Rule · SEC · 5 Apr 2007 · E7-5947
New Exchange Act Rule 12h-6 permits a foreign private issuer to terminate its registration of equity securities under Section 12(g) and cease reporting obligations under Sections 13(a) and 15(d) by meeting specific quantitative benchmarks. For equity securities, termination requires that the U.S. average daily trading volume be no greater than 5 percent of the worldwide average daily trading volume, or alternatively, that fewer than 300 U.S. residents hold the securities. Debt securities issuers may terminate reporting obligations if fewer than 300 U.S. residents hold the securities. The rule also establishes conditions regarding prior reporting, dormancy, and foreign listing, with an effective date of June 4, 2007.
1 17 CFR 200.30–1.
2 17 CFR 232.101.
3 17 CFR 232.10 et seq.
4 17 CFR 240.12g3–2, 240.12g–4 and 240.12h–3. 5 15 U.S.C. 78a et seq. 6 17 CFR 240.12h–6. 7 17 CFR 249.324. 8See the definition of foreign private issuer at Exchange Act Rule 3b–4(c) (17 CFR 240.3b–4(c)). 9Release No. 34–53020 (December 23, 2005), 70 FR 77688 (December 30, 2005) (Original Proposing Release). 10This statutory section applies to equity securities only. See Exchange Act Section 12(g)(1) [15 U.S.C. 78l (g)(1)]. 11 15 U.S.C. 78o(d). The effectiveness of a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933 (‘‘Securities Act’’) triggers Section 15(d) reporting obligations. That section provides that an issuer cannot suspend its reporting obligations unless the subject class of securities is held of record by less than 300 persons at the beginning of a fiscal year other than the year in which the Securities Act registration statement became effective. Section 15(d) does not permit an issuer to terminate, but only to suspend, its reporting obligations under that section. 12Exchange Act Rules 12g–4(a)(2)(i) (17 CFR 240.12g–4(a)(2)(i)) and 12h–3(b)(2)(i) (17 CFR 240.12h–3(b)(2)(i)). 13See Original Proposing Release, 70 FR at 77689–77690. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR Parts 200, 232, 240 and 249 [Release No. 34–55540; International Series Release No. 1301; File No. S7–12–05] RIN 3235–AJ38 Termination of a Foreign Private Issuer’s Registration of a Class of Securities Under Section 12(g) and Duty To File Reports Under Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission. ACTION: Final rule. SUMMARY: We are adopting amendments to the rules that govern when a foreign private issuer may terminate the registration of a class of equity securities under section 12(g) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Exchange Act’’) and the corresponding duty to file reports required under section 13(a) of the Exchange Act, and when it may cease its reporting obligations regarding a class of equity or debt securities under
section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.
Under the current rules, a foreign private issuer may find it difficult to terminate its Exchange Act registration and reporting obligations despite the fact that there is relatively little interest in the issuer’s U.S.-registered securities among United States investors. Moreover, currently a foreign private issuer can only suspend, and cannot terminate, a duty to report arising under
section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. New
Exchange Act Rule 12h–6 will permit a foreign private issuer of equity securities to terminate its reporting obligations under either section 13(a) or
section 15(d) of the Exchange Act by
meeting a quantitative benchmark designed to measure relative U.S. market interest for its equity securities that does not depend on a head count of the issuer’s U.S. security holders. The new rule will permit a foreign private issuer to compare the average daily trading volume of its securities in the United States with its worldwide average daily trading volume, using a 5 percent benchmark. The accompanying rule amendments will also help provide U.S. investors with ready access through the Internet on an ongoing basis to material information about a foreign private issuer of equity securities that is required by its home country after it has exited the Exchange Act reporting system. The new rule will also permit a foreign private issuer of debt securities to terminate, rather than merely suspend, its section 15(d) reporting obligations. DATES: Effective Date: June 4, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elliot Staffin, Special Counsel, at (202) 551–3450, in the Office of International Corporate Finance, Division of Corporation Finance, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549– 3628. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are adopting amendments to Commission Rule 30–1,1 Rule 101 2 of Regulation S– T,3 and Rules 12g3–2, 12g–4 and 12h– 3 4 under the Exchange Act,5 and adding new Rule 12h–6 6 and Form 15F 7 under the Exchange Act.
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary and Background
A. Introduction
B. Principal Comments Regarding the Reproposed Rule Amendments
C. Summary of the Adopted Rule
Amendments
II. Discussion
A. Conditions for Equity Securities Issuers
1. Quantitative Benchmarks
a. Trading Volume Benchmark
i. Calculation of the U.S. Trading Volume
Benchmark as a Percentage of Worldwide Trading Volume Instead of Primary Trading Market Trading Volume
ii. Inclusion of Off-Market Transactions in
the Trading Volume Calculation
iii. The 5 Percent Trading Volume Measure
iv. Definition of Equity Securities
v. One Year Ineligibility Period After
Delisting
vi. One Year Ineligibility Period After
Termination of Sponsored ADR Facility
vii. Transition Period
b. Alternative 300-Holder Condition
2. Prior Exchange Act Reporting Condition
3. The One Year Dormancy Condition
4. Foreign Listing Condition
B. Debt Securities Provision
C. Revised Counting Method
D. Expanded Scope of Rule 12h–6
1. Application of Rule 12h–6 to Successor
Issuers
2. Application of Rule 12h–6 to Prior Form
15 Filers
E. Public Notice Requirement F. Form 15F G. Amended Rules 12g–4 and 12h–3 H. Amendment Regarding the Rule 12g3– 2(b) Exemption
1. Extension of the Rule 12g3–2(b)
Exemption Under Rule 12g3–2(e)
2. Electronic Publishing of Home Country
Documents
I. Concerns Regarding Securities Act Rule
701
III. Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis
IV. Cost-Benefit Analysis
V. Consideration of Impact on the Economy,
Burden on Competition and Promotion of Efficiency, Competition and Capital Formation Analysis
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
VII. Statutory Basis and Text of Rule
Amendments
I. Executive Summary and Background
A. Introduction
In December 2005, the Commission issued proposed amendments to its current rules governing when a foreign private issuer 8 may exit the Exchange Act reporting regime.9 Under the current rules, the primary determinant regarding whether a foreign private issuer may terminate its registration of a class of securities under section 12(g) 10 or suspend its reporting obligations under section 15(d) 11 is if its subject securities are held of record by less than 300 residents in the United States.12 The Commission proposed to amend these rules out of concern that, due to the increased globalization of securities markets in recent decades as well as other trends, it has become difficult for a foreign private issuer to exit the Exchange Act reporting system even when there is relatively little U.S. investor interest in its U.S.-registered securities.13 We recognize that U.S. investors benefit from the investment opportunities provided by foreign private issuers registering their securities with the Commission and listing and publicly offering those securities in the United States. However, because of the burdens and uncertainties associated with terminating registration and reporting under the Exchange Act, the current exit process may serve as a disincentive to foreign private issuers accessing the pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
14See Part I.C of the Original Proposing Release for a discussion of the concerns raised by foreign private issuers regarding the current Exchange Act exit regime. 15For purposes of proposed Rule 12h–6, a ‘‘wellknown seasoned issuer’’ meant a well-known seasoned issuer as defined in Securities Act Rule 405 (17 CFR 230.405), which would have required the worldwide market value of an issuer’s outstanding voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates to be $700 million or more. 16Under the original rule proposal, a WKSI would have been eligible to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities if the U.S. average daily trading volume (‘‘ADTV’’) of the subject class of securities had been no greater than 5 percent of the ADTV of that class of securities in its primary trading market during a recent 12 month period, and U.S. residents held no more than 10 percent of the issuer’s worldwide public float as of a specified date. A WKSI with greater than 5 percent U.S. ADTV or a non-WKSI would have been eligible for termination of reporting regarding a class of equity securities if, regardless of U.S. trading volume, U.S. residents held no more than 5 percent of the issuer’s worldwide public float as of a specified date. See
Part II.B.2.d of Release No. 34–53020.
17Release No. 34–55005 (December 22, 2006), 72 FR 1384 (January 11, 2007) (Reproposing Release). 18We reproposed the rule amendments primarily because the Commission did not fully address this trading volume approach in the Original Proposing Release. 19See Parts II.A.1.a and IV of the Reproposing Release. 20These comment letters, along with the letters received at the proposing stage, are available on the Commission’s Internet Web site, located at http:// www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/s71205.shtml, and in the Commission’s Public Reference Room in its Washington, DC headquarters. 21An ADR is a negotiable instrument that represents an ownership interest in a specified number of securities, which the securities holder has deposited with a designated bank depositary. Use of an ADR facility makes it easier for a U.S. resident to collect dividends in U.S. dollars. Moreover, because the clearance and settlement process for ADRs generally is the same for securities of domestic companies that are traded in U.S. markets, a U.S. holder of an ADR is able to hold securities of a foreign company that trades, clears and settles within automated U.S. systems and within U.S. time periods. 22 17 CFR 240.15d–2. 23As reproposed, Rule 12h–6 would prohibit an equity securities registrant from selling its securities in the United States in a registered offering under the Securities Act, except for specified registered offerings, during the 12 months preceding the filing of its Form 15F. 24As reproposed, Rule 12h–6 would require an equity securities issuer to have maintained a listing on an exchange in its primary trading market. U.S. public capital markets.14 In order to remove this disincentive, we proposed to amend the current Exchange Act exit rules for foreign private issuers. As originally proposed, new Exchange Act Rule 12h–6 would have permitted a foreign private issuer of equity securities to terminate its Exchange Act registration and reporting obligations if, among other conditions, it met one of a set of alternative quantitative benchmarks that, depending on whether the issuer was a well-known seasoned issuer (‘‘WKSI’’),15 was based either on a combination of U.S. trading volume and U.S. public float criteria or just U.S. public float data.16 However, numerous commenters stated that the originally proposed rules would still unduly restrict a significant portion of U.S.- registered foreign private issuers from exiting the Exchange Act reporting regime, thus making it unlikely that the proposed rules would achieve their purpose of attracting more foreign companies to U.S. public capital markets. In light of these criticisms, we reconsidered our approach and, in December 2006, we reproposed the amendments to the Exchange Act exit rules for foreign private issuers.17 As an alternative to the record holder standard for equity securities issuers, we proposed a quantitative benchmark based solely on a comparison of the average daily trading volume of a foreign
private issuer’s equity securities in the United States with that in its primary trading market. We reasoned that a standard based on trading volume may in fact be superior to the originally proposed standard, which was based primarily on a comparison of an issuer’s U.S. public float with its worldwide public float, because it is a more direct measure of the issuer’s nexus with the U.S. market and because trading volume data is easier to obtain than public float or record holder data.18 We concluded that, in applying an exit standard based on trading volume data for the U.S. and an issuer’s primary trading market, issuers would face reduced costs when determining whether they can terminate their registration and reporting obligations under the Exchange Act, compared to the originally proposed standards that would have required an issuer to assess the U.S. residence of its security holders.19 B. Principal Comments Regarding the Reproposed Rule Amendments We received 30 comment letters in response to the reproposed rule amendments.20 These letters represented the views of over 40 distinct entities, including business, financial and legal associations, foreign companies, financial advisory and accounting firms, law firms, and one foreign government. While the commenters generally strongly supported the trading volume-based approach and other aspects of the reproposed rules, many offered suggestions designed primarily to finetune those rules. We received the most comments concerning the reproposed trading volume benchmark for equity securities issuers. Numerous commenters urged us to adopt a quantitative benchmark that would require an issuer to measure its U.S. ADTV as a percentage of its ADTV for the same class of securities on a worldwide basis, rather than against its ADTV in its primary trading market, as reproposed. Many commenters also requested that we permit an issuer to include off-market transactions when calculating its worldwide ADTV for a class of equity securities, rather than only when calculating its U.S. ADTV, as reproposed. Some commenters further urged us to permit an issuer to include trades conducted through alternative trading systems when determining whether it meets the proposed trading volume benchmark. Still others requested that we increase the percentage in the trading volume-based measure to a percentage greater than 5 percent, as reproposed, particularly if we did not move to a worldwide ADTV standard. Commenters expressed concern or requested guidance regarding a number of other issues, including:
25 17 CFR 240.12g–3(g).
26Like current Rules 12g–4 and 12h–3, which require the filing of Form 15, reproposed Rule 12h– 6 would require the filing of a form—Form 15F— by which an issuer would certify that it meets the conditions for ceasing its Exchange Act reporting obligations. 27Neither the OTC Bulletin Board operated by Nasdaq nor the market operated by the Pink Sheets LLC are deemed to be automated inter–dealer quotation systems. See Release 33–6862 (April 23, 1999), n.22. 28See Part II.D.1 of this release for clarification regarding the limited role of the predecessor in determining a successor issuer’s eligibility to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations under Rule 12h–6. issuer that delists from its non-U.S. exchange in connection with being acquired;
29See Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2(b)(1)(iii) (17 CFR 240.12g3–2(b)(1)(iii)). 30See p. 12 and Part II.A.2 of this release. 31New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(a)(4)(i) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(a)(4)(i)). 32See, for example, the letter, dated February 12, 2007, from Cleary Gottlieb, Steen & Hamilton LLP (Cleary Gottlieb). 33See the comment letters discussed in Part II.A.1.a of the Reproposing Release. Rule 12g3–2(b) 29 on its Internet Web site or through an electronic information delivery system generally available to the public in its primary trading market, as reproposed;
34See, for example, the letter, dated February 12, 2007, from the European Association for Listed Companies and other signatories (EALIC). 35See, for example, the letter, dated February 12, 2007, from Sullivan & Cromwell LLP (Sullivan & Cromwell) and the letter, dated January 2, 2007, from Galileo Global Advisors (Galileo). 36See, for example, the letter from Cleary Gottlieb. 37See, for example, the letter, dated February 12, 2007, from the European Commission. 38See the letter from Cleary Gottlieb. 39See, most recently, the letter, dated February 23, 2007, from the American Bar Association,
Section of Business Law (ABA).
40For example, a trading volume standard that favored WKSIs could discourage smaller foreign companies from entering U.S. public capital markets, to the detriment of U.S. investors. Moreover, commenters at the proposing stage noted that the costs of continued Exchange Act reporting fall disproprotionately on smaller issuers. See Part II.A.1.a of the Reproposing Release. 41As discussed in Part II.A.4 of this release, we define primary trading market to mean that at least 55 percent of the trading in a foreign private issuer’s subject class of securities took place in, on or through the facilities of a securities market or markets in a single foreign jurisdiction or in no more than two foreign jurisdictions during a recent 12-month period. If an issuer aggregates the trading in two foreign jurisdictions, the trading market for the issuer’s securities in at least one of the two foreign jurisdictions must be larger than the United States trading market for the same class of the issuer’s securities. We proposed a substantially similar definition at the reproposing stage. 42See, for example, the letter, dated February 8, 2007, from BusinessEurope, the letters, dated February 12, 2007, from Davis Polk & Wardwell (Davis Polk), Linklaters, and Makinson Cowell, and the letters from Cleary Gottlieb, EALIC, and the EU. In contrast, only one commenter opposed using worldwide trading volume. See the letter from Galileo. 43See the letters from Cleary Gottlieb and EALIC. 44See the letter from Linklaters. 45See Part II.A.4 of this release. 46Worldwide ADTV includes U.S. ADTV. Some commenters favored a trading measure based on the dollar value of shares traded rather than on the number of shares traded. See the letter, dated February 12, 2007, from Ziegler, Ziegler and Associates (Ziegler) and the letter from Galileo. We decline to adopt a trading value measure because we believe that it would add an unnecessary level of complexity and cost to the non-record holder determination. 47See the letters from BusinessEurope, Cleary Gottlieb, Davis Polk, EALIC, the EU, Makinson Cowell, and Sullivan & Cromwell, and the letters, dated February 12, 2007, from the International Bar Association and Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom (Skadden Arps). volume-based benchmark should result in reduced costs to issuers in determining whether they can terminate their Exchange Act reporting obligations.34 Some commenters supported the reproposed trading volume measure because it would provide a simple and clear measure of the degree of U.S. market interest in an issuer’s equity securities.35 Some commenters expressed the view that basing the new exit rule on a trading volume measure would help ensure that an issuer’s termination of Exchange Act registration and reporting would not have a significant impact on the primary pricesetting determinants of an issuer’s equity securities, which would allow for U.S. investors to trade in that issuer’s securities following its U.S.
deregistration.36 Commenters expressed their belief that adoption of the reproposed trading volume standard would enable significantly more foreign private issuers to exit the Exchange Act reporting regime if they so desire.37 Consequently, as one commenter indicated, by removing restrictions regarding the ability to exit U.S. securities markets, adoption of new Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying amendments will have a major impact on the perception that foreign companies have of those markets, making the U.S. capital markets ‘‘much more attractive and competitive on an international scale.’’38 For the above reasons, we are adopting a quantitative exit standard for equity securities registrants based solely on trading volume instead of one based on a combination of trading volume and public float criteria or just public float data. We also are adopting, as reproposed, one trading volume standard that will apply to all issuers of equity securities. Commenters generally supported having one benchmark applicable to any foreign private issuer, regardless of size.39 Although we originally proposed a set of quantitative benchmarks that depended primarily on whether an issuer was a WKSI, we are adopting the same trading volume standard for a smaller issuer as for a larger issuer in order to provide increased flexibility and simplification to the Exchange Act deregistration regime, and for the other reasons discussed in the Reproposing Release.40
i. Calculation of the U.S. Trading
Volume Benchmark as a Percentage of Worldwide Trading Volume Instead of Primary Trading Market Trading Volume Numerous commenters requested that the Commission calculate U.S. trading volume as a percentage of worldwide trading volume rather than as a percentage of ADTV in the issuer’s primary trading market,41 as reproposed.42 The primary rationale for this request is that, with the increased globalization of securities markets, many issuers now trade on multiple non-U.S. markets. According to these commenters, since the goal of the reproposed trading volume benchmark is to determine the relative importance of the U.S. trading market for an issuer’s securities, an issuer should be able to take into account all non-U.S. trading in its securities, and not just the trading that has occurred in the one or two jurisdictions comprising its primary trading market.43 Some commenters maintained that, while it is reasonable to base Rule 12h– 6’s foreign listing condition on the reproposed primary trading market definition, it is not so for the trading volume benchmark.44 As discussed below, the purpose of the foreign listing condition is to help assure that there is a non-U.S. jurisdiction that principally regulates and oversees the issuance and trading of the issuer’s securities and the issuer’s disclosure obligations to investors.45 Limiting the definition of primary trading market in this context to no more than two jurisdictions helps to further the purpose of the foreign listing condition. In contrast, the purpose of the trading volume benchmark is to measure the relative U.S. market interest in a foreign private issuer’s equity securities. Accounting for as much of the issuer’s trading as is reasonably possible would further the purpose of this rule. We agree that, in light of the number of foreign registrants that have listings in more than two jurisdictions, and given the purpose of the trading volume benchmark, measuring an issuer’s U.S. ADTV as a percentage of its worldwide ADTV would increase the likelihood of obtaining a more accurate measure of relative U.S. market interest for that issuer’s equity securities. Therefore, we are adopting a trading volume benchmark for new Rule 12h–6 that will require an issuer to use as the denominator of its trading volume calculation its worldwide ADTV for the subject class of securities.46
ii. Inclusion of Off-Market Transactions
in the Trading Volume Calculation We reproposed to require an issuer to include both transactions occurring on a stock exchange and over-the-counter trades for the purpose of calculating U.S. ADTV for the numerator of the trading volume benchmark, but to include only on-exchange transactions for the purpose of calculating its ADTV for the denominator (its primary trading market, as reproposed). We did so based on our belief that trading volume information about over-the-counter trades was more readily available in the United States than in many foreign jurisdictions. Numerous commenters 47 urged the Commission to permit an issuer to include ‘‘off-market’’ transactions when determining whether it meets the 5 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
48See, for example, the letter from Cleary Gottlieb. 49 Directive 2004/39/EC, also known as the Market in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID). 50See the letters from Cleary Gottlieb, the EU, and BusinessEurope. 51See the letters from the EU and Davis Polk. 52See, for example, the EU letter. 53See, for example, the letter from Davis Polk. 54See the letters from BusinessEurope and the EU. 55See the letter from Skadden Arps. 56Rule 601 of Regulation NMS (17 CFR 242.601) requires every national securities exchange to file a transaction reporting plan regarding transactions in listed equity and Nasdaq securities. 57See, for example, NASD Manual Rule 6600 et seq. for rules regarding recording and reporting transactions in OTC Equity Securities. A member broker-dealer must report information concerning OTC trades not involving a listed security, including a Nasdaq security, under the NASD rules rather than pursuant to a transaction reporting plan since the latter only covers unlisted transactions involving listed (and Nasdaq) securities. 58See, for example, the letters from Cleary Gottlieb and EALIC. 59See Instruction 3.c to Item 4 of Form 15F. 60See Item 4.F of Form 15F. 61See the letter, dated February 9, 2007, from SGL Carbon, the letter, dated February 12, 2007, from Fried Frank Harris Shriver & Jacobson (Fried Frank), and the letter from Skadden Arps. Another commenter requested an increase to 15 percent. See the letter from i-CABLE Communications Ltd. (iCABLE). 62See the letters from Cleary Gottlieb, EALIC, Galileo, Sullivan & Cromwell, and the New York State Society of Certified Public Accountants (NYSSCPA). 63See the letters from the ABA, BusinessEurope, and Linklaters. 64See Part III, n. 191 of this release. 65 17 CFR 240.3a11–1. 66See the letters from BusinessEurope, the EU, EALIC and Cleary Gottlieb. percent trading volume standard, rather than just transactions occurring on a stock exchange, as reproposed. These commenters maintained that it was inappropriate to require an issuer to include both on-exchange and offexchange transactions when calculating its U.S. ADTV but not when calculating its worldwide trading volume. As noted by some of these commenters, members of Euronext markets are currently required to report off-market transactions.48 Moreover, some commenters noted that an EU Directive,49 scheduled for effectiveness in November 2007, will generally require the reporting of off-market transactions, which will make information regarding off-market transactions generally available in Europe the same way that such information is available through a transaction reporting plan in the United States.50 Some of these commenters urged the Commission to permit an issuer to include not only off-market transactions that currently occur through traditional over-the-counter means, but those that may occur through alternative trading systems.51 According to these commenters, MiFID will encourage the development of such trading systems.52
These commenters stated that, as long as trading information is credible and the sources reliable, an issuer should be able to include information about securities transactions regardless of the platform on which they occur.53 Some commenters requested that, if the Commission does not permit an issuer to include off-market transactions when determining its worldwide trading volume for the denominator of its trading volume calculation, it should also prohibit the inclusion of off-market transactions when determining its U.S. ADTV for the numerator of that calculation.54 In contrast, one commenter, which favored a worldwide trading volume measure, expressly requested that the Commission prohibit the inclusion of off-market transactions for both the numerator and denominator because of the difficulty of obtaining over-the-counter trading information.55 These comments have persuaded us that, for at least some foreign private issuers, information regarding offexchange transactions in non-U.S. jurisdictions will be readily obtainable. Therefore, under adopted Rule 12h–6, when making its trading volume determination, an issuer must include in its calculation of U.S. ADTV both onexchange and off-exchange transactions, as reproposed. For both on-exchange and off-exchange transactions in the United States, we expect an issuer to be able to obtain relevant trading volume information as reported pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan,56 pursuant to NASD rules,57 or reported by a national securities exchange otherwise than pursuant to an effective transaction reporting plan. In addition, an issuer may include in its calculation of worldwide ADTV off-market transactions, including transactions conducted through alternative trading systems, in addition to transactions occurring on an exchange, as long as an issuer has obtained the information concerning the off-market transactions from publicly available sources or thirdparty information service providers, upon which the issuer has reasonably relied in good faith, and as long as the off-market transaction information does not duplicate any other trading volume information obtained. In response to our request for comments on whether issuers should be required to obtain trading volume data from particular sources, a number of commenters advocated that the final rules provide issuers with sufficient flexibility to use such data sources as they deem reliable and appropriate.58 The adopted rules do not specify any particular data sources that issuers must use to determine either its U.S. or worldwide trading volume. In this respect, when obtaining information concerning either onexchange or off-exchange transactions, issuers will have the latitude to use market data vendors or other commercial service providers and publicly available sources of market information that they reasonably believe to be reliable and that do not duplicate trading volume information obtained from other sources, such as
various exchanges or markets.59 Issuers will be required to disclose their trading volume data sources on Form 15F, which will inform investors of the data sources used.60
iii. The 5 Percent Trading Volume
Measure
Commenters expressed a variety of views on whether 5 percent U.S. ADTV was the appropriate threshold for the trading volume benchmark. Although some commenters requested that the Commission increase the percentage to 10 percent ADTV,61 many others supported the 5 percent threshold.62 Moreover, some of the commenters that requested an increase to 10 percent did so only if the Commission decided not to adopt a world-wide trading based benchmark.63 We believe that adoption of the ‘‘5 percent of worldwide trading volume’’ standard will permit foreign companies with relatively little U.S. market interest to deregister.64 Moreover, by permitting an issuer to include both on-exchange and off-exchange transactions when calculating its worldwide ADTV, we have addressed the concerns of commenters who suggested the 5 percent threshold could be too low to achieve the rule’s purpose of reducing the disincentive to U.S. registration that may be caused by the current exit regime.
iv. Definition of Equity Securities
We reproposed that, for purposes of new Rule 12h–6, an issuer would use the definition of equity security provided in Exchange Act Rule 3a11–
1.65 That provision includes equitylinked securities, such as convertible
debt securities and warrants, within the definition of equity security. Several commenters 66 requested that the Commission exclude equity-linked securities from the definition of equity pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
67See the letter from Cleary Gottlieb, which cites Securities Act Rule 800(b) (17 CFR 230.800(b)). 68See Part II.A.4 of this release. 69New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(f)(3) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(f)(3)). These are the same categories of securities excluded from the definition of equity security under Securities Act Rule 800(b). 70New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(b)(1) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(b)(1)). We previously proposed to codify this delisting requirement, along with a similar requirement concerning termination of a sponsored ADR facility, as Notes to paragraph (a)(4) of reproposed Rule 12h–6. We have restructured final Rule 12h–6 to provide for these requirements in a separate paragraph and have changed the paragraph numbering of the adopted rule accordingly. As adopted, Rule 12h–6(b) does not apply to issuers terminating their reporting obligations under either Rule 12h–6(d) (the successor issuer provision) or Rule 12h–6(i) (the prior Form 15 filer provision). 71For example, an issuer that failed to meet the trading volume standard at the date of delisting would have to meet the trading volume standard one year later when filing its Form 15F. If, notwithstanding its delisting, an active U.S. overthe-counter market in the company’s securities continued, the company would not be eligible to use Rule 12h–6 and file a Form 15F in reliance on the trading volume benchmark. 72See the letter, dated February 9, 2004, from Cleary Gottlieb. 73See the letters from Galileo, Makinson Cowell and SGL Carbon. 74Some commenters requested that we exempt from the delisting condition an issuer that has been involuntarily delisted. See, for example, the letter, dated February 22, 2007, from Cravath, Swaine & Moore (Cravath). We decline to do so since such an exemption could encourage an issuer not to comply with exchange standards in order to get delisted. 75When an issuer terminates its ADR facility, the holders of ADRs generally have the option to make arrangements to hold the underlying securities directly. However, if holders are unable or unwilling to make these arrangements, or to pay the costs associated with these arrangements, the holders will have their investment cashed out, that is, the underlying securities will generally be sold into the home market and the net proceeds (after deducting fees and expenses of the selling broker and the depositary bank) remitted to the former ADR holders. security on the grounds that trading volume information for equity-linked securities is difficult to obtain. One commenter suggested using instead the definition of equity security provided in the Securities Act cross-border rules, which explicitly excludes convertible debt and other equity-linked securities.67 We agree with those commenters that, because trading volume information concerning convertible debt and other equity-linked securities is more difficult to obtain than trading volume information for the underlying equity securities, an issuer should not have to include
equity-linked securities when determining whether it meets the trading volume benchmark. The same reasoning applies to an issuer’s determination concerning the foreign listing condition, which requires an issuer to meet the definition of primary trading market, which is a trading volume-based definition.68 Therefore, we are adopting a definition of equity security that is based on Rule 3a11–1, except that, for purposes of the trading volume and foreign listing provisions of Rule 12h–6, the definition explicitly excludes:
76See, for example, the letter, dated February 12, 2007, from the New York State Bar Association (N.Y. State Bar), and the letters from the ABA and Linklaters. 77See the letter from the N.Y. State Bar. 78New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(b)(2) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(b)(2)). 79Note to paragraph (a)(4) of Rule 12h–6. Typically the ratio defining the number of common or ordinary shares underlying each ADR is included as part of the deposit agreement or in an exhibit to that agreement. 80See the letter from the ABA. 81New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(a)(4)(ii) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(a)(4)(ii)). 82We did not originally propose or repropose a similar 500 record holder condition, although one exists in the current rules for a small issuer with total assets that have not exceeded $10 million for its most recent three fiscal years. Based on current experience, most foreign private issuers have not relied on that provision due to the difficulty in meeting the asset test. 83See the letters from the ABA and the Organization for International Investment. 84See Part II.A.1.b of the Reproposing Release. 85 In this regard, we note that the Advisory Committee on Smaller Public Companies has made recommendations relating to Exchange Act registration and termination of registration. See the Final Report of the Advisory Committee on Smaller Public Companies, dated April 23, 2006, which is available at http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/ acspc/acspc-finalreport.pdf. 86See Part II.C of this release. 87New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(a)(1) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(a)(1)). the securities of the subject foreign company. Some commenters opposed the ADR facility termination condition on grounds similar to those raised against the delisting condition. However, these commenters also objected to the fact that, unlike the delisting condition, the proposed ADR facility condition applied regardless of whether, at the time of termination of its ADR facility, an issuer met the trading volume threshold measured for the previous 12 months.76 One commenter stated that adoption of the reproposed condition could dissuade issuers from sponsoring ADR programs, to the detriment of U.S. investors.77 We continue to believe that, due to the importance of ADR facilities for U.S. investors, a sponsored ADR facility termination condition is appropriate. However, we agree with commenters that the importance of this concern significantly diminishes if, at the time of its termination of a sponsored ADR facility, an issuer’s U.S. ADTV has already fallen below the trading volume threshold. Therefore, we are adopting a condition providing that, if an issuer has terminated a sponsored ADR facility, and at the time of termination the average daily trading volume in the United States of the ADRs exceeded 5 percent of the average daily trading volume of the underlying class of securities on a worldwide basis for the preceding 12 months, the issuer must wait 12 months before it may file a Form 15F to terminate its Exchange Act reporting
obligations in reliance on Rule 12h–6’s trading volume provision.78 We are also clarifying that, for purposes of Rule 12h–6’s trading volume provision, an issuer must calculate the trading volume of its ADRs in terms of the number of securities represented by those ADRs.79
vii. Transition Period
In connection with our reproposal of Rule 12h–6, we solicited comment on whether the proposed delisting and ADR termination conditions should apply to a foreign private issuer that delisted its equity securities from a U.S. exchange or terminated a sponsored ADR facility before the effective date of the new exit rule. One commenter 80 requested that neither provision apply to an issuer that delisted or terminated a sponsored ADR facility before December 13, 2006, which is the date of the open meeting at which the Commission voted to repropose Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying rule amendments. We agree that, in the interests of fairness, an issuer should not be precluded from relying on Rule 12h–6’s trading volume provision because it delisted or terminated a sponsored ADR facility before the Commission had even proposed to make those acts meaningful to the application of Rule 12h–6. However, we believe that March 21, 2007 should be the dispositive date since, on that date, the Commission voted to adopt the delisting and ADR termination conditions, thus making definite its intent that those conditions apply to Rule 12h–6’s trading volume provision. Therefore, a foreign private issuer that, before March 21, 2007, delisted a class of equity securities from a national securities exchange or inter-dealer quotation system in the United States or terminated a sponsored ADR facility, may file a Form 15F in reliance on Rule 12h–6’s trading volume provision even if, at the time of delisting or termination, its U.S. ADTV exceeded 5 percent of the ADTV of that class of securities on a worldwide basis for the preceding 12 months. b. Alternative 300-Holder Condition We are adopting, substantially as reproposed, an alternative to the trading volume benchmark provision, which will permit a foreign private issuer to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities if it has less than 300 record holders on a worldwide basis or who are U.S. residents as long as the issuer meets the rule’s other conditions.81 The purpose of this alternative 300-holder condition is to enable an issuer to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations if it cannot satisfy the new trading volume benchmark but does meet the current 300-holder standard. Otherwise, an issuer could find itself worse off under Rule 12h–6 than under the current exit rules.82 The adopted alternative record holder condition is substantially the same as the proposed and reproposed condition. Although at the proposing stage, some commenters requested that the Commission significantly raise the 300- holder threshold in both the Exchange Act exit and entrance rules, and a few made a similar request at the reproposing stage,83 we decline to adopt an increase to the 300-holder threshold for foreign private issuers either in the exit or entrance rules at this time. As we previously stated, the limited purpose for retaining the 300-holder provision in the new exit rule is to
preclude disadvantaging those companies that could terminate their Exchange Act reporting obligations under the current exit rules but not under the new trading volume condition.84 Moreover, since domestic registrants are subject to a substantially similar record holder standard, we believe any change would be more appropriately considered as
part of a comprehensive evaluation of
the record holder provisions in both the Exchange Act entrance and exit rules for both domestic and foreign registrants.85 In addition, issuers relying on the alternative holder provision will be able to use the revised counting method that we are adopting today, which should make the U.S. holder determination easier for those issuers.86
2. Prior Exchange Act Reporting
Condition
We are adopting, substantially as reproposed, a prior Exchange Act reporting condition that a foreign private issuer must meet before it can terminate its section 12(g) registration or its section 15(d) reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities under Rule 12h–6.87 This condition will require an issuer of equity securities to have had reporting obligations under
section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the
Exchange Act for at least the 12 months preceding the filing of Form 15F, to have filed or furnished all reports required for this period, and to have filed at least one annual report pursuant pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
88Under cover of a Form 6–K (17 CFR 249.306), a foreign private issuer is required to furnish in English a copy of any document that it publishes or is required to publish under the laws of its home country or the requirements of its local exchange or that it has distributed to shareholders, and which is material to an investment decision. 89See Part II.A.2 of the Reproposing Release. 90See the letter from the ABA. 91EDGAR is the Commission’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval System. 92See, for example, the letter from Galileo. 93See the letter from Sullivan & Cromwell. 94 17 CFR 240.15d–2. This rule requires an issuer that filed a Securities Act registration statement, which did not contain audited financial statements for the last full fiscal year preceding the year in which the registration statement became effective, to file a special financial report with the Commission that includes audited financials for that last full fiscal year. 95 15 U.S.C. 7262. See Release No. 33–8760 (December 15, 2006), 71 FR 76580 (December 21, 2006). 96New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(a)(2) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(a)(2)). 97See the letters from the ABA, Linklaters, the N.Y. State Bar, Sullivan & Cromwell, and Skadden Arps. 98See the letters from the ABA, Skadden Arps, and Sullivan & Cromwell. to section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. The purpose of this prior Exchange Act reporting condition is to provide investors in U.S. securities markets with a minimum period of time to make investment decisions regarding a foreign private issuer’s securities based on the information provided in an Exchange Act annual report and the interim home country materials furnished in English under cover of Form 6–K.88 Originally proposed Rule 12h–6 would have required a foreign private issuer to have had Exchange Act reporting obligations for the two years preceding the filing of its Form 15F and to have filed at least two Exchange Act annual reports before it could terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities. As previously noted, several commenters objected to this two year reporting condition primarily on the grounds that it would impose a stricter reporting requirement than is the case under the current exit rules.89 In response to those commenters, when reproposing Rule 12h–6, we reduced the required prior reporting period to at least 12 months and proposed to require only one Exchange Act annual report. We received only a few comments on the reproposed prior reporting condition for equity security issuers. One commenter supported the revisions made to the proposed prior reporting condition but urged the Commission to permit an issuer to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities even if it has not submitted all required Form 6–Ks.90 That commenter pointed to the difficulties that a foreign private issuer may experience when determining whether a Form 6–K submission is required under foreign
reporting and U.S. materiality requirements. As adopted, Rule 12h–6 will require a foreign private issuer to have submitted all Form 6–Ks required during the 12 months preceding the filing of its Form 15F in order to be eligible to terminate its reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities. This requirement will help ensure that a U.S. investor is able to access through EDGAR91 and in English all material interim information about a foreign private issuer as required by its home country. We continue to believe that our rules should provide appropriate incentives for companies to stay current with their Exchange Act reporting obligations. From a practical point of view, the 12- month prior reporting requirement should not be problematic since, based on current experience, most foreign companies that register securities with the Commission, including solely under Exchange Act section 12(g), stay in the U.S. market for at least a year and file at least one Exchange Act annual report.92 Moreover, the prior reporting condition will require that a foreign private issuer must be current in its reporting obligations, not that it must have timely filed all reports required during the 12 month period. In the event that an issuer determines that it should have filed a Form 6–K during this period, it can do so before it files its Form 15F. Another commenter 93 requested that we permit an issuer to satisfy the prior Exchange Act annual report requirement by filing a special financial report required under Exchange Act Rule 15d–
2.94 We agree that it would be
appropriate to have the special financial report satisfy the annual report filing requirement under new Rule 12h– 6(a)(1). In this situation, an issuer will have recently sold securities under an effective Securities Act registration statement with non-financial information as current as the date of the prospectus, and the information in the special financial report will provide financial statements and other information as of and for the most recent fiscal year end, thus serving the same purpose as an Exchange Act annual report. In addition, this approach is consistent with our recent implementation rules for the internal control over financial reporting requirements mandated by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.95 Accordingly, we are clarifying that a special financial report, filed with the Commission pursuant to Rule 15d–2, constitutes an Exchange Act annual report for the purpose of complying with Rule 12h–6’s prior reporting condition.
3. One Year Dormancy Condition
We are adopting, as reproposed, a one year dormancy condition with which a foreign private issuer must comply before it can terminate its Exchange Act registration and reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities under Rule 12h–6.96 New Rule 12h–6 will prohibit sales of a foreign private issuer’s securities in the United States in a registered offering under the Securities Act during the 12 months preceding the filing of its Form 15F other than securities issued:
99 15 U.S.C. 77d(2).
100 17 CFR 230.501 et seq.
101 17 CFR 230.144A.
102 17 CFR 230.801 and 230.802.
103 15 U.S.C. 77c and 77c(a)(10).
104See Part II.A.3 of the Reproposing Release. 105 Instruction 2 to Item 8 of Form 20–F imposes a similar limitation. 106See the letters from Linklaters and the N.Y. State Bar. 107 17 CFR 239.16b. Form S–8 is the form used by an Exchange Act reporting company to register securities for issuance to its employees or those of its subsidiaries or parent under an employee benefit plan. 108New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(f)(2) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(f)(2)). 109See General Instruction A.1 to Form S–8. 110New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(a)(3) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(a)(3)). 111New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(f)(5)(i) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(f)(5)(i)). Rule 12h–6 defines ‘‘recent 12- month period’’ to mean a 12-calendar month period that ended no more than 60 days before the filing date of the Form 15F. New Exchange Act Rule 12h– 6(f)(6) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(f)(6)). 112New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(f)(5)(ii) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(f)(5)(ii)). As proposed and as adopted, measurement under this condition is by reference to average daily trading volume (ADTV) as reported by the relevant market. Although the proposing and reproposing releases noted that there are differences concerning how various markets measure and report trading volume (for example, dealer markets versus auction markets), no commenter supported a trading volume standard that would take such differences into account. 113See, for example, the letter from Cravath. 114For the purpose of the primary trading market determination, an issuer would measure the ADTV of on-exchange transactions in its securities aggregated over one or two foreign jurisdictions against its worldwide trading volume. The issuer could include in this measure off-exchange Continued Act during the dormancy period. The permitted category of securities will include sales pursuant to section 4(2),99 Regulation D,100 Rule 144A,101 Rules 801 and 802,102 and exempt securities under section 3, including section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Act.103 Some of the comments pertained to additional proposed exceptions to the dormancy condition. As originally proposed, Rule 12h–6 would have excepted from the dormancy condition’s prohibition of sales of an issuer’s registered securities in the United States only securities sold to an issuer’s employees and those sold by selling security holders in non-underwritten offerings. When reproposing Rule 12h– 6, we proposed three additional exceptions to the dormancy condition’s prohibition of sales of an issuer’s registered securities: the issuance of registered securities pursuant to pro rata rights offerings, dividend or interest reinvestment plans, and the conversion of outstanding convertible securities.104 Like the earlier proposed exceptions, these transactions often occur for reasons unrelated to capital raising or for the benefit of the issuer, for example, to benefit current security holders or for the convenience of investors. We also reproposed that these additional exceptions would not apply to securities issued pursuant to
a standby underwritten offering or other similar arrangement in the United States. As we explained, this limitation is consistent with the Commission’s previous treatment of these types of registered offerings.105 Two commenters requested that we clarify that an issuer would not trigger the dormancy condition if it conducted a registered offering involving, for example, a rights offering, in the United States, with a standby underwriting arrangement according to which the underwriter only resold the securities purchased in the offering outside the United States pursuant to Regulation S.106 We agree that this type of standby underwritten arrangement would not trigger the dormancy condition since it would not increase an issuer’s involvement in public capital raising in the United States. Also as reproposed, the adopted rule includes under the dormancy condition sales of an issuer’s securities by its selling security holders in an underwritten registered offering because there is a greater likelihood of issuer involvement in a U.S. underwritten offering than in a non-underwritten offering of selling security holders. New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6 will use the definition of ‘‘employee’’ under Form S–8 107 for the purpose of applying the dormancy condition under Rule 12h–6, as reproposed.108 That definition includes any employee, director, general partner, certain trustees, certain insurance agents, and former employees as well as executors, administrators or beneficiaries of the estates of deceased employees, and a family member of an employee who has received shares through a gift or domestic relations order.109 Otherwise, a narrow interpretation of the term ‘‘employee’’ could result in an issuer being disqualified from terminating its Exchange Act registration and reporting obligations under Rule 12h–6 because it engaged in a sale of securities during the dormancy period to an employee’s family member or other relationship permitted under Form S–8 but not explicitly allowed under the new rule.
4. Foreign Listing Condition
We are adopting a foreign listing condition under Rule 12h–6, which will require that, with respect to equity securities, for at least the 12 months preceding the filing of its Form 15F, a foreign private issuer must have maintained a listing of the subject class of securities on one or more exchanges in a foreign jurisdiction that, either singly or together with the trading of the same class of the issuer’ s securities in another foreign jurisdiction, constitutes the primary trading market for the issuer’s subject class of securities.110 The new rule defines ‘‘primary trading market’’ to mean that at least 55 percent of the trading in the foreign private issuer’s subject class of securities took place in, on or through the facilities of a securities market or markets in no more than two foreign jurisdictions during a recent 12-month period.111 That definition further provides that if an issuer aggregates the trading of its securities in two foreign jurisdictions for the purpose of Rule 12h–6’s foreign listing condition, the trading for the issuer’s securities in at least one of the two foreign jurisdictions must be larger than the trading in the United States for the same class of the issuer’s securities.112 The purpose of this foreign listing condition is to help assure that there is a non-U.S. jurisdiction that principally regulates and oversees the issuance and trading of the issuer’s securities and the issuer’s disclosure obligations to investors. This foreign listing condition increases the likelihood that the principal pricing determinants for a foreign private issuer’s securities are located outside the United States, and makes more likely the availability of a set of non-U.S. securities disclosure documents to which a U.S. investor may turn for material information when making investment decisions about the issuer’s securities following the termination of its disclosure obligations under Rule 12h–6. If the United States was the sole or principal market for the foreign private issuer’s securities, then the Commission would have a greater regulatory interest in continuing to subject the foreign company to the Exchange Act reporting regime. The adopted foreign listing condition is substantially the same as the reproposed condition, except that, at the request of commenters, we have modified the rule to reflect that an issuer may be listed on multiple exchanges within a single jurisdiction.113 Thus, the new rule provides that an issuer may aggregate trading in the same class of its equity securities on all of its exchanges within a single foreign jurisdiction or in no more than two foreign jurisdictions for the purpose of the foreign listing condition, as long as the trading in one of the foreign jurisdictions is greater than the trading in the United States.114 pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
transactions in those jurisdictions comprising the numerator only if it includes those off-exchange transactions when calculating worldwide trading volume in the denominator. This denominator would be the same as the denominator used for the trading volume benchmark. Thus, this denominator would consist of U.S. ADTV, which must include both on-exchange and off-exchange transactions, and non-U.S. ADTV, which must include onexchange transactions, but could also include offexchange transactions. See Part II.A.1.a.ii of this release. 115See the letters from the ABA, BusinessEurope, Cravath, Davis Polk, Linklaters, and Skadden Arps. 116See the letters from the ABA, Linklaters, and Skadden Arps. 117See Part II.A.4 of the Reproposing Release. 118See the letters from BusinessEurope and Davis Polk. 119For this reason, we decline to adopt a general exception from the foreign listing condition for equity securities issuers proceeding under the alternative 300-holder provision. 120Exchange Act Rules 12g–4(a)(1)(i) and 12h– 3(b)(1)(i) (17 CFR 240.12g–4(a)(1)(i) and 240.12h– 3(b)(1)(i)). 121New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(c) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(c)). 122As originally proposed and reproposed, the adopted exit rule for debt securities does not include a provision comparable to Rule 12h–3’s 500 record holder provision because most foreign private issuers that are debt securities registrants would likely exceed the $10 million asset threshold that accompanies the 500 record holder standard. No commenter has ever requested that we incorporate the 500 record holder and $10 million asset standard into Rule 12h–6’s debt securities provision, either at the proposing or reproposing stage. 123See the letters from Cleary Gottlieb, EALIC, Davis Polk, and the EU. 124 Davis Polk favored an increase to at least 3,000. 125We note that foreign private issuers that avail themselves of Rule 12h–6 will be able to terminate their reporting obligations under section 15(d) while U.S. companies will only continue to be able to suspend their reporting obligations pursuant to Rule 12h–3 and section 15(d). 126New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(e) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(e)). 127New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(e)(1) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(e)(1)). 128Securities Act Rules 800 et seq. (17 CFR
230.800 et seq.).
129 17 CFR 230.405 and 240.3b–4(c). We received relatively few comments on the reproposed foreign listing condition.115 Three commenters generally approved of the changes made to the originally proposed foreign listing condition.116 These changes included shortening the proposed foreign listing requirement from two years to one year and permitting an issuer to aggregate its trading on an exchange in one foreign jurisdiction with that in a second foreign jurisdiction.117 These commenters agreed that the reproposed foreign listing condition would increase the flexibility of the new rule for foreign private issuers while serving to protect investors. New Rule 12h–6’s foreign listing condition will apply to any issuer of equity securities, whether that issuer is relying on the trading volume benchmark or the alternative holder provision, as reproposed. Some commenters requested that the Commission not apply the foreign listing condition to an issuer that has delisted in its primary trading market as a result of being acquired. According to these commenters, that issuer would not be able to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations under the 300- holder provision because it could not meet the foreign listing requirement.118 The foreign listing condition is an important component of the new exit regime because it increases the likelihood that U.S. investors will have a set of material disclosure documents about an issuer to which they may turn following that issuer’s exit from the Exchange Act reporting system. Therefore, we decline to create an exception from this condition for any issuer at this time.119 We note that, under most circumstances, a foreign private issuer that has been acquired may exit the Exchange Act reporting regime under the provisions of the current exit rules that permit any issuer, whether domestic or foreign, or listed or unlisted, to file a Form 15 if its securities are held by less than 300 holders of record.120 B. Debt Securities Provision As adopted, Rule 12h–6 will enable a foreign private issuer to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations regarding a class of debt securities as long as the issuer has filed or furnished all reports required under Exchange Act
section 13(a) or section 15(d), including
at least one Exchange Act annual report, and has its class of debt securities held of record by less than 300 holders either on a worldwide basis or who are U.S. residents.121 This provision reflects the minimum reporting requirement and current 300 holder standard under
section 15(d) and Rule 12h–3. Moreover,
it is the same as the reproposed debt securities provision.122 Some commenters requested that we revise the 300-holder standard for termination of a foreign private issuer’s Exchange Act reporting obligations under Exchange Act Section 15(d) regarding a class of debt securities that had been offered and sold pursuant to an effective registration statement under the Securities Act.123 In the view of most of these commenters, an increase to at least 1,000 holders would be appropriate in light of the changes in the global securities markets since the 300-holder standard was adopted by Congress in the 1960s.124 We are not revising the 300-holder standard as it applies to debt securities. While we agree that there have been substantial changes in the global capital markets, no commenter has presented us with data or other information that supports raising the threshold from that adopted by Congress. In addition, the problems associated with determining the ownership of equity securities do not appear to apply to debt securities, as to which there is generally a single U.S.- based transfer agent. Further, the same 300-holder threshold applies to U.S. companies, and unlike the situation for equity securities, no commenter has addressed why it would be appropriate to treat U.S. and foreign registrants differently with respect to the termination or suspension of reporting obligations under section 15(d) as applied to debt securities.125
C. Revised Counting Method
We are adopting, as reproposed, Rule 12h–6’s revised counting method, which will enable an issuer of equity securities proceeding under the alternative 300-holder provision, or a debt securities issuer, to use a modified version of the ‘‘look through’’ counting method under Rule 12g3–2(a) when determining the number of its U.S. resident security holders.126 Instead of having to look through the accounts of brokers, banks and other nominees on a worldwide basis to determine the number of its U.S. resident holders, as is required under the current rules, a foreign private issuer could limit its inquiry to brokers, banks and other nominees located in the United States, the issuer’s jurisdiction of incorporation, legal organization or establishment and, if different, the jurisidiction of its primary trading market.127 This revised counting method is substantially similar to the counting method that the Commission adopted under the exemptive rules for cross-border rights offerings, exchange offers and business combinations,128 as well as under the definition of foreign private issuer.129 Like the reproposed rule, the adopted counting method provision requires an issuer that aggregates the trading volume of its securities in two foreign jurisdictions for the purpose of meeting Rule 12h–6’s foreign listing condition to look through nominee accounts in both foreign jurisdictions, which comprise its primary trading market, and in the United States as well as in its jurisdiction of incorporation or organization, if different from the two jurisdictions that comprise its primary pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
130New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(e)(1)(ii) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(e)(1)(ii)). 131New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(e)(4) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(e)(4)). 132See Securities Act Rule 800(h)(4) (17 CFR 230.800(h)(4)) and Instruction B to Exchange Act Rule 3b–4(c)(1) (17 CFR 240.3b–4(c)(1)). 133New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(e)(2) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(e)(2)). 134See the letter from Cravath. 135New Rule 12h–6(e)(3) (17 CFR 240.12h– 6(e)(3)). 136See, for example, section 212 of the United Kingdom Companies Act. 137 17 CFR 240.12h–6(d). 138 17 CFR 240.12g–3. 139 17 CFR 240.15d–5. 140New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(d)(1)(i) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(d)(1)(i)). 141New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(d)(1)(ii) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(d)(1)(ii)). 142New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(d)(2) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(d)(2)). trading market.130 Also as reproposed, the adopted counting method provision permits an issuer to rely on the assistance of an independent information services provider when calculating the number of its U.S. security holders.131 We are also adopting a presumption, included in both the originally proposed and reproposed counting method provisions, that we previously adopted under the cross-border rules and definition of foreign private issuer.132 This presumption is that, if, after reasonable inquiry, an issuer is unable without unreasonable effort to obtain information about the amount of securities held by nominees for the accounts of customers resident in the United States, it may assume that the customers are the residents of the jurisdiction in which the nominee has its principal place of business.133 The reproposed rule provided that an issuer must count securities as owned by U.S. holders when publicly filed reports of beneficial ownership or information that is otherwise provided to it indicates that the securities are held by U.S. residents. One commenter requested that we clarify that an issuer is not required to take account of U.S. ownership information provided to it if the issuer determines that it is unreliable.134 We have so clarified by revising the above provision to state that an issuer must count securities as owned by U.S. holders when publicly filed reports of beneficial ownership or other reliable information that is provided to it indicates that the securities are held by U.S. residents.135 Some foreign jurisdictions have laws that provide an established and enforceable means for a public company to obtain information about its shareholders.136 Like the reproposed rule, Rule 12h–6 does not provide that a foreign private issuer may rely solely on specified foreign statutory or code provisions when calculating the number of its U.S. resident equity or debt holders. We received only two comments in support of such a provision at the proposing stage, and none at the reproposing stage. However, as we noted in the reproposing release, as part of its inquiry regarding whether it meets any of the quantitative benchmarks under Rule 12h–6, an issuer may refer to shareholder information
obtained pursuant to those foreign statutory or code provisions to the extent that this shareholder information is reasonably reliable and accurate and furthers the purpose of the inquiry. D. Expanded Scope of Rule 12h–6 We are adopting, substantially as reproposed, an expansion of the scope of the originally proposed Rule 12h–6 in two respects. First, we are adopting a rule providing that an issuer that has succeeded to the Exchange Act reporting obligations of an acquired company may terminate those reporting obligations under Rule 12h–6 as long as it satisfies specified conditions. Second, we are extending the application of Rule 12h–6 to a foreign private issuer that previously filed a Form 15 and effected its termination of registration or suspension of reporting under the current exit rules before the effective date of Rule 12h–6, subject to conditions.
143Because some commenters stated that the dormancy condition should not apply to a foreign private issuer that filed a Securities Act registration statement solely to effect an acquisition or business combination (see, for example, the letter from Sullivan & Cromwell), we believe it is necessary to state explicitly in Rule 12h–6 that the dormancy condition applies to a successor issuer. 144See, for example, the letters from Cleary Gottlieb and PricewaterhouseCoopers. 145See the letter from Latham & Watkins. 146 17 CFR 240.12g–3(g). This provision requires a successor issuer to file an Exchange Act annual report for the last full fiscal year of the predecessor before the issuer’s succession if the predecessor has not done so. 147 17 CFR 240.12h–6(g). 148New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(i)(1) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(i)(1)). A former section 15(d) reporting company would benefit from proceeding under Rule 12h–6 by obtaining termination, rather than mere suspension, of its reporting obligations with respect to a class of equity or debt securities. As discussed below, a former section 12(g) company also would benefit from proceeding under Rule 12h–6 by being able to claim the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption immediately upon the effectiveness of its Rule 12h–6 termination. 149Rule 12h–6(i)(2)(i) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(i)(2)(i)). 150Rule 12h–6(i)(2)(ii) (17 CFR 240.12h– 6(i)(2)(ii)). 151See Part II.D.2 of the Reproposing Release. 152See the letters from the ABA, BusinessEurope, Cleary Gottlieb, EALIC, the EU, the N.Y. State Bar, and Sullivan & Cromwell. 153See, for example, the letters from EALIC and Sullivan & Cromwell. 154New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(h) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(h)). 155See the letter from Skadden Arps. securities conditions, which includes the dormancy condition.143 Most of the parties that commented on the reproposed successor issuer provision supported it.144 However, one commenter sought clarification regarding the intended role that the predecessor company would play in satisfying Rule 12h–6’s requirements.145 More particularly, this commenter was concerned that Rule 12h–6 could be construed to require an issuer to take into account the listing and trading history of an acquired company. Such an interpretation could preclude an acquiror from terminating its Exchange Act reporting obligations immediately after succession if the acquired company was unlisted or had an active U.S. trading market. Therefore, we are clarifying that Rule 12h–6(d) permits a successor issuer to consider an acquired company’s history only when determining whether the successor meets Rule 12h–6’s prior reporting condition. Following an acquisition, a successor issuer must look only to its own foreign listing history, and consider its own U.S. and worldwide trading volume, when determining whether it satisfies Rule 12h–6’s foreign listing and trading volume conditions. This commenter also sought clarification regarding whether, as a condition to deregistration under Rule 12h–6, a
successor issuer would have an obligation under Exchange Act Rule 12g–3(g)146 to file an Exchange Act annual report for the predecessor’s last full fiscal year prior to succession. As with the filing of a Form 15 under the current exit rules, under Rule 12h– 6(g),147 the suspension of a foreign private issuer’s duty to file reports under section 13(a) or 15(d) occurs immediately upon filing a Form 15F. This suspension extends to an annual report that would be required under Rule 12g–3(g). A successor issuer would only have to file an annual report on behalf of its predecessor under Rule 12g–3(g) if, at the time of filing its Form 15F, that annual report was past due. This is consistent with the current practice involving Form 15.
2. Application of Rule 12h–6 to Prior
Form 15 Filers
As adopted, Rule 12h–6(i) will extend termination of Exchange Act reporting under the new exit rule to a foreign private issuer that, before the effective date of Rule 12h–6, already effected the suspension or termination of its Exchange Act reporting obligations after filing a Form 15.148 A prior Form 15 filer will have to meet the following conditions in order to obtain the benefits of Rule 12h–6 with respect to a class of equity securities:
156See Item 7.B of Form 15F.
157New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(a).
158 17 CFR 249.324.
159Form 15F General Instruction B.
160New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6(g) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(g)). 161Form 15F Item 11. 162See the letter from Cleary Gottlieb. 163See Exchange Act Rules 12g–4(a)(2) and 12h– 3(b)(2) (17 CFR 240.12g–4(a)(2) and 12h–3(b)(2)). 164New Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2(e)(1) (17 CFR 240.12g3–2(e)(1)). 165Currently, foreign private issuers that registered a class of securities under section 12 must wait at least 18 months following their termination of reporting before they would be eligible to apply for the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption. In addition, foreign private issuers with an active or suspended reporting obligation under section 15(d) have thus far not been eligible to claim the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption. See Rule 12g3–2(d)(1) (17 CFR 240.12g3–2(d)(1)), which currently excepts from the 18 month requirement only issuers that have filed Securities Act registration statements using the Multijurisdictional Disclosure Act (MJDS) forms. 166New Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2(e)(2) (17 CFR 240.12g3 –2(e)(2)). 167Any post-termination trading of a foreign private issuer’s securities in the United States Continued service, used to disseminate the notice in the United States.156 F. Form 15F Like our current exit rules, adopted Rule 12h–6 will require a foreign private issuer to file electronically on EDGAR a form certifying that it meets the requirements for ceasing its Exchange Act reporting obligations.157 By signing and filing new Form 15F,158 a foreign private issuer will be certifying that:
would have to occur through over-the-counter markets such as that maintained by the Pink Sheets, LLC since, as of April, 1998, the NASD and the Commission have required a foreign private issuer to register a class of securities under Exchange Act
section 12 before its securities could be traded
through the electronic over-the-counter bulletin board administered by Nasdaq. See, for example, NASD Notice to Members (January 1998). 168 In order to establish an ADR facility, an issuer must register the ADRs on Form F–6 (17 CFR 239.36) under the Securities Act. The eligibility criteria for the use of Form F–6 include the requirement that the issuer have a reporting obligation under Exchange Act section 13(a) or have established the exemption under Rule 12g3–2(b). See General Instruction I.A.3 of Form F–6. 169See Securities Act Rule 144A(d)(4) (17 CFR 230.144A(d)(4)). 170Brokers currently are exempt from complying with certain information obligations under Exchange Act Rule 15c2–11 (17 CFR 240.15c2–11) when a foreign company has established and maintains the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption. See Release No. 34–41110 (February 25,1999), 64 FR 11124 (March 8, 1999). 171See New Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2(e)(3) (17 CFR 240.12g3–2(e)(3)). 172Most parties that commented on reproposed Rule 12g3–2(e) favored the extension of the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption to the above categories of issuers. See, for example, the letter from the ABA. 173 17 CFR 240.12g3–2(d)(2). 174New Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2(e)(4) (17 CFR 240.12g3–2(e)(4)). 175See the letter from MTR Corporation. 176See General Instruction I.A.3 of Form F–6. 177Commission staff will work with issuers to coordinate the establishment of the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption on the same day as their termination of Exchange Act reporting. will be able to maintain a sponsored ADR facility with respect to its securities.168 This condition also will facilitate resales of that issuer’s securities to qualified institutional buyers under Rule 144A.169 Moreover, having a foreign private issuer’s key home country documents posted in English on its web site will assist U.S. investors who are interested in trading the issuer’s securities in its primary securities market.170 The adopted extension of Rule 12g3– 2(b) will apply both to a class of equity securities formerly registered under
section 12(g) and one that formerly gave
rise to section 15(d) reporting obligations, as reproposed. The Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption received under new Rule 12g3–2(e) will remain in effect for as long as the foreign private issuer satisfies the rule’s electronic publication conditions or until the issuer registers a new class of securities under section 12 or incurs section 15(d) reporting obligations by filing a new Securities Act registration statement, which has become effective.171
178A foreign private issuer that has successfully filed an application for the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption must currently furnish its home country documents in paper because the application is analogous to one submitted for an exemption under Exchange Act section 12(h). See Regulation S–T Rule 101(c)(16)(17 CFR 232.101(c)(16)). Although the Commission’s EDGAR database contains an entry signifying the receipt of paper documents, materials received in paper are not accessible through the EDGAR system. 179Note 1 to Rule 12g3–2(e). Rule 12g3–2(b) requires an exempt issuer to submit substantially the same categories of home country documents as a reporting issuer must furnish to the Commission under cover of Form 6–K. Moreover, both Rule 12g3–2(b) and Form 6–K state that only material information need be furnished under the rule and form. See Rule 12g3–2(b)(3) (17 CFR 240.12g3– 2(b)(3)) and General Instruction B to Form 6–K. 180Note 3 to Rule 12g3–2(e). An issuer will not have to update the Form 15F to reflect a change in that address. 181New Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2(f) (17 CFR 240.12g3–2(f)). Parties that commented on the reproposed extension of Rule 12g3–2(b) supported this electronic publishing provision for issuers claiming the Rule 12g3–2(b) other than through Rule 12h–6. See, for example, the letters from the ABA and Skadden Arps. 182 17 CFR 240.12g3–2(b)(1)(i) and (ii). 183As under current practice, the applicant should send these initial materials to the Commission’s Office of International Corporate Finance in the Division of Corporation Finance. 184See Part II.H.2 of the Reproposing Release and, more recently, the letter from Sullivan & Cromwell. 185 17 CFR 230.701. Rule 701 provides a Securities Act exemption for the offer and sale of securities to employees and others pursuant to certain compensatory benefit plans and contracts relating to compensation. 186See the Original Proposing Release at n. 45. format.178 Because paper submissions are more difficult to access, we are adopting Rule 12g3–2(e), which relies on electronic access to a foreign company’s home country securities documents, although not through the Commission’s electronic database. As part of the condition requiring an issuer to publish its home country documents required under Rule 12g3– 2(b)(1)(iii) on its Internet Web site or through an electronic information delivery system generally available to the public in its primary trading market, Rule 12g3–2(e) will require an issuer to publish English translations of the following documents:
187 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
188A limited number of foreign private issuers file annual reports on Form 10–K. In voluntarily electing to file periodic reports using domestic issuer forms, these issuers seem to have closely aligned themselves with the U.S. market. Accordingly, for the purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act Analysis, these issuers do not appear likely to terminate their Exchange Act registration under new Rule 12h–6, and we have assumed that none of these companies will seek to use Rule 12h–
6. Foreign private issuers that file periodic reports
using domestic issuer forms will be eligible, nonetheless, to use Rule 12h–6. (‘‘PRA’’).187 The titles of the affected collection of informations are Form 20– F (OMB Control No. 3235–0288), Form 40–F (OMB Control No. 3235–0381), Form 6–K (OMB Control No. 3235– 0116), new Form 15F, and submissions under Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2 (OMB Control No. 3235–0119).188 An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information such as Form 20–F or new Form 15F unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. Compliance with the disclosure requirements of new Form 15F and new Rule 12h–6, which will affect the above collections of information, is mandatory. Form 20–F sets forth the disclosure requirements for a foreign private issuer’s annual report and registration statement under the Exchange Act as well as many of the disclosure requirements for a foreign private issuer’s registration statements under the Securities Act. We adopted Form 20–F pursuant to the Exchange Act and the Securities Act in order to provide investors with information about foreign private issuers that have registered securities with the Commission. Form 40–F sets forth the disclosure requirements regarding the annual report and registration statement under the Exchange Act for a Canadian issuer that is qualified to use the Multijurisdictional Disclosure System (‘‘MJDS’’). We adopted Form 40–F pursuant to the Exchange Act in order to permit qualified Canadian issuers to prepare their Exchange Act annual reports and registration statements based primarily in accordance with Canadian requirements. Form 6–K is used by a foreign private issuer to report material information that it:
189 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) and 5 CFR 1320.11. 190See Part III of the Reproposing Release. 191 191 As noted at the reproposing stage, a review by the Commission’s Office of Economic Analysis of trading volume data on a sample of foreign Exchange Act reporting companies that filed Form 20–F during 2004 suggested that approximately 30% of filers would meet the U.S. trading volume threshold of the reproposed rule. See Part III, n. 137 of the Reproposing Release. A more recent review of the Office of Economic Analysis of trading volume data on foreign Exchange Act reporting companies with common equity trading during 2005 indicates that an estimated 29% of filers would meet the U.S. trading volume threshold of the adopted rule. That percentage may vary by region. 192 1,100 Form 20–Fs filed annually (prior to this rulemaking) × .20 = 220; 1,100—220 = 880 Form 20–Fs filed annually. 193As in the Reproposing Release, we estimate that a foreign private issuer requires on average 2,630 hours to produce each Form 20–F. 194 880 Form 20–Fs filed annually × 2,630 hours per Form 20–F = 2,314,400 hours. 195 880 Form 20–Fs × 2,630 hours per Form 20– F × .25 = 578,600 hours. Thus, we estimate that, during the first year of effectiveness of Rule 12h– 6, foreign private issuers could incur a reduction of 144,650 hours in the number of burden hours required to produce Form 20–F. 220 Form 20–Fs × 2,630 hrs. × .25 = 144,650 hours. Using an estimated hourly rate of $175 for in-house work, foreign private issuers could incur Form 20–F cost savings of $25,313,750 during Rule 12h–6’s first year of effectiveness. 144,650 hrs. × $175/hr. = $25,313,750. 196We estimate cost savings of $173,580,000 regarding outside firms’ production of Form 20–Fs during Rule 12h–6’s first year of effectiveness. 220 Form 20–Fs × 2,630 hrs. × .75 × $400/hr. = $173,580,000. Thus, during the first year of its effectiveness, Rule 12h–6 could result in total estimated Form 20–F cost savings of $198,893,750. $25,313,750 + $173,580,000 = $198,893,750. 197 880 Form 20–Fs × 2,630 hours × .75 × $400/ hour = $694,320,000. The $108,487,500 increase reflects the increase in the estimated outside firm hourly rate from $300 to $400. 198We do not expect the expanded scope of reproposed Rule 12h–6 to have as great an effect on MJDS filers as other foreign reporting companies since, typically, the U.S. trading volume relating to those shares is significant. Moreover, because of their close proximity to U.S. capital markets, we believe MJDS filers are less likely to seek to terminate their Exchange Act reporting obligations than other foreign private issuers. Accordingly, based on current experience, we expect no more than 10% of Form 40–F filers will terminate their Exchange Act reporting obligations under Rule 12h–6. 199This is the same percentage previously estimated under the originally proposed rule amendments. 200 134 Form 40–Fs filed annually (prior to this rulemaking) × .07 = 9; 134¥9 = 125 Form 40–Fs filed
annually. 201As in the Reproposing Release, we estimate that it takes 427 hours on average to produce a Form 40–F report. 202 125 Form 40–Fs filed annually × 427 hours per Form 40–F = 53,375 hours. 203 125 Form 40–Fs filed annually × 427 hours per Form 40–F × .25 = 13,344 hours. Thus, we estimate that, during the first year of effectiveness of Rule 12h–6, foreign private issuers could incur a reduction of 961 hours in the number of burden hours required to produce Form 40–F. 9 Form 40– Fs × 427 hrs. × .25 = 961 hrs. This could result in estimated Form 40–F cost savings for foreign private issuers of $168,175. 961 hrs. × $175/hr. = $168,175. 204 125 Form 40–Fs filed annually × 427 hours per Form 40–F × .75 × $400/hour = $16,012,500. This estimate corresponds to estimated cost savings of $1,152,900 in connection with outside firms’ production of Form 40–F during reproposed Rule 12h–6’s first year of effectiveness. 9 × 427 hrs. × .75 × $400/hr. = $1,152,900. Thus, during the first year of its effectiveness, Rule 12h–6 could result in estimated total Form 40–F cost savings of $168,175
207 14,661 Form 6–K reports × .18 = 2,639; 14,661 – 2,639 = 12,022 Form 6–K reports. 208 In the Original and Reproposing Releases, we estimated that, prior to this rulemaking, it took a total of 127,197 annual burden hours to produce the 14,661 Form 6–Ks, or approximately 8.7 hours per Form 6–K (for work performed by foreign private issuers and outside firms). We continue to use this
8.7 hour estimate for the final rule amendments.
209 12,022 Form 6–K reports × 8.7 hours = 104,591 hours. 210We estimate that, during the first year of effectiveness of Rule 12h–6, foreign private issuers could incur a reduction of 14,349 hours in the number of burden hours required to produce Form 6–K. 2,639 Form 6–Ks × 8.7 hours = 22,959 hours; 22,959 hours × .25 = 5,740 hours of English translation work; 5,740 hours × .25 = 1,435 hours of English translation work for foreign private issuers; 22,959 × .75 = 17,219 hours of non-English translation work; 17,219 × .75 = 12,914 hours of non-English translation work for foreign private issuers; 1,435 + 12,914 = 14,349 hours. This could result in estimated Form 6–K cost savings of $2,511,075 for foreign private issuers during the first year of Rule 12h–6’s effectiveness. 14,349 hrs. × $175/hr. = $2,511,075. 211 104,591 hours × .25 = 26,148 hours for English translation work; 104,591 hours—26,148 hours = 78,443 hours for non-English translation work; 78,443 hours × .75 = 58,832 hours for non-English translation work performed by foreign private issuers; 26,148 hours × .25 = 6,537 hours of English translation work performed by foreign private issuers; 58,832 hours + 6,537 hours = 65,369 total hours for Form 6–K work performed by foreign private issuers, or 5.4 hours for foreign private issuer work per Form 6–K. 212We estimate cost savings of $2,260,025 in connection with outside firms’ production of Form 6–K during Rule 12h–6’s first year of effectiveness. 5,740 hrs. × .75 × $125/hour = $538,125 for English translation work; 17,219 × .25 × $400/hour = $1,721,900 for non-English translation work. $538,125 + $1,721,900 = $2,260,025 in Form 6–K cost savings for outside firms. Thus, Rule 12h–6 could result in total estimated Form 6–K cost savings of $4,771,100. $2,511,075 + $2,260,025 = $4,771,100. 213 78,443 hours × .25 = 19,611 hours × $400/hour = $7,844,400 for non-translation work; 26,148 hours × .75 = 19,611 hours × $125/hour = $2,451,375 for English translation work; $7,844,400 + $2,451,375 = $10,295,775 for total work performed by outside firms. The $2,078,475 increase reflects the increase in the estimated outside firm hourly rate from $300 to $400 and the increase in the estimated outside firm rate for English translation work from $75 to $125/hour based on current information provided by financial printer representatives. 214We derived this estimate from the number of Form 20–F filers (275) and Form 40–F filers (13) estimated to elect to terminate their Exchange Act reporting obligations under Rule 12h–6 during the first year of the rule’s effectiveness. We then added to this sum (288) the number of prior Form 15 filers (63) estimated to file a Form 15F during the first year of Rule 12h–6’s effectiveness in order to make their Form 15 termination or suspension of reporting obligations permanent. The latter number is based on the approximate number of foreign private issuers that filed a Form 15 from 2003 through the present. 215 In the Original
and Reproposing Releases, we estimated that the production of each Form 15F would require 30 hours. We continue to use this estimate for the final rule amendments. 216 351 Form 15Fs × 30 = 10,530 hours. 217 10,530 hours × .25 = 2,633 hours. This could result in estimated Form 15F costs for foreign private issuers of $460,775 during Rule 12h–6’s first year of effectiveness. 2,633 hrs. × $175 = $460,775. 218 10,530 hours × .75 = 7,898 hours; 7,898 hours × $400/hour = $3,159,200. The $3,159,200 increase reflects the increase in the number of estimated Form 15F filers and the increase in the estimated outside firm hourly rate from $300 to $400. 219Thus, Rule 12h–6 could result in total estimated Form 15F costs of $3,619,975 during its first year of effectiveness. $460,775 + $3,159,200 = $3,619,975. 220This estimate is based on Commission staff’s most recent annual review of the number of current Rule 12g3–2(b) exempt companies, which will be available soon on our Internet Web site at http:// www.sec.gov/divisions/corpfin.shtml. 221These estimates are the same as the estimates presented in the Reproposing Release. As we stated in that release, the estimates represent an adjustment of 31,080 hours from the 1,800 total hours previously reported for Rule 12g3–2(b) submissions. They reflect a re-evaluation of the number of foreign private issuers that currently claim the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption, the number of Rule 12g3–2(b) submissions made by them, and the number of burden hours required for their production, in addition to assessing the effects on Rule 12g3–2(b) submissions expected to result from adoption of the final rule amendments. We believe these estimates more accurately reflect the current burden hours required for the collections of information submitted under Rule 12g3–2(b). 222This amount includes the estimated 288 Form 20–F and 40–F filers expected to terminate their Exchange Act reporting obligations under Rule 12h–6 as well as the estimated 63 prior Form 15 filers expected to file a Form 15F to make their prior termination or suspension of reporting under Rule 12h–6. 223Because the home country document submission requirement under Rule 12g3–2(b) is similar to the home country document submission requirement under Form 6–K, we have used the same assumptions regarding the English and nonEnglish translation work required under Rule 12g3– 2(b) that we adopted for Form 6–K submissions. Accordingly: 49,728 hours × .25 = 12,432 total annual burden hours for English translation work; 49,728¥12,432 = 37,296 total annual burden hours required for non-English translation work; 37,296 hours × .75 = 27,972 total annual burden hours incurred by foreign private issuers for non-English translation work; 12,432 hours × .25 = 3,108 total annual hours incurred by foreign private issuers for English translation work; 27,972 + 3,108 = 31,080 total annual burden hours incurred by foreign private issuers for Rule 12g3–2(b) submissions, or
2.5 annual burden hours per submission. Of the
31,080 hours, 10,530 hours would result from adoption of the new rules and 20,550 hours represents an adjustment from the previous PRA estimates for Rule 12g3–2 submissions. 224 49,728 hours × .25 = 12,432 hours for English translation work; 12,432 hours × .75 = 9,324 hours; 9,324 hours × $125 = $1,165,500 for English translation work; 49,728 hours¥12,432 hours = 37,296 hours for non-English translation work; 37,296 hours × .25 = 9,324 hours; 9,324 hours × $400 = $3,729,600 for non-English translation work; $1,165,500 + $3,729,600 = $4,895,100 for total work performed by outside firms. Of that total amount, $1,658,475 would result from adoption of the new rules and $3,236,625 constitutes an adjustment from the previous PRA estimates for Rule 12g3–2 submissions. 225We further estimate that new Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying rule amendments could result in total estimated Rule 12g3–2(b) costs of $3,501,225 during the first year of their effectiveness. 351 issuers × 12 submissions/issuer × 2.5 hrs./ submission = 10,530 hours; 10,530 hours × $175/ hr. = $1,842,750 in Rule 12g3–2(b) submission costs for foreign private issuers. For outside firm costs:
351 issuers × 12 submissions/issuer × 4 hrs./ submission = 16,848 hours; 16,848 × .25 = 4,212
hours of English translation work; 4,212 × .75 × $125 = $394,875 of English translation costs for outside firms. 16,848 hours × .75 = 12,636 hours of non-English translation work; 12,636 × .25 × $400 = $1,263,600 of non-English translation costs for outside firms. $394,875 + $1,263,600 = $1,658,475 in total Rule 12g3–2(b) submission costs for outside firms. $1,842,750 + $1,658,475 = $3,501,225 in total estimated Rule 12g3–2(b) costs. 226We recognize that, as a result of terminating their Exchange Act reporting obligations under Rule 12h–6, foreign firms may accrue other cost savings that are not specifically quantified in this section. One such example is an investment in an internal control system in order to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. 227As discussed in Part III of this release, for the first year of Rule 12h–6’s effectiveness, estimated cost savings in connection with Forms 20–F, 40–F and 6–K could amount to, respectively, $198,893,750, $1,321,075, and $4,771,100, for a total of $204,985,925. These cost savings could be less to the extent that more foreign private issuers register with the Commission over time as a result of the adoption of Rule 12h–6. 228Conversely, in countries that have similar regulatory regimes and levels of investor protection, the impact of U.S. deregistration may be mitigated. 229As discussed in Part III of this release, based on estimates and assumptions adopted for the purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act, these costs could total $3,619,975 during the first year of the new form’s use. 230As discussed in Part III of this release, based on estimates and assumptions adopted for the Paperwork Reduction Act, these resulting Rule 12g3–2(b) costs could amount to $3,501,225.
IV. Cost-Benefit Analysis
A. Expected Benefits
New Exchange Act Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying rule amendments will benefit U.S. investors to the extent that they remove a possible disincentive for foreign companies that are not currently Exchange Act reporting companies to register their equity and debt securities with the Commission. In response to foreign companies’ concerns about Exchange Act reporting and other obligations, these rules will expand the criteria by which a foreign company may terminate those obligations. In so doing, the adopted rule amendments should over time remove an impediment to foreign company access and participation in U.S. public capital markets while still providing U.S. investors with the protections afforded by our Exchange Act reporting regime. The adopted rule amendments should remove a disincentive for foreign firms to enter our Exchange Act reporting regime by lowering the cost of exiting from that regime. Investors are expected to benefit from the amendments by being able to purchase shares in foreign firms that have been registered with the Commission and that, therefore, provide a high level of investor protection. In addition, U.S. investors may incur lower transaction costs when trading a foreign company’s shares on a U.S. exchange relative to a foreign exchange. To remove a disincentive for foreign companies to enter U.S. public capital markets, the adopted rule amendments will benefit U.S. investors by enabling a foreign Exchange Act reporting company to lower its costs of compliance in connection with Exchange Act deregistration. This reduction in the cost of compliance will directly benefit both foreign companies and their investors, including those resident in the United States. The final rule amendments will result in foreign private issuers incurring lower costs of Exchange Act compliance in four possible ways. First, rather than require a foreign private issuer to determine the number of its U.S.holders, as is the case under the current exit rules, new Rule 12h–6 will enable a foreign private issuer to rely solely on trading volume data regarding its securities in the United States and on a worldwide basis when determining whether it may terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations. Because trading volume data is more easily obtainable than information regarding its U.S. shareholders, the new rule should lower the costs of Exchange Act termination for foreign private issuers. Second, new Rule 12h–6 will allow a foreign firm to terminate its Exchange Act reporting obligations regarding a class of equity securities and immediately obtain the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption. Accordingly, such a terminating foreign private issuer would be able to avoid the costs associated with continued annual verification that its number of holders of record remains below 300. Third, new Rule 12h–6 will permit an issuer to rely on the assistance of an independent information services provider when determining whether it falls below the 300-holder standard. The
option to hire an independent information services provider may be a more efficient and cost-effective mechanism to make that determination. Moreover, a foreign company may save costs when assessing its eligibility to terminate its registration and reporting under the 300-holder provision of Rule 12h–6, since the rule will limit the number of jurisdictions in which a foreign private issuer must search for the amount of securities represented by accounts of customers resident in the United States held by brokers, dealers, banks and other nominees. The current rules require a foreign private issuer to conduct a worldwide search for such U.S. customer accounts. Fourth, once having terminated its reporting obligations under new Rule 12h–6, a foreign company will no longer be required to incur costs associated with producing an Exchange Act annual report or interim Form 6–K reports.226 Based on estimates and assumptions used for the purpose of the Paperwork Reduction Act, these estimated cost savings could total approximately $200,000,000 for the first year of Rule 12h–6’s effectiveness.227 B. Expected Costs Investors could incur costs from the adopted rule amendments to the extent that currently registered foreign companies respond to the rule changes by terminating their Exchange Act registration and reporting obligations with respect to their equity and debt securities. If Exchange Act disclosure requirements provide more information or protection to U.S. or other investors than is provided in an issuer’s primary trading market, then all investors, both U.S. and foreign, may suffer the costs of losing that information and protection upon Exchange Act termination.228 If this is the case, the announcement that a foreign firm is terminating its Exchange Act reporting may result in a loss of share value and the incurrence by investors of higher costs from trading in the firm’s equity and debt securities. There are costs associated with the filing of new Form 15F, which is a requirement for a foreign private issuer that terminates its Exchange Act registration and reporting under Rule 12h–6.229 A foreign private issuer will also incur costs in connection with having to post on its Internet Web site in English its material home country documents required to maintain the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption that it will have received upon the effectiveness of its termination of reporting under new Rule 12h–6.230 We expect that new Rule 12h–6 will enable some foreign registrants to avoid other recent U.S. regulation, such as the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Investors will lose the benefits afforded by the SarbanesOxley Act to the extent a current foreign registrant is not fully subject to that Act. Some U.S. investors might seek to trade in the equity securities of a foreign company following its termination of Exchange Act reporting under Rule 12h–6. U.S. investors seeking to trade the former reporting company’s securities in the U.S. may be forced to trade in
over-the-counter markets such as the one administered by Pink Sheets, LLC, which could result in higher transaction costs than if the foreign company had continued to have a class of securities registered with the Commission. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
231A foreign company may terminate its ADR facility whether or not it is an Exchange Act registrant, and adopted Rule 12h–6 does not require the termination of ADR facilities. In fact, by granting foreign private issuers the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption immediately upon their termination of reporting with regard to a class of equity securities, Rule 12h–6 will enable foreign private issuers to retain their ADR facilities as unlisted facilities following their termination of reporting under Rule 12h–6. As adopted, Rule 12h–6 will require an issuer that has terminated a sponsored ADR facility to wait a year before it may file a Form 15F in reliance on the trading volume provision of Rule 12h–6 if, on the date of termination, the issuer does not meet the trading volume benchmark. 232 15 U.S.C. 78w(a)(2). 233 15 U.S.C. 78c(f). 234Similarly, by expanding the scope of the originally proposed Rule 12h–6 to permit prior Form 15 filers to terminate their Exchange Act reporting obligations under the new exit rule and claim the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption immediately upon such termination, the adopted rules will help promote the availability of material home country information in English about those issuers for U.S. investors. 235 5 U.S.C. 605(b). 236 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77j, and 77s. 237 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78l, 78m, 78w, and 78mm. U.S. investors seeking to trade the former reporting company’s securities in its primary trading market also could incur additional costs. For example, U.S. investors who held the securities in the form of ADRs could incur costs associated with the depositary’s conversion of the ADRs into ordinary shares.231 Moreover, some U.S. investors could incur costs associated with finding and contracting with a new broker-dealer who is able to trade in the foreign reporting company’s primary trading market. U.S. investors may face additional costs due to the cost of currency conversion and higher transaction costs trading the securities in a foreign market. Some investors who wish to make investment decisions regarding former Exchange Act reporting foreign companies also may incur costs to the extent that the information provided by such companies pursuant to any home country regulations is different from that which currently is required under the Exchange Act. Such investors could incur costs associated with hiring an attorney or investment adviser, to the extent that they have not already done so, to explain the material differences, if any, between a foreign company’s home country reporting requirements, as reflected in its home country annual report posted on its Internet Web site, and Exchange Act reporting requirements.
V. Consideration of Impact on the
Economy, Burden on Competition and Promotion of Efficiency, Competition and Capital Formation Analysis When adopting rules under the Exchange Act, Section 23(a)(2) of the Exchange Act 232 requires us to consider the impact that any new rule will have on competition. Section 23(a)(2) also prohibits us from adopting any rule that will impose a burden on competition not necessary or appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Exchange Act. Furthermore, when engaging in rulemaking that requires us to consider or determine whether an action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, Section 3(f) of the Exchange Act 233 requires the Commission to consider whether the action will promote efficiency, competition and capital formation. In the Reproposing Release, we considered reproposed Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying reproposed rule amendments in light of the standards set forth in the above statutory sections. We solicited comment on whether, if adopted, reproposed Rule 12h–6 and the other reproposed rule amendments would result in any anti-competitive effects or promote efficiency, competition and capital formation. We further encouraged commenters to provide empirical data or other facts to support their views on any anticompetitive effects or any burdens on efficiency, competition or capital formation that might result from adoption of reproposed Rule 12h–6 and the other reproposed rule amendments. We did not receive any comments or any empirical data in this regard concerning reproposed Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying rule amendments. Accordingly, since the adopted rules are substantially similar to the reproposed rules, we continue to believe the new rules will provide a foreign reporting company with a more efficient option of exiting the Exchange Act reporting system when U.S. investor interest has become relatively scarce. In so doing, new Rule 12h–6 and the other rule amendments should encourage foreign private issuers to register their equity and debt securities with the Commission by reassuring foreign private issuers that, should interest in the U.S. market for their securities decline sufficiently, they may exit the Exchange Act reporting system with little difficulty. By providing increased flexibility for foreign private issuers regarding our Exchange Act reporting system, the adopted rules should encourage foreign companies to participate in U.S. capital markets as Exchange Act reporting companies to the benefit of investors. In so doing, the adopted rules should foster increased competition between domestic and foreign firms for investors in U.S. capital markets. Moreover, by requiring a foreign private issuer that has terminated its Exchange Act reporting under Rule 12h–6 to publish its home country documents required under Exchange Act Rule 12g3–2(b) in English on its Internet Web site or through an electronic information delivery system that is generally available to the public in its primary trading market, the
adopted rules will help ensure that U.S. investors continue to have ready access to material information in English about the foreign private issuer.234 Thus, new Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying rule amendments should foster increased efficiency in the trading of the issuer’s securities for U.S. investors following the issuer’s termination of Exchange Act reporting.
VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act
Certification
Under Section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act,235 we certified that, when adopted, reproposed Rule 12h–6 and the accompanying reproposed rule amendments would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. We included this certification in Part VI of the Reproposing Release. While we encouraged written comments regarding this certification, no commenters responded to this request.
VII. Statutory Basis and Text of Rule
Amendments
We are adopting the amendments to Rule 30–1 of Part 200, Rule 101 of Regulation S–T, and Exchange Act Rules 12g3–2, 12g–4 and 12h–3, new Exchange Act Rule 12h–6 and new Exchange Act Form 15F under the authority in sections 6, 7, 10 and 19 of the Securities Act 236 and sections 3(b), 12, 13, 23 and 36 of the Exchange Act.237 List of Subjects 17 CFR Part 200 Administrative practice and procedure, Authority delegations (Government agencies). 17 CFR Parts 232, 240 and 249 Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities. Text of Rule Amendments
PART 200—ORGANIZATION;
CONDUCT AND ETHICS; AND
INFORMATION AND REQUESTS
(e) * * *
(17) At the request of a foreign private issuer, pursuant to Rule 12h–6 (§ 240.12h–6 of this chapter), to accelerate the termination of the registration of a class of securities under
section 12(g) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78l(g))
or the duty to file reports under section 13(a) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78m(a)) or
section 15(d) of the Act (15 U.S.C.
78o(d)).
PART 232—REGULATION S–T—
GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS
PART 240—GENERAL RULES AND
REGULATIONS, SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
(d) * * *
(1) Securities of a foreign private issuer that has or has had during the prior eighteen months any securities registered under section 12 of the Act or a reporting obligation (suspended or active) under section 15(d) of the Act (other than arising solely by virtue of the use of Form F–7, F–8, F–9, F–10 or F–80), except as provided by paragraph (e) of this section; (2) Securities of a foreign private issuer issued in a transaction (other than a transaction registered on Form F–8, F– 9, F–10 or F–80) to acquire by merger, consolidation, exchange of securities or acquisition of assets, another issuer that had securities registered under section 12 of the Act or a reporting obligation (suspended or active) under section 15(d) of the Act, except as provided by paragraph (e) of this section; and
(e)(1) A foreign private issuer that has filed a Form 15F (§ 249.324 of this
chapter) pursuant to § 240.12h–6 shall
receive the exemption provided by paragraph (b) of this section for a class of equity securities immediately upon the effectiveness of the termination of registration of that class of securities under section 12(g) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78l(g)) or the termination of the duty to file reports regarding that class of securities under section 15(d) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78o(d)), or both. (2) Notwithstanding any provision of § 240.12g3–2(b), in order to satisfy the conditions of the § 240.12g3–2(b) exemption received under this paragraph (e), the issuer shall publish in English the information required under paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section on its Internet Web site or through an electronic information delivery system generally available to the public in its primary trading market, rather than furnish that information to the Commission. (3) The § 240.12g3–2(b) exemption received under this paragraph (e) will remain in effect for as long as the foreign private issuer satisfies the electronic publication condition of paragraph (e)(2) of this section or until the issuer registers a class of securities under section 12 of the Act or incurs reporting obligations under section 15(d) of the Act. (4) Notwithstanding the time period specified in § 240.12g3–2(d)(1), a foreign private issuer that filed a Form 15F solely with respect to a class of debt securities under section 15(d) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78o(d)) may establish the exemption provided by paragraph (b) of this section for a class of equity securities upon the effectiveness of its termination of reporting regarding the class of debt securities. Notes to Paragraph (e): 1. In order to maintain the § 240.12g3–2(b) exemption obtained under this paragraph, at a minimum, a foreign private issuer shall electronically publish English translations of the following documents required to be furnished under paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this
section if in a foreign language:
a. Its annual report, including or accompanied by annual financial statements; b. Interim reports that include financial statements;
c. Press releases; and
d. All other communications and documents distributed directly to security holders of each class of securities to which the exemption relates.
2. As used in paragraph (e)(2) of this
section, primary trading market has the same
meaning as under § 240.12h–6(f).
3. A foreign private issuer that files a Form
15F regarding a class of equity securities shall disclose in the Form 15F the address of its Internet Web site or that of the electronic information delivery system in its primary trading market on which it will publish the information required under paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section. An issuer need not update the Form 15F to reflect a change in that address.
4. A foreign private issuer that has filed a
Form 15F solely with respect to a class of debt securities may establish the exemption under § 240.12g3–2(b) regarding a class of equity securities by submitting an application to the Commission after filing its Form 15F. The issuer must provide in that application the date that it filed its Form 15F as well as the address of its Internet Web site or that of the electronic information delivery system in its primary trading market on which it will publish the information required under paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this
section.
(f)(1) A foreign private issuer that, upon application to the Commission and not after filing a Form 15F, has obtained or will obtain the exemption under § 240.12g3–2(b), may publish the information required under paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section on its Internet Web site or through an electronic information delivery system generally available to the public in its primary trading market, rather than furnish that information to the Commission, as long as it complies with the English translation requirements provided in paragraph (e) of this section. pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
(2) Before a foreign private issuer may publish information electronically pursuant to this paragraph, it must provide the Commission with the address of its Internet Web site or that of the electronic information delivery system in its primary trading market in its application for the exemption under § 240.12g3–2(b) or in an amendment to that application.
may take into account the reporting history of the issuer whose reporting obligations it has assumed pursuant to § 240.12g–3 or § 240.15d–5. (e) Counting method. When determining under this section the number of United States residents holding a foreign private issuer’s equity or debt securities:
(1)(i) Use the method for calculating record ownership § 240.12g3–2(a), except that you may limit your inquiry regarding the amount of securities represented by accounts of customers resident in the United States to brokers, dealers, banks and other nominees located in:
(A) The United States;
(B) The foreign private issuer’s jurisdiction of incorporation, legal organization or establishment; and (C) The foreign private issuer’s primary trading market, if different from the issuer’s jurisdiction of incorporation, legal organization or establishment. (ii) If you aggregate the trading volume of the issuer’s securities in two foreign jurisdictions for the purpose of complying with paragraph (a)(3) of this
section, you must include both of those
foreign jurisdictions when conducting your inquiry under paragraph (e)(1)(i) of this section. (2) If, after reasonable inquiry, you are unable without unreasonable effort to obtain information about the amount of securities represented by accounts of customers resident in the United States, for purposes of this section, you may assume that the customers are the residents of the jurisdiction in which the nominee has its principal place of business. (3) You must count securities as owned by United States holders when publicly filed reports of beneficial ownership or other reliable information that is provided to you indicates that the securities are held by United States residents. (4) When calculating under this
section the number of your United
States resident security holders, you may rely in good faith on the assistance of an independent information services provider that in the regular course of its business assists issuers in determining the number of, and collecting other information concerning, their security holders. (f) Definitions. For the purpose of this
section:
(1) Debt security means any security other than an equity security as defined under § 240.3a11–1, including:
(i) Non-participatory preferred stock, which is defined as non-convertible capital stock, the holders of which are entitled to a preference in payment of dividends and in distribution of assets on liquidation, dissolution, or winding up of the issuer, but are not entitled to participate in residual earnings or assets of the issuer; and (ii) Notwithstanding § 240.3a11–1, any debt security described in paragraph (f)(3)(i) and (ii) of this
section;
(2) Employee has the same meaning as the definition of employee provided in Form S–8 (§ 239.16b of this chapter). (3) Equity security means the same as under § 240.3a11–1, but, for purposes of paragraphs (a)(3) and (a)(4)(i) of this
section, does not include:
(i) Any debt security that is convertible into an equity security, with or without consideration; (ii) Any debt security that includes a warrant or right to subscribe to or purchase an equity security; (iii) Any such warrant or right; or (iv) Any put, call, straddle, or other option or privilege that gives the holder the option of buying or selling a security but does not require the holder to do so. (4) Foreign private issuer has the same meaning as under § 240.3b–4. (5) Primary trading market means that:
(i) At least 55 percent of the trading in a foreign private issuer’s class of securities that is the subject of Form 15F took place in, on or through the facilities of a securities market or markets in a single foreign jurisdiction or in no more than two foreign jurisdictions during a recent 12-month period; and (ii) If a foreign private issuer aggregates the trading of its subject class of securities in two foreign jurisdictions for the purpose of paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the trading for the issuer’s securities in at least one of the two foreign jurisdictions must be larger than the trading in the United States for the same class of the issuer’s securities. (6) Recent 12-month period means a 12-calendar-month period that ended no more than 60 days before the filing date of the Form 15F. (g)(1) Suspension of a foreign private issuer’s duty to file reports under
section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Act
shall occur immediately upon filing the Form 15F with the Commission if filing pursuant to paragraph (a), (c) or (d) of this section. If there are no objections from the Commission, 90 days, or such shorter period as the Commission may determine, after the issuer has filed its Form 15F, the effectiveness of any of the following shall occur:
(i) The termination of registration of a class of securities under section 12(g); and (ii) The termination of a foreign private issuer’s duty to file reports under section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Act. (2) If the Form 15F is subsequently withdrawn or denied, the issuer shall, within 60 days after the date of the withdrawal or denial, file with or submit to the Commission all reports that would have been required had the issuer not filed the Form 15F. (h) As a condition to termination of registration or reporting under paragraph (a), (c) or (d) of this section, a foreign private issuer must, either before or on the date that it files its Form 15F, publish a notice in the United States that discloses its intent to terminate its registration of a class of securities under section 12(g) of the Act, or its reporting obligations under
section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Act,
or both. The issuer must publish the notice through a means reasonably designed to provide broad dissemination of the information to the public in the United States. The issuer must also submit a copy of the notice to the Commission, either under cover of a Form 6–K (17 CFR 249.306) before or at the time of filing of the Form 15F, or as an exhibit to the Form 15F. (i)(1) A foreign private issuer that, before the effective date of this section, terminated the registration of a class of securities under section 12(g) of the Act or suspended its reporting obligations regarding a class of equity or debt securities under section 15(d) of the Act may file a Form 15F in order to:
(i) Terminate under this section the registration of a class of equity securities that was the subject of a Form 15 (§ 249.323 of this chapter) filed by the issuer pursuant to § 240.12g–4; or (ii) Terminate its reporting obligations under section 15(d) of the Act, which had been suspended by the terms of that
section or by the issuer’s filing of a
Form 15 pursuant to § 240.12h–3, regarding a class of equity or debt securities. (2) In order to be eligible to file a Form 15F under this paragraph:
(i) If a foreign private issuer terminated the registration of a class of securities pursuant to § 240.12g–4 or suspended its reporting obligations pursuant to § 240.12h–3 or section 15(d) of the Act regarding a class of equity securities, the issuer must meet the requirements under paragraph (a)(3) and paragraph (a)(4)(i) or (a)(4)(ii) of this
section; or
(ii) If a foreign private issuer suspended its reporting obligations pursuant to § 240.12h–3 or section 15(d) of the Act regarding a class of debt securities, the issuer must meet the pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
requirements under paragraph (c)(2) of this section. (3)(i) If the Commission does not object, 90 days after the filing of a Form 15F under this paragraph, or such shorter period as the Commission may determine, the effectiveness of any of the following shall occur:
(A) The termination under this
section of the registration of a class of
equity securities, which was the subject of a Form 15 filed pursuant to § 240.12g–4, and the duty to file reports required by section 13(a) of the Act regarding that class of securities; or (B) The termination of a foreign private issuer’s reporting obligations under section 15(d) of the Act, which had previously been suspended by the terms of that section or by the issuer’s filing of a Form 15 pursuant to § 240.12h–3, regarding a class of equity or debt securities. (ii) If the Form 15F is subsequently withdrawn or denied, the foreign private issuer shall, within 60 days after the date of the withdrawal or denial, file with or submit to the Commission all reports that would have been required had the issuer not filed the Form 15F.
PART 249—FORMS, SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
T Rule 302 (17 CFR 232.302). If you have technical questions about EDGAR, call the EDGAR Filer Support Office at (202) 551–
8900. If you have questions about the EDGAR
rules, call the Office of EDGAR and Information Analysis at (202) 551–3610. If the Form 15F is subsequently withdrawn or denied, you must, within 60 days after the date of the withdrawal or denial, file with or submit to the Commission all reports that would have been required had you not filed the Form 15F. See Rule 12h–6(g)(2) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(g)(2)) and Rule 12h–6(i)(3)(ii) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(i)(3)(ii)). E. Rule 12g3–2(b) Exemption Regardless of the particular Rule 12h–6 provision under which it is proceeding, a foreign private issuer that has filed a Form 15F regarding a class of equity securities shall receive the exemption under Rule 12g3–2(b) (17 CFR 240.12g3–2(b)) for the subject class of equity securities immediately upon the effective date of its termination of registration and reporting under Rule 12h–6. Refer to Rule 12g3–2(e) (17 CFR 240.12g3– 2(e)) for the conditions that a foreign private issuer must meet in order to maintain the Rule 12g3–2(b) exemption following its termination of Exchange Act registration and reporting.
Part I
The purpose of this part is to provide information to investors and to assist the Commission in assessing whether you meet the requirements for terminating your Exchange Act reporting under Rule 12h–6. If, pursuant to Rule 12h–6, there is an item that does not apply to you, mark that item as inapplicable. Item 1. Exchange Act Reporting History A. State when you first incurred the duty to file reports under section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. B. State whether you have filed or submitted all reports required under Exchange Act section 13(a) or section 15(d) and corresponding Commission rules for the 12 months preceding the filing of this form, and whether you have filed at least one annual report under section 13(a). Instruction to Item 1. If you are a successor issuer that has filed this Form 15F pursuant to Rule 12h–6(d), and are relying on the reporting history of the issuer to which you have succeeded under Rule 12g–3 (17 CFR 12g–3) or Rule 15d–5 (17 CFR 240.15d–5), identify that issuer and provide the information required by this
section for that issuer.
Item 2. Recent United States Market Activity State when your securities were last sold in the United States in a registered offering under the Securities Act of 1933 (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.) (‘‘Securities Act’’). Instructions to Item 2.
1. Do not include registered offerings
involving the issuance of securities:
a. to your employees, as that term is defined in Form S–8 (17 CFR 239.16b); b. by selling security holders in nonunderwritten offerings;
c. upon the exercise of outstanding rights
granted by the issuer if the rights are granted pro rata to all existing security holders of the class of the issuer’s securities to which the rights attach; d. pursuant to a dividend or interest reinvestment plan; or e. upon the conversion of outstanding convertible securities or upon the exercise of outstanding transferable warrants issued by the issuer. However, you must include registered offerings described in paragraphs (c) through (e) of this instruction if undertaken pursuant to a standby underwritten offering or other similar arrangement in the United States.
2. If you have registered equity securities
on a shelf or other Securities Act registration statement under which securities remain unsold, disclose the last sale of securities under that registration statement. If no sale has occurred during the preceding 12 months, disclose whether you have filed a post-effective amendment to terminate the registration of unsold securities under that registration statement. Item 3. Foreign Listing and Primary Trading Market A. Identify the exchange or exchanges outside the United States, and the foreign jurisdiction in which the exchange or exchanges are located, on which you have maintained a listing of the class of securities that is the subject of this Form, and which, either singly or together with the trading of the same class of the issuer’s securities in another foreign jurisdiction, constitutes the primary trading market for those securities. B. Provide the date of initial listing on the foreign exchange or exchanges identified in response to Item 3.A. In addition, disclose whether you have maintained a listing of the subject class of securities on one or more of those foreign exchanges for at least the 12 months preceding the filing of this Form.
C. Disclose the percentage of trading in the
subject class of securities that occurred in the identified jurisdiction or jurisdictions of your foreign listing as of a recent 12-month period. Instructions to Item 3
1. When responding to this item, refer to
the definition of ‘‘primary trading market’’ in Rule 12h–6(f) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(f)). In accordance with that definition, if your primary trading market consists of two foreign jurisdictions, provide the information required by this section for both foreign jurisdictions. In addition, disclose whether the trading market for your securities in at least one of those two foreign jurisdictions is larger than the trading market for your securities in the United States as of the same recent 12-month period. Disclose the first and last days of that recent 12-month period.
2. For the purpose of the primary trading
market determination, you must measure the average daily trading volume of on-exchange transactions in the subject securities aggregated over one or two foreign jurisdictions against your worldwide trading volume. You may include in this measure off-exchange transactions in those jurisdictions comprising the numerator only if you include those off-exchange transactions when calculating worldwide trading volume in the denominator. This denominator should be the same as the denominator used for the trading volume benchmark under Rule 12h–6(a)(4)(i) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(a)(4)(i)) and Item 4 of this Form. Item 4. Comparative Trading Volume Data If relying on Rule 12h–6(a)(4)(i), provide the following information:
A. Identify the first and last days of the recent 12-month period used to meet the requirements of that rule provision. B. For the same recent 12-month period, disclose the average daily trading volume of the class of securities that is the subject of this Form both in the United States and on a worldwide basis.
C. For the same recent 12-month period,
disclose the average daily trading volume of the subject class of securities in the United States as a percentage of the average daily trading volume for that class of securities on a worldwide basis. D. Disclose whether you have delisted the subject class of securities from a national securities exchange or inter-dealer quotation system in the United States. If so, provide the date of delisting, and, as of that date, disclose the average daily trading volume of the subject class of securities in the United States as a percentage of the average daily trading volume for that class of securities on a worldwide basis for the preceding 12-month period. E. Disclose whether you have terminated a sponsored American depositary receipt (ADR) facility regarding the subject class of securities. If so, provide the date of the ADR facility termination, and, as of that date, disclose the average daily trading volume of the subject class of securities in the United States as a percentage of the average daily trading volume for that class of securities on a worldwide basis for the preceding 12- month period. F. Identify the sources of the trading volume information used for determining whether you meet the requirements of Rule 12h–6. If you used more than one source, disclose the reasons why you used each source. Instructions to Item 4
1. ‘‘Recent 12-month period’’ means a 12-
calendar-month period that ended no more than 60 days before the filing date of this form, as defined under Rule 12h–6(f). You may disclose the comparative trading volume data in response to this item in tabular format and attached as an exhibit to this Form.
2. An issuer is ineligible to rely on
paragraph (a)(4)(i) of Rule 12h–6 if, as of the date of delisting or termination of an ADR facility, the average daily trading volume of the subject class of securities in the United States exceeded 5 percent of the average daily trading volume of that class of securities on a worldwide basis, as measured over the preceding 12 months, and 12 months has not elapsed from the date of delisting or termination of the ADR facility. See Rule 12h–6(b) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(b)).
3. For purposes of paragraph (a)(4)(i) of
Rule 12h–6:
a. when determining your U.S. average daily trading volume, you must include all pwalker on PROD1PC71 with RULES3
transactions, whether on-exchange or offexchange; b. when determining your worldwide average daily trading volume, in addition to on-exchange transactions, which you must include, you may include off-exchange transactions; and
c. the sources of your trading volume
information may include publicly available sources, market data vendors or other commercial information service providers upon which you have reasonably relied in good faith, and as long as the information does not duplicate any other trading volume information obtained from exchanges or other sources. Item 5. Alternative Record Holder Information If relying on Rule 12h–6(a)(4)(ii) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(a)(4)(ii)):
Disclose the number of record holders of the subject class of equity securities on a worldwide basis or who are United States residents at a date within 120 days before filing this Form. Disclose the date used for the purpose of Item 5. Item 6. Debt Securities If relying on Rule 12h–6(c) (17 CFR 240.12h–6(c)):
Disclose the number of record holders of your debt securities either on a worldwide basis or who are United States residents at a date within 120 days before the date of filing of this Form. Disclose the date used for the purpose of Item 6. Instructions to Items 5 and 6
Note from RegAlert. AI assistants can read this document in full, and search 70,000+ more, through the RegAlert MCP connector (https://mcp.regalert.today/mcp). Free with an account. How to connect ChatGPT, Claude or Cursor.
RegAlert holds no document that amends or replaces this one. This is not a check that it is in force: confirm with the regulator.
“See Release No. 34–55540 (March 27, 2007), 72 FR 16934 (April 5, 2007).”
More like this from SEC
SEC published 7 documents in the last 30 days. We email you each new one the day it's published.
Source: Securities and Exchange Commission — original document · Summary generated with machine assistance and reviewed before publication; the authoritative text is the regulator's original document. How RegAlert works
In RegAlert: added · updated