Mar. 15, 2023
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. To Whom It May Concern, I wish to comment regarding the revisions of File No. S7-01-23, which has caused the efficacy of such a rule to come into question. This rule will exempt non-reporting companies from registering particular securities offerings under the Securities Act, specifically when they are sold to accredited investors. The exemptions made have some massive loopholes for manipulative groups that often exploit retail investors and enable them to continue to prey upon the less fortunate. This rule is not sufficient in protecting household/retail investors in providing the full spectrum of information they may need to make investment decisions. Transparent markets are the key to a stronger perception of said markets by those outside of the financial sector of business, and thereby the overall ecosystem of investors within the market in its entirety. Manipulative groups such as hedge funds and large financial institutions that have a plethora of tools at their disposal already to strip the profits from a household investor, may continue to exploit rules such as what is already written here for S7-01-23. There is no reason to believe, in a market that has a history of manipulative players involved, that these players will not continue to behave in predatory and exploitative ways. The exemption written provides the opportunity for these players to continue their manipulative ways. For example, a hedge fund choosing to manipulate this exemption could create false accredited investor accounts to conduct business outside of regulatory oversight and provide them with unfair advantages within the market as such. I appreciate the time taken to read my comments regarding S7-01-23 and hope my thoughts are taken into consideration to not move forward without correcting this. Signed, Jared Hannah