Taking away investor rights to risk management assets like leveraged and inverse funds is robbing investors of income and simple tools which can only be emulated with complex options transactions if at all. Such regulation Hurts Investors: It could potentially deny us the freedom to choose investments that could help us achieve long-term financial security. Is Arbitrary and Unworkable: FINRAs definition of complex products is so broad, arbitrary and vague that it could ensnare a vast number of commonly used public securities. Tests or criteria to determine investor understanding are subjective and could lead to unfair or even discriminatory treatment of investors. In practice, these tools are less risky then options and short selling if only because they don't have a chance to expire with no value and should be an accessible toolkit with at most similar usage requirements to those tools (such as attestation to taking on the risk, and investor style designation). in general investors take on the responsibility of using asset types and investing in companies where they need to understand what they invest in - you can't keep investors from investing in bad companies, but you can have them attest to the risk they are taking on and declare their investment objectives. Taking away these tools will ruin many responsible investors lives and will only push bad investors to make bad choices elsewhere with perhaps more exotic, complicated and risky tools. Thank you for listening to our feedback.
David Gilon Comment On Regulatory Notice 22-08
Taking away investor rights to risk management assets like leveraged and inverse funds is robbing investors of income and simple tools which can only be emulated with complex options transactions if at all. Such regulation Hurts Investors: It could potentially deny us the freedom to choose investments that could help us achieve long-term financial security. Is Arbitrary and Unworkable: FINRAs definition of complex products is so broad, arbitrary and vague that it could ensnare a vast number of commonly used public securities. Tests or criteria to determine investor understanding are subjective and could lead to unfair or even discriminatory treatment of investors. In practice, these tools are less risky then options and short selling if only because they don't have a chance to expire with no value and should be an accessible toolkit with at most similar usage requirements to those tools (such as attestation to taking on the risk, and investor style designation). in general investors take on the responsibility of using asset types and investing in companies where they need to understand what they invest in - you can't keep investors from investing in bad companies, but you can have them attest to the risk they are taking on and declare their investment objectives. Taking away these tools will ruin many responsible investors lives and will only push bad investors to make bad choices elsewhere with perhaps more exotic, complicated and risky tools. Thank you for listening to our feedback.