Why In-House Counsel Need to Watch for Insider Trading, Public Disclosure Issues From COVID-19
The COVID-19 pandemic is forcing companies to deal with issues around public disclosure of supply chain and other disruptions in their earnings reports and periodic statements to the SEC and investors. Their inside counsel and compliance officers also need to keep an eye out for insider trading by employees, lawyers said.
March 11, 2020 at 05:54 PM
6 minute read
The COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic means in-house counsel need to keep an eye on potential insider trading by employees at all levels who may gain access to material, nonpublic information about supply chain or other disruptions that could affect a company's bottom line, or its financial outlook.
Inside counsel also need to consider whether and how to handle public disclosure about disruptions or related matters in U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filings and reports, lawyers say.
Those concerns are among a host of others that corporate executives and their in-house lawyers are calling law firms about in the midst of outbreak anxiety in boardrooms, c-suites and on Wall Street. News of the global spread of the novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China, has spurred a couple of weeks of extreme volatility in financial markets.
"Company counsel for all public and private companies right now should be considering coronavirus-related insider trading. Federal securities laws prohibit buying or selling securities on MNPI," said Haima Marlier, a securities litigation partner who joined Morrison & Foerster last month from the enforcement division of the SEC in New York.
"This is a really important time right now for organizations to take active steps to mitigate the risks that their employees trade on coronavirus MNPI or disseminate that information to others who may trade," she said.
Counsel at public and nonpublic companies need to identify groups within their organizations that have access to insider information related to the novel coronavirus. They should distribute the organization's insider trading policies to all employees and require them to acknowledge review and receipt electronically. Further measures also may be necessary, such as imposing blackout periods, heightened preclearance procedures and undertaking additional training, she said.
Companies need to have an effective insider trading policy that goes to everyone in an organization, as well as family members and independent contractors, because securities allow the organizations to be held liable if people they control engage in insider trading and they haven't taken steps to prevent it.
Publicly traded companies and private equity companies planning to acquire them also need to consider public disclosure requirements under securities laws, said David Lynn, who is co-chair of Morrison & Foerster's corporate finance and capital markets practice in Washington, D.C.
Lynn, who represents public companies at the SEC and advises them on public disclosures, has been fielding many calls from clients in the last two weeks asking about how to handle their disclosure requirements in a fast-moving crisis. "It's a hot topic among public companies," he said.
Asked which companies have been calling, Lynn said, "All, but probably the most frequent issues are clients focused on manufacturing who have facilities in mainland China and Europe and particularly Italy. To date that has been the bulk of the reason for questions because they either have productive facilities or logistics or other things within the highly infected areas."
Lynn said, "Companies have to have disclosure controls and procedures around decision making, [and] many times there are legal, financial, accounting, investor relations and other public communications people in the room to make these decisions; and often they will contact outside counsel to decide if they have an obligation to disclose and whether the information is material to an investment decision."
The novel coronavirus pandemic's known and unknown impact on supply chains, earnings and company customers could be material for some companies and require disclosure, the lawyers said. This could be in Forms 10-K, 10-Q and 8-K and certain material corporate events, earnings releases, annual and current reports, and securities offering documents.
"Most companies have an insider trading policy that restricts the time period of when the company's insiders can trade in the company's securities, and for many companies that window period is open right now because they just recently put out earnings information and they haven't reached the end of the quarter yet. For that reason, people have to be particularly careful now as we come to the end of that window period as coronavirus could have a very real impact on timing of trades," Lynn said.
On Jan. 30, SEC chairman Jay Clayton issued a statement in which he said he had asked staff to monitor and provide guidance or other assistance to issuers and market participants regarding disclosures related to effects of the novel coronavirus.
"This is an uncertain issue where actual effects will depend on many factors beyond the control and knowledge of issuers. However, how issuers plan for that uncertainty and how they choose to respond to events as they unfold can nevertheless be material to an investment decision," Clayton said. Clayton also issued another public statement about financial reporting with respect to COVID-19 on Feb. 19, and on March 4 the SEC extended filing deadlines for companies affected by the COVID-19 virus.
COVID-19 impacts also may be required in voluntary disclosures and earnings releases, the lawyers said, similar to requirements for disclosing data breaches before filing SEC reports, statements need to be accurate and complete.
David Newman, a Morrison & Foerster partner who advises clients on global risk and crisis management, compared coronavirus risk to cyber breach risk. "You have a crisis situation in which people less accustomed to the rules regarding material nonpublic information could become aware of a significant setback on their company that has not been public, and in a volatile period in which people are looking to sell stocks, this is a step that could easily get missed. Companies really need to look out for this."
Read More:
The COVID-19 Coronavirus Threat: How Can US In-House Counsel Respond?
Big Firms Pitch Coronavirus Task Forces as Client Impacts Spread
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAfter Solving Problems for Presidents, Ron Klain Now Applying Legal Prowess to Helping Airbnb Overturn NYC Ban
7 minute readNLRB Blisters Skilled Care Home Chain That Terminated Nursing Assistant Who Complained About Wages
6 minute read'Erroneous Assumption'?: Apple Challenges DOJ Antitrust Remedy in Google Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1More Litigation Coming? Insulin MDL Gets Boost from FTC Report
- 2Judge Spends 3 Hours Explaining His Decision
- 3Morgan Lewis Closes Shenzhen Office Less Than 2 Years After Launch
- 4On The Move: Freeman Mathis & Gary Adds Florida Partners, Employment Pro Joins Jackson Lewis
- 5New Trouble for Allstate: National Class Action Targets Insurer
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250