Mar. 15, 2023
March 15, 2023 I am a household investor, and am submitting this comment on the proposed rule S7-01-23 release 33.11151. This proposed rule exempts non-reporting companies from registering certain securities offerings under the Securities Act, if they are exclusively sold to accredited investors. However, this exemption has significant flaws. It inadequately protects household investors, such as myself, by reducing the information available to them. This lack of transparency makes it more difficult for them to make informed investment decisions, potentially leading to losses as a direct result of missing information or misinformation. Additionally, the proposed rule could be exploited by hedge funds that may be unethical and/or lacking in integrity. These hedge funds have a documented history of manipulative behavior in the securities market, and the exemption would offer them a new opportunity to legally engage in such unethical practices. By limiting the exemption to accredited investors, hedge funds could create fake accredited investor accounts to conduct manipulative behavior outside of regulatory oversight. If the purpose of this rule is to further separate private/household/independent investors from the information they need to make educated decisions with their investments, and to allow hedge funds/market makers to hide information relevant to the individual investor, it will certainly be successful in that. And that will only cause a steeper divide in the socio-economic classes as \"the rich get richer.\" If the purpose of the SEC is to ensure the markets are fair and that all who trade are on equal ground, they will have failed by enacting this rule.