Proposed ASX Listing Rule changes – greater clarity and increased disclosure
The ASX has sought feedback on proposed changes the ASX Listing Rules and guidance notes,
The Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) recently released its much awaited consultation paper ‘Simplifying, clarifying and enhancing the integrity and efficiency of the ASX listing rules’, seeking feedback on proposed changes the ASX Listing Rules and guidance notes, which are proposed to take effect on 1 July 2019.
Many of the proposed changes are welcome, providing additional clarity on the Listing Rules, seeking to simplify and streamline processes (including avoiding the need for a range of standard waivers) and introducing a more practical two-tier approach to escrow (lock-up) restrictions. However, other amendments introduce more onerous obligations on listed entities, particularly from a disclosure perspective. Although aimed at bolstering the integrity of the ASX market, they may not all be welcomed by listed companies or members of the investment community.
ASX is also proposing to strengthen its powers to operate the market and to monitor and enforce compliance. The proposed changes make it clear that ASX can exercise (or decide not to exercise) any power under the Listing Rules in its absolute discretion and introduce specific new powers to request fairly wide-ranging information (including verified under oath) with respect to compliance with the Listing Rules or that ASX reasonably requires to perform its obligations as a market operator. Finally, ASX proposes to introduce a new power to formally censure a listed company for breach of the Listing Rules and to publish this to the market.
We have summarised below some of the more significant changes proposed both with respect to admission to listing and ongoing obligations for listed entities.
Admission to the ASX
|Subject||Current rule||Proposed changes|
|Mandatory escrow (lock-up)
|ASX will generally impose mandatory escrow on some or all of the existing security holders of an entity seeking to list under the ‘assets test’ that is not able to demonstrate an acceptable track record of profitability or revenue. This is designed to prevent those security holders from selling down shortly after listing and unfairly profiting from the IPO.
Each escrowed security holder must sign an escrow agreement and deliver to ASX as a condition to listing.
|ASX has proposed very welcome changes to the mandatory escrow provisions including simplifying the categories of shareholders subject to escrow, providing stronger guidance around what constitutes an 'acceptable track record of revenue'(which has the potential for more growth stage companies to avoid the mandatory escrow provisions) and introducing a two-tier system to reduce the administrative burden particularly for companies with a large number of shareholders.
'Acceptable track record of revenue'
While considered on a case-by-case basis, the following tests must generally be met to be considered 'acceptable' and therefore avoid mandatory escrow:
Two-tier escrow administration
ASX has proposed a two-tier approach to escrow under which only significant holders (such as related parties, promoters, substantial holders and service providers) will be required to sign a formal escrow agreement. For less significant holders, ASX will permit entities to instead rely on a provision in their constitution containing the restrictions on transfer and the imposition of a holding lock on their securities.
ASX also proposes to amend the escrow rules to permit escrowed security holders to transfer escrowed secruities to a related party and to accept into a takeover offer or scheme of arrangement.
|Working capital test||Entities applying to list under the ‘assets test’ are required to have working capital of at least $1.5 million, including its budgeted revenue and administration costs for the first full financial year following listing in its working capital calculations.||The budgeted revenue after administration costs has been removed so that entities seeking admission under the asset test must confirm that they have at least $1.5 million in working capital at the time of admission and these funds will enable the company to accomplish the objectives set ou tin its prospectus.|
|Good fame and character test||All directors must meet the ASX 'good fame and character' test.||The 'good fame and character' requirement is proposed to be extended to an entity’s CEO even where they do not sit on the Board.|
|ASX liaison officer||Each company must have a person available during market hours who is responsible for communication with ASX on Listing Rule issues.||The entity’s proposed ASX liaison officer will be required to undertake a listing compliance course and attain a satisfactory pass mark.
This requirement will also be introduced for listed companies.
|Subject||Current rule||Proposed changes|
|Quarterly reporting||Any entity that listed under the assets test and had more than half of its total tangible assets in cash is required to lodge a quarterly cashflow report (Appendix 4C).||These entities will also be required to provide a quarterly activities statement with its Appendix 4C to provide an update on its business activities to the market which will be required to:
|Enhanced disclosure in Notices of Meeting||Specific rules apply with respect to the disclosure of information for relevant listing rule approvals.||ASX is proposing certain additional disclosure requirements including:
|Listing Rule 7.1A placement capacity||Certain entities can ask shareholders to approve an additional 10 percent placement capacity (in addition to the 15 percent under Listing Rule 7.1) over a 12 month period which can be used to issue shares for cash or non-cash consideration||ASX proposes to remove the ability for listed entities to use the additional 10 percent placement capacity for the issue of shares for non-cash consideration e.g., as consideration for an acquisition.|
|Agreements to issue shares pre-listing||-||ASX is proposing a new exception to Listing Rule 7.1 which will allow entities to issue securities pursuant to an agreement entered into prior to listing without impacting their 15 percent placement capacity provided that the agreement is disclosed in the listing prospectus/PDS.|
|Voting exclusions at shareholder meetings||Various specific voting exclusions apply.
Shares held by an employee incentive scheme trust can be voted at meetings
|ASX is proposing to change voting exclusions with respect to resolutions under Listing Rules 10.1 (related party transactions), 11.1.2 and 11.2 (significant changes to nature or scale) so these apply to persons 'who will receive a material benefit as a result of the transaction' being a 'benefit that is likely to include the recipient to vote differently from other ordinary shareholders'. The persons excluded would include, for example, advisers who receive a success fee upon the transaction occurring and underwriters of a capital raising conducted for a transaction.
Shares held by employee share trusts will only be able to be voted where they have been allocated to a participant under the incentive scheme and the participant has directed the trustee to vote the shares (where the participant is not excluded from voting under the Listing Rules). Where un-allocated shares are held by an employee share trust, they will be excluded from voting at shareholder meetings.
|Timetables and forms||-||ASX is proposing to update a number of its timetables for corporate actions in addition to amending forms and introducing new forms for reporting including to split the obligation to announce an issue of securities and seek quotation of securities into different forms.|
Submissions on the Listing Rule amendments are due by 1 March 2019. If you have any feedback on the above or would like any assistance in making submissions to ASX on the proposed changes, please do not hesitate to contact Catherine Merity or Rosamond Sayer.
Third-party payments and unfair preference claims- effective shield or not?
By Sam Kingston & Isabella Pierri
Unsecured creditors receiving payments in the current COVID-19 induced economic climate clearly do so at a heightened...
Ask and you may receive - creditors’ rights to information and call meetings
By Sam Kingston & Mathew Gashi
When is an external administrator obliged to respond to requests from creditors to access information and call meetings?...
Year-end earnings surprises and continuous disclosure: COVID-19 impact
With the financial year end (or half year) looming for many companies and the impact of COVID-19 over the last few...
Government decision makers should think twice before jumping on the ban-wagon: lessons from the Brett Cattle class action
Judgement potentially lowers bar for those impacted by government decisions to claim an unlawful exercise of power