March 16, Re: "Aircraft Carrier" Release No A; File No. S
|
|
- Diane Payne
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 March 16, 1999 Mr. Jonathan G. Katz Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Stop 6-9 Washington, D.C Re: "Aircraft Carrier" Release No A; File No. S Dear Mr. Katz: These comments are being submitted on behalf of the Association of Publicly Traded Companies ( APTC ) and the National Venture Capital Association ( NVCA ) to SEC Release No A, widely known as the "aircraft carrier." Release 7606A will hereinafter be referred to as the "Release." I. Scope These comments are limited to Section XI of the Release, which describes various "Proposals Relating to Exchange Act Disclosure." The term "Proposals," as used in these comments, refers to the SEC's proposals made in Section XI of the Release. II. Basic Position The APTC and the NVCA support the fundamental goal of the Proposals: to improve the timeliness and the quality of the information disclosed to the public by domestic reporting companies. However, the APTC and the NVCA have serious concerns about the practicality of the steps that the SEC is proposing as means to this end, as well as concerns about the increased exposure to liability that the Proposals would create for reporting companies, their officers and their directors. The APTC and the NVCA recognize the importance of the federal securities laws and of the SEC's role in protecting investors and the integrity of this
2 country's securities markets. However, these functions do not include regulating the management of America's public companies. We are wary of disclosure requirements that have the ultimate goal of affecting corporate behavior rather than improving the quality of information available to investors. Thus, any changes to securities regulations should be carefully crafted to provide the necessary protections, while imposing as few constraints as possible on the ways companies conduct their businesses. Also, and especially in light of recent Congressional actions that recognize the serious and on-going potential for abuses in private securities litigation, the Commission should not act so as to increase the exposure of companies to securities litigation without the strongest possible justification for so doing. Even where the Proposals contain ideas that may be feasible and appropriate for some public companies, these ideas may be neither feasible nor appropriate for all public companies. In order to avoid placing undue burdens on any public company, the SEC should be alert to the "one-size-fits-all" syndrome and should craft rules that are reasonable and flexible enough so that any public company, regardless of size, industry, or management structure, can meet its obligations without undue burden. III. Additional Disclosures A. Quarterly Descriptions of Risk Factors We have serious reservations about the Proposal to require all public companies to provide updated "risk factor" analyses every quarter. As attractive as this Proposal might seem at first blush, we believe that it would add little information actually useful to investors and that, at the same time, it has the potential of creating a great deal of mischief. This Proposal is based on the unstated assumption that a description of "risk factors" is capable of being fine-tuned on a quarterly basis. This assumption, in turn, is based on the assumption that management, over periods of time that are quite short, can weigh the relative importance and the relative likelihood of various risks and make fine adjustments in the way they are described. This assumption is unrealistic. Moreover, in considering this Proposal, the Commission should pay particular attention to the substantial burden that would be placed on management and its advisers. The difficulty faced by management in drafting a single, well-thought-out "risk factors" section of a prospectus or Form 10-K should not be underestimated. It is challenging, to say the least, to identify the specific risks faced by a particular company in a particular industry and to describe them so that investors can readily understand them. The Commission would increase this burden significantly. However, the burden on companies is not the critical point. The fact of the matter is that a discussion of "risk factors" does not lend itself readily to frequent updating. Indeed, as a practical matter, the Proposal is counter-productive, because the more often risk factors must be stated, the greater will be the temptation to use broad, "boiler-plate" language. We accept the axiom that a company s description of the risks it
3 faces should be as meaningful as possible, but we respectfully submit that this goal is best achieved by the Commission reminding public companies that boilerplate and generalities should be avoided, in favor of a "plain," easily understandable description. Absent unusual circumstances (in which case Form 8-K, Item 5 disclosure should be made), an annual re-visiting of risk factors is sufficient, and in fact superior to a quarterly drill. Finally, this Proposal is contrary to the basic proposition underlying the 1995 Reform Act legislation: a company should be protected against litigation challenging the reasonableness of its forward-looking statements if it also makes "meaningful cautionary statements" -- regardless of whether future adverse developments result from a listed risk, or a risk that was mentioned in the MD&A. If the Proposal is adopted, companies will be subjected to criticism in hindsight, not only on whether they included all the significant risks in their list of risk factors, but also on whether they gave them the proper relative emphasis on a quarter-by-quarter basis. B. Expansion of Form 8-K As a general matter, we concur with the SEC that there should be a "level playing field" between those (usually professional) investors who "have" access to the most current information and those (usually non-professional) investors who "have not" access to this information. We also agree with the SEC's approach of balancing the burden for reporting companies against the benefit to investors. We disagree, however, concerning the relative benefits and burdens of the specific Proposals related to the expansion of the information that is required to be disclosed on Form 8-K. 1. "Selected Financial Data" The Commission expresses a concern that small ("have-not") investors are at a disadvantage concerning access to current financial information, because they are not as likely as professional investors to receive earnings information when it is released in a company's "earnings release." The Commission's proposed solution to this perceived problem is to require that "selected financial data" (as defined in Regulation S-K, Item 301) be filed on Form 8-K as soon as it is released to the public, or, if earlier, 30 days after the close of the fiscal quarter. Our difficulties with this Proposal are three-fold. First, we are not convinced (and we have seen no study supporting the proposition) that small investors are, in fact, at a disadvantage in gaining access to this information, as compared to professional investors. Press releases publicizing current financial information are required by the rules of the NYSE and the NASD, among others, to be given wide dissemination. Moreover, in this era of electronic communications, this information is, in fact, given wide dissemination. Services such as Reuters and Bloomberg News regularly carry items such as these. This information also appears on numerous financial web sites and the companies' own web sites. Active small investors have ready access to this information through these media. Second, small investors are not more likely to gain access to this information simply because it is filed with the Commission and is available through EDGAR. This is not to say that EDGAR is not a tremendously valuable vehicle for the
4 dissemination of information about public companies. It is. However, we doubt that EDGAR is the place that most small investors with Internet access look for news about public companies. There are many financial news sites that have been created for this purpose. And they are, in fact, structured in such a way that an investor's attention is more likely to be attracted to current information of importance to him or her. Third, the Commission's Proposal would require the filing of three more SEC forms annually, which is a significant additional burden. Moreover, the information on these forms would be superceded by the filing of Forms 10-Q only 2 or 3 weeks later, resulting in unnecessary duplication. In this connection, we should add that, although we oppose any acceleration in the filing of Item 301 "selected financial data" earlier than is required under current rules, we prefer the alternative of accelerating the filing of the entire Form 10-Q (which contains the requisite financial information under current rules) over a requirement to file yet another form every quarter. 2. "Other Reporting Events" We concur that the matters required to be reported on Form 8-K should be expanded to include the "other reporting events" listed in the Proposals. We believe that these events are so significant in the life of a public company that investors should be informed about them as soon as possible. We have one concern about this list, however: in several respects, it is not sufficiently clear. For example, among the new disclosure events are several that must be material; yet the notion of "material" is notoriously vague. In order to assure that every reporting company is fully aware of its obligations, the definitions of the events that will be required to be disclosed should be as clear and precise as possible. IV. Timing of Disclosures A. Timing of Forms 10-K and 10-Q We disagree with the Proposal to accelerate the filing deadlines for Form 10-Q. The job of preparing the financial and other information required by Form 10-Q is burdensome enough so that completion of these Forms within 45 days of the close of each quarter is not easy for many public companies. Accelerating this deadline to 30 days would substantially increase this burden, and it would also be counter-productive because it would reduce the ability of companies to draft high-quality disclosure language. Similarly, we disagree with the Proposal to accelerate the filing deadline for Form 10-K. The job of preparing the financial and other information required by Form 10-K, including audited financial statements, is burdensome enough so that completion of these Forms within 90 days of the close of each year is challenging for many public companies. Accelerating this deadline to 60 days would substantially increase this burden. It would also be counter-productive in that it would reduce the ability of companies to draft the disclosure language that the SEC (and issuers) want very much to improve.
5 B. Timing of Form 8-K As discussed above concerning the content of Forms 8-K, we are concerned about the burden that the Proposals would place on public companies to file Forms 8-K with substantially more information than is now required. This burden would be increased geometrically to the extent that the time periods for preparing and filing these forms is shortened. We strongly oppose the portion of the Proposals that would shorten the time period for filing Forms 8-K from 5 business days to 1 business day. Even assuming that management has nothing else to do but to draft and file the form, it is simply unrealistic to suppose that this task can be accomplished in that time frame. The Commission should keep in mind that the events that are currently required to be reported with 5 business days typically involve substantial turmoil at corporate headquarters. During these events, circumstances change rapidly and usually a number of individuals, including members of the board and management, are active in trying to resolve whatever the situation might be. The facts are often complicated and often require several pages of well-thought-out explanation to convey to the public an accurate picture of what has transpired. This task, even when given the highest priority, cannot be accomplished "overnight." Drafts have to be prepared, circulated, reviewed, revised, discussed, finalized, EDGARized and filed. To complete these tasks in the quality fashion expected by the Commission and the public simply takes a few days under the best of circumstances. On the other hand, we do not oppose the portion of the Proposals that would shorten the 15-calendar-day period. The events in question are important to investors, and, it would seem to us, after 15 days the information may very easily become stale. A company can reasonably be expected to file all its 8-K disclosures as soon as is reasonably possible. In our view, the trade-off between company burden and investor benefit argues in favor of shortening the 15-calendar-day time frame to 5 business days. In short, we would suggest that 5 business days should become the standard for filing Forms 8-K, regardless of the Item or Items in question. Such a rule would have the benefit of consistency and simplicity and should permit companies, if they proceed with diligence, to comply with their obligations on a timely basis. Finally, the SEC should keep in mind that the additional burden the Proposals would impose on public companies is substantial, that any such burden must be fully justifiable on public interest grounds, and that, therefore, these burdens should not be increased in any final rulemaking beyond the extent proposed. V. Increase of Liability Exposure We believe that the SEC is making a serious mistake in trying to use the "stick" of increased liability exposure to encourage companies to pay more attention to their periodic reporting obligations, as opposed to relying on "carrots," such as the ability to incorporate these reports into Securities Act filings.
6 A. Additional Signatories We oppose the Proposals to the extent that they would add to the list of individuals who would be required to sign Exchange Act filings. 1. Directors' Signatures on Quarterly Reports We oppose the Proposal to require a majority of the board of directors to personally sign quarterly reports, on two grounds. First, it will be simply impossible from a logistical point of view for most companies to accomplish: preparation of a draft quarterly report, review of the draft quarterly report by directors, coordination of comments from directors, preparation of a final quarterly report, circulation of the final quarterly report, and coordination of receipt of signatures, all within 45 days of the end of each fiscal quarter. It is even more impossible within the 30 days proposed by the SEC. Second, it is doubtful that most members of most boards of directors of public companies are experienced enough in the fine points of corporate disclosure to be able to comment on the phraseology of corporate reports. Yes, they could ask questions such as, "Is the description of [Matter X] adequate?" However, the ability of a director to comment on the details of the specific language proposed by management (or whomever prepares the first draft) is highly doubtful. Thus, the marginal benefit of requiring review and signing by a majority of the directors is likely to be very small, especially in comparison to the logistical burden of accomplishing such review and signing. We believe that the text of the quarterly reports should be the responsibility of those corporate officers (in most cases the CEO, CFO and chief accounting officer) and their advisors (lawyers and accountants) who are experienced in phrasing corporate disclosures and who are hired for this purpose. We would agree that directors should be closely informed as to the disclosures that their company is making so that they can exercise their oversight responsibilities. This end can be accomplished through requiring that each director be provided copies of quarterly reports promptly upon filing (as is proposed for Forms 8-K), but we believe that requiring close involvement by directors in the drafting process will add little to the quality of corporate disclosure. 2. Officers' Signatures on Quarterly Reports We oppose the Proposal to require corporate officers to sign quarterly reports in their individual capacity. To do so simply increases the possibility of individual liability, without any significant likelihood of improving the quality of corporate disclosure. We would support a requirement that each quarterly report be signed by both a high-ranking executive officer and a high-ranking financial officer, but the corporation should be able to choose who the appropriate officers should be, and they should sign on behalf of the corporation, not in their individual capacities. B. New Certifications We believe strongly that the proposed certifications are merely an invitation to mischief by potential litigants, without significantly increasing the quality of
7 the disclosure in Exchange Act filings. It is not necessary, for present purposes, to engage in a detailed analysis of the elements of causes of action under the various provisions of the federal securities laws upon which potential plaintiffs might base their claims. Suffice it to say that certifications contained in the Proposals would substantially increase the litigation exposure for each signatory. It is not clear, on the other hand, that bringing the "Sword of Damocles" ever closer to the necks of corporate officers and directors will result in the increased quality of corporate disclosure sought by the SEC. The vast majority of corporate officers approach the job of formulating corporate disclosure with energy and professionalism. We suggest that the following would have the desired effect without the adverse impact on potential future litigation: a statement by the company placed just before the signatures to the effect that the company "certifies that the foregoing information has been reviewed and approved by [the company's] chief executive officer, chief financial officer, and chief accounting officer." Such a statement would emphasize the importance of careful review by the appropriate corporate officers, without creating an unnecessary and unwarranted exposure for individuals in the event of future litigation. VI. Miscellaneous -- Required Inclusion of Web Site Address on SEC Filings We note that the SEC is proposing to require companies to include their Internet Web-site address on the front cover of registration statements and other filings. We believe that this requirement is unwise, because it might be interpreted as an invitation to potential investors to consider the information contained on that Web site when making investment decisions, when, in fact, the Web site might not have been intended for that purpose. Companies should be permitted to include this information, and, if they were to do so, they presumably would take care to assure that potential investors had access only to information that was intended for them. Respectfully submitted, Dana T. Ackerly II On behalf of Association of Publicly Traded Companies and National Venture Capital Association
Proposed Rules on Proxy Voting by Investment Advisers and Registered Management Investment Companies (File No. S )
Jonathan G. Katz Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20549 0609 Re: Proposed Rules on Proxy Voting by Investment Advisers and Registered Management Investment
More informationComments to Notice , Request for Input on Draft FAQ s Regarding Rule G-42 and the Making of Recommendations
800 Nicollet Mall, J12NPF, Minneapolis, MN 55402 P 612-303-6657 F612-303-1032] Piper Jaffray & Co. Since 1895. Member SIPC and NYSE. Ronald W. Smith Corporate Secretary Municipal Securities Rulemaking
More informationWachovia Securities, LLC. August 22, 2004
Direct Dial: 804.787.6851 Facsimile: 804.344.6599 E-Mail: ronlong@wachoviasec.com Wachovia Securities, LLC Ms. Barbara Z. Sweeney NASD Office of the Corporate Secretary 1735 K Street N.W. Washington, D.C.
More informationFINRA Regulatory Notice 17-20: Retrospective Rule Review Outside Business Activities and Private Securities Transactions
By Electronic Mail (pubcom@finra.org) Office of the Corporate Secretary FINRA 1735 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1506 Re: FINRA Regulatory Notice 17-20: Retrospective Rule Review Outside Business Activities
More informationFREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT REGULATION FD
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT REGULATION FD Background What is Regulation FD? Regulation FD (for Fair Disclosure ), promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
More informationThe final rules are described in SEC Release Nos , and IC (the 302 Release ).
NEW RULES APPLICABLE TO REGISTERED INVESTMENT COMPANIES INCLUDING CEO/CFO CERTIFICATIONS AND REPORTING OF TRADES BY INSIDERS SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP SEPTEMBER 6, 2002 The Securities and Exchange
More informationJanuary 23, Barbara Z. Sweeney NASD Office of the Corporate Secretary 1735 K Street, NW Washington, D.C
Barbara Z. Sweeney NASD Office of the Corporate Secretary 1735 K Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20006-1500 Dear Ms. Sweeney: Re: Request for Comment Regarding Disclosure of Mutual Fund Expense Ratios in Performance
More informationJuly 30, Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 100F Street, NE Washington, D.C
July 30, 2008 Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 100F Street, NE Washington, D.C. 20549-1090 RE: File No. S7-11-08, Interactive Data to Improve Financial Reporting Dear Sir or Madame: On behalf
More informationWhat the SEC has in store for your periodic reports
IR Update Back to April 1999 IR Update Table of Contents Search: What the SEC has in store for your periodic reports By Lois Yurow As you may have read in last month s Update, the SEC s recent "Aircraft
More informationNASD NOTICE TO MEMBERS 96-84
NASD NOTICE TO MEMBERS 96-84 NASD Regulation Solicits Comment On The Use Of Bond Mutual Fund Risk Ratings In Supplemental Sales Literature; Comment Period Expires February 24, 1997 Suggested Routing Senior
More informationRegulatory Notice. Request for Comment on Draft Amendments to MSRB Form G-45 under Rule G-45, on Reporting of Information on Municipal Fund Securities
Regulatory Notice MSRB Regulatory Notice 2017-17 0 2017-17 Publication Date August 22, 2017 Stakeholders Municipal Securities Dealers Notice Type Request for Comment Comment Deadline September 21, 2017
More informationSEC ADOPTS NEW CEO/CFO CERTIFICATION RULES PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 SEPTEMBER 6, 2002
SEC ADOPTS NEW CEO/CFO CERTIFICATION RULES PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP SEPTEMBER 6, 2002 The Securities and Exchange Commission issued final
More informationRe: Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act Interpretation of the Advice Exemption; RIN 1245-AA03
655.44 VIA ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION September 21, 2011 Mr. John Lund Director Office of Labor-Management Standards U.S. Department of Labor 200 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20210 Mr. Andrew R.
More informationasset management group
asset management group Via Electronic Mail: gbarnett@cftc.gov Mr. Gary Barnett Director Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155
More informationFINRA Regulatory Notice 18-08: Outside Business Activities and Private Securities Transactions
By Electronic Mail (pubcom@finra.org) Jennifer Piorko Mitchell Office of the Corporate Secretary FINRA 1735 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1506 RE: FINRA Regulatory Notice 18-08: Outside Business Activities
More informationWritten Statement of the Mutual Fund Directors Forum. House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises
Written Statement of the Mutual Fund Directors Forum House Financial Services Subcommittee on Capital Markets and Government Sponsored Enterprises March 28, 2012 Accounting and Auditing Oversight: Pending
More informationIIAC CORPORATE FINANCE DUE DILIGENCE GUIDELINES
IIAC CORPORATE FINANCE DUE DILIGENCE GUIDELINES February 2006 February 2006 IDA DUE DILIGENCE GUIDELINES The purpose of these Guidelines is to provide guidance to Member firms regarding the planning and
More informationRE: Request for Comment on Draft Amendments to and Clarifications of MSRB Rule G-34, on Obtaining CUSIP Numbers
March 31, 2017 Submitted Electronically Ronald W. Smith Corporate Secretary Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board 1300 I Street NW Washington, DC 20005 RE: Request for Comment on Draft Amendments to and
More informationPerformance-Based Agreements: Incorporating Performance-Based Elements into Standard Loan and Grant Agreements
Performance-Based Agreements: Incorporating Performance-Based Elements into Standard Loan and Grant Agreements A Technical Guide Mayada El-Zoghbi Jasmina Glisovic-Mezieres Alexia Latortue The authors are
More informationSILVER, FREEDMAN & TAFF, L.L.P. A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS
LAW OFFICES SILVER, FREEDMAN & TAFF, L.L.P. A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 3299 K STREET, N.W., SUITE 100 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20007 PHONE: (202) 295-4500 FAX: (202) 337-5502
More informationEquity Press Release: When Time is Not on Your Side
Lawyer Insights April 27, 2018 by Peter O Brien, Steven Friend and Christina Kwon Published in Law360 The sequence of events in launching an equity deal is critical. And the most important event in such
More informationNovember 11, Ms. Marcia E. Asquith Office of the Corporate Secretary FINRA 1735 K Street, NW Washington, DC
Ms. Marcia E. Asquith Office of the Corporate Secretary FINRA 1735 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1506 Re: FINRA Regulatory Notice to Members 11-44; Proposed Amendments to NASD Rule 2340 to Address
More informationOverview. August 31, VIA
August 31, 2015 VIA E-MAIL: comments@pcaobus.org Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Attention: Office of the Secretary 1666 K Street N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006-2803 RE: PCAOB Rulemaking Docket
More information8/20/2002. Changes from the Initial NYSE Proposal Morrison & Foerster LLP. All Rights Reserved.
NYSE Adopts Changes to its Corporate Governance and Listing Standards; Differences between Current NYSE and Nasdaq Proposals and Sarbanes-Oxley Act Requirements 8/20/2002 Corporate, Financial Institutions
More informationFebruary 28, Brent J. Fields Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street NE. Washington, DC
February 28, 2018 100 F Street NE. Washington, DC 20549-1090 Re: File No. SR-MSRB-2018-01; Proposed Rule Change Consisting of Amendments to Rule G-21, on Advertising, Proposed New Rule G- 40, on Advertising
More informationCESR consultation on Transparency Directive due date January 28 th 2005
Business Wire Europe Rue Abbé Cuypers 3 B-1040 Brussels, Belgium Tel. 00 32 2741 24 55 e-mail: rudi.deceuster@scarlet.be www.businesswire.com CESR consultation on Transparency Directive due date January
More informationAugust 7, Via Electronic Submission. Mr. Brent J. Fields Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street NE Washington, DC 20549
August 7, 2018 Via Electronic Submission Mr. Brent J. Fields Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street NE Washington, DC 20549 Re: Form CRS Relationship Summary; Amendments to Form ADV;
More informationNovember 3, VIA Office of the Secretary PCAOB 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington DC
November 3, 2014 VIA Email Office of the Secretary PCAOB 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington DC 20006-2803. comments@pcaobus.org RE: PCAOB Staff Consultation Paper, Auditing Accounting Estimates and Fair Value
More informationRe: MSRB Regulatory Notice , Request for Comment on Draft Amendments to MSRB Rule G-30 to Provide Guidance on Prevailing Market Price
March 31, 2016 BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Ronald W. Smith Corporate Secretary 1300 I Street NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 Re: MSRB Regulatory Notice 2016-07, Request for Comment on Draft Amendments to MSRB
More informationCommissioner, Iowa Insurance Division Commissioner, D.C. Department of Insurance,
Insured Retirement Institute 1100 Vermont Avenue, NW 10 th Floor Washington, DC 20005 t 202.469.3000 f 202.469.3030 February 15, 2019 www.irionline.org www.myirionline.org Submitted Electronically to jmatthews@naic.org
More informationJanuary 28, Elizabeth M. Murphy Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC
January 28, 2011 Elizabeth M. Murphy Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-1090 RE: Comments Regarding File Number S7-41-10 on Mine Safety Disclosure
More informationThe Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants
The Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants 4-4-1 Kudan-Minami, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102-8264, Japan Phone: 81-3-3515-1130 Fax: 81-3-5226-3355 Email: international@sec.jicpa.or.jp November 21,
More informationDear Mr. Seymour: September 7, 2007
` Deloitte & Touche LLP Ten Westport Road P.O. Box 820 Wilton, CT 06897-0820 USA www.deloitte.com Public Company Accounting Oversight Board Office of the Secretary Attn: J. Gordon Seymour 1666 K Street,
More informationFile No. S Release Nos ; Acceleration of Periodic Report Filing Dates and Disclosure Concerning Website Access to Reports
June 4, 2002 Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20549 Attention: Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary Re: File No. S7-08-02 Release Nos. 33-8089; 34-45741 Acceleration of
More informationIn summary, CEOs and CFOs of public companies are potentially subject to three separate certification requirements:
Checklist for CEO/CFO Certifications by Large Companies and Sarbanes-Oxley Certifications August 9, 2002 On July 25 and July 30, 2002, the Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission issued additional
More informationIAASB Consultation Paper, Enhancing the Value of Auditor Reporting: Exploring Options for Change
Technical Director International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board 545 Fifth Avenue, 14 th Floor New York, 10017 USA Dear Sir/Madam IAASB Consultation Paper, Enhancing the Value of Auditor Reporting:
More informationNASD and NYSE Rulemaking: Relating to Corporate Governance
Home Previous Page NASD and NYSE Rulemaking: Relating to Corporate Governance SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION (Release No. 34-48745; File Nos. SR-NYSE-2002-33, SR-NASD-2002-77, SR- NASD-2002-80, SR-NASD-2002-138,
More informationPUBLIC COMPANY ACCOUNTING OVERSIGHT BOARD. Public Meeting on the Auditor s Reporting Model. Washington, D.C. April 2, 2014
PUBLIC COMPANY ACCOUNTING OVERSIGHT BOARD Public Meeting on the Auditor s Reporting Model Washington, D.C. April 2, 2014 Lynn Turner 1 I want to thank Chairman Doty and his fellow board members for inviting
More informationCopenhagen Stock Exchange Decisions and Statements
Copenhagen Stock Exchange Decisions and Statements in 2006 JANUARY... 2 The time for publication of changed expectations... 2 FEBRUARY... 3 1. Information in the press... 3 2. Publication by mistake...
More informationFile Number S ; Custody of Funds or Securities of Clients by Investment Advisers
Via Electronic Mail: rule-comments@sec.gov Elizabeth M. Murphy Secretary U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-1090 Re: File Number S7-09-09; Custody of Funds or
More informationElectronic Recordkeeping by Invest. Co. and Invest. Adv.: Release Nos. IC-24991, IA-19... Page 1 of 15 Home Previous Page Final Rule: Electronic Recordkeeping by Investment Companies and Investment Advisers
More informationD I S C L O S U R E P O L I C Y. ~ To provide timely, accurate and balanced disclosure ~
D I S C L O S U R E P O L I C Y ~ To provide timely, accurate and balanced disclosure ~ The Toronto-Dominion Bank and its subsidiaries ("TD Bank Group" or the Bank ) are committed to providing timely,
More informationSeptember 12, Dear Chairman Ketchum:
September 12, 2011 Mr. Richard G. Ketchum Chairman and Chief Executive Officer 1735 K Street NW Washington, DC, 20006 Dear Chairman Ketchum: The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (
More informationTHE WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES
Docket No. FDA-1999-D-0742 COMMENTS of THE WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION to the FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Concerning REQUEST FOR COMMENTS REGARDING FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
More informationFile Number S Request for Comment on Business and Financial Disclosure Requirements in Regulation S-K
Mr. Brent J. Fields Secretary 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-1090 Dear Mr. Fields: File Number S7-06-16 Request for Comment on Business and Financial Disclosure Requirements in Regulation S-K The
More informationUNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT
UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT Description of Disclosure Practices Followed in Connection with General Obligation and Special Obligation Securities issued by the University of Connecticut in the Public Markets
More informationOn behalf of Waddell & Reed, Inc., we submit in triplicate a memorandum setting forth their comments on proposed Rule 10b-10.
Valicenti Leighton Reid & Pine New York, NY March 29, 1968 Office of the Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission Washington, D. C. 20549 Dear Sir: On behalf of Waddell & Reed, Inc., we submit in triplicate
More informationInvestors Diversified Services, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota. March 29, 1968
Investors Diversified Services, Inc. Minneapolis, Minnesota March 29, 1968 Securities and Exchange Commission 500 North Capitol Street Washington, D. C. 20549 Re: Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Release
More informationU.S. Securities Markets Coalition
U.S. Securities Markets Coalition By Electronic Delivery and First Class Mail The Honorable Mark Mazur Assistant Secretary (Tax Policy) Department of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington,
More informationCORPORATE DISCLOSURE POLICY
CORPORATE DISCLOSURE POLICY The following (the Policy ) has been approved and adopted by the Board of Directors (the Board ) of Rubicon Minerals Corporation (the Company). 1. PURPOSE The objective of this
More informationNASD Notice to Members Proposed Rule Governing the Purchase, Sale, or Exchange of Deferred Variable Annuities
Robert S. Jones Chairman of the Board AXA Advisors, LLC Jerald Hampton Chief Executive Officer AXA Distributors, LLC Barbara Z. Sweeney NASD Office of the Corporate Secretary 1735 K Street, NW Washington,
More information(a) Pursuant to the provisions of Section 107(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
PCAOB 2007-03 Page Number 002 1. Text of the Proposed Rule (a) Pursuant to the provisions of Section 107(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the "Act"), the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
More informationLegal Alert: Sarbanes-Oxley Act Certification Requirements and Best Practices September 12, I. Introduction
Legal Alert: Sarbanes-Oxley Act Certification Requirements and Best Practices September 12, 2002 I. Introduction Since the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the Act ) became law on July 30, 2002, much attention
More informationRe: Regulatory Notice Proposed Amendments to Rule 5210 Regarding Publication of Indications of Interest
71 Broadway, 2K New York, NY 10006 P. 212.344.0410 F. 212.943.8478 www.stany.org KIMBERLY UNGER, ESQ. Executive Director October 21, 2011 Marcia E. Asquith Senior Vice President and Corporate Secretary
More informationRe: Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board s Recommendations for Update of 1994 Interpretive Guidance
Commissioner Elisse B. Walter U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Room 10200 Washington, DC 20549 Re: Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board s Recommendations for Update of 1994 Interpretive
More informationDisclosure Controls and Procedures Policy
Disclosure Controls and Procedures Policy This document sets forth Natural Resource Partners ( NRP ) policy with respect to disclosure controls and procedures generally, and specifically addresses the
More informationFile No. SR-NASD-00-55; Delivery of a Margin Disclosure Statement to Non- Institutional Customers. Very truly yours, Alden S.
Alden S. Adkins General Counsel and Senior Vice President September 5, 2000 Ms. Katherine A. England Assistant Director Division of Market Regulation Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street,
More informationWhat to Expect from the U4 and U5 Filing Process
What to Expect from the U4 and U5 Filing Process This is another installment in our What to Expect webcast series on FINRA s regulatory processes. It focuses on the process for filing Uniform Applications
More informationSEC ISSUES FINAL RULES ON DISCLOSURE OF AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERTS AND CODES OF ETHICS
CLIENT MEMORANDUM SEC ISSUES FINAL RULES ON DISCLOSURE OF AUDIT COMMITTEE FINANCIAL EXPERTS AND CODES OF ETHICS Last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission ( SEC ) issued final rules 1 to implement
More informationPosted by Mary Jo White, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, on Thursday, June 25, 2015
Posted by Mary Jo White, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, on Thursday, June 25, 2015 Editor s note: Mary Jo White is Chair of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The following post is
More informationAugust 15, Office of the Secretary Public Company Accounting Oversight Board 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C
August 15, 2016 Office of the Secretary Public Company Accounting Oversight Board 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006-2803 Re: PCAOB Release No. 2016-003; Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 034; Proposed
More informationStatement of Policy and Procedures Governing Trading in Shares of Prudential Bancorp, Inc.
Statement of Policy and Procedures Governing Trading in Shares of Prudential Bancorp, Inc. QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT INSIDER TRADING THE COVERAGE OF THE PROHIBITION Q: Does the insider trading prohibition
More informationOffice of the Secretary Public Company Accounting Oversight Board 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC December 11, 2013
Office of the Secretary Public Company Accounting Oversight Board 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20006-2803 December 11, 2013 RE: PCAOB Rulemaking Docket Matter No. 034, Proposed Auditing Standards
More informationMarket Abuse Directive. Level 3 Third set of CESR guidance and information on the common operation of the Directive to the market
THE COMMITTEE OF EUROPEAN SECURITIES REGULATORS Ref: CESR/08-717 Market Abuse Directive Level 3 Third set of CESR guidance and information on the common operation of the Directive to the market Public
More informationDear Members and Staff of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board:
Deloitte & Touche LLP Ten Westport Road P.O. Box 820 Wilton, CT 06897-0820 USA www.deloitte.com Office of the Secretary Public Company Accounting Oversight Board 1666 K Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20006-2803
More informationFile No. SR-NASD Proposed Rule Change to NASD Interpretive Material 2260 (IM-2260)
February 12, 2003 Ms. Katherine A. England Assistant Director Division of Market Regulation Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20549-1001 Re: File No. SR-NASD-2003-019
More information3: Equivalent markets
29 3: Equivalent markets This material is issued to assist firms by setting out how they might approach their assessment of regulated markets, to determine whether they are equivalent for the purposes
More informationFrequently Asked Questions About Regulation FD. Updated September 20, 2000
Frequently Asked Questions About Regulation FD Updated September 20, 2000 Frequently Asked Questions About Regulation FD What is the purpose of Regulation FD? The Securities and Exchange Commission adopted
More informationConcept Release on possible revisions to PCAOB Standards related to reports on audited financial statements
Attachment A Concept Release on possible revisions to PCAOB Standards related to reports on audited financial statements Questions 1 through 32: 1. Many have suggested that the auditor's report, and in
More informationRe: Form CRS Relationship Summary, SEC Rel. No ; File No. S
February 15, 2019 Via Electronic Filing Brent J. Fields Secretary Security and Exchange Commission 100 F Street N.E. Washington, DC 20549-1090 Re: Form CRS Relationship Summary, SEC Rel. No. 34-83063;
More informationBy electronic delivery. September 17, 2004
1120 Connecticut Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 1-800-BANKERS www.aba.com World-Class Solutions, Leadership & Advocacy Since 1875 By electronic delivery September 17, 2004 Nessa Feddis Senior Federal
More informationThe CAM A New Challenge
The CAM A New Challenge I. Introduction On October 23, 2017 the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC ) issued its Release No. 34-81916; File No. PCAOB-2017-01 in which the SEC approved, without
More informationDecember 21, Barbara Z. Sweeney Office of the Corporate Secretary NASD Regulation, Inc K Street, NW Washington, DC
December 21, 2001 Barbara Z. Sweeney Office of the Corporate Secretary NASD Regulation, Inc. 1735 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1500 Re: NASD Notice to Members 01-59; Proposed Amendments to Rule 2710
More informationCommittee on Small Business Know Before You Regulate: The Impact of CFPB Regulations on Small Business August 1, 2012 Questions for the Record
Committee on Small Business Know Before You Regulate: The Impact of CFPB Regulations on Small Business August 1, 2012 Questions for the Record 1. On July 9, 2012, the CFPB posted the Integrated Mortgage
More informationAugust 7, The Honorable Steven Mnuchin Secretary of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20220
August 7, 2017 The Honorable Steven Mnuchin Secretary of the Treasury 1500 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20220 RE: SIFMA Response to Notice 2017-38 Dear Secretary Mnuchin: The Securities Industry
More informationPERMANENT EDITORIAL BOARD REPORT
PERMANENT EDITORIAL BOARD FOR THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE REPORT MAINTAINING PERFECTION BEYOND JUNE 30, 2006 OF SECURITY INTERESTS CREATED AND PERFECTED BY FILING UNDER FORMER ARTICLE 9 A. Introduction
More informationAfter March 28, 2003, public companies reporting earnings must comply with new
MARCH 20, 2003 REVISED: JUNE 26, 2003 Reporting Earnings -- A New Model After March 28, 2003, public companies reporting earnings must comply with new rules adopted by the SEC as part of its implementation
More informationOpinion. 17 June 2016 ESMA/2016/982
Opinion Draft Implementing Technical Standards on the technical means for appropriate public disclosure of inside information and for delaying the public disclosure of inside information 17 June 2016 ESMA/2016/982
More informationSEC Issues Further Guidance on MD&A
January 2004 SEC Issues Further Guidance on MD&A The Staff of the SEC had for the past few months been stating that the SEC was working on an interpretive release to provide additional guidance on the
More informationDecember 19, Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick:
December 19, 2016 Mr. Christopher Kirkpatrick Secretary of the Commission Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21 st Street NW Washington, DC 20581 Re: Cross-Border Application
More informationThe ICC Launches New Guide for In-House Counsel on Effective Management of International Arbitration
June 12, 2014 INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION UPDATE The ICC Launches New Guide for In-House Counsel on Effective Management of International Arbitration On June 6, 2014, the International Chamber of Commerce
More informationSTAFF GUIDANCE CHANGES TO THE AUDITOR'S REPORT EFFECTIVE FOR AUDITS OF FISCAL YEARS ENDING ON OR AFTER DECEMBER 15, 2017
1666 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 Office: (202) 207-9100 Fax: (202) 862-8430 www.pcaobus.org STAFF GUIDANCE CHANGES TO THE AUDITOR'S REPORT EFFECTIVE FOR AUDITS OF FISCAL YEARS ENDING ON OR AFTER DECEMBER
More informationJanuary 3, Re: Comments Regarding CFTC s Proposed Rule Pertaining to the Process for Review of Swaps for Mandatory Clearing
Mr. David A. Stawick Secretary Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21st Street, NW Washington, DC 20581 Submitted via Agency Website January 3, 2011 Re: Comments Regarding
More information1. Euronext. 2. General Comments
Euronext s Response to the ESMA Consultation Paper entitled Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on prospectus related issues under the Omnibus II Directive 1. Euronext Euronext is a leading operator of
More informationStatement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ON: TO: BY: GETTING IMPLEMENTATION RIGHT: SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 404 AND SMALL BUSINESS HOUSE SMALL BUSINESS COMMITTEE DAVID T. HIRSCHMANN, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT,
More informationJanuary 13, Mr. Brent J. Fields Secretary United States Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street NE Washington, DC 20549
January 13, 2016 Mr. Brent J. Fields Secretary United States Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street NE Washington, DC 20549 Re: Open-End Fund Liquidity Risk Management Programs; Swing Pricing;
More informationThe SEC s Proposed Regulation Best Interest, Form CRS Relationship Summary, and Interpretation Regarding Standards of Conduct for Investment Advisers
Brent J. Fields Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street NE Washington, DC 20549 Re: The SEC s Proposed Regulation Best Interest, Form CRS Relationship Summary, and Interpretation Regarding
More informationRequest for Relief to Address "Legacy" Structured Finance Transactions
November 15, 2012 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL: secretary@cftc.gov c/o Mr. David A. Stawick, Secretary Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21 Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20581 Chairman
More informationNotice to Members Proposed Rule Governing the Purchase, Sale or Exchange of Deferred Variable Annuities (June 2004)
ADVANCE COPY BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Ms. Barbara Sweeney NASD Office of the Corporate Secretary 1735 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1500 Re: Notice to Members 04-45 Proposed Rule Governing the Purchase,
More informationAugust 14, Ms. Monica Jackson Office of the Executive Secretary Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 1700 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20552
Office of the Executive Secretary Consumer Financial Protection Bureau 1700 G Street, NW Washington, DC 20552 Re: Amendments to Rules Concerning Prepaid Accounts Under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act
More informationRegulatory advice and custom compliance solutions for the municipal securities community
April 11, 2011 Mr. Ronald W. Smith Corporate Secretary Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board 1900 Duke Street Alexandria, VA 22314 Sent via email to CommentLetters@msrb.org Re: MSRB Notice No. 2011-12:
More informationMarket Abuse Directive. Level 3 Third set of CESR guidance and information on the common operation of the Directive to the market. Public Consultation
THE COMMITTEE OF EUROPEAN SECURITIES REGULATORS Ref: CESR/08-274 Market Abuse Directive Level 3 Third set of CESR guidance and information on the common operation of the Directive to the market Public
More informationCODE OF CONDUCT FUNDAMENTALS FOR CREDIT RATING AGENCIES
CODE OF CONDUCT FUNDAMENTALS FOR CREDIT RATING AGENCIES A CONSULTATION REPORT OF THE CHAIRMEN S TASK FORCE OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF SECURITIES COMMISSIONS OCTOBER
More informationSummary of the SEC s Newly Adopted Amendments
September 2, 2008 The SEC Adopts Amendments to Foreign Private Issuer Registration and Disclosure Requirements, Including Those Relating to Cross-Border Mergers, Tender and Exchange Offers and Rights Offerings
More informationRailways Pension Trustee Company Limited
Nadia Dabbagh-Hobrow Secretary SORP Working Party c/o KPMG One Snowhill Snow Hill Queensway Birmingham B4 6GH Dear Ms Dabbagh-Hobrow 3 rd July 2014 Comments on the exposure draft Statement of Recommended
More informationStatement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 119
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 119 Note: This Statement has been completely superseded FAS119 Status Page FAS119 Summary Disclosure about Derivative Financial Instruments and Fair Value
More informationUseful Simplifications versus New Difficulties
Useful Simplifications versus New Difficulties ESMA has made good suggestions, but unfortunately might also create new difficulties. The result of Level 1 and 2 should improve the current prospectus regime.
More information2 EFAMA's reply to ESMA's Consultation on the revised Transparency Directive
EFAMA Reply to the Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on major shareholdings and indicative list of financial instruments subject to notification requirements under the revised Transparency Directive
More informationGETTING WIRED AT THE SEC: REFORMING THE PROXY PROCESS TO ACCOUNT FOR NEW TECHNOLOGIES
GETTING WIRED AT THE SEC: REFORMING THE PROXY PROCESS TO ACCOUNT FOR NEW TECHNOLOGIES I. INTRODUCTION A March 2004 study by Nielsen//NetRatings showed that almost 75% of Americans have access to the Internet
More information1997 WL Page 1 (Cite as: 1997 WL (S.E.C. No - Action Letter)) (SEC No-Action Letter)
1997 WL 177550 Page 1 March 24, 1997 (SEC No-Action Letter) *1 Securities Activities of U.S. -Affiliated Foreign Dealers Publicly Available April 9, 1997 LETTER TO SEC Mr. Richard R. Lindsey Director,
More information