U.S. Sens. Bill Hagerty (R-TN) and Thom Tillis (R-NC) recently raised concerns about the length of comment periods provided for some Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rule proposals.
“In recent months, both Republican and Democrat Members of Congress have repeatedly raised concerns about the length of comment periods the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is providing for a number of SEC rule proposals. As a result of these shortened windows for critical feedback, market participants are not being provided adequate time to provide effective and meaningful input,” the senators wrote to SEC Chair Gary Gensler.
The senators cited Gensler’s recent testimony before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government, in which he claimed that the agency provides the public “always at least two months” to respond to rule proposals. The lawmakers say this is inaccurate.
“Despite your testimony to the contrary, since you became Chair, the SEC has issued at least three rule proposals where the public was given less than two months to respond. The first and most egregious example of the SEC’s failure to provide adequate time to comment was the SEC’s Proxy Voting Advice proposal. The commission voted to propose that rule (by a 3 to 2 vote) on November 17, 2021, and the comment period closed on December 27, 2021… In addition to the Proxy Voting Advice proposal, the public was also given less than two months to comment on the SEC’s Electronic Recordkeeping Requirements for Broker-Dealers, Security-Based Swap Dealers, and Major Security-Based Swap Participants proposal and the Commission’s Form PF proposal. Despite providing less than two months to comment on the Form PF proposal, you recently declined a request from a bipartisan group of 47 Members of Congress to reopen the comment period on that proposal,” the senators continued in their letter.
The senators are requesting that Gensler reopen the comment period on each of the listed proposals to ensure that the public has adequate time to comment.
“If you choose not to reopen the comment periods for these three proposals, we request that you reply to this letter with an explanation of the basis for your decision and an explanation for why your testimony included inaccurate statements about the SEC’s track record during your tenure for providing the public with adequate notice and a reasonable opportunity to comment on the agency’s proposed rulemaking,” they concluded.