The Australian Treasury has today, 4 August 2015, released a consultation paper providing the first details of the impending legislative framework for crowd-sourced equity funding (CSEF) for public companies. The introduction of a legislative framework for CSEF’s is part of the 2015-16 federal budget package.
The consultation paper outlines some of the key provisions that will apply to companies participating in CSEF’s, these include:
- the availability of CSEF is restricted to Australian public companies that qualify as small enterprises who are yet to raise funds through a previous public offer;
- a number of exemptions from certain public company compliance costs for newly registered or converted public companies;
- a maximum of five (5) million dollars in a twelve (12) month period can be raised through CSEF;
- a limit of one class of fully paid ordinary shares per round of CSEF with equal price, terms and conditions; and
- a tailored disclosure package that applies specifically to CSEF.
Further details will be forthcoming in the draft legislation to be released later in the year. Presently the Australian Treasury is inviting comments from interested stakeholders until 31 August 2015. It is anticipated that the legislation will be introduced to Parliament in the Spring sittings.
Further information
If you need advice on your rights and obligations in light of the proposed crowd funding laws, contact us for a confidential and obligation-free discussion:
Malcolm Burrows B.Bus.,MBA.,LL.B.,LL.M.,MQLS.
Legal Practice Director
T: +61 7 3221 0013 (preferred)
M: +61 419 726 535
E: mburrows@dundaslawyers.com.au
Disclaimer
This article contains general commentary only. You should not rely on the commentary as legal advice. Specific legal advice should be obtained to ascertain how the law applies to your particular circumstances.
Related insights about corporate law
-
Director’s identification numbers to become a reality
On 12 June 2020, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Registries Modernisation and Other Measures) Act 2020 introduced the requirement for all Australian company directors to have a “Director Identification Number” (DIN). The DIN will become a single identifier for each director across all of their office holdings with the true identity of each director is verified…
-
What exactly is a section 293 direction?
There are several reasons why a shareholder may require financial information, primarily they are denied access to the ‘accounts’ so as to make informed decision about the company. The Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) provides various mechanisms for shareholders to obtain financial and accounting information about a company, to allow them to access full and…
-
Director’s misuse of funds held to be oppressive
This article explores shareholder oppression, examining Section 232 of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and Martin v Australian Squash Club Pty Ltd (1996) 14 ACLC 452, to understand the cumulative effect of individual acts.
-
What are sophisticated investors?
This article provides an overview of the requirements for a person to be a sophisticated investor under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) and the Corporations Regulations 2001 (Cth). It covers the definition of ‘person’, the Assets Test and Income Test, Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) guidance, and the complexities of self-managed super funds.
-
e-Signatures – legally binding on companies?
E-signatures are becoming increasingly popular, but are they legally binding? Find out in this article, which examines the Adelaide Bank case and reveals the limitations of e-signatures when it comes to executing a deed. Click through to learn more.
-
Company funds must be used for company purposes
This article examines the legal principles behind when it is permissible to use company funds, focusing on the case of Re D G Brims and Sons Pty Ltd (1995) 16 ASCR 559, which established that company funds must only be used for company purposes and not to pay for legal costs of proceedings for the…
-
The running account defence to unfair preference claims
Creditors who have been paid by a customer on credit may find themselves facing an Unfair Preference claim letter from a liquidator. Learn more about the defences available to creditors and how to protect yourself from repaying more than your fair share.
-
Unfair preferences & the set-off defence
Under section 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) (Act) an unfair preference is defined as a transaction, such as payment of an outstanding debt, between a company and an unsecured creditor which results in that unsecured creditor receiving more than it would have received if it had to prove in the winding up of the…
-
Unfair preferences – the Doctrine of Ultimate Effect
Explore the Doctrine of Ultimate Effect, running account defence and more in this article by Dundas Lawyers. Learn how these concepts can provide a defence to an unfair preference claim under Section 588FA of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth).
