Top 10 Topics for Directors in 2019: SEC Regulation and Enforcement

Mar 18, 2019

Reading Time : 3 min

In August 2018, the SEC adopted significant rule changes in its ongoing disclosure update and simplification program. Companies and boards will want to ensure that accounting and disclosure controls are in place for the upcoming annual report and proxy season to take advantage of these rule changes. Most of these revisions reduce disclosure requirements that are duplicative or are no longer considered important to investors. However, some amendments expand existing requirements, and companies will want to implement any changes necessary to comply with the revised rules, including the expanded requirement to provide quarterly, in addition to annual, statements of changes in stockholders’ equity and disclosure of the amount of dividends per share for each class of shares with respect to interim financial periods. In addition, the SEC plans to seek comment on President Trump’s proposal to shift from quarterly to semiannual reporting, as well as earnings guidance and related matters. Boards will want to monitor developments in this area and the ongoing development of investor and regulator views, including the formal SEC request for comment on earnings releases and quarterly reports.

Proxy Voting, Proxy Advisors and Shareholder Proposals.

In November 2018, the SEC conducted a proxy roundtable on the proxy voting process and solicited comments for possible rule revisions, including amendments to the regulation of proxy advisory firms, such as ISS and Glass Lewis. Possible amendments include increased regulation of potential conflicts of interest on the part of proxy advisors, due to their relationships with investor groups and companies, and satisfaction of investment advisors’ fiduciary duties when they rely on proxy advisor recommendations. The proxy roundtable also addressed the Rule 14a-8 shareholder proposal process. As with the subject of proxy advisor regulation, this builds on the SEC’s 2010 Concept Release on the proxy system and follows on SEC Staff Legal Bulletins in 2017 and 2018 emphasizing the role of the board’s analysis in determining whether shareholder proposals may be excluded from a company’s proxy statement under the “ordinary business” exclusion of Rule 14a-8. While the SEC staff has provided interpretations that may reduce the burdens of the shareholder proposal process on public companies, significant institutional investors and advocates have proposed expanding the shareholder proposal process and submitted an October 2018 petition for rulemaking to mandate increased environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosures, including expanded requirements relating to gender and other diversity measures, climate change, executive compensation and human capital management. These and other aspects of the proxy system have been the subject of ongoing legislative initiatives that would increase regulation of the activities of proxy advisory firms, such as the proposed Corporate Governance Reform and Transparency Act, H.R. 4015, and Corporate Governance Fairness Act, S. 3614, and we expect the new Congress will also consider these topics. Boards will want to consider appropriate responses to developments in this area, considering the increased emphasis on ESG matters by proxy advisors and institutional investors when voting on director elections, and the potential for changes in emphasis following the midterm elections.

Securities Litigation and Enforcement

The Supreme Court is expected to continue its recent trend of deciding significant securities law cases in Lorenzo v. Securities and Exchange Commission. In Lorenzo, the Court will revisit the question of whether a secondary actor can be held liable under Rule 10b-5 for a false or misleading statement, even if they are not the “maker” of the statement under the Court’s 2011 decision in Janus Capital Group Inc. v. First Derivative Traders. In addition, the Court will consider whether secondary actors can be held liable under Rule 10b5 in SEC enforcement actions, in contrast to private causes of action, where the Court’s decisions have explained that “secondary actor” and “aiding and abetting” liability is generally not available. Newlyappointed Justice Kavanaugh has recused himself from the appeal because he heard the case in the D.C. Circuit. This could lead to a 4-4 split decision that would effectively affirm the D.C. Circuit decision that Rule 10b-5 scheme liability can attach in this context. However, the situation is likely to recur, and the Court’s decision may be informative in this area. As a result, boards and compliance professionals will want to carefully consider the implications of this case when evaluating potential exposure to securities litigation.

View the full report here.

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.