A Review of FINRA’s Corporate Finance Rule
As the strongest U.S. IPO market in decades continues unabated, it seems a good time to talk about underwriter’s compensation. FINRA Rule 5110 (Corporate Financing Rule – Underwriting Terms and Arrangements) governs the compensation that may be received by an underwriter in connection with a public offering.
Rule 5110 – The “Corporate Financing Rule”
Rule 5110 regulates underwriting compensation and prohibits unfair arrangements in connection with the public offerings of securities. The Rule prohibits member firms from participating in a public offering of securities if the underwriting terms and conditions, including compensation, are unfair as defined by FINRA. The Rule requires FINRA members to make filings with FINRA disclosing information about offerings they participate in, including the amount of all compensation to be received by the firm or its principals, and affiliations and relationships that could result in the existence of a conflict of interest. As more fully described herein, underwriter’s compensation is subject to lock-up provisions.
Filing Requirements
SEC Chair Gary Gensler Testifies To Congress
On September 14, 2021, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler gave testimony to the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs highlighting the priorities of the SEC under his rule. After giving the obligatory opening statements on the size and impact of the U.S. capital markets, Gensler broke down the SEC agenda into four topics including market structure, predictive data analytics, issuers and issuer disclosure and funds and investment management.
Market Structure
Chair Gensler began his speech market structure by talking about the U.S. Treasury Market, which I found interesting mainly because I do not recall any speech or testimony by recent SEC chairpersons that focused on the topic (albeit I haven’t read them all, but I’ve read a lot!). During Covid, the Treasury Market suffered from liquidity issues prompting the SEC to consider rule and process changes, including those related to clearing, that could make the Treasury Markets more resilient and competitive. The SEC is also considering Treasury trading
SEC Approves Nasdaq Board Diversity Rule
On August 6, 2021, the SEC approved Nasdaq’s board diversity listing standards proposal. Not surprisingly, the approval vote was divided with Commissioner Hester Peirce dissenting and Commissioner Elad Roisman dissenting in part. On the same day as the approval, Chair Gary Gensler and Commissioners Peirce, Roisman and Allison Herren Lee and Caroline Crenshaw issued statements on the new Rules.
As more fully explained below, new Nasdaq Rule 5605(f) requires Nasdaq listed companies, subject to certain exceptions, to: (i) to have at least one director who self identifies as a female, and (ii) have at least one director who self-identifies as Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Asian, Native American or Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, two or more races or ethnicities, or as LGBTQ+, or (iii) explain why the company does not have at least two directors on its board who self-identify in the categories listed above. The rule changes also made headlines in most major
China Based Companies Continue To Face US Capital Market Scrutiny
On March 24, 2021, the SEC adopted interim final amendments to implement the congressionally mandated submission and disclosure requirements of the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (HFCA Act). Following adoption of the HFCA, on July 30, 2021, SEC Chairman Gary Gensler issued a statement warning of risks associated with investing in companies based in China. Although the statement has a different angle, it joins the core continued concerns of the SEC top brass and Nasdaq expressed over the years.
In June 2020 Nasdaq published proposed rules which would make it more difficult for a company to list or continue to list based on the quality of its audit, which could have a direct effect on companies based in China (see HERE). In September 2020, the SEC instituted proceedings as to whether to approve or deny the proposed rule change. As of the date of this blog, the proposal has not been ruled upon by the SEC.
However, the
OTC PINK Companies Now Qualify For Equity Line Financing
Without fanfare, the issuance of guidance, or any other formal notice, the SEC quietly changed its policy related to the filing of an at-the-market resale registration statement for an equity line financing by OTC Pink listed companies. To be clear, an OTC Pink listed company may now utilize a re-sale registration statement on Form S-1 for an equity line financing transaction, pursuant to which the securities may be sold by the investor, into the market, at market price. This results in a dramatic shift, for the better, for OTC Pink companies in the world of capital markets.
Background
Rule 415 sets forth the requirements for engaging in a delayed offering or offering on a continuous basis. Under Rule 415 a re-sale offering may be made on a delayed or continuous basis other than at a fixed price (i.e., it may be priced at the market). It is axiomatic that for a security to be sold at market price, there must
SEC Denies Expert Market – For Now
As the compliance date for the new 15c2-11 rules looms near, on August 2, 2021, in a very short statement, the SEC shot down any near-term hope for an OTC Markets operated “expert market.” The SEC short statement indicated that a review of the proposed exemptive order that would allow the expert market is not on its agenda in the short term. The SEC continued that “[A]ccordingly, on September 28, 2021, the compliance date for the amendments to Rule 15c2-11, we expect that broker-dealers will no longer be able to publish proprietary quotations for the securities of any issuer for which there is no current and publicly available information, unless an existing exception to Rule 15c2-11 applies.”
The statement acts as a great segue for a review as to just what those exceptions may be. In addition, this blog will discuss the OTC Markets proposed expert market and finish with a broader refresher on the new 211 rules including the
SEC Spring 2021 Regulatory Agenda
The first version of the SEC’s semiannual regulatory agenda and plans for rulemaking under the current administration has been published in the federal register. The Spring 2021 Agenda (“Agenda”) is current through April 2021 and contains many notable pivots from the previous SEC regime’s focus. The Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions contains the Regulatory Plans of 28 federal agencies and 68 federal agency regulatory agendas. The Agenda is published twice a year, and for several years I have blogged about each publication.
The Agenda is broken down by (i) “Pre-rule Stage”; (ii) Proposed Rule Stage; (iii) Final Rule Stage; and (iv) 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 jumped up to 45 items since Fall, which had only 32 items. Some of the new items are a revisit
SEC Rules Requiring Disclosures for Resource Extraction Companies
As required by the Dodd-Frank Act, in December 2020, the SEC adopted final rules requiring require resource extraction companies to disclose payments made to foreign governments or the U.S. federal government for the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals. The last version of the proposed rules were published in December 2019 (see HERE )The rules have an interesting history. In 2012 the SEC adopted similar disclosure rules that were ultimately vacated by the U.S. District Court. In 2016 the SEC adopted new rules which were disapproved by a joint resolution of Congress. In December 2019, the SEC took its third pass at the rules that were ultimately adopted.
The final rules require resource extraction companies that are required to file reports under Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) to disclose payments made by it or any of its subsidiaries or controlled entities, to the U.S. federal government or foreign governments
A Resolution For SPAC Warrant Accounting
On April 12, 2021, the SEC effectively chilled SPAC activity by announcing that it had examined warrant accounting in several SPACs and found that the warrants were being erroneously classified as an asset. The SEC identified two accounting issues, one related to the private placement warrants and the other related to both the private placement and public warrants. These companies were required to restate previously issued financial statements to reclassify warrants as liabilities, and the ripple effect began. Overnight SPAC management teams, accountants and auditors were scrambling to determine if a restatement was required (in most cases it was) and in-process SPACs were put on hold or at least delayed while market participants tried to figure out the meaning of the SEC guidance and how to address it.
The timing of the statement was interesting as well; most calendar year end SPACs had just filed their Form 10-K for FYE 2020 requiring a slew of 8-Ks to disclose non-reliance on
SEC Re-Opens Comments On The Use Of Universal Proxy Cards
On April 16, 2021, the SEC voted to reopen the comment period on the proposed rules for the use of Universal proxy cards in all non-exempt solicitations for contested director elections. The original rules were proposed on October 16, 2016 (see HERE) with no activity since. However, it is not surprising that the comment period re-opened, and it is not as a result of the new administration. The SEC’s Spring and Fall 2020 semi-annual regulatory agendas and plans for rulemaking both included universal proxies as action items in the final rule stage. Prior to that, the topic had sat in the long-term action category for years.
In light of the several years since the original proposing release, change in corporate governance environment, proliferation of virtual shareholder meetings, and rule amendments related to proxy advisory firms (see HERE) and shareholder proposals in the proxy process (see HERE), the SEC believed it prudent to re-open a public comment period.
