The long awaited salvation from the havoc of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) treatment of liquidated damages and other cash settle- ment provisions may at last be
- n the horizon.
For almost two years now, the SEC has held up registration statements, and in many cases has required issuers to restate financial statements, on account of perceived excessive liqui- dated damages and other cash settlement provisions in capital raising
- transactions. In implementing EITF
Issue No. 00-19, “Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments Indexed to, and Potentially Settled in, a Company’s Own Stock,” the SEC Staff has haphazardly imposed constraints on financing transactions containing these types of provisions. Failure to comply with these con- straints has had dreadful effects, including delayed effectiveness of reg- istration statements and restatements
- f financial statements. The capital
markets community has been strug- gling to navigate through the fleeting whims of the Staff, which itself has conceded its own quandary on how exactly to implement this EITF in the absence of guidance from The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). The FASB recently issued for comment a proposed FASB Staff Position (FSP EITF 00-19-b) addressing how compa- nies should account for liquidated damages provisions in their registra- tion rights agreements. The FSP provides that liquidated damages penalties in a registration rights agree- ment that are triggered when an issuer fails to file and have declared effective the related resale registration statement or to maintain its effective- ness as required by the agreement generally should be accounted for under FASB Statement No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies, and should not cause the warrant, convert- ible security or other financial instrument to be accounted for as a derivative liability under EITF 00-19.
What this means for issuers and investors in PIPEs transactions:
This FSP is significant because, despite the uncertainty regarding the proper accounting for such liquidated damages provisions, the Staff of the SEC has been requiring companies that issue a warrant or convertible instrument in conjunction with an agreement to register the financial instrument or the equity shares underlying it to account for the instrument under EITF 00-19 as a liability if the registration rights agreement requires the issuer to pay liquidated damages in cash to the holder of the instrument in the event
- f a registration default. The only way
to avoid the recognition of a liability as a result of a cash payment liquidated damages provision in this context has been to cap the aggregate amount
- f liquidated damages payable under
the registration rights agreement in the event of a registration default. Initially, the SEC Staff accepted a 10% cap, and then began and currently continues to allow caps in the 18% to 24% range. Although the proposed FSP is subject to final approval by the FASB, it strongly suggests that the SEC’s current position on this issue is not
LOWENSTEIN SANDLER PC CLIENT ALERT
SPECIALTY FINANCE
PROPOSED FASB STAFF POSITION CLARIFIES THE ACCOUNTING FOR LIQUIDATED DAMAGES PENALTIES IN REGISTRATION RIGHTS AGREEMENTS
By Steven E. Siesser, Esq. and Paul W. Hartzel, Esq. October 2006