Apr. 20, 2022
Dear SEC, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed rule. I'm a retail investor from the UK, so please account for the fact that I'm not an expert and may not fully comprehend all the jargon of the financial markets. That is precisely one of the largest criticisms I have of this rule. It's shrouded in so much wall-speak that the average retail investor couldn't possibly decipher the full repercussions, which I think is entirely by design. From what I do understand, this would give bad actors yet another tool to obfuscate their FTDs. It would create the illusion of stability at the cost of the integrity of the market. Such a ruling only serves to benefit those with bad intentions, which is why it's designed to be as confusing as possible to the average person. This is perhaps a prime example of a rule that absolutely should not be passed. It benefits the wrong people, allows more corruption and reduces transparency - all packaged neatly in a document that in itself lacks transparency by being intentionally incomprehensible to anyone not financially educated. So, in my opinion, as an average retail investor, this rule should absolutely not be passed. It would completely fly in the face of the SEC's duty to police the markets and create a fair and honest system. Thank you for your time, Jake