July 30, 2014

20

New Articles

Advertisement

July 25, 2014

The Inadvertent Broker-Dealer: Using EB-5 New Commercial Enterprises to Raise Capital for Project Companies

Many regional centers form limited partnerships or other pooled investment vehicles known as new commercial enterprises in EB-5 terminology to raise capital for project companies seeking to use the regional center’s designation granted by the USCIS.  These regional centers may be motivated by keeping the identity of their migration agents confidential or simply by the desire to generate a greater economic return for its principals by paying investors a preferred return of 2% while charging the project companies 5% interest, thereby making the spread.  Whatever the reason, the repeated formation of pooled investment vehicles to provide financing to project companies may constitute capital raising (i.e., effecting transactions in securities) for the account of others which requires registration as a broker-dealer under Section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).

According to the SEC, the SEC’s Division of Trading and Markets is actively investigating regional centers engaged in the above-described activity for referral to the SEC’s Division of Enforcement.  Further, the SEC now has specific staff members devoted to matters relating to the EB-5 Program and, at least one such staff member, has stated that the EB-5 Program is on its radar. According to this staff member, the SEC is actively seeking tips regarding, and is currently investigating, regional centers for unlawful broker-dealer activity and expect enforcement actions to be forthcoming. 

As discussed below, the use of pooled investment vehicles to raise capital to loan to project companies may require the regional center and its representatives to register with the SEC as a broker-dealers or “associated persons” of a broker-dealer.

Broker-Dealer Registration Requirement

Section 15(a) of the Exchange Act makes it unlawful for any entity (or a natural person who is not associated with a broker or dealer) to make use of any means of interstate commerce to effect any transaction in any security unless registered under the Exchange Act.  Section 3(a)(4) of the Exchange Act generally defines the term “broker” to mean any person engaged in the business of effecting transactions in securities for the account of others.  The term “broker” is broadly interpreted by the SEC staff.  Being a broker is not necessarily dependent upon the receipt of a commission or other compensation directly related to sales of securities.  Persons engaged in the business of soliciting prospective investors in an Issuer fall within the definition of “broker” and, absent an available exemption, are required to register as, or be associated with, a broker dealer under the Exchange Act.

Historically, it has been recognized that issuers of securities (i.e., a pooled investment vehicle organized by a regional center) engaged in the offering of their own securities are not brokers.  However, this exemption does not apply to any employee or other person related to the issuer (i.e., the individuals associated with the regional center or the regional center’s affiliates) who routinely engages in the business of effecting securities transactions for the issuer or a related party (i.e., the regional center or other pooled investment vehicles sponsored by the regional center).  Such employees and other related persons of an issuer who assist in selling its securities may be “brokers,” especially if they are paid for selling these securities and have few other duties, and particularly if they are paid amounts tied to the value of what they cause to be sold by the issuer.[1]  Accordingly, to avoid the need for registration as a broker-dealer under the Exchange Act, such employees and other related persons generally rely on a “safe harbor” provided under Rule 3a4-1 of the Exchange Act discussed below.

Rule 3a4-1 Issuer Exemption

Rule 3a4-1 under the Exchange Act provides a non-exclusive “safe harbor” for persons associated with an issuer to avoid broker dealer registration (or licensing as an associated person of a broker-dealer).  Such associated persons include any natural person (not entity) who is a partner, officer, director, or employee of:  the issuer; a corporate general partner of a limited partnership that is the issuer; a company or partnership that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with, the issuer; or an investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 Act (“ICA”) that is the issuer.

Under the rule, an associated person will not be deemed to be a broker solely because of that person’s participation in the sale of securities so long as the associated person meets certain conditions.  Some of the key provisions of Rule 3a4-1 are as follows:

  • The associated person may not be compensated, directly or indirectly, in connection with the offering of the issuer’s securities (i.e., transaction-based compensation); and
  • The associated person primarily performs substantial duties for or on behalf of the issuer otherwise than in connection with transactions in securities; was not a broker or dealer, or an associated person of a broker or dealer, within the preceding 12 months; and does not participate in selling an offering of securities for any issuer more than once every 12 months; or
  • The associated person restricts his or her participation to one or more of the following activities: preparing or delivering written communications that do not involve oral solicitation by the associated person of a potential purchaser; responding to inquiries of potential purchasers in a communication initiated by the potential purchaser; and performing ministerial and clerical work involved in effecting any transaction.

Application to Regional Centers

Typically, regional centers undertake (or attempt to undertake) more than one financing transaction each year.  As such, the 3a4-1 “safe harbor” discussed above does not provide an available exemption from registration to those regional center principals and employees who participate in discussions with migration agents or undertake other capital raising activities for such pooled investment vehicles or their project company borrowers more than once every 12 months.  Accordingly, to comply with the law, such regional centers and/or their principals and applicable employees should register as broker dealers and/or licensed “associated persons” of a broker dealer with the SEC.

The views expressed in this publication are those of the author and not necessarily those of Greenberg Traurig LLP.  The comments contained herein do not constitute legal opinion and should not be regarded as a substitute for legal advice.


[1]       In addition, although not within the scope of this outline, many state securities laws regulate “issuer-dealers” selling the issuer’s own securities, and require officers or employees of the issuer to register as “issuer-agents.”

©2014 Greenberg Traurig, LLP. All rights reserved.

Emerging Legal News Headlines:

Multiple reports have confirmed that the U.S. Department of State’s global database for issuing travel documents recently crashed. While the system has been restored, it is operating at reduced...

Key points:

  • New benefit rate of $4.02 an hour (except for Hawaii)

  • Effective July 22, 2014

  • Updated Wage Determinations 

The U.S. Department of Labor...

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Civil Rights (OCR) will soon begin a second phase of audits (Phase 2 Audits) of compliance with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA...

Has the time come to license investors?

Regulators are often called upon to draw regulatory lines. In my experience as a former regulator (some would argue I never left, though it’s been almost 16 years), when called upon to...

Commerce Department Action on Solar Trade Case

From time to time the Energy and Environment Update will focus on legislative and regulatory developments facing a particular energy sector. 

For several years,...

Takeaway: In order to discover additional documents regarding privity, the patent owner does not have to prove privity, but does have to show evidence tending to show beyond speculation that there could have been privity between petitioner...

Takeaway: A party’s speculation that materials for which routine discovery is being sought “could” contain inconsistent information is not sufficient under 37 C.F.R. § 42.51(b)(1)(iii).

In its Order,...

Business communications firm Greentarget has just released the results of interviews with 100 news reporters and editors in their 2014 Disrupting the Press Release ...

This past Wednesday, the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission (NMPRC) approved a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) to revise New Mexico’s State Rural Universal Service Fund...

Takeaway: A petition asserting obviousness grounds of unpatentability must articulate reasons with rational underpinnings to support the obviousness conclusion, including, where appropriate, how the prior art addressed a need or problem in...

Takeaway: A petition filed more than one year after the petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement will bar institution of inter partes review, even if that complaint is dismissed, if the dismissal is “with prejudice....

Earlier this month, Public Service Company of New Mexico (PNM) filed a notice of the status of negotiations among the San Juan Generating Station (SJGS) participants relating to the ownership restructuring of...

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently announced a settlement with a partner at an investor relations firm who allegedly traded on inside information obtained through his representation of two companies. 

...

As reported by HealthcareInfoSecurity.com, a former hospital employee is facing criminal charges brought by federal prosecutors in Texas for alleged violations of the privacy and security requirements under the Health...

You know how sometimes you misplace things? Glasses, wallet, keys, cell phone, remote control . . . vials of smallpox.

Not joking. Smallpox. As in “[a] government scientist cleaning out a storage room last week at a lab on the...

Today, the Department of Defense, General Services Administration, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration issued a ...

The US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied a motion to dismiss a 16-count indictment for insider trading, finding the government adequately alleged each element of the offense.  

S...

For those companies that are seeking additional insured status, keep in mind that there have been major changes in how that insurance status is written. The Insurance Services Office, the drafter of many “...

In its Order, the Board granted Petitioner’s request for authorization to file a Motion to Submit Supplemental Information. Petitioner sought to submit paragraph 179 from a report of Patent Owner’s expert that...

The Security and Exchange Commission’s Divisions of Investment Management and Corporation Finance issued Staff Legal Bulletin No. 20 (IM/CF) on June 30 (SLB 20). SLB 20 provides guidance...

In cases challenging participation of food service workers other than the quintessential roles with which most diners are familiar (e.g., server/waiter, busboy, etc.) in tip sharing/pooling/splitting arrangements...

In a recent split decision, the Federal Circuit ordered the Eastern District of Texas to stay district court litigation pending a covered business method (CBM) review, reversing the district court’s...

As reported in the press, President Obama plans to issue an Executive Order authorizing the Commerce Department’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration (“...

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

Steven T. Anapoell, Private Equity Corporate Attorney Greenberg Traurig law firm
Shareholder

Steven Anapoell focuses his practice on forming private equity, distressed debt, real estate, venture capital and special strategy funds, mergers and acquisitions, private and public securities offerings, debt and equity investments and financings, and structuring and negotiating complex corporate transactions. He has represented companies and investors in a variety of industries, including renewable energy, real estate, entertainment, telecommunications, sporting goods, software, senior life settlements and medical devices. In addition, he has experience in representing...

949-732-6504