Mar. 31, 2023
As a household investor, I fully support the new proposed rule. Payment For Order Flow (PFOF) has never been in the interest of any investor. It is a clear example of conflict of interest for brokers that participate in such a scheme. The practice has been banned in other modern countries such as the UK. It's about time we put an end to this scheme here in the US as well. Opponents of the rule may talk about how much money household investors save with PFOF. They claim that since introducing PFOF, the household investors can get better executions at little to no trade cost. I have worked in similar industries and know that in the eyes of brokerages that use PFOF, the investors are the product and the real customers are market wholesalers. As an investor in the US markets, I want to know that I can get the best execution on my trades and I do not mind paying for that service. I want my trades to always be executed on the lit markets. As a free market participant, not only should I have that option, it must be the default policy for my brokerage as well as all other free market participants. I do not wish my trade data to be the product of any entity, including broker-dealers and market makers. I want my orders to be routed through public auctions. I do not mind paying for a bona-fide trade service. Sincerely, Bahram Dahi Engineer, Household Investor