Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I'd be interested to hear why you think this. I've spoken with several people who I consider very knowledgeable in this area -- former SEC attorneys, people who practice before the SEC, etc. -- and they take a very different view.
|
My view is that day to day life will not change from a rule making perspective. The SEC regs change minimally from year to year. The recent exception, of course, was SOX, but most of the SOX regs have already been implemented and no one expects major changes on that front. The only significant rule change proposal that I am aware that is currently on the table is to change the level of disclosure required for securities offerings based on the size of issuer (i.e., large issuers will be need less current disclosure in prospectuses on the theory that they are widely held and all material info is in their periodic filings).
From an enforcement perspective, the SEC is like any other agency. Most of the people on the ground are career professionals who do their jobs conscienciously no matter the administration or commissioner. The exception is the big ticket, political items, that Spitzer is pursuing like a rabbid dog.* The SEC lost face to Spitzer several times in the last few years (e.g., market timing investigations), and I think their has been a conscious effort under Donaldson not to let that happen again. This may change under Cox.
Lastly, and this is more to Ty's point, the SEC cannot stop fraud. Enron, Worldcom, etc., would have happened regardless of who was guarding the chicken coup.
*Even though he is a political hack, I kind of like Spitzer. There is a lot of dirty shit that happens every day on Wall Street, and he has been the one guy willing to take these guys on, even if his motives are not entirely charitable.
Threaded Mode