1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |SEC Disclosure Requirements for State Sponsors of Terrorism

SEC Disclosure Requirements for State Sponsors of Terrorism

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.04.07

In an effort to provide investors with greater transparency as to public issuers’ disclosures concerning their activities with terrorist-sponsoring countries, the SEC, in June 2007, released a web tool listing "Companies' Activities in Countries Known to Sponsor Terrorism." However, in response to the receipt of numerous complaints concerning the web tool, the SEC removed the list and announced its plan to re-launch the "reference tool" after it addressed the voiced concerns.


The SEC has just issued a Concept Release "soliciting comment about whether it should develop mechanisms to facilitate greater access to companies' disclosures concerning their business activities in or with countries designated as State Sponsors of Terrorism." Specifically, the release seeks public comment on whether it is appropriate to provide easier access to such information, whether the SEC should pursue one of the alternative means to accomplish easier access (e.g., improving the web tool or providing companies with the means to utilize data tagging of relevant information), and any other issues relating to access improvements and the benefits and costs of providing improved access to companies' disclosures. At this time, the Concept Release does not include a list of companies that have made disclosures regarding business activities with State Sponsors of Terrorism (as identified by the U.S. Department of State). The Concept Release may be viewed here http://www.sec.gov/rules/concept/2007/33-8860.pdf. The deadline for submitting a comment is January 22, 2008.


The SEC’s enhanced focus on public issuers’ disclosures concerning business activities with State Sponsors of Terrorism raises questions as to how companies should, and do, disclose such activities in public filings. Through Crowell & Moring’s broad SEC-reporting and trade sanctions expertise, we can aid public companies in dealing with the potential new reporting regime imposed by the SEC.


Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 12.12.25

Eleventh Circuit Hears Argument on False Claims Act Qui Tam Constitutionality

On the morning of December 12, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit heard argument in United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical Associates, LLC, et al., No. 24-13581 (11th Cir. 2025). This case concerns the constitutionality of the False Claims Act (FCA) qui tam provisions and a groundbreaking September 2024 opinion in which the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida held that the FCA’s qui tam provisions were unconstitutional under Article II. See United States ex rel. Zafirov v. Fla. Med. Assocs., LLC, 751 F. Supp. 3d 1293 (M.D. Fla. 2024). That decision, penned by District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, was the first success story for a legal theory that has been gaining steam ever since Justices Thomas, Barrett, and Kavanaugh indicated they would be willing to consider arguments about the constitutionality of the qui tam provisions in U.S. ex rel. Polansky v. Exec. Health Res., 599 U.S. 419 (2023). In her opinion, Judge Mizelle held (1) qui tam relators are officers of the U.S. who must be appointed under the Appointments Clause; and (2) historical practice treating qui tam and similar relators as less than “officers” for constitutional purposes was not enough to save the qui tam provisions from the fundamental Article II infirmity the court identified. That ruling was appealed and, after full briefing, including by the government and a bevy of amici, the litigants stepped up to the plate this morning for oral argument....

View All Insights