17 C.F.R. § 230.131

Definition of security issued under governmental obligations

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Any part of an obligation evidenced by any bond, note, debenture, or other evidence of indebtedness issued by any governmental unit specified in section 3(a)(2) of the Act which is payable from payments to be made in respect of property or money which is or will be used, under a lease, sale, or loan arrangement, by or for industrial or commercial enterprise, shall be deemed to be a separate security within the meaning of section 2(l) of the Act, issued by the lessee or obligor under the lease, sale or loan arrangement.

(b) An obligation shall not be deemed a separate security as defined in paragraph (a) of this section if, (1) the obligation is payable from the general revenues of a governmental unit, specified in section 3(a)(2) of the Act, having other resources which may be used for payment of the obligation, or (2) the obligation relates to a public project or facility owned and operated by or on behalf of and under the control of a governmental unit specified in such section, or (3) the obligation relates to a facility which is leased to and under the control of an industrial or commercial enterprise but is a part of a public project which, as a whole, is owned by and under the general control of a governmental unit specified in such section, or an instrumentality thereof.

(c) This rule shall apply to transactions of the character described in paragraph (a) of this section only with respect to bonds, notes, debentures or other evidences of indebtedness sold after December 31, 1968.

(15 U.S.C. 77w) [33 FR 12648, Sept. 6, 1968, as amended at 35 FR 6000, Apr. 11, 1970]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 1989–2006 · leading case: Medill v. Westport Ins. Corp., 2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9358 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Medill v. Westport Ins. Corp., 2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9358 (Cal. Ct. App. 2006). “( 17 C.F.R. § 230.131 (2006).) Thus, the Heritage entities, as insureds, engaged in the excluded activity of issuing bonds or securities.”

In re Bexar Cnty. Health Facility Dev. Corp. Sec. Litig., 125 F.R.D. 625 (E.D. Pa. 1989). “17 C.F.R. § 230.131 . Plaintiff thus alleges that the loan agreement between the Trinity Retirement Living Foundation and the Bexar County Health Facilities Development Corporation is a separate security under SEC Rule 131, thereby obviating the § 3(a)(2) exemption.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.