The US Supreme Court is likely to come out shortly with its ruling on same sex marriages. The ruling may have an impact on fundraising for private funds and other private placements.
One of the standards for private placements of securities is that the investors generally need to meet the definition of “accredited investors.” For individuals that means a (1) net worth, excluding the primary residence, of $1 million, or (2) annual income in excess of $200,000 in each of the two most recent years or joint income with a spouse in excess of $300,000.
That word “spouse” is the one being addressed by the Supreme Court. Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) states that in determining the meaning of “any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States,…the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.” (1 U.S.C. § 7 (1997)
William Carleton picked up on the wrinkle in Rule 506 that same-sex marriages were not treated equally for purposes of the accredited investor standard.
Here in my home state of Massachusetts, “spouse” is not limited to a man and a woman. In the landmark Goodridge decision that made same-sex marriage legal, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court went through a laundry list of legal rights that couples enjoy once they are married. Those were rights not available not available to same-sex couples.
You can add the accredited investor standard to that big pile of legal rights.
The accredited investor concept was included in Regulation D “based on the presumption that accredited investors can fend for themselves without the protections afforded by registration.” I’m not sure how gender plays a role in determining the financial ability of a couple. But currently it does.
What happens if the Supreme Court strikes down the DOMA restriction? I assume the SEC will not do anything and let the term “spouse” sit in the definition. They have enough political landmines to deal with, I don’t see the SEC jumping out with a rulemaking embrace of same-sex marriage when it still has not yet removed the ban on general advertising or issued rules on crowdfunding.
That will leave it up to the issuers, the fund managers, the start-up companies, and their lawyers to wrestle with the definition of “spouse.” I expect a few intrepid offerings will get an extra investor or two. I expect many conservative issuers will wait for more guidance from the SEC.
- The accredited investor definition, after the Supreme Court strikes down DOMA
- A Story by Joe Wallin
- “Spouse” Abuse: Regulation D And The Defense Of Marriage (.pdf) by Ryan J. Kretschmer, Walton International Group in the Blue Sky Bugle
- United States v. Windsor on the SCOTUS Blog
- Goodridge v. Dept. of Public Health (.pdf)
- The New Accredited Investor Standard – prior post