SEC Charges Revlon with Misleading Shareholders in Going Private Transaction

On June 13, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) charged Revlon with violating federal securities laws when the company misled shareholders during a going private transaction.  Specifically, the SEC found that Revlon violated Section 13(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 13e-3(b)(1)(iii), which prohibits issuers and their affiliates in going private transactions from directly or indirectly engaging in any act, practice, or course of business that operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit.

In its investigation, the SEC found that in connection with a voluntary exchange offer to satisfy a significant debt to its controlling shareholder, Revlon erected “informational barriers” or engaged in what one employee termed as "ring fencing" that deprived the Revlon independent board members from knowing critical information (i.e., a third-party financial adviser found that the consideration offered in the transaction was inadequate for tendering 401(k) shareholders). The trustee administering Revlon's 401(k) plan determined that 401(k) members could only tender their shares if a third-party financial adviser made an "adequate consideration determination," which involved assessing whether the value of the preferred stock 401(k) participants would receive was at least equal to the fair market value of the exchanged common stock shares.

The SEC's order determined that, in an attempt to avoid a potential disclosure obligation, Revlon undertook a number of actions to avoid receiving the adequate consideration determination from the third-party adviser, including the following:

  • Revlon amended the trust agreement it had with the trustee to ensure that the trustee would not share the adequate consideration determination with Revlon;
  • Revlon ensured that it was not a party to any engagement letter concerning the adequate consideration determination;
  • Revlon directed the trustee to inform the company of its decision whether to allow 401(k) members to tender their shares without any reference to the adequate consideration determination; and
  • In a notice sent to the 401(k) participants and publicly filed as an exhibit to the exchange offer documents, Revlon removed the explicit term "adequate consideration" and replaced it with citations to ERISA statutes.

The SEC's order found that Revlon's ring-fencing conduct resulted in various materially misleading disclosures to its shareholders. For example, Revlon represented in its offering documents that its board's process was full, fair, and complete in determining the fairness of the exchange offer. In fact, however, the process was compromised because Revlon's board was unable to consider the adequate consideration determination as part of its process to evaluate and ultimately approve the offer.  Revlon agreed to settle the SEC's charges and pay an $850,000 penalty.

Introduction of H.R. 2274 - The Small Business Mergers, Acquisitions, Sales and Brokerage Simplification Act of 2013

H.R. 2274, the Small Business Mergers, Acquisitions, Sales and Brokerage Simplification Act of 2013, was introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives by Rep. Bill Huizenga on June 6, 2013.  The bill is intended to reduce the regulatory costs incurred by buyers and sellers of smaller privately held companies for professional business brokerage services.  The legislation would create a simplified system for registration through a public notice filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") and would require appropriate client disclosures, pertaining to “M&A brokers” and their associates.  An M&A broker relying on this legislation would not be permitted to (i) receive, hold, transmit or have custody of the funds or securities to be exchanged in the transfer of ownership of an “eligible privately held company,” or (ii) engage on behalf of an issuer in a public offering of securities.

An “M&A broker” means a broker engaged in the business of effecting the transfer of ownership of an eligible privately held business , whether acting for the seller or buyer, through the purchase, sale, exchange, issuance, repurchase, or redemption of, or a business combination involving, securities or assets of the eligible privately held company, if the broker reasonably believes that (i) upon consummation of the transaction, the acquirer, acting alone or in concert with, will control and, directly or indirectly, will be active in the management of the eligible privately held company or the business conducted with the assets of the eligible privately held company; and (ii) if the person is offered securities in exchange for securities or assets of the eligible privately held company, such person will, prior to being bound to close the transaction, receive or have access to the most recent year-end balance sheet, income statement, statement of changes in financial position and statement of owner’s equity of the issuer of the securities to be offered in exchange, and, if the financial statements are audited, the related report of the independent auditor, a balance sheet dated not more than 120 days before the date of the offer, and information pertaining to the management, business, results of operations for the period covered by the financial statements and material loss contingencies of the issuer.

An “eligible privately held company” means a company that (i) is privately held and not required to file periodic information, documents or reports with the SEC, and (ii) in the fiscal year immediately preceding the fiscal year in which the business broker is initially engaged with respect to the securities transaction, the company meets either or both of the following conditions:

  • EBITDA is less than $25 million;
  • gross revenues are less than $250 million

We expect that SEC registered broker dealers and their associates will have an opinion on this legislation.

Tags:

SEC Issues Investor Alert for Private Oil & Gas Offerings

We previously blogged about securities regulation of interests in oil and gas exploration and development. Industry participants, state and federal securities regulators have recently cautioned investors regarding investing in oil and gas ventures.

At the federal level, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an investor alert aimed at private oil and gas offerings. In addition to the usual cautions to investors to do their homework on these deals, the SEC encouraged investors to verify that the person offering the investment is licensed as a broker-dealer. The SEC recently stepped up its efforts to pursue “finders” and other unlicensed persons compensated by issuers to assist in finding investors. Companies raising investment funds need to understand that persons who they engage to assist in selling investments are required to have a securities license. Failure to do so exposes the issuer to civil liability, including rescission claims by investors, and potential criminal liability in cases where material misstatements or omissions are made in the private placement memorandum or other offering material, or other fraudulent activity is present. The investor alert cites several examples of recent enforcement actions where such illegal activity was involved.

Continue Reading...
Tags:

SEC Issues FAQs on Conflict Minerals & Resource Extraction

On May 30, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) issued 12 Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQs”) providing guidance on various aspects of Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) Section 13(p), Rule 13p-1 and Item 1.01 of Form SD relating to disclosure regarding the use of conflict minerals from the Democratic Republic of the Congo or adjoining countries.

The Guidance offered by the Conflict Minerals FAQs includes:

Continue Reading...
Tags:

SEC and CFTC Red Flag Rules Become Effective May 20, 2013

The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission have adopted rules that require most broker-dealers, mutual funds, investment advisers, and certain other regulated entities to create programs to prevent identity theft. The new rules become effective May 20, 2013, and entities regulated by the new rules must comply by November 20, 2013.

Regulated entities subject to the rules must develop identity theft prevention programs to detect “red flags” signaling potential identity theft, to respond appropriately to such red flags, and to periodically update detection programs as identity theft risks change.

Among other requirements, the Red Flag Rules apply to “financial institutions” that offer or maintain “covered accounts.” “Covered accounts” are defined broadly to include personal accounts designed to permit multiple transactions and any account with a reasonably foreseeable risk of identity theft to customers. “Financial institutions” include any entity that holds a transaction account belonging to a consumer on which the account holder can make withdrawals to pay third parties. Examples cited by the SEC include:

  1. a broker-dealer that offers custodial accounts;
  2. a registered investment company that enables investors to make wire transfers to other parties or that offers check-writing privileges; and
  3. an investment adviser that directly or indirectly holds transaction accounts and that is permitted to direct payments or transfers out of those accounts to third parties.

Many of these entities likely have identity theft prevention programs because they were previously required by Federal Trade Commission rules; however some entities, such as investment advisers, may have avoided scrutiny of their programs due to lax enforcement and may face increased attention now that the SEC and CFTC are charged with enforcing the Red Flag Rules for these entities.

Regulated entities should evaluate current red flag programs in the context of the SEC’s and CFTC’s new enforcement duties to determine if improvements are needed.
 

Tags:

The Timken Board: Between a Rock and a Hard Place

On May 7, 2013, Timken Co. announced that its shareholders approved a nonbinding proposal from activist shareholders (Relational Investors and Calstrs—California State Teachers' Retirement System, who together own 7.28% of the Company) to spin-off the Company's steel business into a separate entity. The Company's Board had opposed the proposal.

The Company said that 47% of outstanding shares (53% of the shares voted) were voted in favor of the plan to create a separate company, while 41% of outstanding shares (47% of the shares voted) voted against the proposal.

In a joint statement released on May 7, 2013, Relational and Calstrs stated that Timken's Board "must now acquiesce to the will of the shareholders consistent with their fiduciary duties."  On the same date, Chairman Tim Timken Jr. stated, "We appreciate the thoughtful feedback we've received from our shareholders on the spin-off proposal as well as their broader input on corporate governance and capital allocation. The board will carefully evaluate the views of our shareholders and announce next steps within 45 days."

The real work for the Timken Board now begins.  The Board will need to work through their fiduciary duties to act in the best interests of all their shareholders and determine an appropriate course of action.  Merely acquiescing to shareholders' favoring the nonbinding proposal will not necessarily fulfill their fiduciary obligations.  Prior to the vote, as part of their fiduciary obligations, the Board determined that the proposal and subsequent spin-off were not in the best interests of the shareholders.  The real question for them now is, other than the vote which was by no means overwhelming, what has changed?  It is these types of situations that test the true mettle of a director.  Timken's Board is between a rock and a hard place and there are no easy answers. 

Zillow, Inc. To Use Twitter For Earnings Call

The real estate website company Zillow, Inc. announced it would use Twitter and Facebook to field questions on its first quarter earnings call.  The company claims that it is the first to take questions in this manner, but will continue to take questions in the traditional way - from those dialed into the call. This announcement comes in the wake of the SEC relaxing the rules related to the use of social media to comply with Regulation FD. 

Continue Reading...
Tags: ,

SEC Social Media Guidance - Tread Carefully

As discussed in a post on April 2, 2013, the SEC issued a report on that date that contained guidance on the use of social media to publicly disclose material information under Regulation FD.

The report centered on the SEC investigation of Netflix and Netflix CEO, Reed Hastings, and whether Regulation FD was violated when Mr. Hastings disclosed on his Facebook page favorable news about the number of hours that Netflix streamed in a month. The SEC decided not to bring enforcement action against Netflix or Mr. Hastings, making recognition that there has been market uncertainty about the application of Regulation FD to social media.

Regulation FD provides that a public company, or anyone acting on its behalf, may not disclose material, nonpublic information to market professionals or securityholders when it is reasonably foreseeable that someone may trade on the basis of the information, unless such information is simultaneously disclosed to the public in a method reasonably designed to provide broad, non-exclusionary distribution of information to the public.

It is important to remember that whether disclosures comply with Regulation FD must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The SEC stated in the report that the disclosure of material nonpublic information on the personal social media site of a corporate officer, without advance notice to investors that the site may be used for this purpose, is unlikely to satisfy Regulation FD. The SEC explained that this is true regardless of the number of subscribers. The report focused on the fact that a company must notify the market about which forms of communication, including the social media channels, it intends to use for the dissemination of material nonpublic information.

The SEC expects issuers to rigorously examine the factors outlined in its 2008 website guidance that are taken into account when determining whether a particular channel is a recognized channel of distribution for communicating with investors. A company should ask itself several questions. Is the proposed channel of distribution one that is practical for investors to monitor? Do investors need “lead time” to register to use the channel of distribution? Is the company comfortable using only that channel of distribution for communications to investors? In any event, the company must be confident that the channel of distribution will provide for broad, non-exclusionary distribution of information to the public and it must provide adequate advance notice of the use of such channel to its investors. As best practices continue to evolve, companies should strongly consider continuing to use press releases, conference calls, and current reports on Form 8-K in addition to any social media channels to distribute material nonpublic information.

Tags:

SEC Confirms Use of Social Media for Company Announcements

The SEC issued a report today that clarifies that companies may use social media outlets to make key announcements in compliance with Regulation FD (Fair Disclosure) so long as investors have previously been alerted about which social media outlet(s) will be used to disseminate such information.

Regulation FD requires companies to distribute material information in a manner reasonably designed to get that information out to the general public broadly and non-selectively.  Companies should review the SEC guidance issued in 2008 regarding the dissemination of information via websites, as that guidance also applies to questions relating to communication through social media.

The SEC report relates to an inquiry by the Division of Enforcement into a post made by Netflix CEO, Reed Hastings, on his personal Facebook page that Netflix's monthly online viewing had exceeded one billion hours for the first time.  The SEC did not initiate enforcement action or allege wrongdoing by Hastings or Netflix, recognizing that there has been market uncertainty about the application of Regulation FD to social media.

Tags:

SAC Capital: SEC Shatters Record for Largest Insider Trading Fine

Last week, the SEC reached a settlement with CR Intrinsic Investors, LLC, which tore up the record books on insider trading cases.  CR Intrinsic, an affiliate of SAC Capital, agreed to pay over $600 million to settle charges of using nonpublic information about clinical pharmaceutical trials to earn profits of over $274 million.  

Continue Reading...

This Week in SEC Enforcement Activity

State of Illinois Charged With Misleading Muni Bond Investors

The SEC charged the state of Illinois with failing to inform municipal bond investors of potential issues with its pension funding plan. The state failed to disclose that its pension obligations were at risk of “structural underfunding” issues associated with the state’s statutory funding plan, and misrepresented the overall risk associated with the pension’s financial condition.  Illinois offered $2.2 billion in bonds during 2005 to 2009.

Continue Reading...

SEC Enforcement Activity: March 4-8

Mark Cuban Insider Trading Case Set For Trial

Mark Cuban, the charismatic owner of the NBA’s Dallas Mavericks, lost his attempt to dismiss the SEC’s insider trading case against him, sending it to trial. The district court judge in Dallas said the ruling was “in some respects a close one.” Mr. Cuban is charged in connection with a 2004 sale of his stock in Mamma.com, allegedly after learning non-public information about an upcoming equity offering.  Read the original complaint here.

Continue Reading...

Could This Happen Here?

Last weekend, voters in Switzerland strongly backed a plan giving shareholders unprecedented authority over executive pay.  The Minder Initiative, named after the Swiss businessman who created it, was supported by approximately 68% of Swiss voters.  The measure gives shareholders of Swiss companies the power to approve or block proposed compensation for executives and directors.

Novartis AG and UBS AG are two of the multinational companies listed in Switzerland that will be affected by the Minder proposals.  The proposals now go to the government for legislative drafting.  Implementation is not expected until 2014 at the earliest.

Switzerland has provided a supportive environment for Mr. Minder's ideas.  In 2008, the Swiss government was forced to bail out UBS, the country's largest bank.  Also lending support to the success of the Minder Initiative was Daniel Vasella, the departing chairman of Novartis.  He was to receive 72 million Swiss francs ($76 million) over six years as part of his exit.  Novartis went back to the drawing board on Mr. Vasella's package after it created backlash among the Swiss people.

SEC Publishes Handbook For Foreign Issuers: "Accessing U.S. Capital Markets"

This month the SEC released a handbook for foreign companies interested in registering and issuing securities on U.S. exchanges. The handbook, titled “Accessing the U.S. Capital Markets – A Brief Overview for Foreign Private Issuers,” explains the eligibility requirements for “foreign private issuer” status and the unique registration and reporting rules that apply to foreign companies.

Continue Reading...
Tags: ,

SEC Enforcement Activity: Feb. 11- 15

Second Circuit Hears Oral Argument on SEC-Citigroup Settlement

Last November, a federal judge in New York rejected a proposed settlement between the SEC and Citigroup in connection with charges of misleading investors at the beginning of the financial crisis. This week the Second Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments in the case, which saw the SEC and Citigroup join forces against the District Court. Jim Hamilton has a good analysis of the proceedings here

Continue Reading...