Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
The newly enacted federal JOBS Act of 2012 (H.R. 3606; http://bit.ly/JfRRg2) impacts independent film financing by loosening the restrictions on companies (“issuers”) raising capital via securities offerings that are exempt from registration with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). One section of the JOBS Act permits “crowd funding,” which is aimed at equity or debt offerings of not more than $1 million through “funding portals,” envisioned as websites that match investors to investments. Another section permits general solicitation and advertising for offerings sold only to “accredited investors.”
The theory behind the crowd funding exemption is laudable, but the Act actually makes crowd funding a chimera because it adds so many hurdles and restrictions that it makes the crowd funding exemption worse than just relying on the current exemptions from registration. Here are just a few reasons why the crowd funding exemption is smoke and mirrors:
So what is the theoretical benefit of meeting this mass of restrictions and qualifications, compared to relying on an existing exemption for offerings up to the same $1 million? Rather meager, but here they are:
The alternative to all this lunacy for small offerings is to just rely on good ol' Rule 504 of Federal Regulation D, which exempts offerings of not more than $1 million to whomever you want, as long as you disclose all material facts, don't commit fraud, don't advertise, and file Form D with the SEC. That's it. For Rule 504 offerings, you also have to comply with state securities laws, but for most of them, all you need to do is keep the offering to under 35 investors that either have a pre-existing relationship with the promoter or that are financially sophisticated (or are represented by someone that is).
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
This article explores legal developments over the past year that may impact compliance officer personal liability.