Regarding Public and Internal
Agency decision
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT
TO CONGRESS
Regarding Public and Internal
Use of Machine-Readable Data for
Corporate Disclosures
December 2024
DISCLAIMER: This is a report prepared by staff of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The Commission has
expressed no view regarding any analysis, findings, or conclusions contained herein.
Contents
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................................................1
IDENTIFICATION OF CORPORATE DISCLOSURES EXPRESSED AS
MACHINE-READABLE DATA.............................................................................................................................................2
Existing Machine-Readable Data Requirements.................................................................................. 2
Proposed Joint Agency Data Standards................................................................................................. 3
ANALYSIS OF THE COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE USE OF MACHINE-READABLE DATA........... 4
Benefits ...............................................................................................................................................................4
Costs...................................................................................................................................................................... 5
SUMMARY OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS RESULTING FROM THE USE OR
ANALYSIS OF THE MACHINE-READABLE DATA THAT THE COMMISSION COLLECTS....................7
ANALYSIS OF HOW THE COMMISSION’S STAFF USES THE MACHINE-READABLE
DATA THAT THE COMMISSION COLLECTS............................................................................................................. 8
PUBLIC USE OF THE MACHINE-READABLE DATA THAT THE COMMISSION COLLECTS............... 11
CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................................................................... 11
APPENDIX................................................................................................................................................................................12
ENDNOTES.............................................................................................................................................................................25
Introduction
The Financial Data Transparency Act of 2022 (FDTA), which was signed into law on
December 23, 2022, as Title LVIII of the James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2023,1 requires the Commission to report semi-annually on the
public and internal use of machine-readable data for corporate disclosures.2 The FDTA
requires the Commission to submit this report to the Committee on Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs of the Senate and the Committee on Financial Services of the House of
Representatives every 180 days until December 23, 2029, when the provision requiring the
report sunsets.3
FDTA Section 5825(b) requires that this report include: (1) an identification of which
corporate disclosures required under specified provisions of the securities laws are
expressed as machine-readable data and which are not; (2) an analysis of the costs and
benefits of the use of machine-readable data in corporate disclosure to investors, markets,
the Commission, and issuers; (3) a summary of enforcement actions that result from the
use or analysis of machine-readable data collected under the specified statutory provisions;
and (4) an analysis of how the Commission uses the machine-readable data it collects.4
This report contains the following new information since the last report: additional
Commission rulemaking releases adopting structured data tagging requirements, proposed
joint data standards, and updated statistics in the analysis of the costs and benefits of the
use of machine-readable data.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 1
Identification of Corporate Disclosures
Expressed as Machine-Readable Data
FDTA Section 5825(b)(2)(A) requires an identification of which corporate disclosures
required under Section 7 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the Securities Act),5 Section 13 of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act),6 and Section 14 of the Exchange
Act7 are expressed as machine-readable data and which are not. Please refer to the
Appendix.
EXISTING MACHINE-READABLE DATA REQUIREMENTS
In 2009, the Commission adopted rules requiring operating companies to provide the
information from the financial statements in their registration statements and periodic
and current reports using eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL),8 which
is a machine-readable, structured data language used for standardized reporting of
business information, including information relating to the financial performance of
companies.9 That same year, the Commission similarly required open-end management
investment companies (mutual funds) to provide risk/return summary information in their
prospectuses in XBRL format.10
Since that time, the Commission has refined many of its rules by requiring open and freely
available, machine-readable standardized formats promulgated by standards organizations
or voluntary consensus standards bodies. For instance, in 2018, the Commission adopted
amendments requiring the use, on a phased-in basis, of Inline XBRL for operating
company financial statement information and fund risk/return summary information.11
Whereas previously filers generated an HTML document of their financial statement
information or risk/return summary information and then tagged a copy of the data to
create a separate XBRL exhibit, Inline XBRL allows filers to prepare a single document
that is both human-readable and machine-readable.12
The Commission has adopted rules requiring machine-readable standardized formats for
additional collections of information. In 2019, the Commission introduced structured
data tagging requirements for certain reporting form cover-page data.13 In 2021, the
Commission amended most of its fee-bearing forms and schedules to require tagging of
information related to filing fee calculation.14 Also in 2021, the Commission added tagging
requirements in Forms 10-K, 20-F, and 40-F pertaining to the auditor and jurisdiction
on the audit report signed by the registered public accounting firm.15 Since 2022, the
2 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Commission has adopted structured data tagging requirements for a number of additional
collections of information.16
In addition to requiring XBRL and Inline XBRL for certain filings, the Commission
requires some reports and disclosures to be filed in machine-readable eXtensible Markup
Language (XML).17 In other words, certain filings are submitted using data languages that
are specific to the particular form being submitted.18 For such filings, filers are typically
provided the option either to submit the filing directly in the relevant custom XML data
language, or to manually input the information into a fillable web-based form developed
by the Commission that converts the completed form into a custom XML document.19
Currently, there are 55 forms, schedules, and statements containing disclosures required
under Securities Act Section 7, Exchange Act Section 13, or Exchange Act Section 14.
About three-quarters (43 of 55) of those forms, schedules, and statements require some
machine-readable data, while about one-quarter (12)20 do not require any machinereadable data. Since the last report, the Commission added new disclosures to Form N-4
that are required to be structured in Inline XBRL.21
PROPOSED JOINT AGENCY DATA STANDARDS
In August 2024, the Commission, along with the Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, National Credit Union Administration, Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau, Federal Housing Finance Agency, Commodity Futures Trading Commission,
and Department of the Treasury, proposed a rule to establish data standards to promote
interoperability of financial regulatory data across these agencies.22 The agencies proposed
this rule as required by the FDTA. The proposed joint data standards include common
identifiers related to entities, financial instruments, geographic locations, dates, and
certain products and currencies. Pursuant to the FDTA, once joint standards have been
established, each agency is responsible for adopting agency-specific standards for certain
collections of information in separate rulemakings by the agencies or through other actions
taken by the agencies.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 3
Analysis of the Costs and Benefits of the
Use of Machine-Readable Data
FDTA Section 5825(b)(2)(B) requires an analysis of the costs and benefits of using
machine-readable data in corporate disclosure to investors, markets, the Commission,
and issuers.23
BENEFITS
Studies show that machine-readable disclosures benefit investors, markets, and issuers.
With respect to investors and, more broadly, to markets, making corporate disclosures
machine-readable has decreased information asymmetry between firms and investors by
reducing information processing costs, making stock prices more informative (i.e., more
reflective of firm-specific information), and reducing market inefficiencies and risks.24
Machine-readability has enhanced market competition by, for example, reducing insider
advantages relative to non-insiders and local investor advantages relative to non-locals.25
The reduction in information processing costs has heightened monitoring of issuers by
investors and other external parties (e.g., financial analysts, press, data aggregators,
academic researchers, and financial media) which often helps to inform investors and
markets.26 Greater monitoring has driven firms to provide more quantitative disclosure
and report earnings in a more consistent manner.27 Such benefits may increase over time as
tools for investor use of machine-readable data become more widely available.
Issuers have, in some instances, benefitted from decreased audit fees and increased
timeliness of audit and financial reports as a result of machine-readable disclosures.28
Issuers have experienced additional benefits associated with machine-readable disclosures,
including: higher liquidity; lower cost of capital; higher return on investment; and
improved performance benchmarking and acquisition analysis.29 Finally, machine-readable
disclosures have facilitated the Commission’s investor protection efforts, enabling staff
to analyze large quantities of information in support of risk assessment, rulemaking,
and enforcement activities, including as part of its internally developed structured data
applications.30 Freely usable technical validation rules also allow issuers to check for
certain errors before the machine-readable data is submitted, which can further streamline
the compliance process by reducing Commission staff time that would otherwise be
spent pinpointing and communicating the existence of technical errors to issuers, and by
reducing issuer time that would otherwise be spent resolving such errors and resubmitting
the machine-readable data file.31
4 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
COSTS
The cost of machine-readable disclosure largely affects filers and the Commission, as these
parties must, respectively, comply with or mandate and implement machine-readable
disclosure requirements. Investors and other data users (e.g., financial analysts, asset
managers, and academic researchers) are not bound to use machine-readable versions of
corporate disclosures, because the disclosures are human-readable as well.32 Furthermore,
while commercial XBRL research software is available for a cost, investors and other data
users can access and download machine-readable corporate disclosures at no cost.33
Filers incur compliance costs to apply machine-readable tags to their disclosures or
pay a third-party tagging service provider to do so. Compliance costs for new tagging
requirements tend to be higher, but generally decline as filers and service providers gain
experience and develop new tools to adapt to the requirements.34 These compliance costs
are likely reduced for those filers with experience applying tags to their disclosures, whether
through other machine-readability requirements or through the use of machine-readable
data in their internal enterprise resource planning systems.35 Compliance costs also vary
based on the type of filer, because some types of filers are subject to more extensive tagging
requirements than other types of filers. For example, business development companies
(BDCs) and registered closed-end funds both are subject to Form N-2 prospectus and cover
page tagging, but BDCs, because they are registered under the Exchange Act, are also
subject to financial statement tagging and thus incur additional tagging compliance costs as
compared to registered closed-end funds. Registered closed-end funds are subject to Form
N-2 prospectus and cover page tagging, but are not subject to financial statement tagging,
and thus incur lower tagging compliance costs than BDCs do.
With respect to the magnitude of these compliance costs, an American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants survey of 1,032 smaller reporting companies in 2018 found a median
cost of $2,500 per year for fully outsourced XBRL creation and filing.36 A separate survey
of 139 Nasdaq-listed filers and other responding companies in 2018 found higher XBRL
compliance costs, including a median XBRL compliance cost of $7,500 per Form 10-Q.37
The discrepancy may be due to Nasdaq-listed companies generally having longer, more
detailed and complex financial statements than smaller reporting companies, thus having
more tags that they will need to apply to their documents, resulting in more time and effort
needed to tag discrete disclosures (such as numbers, blocks of narrative text, checkboxes,
etc.) and ultimately increased compliance costs.38
Both surveys were conducted before the compliance dates for the Commission’s transition
from XBRL to Inline XBRL and before the implementation of cover page and other
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 5
tagging requirements for periodic reports. For the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995,39 Commission staff estimated in the Inline XBRL Filing of Tagged Data
Adopting Release, that the effect of using Inline XBRL rather than XBRL to tag financial
statements would be to reduce the existing aggregate average internal burden of 56 hours
per response for reporting companies by 2 hours during each of the first three years of
the Inline XBRL requirements, and increase the aggregate average out-of-pocket cost to
$6,175 per response.40 In 2022, Commission staff updated this burden estimate to 53
hours per response, while noting that the actual burdens will likely vary among individual
companies based on the size of their organization.41
In 2023, the Commission stated in a proposed rule release that, based on the staff’s
understanding of third-party structured data compliance pricing, smaller filers typically
pay between $1,500 and $5,000 per year for third-party structured data compliance
services and/or software, while larger filers typically pay between $5,000 and $30,000
per year for such services and/or software.42 The Commission also cited a number of
factors that affect the cost of compliance, including the particular filing or submission on
which structured data is required, the number of data points to be structured, the size
of the entity providing the data, the industry to which the entity belongs, the number
of individual users of the structured data compliance software, the extent to which the
structuring is fully outsourced, and others.43
The Commission incurs costs to develop taxonomies and schemas for new structured
disclosures and to set up the infrastructure for structured data intake, validation,
publication, and use. This includes the cost of updating the Commission’s Electronic
Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR) filing system, the integration of new
structured data into databases and internal applications, and the publication of structured
datasets. Such costs can vary based on the volume, complexity, and novelty of new
structured disclosure requirements. For example, rules which add a limited number of
newly tagged disclosures to already tagged disclosure forms will generally entail less
implementation time and cost than rules which add a significant number of newly tagged
disclosures to disclosure forms that were previously untagged. The Commission also incurs
costs to update taxonomies and schemas and the related EDGAR intake and validation
functions on a periodic basis.
6 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Summary of Enforcement Actions Resulting
from the Use or Analysis of the MachineReadable Data That the Commission Collects
The availability of machine-readable data that has been submitted to the Commission
has enabled staff in the Division of Enforcement (Enforcement) to perform more efficient
analyses of individual issuers’ disclosures and accounting practices and more sophisticated
analyses of disclosures and accounting practices across wide-ranging cross-sections of
issuers. Both types of analyses, together with traditional investigative tools, have resulted
in the filing of actions against issuers and related individuals alleging various types
of misconduct that violated the federal securities laws. Without the use or analysis of
machine-readable data, the alleged violations would have been significantly more difficult
to detect and pursue in a cost-effective or timely manner.
Enforcement utilized risk-based data analytics to uncover potential accounting-related
disclosure irregularities caused by, among other things, earnings management practices.
Machine-readable data enabled Enforcement staff to review the financial data of thousands
of public issuers in order to detect indicia of earnings management or other types of
financial misconduct. The initiative resulted in charges against six public companies and
several related individuals during the last five years for violations of the federal securities
laws for engaging in certain practices that gave the appearance of meeting or exceeding
consensus earnings-per-share (EPS) estimates.44
Enforcement used and analyzed machine-readable data during the underlying investigation
of one other action brought in 2023. In the course of performing background due
diligence, Enforcement staff reviewed financial statements and notes and was able to view
period-over-period changes more efficiently due to the machine-readability of the data.45
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 7
Analysis of How the Commission’s Staff
Uses the Machine-Readable Data That the
Commission Collects
CURRENT APPLICATIONS USED TO ANALYZE MACHINE-READABLE DATA
The Commission’s staff uses several applications to analyze machine-readable data. The
following applications are internally developed and available to Commission staff:
• Filer Profile provides instant access to certain key data points, such as financial data,
audit-related information, and other data for operating companies. It highlights
potentially high-risk data points or topic areas and facilitates further analysis via links
to data sources. Additionally, Filer Profile allows users to identify quickly specific
areas and topics of interest.
• Financial Statement Query Viewer (FSQV) offers users a convenient means of
comparing machine-readable financial statement data (including notes and schedules),
cover-page data, and certain executive compensation data for operating companies
and BDCs, as well as cover-page data and certain prospectus data for registered
closed-end funds and BDCs. FSQV facilitates comparative data analyses across
multiple filings and periods. In FSQV, users can query tagged narrative or numeric
disclosures. FSQV has various features, such as the ability to track a filer’s changes in
footnotes across reporting periods and share queries with other users.
• iView leverages the open-source, freely and publicly available Inline XBRL Viewer.
iView includes various filters and query capabilities, such as the identification of
disclosures with custom tags (i.e., filers creating tags instead of using standard tags)
and the sorting of machine-readable data by scale (e.g., amounts in thousands,
millions, or billions). iView also offers time-series charting and benchmark analyses
for numeric values and tracking changes in narrative disclosures.
CURRENT DIVISION USES OF MACHINE-READABLE DATA
Division of Corporation Finance (Corporation Finance) staff uses machine-readable data
in a variety of ways:
• Corporation Finance staff uses machine-readable data to help identify issuers that
are subject to the disclosure and submission requirements of, and potentially subject
to a trading prohibition under, the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act
8 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
(Commission-Identified Issuers).46 Specifically, the staff uses data in Forms 10-K, 20-F
and 40-F identifying the auditor (or auditors) who provided opinions related to the
financial statements presented in the issuer’s annual report, the location where the
auditor’s report has been issued, and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board
(PCAOB) ID Number(s) of the audit firm(s) or branch(es) providing the opinion(s).
• Corporation Finance staff uses several items of machine-readable data that appear
on the cover pages of registrants’ annual reports (Forms 10-K, 20-F, and 40-F) to
identify, count, sort, compare, and analyze registrants and their disclosures (e.g., to
identify more readily and accurately issuers that are listed on a specific exchange or
that have identified themselves as well-known seasoned issuers).
• Corporation Finance staff and Division of Economic and Risk Analysis (DERA) staff
review machine-readable financial statement information contained in filings under
Commission rules. In connection with these reviews, the staff has issued comment
letters to some individual issuers regarding the Inline XBRL tagging requirements. The
staff has also used its findings to publish observations on data quality and analyses of
custom tags. On September 7, 2023, Corporation Finance published a sample letter to
companies regarding their XBRL disclosures.47 The letter included sample comments
that, depending on the particular facts and circumstances, and type of filing under
review, Corporation Finance staff may issue to certain companies.
• Corporation Finance staff uses machine-readable data to make preliminary assessments
of compliance with the Commission’s pay-versus-performance disclosure requirements.
Division of Investment Management (Investment Management) staff also uses machinereadable data in a variety of ways:
• Investment Management staff uses machine-readable data for fund disclosures to
readily detect errors and inconsistencies within filings and to identify funds with
particular characteristics or disclosures, as well as funds with certain holdings,
exposures or risk parameters.48 The ability to scan across the industry for funds with
certain disclosures and characteristics enhances Investment Management’s disclosure
review program,49 informs staff recommendations for Commission rulemakings
and other policy initiatives, and supports the staff’s coordination with other
federal agencies.
• Structured data analysis may also better enable Investment Management staff to
identify fund and adviser data errors. For example, when Investment Management
staff identified common errors as a result of its use of structured data, the staff
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 9
published information highlighting common tagging issues to facilitate more
accurate fund disclosure.50 Investment Management staff also analyzes structured
data provided by investment advisers on Form ADV to scan across the industry for
advisers with certain disclosures and characteristics, inform staff recommendations
for Commission rulemakings and other policy initiatives, and support the staff’s
coordination with other federal agencies.
• Investment Management staff has also used machine-readable information regarding
fund holdings, among other data, to evaluate fund compliance with the federal
securities laws and to identify trends and risks faced by the fund industry. This
information can be shared with the Divisions of Examinations and/or Enforcement
when it suggests non-compliance with law or other heightened risks.
Other Divisions and Offices use machine-readable data in similar ways:
• Office of the Chief Accountant (OCA) staff uses the Commission’s analytical
applications, including FSQV, iView, and others, to perform searches based on key
words and XBRL tagging. OCA staff uses the output of these searches to conduct
research for accounting consultations, information gathering relevant to accounting
standard-setting projects and requests from other regulators, and the preparation of
responses to specific data requests regarding registrants’ application of accounting
principles. OCA staff additionally uses the outputs in researching the identification of
independent auditors concentrated in specific industries, identifying issuers subject to
the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, and supporting Enforcement on
auditor-related matters.
• The tagging requirements of filing fee-related information, adopted in 2021,51 will
enable EDGAR to determine automatically in many cases whether a registrant’s filing
fee calculations have been performed correctly. Filings that use the SEC’s optional
fee-tagging tool and test filings that do not pass specific validation tests will be
flagged before the related live filing is filed. This will allow filers to correct any filing
fee calculation errors without needing to wait for Commission staff to verify the
calculations manually, and without having to subsequently revise an already-filed
document and adjust any fees owed due to an erroneous calculation.
10 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Public Use of the Machine-Readable Data That
the Commission Collects
FDTA Section 5825(b)(2)(1) requires a report regarding the “public . . . use of machinereadable data for corporate disclosures.”52 Users of machine-readable corporate disclosures
include institutional investors,53 asset managers,54 issuers,55 financial analysts and research
firms,56 individual investors,57 data aggregators,58 the financial press,59 other regulators,60
and academics.61 For example, academic studies indicate that the implementation of XBRL
data requirements appears to be correlated with increased forecast accuracy by financial
analysts.62 Also, financial academics have used XBRL data to study topics such as financial
reporting complexity and dual-class voting structures.63 Further, staff members of the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) have used XBRL data to complete more
than 200 research projects over the past several years.64 Public users retrieve XBRL data by
downloading them from individual Commission filings and from aggregated datasets that
Commission staff compiles from individual Commission filings and makes available on the
Commission’s website.65
Financial analysts and press also use data from Commission filings that are in a custom
XML, such as data from Form 13F (quarterly equity holdings reports filed by large
institutional investment managers).66 For example, since August 2022 (when the Form
13F datasets first became available), there have been over 1,894,000 Form 13F dataset
downloads.67
Conclusion
The FDTA’s directives coincide with internal Commission and staff efforts68 to improve the
management and use of data across the agency, consistent with other statutory directives69
as well as overall strategic goals to work more efficiently.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 11
Appendix
FDTA Section 5825(b)(2)(A) requires an identification of which corporate disclosures
required under Securities Act Section 7 and Exchange Act Sections 13 and 14 are expressed
as machine-readable data and which are not. The Commission collects these disclosures
via the submission of forms and schedules through the EDGAR System. This Appendix
identifies the disclosures expressed in a machine-readable format on an individual form,
schedule, and statement basis.70 All other required disclosures in these filings are submitted
in a non-machine readable format. The Appendix also identifies the forms, schedules, or
statements that do not collect any machine-readable information. The Appendix does not
include other collections of information with machine-readable data that are not required
under these statutory provisions.
The Commission’s requirement to file information tagged in XBRL (Inline XBRL, except
where noted) is implemented primarily through Rule 405 of Regulation S-T. Rule 405
addresses the obligation to tag financial statements71 and disclosure regarding pay-versusperformance, action to recover erroneously awarded compensation, insider trading
arrangements and policies, policies and practices related to the grant of certain equity
awards close in time to the release of material non-public information, cybersecurity risk
management, strategy, and governance, and special purpose acquisition company (SPAC)
initial public offerings and business combination transactions with private companies. Rule
405 also addresses the obligation to tag certain fund prospectus, semi-annual report, and
annual report disclosures in Forms N-1A, N-2, N-3, N-4, N-6, N-8B-2, S-6, and N-CSR.
Rule 406 of Regulation S-T addresses the obligation to tag the cover page of Forms 10-K,
10-Q, 8-K, 20-F, and 40-F. Rule 408 of Regulation S-T addresses the obligation to tag the
filing fee exhibit for registration statements and related fee-bearing prospectus supplements
(excluding SF-1, SF-3, S-20, Schedule B, F-6, F-7, F-8 and F-80), fee-bearing Schedules
14A, 14C, 13E-3, 13E-4F, TO, and 14D-1F, and statements under Rule 13e-1 (phase-in
began in July 2024). The information in this Appendix is as of November 1, 2024.
12 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
CORPORATE DISCLOSURES IN FORMS AND SCHEDULES
UNDER SECURITIES ACT SECTION 7
Securities Act Registration Statements72
Form S-173
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K (disclosures for SPAC initial
public offerings and business combination transactions with private companies) must
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form S-374
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form S-475
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K (disclosures for SPAC initial
public offerings and business combination transactions with private companies) must
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form S-876
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form S-1177
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form F-178
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K (disclosures for SPAC initial
public offerings and business combination transactions with private companies) must
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 13
Form F-379
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form F-480
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K (disclosures for SPAC initial
public offerings and business combination transactions with private companies) must
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form F-1081
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form SF-1/SF-382 (registration forms used by certain types of asset-backed issuers)
• If an asset-backed issuer registrant’s asset pool includes residential mortgages,
commercial mortgages, automobile loans, automobile leases, debt securities or
re-securitizations of asset-backed securities, certain asset-level information83 is
required to be filed under cover of Form ABS-EE in XML format.84 The initial
asset-level disclosure filing is incorporated by reference into the relevant registration
statement filing or related prospectus filing.
• Filing fee exhibits are not required to be tagged, but may be tagged, in Inline XBRL.
No machine-readable data is required in Forms F-6, F-7, F-8 and F-80 (registration
statements available only to a registrant that is incorporated or organized under the laws
of Canada or any Canadian province or territory and meets certain other conditions).
No machine-readable data is required in Form S-20 (used to register standardized options
under the Securities Act if specified conditions are met) or in Schedule B (a registration
statement available only to a registrant that is a foreign government).
14 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
CORPORATE DISCLOSURES IN FORMS, SCHEDULES, AND
STATEMENTS UNDER EXCHANGE ACT SECTION 13
Form 10-K85
• Cover page information (e.g., registrant name, form type, filer size, public float, ticker
•
•
•
•
•
•
symbol) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
The identity of the auditor (or auditors) who have provided opinions related to the
financial statements presented in the registrant’s annual report, the location where the
auditor’s report has been issued, and the PCAOB ID Number(s) of the audit firm(s) or
branch(es) providing the opinion(s) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 106 of Regulation S-K (registrant’s cybersecurity risk
management, strategy, and governance) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 402(w) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s action to recover
erroneously awarded compensation) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 402(x) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s policies and
practices related to the grant of certain equity awards close in time to the release of
material non-public information) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 408(a) and (b)(1) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s insider
trading arrangements and policies) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form 10-Q86
• Cover page information (e.g., registrant name, form type, filer size, public float, ticker
symbol) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Item 408(a) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s insider trading
arrangements and policies) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form 11-K87
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL (beginning in 2025).
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 15
Form 20-F88
• Cover page information must be tagged in Inline XBRL (when Form 20-F is filed as
•
•
•
•
•
an annual report).
Disclosure required by Item 6.F (registrant’s action to recover erroneously awarded
compensation) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 16J (insider trading policies) must be tagged in Inline
XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 16K (registrant’s cybersecurity risk management, strategy,
and governance) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
The identity of the auditor (or auditors) who have provided opinions related to the
financial statements presented in the registrant’s annual report, the location where the
auditor’s report has been issued, and the PCAOB ID Number(s) of the audit firm(s) or
branch(es) providing the opinion(s) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form 40-F89
• Cover page information must be tagged in Inline XBRL (when Form 40-F is filed as
an annual report).
• Disclosure required by General Instruction B, paragraph (19) (registrant’s action to
recover erroneously awarded compensation) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• The identity of the auditor (or auditors) who have provided opinions related to the
financial statements presented in the registrant’s annual report, the location where the
auditor’s report has been issued, and the PCAOB ID Number(s) of the audit firm(s) or
branch(es) providing the opinion(s), must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form ABS-EE90
• The information in Form ABS-EE must be filed in XML format.
16 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Form 8-K91
• Cover page information (e.g., registrant name, form type, date of report) must be
tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Item 1.05 (disclosure of material cybersecurity incidents) must
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Item 1609(a) and (b) of Regulation S-K (disclosure related
to projections in connection with business combination transactions with private
companies) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL (when the form includes audited
annual financial statements that are a revised version of financial statements that
previously were filed with the Commission).
Form 6-K92
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL (when the form includes audited
annual financial statements that are a revised version of financial statements that
previously were filed with the Commission, or current interim financial statements
are included pursuant to the nine-month updating requirement of Item 8.A.5 of
Form 20-F).
Form SD93
• Information included in the Resource Extraction Issuer Disclosure Report (Exhibit
2.01) must be filed in XBRL.
Form 10-D94
• ABS issuers generally are required to file standard Exchange Act filings, including
Forms 10-K and 8-K. Additionally, ABS issuers are required to file ongoing reports
(typically monthly) on Form 10-D, which include the distribution report sent to
the holders of the ABS. If the issuer’s asset pool includes residential mortgages,
commercial mortgages, automobile loans, automobile leases, debt securities or
re-securitizations of asset-backed securities, Form 10-D must also incorporate by
reference the current asset-level disclosure filing on Form ABS-EE, which must be filed
in XML format.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 17
Schedules 13D and 13G95
• The information in Schedules 13D and 13G (other than the exhibits to those
schedules) must be filed in XML format.
Schedules 13E-3 and 13E-4F and Statements under Rule 13e-196
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
No machine-readable data is required in Form 18-K (annual report form used by foreign
governments or political subdivisions of foreign governments with securities listed on a
United States exchange).
Exchange Act Section 13(n) requires Security-Based Swap Data Repositories to file
registration statements (Form SDR). Commission Rules 13n-1(b) and 13n-11(f)(5) require
entities to file Form SDR and all amendments “electronically in a tagged data format.”
The Commission has stated that for a period of four years following Regulation SBSR’s
Compliance Date 1, “an entity submitting an application to register would not need to
comply with the requirement in Rule 13n-1(b) and Rule 13n-11(f)(5) to file Form SDR and
all amendments ‘electronically in a tagged data format’ but instead would be able to submit
such documents to the Commission electronically as portable document format (PDF) files,
consistent with the CFTC SDR application procedures under Part 49.3(a)(1).775.”97
CORPORATE DISCLOSURES IN SCHEDULES UNDER EXCHANGE ACT SECTION 14
Schedules 14A/14C98
• Disclosure required by Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K (pay versus performance) must
•
•
•
•
•
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 402(w) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s action to recover
erroneously awarded compensation) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 402(x) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s policies and
practices related to the grant of certain equity awards close in time to the release of
material non-public information) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 408(b)(1) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s insider trading
arrangements and policies) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K (disclosures for SPAC initial
public offerings and business combination transactions with private companies) must
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
18 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Schedule TO99
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Subpart 1600 of Regulation S-K (disclosures for SPAC initial
public offerings and business combination transactions with private companies) must
be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Schedule 14D-1F100
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
No machine-readable data is required in Schedules 14D-9, 14D-9F, or 14N.
FUND STRUCTURED DATA REQUIREMENTS
Specific forms govern the disclosures made by mutual funds, exchange-traded funds
(ETFs), money market funds, variable and certain non-variable insurance products, closedend funds and BDCs (together, “funds”). Funds are subject to a number of disclosure
requirements, several of which are required to be machine-readable. Institutional investment
managers are also required to periodically disclose certain holdings. The list below provides
a complete list of such machine-readable disclosure requirements for these entities.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 19
List of Machine-Readable Fund Disclosures under Securities Act Section 7 and
Exchange Act Sections 13 and 14
FUND DISCLOSURES IN FORMS UNDER SECURITIES ACT SECTION 7
Securities Act Registration Statements
Form N-1A101
• Items 2 through 4 of Form N-1A must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Mutual funds and
ETFs are required to tag their investment objectives including how terms used in fund
names are defined, fee tables, principal strategies, principal risks, and performance
information.)
Form N-2102
• Cover page information of Form N-2 (e.g., registrant name, form type, approximate
date of proposed public offering) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Items 3.1, 4.3, 8.2.b, 8.2.d, 8.3.a, 8.3.b, 8.5.b, 8.5.c, 8.5.e, 10.1.a-d, 10.2.a-c, 10.2.e,
10.3, and 10.5 of Form N-2 must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Closed-end funds and
BDCs are required to tag their fee table, senior securities table, investment objectives
and policies including how terms used in fund names are defined, risk factors, share
price data, and capital stock, long-term debt and other securities. This information
may be tagged in the prospectus or in periodic reports.)
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Closed-end funds that are not
interval funds are required to tag their filing fee exhibits.)
Form N-3103
• Items 2, 4, 5, 11, 18, and 19 of Form N-3 for contracts available to new investors
must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Variable insurance contracts are required to tag
their key information table, fee table, principal risks, information about benefits, and
investment options.)
Form N-4104
• Items 2(b)(2), 2(d), 3, 4, 5, 6(a) (instruction), 6(d), 6(e), 7(e), 10, 17, 26(c), and 31A
of Form N-4 for contracts available to new investors must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
(All filers are required to tag the key information table, fee table, principal risks,
information about benefits, whether the filer is relying on an exception from Exchange
Act reporting, and investment options. Issuers of relevant non-variable annuities
20 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
must also tag specified portions of the prospectus that provide information about the
annuities’ features, census-type information about the annuities, historical limits on
returns, and information about changes in and disagreements with accountants.)
Form N-6105
• Items 2, 4, 5, 10, 11, and 18 of Form N-6 for contracts available to new investors
must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Variable insurance contracts are required to tag
their key information table, fee table, principal risks, information about benefits, and
investment options.)
Form N-14106
• Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Closed-end funds that are not
interval funds are required to tag their filing fee exhibits.)
Forms N-8B-2 and S-6107
• Information provided in response to Instruction 2 to Item 11 of Form N-8B-2
must be tagged in Inline XBRL. Form S-6 incorporates the disclosure and tagging
requirements of Form N-8B-2. (Unit investment trusts registering on Forms N-8B-2
and S-6 are required to tag how terms used in fund names are defined.)
No machine-readable data is required in Form N-5.
FUND DISCLOSURES IN FORMS UNDER EXCHANGE ACT SECTION 13
Form N-CSR108
• Item 27A of Form N-1A is required to be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Mutual funds and
ETFs are required to tag their shareholder reports, which includes fee, performance,
holdings, material changes and other specified fund information.)
• Items 3.1, 4.3, 8.2.b, 8.2.d, 8.3.a, 8.3.b, 8.5.b, 8.5.c, 8.5.e, 10.1.a-d, 10.2.a-c, 10.2.e,
10.3, and 10.5 of Form N-2 must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Closed-end funds
are required to tag their fee table, senior securities table, investment objectives and
policies, risk factors, share price data, and capital stock, long-term debt and other
securities. This information may be tagged in the N-CSR filing to the extent this
information is included.)
• Item 18 of Form N-CSR is required to be tagged in Inline XBRL. (Internally managed
closed-end funds are required to tag disclosure related to the recovery of erroneously
awarded compensation.)
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 21
Form N-CEN109
• Form N-CEN must be filed in XML format. (Form N-CEN provides annual census
information for nearly all registered investment companies. The filing of Form
N-CEN satisfies Exchange Act reporting obligations for unit investment trusts.)
Form 10-K (Only for BDCs)110
• Cover page information (e.g., registrant name, form type, filer size, public float, ticker
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
symbol) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Items 3.1, 4.3, 8.2.b, 8.2.d, 8.3.a, 8.3.b, 8.5.b, 8.5.c, 8.5.e, 10.1.a-d, 10.2.a-c, 10.2.e,
10.3, and 10.5 of Form N-2 must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (BDCs are required
to tag their fee table, senior securities table, investment objectives and policies, risk
factors, share price data, and capital stock, long-term debt and other securities. This
information may be tagged in the 10-K to the extent this information is included in
the Exchange Act report.)
Financial statements and schedules listing various BDC investments must be tagged in
Inline XBRL.
The identity of the auditor (or auditors) who have provided opinions related to the
financial statements presented in the registrant’s annual report, the location where the
auditor’s report has been issued, and the PCAOB ID Number(s) of the audit firm(s) or
branch(es) providing the opinion(s) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 106 of Regulation S-K (registrant’s cybersecurity risk
management, strategy, and governance) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 402(w) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s action to recover
erroneously awarded compensation) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 402(x) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s policies and
practices related to the grant of certain equity awards close in time to the release of
material non-public information) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Disclosure required by Item 408(a) and 408(b)(1) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s
insider trading arrangements and policies) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
22 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Form 10-Q (Only for BDCs)111
• Cover page information (e.g., registrant name, form type, filer size, public float, ticker
symbol) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Items 3.1, 4.3, 8.2.b, 8.2.d, 8.3.a, 8.3.b, 8.5.b, 8.5.c, 8.5.e, 10.1.a-d, 10.2.a-c, 10.2.e,
10.3, and 10.5 of Form N-2 must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (BDCs are required
to tag their fee table, senior securities table, investment objectives and policies, risk
factors, share price data, and capital stock, long-term debt and other securities. This
information may be tagged in the 10-Q to the extent this information is updated in
the Exchange Act report.)
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Disclosure required by Item 408(a) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s insider trading
arrangements and policies) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form 8-K (Only for BDCs and is optional for registered closed-end funds)112
• Cover page information (e.g., registrant name, form type, date of report) must be
tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Items 3.1, 4.3, 8.2.b, 8.2.d, 8.3.a, 8.3.b, 8.5.b, 8.5.c, 8.5.e, 10.1.a-d, 10.2.a-c, 10.2.e,
10.3, and 10.5 of Form N-2 must be tagged in Inline XBRL. (BDCs are required
to tag their fee table, senior securities table, investment objectives and policies, risk
factors, share price data, and capital stock, long-term debt and other securities. This
information may be tagged in the 8-K to the extent this information is updated in the
Exchange Act report.)
• Disclosure required by Item 1.05 of Form 8-K (disclosure of material cybersecurity
incidents) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
• Financial statements must be tagged in Inline XBRL (when the form includes audited
annual financial statements that are a revised version of financial statements that
previously were filed with the Commission).
Form 13F113
• Form 13F must be filed in XML format. (Form 13F is a quarterly report of certain
holdings filed by institutional investment managers that manage equity securities,
generally exchange-listed, with a value of $100 million or more. This includes
investment advisers, banks, insurance companies, broker-dealers, pension funds, and
corporations.)
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 23
Form SHO114
• Form SHO must be filed in XML format. (Form SHO is a monthly report of certain
short position data and short activity data for certain equity securities that is required
of institutional investment managers that meet certain reporting thresholds.)
FUND DISCLOSURES IN SCHEDULES AND FORMS UNDER
EXCHANGE ACT SECTION 14
Schedules 14A/14C115
• For BDCs, disclosure required by Item 402(v) of Regulation S-K (pay versus
•
•
•
•
performance) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
For BDCs, disclosure required by Item 402(w) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s action
to recover erroneously awarded compensation) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
For BDCs, disclosure required by Item 402(x) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s policies
and practices related to the grant of certain equity awards close in time to the release
of material non-public information) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
For BDCs, disclosure required by Item 408(b)(1) of Regulation S-K (registrant’s
insider trading arrangements and policies) must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Filing fee exhibits must be tagged in Inline XBRL.
Form N-PX116
• Form N-PX must be filed in XML format. (Form N-PX is used by registered
management investment companies (other than SBICs) and institutional investment
managers to file annual reports that contain their proxy voting records. The filing of
Form N-PX satisfies Exchange Act reporting obligations for institutional investment
managers.)
24 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Endnotes
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
See James M. Inhofe National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2023, P.L. 117-263 (2022).
See FDTA Section 5825(b).
See FDTA Section 5825(c) (“Beginning on the date that is 7 years after the date of enactment of this Act, this
section shall have no force or effect.”).
See FDTA Section 5825(b)(2). A separate provision of the FDTA indicates that the term “machine-readable,”
when used with respect to data, means data in a format that can be easily processed by a computer without
human intervention while ensuring no semantic meaning is lost. See FDTA Section 5811 (providing that the
term “machine-readable” shall have the meaning given in 44 U.S.C. 3502(18)).
15 U.S.C. 77g.
15 U.S.C. 78m.
15 U.S.C. 78n.
See Interactive Data to Improve Financial Reporting, Release No. 33-9002 (Jan. 30, 2009) (adopting release)
[74 FR 6776 (Feb. 9, 2009)] (“Interactive Data to Improve Financial Reporting”) as corrected by Interactive
Data to Improve Financial Reporting, Release No. 33-9002A [74 FR 15666 (Apr. 7, 2009)].
See Interactive Data to Improve Financial Reporting, supra note 8, at 6778 (describing how financial
reporting in XBRL involves the use of standard tags that cover “financial concepts that can be read and
understood by software applications”). See also XBRL: What Is It? Why the FASB? Who Uses It?, FASB.
org (Apr. 1, 2021), available at https://www.fasb.org/Page/ShowPdf?path=FASB_in_Focus--XBRL_(4-21).pdf
(“[XBRL] is the open international standard for digital business reporting. XBRL is used to deliver humanreadable financial statements in a machine-readable, structured data format.”).
See Interactive Data for Mutual Fund Risk/Return Summary, Release No. 33-9006 (Feb. 11, 2009) (adopting
release) [74 FR 7748 (Feb. 19, 2009)] as corrected by Interactive Data for Mutual Fund Risk/Return
Summary; Correction, Release No. 33-9006A [74 FR 21255 (May 7, 2009)].
See Inline XBRL Filing of Tagged Data, Release No. 33-10514 (Jun. 28, 2018) (adopting release) [83 FR
40846 (Aug. 16, 2018)] (“Inline XBRL Filing of Tagged Data Adopting Release”).
See Inline XBRL Filing of Tagged Data Adopting Release, supra note 11, at Section III.A.1.a. Structured data
is data that is tagged to make it machine-readable.
FAST Act Modernization and Simplification of Regulation S-K, Release No. 33-10618 (Mar. 20, 2019)
(adopting release) [84 FR 12674 (Apr. 2, 2019)] as corrected by FAST Act Modernization and Simplification
of Regulation S-K; Correction, Release No. 33-10618A [84 FR 39966 (Aug. 13, 2019)].
See Filing Fee Disclosure and Payment Methods Modernization, Release No. 33-10997 (Oct. 13, 2021)
(adopting release) [86 FR 70166 (Dec. 9, 2021)] (“Filing Fee Disclosure and Payment Methods Modernization
Adopting Release”).
See Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act Disclosure, Release No. 34-93701 (Dec. 2, 2021) (adopting
release) [86 FR 70027 (Dec. 9, 2021)].
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 25
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
See, e.g., Special Purpose Acquisition Companies, Shell Companies, and Projections, Release No. 33-11265
(Jan. 24, 2024) [89 FR 14158 (Feb. 26, 2024)]; Modernization of Beneficial Ownership Reporting, Release
No. 33-11253 (Oct. 10, 2023) [88 FR 76896 (Nov. 7, 2023)] (“Beneficial Ownership Reporting Adopting
Release”); Investment Company Names, Release No. 33-11238 (Sep. 20, 2023) [88 FR 70436 (Oct. 11,
2023)]; Cybersecurity Risk Management, Strategy, Governance, and Incident Disclosure, Release No. 3311216 (Jul. 26, 2023) [88 FR 51896 (Aug. 4, 2023)]; Money Market Fund Reforms, Release No. 33-11211
(Jul. 12, 2023) [88 FR 51404 (Aug. 3, 2023) (“Money Market Fund Reform Adopting Release”]; Insider
Trading Arrangements and Related Disclosures, Release No. 33-11138 (Dec. 14, 2022) [87 FR 80362
(Dec. 29, 2022)]; Enhanced Reporting of Proxy Votes by Registered Management Investment Companies;
Reporting of Executive Compensation Votes by Institutional Investment Managers, Release No. 33-11131
(Nov. 2, 2022) [87 FR 78770 (Dec. 22, 2022)] (“Enhanced Reporting of Proxy Votes Adopting Release”);
Short Position and Short Activity Reporting by Institutional Investment Managers, Release No. 34-98738
(Oct. 13, 2023) [88 FR 75100 (Nov. 1, 2023)] (“Short Reporting Adopting Release”); Registration for IndexLinked Annuities; Amendments to Form N-4 for Index-Linked and Variable Annuities, Release No. IC-35273
(July 1, 2024) [89 FR 59978 (July 24, 2024)]; see also Standard Taxonomies, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (last
modified Sept. 25, 2024), available at https://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/edgartaxonomies (providing information
on the current taxonomies supported by the Commission’s Interactive Data program).
On April 4, 2024, the Commission issued an order staying the climate-related disclosure rules it adopted
on March 6, 2024. This delayed the effective date of those rules pending the completion of judicial review
of consolidated Eighth Circuit petitions. See Order Issuing Stay, Release No. 34-11280 (Apr. 4, 2024) [89
FR 25804 (Apr. 12, 2024)]; see also The Enhancement and Standardization of Climate-Related Disclosures
for Investors, Release No. 33-11275 (Mar. 6, 2024) (adopting release) [89 FR 21668 (Mar. 28, 2024)]
(“Climate Risk Disclosure Rule”). Consequently, the Climate Risk Disclosure Rule’s structured data tagging
requirements are not in effect and will not go into effect unless or until the Commission publishes a notice of a
new effective date.
See, e.g., Short Reporting Adopting Release, supra note 17 (Section II.A.4.b discussing decision to adopt
custom XML as Form SHO reporting language); Beneficial Ownership Reporting Adopting Release, supra
note 16 (Section II.F discussing decision to adopt custom XML as Schedule 13D and Schedule 13G reporting
language); Money Market Fund Reform Adopting Release, supra note 16 (Section II.F.1.b discussing decision
to adopt custom XML as Form N-CR reporting language); Enhanced Reporting of Proxy Votes Adopting
Release, supra note 16 (Section II.G. discussing decision to adopt custom XML as Form N-PX reporting
data language); Electronic Submission of Orders Under the Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act,
Confidential Treatment Requests for Filings on Form 13F, and Form ADV-NR; Amendments to Form 13F,
Release No. 34-95148 [87 FR 38943 (Jun. 30, 2022)] (Section IV.B. stating that fund managers submit Form
13F on EDGAR in a custom XML structured data language created specifically for Form 13F).
See Current EDGAR Technical Specifications, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (last modified Sept. 17, 2024), available
at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/filer-information/current-edgar-technical-specifications.
See EDGAR Filer Manual, Volume II, Ch. 8-9 (Version 71, Sept. 16, 2024), Sec. & Exch. Comm’n, available
at https://www.sec.gov/edgar/filermanual.
Including Form SDR discussed in the Appendix at A-5.
See Registration for Index-Linked Annuities; Amendments to Form N-4 for Index-Linked and Variable
Annuities, Release No. IC-35273 (July 1, 2024) [89 FR 59978 (July 24, 2024)].
See Financial Data Transparency Act Joint Data Standards, Release No. 33-11295 (Aug. 2, 2024) [89 FR
67890 (Aug. 22, 2024)].
See FDTA Section 5825(b).
26 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
24
25
26
27
28
See, e.g., Xin Luo et al., Initial Evidence on the Market Impact of the iXBRL Adoption, 37 Acct. Horizons
143 (2023); Yuyun Huang et al., Information Processing Costs and Stock Price Informativeness: Evidence
from the XBRL Mandate, 46 Austl. J. Mgmt. 110 (2021) (“Information Processing Costs”); Ju-Chun Yen
& Tawei Wang, The Association Between XBRL Adoption and Market Reactions to Earnings Surprises, 29
J. Info. Sys. 51 (2015); Yi Dong et al., Does Information-Processing Cost Affect Firm-Specific Information
Acquisition? Evidence from XBRL Adoption, 51 J. Fin. & Quantitative Analysis 435 (2016); Yanan Zhang
et al., XBRL Adoption and Expected Crash Risk, 38 J. Acct. & Pub. Pol’y 31 (2019); Jap Efendi et al., Do
XBRL Filings Enhance Informational Efficiency? Early Evidence from Post-earnings Announcement Drift, 67
J. Bus. Rsch. 1099 (2014). See also J. Efrim Boritz & Won Gyun No, How Significant Are the Differences
in Financial Data Provided by Key Data Sources? A Comparison of XBRL, Compustat, Yahoo! Finance,
and Google Finance, 34 J. Info. Sys. 47 (2020); Raunaq S. Pungaliya & Yanbo Wang, Machine Invasion:
Automation in Information Acquisition and the Cross-Section of Stock Returns, 64 J. Fin. Markets. (2023);
Marcin Jaskowski & Daniel Rettl, Information Acquisition Costs and Credit Spreads, 149 J. Banking Fin.
(2023).
See, e.g., Yuyun Huang et al., Information Processing Costs, supra note 25; Bing Li et al., The Impact of
XBRL Adoption on Local Bias: Evidence from Mandated US Filers, 39 J. Acct. & Pub. Pol’y 106767 (2020).
See also Jeong-Bon Kim et al., Information-Processing Costs and Breadth of Ownership, 36 Contemp.
Acct. Rsch. 2408 (2019); Nilabhra Bhattacharya et al., Leveling the Playing Field Between Large and
Small Institutions: Evidence from the SEC’s XBRL Mandate, 93 Acct. Rev. 51 (2018); but see Elizabeth
Blankespoor et al., Initial Evidence on the Market Impact of the XBRL Mandate, 19 Rev. Acct. Stud. 1468
(2014).
See, e.g., Andrew J. Felo et al., Can XBRL Detailed Tagging of Footnotes Improve Financial Analysts’
Information Environment? 28 Int’l. J. Acct. Info. Sys. 45 (2018) (“XBRL Detailed Tagging of Footnotes”);
Marcus Kirk et al., From Print to Practice: XBRL Extension Use and Analyst Forecast Properties (Aug.
18, 2016), available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2826159 (retrieved from SSRN
Elsevier database); Chunhui Liu et al., XBRL’s Impact on Analyst Forecast Behavior: An Empirical Study, 33
J. Acct. & Pub. Pol’y 69 (2014); but see Sherwood Lane Lambert et al., Analysts’ Forecasts Timeliness and
Accuracy Post-XBRL, 27 Int’l J. Acct. & Info. Mgmt. 151 (2019). See also Alastair Lawrence et al., Investor
Demand for Sell-Side Research, 92 Acct. Rev. 123 (2017); See also, e.g., N. Trentmann, “Companies Adjust
Earnings for Covid-19 Costs, But Are They Still a One-Time Expense?”, WALL ST. J. (2020) (citing an XBRL
research software provider as a source for the analysis described in the article); Bloomberg Lists BSE XBRL
Data, XBRL.ORG (Mar. 17, 2019),
See, e.g., Elizabeth Blankespoor, The Impact of Information Processing Costs on Firm Disclosure Choice:
Evidence from the XBRL Mandate, 57 J. Acct. Rsch. 919 (2019); Jeong-Bon Ki et al., Does XBRL Adoption
Constrain Earnings Management? Early Evidence from Mandated U.S. Filers, 36 Contemp. Acct. Rsch. 2610
(2019). See also Steve Yang et al., The Impact of XBRL on Financial Statement Structural Comparability,
in Network, Smart and Open: Three Keywords for Information Systems Innovation 193 (Rita Lamboglia
et al., ed. 2018); but see Sandip Dhole et al., Effects of the SEC’s XBRL Mandate on Financial Reporting
Comparability, 19 Int’l J. Acct. Info. Sys. 29 (2015).
See, e.g., Yuan George Shan & Indrit Troshani, Does XBRL Benefit Financial Statement Auditing? 54 J.
Comput. Info. Sys. 11 (2014) (finding XBRL adoption to be negatively associated with audit fees due to its
facilitation of the auditing process through enhancement of financial statement transparency); Hui Du & Kean
Wu, XBRL Mandate and Timeliness of Financial Reporting: Do XBRL Filings Take Longer? 15 J. Emerg.
Tech. Acct. 57 (2018) (finding decreased reporting lags for XBRL filings compared to non-XBRL filings from
accelerated and large accelerated filers, but not for non-accelerated filers, and postulating that accelerated and
large accelerated filers have updated their computer system to use a systemic accounting ecosystem); Keval
Amin et al., The Effect of the SEC’s XBRL Mandate on Audit Report Lags, 32 Acct. Horizons 1 (2018)
(finding decrease in audit report lags and audit fees following the mandatory adoption of XBRL, likely driven
at least in part by auditor efficiency gains).
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 27
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
See Wafa Sassi et al., The Impact of Mandatory Adoption of XBRL on Firm’s Stock Liquidity: A CrossCountry Study, 19 J. Fin. Reporting & Acct. 299 (2021); Chae-Won Ra & Ho-Young Lee, XBRL Adoption,
Information Asymmetry, Cost of Capital, and Reporting Lags, 10 iBusiness, 93 (2018); Syou-Ching Lai et al.,
23 XBRL Adoption and Cost of Debt, Int’l. J. Acct. & Info. Mgmt. 199 (2015); Tienshih Hsieh & Jean C.
Bedard, Impact of XBRL on Voluntary Adopters’ Financial Reporting Quality and Cost of Equity Capital, 15
J. Emerging Technologies in Acct. 45 (2018); Xin Cheng et al., How Does Information Processing Efficiency
Relate to Investment Efficiency? Evidence from XBRL Adoption, 35 J. Info. Sys. 1 (2021); Olivia Berkman,
XBRL: What are the Benefits, FEI Daily (Aug. 29, 2019), available at https://www.financialexecutives.org/
FEI-Daily/August-2019/XBRL-What-are-the-Benefits.aspx (“Berkman, XBRL Benefits”).
Specific examples of Commission staff usage of machine-readable disclosures are provided in subsequent
sections. Other Financial Stability Oversight Council member-agency staff use the Commission’s machinereadable data to inform their regulatory efforts. See, e.g., Samuel J. Hempel et al., Money Market Fund Repo
and the ON RRP Facility, FEDS Notes, Board of Governors of the Fed. Rsrv. Sys. (Dec. 15, 2023), available
at https://doi.org/10.17016/2380-7172.3412 (using custom XML Form N-MFP data to examine how money
market funds’ investments in the Fed’s overnight reverse repurchase facility impacted their lending to the
private repo market).
For example, the Negative Values validation rule can automatically check for instances where negative values
are reported for elements that must always be positive or zero. See Approved Validation Rules, XBRL US
(Aug. 2024), https://xbrl.us/data-quality/rules-guidance/; Negative Values, XBRL US (last modified Jun. 27,
2024), https://xbrl.us/data-rule/dqc_0015/. See also EDGAR XBRL Validation Errors, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n
(last modified Sept. 16, 2024), https://www.sec.gov/structureddata/edgarvalidationerrors; EDGAR XBRL
Validation Warnings, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (last modified Sept. 16, 2024), https://www.sec.gov/page/osd_
edgarvalidationwarnings.
Inline XBRL documents are both human-readable and machine-readable. Custom XML documents are
rendered into human-readable versions on the Commission’s public-facing website, https://www.sec.gov/edgar/
searchedgar/companysearch.
See DERA Data Library, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (last modified Sept. 9, 2024), https://www.sec.gov/dera/
data; Structured Disclosure RSS Feeds, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (last modified Jun. 25, 2024), https://www.sec.
gov/structureddata/rss-feeds-submitted-filings; Application Programming Interfaces, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n
(last modified Nov. 9, 2022), https://www.sec.gov/edgar/sec-api-documentation; see infra Public Use of the
Machine-Readable Data That the Commission Collects (describing other data users).
See AICPA, XBRL Cost Study Reveals Lower Than Expected Filing Costs (2023), available at https://
www.aicpa-cima.com/professional-insights/download/xbrl-cost-study-reveals-lower-than-expected-filingcosts (Republishing a XBRL US and AICPA 2018 study that found a 45% decline in XBRL costs for small
companies from 2014 to 2017).
See F. Guo, X. Luo, P. R. Wheeler, L. Yang, X. Zhao & Y. Zhang, Enterprise Resource Planning Systems and
XBRL Reporting Quality, 35 J. Info. Sys. 77-106 (2021).
See AICPA, XBRL Cost Study Reveals Lower Than Expected Filing Costs, supra note 35. While the survey
did not specify the particular filings covered, XBRL filing requirements for reporting companies at the time
of the sample included the XBRL (non-Inline) tagging of quarterly and annual financial statements filed in
periodic reports (e.g., Forms 10-Q, 10-K, and 20-F) and registration statements (e.g., Forms S-1, S-3, and F-1)
that included a price or price range and were filed after the first 10-Q, 20-F, or 40-F following the company’s
initial public offering.
See letter from Nasdaq, Inc. (Mar. 21, 2019), available at https://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-26-18/s726185177722-183507.pdf, Request for Comment on Earnings Releases and Quarterly Reports, Release No. 3310588 [83 FR 65601 (Dec. 21, 2018)].
See, e.g., Electronic Submission of Certain Material Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; Amendments
Regarding the FOCUS Report, Release No. 33-11176 (Mar. 22, 2023) (proposing release) [88 FR 23920 (Apr.
18, 2023)] (“Electronic Submission Proposing Release”) (observing a greater amount of tagged information in
filings from a population of Nasdaq-listed companies than in filings from a population of small companies).
See also Bok Baik et al., Organizational Complexity, Financial Reporting Complexity, and Firms’ Information
Environment, (Apr. 19, 2023), available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4413814
(retrieved from SSRN Elsevier database) (finding organization complexity, as measured by number of
subsidiaries and layers in the corporate hierarchy, influences financial reporting complexity and managers of
complex firms find it beneficial to ameliorate information asymmetries by increasing voluntary disclosure).
28 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
A “response” is a filing that requires Inline XBRL tagging; see Inline XBRL Filing of Tagged Data Adopting
Release, supra note 11, at 40869. These figures represent the costs of tagging financial statements in Inline
XBRL (not the costs of switching from XBRL to Inline XBRL) for operating companies subject to financial
statement tagging requirements.
See OMB, Supporting Statement for the Paperwork Reduction Act Information Collection Submission for
Interactive Data: OMB Control Number 3235–0645, Attachment A (Jun. 6, 2022), available at https://omb.
report/icr/202203-3235-001/doc/122014900.
See Electronic Submission Proposing Release, supra note 39, at 23986. Some compliance service providers
publicly disclose or advertise pricing information on their websites. See, e.g., EDGAR Filing Services,
Advanced Comp. Innovations, Inc., http://www.edgar-services.com/ (last visited Oct. 12, 2023); CompSci
Resources, https://www.compsciresources.com/pricing (last visited Oct. 12, 2023). Other compliance service
providers do not publicly disclose pricing information on their websites, instead requiring individual pricing
consultations.
See Electronic Submission Proposing Release, supra note 39, at 23986.
The six EPS cases covered a wide variety of practices that impacted EPS. See In re Interface, Inc., Release Nos.
33-10854, 34-90018 (Sep. 28, 2020) (settled action) (making unsupported manual accounting adjustments
that boosted the company’s income); In re Fulton Fin. Corp., Release No. 34-90017 (Sep. 28, 2020) (settled
action) (reporting valuation allowances in a manner that was at odds with the valuation methodologies
described in the same filings); In re Healthcare Services Grp., Inc., Release Nos. 33-10967, 34-92735 (Aug.
21, 2021) (settled action) (failing to timely accrue and disclose material loss contingencies related to private
litigation); In re Rollins Inc., Release Nos. 33-11052, 34-94742 (Apr. 18, 2022) (settled action) (making
unsupported reductions in accounting reserves); Securities and Exchange Commission v. Hutchison, No. 1:22cv-02296 (D.D.C. filed Aug. 3, 2022) (litigated action) (alleging that the defendant engaged in the practice of
urging subordinates to ship future orders ahead of schedule and report the revenue early, among other things,
and failed to disclose this practice to investors) and In re Surgalign Holdings, Inc., Release No. 33-11088
(Aug. 3, 2022) (settled action); and In re Gentex Corp., Release No. 34-96819 (Feb. 7, 2023) (settled action)
(reducing an accrual for a performance-based bonus program, among other things).
See In re Grupo Aval Acciones y Valores S.A. and Corporación Financiera Colombiana S.A., Release No. 3498103 (Aug. 10, 2023) (settled action) (finding that Grupo Aval Acciones y Valores S.A (“Grupo Aval”) and
Corporación Financiera Colombiana S.A (“Corficolombiana”) violated the internal accounting controls and
books and records provisions of the federal securities laws and that Corficolombiana violated the antibribery
provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act).
Information and lists of Commission-Identified Issuers under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable
Act are available on the Commission’s website at https://www.sec.gov/hfcaa.
See Division of Corporation Finance, Sample Letter to Companies Regarding Their XBRL Disclosures, Sec.
& Exch. Comm’n (Sep. 7, 2023), https://www.sec.gov/corpfin/sample-letter-companies-regarding-their-xbrldisclosures.
See Division of Investment Management, Accounting and Disclosure Information 2019-09, Performance
and Fee Issues, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n (Oct. 2, 2019) (“Investment Management, Accounting and Disclosure
Information 2019-09”), https://www.sec.gov/investment/accounting-and-disclosure-information/performance/
adi-2019-09-performance-and-fee-issues.
The disclosure review program refers to the staff’s review of fund registration statements, proxy materials,
shareholder reports and other disclosures.
See Investment Management, Accounting and Disclosure Information 2019-09, supra note 49.
See Filing Fee Disclosure and Payment Methods Modernization Adopting Release, supra note 14. The
Commission opted to phase in the structuring requirements over time but otherwise require compliance upon
effectiveness of the rules. For large accelerated filers, the compliance date for the structuring requirements is
for filings submitted on or after July 31, 2024. For accelerated filers, certain investment companies that file
registration statements on Forms N-2 and N-14, and all other filers, the compliance date for the structuring
requirements is for filings submitted on or after July 31, 2025. Filers are now permitted to file the structured
information before their applicable compliance dates. See id. at Section II.A.6.
See FDTA Section 5825.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 29
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
See, e.g., Who’s Using XBRL Data and Why: Case Studies, Morgan Stanley Research (Nov. 2017), available
at https://www.calcbench.com/home/pdf?name=MS%20XBRL%20Case%20Study%2011-1-2017.pdf.
See, e.g., 2019 Pension Review First Take: Flat to Down, Goldman Sachs Asset Management (2020) (an
example of asset manager use of XBRL data), available at https://www.gsam.com/content/dam/gsam/pdfs/
common/en/public/articles/2020/2019_Pension_First_Take.pdf?sa=n&rd=n (citing an XBRL research software
provider as a data source).
See Berkman, XBRL Benefits, supra note 30.
See, e.g., How Third Party Data Providers Use Structured Data and Why; XBRL US, Financial Fundamentals
Analysis – What Analysts Can Do with Structured Data, XBRL US (Mar. 2016), available at https://xbrl.us/
events/analyst-webinar-160323/ (“How Third Party Data Providers Use Structured Data and Why”).
See, e.g., Paulien Zhu, The Effect of XBRL on Insider Trading Profitability, Erasmus Univeriteit Rotterdam
(2018) (noting a decrease in the information gap between insiders and individual investors associated with
XBRL requirements).
See How Third Party Data Providers Use Structured Data and Why, supra note 57.
See, e.g., M. Leonhardt, A Wave of Corporate Refinancings is Coming. This Time, It Won’t Lead to Layoffs,
Barron’s (Dec. 28, 2023), available at https://www.barrons.com/articles/corporaterefinancings-interest-rateslayoffs-job-market-unemployment-ratenterest-rates-layoffs-oo-a-wave-of-corporate-refinancings-is-comingthis-time-it-wont-lead-to-layoffs-46d3405a (citing an XBRL research software provider as a data source).
See Investment Management, Accounting and Disclosure Information 2019-09, supra note 49.
See, e.g., R. Hoitash & U. Hoitash, Measuring Accounting Reporting Complexity with XBRL, 93 Accounting
Review 259-287 (2018) (“Hoitash & Hoitash, Measuring Accounting Reporting Complexity”).
See XBRL Detailed Tagging of Footnotes (and related citations), supra note 27.
See Hoitash & Hoitash, Measuring Accounting Reporting Complexity, supra note 62; Rimona Palas et al.,
Does Wedge Size Matter? Financial Reporting Quality and Effective Regulation of Dual-class Firms. Fin. Res.
Letters 54 (2023) (using XBRL financial statement data to assess reporting patterns in firms with dual-class
share structures).
XBRL: What Is It? Why the FASB? Who Uses It?, FASB.org, available at https://www.fasb.org/page/
PageContent?pageId=/staticpages/what-is-xbrl.html&isstaticpage=true.
For example, the Commission’s quarterly XBRL datasets for mutual fund prospectus risk/return summaries
garnered over 28,000 page views from over 10,000 unique visitors from September 2023 to September 2024,
according to a Splunk query of the Commission’s XBRL dataset webpage, which is available at https://www.
sec.gov/data-research/sec-markets-data/mutual-fund-prospectus-riskreturn-summary-data-sets.
See, e.g., Sonali Basak, The Really, Really Rich Are Playing It Safe, Bloomberg.com (Feb. 17, 2023), available
at https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2023-02-17/how-billionaires-invested-in-the-fourthquarter-of-2022 (example of news media article analyzing 13F data); Travis A. Dyer, The Demand for Public
Information by Local and Non-local Investors: Evidence from Investor-Level Data, 72 J. Acct. & Econ. 1
(Aug. 2021); Ron Kaniel & Pingle Wang, Unmasking Mutual Fund Use During COVID-19 Crisis, 49 Covid
Econ. 172 (Sept. 18, 2020) (example of academic research using custom XML dataset from the Commission’s
Form N-PORT).
Based on Splunk results for Form 13F data set downloads between August 1, 2022, and Sept. 30, 2024,
accessed on Oct. 8, 2024.
See, e.g., Press Release, Sec. & Exch. Comm’n, SEC Publishes FY22-26 Strategic Plan (Nov. 23, 2022),
available at https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-210. See also SEC Office of the Chief Data Officer,
Data Strategy For Fiscal Years 2022-2026 (Jan. 26, 2023), available at https://www.sec.gov/files/2022-ocdodata-strategy-fy2022-2026.pdf; SEC and Markets Data (includes structured datasets extracted from individual
XML submissions), available at https://www.sec.gov/data-research/sec-markets-data; Investment Management
Data (includes Commission staff reports with downloadable statistics), available at https://www.sec.gov/dataresearch/investment-management-data.
See, e.g., Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018, Pub. L. 115-435 (Jan. 14, 2019). Title II
of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018, also known as the Open, Public, Electronic,
and Necessary (OPEN) Government Data Act, sets forth a framework for managing government information
as a strategic asset at each stage of the information’s life cycle to promote accessibility and usability.
30 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
Filers are not yet required to provide some of the disclosures and structured data tags described in this
Appendix.
As used in this report, the reference to financial statements means the face of the financial statements and
accompanying footnotes. The face of the financial statements refers to the statement of financial position
(balance sheet), income statement, statement of comprehensive income, statement of cash flows, and statement
of owners’ equity, as required by Commission regulations. References to the financial statements as required
for interactive data reporting include any required schedules to the financial statements, unless otherwise
stated.
Financial statements in Securities Act registration statements are required to be tagged when physically
included (i.e., not incorporated by reference) unless the registration statement is for an initial public offering
(IPO), in which case, the financial statements are not required to be tagged. See Rule 601(b)(101)(i)(A) and
paragraph (101)(a)(i) of Part II - Information Not Required to be Delivered to Offerees or Purchasers of Form
F-10.
A reference copy of Form S-1 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/forms-1.pdf.
A reference copy of Form S-3 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/forms-3.pdf.
A reference copy of Form S-4 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/forms-4.pdf.
A reference copy of Form S-8 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/forms-8.pdf.
A reference copy of Form S-11 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/forms-11.pdf.
A reference copy of Form F-1 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formf-1.pdf.
A reference copy of Form F-3 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formf-3.pdf.
A reference copy of Form F-4 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formf-4.pdf.
A reference copy of Form F-10 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formf-10.pdf.
A reference copy of Form SF-1 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formsf-1.pdf; A reference copy of Form
SF-3 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formsf-3.pdf.
See Asset-Backed Securities Disclosure and Registration, Release No. 33-9638 (Sep. 4, 2014) (adopting
release) [79 FR 57183 (Sep. 24, 2014)] at Section III. The asset-level item requirements are located in 17 CFR
229.1125. The required asset-level information includes: data points about the payment stream related to a
particular asset, such as the contractual terms, scheduled payment amounts, basis for interest rate calculations
and whether and how payment terms change over time; data points that allow for an analysis of the collateral
related to the asset, such as the geographic location of the property, property valuation data and loan-to-value
(“LTV”) ratio; data points about the performance of each asset over time, for example, data about whether an
obligor is making payments as scheduled; and data points about the loss mitigation efforts by the servicer to
collect amounts past due and the losses that may be passed on to the investors.
The Commission maintains an XML technical specification that includes rules for validation and permitted
response codes for each XML tag. See EDGAR ABS XML Technical Specification (Version 3.1) (Sept. 18,
2023), available at https://www.sec.gov/submit-filings/technical-specifications.
A reference copy of Form 10-K is available at https://www.sec.gov/about/forms/form10-k.pdf.
A reference copy of Form 10-Q is available at https://www.sec.gov/about/forms/form10-q.pdf.
A reference copy of Form 11-K is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/form11-k.pdf.
A reference copy of Form 20-F is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/form20-f.pdf.
A reference copy of Form 40-F is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/form40-f.pdf.
A reference copy of Form ABS-EE is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formabs-ee.pdf.
A reference copy of Form 8-K is available at https://www.sec.gov/about/forms/form8-k.pdf.
A reference copy of Form 6-K is available at https://www.sec.gov/about/forms/form6-k.pdf.
A reference copy of Form SD is available at https://www.sec.gov/about/forms/formsd.pdf.
A reference copy of Form 10-D is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/form10d.pdf.
A reference copy of Schedule 13D is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part240/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR7ce825ff9acf140/section-240.13d-101; A reference copy of Schedule
13G is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/subpart-A/subject-groupECFR7ce825ff9acf140/section-240.13d-102.
DECEMBER 2024 SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS | 31
A reference copy of Schedule 13E-3 is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part240/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR7ce825ff9acf140/section-240.13e-100; A reference copy of Schedule
13E-4F is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/subpart-A/subject-groupECFR7ce825ff9acf140/section-240.13e-102; A reference copy of the statement under Rule 13e-1 is available
at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR7ce825ff9acf140/
section-240.13e-1.
97 See Cross-Border Application of Certain Security-Based Swap Requirements, Release No. 34-87780 (Dec. 18,
2019) (adopting release) [85 FR 6270 (Feb. 4, 2020)].
98 A reference copy of Schedule 14A is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/
subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR8c9733e13b955d6/section-240.14a-101; A reference copy of Schedule
14C is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/subpart-A/subject-groupECFR39f2044c974eb3d/section-240.14c-101.
99 A reference copy of Schedule TO is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/
subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR7c5428565389260/section-240.14d-100
100 A reference copy of Schedule 14D-1F is available at https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-240/
subpart-A/subject-group-ECFR7c5428565389260/section-240.14d-102
101 A reference copy of Form N-1A is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/form-n-1a.pdf.
102 A reference copy of Form N-2 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formn-2.pdf.
103 A reference copy of Form N-3 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formn-3.pdf.
104 A reference copy of Form N-4 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formn-4.pdf.
105 A reference copy of Form N-6 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formn-6.pdf.
106 A reference copy of Form N-14 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formn-14.pdf.
107 A reference copy of Form N-8B-2 is available at https://www.sec.gov/about/forms/formn-8b-2.pdf; A reference
copy of Form S-6 is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/forms-6.pdf.
108 A reference copy of Form N-CSR is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formn-csr.pdf.
109 A reference copy of Form N-CEN is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formn-cen.pdf.
110 See supra footnote 85.
111 See supra footnote 86.
112 See supra footnote 91.
113 A reference copy of Form 13F is available at https://www.sec.gov/pdf/form13f.pdf.
114 A reference copy of Form SHO is available at https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2023/11/01/2023-23050/short-position-and-short-activity-reporting-by-institutional-investmentmanagers#h-194.
115 See supra footnote 98.
116 A reference copy of Form N-PX is available at https://www.sec.gov/files/formnpx.pdf.
96
32 | U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission
100 F Street NE
Washington, DC 20549
SEC.gov
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.