Skip to content

Client Update: TSX Company Manual amendments will result in a “modest increase” to listed issuer’s disclosure practices

Andrew Burke and Kevin Landry

The Toronto Stock Exchange (“TSX”) has made two recent changes to the TSX Company Manual that will impact disclosure:

A. It introduced a requirement for many corporate listed issuers to disclose specified policies and corporate documents on the issuer’s website, effective April 1, 2018, which the TSX refers to as the Part IV Amendments; and,

B. It amended the disclosure requirements for securities based compensation arrangements in circulars for securityholder meetings of the issuer, effective for financial years ending on or after October 31, 2017, which the TSX refers to as the Part VI Amendments.

The TSX believes the changes will be beneficial to security holders by making issuers’ material corporate governance documents more easily obtained in a centralized location and the “modest increase in a listed issuer’s disclosure obligations is outweighed by the benefits to investors”.

 

SUMMARY OF THE AMENDMENTS

A. Website Disclosure

There are two main changes relating to issuer website disclosure:

Posting corporate documents on issuer’s website. Unless they are exempted as described below, listed corporate issuers will now be required to maintain a publicly available website with current, effective versions of the following documents:

  • articles of incorporation, amalgamation, continuation or any other constating or establishing documents of the issuer and its by-laws; and
  • if adopted, copies of:
    • majority voting policy,
    • advance notice policy,
    • position descriptions for the chairman of the board, and the lead
    director,
    • board mandate, and
    • board committee charters.

We understand that the TSX intended only standing committee charters need be posted. Ad hoc committee mandates, which would include special committees, would often be confidential when they are created, and their mandates or charters are not intended to be posted. We expect that the TSX may clarify this requirement.The website hosting these documents must meet several criteria:

  • the webpage should be easily identifiable and accessible from the listed issuer’s homepage or investor relations page;
  • If a listed issuer’s website is shared with other issuers, each listed issuer should have a separate, dedicated webpage; and,
  • a listed issuer may post the current, effective version of a larger document which contain these documents.

These new requirements will not apply to:

  • Non-Corporate Issuers (Exchange traded products like REITs, closed-end funds, or structured products);
  • Eligible Interlisted Issuers (issuers listed on another Recognized Exchange in addition to the TSX); or,
  • Eligible International Interlisted Issuers (Eligible Interlisted Issuers incorporated or organized in Recognized Jurisdictions).

Majority voting policies must be uploaded, not just described. The TSX listing requirements insist that each director of an issuer be elected by a majority of votes cast with respect to their election. To meet this requirement, the TSX permits listed issuers to adopt a policy providing for majority voting if the requirement was not otherwise enforced on the issuer (by its constating documents, for example).

When these amendments take effect, the TSX will require any majority voting policy to be uploaded to the issuer’s website in its entirety. This requirement will apply to both corporate and non-corporate issuers. Although the amendments remove sections of the TSX Company Manual which require the issuer to describe any majority voting policy to security holders on an annual basis, the policy should still be described in a circular for a meeting in which directors are being elected since it is relevant to the election.

B. Compensation arrangements

TSX rules govern securities based compensation arrangements, such as options, securities purchase plans, PSUs, DSUs, RSUs, SARS and other similar arrangements that involve the issuance of securities from treasury. The TSX Company Manual has for some time required certain disclosure relating to these arrangements in (a) circulars sent to security holders seeking approval of these arrangements or amendments to them, and (b) otherwise annually in a circular or other disclosure document distributed to security holders.

Amendments to the TSX Company Manual require the following changes to this disclosure:

Calculation of burn rate. The amendments require that listed issuers disclose the following:

  • annual burn rate for new equity compensation arrangements, including those adopted in replacement of similar arrangements;
  • if the securities awarded include a multiplier, details in respect to such multiplier; and,
  • the annual burn rate for each of the listed issuer’s three most recently completed fiscal years for the relevant arrangement (or since adoption if less than three years).

The amendments provide the following formula for calculating burn rate:

number of securities granted under the arrangement during the applicable fiscal year

– divided by-

weighted average number of securities outstanding for the applicable fiscal year

Changes to time period of compensation arrangement disclosure. The amendments to the TSX Company Manual clarify the time at which the disclosure speaks depending upon the type of meeting as follows:

AGM  Non-AGM 
Security based
compensation
arrangements
up for approval 
Must present disclosure as at
end of issuer’s most recently
completed fiscal year.Include three-year burn rate
disclosure (in accordance
with burn rate calculation)
Must present disclosure as
at the date of the meeting
materials.Include three-year burn
rate disclosure (in
accordance with burn rate
calculation).
No security
based
compensation
arrangements
up for approval
Must present disclosure as at
end of issuer’s most recently
completed fiscal year.Include three-year burn rate
disclosure (in accordance
with burn rate calculation)
Compensation arrangement
disclosure not required.

Certain disclosure broadened beyond options. Formerly only the vesting and term of “stock options” issuable under the compensation arrangement were required to be disclosed by an issuer. The amendments clarified that disclosure applies to “securities issuable” under the compensation arrangements, which captures all plans, not just options.

Clarification to disclosure of plan maximums. The TSX has clarified how plan maximums, outstanding and reserved securities are to be disclosed:

  • Plan maximum — the maximum number of securities issuable under each arrangement expressed as a fixed number (together with the percentage this number represents relative to the number of issued and outstanding securities of the listed issuer) or fixed percentage of the number of issued and outstanding securities of the listed issuer, 
  • Outstanding securities awarded — the number of outstanding securities awarded under each arrangement, together with the percentage this number represents relative to the number of issued and outstanding securities of the listed issuer, and 
  • Remaining securities available for grant — the number of securities under each arrangement that are available for grant, together with the percentage this number represents relative to the number of issued and outstanding securities of the listed issue. 

 

WHAT THE CHANGES MEAN FOR TSX ISSUERS

The new requirements are not overly onerous, but will require non-exempt corporate issuers to review and update their websites by the end of the first quarter of calendar 2018, and keep those websites updated over time whenever changes are made to the posted documents. TSX issuers must also add a few additional calculations, including compensation plan burn rates, to the circular in connection with future AGMs. The changes do not apply to venture issuers.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Charter-ing a Different Course? Two decisions on TWU’s proposed law school

August 11, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…

Read More

Restart the Clock!: Confirmation and resetting limitation periods in Tuck v. Supreme Holdings, 2016 NLCA 40

August 11, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…

Read More

Client Update: SCC issues major decision affecting federal employers: Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited

July 15, 2016

On July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…

Read More

Client Update: Requirement to register as a mortgage brokerage and mortgage administrator in New Brunswick

July 7, 2016

On April 1, 2016 New Brunswick’s Mortgage Brokers Act came into force, requiring businesses acting as mortgage brokerages or as mortgage administrators in New Brunswick to be licensed. A mortgage brokerage is a business that on behalf…

Read More

Copyright does not monopolize facts – documentary filmmakers’ claim against book author and publisher fails

June 29, 2016

In May 2016, the Federal Court of Canada confirmed that copyright does not protect facts, even where a book’s author is clearly inspired by the content of a film (Maltz v. Witterick, 2016 FC 524 (CanLII)).…

Read More

Solicitor-client privilege vs the Canada Revenue Agency: the SCC speaks

June 10, 2016

By Jennifer Taylor “…firms of notaries or lawyers…must not be turned into archives for the tax authorities”1 So says the Supreme Court of Canada in one of two highly anticipated decisions on solicitor-client privilege, offering lawyers…

Read More

Why can’t we be friends?: Lessons on corporate dissolution from Smith v. Hillier

May 30, 2016

Joe Thorne1 and Clara Linegar2 As joint owners of a business, what do you do when the business relationship falls apart? And what if one owner undermines the business in the process? In Smith v Hillier,3 Justice Paquette…

Read More

Client Update: Supreme Court of Canada dismisses appeals in punitive damages cases

May 26, 2016

The Supreme Court of Canada has dismissed the appeals in Bruce Brine v. Industrial Alliance Insurance and Financial Services Inc.1 (with costs) and Luciano Branco, et al. v. Zurich Life Insurance Company Limited, et al.(without costs). Both of…

Read More

Client Update: Pension update: Countdown to Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans

May 17, 2016

On May 4, 2016, the Nova Scotia Pooled Registered Pension Plans Act (“PRPP Act”) was proclaimed in force, and finalized Pooled Registered Pension Plan Regulations were released. While there were no major changes from the previously released draft regulations, the proposed rules…

Read More

Pension Primer: Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) in Nova Scotia

April 22, 2016

By Level Chan and Dante Manna Pooled Registered Pension Plans (“PRPPs”) are closer to becoming a reality for Nova Scotian employers. PRPPs were established by the Federal government in an effort to address the lack of retirement savings…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top