TheCorporateCounsel.net

Perhaps one of the most controversial proposals that the SEC has not yet acted on is a proposal to amend the “held of record” definition for purposes of Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act. The contours of this plan were originally floated by then-Commissioner Allison Herren Lee, who in a speech raised concerns about the “explosive growth of private markets.”

Today under the Exchange Act, a company that reaches either 2,000 holders of record or 500 holders of record that are not accredited investors (whichever happens first) must register a class of equity securities under the mandatory registration provision of Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act. Key to this calculation is how one determines what securities are “held of record,” which historically has not involved looking through to the beneficial ownership of the securities that are listed on the company’s stock records.

In the post-JOBS Act era, back when the SEC was compelled to try to actually encourage capital formation and promote the use of private markets, the SEC implemented the JOBS Act’s higher Section 12(g) mandatory thresholds (discussed above) and actually excluded persons from the definition of “held of record” if they hold only securities issued to them pursuant to an employee compensation plan in transactions exempted from the registration requirements of the Securities Act.

Now, the SEC is talking about going in the other direction. When she discussed the issue at SEC Speaks in 2021, Lee pointed out that most shares in U.S. markets are held in street name, with the result that “record ownership has plummeted and in most cases has no meaningful relationship to the number of actual investors.” Lee suggested that the Commission “should consider whether to recalibrate the way issuers must count shareholders of record under Section 12(g) (and Rule 12g5-1) in order to hew more closely to the intent of Congress and the Commission in requiring issuers to count shareholders to begin with. In other words, it’s time for us to reassess what it means to be a holder of record under Section 12(g).”

It should be noted that the practical effect of this recalibrating would be that more companies would get swept into the mandatory registration provisions of Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act, and would thus be forced to become public companies – that are then subject to all of the extensive disclosure requirements about climate change risk, etc. that the SEC is currently seeking to put in place.

Those of you who have been at this a while might recall that, prior to the JOBS Act amendments, a number of very large private technology companies were forced to go public by virtue of the “held of record” definition and the mandatory registration provision in Section 12(g), such as Facebook and Google. If the SEC were to ultimately adopt the proposed changes to the definition of “held of record,” we would likely see the same “forced” going public scenario for large private companies that played out in the mid-2000s.

Clearly, Lee’s departure from the SEC last year did not scuttle the SEC’s plans to move forward with this proposal, because it has remained on the SEC’s Reg Flex Agenda.

– Dave Lynn