Review Smaller Reporting Company Status in Light of New “Smaller Reporting Company” Definition and Updated SEC Staff C&DIs

Feb 22, 2019

Reading Time : 4 min

A company newly qualifying as an SRC under the amended definition on or after September 10, 2018, regardless of whether it qualified under the previous definition, has the option to use the SRC scaled disclosure accommodations in (i) its next periodic or current report due on or after September 10, 2018, or (ii) transactional filings without a due date, in filings or amended filings made on or after September 10, 2018.

Updated and Withdrawn C&DIs

The SEC Staff updated three Regulation S-K C&DIs and one Exchange Act Form C&DI relating to Form 10-K to reflect the amended SRC definition. The SEC Staff also withdrew four Exchange Act C&DIs addressing transition issues for SRCs and two obsolete Regulation S-K C&DIs relating to rescinded Regulation S-B and the correction of a misstatement on financial expert disclosure in the original SRC adopting release.

Updated Regulation S-K C&DIs

Depending upon its public float, a company may be an accelerated filer and qualify as an SRC (C&DI 102.01)

According to C&DI 102.01, a company can be both an accelerated filer and an SRC. To use the illustration provided by C&DI 102.01, a company with a fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 that had a public float of $80 million on the last business day of its second fiscal quarter would qualify as an SRC for filings due in 2019. This is because the company’s public float as of the last business day of its second fiscal quarter was less than $250 million (the new threshold under the recent amendment to the definition of SRC). At the same time, the company is unable to exit its accelerated filer status for filings due in 2019 because this would require the company to have less than $50 million in public float on the last business day of its second fiscal quarter in 2018 (see paragraph (3)(ii) of the definition of "accelerated filer" in Rule 12b-2). Because the company had a public float of $80 million on the last business day of its second fiscal quarter of 2018, it will remain an accelerated filer for filings made in 2019 despite qualifying as an SRC. C&DI 102.01 points out that the company may use the scaled disclosure rules for SRCs in its annual report on Form 10-K, but the Form 10-K will be due 75 days after the end of its fiscal year and must include the auditor attestation reported described in Item 308(b) of Regulation S-K and required by Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

If an initial determination is made that a company does not qualify as an SRC, subsequent assessments for SRC status use a public float threshold that is 80% of initial threshold (C&DI 102.02)

According to C&DI 102.02, once a reporting company determines that it does not qualify as an SRC, it will remain unqualified unless, when making a subsequent determination, (a) it determines that its public float is less than $200 million or (b) it determines that (i) for any threshold it previously exceeded, it is below the subsequent annual determination threshold (i.e., public float of less than $560 million and annual revenues of less than $80 million) and (ii) for any threshold that it previously met, it remains below the initial determination threshold (i.e., public float of less than $700 million or no public float and annual revenues of less than $100 million). As illustrated by C&DI 102.02, a company having a December 31 fiscal year would not qualify as an SRC if its public float as of June 28, 2019 was $710 million and its annual revenues for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 were $90 million. At the next determination date (June 30, 2020), it will remain unqualified as an SRC unless it determines that its public float as of June 30, 2020 was less than $560 million and its annual revenues for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 remained less than $100 million.

Consolidated annual revenues should be used for determination of SRC status (C&DI 202.01)

C&DI 202.01 clarifies that an issuer should include “all annual revenues on a consolidated basis” when calculating an issuer’s annual revenues to determine whether the issuer qualifies as an SRC. Accordingly, a holding company with no public float as of the last business day of its second fiscal quarter would not qualify as an SRC unless “it had less than $100 million in consolidated annual revenues in the most recently completed fiscal year for which audited financial statements are available (i.e., as of the fiscal year end preceding that second fiscal quarter).”

Updated Exchange Act Form C&DI

A company that no longer qualifies as an SRC may still use SRC scaled disclosure in a proxy statement for a section that it is incorporating into a prior year’s Form 10-K, if it qualified as an SRC in such prior year (C&DI 104.13)

In C&DI 104.13, the SEC Staff provides an illustration of a company that files its Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 (the “2019 Form 10-K”) using disclosure permitted for SRCs under Regulation S-K. The cover page of the Form 10-K indicates that the company has its public float exceeding $250 million at the end of its second fiscal quarter in 2019. At the same time, the company proposes to rely on General Instruction G(3) of Form 10-K to incorporate by reference executive compensation and other disclosure required by Part III of Form 10-K into the 2019 Form 10-K from the company’s definitive proxy statement to be filed not later than 120 days after its 2019 fiscal year end. In C&DI 104.13, the SEC Staff confirms that the company may use the scaled SRC disclosure in the proxy statement even though it does not qualify to use SRC disclosure for the fiscal year beginning January 1, 2020. According to the SEC Staff, this is because the company could have used SRC disclosure for Part III of its 2019 Form 10-K if it had not used General Instruction G(3) to incorporate that information by reference from the definitive proxy statement.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 24, 2023

On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted, California’s Board Diversity Statute, required public companies with headquarters in the state to include a minimum number of directors from “underrepresented communities” or be subject to fines for violating the statute. AB 979 defines a “director from an underrepresented community” as “an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.”

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 9, 2023

Update: On October 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit granted the US Chamber of Commerce's petition for review of the SEC's share repurchase disclosure rules, holding that the SEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court directed the SEC to correct the defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 1, 2023, the SEC informed the Fifth Circuit that it was unable to correct the rule's defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 19, 2023, the Fifth Circuit vacated the SEC’s share repurchase disclosure rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

We have released our 2023 ESG Survey which includes a collection of reports reflecting on significant ESG themes and trends from 2022, as well as what we believe to be key developments for 2023.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 6, 2023

As companies begin preparing for the 2023 proxy season, we note that Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis, the leading providers of corporate governance solutions and proxy advisory services, issued updated benchmark policies (proxy voting guidelines), which can be found here and here, respectively. The updated proxy voting guidelines generally focus on board accountability and oversight considerations and address topics such as climate accountability, board diversity, shareholder rights, corporate governance standards, executive compensation and social issues. What follows is a summary of the proxy voting guidelines published by ISS and Glass Lewis for the 2023 proxy season.

...

Read More

© 2024 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.