Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: October 25, 2018
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently amended the definition of “smaller reporting company” as used in federal securities regulations. The expanded definition is intended to encourage more businesses to take advantage of scaled securities disclosure obligations.

First established in 2008, the category of smaller reporting company (SRC) aims to provide general regulatory relief for smaller companies. SRCs may provide scaled disclosures under Regulation S-K and Regulation S-X. Most notably, smaller reporting companies are allowed to include less extensive narrative disclosure than required of other reporting companies, particularly in the description of executive compensation. They are also permitted to provide audited financial statements for two fiscal years, in contrast to other reporting companies, which must provide audited financial statements for three fiscal years.
Under the previous definition, smaller reporting companies generally were companies with less than $75 million in public float. Companies with no public float were considered SRCs if they had less than $50 million in annual revenues.
Under the SEC’s new definition, generally, a company qualifies as a “smaller reporting company” if:
Public float is calculated by multiplying the number of the company’s common shares held by non-affiliates by the market price and, in the case of an IPO, adding to that number the product obtained by multiplying the common shares covered by the registration statement by their estimated public offering price. In some cases, a company may have no public float because it has no public common shares outstanding or because there is no market price for its common shares.
According to SEC estimates, 966 additional companies would be expected to be eligible for SRC status in the first year under the new definition. These include: 779 companies with a public float of $75 million or more and less than $250 million; 161 companies with a public float of $250 million or more and less than $700 million and revenues of less than $100 million; and 26 companies with no public float and revenues of $50 million or more and less than $100 million.
“Expanding the smaller reporting company definition recognizes that a one size regulatory structure for public companies does not fit all,” said SEC Chairman Jay Clayton. “These amendments to the existing SRC compliance structure bring that structure more in line with the size and scope of smaller companies while maintaining our long-standing approach to investor protection in our public capital markets. Both smaller companies — where the option to join our public markets will be more attractive — and Main Street investors — who will have more investment options — should benefit.”
The SEC also amended the definition of the non-accelerated filer to preserve the existing public float thresholds. A company with no public float or a public float of less than $75 million will still be considered a non-accelerated filer. Accordingly, qualifying as a “smaller reporting company” will no longer automatically make a registrant a non-accelerated filer.
However, according to the SEC, Chairman Clayton has directed agency staff to formulate recommendations to the Commission for possible additional changes to the “accelerated filer” definition to reduce the number of companies that qualify as accelerated filers in order to further reduce compliance costs for those companies.
The new definitions will be effective 60 days after the SEC rules are published in the Federal Register. To determine if the changes will benefit your company, we encourage you to contact a member of the Scarinci Hollenbeck’s Corporate Transactions & Business Group.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Jeffrey Cassin, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

For New Jersey businesses, crisis preparedness should be viewed as a legal and operational function, not simply an emergency-management exercise. A well-designed crisis response plan can help preserve evidence, protect confidential communications, meet reporting obligations, limit unnecessary exposure, and prevent an already difficult situation from becoming a larger legal problem. Key Takeaways A serious crisis […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Monmouth County is entering a significant new phase of development. For those looking to acquire property or undertake a new project, understanding the market opportunity is only the beginning. The more important question is whether a particular property can actually be developed as contemplated and what approvals, agreements, and other conditions will be required to […]
Author: Donald M. Pepe

Whether a client’s prompts to a generative AI tool and the documents it produces are protected from disclosure depends on the case type, who claims protection, and whether counsel was involved. In United States v. Heppner, a New York federal judge ruled that a criminal defendant’s communications with an AI platform were protected by neither […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

When a family member can no longer make important decisions for themself, the question is often not whether the family will step in, but whether they have the legal authority to do so. A spouse may manage household finances, or an adult child may arrange medical care and pay bills. Still, informal assistance does not […]
Author: Marc J. Comer

New Jersey residential developers with affordable housing obligations should carefully review their existing approvals, development agreements, and proposed deed restrictions in light of the State’s revised UHAC regulations (Uniform Housing Affordability Controls). The regulations, which took effect on November 6, 2025, significantly change the administration and physical requirements for affordable housing units. For developers with […]
Author: Wendy Rubinstein Quiroga

A “no comment” response is sometimes the right call when a legal problem arises. As a blanket policy, however, it lets allegations go unanswered, deadlines pass, evidence disappear, and manageable disputes grow into expensive litigation. The businesses that fare best are usually the ones that say little publicly while acting decisively behind the scenes. When […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!