February 12, 2007
I oppose increasing the barrier to investing in a hedge fund by adding another accredited person definition.
This proposed rule unfairly restricts the investment options of the merely wealthy. Also, it will inevitably lead to further restrictions on investment as other sophisticated investment tools voluntarily adopt the new definition for reasons of legal self-protection.
Does the Staff feel that the very rich do not have enough investment advantages and must be provided additional breaks to insure that they get the very best available returns? Or, is this really the pooled investment advisor's full employment act - only by paying extra commissions to a mutual fund or other pooled investment will the "little people" be able to invest in hedge funds?
This rule is utterly misguided as to the proposal of adding another accredited person category.