FinCEN Customer Due Diligence Requirements Will Affect Certain Securities Offerings

May 21, 2018

Reading Time : 2 min

Accordingly, selling security holders or issuers that are not excluded entities (see below) in block trades, bought deals or other underwritten securities offerings will want to plan in advance so that the necessary verification can be completed efficiently by all underwriters to avoid delaying otherwise rapid offerings. For example, to avoid delays in block trades if potential underwriters will be asked to submit bids for offering terms, sellers should consider collecting and including the required identification and verification information in the bid invitation package.  As described below, this information includes a certification form and a copy of an identity document for each beneficial owner under the CDD Rule.

In particular, for each legal entity customer, a covered financial institution must identify, and verify the identity of, up to four individuals who satisfy the “Ownership” prong, and at least one individual who satisfies the “Control” prong, of the “beneficial owner” definition under the rule:

  • each individual, if any, who directly or indirectly owns 25 percent or more of the equity interests of a legal entity customer (the “Ownership” prong); and
  • a single individual with significant responsibility to control, manage or direct a legal entity customer (e.g., a CEO, CFO, COO, managing member, general partner, president, vice president or treasurer, or a person performing similar functions) (the “Control” prong).

For each such individual, covered financial institutions must identify the individual (e.g., by obtaining a completed certification in the Form provided by FinCEN under the CDD Rule or otherwise collecting the name, date of birth, address and social security (or similar) number from such individual), and must take action to verify the identity of any beneficial owner by means of a copy of a valid identity document, such as a driver’s license or passport.

Although the CDD Rule imposes additional burdens on securities and financial transactions, several categories of entities are excluded from the definition of “legal entity customer.” Accordingly, covered financial institutions are not required to obtain beneficial ownership information about the following entities:

  • any entity (other than a bank) whose common stock or analogous equity interests are listed on the New York Stock Exchange, the American Stock Exchange or NASDAQ stock exchange
  • any entity organized under the laws of the United States or of any state at least 51 percent of whose common stock or analogous equity interests are held by a listed entity
  • any issuer that has registered securities under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or that is required to file reports under Section 15(d) of that Act
  • financial institutions subject to regulation by a federal functional regulator, banks regulated by a state bank regulator and insurance companies regulated by a state
  • any pooled investment vehicle operated or advised by a financial institution excluded from the definition of legal entity customer
  • any foreign financial institution established in a jurisdiction where the regulator of the institution maintains beneficial ownership information regarding the institution.

The foregoing is a summary of key implications of the CDD Rule for certain securities offerings. The CDD Rule imposes additional compliance obligations for covered financial institutions that are described in detail in the May 11, 2016, Adopting Release, a June 19, 2016, FAQ, an April 3, 2018, FAQ and a May 11, 2018, press release reminding financial institutions that the CDD Rule became effective on that date.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.