If you would like an up-to-date OMB approved Word template of a form NT 10-K (12b-25) to extend your 12/31/2009 10-K with the SEC, simply e-mail us at filing@sec-report-filing.com and we will send you a current template.  After it is complete, send it back for immediate processing and filing with the SEC for just $50.

The 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2009 filing deadline for Non-Accelerated SEC filers is Wednesday, March 31, 2010.  If an extension is necessary, that is due the following day, April 1, with the late 10-K due by Thursday, April 15, 2010.

If a non-accelerated filer extends their September 30, 2009 Form 10-Q by filing form 12b-25 (NT10-Q) then instead of filing by November 16, 2009, they have another five days thereafter to file.  However, since November 21 falls on a weekend, then the following Monday, November 23, 2009 is the deadline to file the Form 10-Q.

The 10-Q deadline for non-accelerated filers is 45 days after the end of the quarter, unless that day falls on a holiday or on a weekend.  In that case, the deadline is extended to the next business day.  Therefore, for non-accelerated filers, the deadline for filing the September 30, 2009 10-Q is Monday, November 16, 2009.

The SEC has announced that it will update the EDGAR system to enhance the validation process of XBRL submissions.  Previously, XBRL files could be submitted to EDGAR, even if they were not compliant with all technical requirements.  With this change comes a stronger need for companies and filers to submit test filings long before due dates so any errors can be corrected.  The complete text from the SEC's announcement is below:

Notice regarding upcoming EDGAR Release 9.17 and XBRL Validation

We plan to update the EDGAR system on 09/28/09 to, among other things, expand the tests the EDGAR system uses to validate information in Interactive Data File (XBRL) submissions. With this update, the EDGAR system will validate an increased number of technical requirements while processing filings that include Interactive Data Files. This part of the update does not change existing technical requirements; it will simply enhance the validation process the EDGAR system uses to confirm compliance with the EDGAR Filer Manual requirements.

Although the EDGAR Filer Manual requirements relating to Interactive Data Files generally have not changed, it is important to note that with the enhanced validation process, the EDGAR system may reject Interactive Data File exhibits that would have been accepted prior to Release 9.17. We encourage filers to take appropriate steps to ensure that all Interactive Data File submissions comply with the EDGAR Filer Manual requirements and once Release 9.17 is in place to test compliance by submitting test filings well in advance of required filing dates.

http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar/ednews/edgar9.17xbrlvalidation.htm

Modified: 08/21/2009

The process of preparing your financial statements for SEC required XBRL reporting is a two-step process:  mapping, then tagging.  Mapping matches your financial statements to the US GAAP taxonomy.  Tagging takes the mapped plan, and creates the filing documents.  Mapping can be done without respect to which XBRL software package is utilized to do the tagging.  Contact Southridge services at info@sec-report-filing.com for more information. 

When mapping your financial statements to the 2009 GAAP taxonomy, do not choose any item that indicates it has been deprecated.  In the 2009 taxonomy, several previous items were superseded, or found to be duplicates of other concepts.  They are, therefore, obsolete items.  The label of a deprecated item will indicate what element(s) could be used instead.

Southridge Services, owned and operated by accountants who understand financial tables, offers "Smart" table striping.  As you know, a typical EDGARizer will simply stripe every other row in alternate colors from the top to the bottom of a financial table.  However, this careless practice makes for tables that are not as professionally presented as they could be.  We stripe only the rows that actually have data, which leaves header rows with a white background that off-sets that section as a separate section of the financial table.

As you can see in the example below, the "Cash Flow from Operating/Investing/Financing Activities" headers are not striped, but left with a white background that highlights and offsets those sections of the table, making it easier for investors and other readers of your financial statements to assimilate the information.  And happy readers are a good thing!  They will appreciate the professionalism with which you file your SEC reports - using Southridge Services!

One of the greatest frustrations felt by SEC reporting companies is the amount of time required by the auditing company to review the "edgarized" proof, especially as a filing deadline looms.  To decrease the amount of time necessary to compare the Word version of the 10-K annual report to the EDGARized pdf proof, the auditors may want to consider utilizing the tools available in Adobe Acrobat's Professional software.  This is not the "free" downloadable version of Adobe's "Reader", but the cost is minimal to obtain the tool.  In fact, we obtained the Reader Version 8 for only $150 from an online store that is 100% legit and licensed.  (Call for more information if interested.)

Once Adobe Acrobat Professional is opened, then go to the menu bar and select "Tools" - then "Compare Documents."  Then one simply browses to a pdf copy of the Word file (which can be made by printing the Word file to pdf), and also selects the pdf copy of the EDGARized proof.  Adobe can then do a side-by-side report that indicates anything that is different from the two documents.

A couple hints:  Insert blank pages as appropriate in either document so what is on any given page is aligned with what is on the other document's similar page.  This makes reading the "side-by-side" report much easier.  Also note that sometimes Adobe finds differences that really are not (it errs on the conservative side!).  These are typically instances in which a word wraps differently at the end of a paragraph in one document than in the other.  So those are easily ignored.

Of course, auditors will likely want to manually review every line and figure in the tables one by one, but using Adobe's "Compare Documents" feature can greatly increase the level of assurance and the speed with which the text portion of two documents can be compared.