SEC and Securities Laws

Subscribe to SEC and Securities Laws via RSS

Form 20-F is the form used for an annual report of a foreign private issuer (“FPI”) filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or the “Commission”). This alert memorandum summarizes considerations that will affect the preparation of the annual report on Form 20-F for the year ending on December 31, 2025 (the “2025 20‑F”) and certain other developments pertinent to FPIs.Continue Reading Preparing an Annual Report on Form 20-F – Guide for 2026

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) adopted the “Filing Fee Disclosure and Payment Methods Modernization Rule” on October 13, 2021, to “make the filing process faster, less expensive, and more efficient for SEC staff and market participants.” Over the last few years, the SEC has phased in various requirements of this rule. However, effective July 31, 2025, all filers are now required to be compliant.Continue Reading Filing Fees and the Fuss over FEPT

On September 17, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Commission) voted 3-1 to issue a policy statement clarifying that the presence of a mandatory arbitration provision for investor claims arising under the federal securities laws in an issuer’s articles or certificate of incorporation, bylaws or any securities-related contractual agreements (Operating Documents) will not affect the Commission’s decision whether to accelerate the effectiveness of that issuer’s registration statement.[1] The statement marks a reversal of the Commission’s longstanding refusal to accelerate an issuer’s registration statement under these circumstances,[2] a position that has resulted in U.S. public companies generally not including mandatory arbitration provisions for federal securities law claims in their Operating Documents. As a result, these claims can and have historically been filed as class actions in federal courts.Continue Reading To Arbitrate or Not to Arbitrate: The SEC Now Allows Companies to Choose

The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance just announced that it will largely step back from the shareholder proposal no-action letter process for the current proxy season (October 1, 2025 – September 30, 2026). The Division cited three reasons: resource constraints following the recent government shutdown, a high volume of registration statements competing for staff attention, and the extensive existing body of guidance already available to companies and proponents. The announcement aligns with the deregulatory approach we flagged in September when discussing potential reforms to the shareholder proposal process under the current SEC.Continue Reading SEC Announces Changes to Rule 14a-8 No-Action Letter Process

For more insights and analysis from Cleary lawyers on policy and regulatory developments from a legal perspective, visit What to Expect From a Second Trump Administration.

As the U.S. government shutdown stretches into its sixth week—and in light of the SEC’s clarification that it will not be reviewing and declaring registration statements effective via the traditional route during the shutdown—issuers seeking to proceed with primary and secondary offerings are turning to a statutory alternative that permits registration statements to go automatically effective without SEC clearance.[1] The exchanges have indicated willingness to play along, with some regulatory caveats,[2] and SEC leadership has publicly endorsed this method of having a registration statement go effective during the shutdown.[3]Continue Reading Taking the Plunge: Registration Statement Filings Without a Delaying Amendment During the Shutdown

On September 10, 2025, the U.S. House Committee on Financial Services hosted a hearing titled “Proxy Power and Proposal Abuse: Reforming Rule 14a-8 to Protect Shareholder Value” to assess the shareholder proposal process, evaluate the influence of proxy advisory firms and highlight legislative solutions to limit shareholder proposals to material issues. The hearing comes at a time of enhanced regulatory scrutiny of the shareholder proposal process and could be indicative of future 14a-8 reform approaches under the SEC’s recently issued Spring 2025 Reg-Flex Agenda. Continue Reading House Financial Services Committee Previews Possible 14a-8 Reform

2025 promises to be another turbulent year for boards of directors. On the heels of a historically unprecedented election, companies are still ramping up compliance with the ambitious agenda of the outgoing administration while simultaneously bracing for the changes promised by the next one. Against that backdrop, colleagues from across Cleary’s offices have zeroed-in on the impact of the issues that boards of directors and senior management of public companies have faced in the past year, as well as on what can be anticipated in the year to come.Continue Reading Selected Issues for Boards of Directors in 2025

In a May 31, 2024 opinion, the Delaware Court of Chancery denied a motion to dismiss a complaint challenging the sale of a public company with a controlling private equity sponsor to an unrelated, arms-length buyer, finding that the sale was potentially tainted by conflicts of interest.[1]  In particular, the court found that it was reasonably conceivable that the private equity sponsor’s receipt of an early termination payment under a tax receivable agreement put into place upon the target company’s initial public offering was a material non-ratable benefit, which may have led the sponsor to push for a sale (which would trigger the early termination payment), even if remaining a standalone company would have been better for the minority stockholders. The opinion also touches on important issues relating to financial advisors’ advice in connection with such a sale. While tax receivable agreements (“TRAs”) are common in sponsor-backed and “Up-C” IPOs, this case highlights a rarely considered issue involving these agreements, and the need for careful navigation of related potential conflicts of interest in a sale process where a private equity sponsor, and TRA beneficiary, continues to control the public company.Continue Reading Delaware Chancery Court Finds Private Equity Sponsor’s Tax Receivable Agreement Potentially Led to Conflicted Sale Process

On April 4, 2024, the Delaware Supreme Court issued its decision on a stockholder suit challenging the fairness of IAC/InterActiveCorp’s separation from its controlled subsidiary, Match Group, Inc.[1]  In this decision, the Delaware Supreme Court provided clarity and guidance on two important issues involving the application of the MFW framework.Continue Reading Delaware Supreme Court Provides Important Guidance on Application of MFW Framework to Controlling Stockholder Transactions

On March 6, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission approved in a 3-2 vote final rules that require most reporting companies to provide certain climate-related information in their registration statements and annual reports filed with the SEC. This memorandum summarizes a portion of the final rules, the amendments to Regulation S-X, as amended (Regulation S-X), under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act), that require a new footnote in audited financial statements, analyzes some of the key challenges these requirements may impose and concludes with some general takeaways. This memorandum does not address the GHG emissions and attestation report disclosure requirements or the governance, business, risk and targets disclosure requirements set forth in the final rules’ amendments to Regulation S-K, as amended (Regulation S-K), under the Securities Act and Exchange Act.Continue Reading SEC’s Final Climate-Related Disclosure Rules: A Closer Look at the Climate Note to Audited Financial Statements