Regulation FD and Rating Agencies: The Landscape After Dodd-Frank

Don Draper is the dapper CEO of your good client Sterling Cooper, Inc.1 Sterling Cooper, one of the great success stories of the 1960s advertising world, has gone on to even greater prominence since its IPO in the 1970s. Don is calling with questions about Regulation FD, and especially how the landscape was changed by the recent Dodd-Frank Act. We all know Don has a few things he’d like to keep quiet, but today he is in disclosure mode. What do you tell him? 

Background — Regulation FD

Regulation FD provides that when an issuer, or person acting on its behalf, discloses material non-public information about the issuer or its securities to specified persons, the issuer must broadly disseminate that information to the public. The specified persons are:

  • broker-dealers;
  • investment advisers and institutional investment managers;
  • investment companies and hedge funds; and
  • any holder of the issuer's securities who are reasonably likely to trade on the basis of the information.

Regulation FD requires the public disclosure to occur:

  • simultaneously, for intentional disclosures; and
  • promptly (i.e., within 24 hours) for unintentional selective disclosures.

Under Regulation FD, the required public disclosure may be made by filing or furnishing a Form 8-K or by another method or combination of methods that is reasonably designed to effect broad, non-exclusionary distribution of the information to the public, such as a press release issued on a wire service.

The SEC has also indicated that, in appropriate circumstances, issuers can use their web sites to make information public for purposes of Reg FD compliance if (1) the website is a “recognized channel of distribution,” (2) posting information online makes the information generally available to the market and (3) investors have had a “reasonable waiting period” to react to the information. This issue is discussed in more detail in Release No. 34-58288.

Regulation FD Exceptions Before Dodd-Frank

In an effort to ensure that Regulation FD did not have a chilling effect on issuer disclosure, the SEC included several exemptions to the rule. That is, the following exempt disclosures could be made — even if the disclosure included material non-public information — without needing to make the same disclosure public:

  • communications made to a person who owes the issuer a duty of trust or confidence such as an attorney, investment banker, or accountant;
  • communications made to any person who expressly agrees to maintain the information in confidence (e.g., by entering into an express oral or written confidentiality agreement);
  • disclosures to a credit rating agency, provided the information is disclosed solely for the purpose of developing a credit rating and the ratings are publicly available; and
  • communications made in connection with certain offerings of securities registered under the Securities Act (e.g., disclosures made in a road show).

Regulation FD after Dodd-Frank

Section 939B of the Dodd-Frank Act directed the SEC to amend Regulation FD to remove the specific exemption for the benefit of disclosures made to ratings agencies, which the SEC has now done. See Release No. 33-9146

In the wake of this change, the key question for Don is whether he can still make disclosures of material non-public information to credit rating agencies without the need for public disclosure. We’ll assume that the rating agency is not a broker-dealer or the like, so what this really boils down to is whether Sterling Cooper can take the position that disclosure to the rating agency is made to a person who owes it a duty of trust or confidence and therefore within a Regulation FD exemption.

Regulation FD does not require an agreement of this sort to be in writing, but Don may nonetheless prefer to have a written agreement.  Market practice post Dodd-Frank is for rating agencies to address confidentiality in their standard-form engagement letters.

 ____________________________________________________________________________ 

1With apologies to Mad Men.

Neither the content on this blog nor any transmissions between you and Latham & Watkins through this blog are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.

In communicating with us through this blog, you should not provide any confidential information to us concerning any potential or actual legal matter you may have. Before providing any such information to us, you must obtain approval to do so from one of our lawyers.

By choosing to communicate with us without such prior approval, you understand and agree that Latham & Watkins will have no duty to keep confidential any information you provide

The purpose of this communication is to foster an open dialogue and not to establish firm policies or best practices. Needless to say, this is not a substitute for legal advice or reading the rules and regulations we have summarized. In any particular case, you should consult with lawyers at the firm with the most experience on the topic. Depending on your specific situation, answers other than those outlined in this blog may be appropriate. Your use of this blog site alone creates no attorney client relationship between you and Latham & Watkins. Do not include confidential information in comments or other feedback or messages left on the Weekly Words of Wisdom Blog, as these are neither confidential nor secure methods of communicating with attorneys.