I definitely do not want FINRA to make any changes to Proposed Rule #22-08. Public traded funds need to remain public. This almost reminds me that I may not be ELITE enough to participate in what has always been available to the public. The thought of being tested to see if I know enough about these funds is ludicrous. I don't believe that FINRA should be awarded this kind of control over
Please approve the new rules to tighten up short interest reporting requirements. There are too many loopholes that short traders use to hide and obfuscate their true short interest (eg hiding shorts in deep OTM put contracts) which puts retail traders at an information disadvantage, which is anathema to free market principles.
The following charges shall be paid by participants for the use of the Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine ("TRACE"):System FeesTransaction Reporting FeesData FeesLevel I Trade Report Only Web Browser Access — $20/month per user IDLevel II Full Service Web Browser Access — Subscription for a single user ID or the first user ID — $50/month (includes one Data Set); $80/month (includes
Remember that time the people of Massachusetts weren't allowed to take part in Apple's IPO? I love blanket rules that assume those with wealth also have more knowledge and have done more research. Not everyone is lucky enough born into old money. But this sure is a step in the right direction to make sure fewer people have that privilege in the future. Make sure to limit the
These rules are exceptionally deleterious. In a free society with free markets it is presumed that individuals know their own best interests. Undoubtedly mistakes will be made, but these mistakes are self-correcting because people learn. Bureaucratic mistakes are not self-correcting, because when there is a mistake made. then bureaucracies tend to either deny, or add more regulations.
I would like to oppose this rule. In my opinion, investors who are investing in these complex products know the risks already. Also brokerage companies let us informed of the risks. Whenever i try to buy a leverage fund, my broker shows warnings at multiple places in big bold red letters during the transaction. I suspect if someone "accidentally" bought these leveraged funds. I
I oppose any restrictions on my right to invest in public investments. I do not agree that any special process like passing a test to be able to invest in public securities and inverse leveraged funds. Making investors try and prove their ability to protect my investments puts a restriction on my ability to secure my entire portfolio of investments. I am NOT ALIGNED with this notice as it creates
Transparency is essential to our “free” markets and recently implemented rules & regulations mean NOTHING without enforcement. I am sickened by the lack of accountability of our government officials and how naked short-selling and other egregious behaviors have continued for far too long by Hedge Fund institutions with ZERO considerations “paid” to retail investors.
Reporting needs to be more than monthly, weekly at latest. It also needs to be changed so that it 100% accurately identifies short interest and delineates between real and synthetic borrowed shares for short interest. Fines should also be such that they accumulate to a point that a rule breaker will not be able to just choose to keep paying the fine and committing the crime.
I clicked over to a website that does not support the proposed rule, but I *DO* agree with the limitations being proposed. I was Series 7 and Series 63 licensed, and have seen many people maneuvered into investments that neither they nor their financial advisors understood. The results can be devastating. I think it might be better to do a two-pronged approach with limits on the types of
