Apr. 20, 2023
April 20, 2023 Dear SEC, As a retail investor, I am writing to express my concerns regarding SEC proposal S7-02-22 and the potential ramifications it may have on the interests of retail investors like myself. While the proposal aims to modernize the regulatory framework for multilateral U.S. Treasury trading venues, it is essential to ensure that such changes do not compromise the transparency, fairness, and resilience of the market. One comment submitted to the SEC seems to prioritize the interests of large market participants, rather than retail investors. It is crucial to recognize that the interests of large financial institutions may not always align with those of retail investors. For instance, the support for the proposal to clarify that the revised \"exchange\" definition under Regulation ATS remains focused on multilateral trading venues, and not single-dealer platforms, may not necessarily benefit retail investors. Moreover, the recommendation to re-insert the word \"multiple\" in Rule 3b-16(a)(1) may not be in the best interests of retail investors. In this case, it is crucial to consider the potential consequences of making revisions to the longstanding \"exchange\" definition and the impact it may have on market participants. As retail investors, we rely on the SEC to provide a fair and transparent market environment, where all participants have equal access to information and opportunities. Introducing public post-trade transparency and greater central clearing can help achieve this, but it is essential to avoid changes that might unintentionally reduce market transparency or create an unfair advantage for specific market participants. Therefore, I urge the SEC to take a thorough and cautious approach when considering the recommendations put forth in the aforementioned comment. It is vital to ensure that any changes to the regulatory framework prioritize the interests of retail investors, promoting a fair, transparent, and resilient market for all participants. Thank you for your attention to this matter, and for your commitment to safeguarding the interests of retail investors. Sincerely, Mark Wetzel