Feb. 4, 2024
Dear SEC & Gary Gensler, I am writing to vehemently oppose the proposed rule change, expressing deep concerns about its potential repercussions on retail investors. The proposal introduces risks such as shielding risky positions during market volatility and raises valid concerns about conflicts of interest within the role of the Financial Risk Management (FRM) Officer. The lack of transparency, as evident from redacted materials accompanying the proposal, heightens apprehensions. Furthermore, there is a significant worry that the rule may compromise crucial risk management mechanisms, such as margin calls, potentially leaving retail investors exposed to unchecked risks. In light of these concerns, I strongly recommend a reassessment of the loss allocation framework, prioritizing Clearing Fund deposits over the OCC's pre-funded resources. Additionally, urgent consideration should be given to implementing an independent review mechanism to ensure an unbiased evaluation of control settings and instill confidence in the risk management process. Transparent measures, including providing non-confidential summaries of redacted materials, and fortifying oversight mechanisms, are imperative. Public accessibility to stress testing results and collaborative efforts with stakeholders to establish industry-wide standards and best practices are essential for maintaining market stability. In conclusion, I firmly oppose the proposed rule change and implore the SEC to reconsider its potential adverse impact on retail investors. A financial landscape that upholds principles of fairness, transparency, and the protection of retail investor interests is paramount. I trust the SEC will conscientiously consider these concerns during the rulemaking process. Thank you for your attention to this matter.I am reaching out to express my vehement opposition to the proposed rule change, as it raises grave concerns about its potential impact on retail investors. The proposal introduces risks such as shielding risky positions during market volatility and brings attention to conflicts of interest within the Financial Risk Management (FRM) Officer's role. The lack of transparency, evidenced by redacted materials accompanying the proposal, only deepens these concerns. Additionally, there's a considerable fear that the rule might compromise essential risk management mechanisms, such as margin calls, potentially leading to unchecked risk exposure for retail investors. To address these pressing concerns, I strongly recommend a reassessment of the loss allocation framework, giving priority to Clearing Fund deposits over the OCC's pre-funded resources. Furthermore, implementing an independent review mechanism is crucial for ensuring an impartial evaluation of control settings, fostering confidence in the risk management process. Urgent measures are needed to enhance transparency, such as providing non-confidential summaries of redacted materials, and bolstering oversight mechanisms. Public accessibility to stress testing results and collaborative efforts with stakeholders to establish industry-wide standards and best practices are indispensable for maintaining market stability. In conclusion, I firmly oppose the proposed rule change and urge the SEC to reconsider its potential negative implications for retail investors. A financial environment that prioritizes fairness, transparency, and the protection of retail investor interests is of utmost importance. I trust that the SEC will thoroughly consider these concerns during the rulemaking process. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Best regards, Bill, Vick, Bernadine, Joseph, Roxie & The Gilbert Family