In addition to Commissioner Giancarlo's concerns about market liquidity, his request for an "unbiased analysis" of the the systemic risk of "unprecedented capital constraining regulations on global financial and risk-transfer markets" is noteworthy. Regulators seem either reluctant or incapable of assessing whether their rulemakings have been successful, or whether certain benefits of the rulemakings might be outweighed by unintended consequences. On that topic, see this .

Central clearing was never a cure-all for risk, and it may increase systemic risk. It seems fair to ask whether regulators will be capable of coming to grips with the fact that the benefits of central clearing were radically oversold. See, e.g.,

One of the more interesting parts of the CGTF's report is the discussion of "diversity" in corporate boards of directors, since regulators from different countries expressed contrasting views on the meaning and significance of diversity, and the degree to which it should be treated as a governmental goal.

On the one hand, it is good that the SEC is conducting experiments to determine how the market system functions and whether liquidity for small issuers can be improved. On the other, it is unclear why SEC is focusing on this particular experiment. This kind of program seems unlikely to produce meaningful results. Even if the results should prove meaningful, more useful experiments could have been conducted. For some reason, this broad tick test caught Congress members' fancy (in the JOBS Act…