For years the enforcement conversation around toxic financing focused on fraud and manipulation theories that required proof of scienter. A different and simpler theory has since done most of the work: Section 15(a)(1) of the Exchange Act, which makes it unlawful to act as a dealer in securities without registering.
The Theory in Plain Terms
A dealer is a person engaged in the business of buying and selling securities for its own account. The SEC's position in this line of cases is that a funder whose business consists of acquiring convertible notes from small issuers, converting them into free-trading shares at a discount, and reselling those shares into the public market is doing exactly that — as a regular business, not as an incidental investment.
The staff typically points to a combination of factors:
- › A high volume of note purchases across many issuers
- › Short holding periods between conversion and resale
- › Revenue derived principally from the conversion discount rather than interest or appreciation
- › Marketing and outbound solicitation of issuers
- › Dedicated infrastructure: standard documents, in-house conversion processing, transfer agent relationships
Registration status is a status offense. Once the dealer conclusion is reached, no deception needs to be proven.
Consequences That Reach the Issuer
Issuers are usually not the respondents, but they absorb consequences.
- › Rescission exposure. Section 29(b) has been used to argue that contracts made in violation of Section 15(a)(1) are voidable, and issuers have pursued rescission of notes and cancellation of shares.
- › Share cancellation and cap table repair. Court-ordered cancellation is a remedy, but it requires litigation the issuer must fund.
- › Transfer agent and opinion exposure. Counsel who issued removal-of-legend opinions for the resold shares may be asked to explain the analysis.
- › Disclosure obligations. Litigation, rescission claims, and a funder's regulatory status can become material facts requiring disclosure in periodic reports.
The Rule 144 Interaction
Conversion shares are frequently sold in reliance on Rule 144, with the holding period tacked back to the original note under Rule 144(d)(3)(ii). That analysis fails if the issuer is or was a shell, if the note was not fully paid at issuance, or if the holder is an affiliate or acting as an underwriter. Where a dealer-status finding attaches to the same transactions, the resale analysis is rarely the strongest part of the record.
What Issuers and Counsel Should Do
- › Diligence the funder before signing: registration status, litigation history, prior SEC actions, and the pattern of its other issuer deals.
- › Document who prepared the tradability analysis and on what facts.
- › Do not treat a legal opinion as a substitute for the underlying record. Opinions rest on issuer representations, and false representations do not become safe because a lawyer relied on them.
- › If a funder in your cap table is charged, evaluate rescission and cancellation options promptly rather than waiting for the market to react.
The practical lesson is unchanged from the fraud era of these cases: the terms that make this paper cheap and fast to obtain are the same terms that put the issuer's capital structure inside someone else's enforcement problem.
Related Reading
- › Rule 144 Tradability Opinion Risk
- › Toxic Financing: Death Spirals & Dilution
- › Toxic Convertible Notes: How Death-Spiral Financing Works
- › Disclosing Convertible Note Dilution in SEC Filings
<!-- related-links-injected -->
Authoritative Sources
- 15 U.S.C. § 78o(a)(1) — Registration of brokers and dealers (Exchange Act § 15(a)(1)) — Cornell Legal Information Institute
- 15 U.S.C. § 78c(a)(5) — Definition of “dealer” (Exchange Act § 3(a)(5)) — Cornell Legal Information Institute
- SEC v. Keener, 102 F.4th 1328 (11th Cir. 2024) — convertible note funder as unregistered dealer — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- SEC Investor Guide: Microcap Stock — dilutive financing and market risks — U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
- 17 C.F.R. § 229.303 — Item 303, Management’s Discussion and Analysis (liquidity and dilution disclosure) — Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
- 15 U.S.C. § 77c(a)(10) — Exempted securities (Securities Act § 3(a)(10)) — Cornell Legal Information Institute
Primary sources are cited so readers can verify the law directly. Rules and staff guidance change; see our editorial and corrections policy to report an error or an outdated citation.
Frederick M. Lehrer served as an enforcement attorney in the SEC's Division of Enforcement at the Southeast Regional Office from 1991 through 2000, and concurrently as a Special Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of Florida from 1997 through 1999, prosecuting securities-related financial crimes. He has practiced securities and corporate law in private practice for more than twenty-five years, advising issuers worldwide on SEC registration, disclosure obligations, Regulation D private placements, Regulation A offerings, and going public transactions. The firm is based in Florida and serves clients internationally.