Municipal Bond Disclosure - History, Requirements and Services Provided by WMFS |
It is with great pride that municipalities promote their communities. However, when it comes to offering bonds or other municipal securities you are required to disclose all material facts whether the facts are favorable or negative, i.e., issuers must provide all information that enables investors to make informed investment decisions. Historical Overview of Municipal Disclosure Practices
Following congressional
hearings into allegations of corporate fraud in the early 1930s, Congress passed
the Securities Act of 1933 with the objective of providing investors full
disclosure of material facts about securities offered and sold. In 1934, Congress
passed the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 that created the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) and empowered the SEC with broad authority over most
aspects of the securities industry.
Both the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934
(the "Securities Acts") were enacted with broad exemptions for municipal securities. Municipal
securities received special exemptions based on considerations of federal-state
comity.
In addition, at the time of enactment, there was a lack of perceived abuse in
the municipal securities market as compared with the corporate market.
Furthermore, the typical purchasers of municipal securities were institutional
investors with financial expertise.
Although municipal securities are exempt from the registration and
reporting requirements of the Securities Acts, issuers are subject to liability
under the anti-fraud provisions of the Securities Acts
(principally Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Rule 10b-5
requires the disclosure of all material facts and prohibits the omission of
facts necessary to make statements not misleading. The Securities Acts do not
detail the extent of liability nor the information an issuer must disclose.
Courts, however, have consistently held that an omitted fact is "material" if
there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider it
important in making an investment decision.
In spite of Rule 10b-5, full disclosure was not frequently practiced
by municipal issuers. Prior
to the 1960s, the majority of tax-exempt issues were general obligation bonds.
Due to the full faith and credit pledge, predominance of institutional
investors, and consistent terms, municipal bonds were sold without difficulty
even when disclosure was limited to a notice of sale.
After the 1960s, dramatic changes began occurring in the municipal bond
market. Revenue bonds became more prevalent, new types of bonds were introduced,
such as advance refunding, industrial revenue, and housing bonds, and innovative
structures such as zero coupon, variable rate and credit enhanced issues were
created. Diversity of security types necessitated greater disclosure. A major
thrust to change disclosure requirements and practices occurred during the 1970s
as a result of bond defaults. Prior to the default by the City of New York in
1975, tax-exempt securities were thought to be "risk free." To address the
growing need for disclosure, in 1976 the Municipal Finance Officers Association
(now the Government Finance Officers Association) completed disclosure
guidelines.(1)
The guidelines
were not intended to be legally binding, but rather to encourage improved
disclosure and greater standardization of disclosure practices. The guidelines
set forth information that the Association believed municipal issuers should disclose
to potential investors.
Changes in investor composition after the 1970s also triggered a demand for
increased disclosure. While the historical buyers of bonds (ie. banks, insurance
companies and individuals) remained the same, the demand for municipal
securities among various buyers changed dramatically. Brought about principally by
revisions in the tax code, banks were no longer the primary buyers of tax-exempt
bonds. Since the mid 1980s, the public sector, comprised of individuals and
trusts, has accounted for more than 50% of the purchases of new issues. In
contrast to institutional investors, which are staffed with professional
analysts and have resources and access to a variety of informational sources,
individual investors are likely to depend upon an official statement as the
primary source of information. Public sentiment for increased disclosure reached new heights in 1983 when the Washington Public Power Supply System defaulted on $2.45 billion of tax-exempt revenue bonds. Congress requested that the SEC investigate whether Federal Securities Laws had been violated. On September 22, 1988, the SEC released to Congress the results of its extensive investigation. At the same time, the SEC published a Release requesting comment on several initiatives that were designed to improve the quality, timing, and dissemination of disclosure in the municipal securities markets. The Release proposed adoption of Rule 15c2-12 under the Securities Act of 1934. While the Rule was adopted in the wake of the Washington Public Power Supply System default, it also was in response to a widely held belief that there were problems in the timeliness of and access to official statements. On January 1, 1990, Rule 15c2-12 went into effect. Although the SEC is prohibited from imposing disclosure rules on municipal government entities, the SEC did so indirectly through the requirements that Rule 15c2-12 placed on broker-dealers. Summary of Rule 15c2-12 for Primary Offerings
Rule 15c2-12 obligates underwriters participating in primary (new)
offerings of municipal securities of $1,000,000 or more to obtain, review, and
distribute to investors copies of the issuer's official statement. The
official statement preparation and dissemination requirements of the Rule are as
follows:
(1) Prior to bidding on or purchasing an issue, the underwriter is
required to "obtain and review" an official statement that is deemed final by
the issuer as of its date, except for the omission of certain information that
is not known until the time of the sale. The information which may be omitted
includes the offering price, interest rates, selling compensation, aggregate
principal amount, principal amount per maturity, delivery dates, ratings, other
provisions required to be specified in a competitive bid, other terms of the
securities depending on such matters, and the name of the underwriter.
(2) In a negotiated underwriting, the
underwriter must distribute preliminary official statements, if one has been
prepared by the issuer, not later than the next business day, to potential
customers upon request.
(3) The underwriter must contract with the
issuer or its agents to receive a sufficient number of copies of a final
official statement to enable compliance with the delivery requirements of the
Rule and the rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (see MSRB Rule
G-32). The issuer must provide copies of the final official statement not later
than seven business days after entering into a contract for the sale of
securities.
(4) The underwriter must provide a copy of the
final official statement, upon request, to any potential customer for designated
time periods following an underwriting of a new issue.
The rule does not apply to certain private placements
or short-term issues if the securities are in denominations of $100,000 or more
and if such securities:
(1) Are sold to no more than
thirty-five persons which the underwriter believes: (a) have knowledge and
experience in financial and business matters and are capable of evaluating the
merits and risks of the prospective investment; and (b) is not purchasing for
more than one account or with the view to distribute the securities; or (2) Have a maturity of nine months or less.
While the quality of disclosure
for primary offerings significantly improved with the passage of Rule
15c2-12, there was a continuing concern with the adequacy of disclosure in
the secondary market. Contributing to the concerns were highly publicized
defaults, growing ownership of municipal securities by individual investors,
and the increasing volume and complexity of new issues. In 1993, the SEC's
Division of Market Regulation conducted a comprehensive review of many
aspects of the municipal securities market, including secondary market
disclosure. The findings were set forth in the September 1993 Staff Report
on the Municipal Securities Market. The Staff Report indicated that the
growing participation of individual investors, who may not be sophisticated
in financial matters, as well as the proliferation of complex derivative
municipal securities, underscored the need for improved disclosure practices
in both the primary and secondary municipal securities markets.(2)
On November 10, 1994, the Securities and Exchange Commission amended Rule
15c2-12. Under the amended rule, broker-dealers are barred from buying
municipal securities sold on and after July 3, 1995 (January 1, 1996 for bonds
of small issuers) unless the issuer has agreed, in writing, to provide ongoing
disclosure. Although the SEC cannot regulate municipalities, it once again
effectively did so indirectly by the rules imposed on broker-dealers. With
certain exceptions, described below, the rule required bond issuers to prepare
and disseminate to Nationally Recognized Municipal Securities Information
Repositories "Annual Financial Information" and notices of material events. In
2008, the MSRB established an Electronic Municipal Market Access (“EMMA”)
system and through amendments to Rule 15c2-12 made EMMA the sole repository
for continuing disclosure filings.
Under Rule 15c2-12 the issuer's written agreement to provide ongoing disclosure may take the
form of a covenant in the trust indenture, bond ordinance or bond resolution or
there may be a separate written agreement. Although the agreement may be
executed at the time of the bond closing, the underwriter may not enter into a
contract for the purchase of the security unless the underwriter has made a
reasonable determination that there will be continuing disclosure at the time
the bond purchase agreement is executed. A reasonable determination may be made
by including an obligating provision in the bond purchase agreement or, in the
case of a competitively bid offering, such assurances could be contained in a
notice of sale.
Annual financial information may be presented through any
disclosure document or set of disclosure documents. In its Release No. 34-34961,
the SEC warned that the fact
that the Rule relies on the final official statement to set the standard
for ongoing disclosure it should not serve as an incentive for issuers to reduce
existing disclosure practices in the preparation of official statements. The SEC
stated that it encourages market participants to continue to refer to voluntary
guidelines (such as the guidelines prepared by the Government Finance Officers
Association) and the SEC's Interpretive Release in preparing official
statements. If audited financial statements are prepared, such audited
financial statements must also be submitted to EMMA.
At the time bonds are offered, the issuer must outline the type of Annual
Financial Information it will provide annually and the terms of its continuing
disclosure agreement. The contract must include and the official statement must
describe (i) the type of information to be provided as part of the Annual
Financial Information, (ii) the accounting principles used to prepare the
financial statements and the timing of such statements, (iii) the date in each
year by which the Annual Financial Information will be provided and to whom, and
(iv) who will be providing the information - the issuer, an "obligation person,"
an indenture trustee or a
designated agent. The official statement must also indicate any instances in the
previous five years in which there has been a failure to provide the continuing
disclosure for which the issuer is contractually bound.
Issuers are also required to file event
notices with EMMA in not more than 10 business days after the occurrence of
the event.(3)
As
of December 1, 2010, the events that must be reported are as follows: Principal and interest
payment delinquencies Non-payment related
defaults, if material Unscheduled draws on
debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties Unscheduled draws on
credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties Substitution of credit
or liquidity providers or their failure to perform Adverse tax opinions,
IRS notices or material events affecting the tax status of the
security Modifications to rights
of security holders, if material Bond calls, if material
and tender offers Defeasances Release, substitution or
sale of property securing repayment of the securities, if material
Rating changes Bankruptcy, insolvency,
receivership or similar event of the obligated person (which is
considered to occur when any of the following occur: appointment of
a receiver, fiscal agent or similar officer for an obligated person
in a proceeding under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code or in any other
proceeding under state or federal law in which a court or
governmental authority has assumed jurisdiction over substantially
all of the assets or business of the obligated person, or if such
jurisdiction has been assumed by leaving the existing governing body
and officials or officers in possession but subject to the
supervision and orders of a court or governmental authority, or the
entry of an order confirming a plan of reorganization, arrangement
or liquidation by a court or governmental authority having
supervision or jurisdiction over substantially all of the assets or
business of the obligated person) Merger, consolidation,
or acquisition of the obligated person, if material
Appointment of a
successor or additional trustee, or the change of name of a trustee,
if material.
In 1995, SEC attorneys noted that issuers' disclosure obligations under the securities fraud
laws go beyond the SEC's list and covers anything that could materially affect
their
Primary issues that are exempt from Rule 15c2-12 are also exempt for
purposes of secondary market disclosure. In addition, issues which are
outstanding 18 months or shorter are exempt from secondary market disclosure.
Two new event notices are required to be added to any Continuing
Disclosure Agreement executed on or after February 27, 2019. These
events notices are as follows:
Issuers must disclose the incurrence of a financial obligation of the issuer
or obligated person, if material, or agreement to covenants, events of
default, remedies, priority rights, or other similar terms of a financial
obligation of the issuer or obligated person, any of which affect security
holders, if material.
and
Issuers must disclose any default, event of acceleration, termination event, modification of terms, or other similar events under the terms of the financial obligation of the issuer or obligated person, any of which reflect financial difficulties.
Failure to Comply With Secondary Market Disclosure
In the SEC Release No. 34-34961
the SEC stated that: "The amendments do not prohibit Participating Underwriters from underwriting an Offering of municipal securities if an issuer or obligated person has failed to comply with previous undertakings to provide secondary market disclosure. However, if a failure to comply with such previous undertakings has not been remedied as of the start of the Offering, or if the party has a history of persistent and material breaches, it is doubtful whether a Participating Underwriter could form a reasonable basis for relying on the accuracy of the issuer's or obligated person's ongoing disclosure representations." Several organizations including the Government Finance Officers Association and the National Association of Municipal Analysts have long urged municipalities to provide secondary market disclosure and have suggested going beyond the requirements of Rule 15c2-12. Continuing disclosure improves relations with investors and analysts. At the 2001 National Association of State Auditors, Comptrollers and Treasurers annual conference, Stephen J. Wenstein from the Office of Municipal Securities of the Securities and Exchange Commission stated "The provisions of Rule 15c2-12 set a floor, not a ceiling. Common-sense approaches to disclosure also serve ethical considerations and the issuers' self-interests, in keeping their investors and constituents alike current and fully informed." Secondary Market (Continuing) Disclosure Services To assist government entities in fulfilling their secondary market disclosure requirements, WM Financial Strategies, offers continuing disclosure services. WM Financial Strategies collects and compiles data and prepares an Annual Financial Information Report that meets the requirements as well as the spirit of Rule15c2-12. When the document is completed, WM Financial Strategies serves as the Dissemination Agent in filing with EMMA, and any other parties named in the continuing disclosure undertaking, the Annual Financial Information Report together with audited financial statements. WM Financial Strategies prepares all documents in word searchable PDF format as now required by the MSRB. In addition, WM Financial Strategies, can annually (or periodically) review your compliance with the filing of Event Notices.
For further information
contact:
Joy A. Howard at 314-423-2122.
|
Coming
Soon-
|
|
WM Financial
Strategies |