DROPLETS
Employers operating in Virginia, Maine, Connecticut and Delaware must update hiring and compensation practices to comply with new state pay transparency rules that carry civil penalties and private lawsuit exposure.
Four states (Virginia, Maine, Connecticut and Delaware) have enacted new pay transparency laws with 2026 effective dates, imposing varying wage disclosure, recordkeeping and hiring practice requirements on employers. Virginia’s universal rule (no employee threshold) mandates good-faith wage range disclosures in all public and internal job postings, bans most salary history inquiries, and allows private lawsuits and AG enforcement with up to $5,000 in penalties for repeat violations. Maine’s rule applies to employers with 10 or more employees, requires pay range disclosures in postings and upon employee request, and mandates three years of post-employment pay recordkeeping. Connecticut’s expanded rule applies to all employers, requiring wage ranges and general benefit descriptions in all job advertisements. Employers in these states should update relevant policies and processes ahead of each law’s effective date to reduce enforcement and litigation risk.
Defense tech company in-house counsel must embed CFIUS compliance into investor vetting processes to avoid blocked funding and national security enforcement actions.
The BakerHostetler alert outlines rising CFIUS scrutiny of foreign venture capital investments in U.S. defense technology firms, as the committee now classifies investor nationality and foreign government ties as core national security risks. Recent enforcement actions have blocked or conditioned deals involving non-U.S. backing for dual-use and military-focused tech startups. In-house counsel for defense tech companies should update investor due diligence protocols to include mandatory CFIUS pre-screening for all non-U.S. capital sources, document national security risk mitigation plans for pending investments, and align fundraising timelines with CFIUS review windows to avoid deal delays or cancellations.
Energy companies, utilities, and FERC-regulated market participants must track developments because the ruling allows at-will presidential removal of FERC commissioners, undermining the agency's longstanding bipartisan, expertise-driven decision-making.
On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court issued Trump v. Slaughter, overruling 90-year-old Humphrey’s Executor precedent and holding that for-cause removal protections for independent agency commissioners violate the separation of powers. While the Court did not explicitly rule on FERC, the agency’s identical for-cause removal protections and core executive functions (rulemaking, enforcement, adjudication) align with the FTC structure the Court invalidated. FERC’s recent alignment with executive policy directives, paired with risk of politically motivated commissioner turnover, creates uncertainty for energy infrastructure permitting, market rulemaking, and enforcement actions. Regulated entities should monitor FERC leadership changes and upcoming policy shifts.
In-house counsel for corporate debt issuers and institutional bond investors must adapt to the SEC's new exemptive order, which expands eligibility for 5-day tender offers and eliminates key prior restrictions on transaction structure and response timelines.
On June 30, 2026, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance issued an immediately effective exemptive order superseding its 2015 no-action letter to expand eligibility for 5-business-day tender and exchange offers for nonconvertible debt securities. The order eliminates prior restrictions on including consent solicitations for simple-majority indenture amendments, financing offers with priming senior debt, and running partial prorated offers, while shortening required waiting periods after material offer term changes. Issuers gain greater flexibility to execute faster refinancing and exchange transactions, while investors face compressed timelines to assess complex terms, making early bondholder coordination critical to mount timely responses.
Energy sector in-house counsel and cross-border supply chain legal teams must act because unresolved strait access creates unplanned cost volatility and unaddressed force majeure risks that fall outside short-term ceasefire assumptions.
A recently announced regional ceasefire framework briefly raised expectations of stable, restored shipping access through the critical Strait of Hormuz oil transit chokepoint, but a rapid relapse in hostilities has left access inconsistent and unpredictable. Initial market forecasts of a swift return to normal supply flows were quickly invalidated as oil prices reacted to renewed instability. Legal and operations teams should not treat temporary ceasefire terms as a stable planning baseline, and instead build contingency plans for extended access disruptions, including reviewing force majeure clauses in supply contracts and mapping alternative transit routes for time-sensitive energy shipments.
Founders, early employees, and venture investors in qualified small businesses must track emerging regulatory guidance, as heightened scrutiny of QSBS trust stacking could eliminate eligibility for the $15 million federal capital gains tax exclusion for affected holdings.
Enacted in 1993, Section 1202 of the Internal Revenue Code permits eligible shareholders of qualified small businesses to exclude up to $15 million in federal capital gains from the sale of qualifying stock, a benefit expanded by Congress in 2025. Regulators are now increasing scrutiny of 'trust stacking' strategies, where multiple trusts hold QSBS to multiply the available exclusion amount. Potential new rules or enforcement guidance could limit or disallow these stacking arrangements. Affected stakeholders should review existing QSBS holding structures with qualified tax counsel, confirm all statutory eligibility requirements are met, and monitor upcoming regulatory guidance to adjust holdings as needed to preserve tax benefits.
Schools, libraries, E-Rate consultants, and participating telecom providers must monitor these proposals, as they would reshape eligibility, compliance obligations, and funding for the federal program that supports K-12 and library broadband access.
On June 25, the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking public comment on sweeping changes to the E-Rate program, which provides discounted telecommunications and internet access to eligible U.S. schools and libraries. The proposals include narrowing eligible services and equipment, reevaluating discount rate calculations to potentially redirect more funding to rural areas, reinterpreting CIPA children’s online safety requirements, and establishing a broad new definition of 'consultant' subject to program oversight to reduce fraud risk. Stakeholders may submit feedback on all proposed changes during the open comment period.
Employers operating in Virginia, Maine, Connecticut and Delaware must update hiring and compensation practices to comply with new state pay transparency rules that carry civil penalties and private lawsuit exposure.
Four states (Virginia, Maine, Connecticut and Delaware) have enacted new pay transparency laws with 2026 effective dates, imposing varying wage disclosure, recordkeeping and hiring practice requirements on employers. Virginia’s universal rule (no employee threshold) mandates good-faith wage range disclosures in all public and internal job postings, bans most salary history inquiries, and allows private lawsuits and AG enforcement with up to $5,000 in penalties for repeat violations. Maine’s rule applies to employers with 10 or more employees, requires pay range disclosures in postings and upon employee request, and mandates three years of post-employment pay recordkeeping. Connecticut’s expanded rule applies to all employers, requiring wage ranges and general benefit descriptions in all job advertisements. Employers in these states should update relevant policies and processes ahead of each law’s effective date to reduce enforcement and litigation risk.
Employers operating in Virginia, Maine, Connecticut and Delaware must update hiring and compensation practices to comply with new state pay transparency rules that carry civil penalties and private lawsuit exposure.
Four states (Virginia, Maine, Connecticut and Delaware) have enacted new pay transparency laws with 2026 effective dates, imposing varying wage disclosure, recordkeeping and hiring practice requirements on employers. Virginia’s universal rule (no employee threshold) mandates good-faith wage range disclosures in all public and internal job postings, bans most salary history inquiries, and allows private lawsuits and AG enforcement with up to $5,000 in penalties for repeat violations. Maine’s rule applies to employers with 10 or more employees, requires pay range disclosures in postings and upon employee request, and mandates three years of post-employment pay recordkeeping. Connecticut’s expanded rule applies to all employers, requiring wage ranges and general benefit descriptions in all job advertisements. Employers in these states should update relevant policies and processes ahead of each law’s effective date to reduce enforcement and litigation risk.
Energy companies, utilities, and FERC-regulated market participants must track developments because the ruling allows at-will presidential removal of FERC commissioners, undermining the agency's longstanding bipartisan, expertise-driven decision-making.
On June 29, 2026, the Supreme Court issued Trump v. Slaughter, overruling 90-year-old Humphrey’s Executor precedent and holding that for-cause removal protections for independent agency commissioners violate the separation of powers. While the Court did not explicitly rule on FERC, the agency’s identical for-cause removal protections and core executive functions (rulemaking, enforcement, adjudication) align with the FTC structure the Court invalidated. FERC’s recent alignment with executive policy directives, paired with risk of politically motivated commissioner turnover, creates uncertainty for energy infrastructure permitting, market rulemaking, and enforcement actions. Regulated entities should monitor FERC leadership changes and upcoming policy shifts.
Energy sector in-house counsel and cross-border supply chain legal teams must act because unresolved strait access creates unplanned cost volatility and unaddressed force majeure risks that fall outside short-term ceasefire assumptions.
A recently announced regional ceasefire framework briefly raised expectations of stable, restored shipping access through the critical Strait of Hormuz oil transit chokepoint, but a rapid relapse in hostilities has left access inconsistent and unpredictable. Initial market forecasts of a swift return to normal supply flows were quickly invalidated as oil prices reacted to renewed instability. Legal and operations teams should not treat temporary ceasefire terms as a stable planning baseline, and instead build contingency plans for extended access disruptions, including reviewing force majeure clauses in supply contracts and mapping alternative transit routes for time-sensitive energy shipments.
Schools, libraries, E-Rate consultants, and participating telecom providers must monitor these proposals, as they would reshape eligibility, compliance obligations, and funding for the federal program that supports K-12 and library broadband access.
On June 25, the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking seeking public comment on sweeping changes to the E-Rate program, which provides discounted telecommunications and internet access to eligible U.S. schools and libraries. The proposals include narrowing eligible services and equipment, reevaluating discount rate calculations to potentially redirect more funding to rural areas, reinterpreting CIPA children’s online safety requirements, and establishing a broad new definition of 'consultant' subject to program oversight to reduce fraud risk. Stakeholders may submit feedback on all proposed changes during the open comment period.
Defense tech company in-house counsel must embed CFIUS compliance into investor vetting processes to avoid blocked funding and national security enforcement actions.
The BakerHostetler alert outlines rising CFIUS scrutiny of foreign venture capital investments in U.S. defense technology firms, as the committee now classifies investor nationality and foreign government ties as core national security risks. Recent enforcement actions have blocked or conditioned deals involving non-U.S. backing for dual-use and military-focused tech startups. In-house counsel for defense tech companies should update investor due diligence protocols to include mandatory CFIUS pre-screening for all non-U.S. capital sources, document national security risk mitigation plans for pending investments, and align fundraising timelines with CFIUS review windows to avoid deal delays or cancellations.
In-house counsel for corporate debt issuers and institutional bond investors must adapt to the SEC's new exemptive order, which expands eligibility for 5-day tender offers and eliminates key prior restrictions on transaction structure and response timelines.
On June 30, 2026, the SEC Division of Corporation Finance issued an immediately effective exemptive order superseding its 2015 no-action letter to expand eligibility for 5-business-day tender and exchange offers for nonconvertible debt securities. The order eliminates prior restrictions on including consent solicitations for simple-majority indenture amendments, financing offers with priming senior debt, and running partial prorated offers, while shortening required waiting periods after material offer term changes. Issuers gain greater flexibility to execute faster refinancing and exchange transactions, while investors face compressed timelines to assess complex terms, making early bondholder coordination critical to mount timely responses.
Founders, early employees, and venture investors in qualified small businesses must track emerging regulatory guidance, as heightened scrutiny of QSBS trust stacking could eliminate eligibility for the $15 million federal capital gains tax exclusion for affected holdings.
Enacted in 1993, Section 1202 of the Internal Revenue Code permits eligible shareholders of qualified small businesses to exclude up to $15 million in federal capital gains from the sale of qualifying stock, a benefit expanded by Congress in 2025. Regulators are now increasing scrutiny of 'trust stacking' strategies, where multiple trusts hold QSBS to multiply the available exclusion amount. Potential new rules or enforcement guidance could limit or disallow these stacking arrangements. Affected stakeholders should review existing QSBS holding structures with qualified tax counsel, confirm all statutory eligibility requirements are met, and monitor upcoming regulatory guidance to adjust holdings as needed to preserve tax benefits.