nyse Archives - Securities Law Blog

NYSE Amends Listing Standards For Foreign Private Issuers And Listing Fees For All Issuers

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 Information

Recent Posts

Legal Resources

Tweets

DEVELOPED AND MANAGED BY

Featured On

Contact Author

Have a Question for Laura Anthony?