Economy & Business

The SEC Should Withdraw Its New Regulations on ETFs

Chairman Jay Clayton participates in a U.S Securities and Exchange Commission open meeting in Washington, December 18, 2019. (Erin Scott/Reuters)
The Securities and Exchange Commission should make sure that everyone, not just the big boys on Wall Street, can invest and trade as they wish.

Deregulation has been one of the great Trump-administration success stories. So why does the Securities and Exchange Commission want more cumbersome rules that will restrict investor choices? A new 456-page SEC rule restricts the availability of a subset of Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs), specifically those that offer returns that are the inverse or a multiple — double or triple — of a reference index. Inverse funds go up when the market goes down — which has been handy lately. Leveraged funds track their indexes with a multiple of two or three.

These ETFs are popular because they are low-cost, transparent, and well-regulated funds that can be used to reduce risk in a portfolio or to gain exposure to an index with less cash. They are generally straightforward in their names and descriptions, and hardly mislead investors.

Yet Trump-appointed SEC chairman Jay Clayton — along with the two commissioners who are Democrats has proposed requiring brokers and advisers to “exercise due diligence” before allowing a customer to buy one of these ETFs. At a minimum, the SEC would require the broker or adviser to determine the customer’s investment objectives, time horizon, employment status, estimated income, estimated total net worth, estimated liquid net worth, percent of liquid net worth intended to be invested, and investment experience and knowledge — which the SEC suggests would include years, size, frequency, and types of transactions involving stocks, bonds, commodities, options, and other financial instruments.

But somehow, that exhaustive amount of required information is not necessarily enough. The SEC would not create any bright-line test for brokers and advisers to prove they have complied with the new rule. Instead, they would be required to use a facts-and-circumstances test to show that they have a reasonable basis for believing an investor can understand a leveraged or inverse ETF. The two other Republican SEC commissioners have expressed major concerns about the rule, calling it an “overly paternalistic approach.”

Markets always go up and down. Putting a new legal risk on these kinds of investments will only raise their cost — which surely doesn’t benefit investors — or simply price smaller investors out of the market altogether.

The SEC would allow investors who currently own these products to sell them without these new hurdles. But otherwise, the rule would prohibit even existing accounts from buying or selling the supposedly dangerous products until they meet the extensive new requirements.

Some brokers would likely drop these funds entirely rather than set up the complicated compliance process. This will reduce investors’ choices and could reduce their returns or amplify their risk.

Even worse, the SEC is engaging in this regulatory adventurism with very little evidence that these ETFs present a problem to be solved. There is a theory that some inexperienced investors may misunderstand that daily performance of an index means its performance daily, creating unexpected results or large losses over a longer holding period. Yet the SEC itself acknowledges research showing that the ETFs have an “average implied holding period ranging from 1.18 days to 4.03 days.”

Moreover, it’s not at all clear that it’s irrational for an investor to consider holding these funds for the long term. In fact, it might surprise the SEC commissioners to learn that leveraged ETFs were among the top-performing funds for the entire decade that just concluded. Like all investments, these funds need to be monitored for changing market conditions. But certainly there’s no evidence that government should declare any such strategy presumptively ignorant and use it as the basis for regulation.

Worst of all, though, is the potential for this rule to become a new precedent. If it does, it could open up a Pandora’s Box of new regulatory barriers against the small investor. These ETFs are securities traded on public stock markets, which have never before been subject to investor certification requirements.  If a Republican-chaired SEC determines that this narrow class of securities should be available only to investors who can exhaustively document their investment fitness, it is easy to imagine the SEC in future administrations extending these requirements to other asset classes and, perhaps, ultimately to securities markets as a whole.

The SEC should look for ways that to provide small, non-institutional investors a full range of investment products from which to choose. This new regulatory approach would invite further impediments to small investors’ getting the best products they can. Instead, the SEC should make sure that everyone, not just the big boys on Wall Street, can invest and trade as they wish.

Stephen Moore is the chairman and Phil Kerpen is the president of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity. 

Most Popular

World

How to Make China Pay

One of the big questions facing the international community today is how to hold China legally and politically accountable for all its dishonesty and harm to people around the world. According to reports, U.S. intelligence agencies have confirmed to the White House that China has deliberately understated the ... Read More
World

How to Make China Pay

One of the big questions facing the international community today is how to hold China legally and politically accountable for all its dishonesty and harm to people around the world. According to reports, U.S. intelligence agencies have confirmed to the White House that China has deliberately understated the ... Read More

The Trail Leading Back to the Wuhan Labs

It is understandable that many would be wary of the notion that the origin of the coronavirus could be discovered by some documentary filmmaker who used to live in China. Matthew Tye, who creates YouTube videos, contends he has identified the source of the coronavirus — and a great deal of the information that ... Read More

The Trail Leading Back to the Wuhan Labs

It is understandable that many would be wary of the notion that the origin of the coronavirus could be discovered by some documentary filmmaker who used to live in China. Matthew Tye, who creates YouTube videos, contends he has identified the source of the coronavirus — and a great deal of the information that ... Read More

The Eeyore Syndrome

In A. A. Milne's classic Winne-the-Pooh children’s tales, Eeyore, the old gray donkey, is perennially pessimistic and gloomy. He always expects the worst to happen. Milne understood that Eeyore’s outbursts of depression could at first be salutatory but then become monotonous. The outlook of the pessimist ... Read More

The Eeyore Syndrome

In A. A. Milne's classic Winne-the-Pooh children’s tales, Eeyore, the old gray donkey, is perennially pessimistic and gloomy. He always expects the worst to happen. Milne understood that Eeyore’s outbursts of depression could at first be salutatory but then become monotonous. The outlook of the pessimist ... Read More
World

All Signs Point to China

Just one big story today: collecting and sorting through what we know about the coronavirus's origins, and what makes sense and what doesn’t in the theory that it originated from someone eating bats or pangolins from the Huanan Seafood Market. What We Know and What We Don’t Know about the Source of ... Read More
World

All Signs Point to China

Just one big story today: collecting and sorting through what we know about the coronavirus's origins, and what makes sense and what doesn’t in the theory that it originated from someone eating bats or pangolins from the Huanan Seafood Market. What We Know and What We Don’t Know about the Source of ... Read More