US Passes Crowdfunding Legislation

Pretty cool, a $1 or $2 million cap (depending on how you handle your accounting) which is more than any crowdfunding campaign raises anyway, but a $10,000 (or 10% of your <under $100k annual income) cap makes an angel gift a little harder. From what I read correctly, they want that 10%/$10K+ pledge/gift to be considered an investment. Not sure how to handle the guys who are $10k short of a $100k campaign with 30 minutes left who make a donation (through a family member or team member) to secure the $90k already pledged on an all-or-nothing campaign.

Edit: Notice this part also: a requirement that the issuer or broker raise at least 60% of the target offering to take possession of the funds (this is a good because it keeps the issuer from collecting money for a project they can’t afford to finish.)

http://filmclosings.com/2011/12/us-house-passes-hr-2930-crowdfunding-legislation/

The U.S. House overwhelmingly passed its first significant crowdfunding legislation, in the form of H.R. 2930, the Entrepreneur Access to Capital Act. The bill (now in the Senate) amends the Securities Act of 1933, by allowing entrepreneurs to crowdsource (online) up to $2 million per year in investment capital directly from individuals without having to register the investors with the SEC; however, the commencement and completion of the raise do need to be filed with the SEC. Entrepreneurs (the “issuers”) must provide potential investors with audited financial statements in order to qualify for the $2 million cap, otherwise you are capped at $1 million. Individual investments from crowd-shareholders are capped at $10,000 (or 10% of their annual income), whichever is less.

To be clear, this is not free money; these are bona fide investor-securities for which they will receive a return on their investment as well as ownership interest in your enterprise, be it film, music, games, art, books, inventions, startups, etc.

Many filmmakers have raised funding for films on popular gifting sites like Kickstarter and IndyGoGo. These sites have found success raising free money for ultra low budget films and other projects through crowdfunding models where people can pledge as little as $1 and as much as they like to a variety of different projects; that is free gift-money that cannot be paid back, so project benefactors have no financial interest in your film, nor can they take a charitable deduction on their gift (though some sites have contrived charitable workarounds.)

H.R. 2930 specifically amends the “Requirements with Respect to Certain Small Transactions” (Section 4A of the Securities Act), by providing for registration exemptions for certain crowdfunded securities — the details of which are summarized at the end of this article.

Some important points worth highlighting are:

the $1m/$2m funding caps and the $10,000 investment cap are pegged to the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers, so they can be adjusted over time (this prevents the caps from becoming outdated.)
a requirement that the issuer or broker use a 3rd party for cash management (this keeps prying fingers out of the cookie jar.)
a requirement that the issuer or broker raise at least 60% of the target offering to take possession of the funds (this is a good because it keeps the issuer from collecting money for a project they can’t afford to finish.)
that raising crowdfunds does not preclude issuer from raising capital by other means (this allows crowdsourced equity to participate in traditional capital structures alongside (other equity investors, tax credits, collateralized and mezzanine loans, etc.)
background checks are required for issuers and brokers/intermediaries.
that crowdfunded shares cannot be resold for 1 year, unless the shareholder is an accredited investor or the issuer.
the Act does not specify which enterprises can be crowdfunded and which enterprises will be banned, if any. So that remains to be seen.
the Act does preempt state “blue-sky” laws, but still allows for state enforcement.
Massachusetts has the most representatives that voted against it (5 out of 10). Curious.
the initial funding cap was $5 million, but was quickly lowered to $2m/$1m.
the Act spells crowdfunding as one word, which will hopefully alleviate the 1 word vs. 2 words vs. hyphenated discrepancies.
The bill has met some backlash by politicians claiming that crowdfunding measures would lead to speculative, risky offerings that could translate into heavy losses for small investors. This argument has merit and should be carefully considered by the Senate and SEC. It’s ironic that given the potential fraud risk and rampant financial abuses of the past 10 years that the House Republicans voted (in a strict partly-line vote) to kill an amendment that would have required intermediaries to disclose to potential investors how they are compensated. This issue has plagued charities that outsource fundraising to 3rd party companies that, in turn, take a hefty percentage of the donations they raise. Perhaps the Senate will re-introduce it.

During the Senate Banking Committee’s December 1st hearing on spurring job creation through access to capital, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson said in his opening statement that they will hear from witnesses who will “provide insight on proposals to expand the scope of Regulation A offerings, to permit general solicitation of investors in Regulation D offerings, and to allow individuals to solicit and sell small amounts of stock over the Internet through crowd-funding.”

Johnson continued, “They will address the size of a private offering and the amount of money that a crowdfunder should be able to risk without full regulatory protection. They will discuss the types of markets where these securities should trade. They will also describe the existing investors’ safeguards, such as disclosures about the business and financials, and how current proposals would affect those safeguards.”

Summary of H.R. 2930 (PDF):

The amendments to Section 4A are as follows:
‘‘(6) transactions involving the offer or sale of securities by an issuer, provided that—

‘‘(A) the aggregate amount sold within the previous 12-month period in reliance upon this exemption is—

‘‘(i) $1,000,000, as such amount is adjusted by the Commission to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or less;

or

‘‘(ii) if the issuer provides potential investors with audited financial statements, $2,000,000, as such amount is adjusted by the Commission to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, or less;

‘‘(B) the aggregate amount sold to any investor in reliance on this exemption within the previous 12-month period does not exceed the lesser of—

‘‘(i) $10,000, as such amount is adjusted by the Commission to reflect the annual change in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics; and

‘‘(ii) 10 percent of such investor’s annual income;

‘‘(C) in the case of a transaction involving an intermediary between the issuer and the investor, such intermediary complies with the requirements under section 4A(a); and

‘‘(D) in the case of a transaction not involving an intermediary between the issuer and the investor, the issuer complies with the requirements under section 4A(b).’’

H.R. 2930 goes on to describe the statutory Requirements to Qualify for Crowdfunding Exemption, for issuers and brokers, which includes cautionary language, background checks, website requirements, etc.
 
Last edited:
So from what I've gathered here, it's not going to apply to sites like Kickstarter or Indiegogo, because in those cases you're effectively receiving gifts or selling products (rewards), not getting investments.

So that kind of leaves me wondering what the point is...other than opening up opportunities for new business models surrounding crowdfunding. It also leaves me wondering if the people in the House and Senate have any real grasp of what crowdfunding actually is, since from what the above said, it doesn't look like it...
 
It applies to kickstarter and the other sites. It's defining the contributions as gifts.

Basically, the legislation is to prevent money laundering and tax evasion and what not. While contributions aren't tax deductible, if you had a whole lot of illegal money you could "raise" it through crowdfunding and say someone gave it to you. Limiting it to $10k each and forcing a third party (like kickstarter) to manage it keeps it more on the level.

It also potentially protects investors from a company saying that money given was crowd sourcing and therefore no money was "invested," instead it was "given" maybe?

All-in-all, it doesn't seem like it'll impact 90% of campaigns that are raising $500-10k for their project except the indiegogo folks who don't raise at least 60% of their goal.

Not sure how you're supposed to give the money raised back though? haha
 
To be clear, this is not free money; these are bona fide investor-securities for which they will receive a return on their investment as well as ownership interest in your enterprise, be it film, music, games, art, books, inventions, startups, etc.

It applies to kickstarter and the other sites. It's defining the contributions as gifts.

Basically, the legislation is to prevent money laundering and tax evasion and what not. While contributions aren't tax deductible, if you had a whole lot of illegal money you could "raise" it through crowdfunding and say someone gave it to you. Limiting it to $10k each and forcing a third party (like kickstarter) to manage it keeps it more on the level.

It also potentially protects investors from a company saying that money given was crowd sourcing and therefore no money was "invested," instead it was "given" maybe?

All-in-all, it doesn't seem like it'll impact 90% of campaigns that are raising $500-10k for their project except the indiegogo folks who don't raise at least 60% of their goal.

Not sure how you're supposed to give the money raised back though? haha

No, according to the link and the quote above, it applies only to investments where whoever is investing will potentially get a return. Since Kickstarter and Indiegogo specifically state that any projects listed are not investments, this legislation wouldn't apply. And if you look at the actual bill text, there's no mention of gifts, just investments.

ETA: It's good that sites like Kickstarter, etc. aren't effected by the bill, since I know that I, for one, do not want to have to deal with all of the SEC crap (which you still have to deal with under this bill, it's just that you deal with it after the fact rather than before) if I want to crowdsource a few thousand dollars for a project.
 
From what I've seen of this, it seems to be bigger news for app developer start-ups, which is a booming trade right now and is seeing a lot of investor interest.

I hadn't thought about the anti-money-laundering side of it, but I bet that had quite a lot to do with the bill's passage.

H.R. 2330, no congratulations yet. You're still a Bill.
 
Not sure how you're supposed to give the money raised back though? haha

This law requires sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo to return funds if the projects don't meet the minimum amounts... which they already did on Kickstarter, but IndieGoGo will have to change their rules.
 
This law requires sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo to return funds if the projects don't meet the minimum amounts... which they already did on Kickstarter, but IndieGoGo will have to change their rules.

Sounds like it.
It directly affects campaigns like the one we've been discussing in the screening room where people set a very high (ridiculous) goal like 300K and only raise 10% or less of that.
 
This law requires sites like Kickstarter and IndieGoGo to return funds if the projects don't meet the minimum amounts... which they already did on Kickstarter, but IndieGoGo will have to change their rules.

Nope. Here's the exact text from the actual bill (bolding mine):

withholds offering proceeds until aggregate capital raised from investors other than the issuer is no less than 60 percent of the target offering amount;

Kickstarter/Indiegogo contributors aren't investors, so therefore this law doesn't apply to them. This only applies in situations where whoever is investing money has the potential for return. Without the potential for a return, they're not investors, and therefore this law doesn't apply.

I do see some new business opportunities coming into play with this, since now you could use the crowdfunding model to get actual investors. But as it stands now, these rules don't apply to places like Kickstarter or Indiegogo.
 
Kickstarter is a middle man. This law applies to Kickstarting. Already had this discussion on the topic four weeks ago when it was actually announced.

The amendment on kickstarters behalf will be to allow people to sell shares for up to 10K.

SEC doesnt get involved, reporting wise.
 
Kickstarter is a middle man. This law applies to Kickstarting. Already had this discussion on the topic four weeks ago when it was actually announced.

The amendment on kickstarters behalf will be to allow people to sell shares for up to 10K.

SEC doesnt get involved, reporting wise.

Have you read the actual legislation?

Kickstarter would only be involved if they start letting people make actual investments, which they currently do not; they only allow what equates to a gift (or a purchase in some cases).

And yes, the SEC does get involved. You have to file paperwork with them at the completion:

(8) provides the [Securities and Exchange] Commission with notice of the offering, not later than the first day securities are offered to potential investors, including--

`(A) the stated purpose and intended use of the proceeds of the offering sought by the issuer; and

`(B) the target offering amount and the deadline to reach the target offering amount;

and:

...provides the [Securities and Exchange] Commission with a notice upon completion of the offering, which shall include the aggregate offering amount and the number of purchasers;...

It's not the same paperwork you would normally have to provide investors, but it's still paperwork that has to be legally filed.

Basically, though, for the way most indie filmmakers have been using crowdsourcing, this legislation will make no difference. It's only if you start promising a return on the money given that you'll have to worry about it.
 
Have you read the actual legislation?

Kickstarter would only be involved if they start letting people make actual investments, which they currently do not; they only allow what equates to a gift (or a purchase in some cases).

And yes, the SEC does get involved. You have to file paperwork with them at the completion:



and:



It's not the same paperwork you would normally have to provide investors, but it's still paperwork that has to be legally filed.

Basically, though, for the way most indie filmmakers have been using crowdsourcing, this legislation will make no difference. It's only if you start promising a return on the money given that you'll have to worry about it.

The paperwork is the same paperwork you have to file if you take more than 10K through Amazon Payments in one chunk, technically.

And, again, I did say that Kickstarter would have to amend their policy.

It's old news.
 
The paperwork is the same paperwork you have to file if you take more than 10K through Amazon Payments in one chunk, technically.

Since when did you have to file paperwork with the SEC in advance of getting an Amazon payment? The new bill means you'd have to file an advance notice of the funding effort, as well as paperwork regarding the results.

Not to mention all the other information the middle-man has to collect (including background checks).
 
I don't like this at all. It favors investors with capital and infrastructure enough to "eat" the cost of compliance with SEC filings and other rules. The government doesn't like the idea of small capital exchange happening outside their fee structure. Compliance with those fee gathering apparatus cost more then the small investment could ever return, hence the end of small crowd funding. A million dollar idea inst that big of an idea.

The arguments that this legislation will close some gap for illegal activity is a straw man arguments. The actives given are clearly criminal regardless how you move the money around and can already be prosecuted. This legislation is to PROTECT large angel investment folks from the "little people"
 
Since when did you have to file paperwork with the SEC in advance of getting an Amazon payment? The new bill means you'd have to file an advance notice of the funding effort, as well as paperwork regarding the results.

Not to mention all the other information the middle-man has to collect (including background checks).

Not in advance, afterward. You're saying you don't want to have to deal with paperwork but if you're trying to collect over 10K you will regardless. That's what I mean.

Sure, there are background checks. IMO if you have something worth investing in then it's not an issue. I can see one thing this is good for that's related to indies. Just noones gone that route yet. I'm sure there are many people thinking of it though, those who have features and more on the way.
 
"that crowdfunded shares cannot be resold for 1 year, unless the shareholder is an accredited investor or the issuer."

That portion makes it clear to me this is a new form of small-scale investment security, and is specifically not applicable to things like kickstarter and indiegogo which are simply people giving you free money with no 'shares' given in return.

In the past if you were making a movie it was fine to solicit limited private investment without registering with the SEC. What you generally couldn't do was make a public offering of investment in your film without essentially treating it like any other IPO, which added a prohibitive amount of regulation, cost and paperwork to the process because it's designed for larger business ventures. This new bill essentially looks to create a structure for offering limited public investment in a project without requiring the resources to to launch a publicly traded security. Again, that has nothing to do with the current types of crowdfunding offered by kickstarter & indiegogo - in fact the only reason those are currently legal is because they specifically prohibit treating the money given as an investment. Where it does apply to them is that they would have the option expand their offerings to include the option to solicit true investment in a project.
 
Back
Top