Review Quarterly Report For Sec Compliance

---
name: review-quarterly-report-for-sec-compliance
task_id: capital-markets/review-quarterly-report-for-sec-compliance
description: Form 10-Q compliance review focused on checking whether the filing’s cover page, financial statements, and MD&A disclosures follow the required form and whether period-specific disclosure items are handled consistently with the applicable accounting and SEC framework.
activates_for: [planner, solver, checker]
---

# Skill: Review Quarterly Report for SEC Compliance — Form 10-Q

## 1. Subject-matter triage

- Treat the assignment as a filing-compliance and issue-spotting review, not a merits memo.
- Separate cover-page mechanics, financial statement presentation, note disclosures, MD&A updates, and follow-through on prior regulator comments.
- Identify whether the source set contains one filing, one reporting period, and one comment history; if multiple periods or comment rounds appear, enumerate them first and analyze each separately.
- Anchor every issue to the exact 10-Q location and the controlling authority invoked by the defect.

## 2. Failure modes the skill is correcting

- A review may note that a restructuring discussion exists without checking whether the disclosure includes the full required elements, including movement in the related liability and cumulative costs versus expected costs.
- A review may fail to carry forward issues flagged in earlier regulator correspondence and therefore miss unresolved filing defects.
- A review may treat a cash flow classification error as a style issue instead of a substantive reporting problem when activity is placed in the wrong cash flow category.
- A review may identify a disclosure gap but stop at description, without tying the gap to the applicable rule, the affected period or line item, and the practical consequence for the filing.
- A review may omit severity gradation, making it harder to distinguish filing blockers from lower-risk drafting corrections.
- A review may miss that quarterly disclosure obligations are dynamic and must be tested against the most recent annual report, interim changes, and the current filing package together.

## 3. Legal frameworks / domain conventions that apply

- Cover page accuracy: the filer category, registration status, share count presentation, and period-end information must be consistent with the issuer’s current status and the filed form requirements.
- Quarterly filing architecture: the review should test the cover page, financial statements, notes, and MD&A as a single compliance package rather than as isolated excerpts.
- Restructuring disclosure: if a restructuring charge appears in the period, the note should describe the plan, categories of charges, liability rollforward, and cumulative costs recognized compared with expected costs under the applicable accounting guidance.
- Subsequent-event disclosure: if a material event occurs after the balance sheet date but before filing, the filing should address timing, consideration, and any preliminary accounting under the relevant subsequent-event and business-combination guidance.
- Non-GAAP presentation: any non-GAAP subtotal must be clearly labeled and reconciled to the most directly comparable GAAP measure under the applicable SEC presentation rules.
- EPS disclosure: when diluted EPS equals basic EPS because instruments are anti-dilutive or the issuer reports a loss, the note should disclose the number of anti-dilutive securities excluded from diluted share count under the EPS disclosure framework.
- Cash flow classification: the statement of cash flows must place significant cash movements in the correct operating, investing, or financing category under the governing cash-flow presentation standards.
- Risk factor currency: if circumstances materially changed since the most recent annual report, the quarterly filing should update risk factors or explain why no material change occurred under the quarterly-report disclosure regime.
- Prior comment letter follow-through: unresolved matters raised by the regulator in earlier correspondence must be checked against the current draft for closure, partial response, or continuing omission.
- Every legal or SEC conclusion should be tied to the relevant rule, form requirement, or accounting framework rather than stated in conclusory form.

## 4. Analytical scaffolds

- Start by mapping the source set: draft 10-Q, checklist, prior 10-K, partner instructions, and prior comment letter.
- For each identified issue, use a three-part closeout: cite the affected disclosure amount, period, or other scale from the source materials; cross-reference the related note, schedule, or prior comment; and state the filing consequence if the defect remains.
- Apply the relevant authority for each issue, not just a generic “SEC compliance” label.
- Test the cover page first, then the financial statements and notes, then MD&A and risk factors, then prior-comment follow-through.
- If a disclosure item can arise in more than one place, check all relevant locations rather than assuming one section cures another.
- If only one candidate issue is present for a given topic, say so affirmatively and explain why the issue is singular on the source record.
- Assign an ordinal severity to every issue using a single scale defined once at the top of the memorandum, and keep that severity consistent throughout.
- Use the most direct corrective step that would make the filing compliant on its face.

## 5. Vertical / structural / temporal relationships

- Compare the draft 10-Q against the immediately preceding annual report for changed-risk-factor analysis and for consistency in accounting policy or presentation.
- Compare the current draft with the prior comment letter to determine whether each outstanding point was addressed, narrowed, or ignored.
- Compare the current interim period to the balance sheet date and filing date when testing subsequent events.
- Compare non-GAAP and GAAP presentations within the same filing to ensure the reconciliation is complete and the subtotal label is not misleading.
- Compare basic and diluted EPS inputs to determine whether anti-dilutive securities disclosure is triggered.
- Compare operating, investing, and financing classifications across the cash flow statement and supporting notes when testing for misclassification.
- Compare restructuring charges, liabilities, and cumulative costs across the note and any related MD&A discussion to see whether the disclosure tracks the economic reality over time.

## 6. Output structure conventions

- Produce a form-check memorandum, not a generic issue list.
- Begin with a short executive summary and a legend for severity levels.
- Include a concise source-set summary identifying the documents reviewed and any key assumptions.
- Present a table of issues by filing location or topic, with columns for location, issue, authority, severity, consequence, and recommended fix.
- Follow the table with short narrative discussion for each issue, using the same severity label and citing the controlling authority by name and section or rule.
- For each issue, include: where it appears in the 10-Q, what is missing or wrong, the applicable SEC or accounting framework, why it matters for the filing, and the corrective action.
- Close with an explicit Recommended Actions section that assigns next steps to the appropriate role from the source set and ties each action to a practical timing anchor, such as before filing, before circulation, or before the next draft.
- Keep the draft conventionally structured and internally cross-referenced so a reviewer can locate each defect quickly.