Author: Chris Doerksen
Chris helps clients raise money by selling equity and debt, buy and sell assets and businesses, manage their SEC disclosures, implement corporate governance structures, list on stock exchanges, and establish equity-based compensation arrangements. He currently serves as the head of Seattle’s Corporate department and co-chair of the Canada Cross-Border Practice Group.
View Full Bio on Dorsey
The SEC is aiming to finalize its new mining disclosure rules within the next year, according to statements made last week by William Hinman, Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, at the Securities Regulation Institute. For more details regarding the SEC’s original 2016 proposal to revamp the rules, and reactions by industry, see our summary of the initial proposal (here: www.dorsey.com/newsresources/publications/client-alerts/2016/07/new-mining-disclosure-rules) and our last blog post (here: crossbordercounselor.com/status-check-on-the-secs-proposed-overhaul-of-the-mining-disclosure-regime/).
About 18 months have passed since the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published its bold attempt to modernize the disclosure requirements for mining companies that are listed on U.S. stock exchanges or otherwise report to the SEC. With final rules not yet adopted, the fight for a streamlined reporting regime continues. The SEC’s proposed overhaul was spawned by industry request – specifically, a request by the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration (SME), the leading professional society of mining professionals in the United States, that the SEC bring its disclosure requirements into the modern age and adopt a new disclosure regime based on the Committee for Mineral Reserves International Reporting Standards (CRIRSCO)...
Over the last few years, many Canadian junior resource companies and startup companies have cut back on their legal spend, not necessarily undertaking a legal review of each new private placement of securities, or limiting their review to a Canadian one. Yet over this same time frame, the applicable U.S. rules and relevant interpretations have changed, and previously vetted forms may not be current. Indications that your U.S. law compliance practices in offering and selling securities could use a good scrub include the following: You don’t know the definition of a “foreign private issuer” or whether your company is one; You don’t know if your company has a “substantial U.S. market interest” in...
On September 5, 2017, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed (by a vote of 403-3) the Improving Access to Capital Act. The Act directs the SEC to amend Regulation A+ to allow SEC reporting issuers to use Regulation A+ when raising capital, and to deem their SEC periodic reports to satisfy the periodic and current reporting requirements of Tier 2 of Regulation A+. The Act is now being considered by the U.S. Senate. If the Act becomes law, it will increase the alternatives available to SEC reporting companies in seeking additional capital. Smaller public companies that are not listed on Nasdaq or the NYSE, and are therefore subject to state securities regulation...
Readers listed on the NYSE will want to note a recent rule change. Effective immediately, notification of public announcements regarding dividends or stock distributions must be provided to the NYSE at least ten minutes prior to public release, even after market close. Read more in the post from our partner Jason Brenkert here: https://governancecomplianceinsider.com/nyse-rule-change-requires-ten-minutes-advance-notice-of-public-announcement-of-dividends-or-stock-distributions/
This week the SEC Division of Economic and Risk Analysis published a new report including a wealth of data regarding recent trends in public offerings and private placements of securities. The report includes a number of interesting facts about U.S. private placement practice, including: In the last few years, issuers have raised 2-3 times more capital through Regulation D than through Rule 144A. Rule 506(b) remains the most popular way to raise capital under Regulation D, with 97% of all funds raised under Rule 506 being raised under Rule 506(b), rather than the newer Rule 506(c), with issuers choosing not to take the additional steps required by Rule 506(c) to generally solicit investors. Only...
Occasionally, we will see Canadians or Canadian companies assume that they can authorize as many shares for issuance as they want when forming a Delaware corporation, or that they can authorize shares without par value. That’s technically true, but Delaware will make you pay dearly for it, up to $180,000 per company per year. A Delaware corporation must pay the state an annual franchise tax. This tax is initially based on the number of authorized shares. Provided the authorized shares have a stated par value, the tax assessment can be re-calculated on an assumed par value basis using a formula that involves the number of shares authorized for issuance by the certificate of...
A Canadian company that proposes to grant stock options or other types of equity compensation to persons in the United States must comply with the securities laws of the state in which the recipient is located, unless the type of equity being issued (e.g., the underlying common shares, in the case of options to purchase common shares) is listed on a “national securities exchange” such as the NYSE, Nasdaq, and NYSE MKT. This means that private companies, Canadian public companies that are not listed in the United States, and Canadian companies that are listed in the United States only in over-the-counter markets such as the OTCQX, OTCQB, or Pink Sheets, are required to...
Canadian manufacturers who sell products through U.S. distributors should ensure that they take appropriate action to establish their U.S. intellectual property rights, and to deal clearly with those rights in their cross-border distribution agreements. In a recent post on Dorsey’s IP blog, The TMCA, Sandra Edelman discusses the difficulties encountered by Covertech Fabricating, a Canadian manufacturer of protective packaging and reflective insulation, in establishing that it was the rightful owner of the trademarks in its branded products, not its U.S. distributor. Read her analysis of the recent court decision here: thetmca.com/who-owns-that-trademark-the-manufacturer-or-the-exclusive-distributor/
This week, the SEC approved a rule that would require broker-dealers to settle most securities transactions on a T+2 basis (shortening the current regime from T+3), effective September 5, 2017. See additional information in the post from our partner Jason Brenkert here. Will Canadian regulators follow suit?
