This is, for the reasons noted in the proposal, a very sensible rule amendment. It made no sense that FINRA would impose a stricter rule on broker-dealers than the SEC imposed on investment advisers with respect to the same marketing materials. The divergence in regulatory requirements resulted in situations where, for example, marketing material that could be sent by an investment adviser would be illegal if mailed by a broker-dealer.  

While the courts can rule as they will, ultimately Congress will be the decision maker on this.

The SEC has been operating under the premise that more disclosure is always beneficial to the markets. Proposed or adopted rules to increase or shorten time periods for trade reporting and position reporting reflect this. 

While it seems reasonable to conclude that the investor who receives the information is benefitted, that benefit comes at the expense of the person who must disclose. To the extent that an investor (including a fund) must disclose information that allows…

Mr. Atkins' approach marks a significant and welcome change from that of the SEC under his predecessor. Former Chair Gensler acknowledged that issuers increasingly preferred staying private to going public; however, the only means by which he considered addressing this preference was to increase the regulatory requirements on private issuers to make staying private more burdensome. He never considered whether it was possible to decrease the regulatory requirements on public issuers to make…