかし、多くの日本企業にとって、ADRはもはや唯一の選択肢ではなく、必ずしも最適な手段でもありません。

まとめ

数十年にわたり、ADRは日本企業が米国の公開市場にアクセスする手段を規定してきました。しかし、そのパラダイムは今や変化しています。

NYSEおよびナスダックでの日本普通株式の上場が成功したことにより、日本企業には新たで現実的な選択肢が生まれました。この選択肢は柔軟性を提供し、ADRインフラへの依存を軽減するとともに、米国と日本の間で真の二重上場を実現する道を開きます。

今日、米国でのIPOを検討する日本企業にとって、もはやADRが必須かどうかが問題ではなく、むしろ自社の長期的な資本市場戦略に最も適したストラクチャーは何か、という点が重要となっています。

著者

ローラ・アンソニー弁護士

設立パートナー

アンソニー、リンダー＆カコマノリス

企業法務および証券法務事務所

LAnthony@ALClaw.com

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

For Japanese companies considering an initial public offering in the United States, one of the earliest — and most consequential — structuring decisions is whether to list through American Depository Receipts (“ADRs”) or to list Japanese common shares directly. Historically, ADRs were the default (and often the only viable) path. That is no longer the case.

This blog discusses how ADRs work, the pros and cons of ADRs versus direct listings of Japanese common shares, and why recent developments have fundamentally expanded the options available to Japanese issuers contemplating a U.S. public listing.

What Is an ADR and How Does It Work?

An ADR is a U.S.-traded security issued by a U.S. depository bank that represents an interest in a specified number of a foreign company’s underlying ordinary shares. The depository holds the ordinary shares through a custodian in the issuer’s home country — in this case, Japan — and issues ADRs that trade in the U.S. market.

From a

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

NYSE Listed Company Rule 902.03 – Fees for Listed Equity Securities

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

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

On January 15, 2025, the SEC approved amendments to NYSE Listed Company Manual Rule 802.01C to allow for an accelerated delisting process where a listed company uses a reverse split to regain compliance with the bid price requirement for continued listing, but that as a result of the reverse split, the company falls below other listing standards, such as the minimum number of round lot holders, or minimum number of shares in the publicly held float. In October 2024, the SEC approved a similar rule change for Nasdaq – see HERE.

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

Background

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

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

OTCID

Currently, the OTC Markets divides issuers into

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

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

Nasdaq Clawback Rules

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

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

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

Definition of a Foreign Private Issuer

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

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

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

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

NYSE Continued Listing Standards

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

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

On December 26, 2023, the SEC approved an NYSE rule change to make it easier for listed companies to raise money from existing substantial shareholders. In particular, the NYSE has amended Section 312.03(b) and 312.04 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual to modify the circumstances under which a listed company must obtain shareholder approval prior to the sale of securities below the Minimum Price to a substantial security holder.

Background

Section 312.03 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual lists the circumstances upon which shareholder approval must be obtained prior to the issuance of securities. Pre-amendment Section 312.03(b)(i) requires shareholder approval prior to the issuance of common stock, or of securities convertible into or exercisable for common stock, in any transaction or series of related transactions, to a director, officer or substantial security holder of the company (each a “Related Party”) if the number of shares of common stock to be issued, or if the number of shares of common stock

Although I often write about initial listing standards, I realized that I have not yet blogged about the reduced ongoing listing standards for national exchanges. Last week I wrote about the Nasdaq continued listing requirements (see HERE) and this week I will cover the NYSE and NYSE American. For a review of the initial listing requirements for the NYSE American see HERE.

NYSE American

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Annual Compliance Guidance Memo

The NYSE Memo provides a list of important

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

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

The American Trade Association for Cannabis and Hemp (ATACH) has published a policy paper urging the Nasdaq and New York Stock Exchange to allow U.S. cannabis operators that “touch the plant” to list on their respective Exchanges. The current prohibition to listing is purely discretionary and not because of any regulatory action by the SEC or any other U.S. regulatory authority. The policy paper, published November 7, 2022, outlines very convincing arguments for allowing U.S. operators to list on the National Exchanges.

The policy paper notes that up until now, the National Exchanges have refused to list these companies while cannabis remains federally illegal out of concerns that they could be charged with aiding and abetting violations of the U.S. Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”) or with money laundering by the receipt of listing fees. As of the time of the publication of the policy paper, cannabis is legal in 37 states, D.C. and U.S. territories. The ATACH rightfully asserts that

Update On Nasdaq And NYSE Direct Listings

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

The Nasdaq Stock Market has three tiers of listed companies: (1) The Nasdaq Global Select Market, (2) The Nasdaq Global Market, and (3) The Nasdaq Capital Market. Each tier has increasingly higher listing standards, with the Nasdaq Global Select Market having the highest initial listing standards and the Nasdaq Capital Markets being the entry-level tier for most micro- and small-cap issuers.

Public Market Listing Standards

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

Quantitative and Liquidity Listing Standards

Nasdaq Capital Markets

To list its securities on Nasdaq Capital Markets, a company is required to meet: (a) certain initial quantitative and qualitative requirements and (b) certain continuing quantitative and qualitative requirements. The quantitative listing thresholds for initial listing are generally higher than for continued listing, thus helping to ensure that companies have reached a sufficient level of maturity prior to listing. NASDAQ also requires listed companies to meet stringent corporate governance standards.

Requirements

Equity Standard

Market Value of

Listed Securities

Standard

Net

The MEMX

Although overshadowed by all things ESG and SPAC related, a new Wall Street backed national exchange, the Members Exchange (MEMX), launched in Q4 2020 with ambitions to rival the NYSE and Nasdaq. In the same month, the long-anticipated launch of the Silicon Valley backed Long-Term Stock Exchange (LTSE) came to fruition. The MEMX, founded as a lower cost alternative to Nasdaq and the NYSE, started small, initially only trading the securities of 7 large cap companies including Alphabet and Exxon Mobil, but has since opened to all exchange traded securities.

The MEMX was backed by Blackrock, Charles Schwab, Citadel, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, JP Morgan, E-Trade and Virtu, among others. These financial giants invested over $135 million into the platform and as such, have a vested interest in its success. They also have the power to direct significant trading activity onto the MEMX, where others will likely follow. In the 6 months since it went live,

Audit Committees – NYSE American

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

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

Finders – Part 2

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

Regulation S

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

SEC Proposes Amendments To Rule 144

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

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

NYSE Continues To Struggle With Direct Listing Rule Changes

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

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

Nasdaq Rule Amendments 2020

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

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

Delisting Process

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

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

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

NYSE

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

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

Nasdaq Board Independence Standards

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

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

Nasdaq Direct Listing Rule Change

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

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

NYSE American Compliance Guidance MEMO

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

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

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

SEC Cautionary Statement on Audits of Public Companies Operating in China

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

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

An IPO Without The SEC

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

Going Public Without An IPO

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

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

SEC Chief Accountant Speaks On Financial Reporting

Nominate Us For ABA Journal’s Top Blog- HERE

——————————————————————————————————

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

Introduction and Role of the PCAOB

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

The U.S. Capital Markets Clearance And Settlement Process

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

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

History and Background

The Paperwork Crisis

The Materiality Standard; NYSE Amends Rules; FASB Proposed Guidance

The recent increase in regulatory activity and marketplace discussion on the topic of disclosure has not been limited to the small business arena or small cap marketplace. Effective September 28, 2015, the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) amended its Rule 202.06 of the NYSE Listed Company Manual, which governs the procedures that listed companies must follow for the release of material information. Also, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has issued two exposure drafts providing guidance and seeking comments on the use of materiality to help companies eliminate unnecessary disclosures in their financial statements and to determine what is “material” for inclusion in notes to the financial statements. Both exposure drafts solicit public comment on proposed amendments to the Statement of Financial Accounting Concepts published by FASB.

NYSE Rule 202.06 Amendment

As published in the federal register, the NYSE proposes to amend Section 202.06 of the Manual to “(i) expand the premarket hours during which listed companies are required to

Contact Author

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?