Alert Memo

Subscribe to Alert Memo via RSS

Prediction markets allow participants to trade contracts on whether or not real-world events will occur. These platforms have grown rapidly, and contracts tied to specific company activity are now actively trading, including contracts on IPOs, mergers and acquisitions, earnings call mentions, and sales and subscriber metrics. While most public companies have adopted insider trading and related policies to regulate trading in the company’s securities, companies’ policies are generally written for securities transactions, where prediction market event contracts are generally not offered or traded as securities in the traditional sense. That gap matters, as companies still need to guard against misuse of company information in the context of other transactions, such as events contracts. Trading on the basis of nonpublic information on prediction markets may attract enforcement at multiple levels, including platform based sanctions, regulatory actions, and criminal charges against individuals that may have implications for public companies. This alert explains the risks, outlines what companies can do to address these risks and identifies what to watch for as the regulatory framework takes shape.Continue Reading Betting on Company Information: Prediction Market Considerations for Public Companies

Just a few days ago, a state-linked hacking group claimed responsibility for a disruptive cyberattack on a Fortune 500 medical technology company with no ransom demand and no negotiation, calling it retaliation for a U.S. military strike. The risk of this type of politically-motivated cyberattack may increase given the increasingly volatile geopolitical environment. To combat this, the President recently signed an executive order targeting cybercrime carried out by transnational criminal organizations, aimed at improving federal coordination in combatting cybercrime. Now is an important time for boards and management teams to focus on crisis and risk management, including durable operational resilience planning. This alert provides perspectives about current best practices on incident preparedness in the face of such threats, explains how this preparedness can be supplemented by an operational resilience framework, discusses the practical implications of the executive order, and lays out a governance hygiene checklist to guide your next cybersecurity oversight discussion.Continue Reading Cybersecurity in the Age of Cyber Warfare: Governance Reminders for Public Company Boards

On March 5, 2026, the SEC granted exemptive relief from Section 16(a) beneficial ownership reporting requirements for directors and officers of foreign private issuers (“FPIs”) incorporated or organized in certain jurisdictions with insider reporting regimes substantially similar to the United States. The exemption covers FPIs incorporated in Canada, Chile, member states of the European Economic Area, the Republic of Korea, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom—provided the FPI is subject to a qualifying regulation and each individual director or officer satisfies certain conditions. This relief arrives just ahead of the March 18, 2026 deadline for initial Form 3 filings, although qualifying FPIs and their directors and officers should review the exemption’s conditions carefully before concluding they can rely on it. In this alert, we summarize the qualifying jurisdictions, the exemption’s conditions and limitations, and what FPIs should do now.Continue Reading Section 16(a) Reporting: SEC Grants Exemptive Relief for Foreign Private Issuers in Certain Jurisdictions

On February 27, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted final rules implementing the Holding Foreign Insiders Accountable Act, or HFIAA. As expected, the final rules require directors and officers of foreign private issuers with a class of equity securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act to report their beneficial ownership and transactions on Forms 3, 4, and 5. The rules take effect on March 18, 2026, meaning initial Form 3 filings are due in less than three weeks. The final rules contain no major surprises, and address several interpretive questions that remained open following enactment. As the SEC noted in explaining its decision to forgo notice-and-comment rulemaking, the amendments “simply conform the Commission’s rules and forms to the requirements of HFIA Act and involve limited exercise of agency discretion.” In this alert, we highlight the most significant clarifications and practical considerations for compliance. For additional background on HFIAA, please refer to our prior alert, Section 16(a) Insider Reporting: Legislation Ends Foreign Private Issuer Exemption.Continue Reading Section 16(a) Reporting: SEC Adopts Final Rules for Foreign Private Issuers

When the SEC announced changes to the Rule 14a-8 no-action letter process in November 2025, many observers—ourselves included—anticipated that some shareholder proponents might turn to litigation if companies excluded their proposals under the new framework. That anticipated litigation has now arrived. On February 17, 2026, two separate lawsuits were filed challenging company decisions to exclude shareholder proposals from their 2026 proxy materials. A third lawsuit followed just two days later, on February 19, 2026. These cases mark the earliest examples of litigation under this season’s revised Rule 14a-8 no-action letter process.Continue Reading Lawsuits Filed Under SEC’s Revised Rule 14a-8 No-Action Letter Process

On January 28, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) Division of Corporation Finance, Division of Investment Management, and Division of Trading and Markets (the “Divisions”) published a joint statement providing taxonomies for tokenized securities (the “Guidance”).[1] The Guidance is intended to assist market participants active in tokenized products to ensure compliance with federal securities laws.Continue Reading SEC Staff Issues Guidance on Tokenized Security Taxonomies

On January 7, 2026, the White House issued an Executive Order (EO) titled “Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting,” announcing an effort to “accelerate defense procurement and revitalize the defense industrial base” by preventing “major defense contractors” from “conduct[ing] stock buy-backs or issu[ing] dividends at the expense of accelerated procurement and increased production capacity.”[1]  The EO states that going forward there will be limitations on the ability of defense contractors who are “underperforming on their contracts” to pay dividends or buy-back stock, at least until such time as they are “able to produce a superior product, on time and on budget,” pursuant to their existing defense contracts.  The Secretary of the U.S. Department of War (the “Secretary”) is empowered to identify underperformers and initiate remediation or enforcement.[2]Continue Reading Executive Order on “Prioritizing the Warfighter in Defense Contracting” – Key Implications for Defense and Government Contractors

In Augenbaum v. Anson Investment Master Fund LP et al., the Southern District of New York recently denied a motion to dismiss in a case seeking short-swing profit disgorgement relating to trades that generated ~$500 million by an alleged investor “group”.[1]Continue Reading Sections 13/16: Group Formation & Short-Swing Profit Disgorgement