From: Arnold Ward [awardnetmail@netscape.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 7:12 PM To: rule-comments@sec.gov Subject: File No. S7-11-04 mandatory mutual fund redemption fees The rule should permit, as the current laws allow, a mutual fund to charge a redemption fee but not mandate such a fee for all funds. Mandating redemption fees constitutes government mandated expense to the investor to protect the mutual fund. We do not need the government protecting the mutual fund from the investor. Mutual funds are free to charge redemption fees and many funds currently do, even some held by financial intermediaries and even low cost or no cost mutual funds and especially even small mutual funds. The free market can decide better whether redemption fees should be charged and the government should stay out of this arena. The idea that there is “competitive pressure not to charge redemption fees and therefore the government must step in to make a uniform enforcement fee is Big Brother at its worst. What else in the trading world is Big Brother going to protect the investor or mutual fund from? Abrupt changes in share value from changes in stock value caused by excessive selling? The stock market, by its nature, is fluidic and comprised of continually changing prices. An investor who changes their mind and wants out should not be precluded or hindered by government-forced penalty fees as this proposed body of regulations suggests. Let the mutual fund decide individually, based on its own specific costs, whether or not a redemption fee or penalty is necessary, and if so at what percent or amount. Doing what this body of regulations suggests mandates more paperwork and bureaucracy for mutual funds which already are amass in such bookkeeping requirements, the cost for which will be directly born by the mutual fund investors as a group. _______________________________________________________________________ Internet Access, Shared & Dedicated Web Hosting. Colocation and Domain Name Registration at http://www.SharedPoint.com