I am highly concerned about FINRA Regulatory Notice #22-08 because it could negatively impact the time and effort I have put into managed my leveraged portfolio. By imposing rules that restrict the freedom of my financial decisions, the regulation will make generalizations about who is sufficiently knowledgeable about leveraged products to use them properly. Adding special hoops to jump through
By Robert Cook, President and CEO, FINRA. To serve its mission—promoting investor protection, market integrity, and vibrant capital markets—FINRA must continuously improve its regulatory policies and programs to make them more effective and efficient. During my time as CEO, we have worked hard to build a culture of continuous improvement across FINRA—and we have come a long way, including by restructuring departments, building new technology capabilities, improving coordination across different functions, enhancing transparency, and identifying ways to be more risk-focused.
Corporate mergers and acquisitions can have a significant impact on the value of stock held by investors. But apart from the potential for sudden price changes for impacted shares, what else do investors need to know about mergers and acquisitions?
While I appreciate attempts to protect investors, I believe that we need less interference in our free markets, not more. We should also acknowledge a regulatory agency grows it's own power by expansion of regulation. However, I believe such interference is definitively not in investors, or greater still, the American taxpayers best long-term interest. An attempt to protect investors
Public securities are just that, "Public". And, if crypto related public securities are having special testing/restrictions being placed on the security in advance of the investor choice, this is an undue and illegal method to reduce investor interest or involvement in the related security.
To the SEC: Do not restrict access to investment in cryptocurrencey related securities.
I object to the proposed regulation that proposes to limit my access to certain investment vehicles. I consider any paternalistic regulations purporting to protect my interests as an invasion of my right to make my own investment decisions. In the matter of the leveraged and inverse ETFs being suggested for regulation, note that each presently carries declarations and warnings to investor. We
Although I am opposed to restriction of access to complex investments for anyone, I fully support efforts to ensure that consumers are provided full disclosure in layman's/non-financial-professional terms about the complexities and risks that may effect their investing and investments. Many reputable major brokerages seem to do a decent job of providing investor classification and risk-
Dear Regulator(s), Kindly requesting you to reconsider the imposing investment restrictions to individual investors. I am in no position to analyze full picture of why considering such rule and what future impact will be for US investors. However, customers move away from companies that are not prioritizing and addressing customers real need and within parameters these parameters I can imagine
As a registered representative, financial advisor and personal investor I would sincerely hope that I am never prohibited from using these funds in the future. If you want to ad investor education and or disclosures, so be it. But please do NOT reduce the availability of such products. As a rule of thumb, my firm does not permit the solicitation of these vehicles in my position. As for my own
Hello, First of all any rule changes should effect at least after 12 months (maybe 24 months) to be fair for the investors. We are using these funds generally to protect (hedge) our investment or sometimes to gain in a short time. We know the risk of the any investment which we are investing. So, actually/generally I oppose restrictions on my right to invest in public investments. Rules should
