Mar. 10, 2023
March 10, 2023 As an employee directly affected by this proposal and many other personal trading edicts issued in the past by the Commission, I wonder if the prohibition on owning financial sector ETFs 1. couldn't be more narrowly tailored to any potential benefit 2. why the Commission treats employees in different divisions and in different roles exactly alike for purposes of personal trading/holding and why all the prohibitions on personal trading are applied to spouses as if any knowledge is inputed even if the spouse has a completely separate and distinct trading history that predates marriage. Echoing other SEC employees, I am not certain why I should be forced to sell a sector ETF that numerous other Chairs and Ethics Offices didn't find problematic. I am also at a loss as to why I have to divest and either hire an accountant to avoid a taxable gain or alternatively, pay such a gain now. As someone in the Division of Examinations, whose daily tasks don't expose me to any inside information, I am at a loss as to why I am treated the same as Division of Enforcement employees or rulemaking employees, who may very well possess non-public, material information. For example, I haven't been able to sell one stock that I purchased during my time at the Commission for over 4 years during which time the stock continues to drop in price. Which begs the questions as to why and what kind of investigation lasts 4 years? Three, my spouse inherited a portfolio of stocks that is managed outside her control yet again despite possessing no insider information, she is subject to the same stringent rules as I am and which the Chair wants to make even more stringent for ideological reasons and for his own personal benefit. He is a great proponent of indexing, which has same merit but it is something I believe in but not exclusively. Please not only reconsider this proposal but also ensuring that our personal trading rules are designed less for public consumption and more for the risks that are posed. It is clear that examiners shouldn't be subject to the same restrictions as rulemaking or certain enforcement divisions.