The tumultuous events of 2020 and 2021, most notably the COVID-19 pandemic and the global outcry for racial justice, have created new challenges and opportunities for diversity and inclusion. (Kenji Yoshino and Fenimore Fisher, Bloomberg Law). Many companies are grappling with the concept of privilege for the first time. These companies are also rethinking the financial rationale behind engaging in the work of educating about privilege and diverse experiences and are struggling to transform good ideas into practical outcomes. Id. While kind words and acknowledgment of privilege serve as a discussion launch point, the question becomes: what can corporations do in practice to advance social justice and diversity in order to add value to the investor? . . .
Read MoreEven though Nasdaq’s new board diversity rules were approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) in August 2021, most public companies will not be required to comply with the rules’ standards until 2023, assuming the rules are not overturned based on the legal challenges they are currently facing. (Nasdaq, Rule 5605(f); Bre Bradham and Patrica Hurtado, Bloomberg Law). However, other corporate diversity advocates, including shareholders and institutional investors, are currently pushing for greater diversity on boards of directors and company disclosures stating the racial and gender make-up of the board of directors (“board”). . .
Read MoreElon Musk, with a net worth close to $240 billion, is not one to shy away from his dislike of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). (Forbes, last visited Feb. 4th, 2022). As the CEO of Tesla, Inc. (“Tesla”), Musk has repeatedly tweeted comments that have affected both Tesla’s stock price and his reputation with investors. A tweet from November 6, 2021 regarding Tesla has caught the eye of investors, some of whom filed a Delaware lawsuit on December 16, 2021, alleging mismanagement of the company based on the tweet. (Mike Leonard, Bloomberg Law). The tweet polled Musk’s approximately 70 million followers asking if he should sell a tenth of his stake in the company, and 57.9% of those who viewed his poll voted for the sale. . .
Read MoreThe name “Special Purpose Acquisition Company” or “SPAC” has been around since the 1990s but only recently have these blank-check companies become popular enough to draw significant attention from investors and the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). (Holmes, Forbes). According to the SEC, a SPAC is a company with no operations that goes public for the sole purpose of acquiring a private company—effectively bringing the private company public. (Division of Corporate Finance Staff, SEC). SPACs offer an alternative to the traditional Initial Public Offering (“IPO”) route for taking a company public. (Frank Holmes, Forbes). While this alternative has its advantages, the SEC has begun taking action as it relates to SPACs and applicable disclosures. . .
Read MoreThe year 2021 proved to be a significant year for cryptocurrency (“crypto”). (Nikita Prasad, NDTV). With El Salvador becoming the first country to use Bitcoin as their legal currency and Tesla, Inc.––one of the world’s most valuable companies––accepting Bitcoin as payment, public interest and the potential for general mainstream acceptance have grown exponentially. Id. This increase in popularity has unsurprisingly exposed crypto to the focus of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) because of the present need for tax dollars and governmental spending. (Alex Gailey & Kendall Little, Time; Robert W. Wood, Forbes). . .
Read MoreThe Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) released a vindicatory letter to China-based issuers demanding increased disclosures and financial reporting requirements. (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission). The SEC’s letter took considerable jabs at the Chinese infrastructure that has stalled the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) from auditing the Chinese issuers’ public accounting firms. (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission). The letter demands that disclosures from China-based issuers include disparaging warnings indicating the lack of enforcement mechanisms and risks associated with a “less developed legal system.” (U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission). . .
Read More