Oct. 28, 2023
Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing to express my utmost frustration and bewilderment regarding the proposed rule on Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). As a concerned U.S. citizen, I cannot help but feel deeply disappointed by the lack of clarity and consideration evident in this proposal. First and foremost, I find it utterly perplexing that the SEC has failed to provide a clear definition of digital assets in this proposed rule. In an era where technological advancements have revolutionized the investment landscape, one would expect the SEC to keep pace and establish precise guidelines. Instead, this proposal seems to be shrouded in ambiguity and open to misinterpretation, leaving both investment advisers and investors in a state of confusion and vulnerability. Is it too much to ask for a comprehensive definition that encompasses various virtual currencies, utility tokens, security tokens, and emerging digital financial instruments? By neglecting to address this crucial aspect, the SEC is effectively rendering the proposed rule toothless and impotent in the face of rapidly evolving investment opportunities. Equally exasperating is the disregard for privacy and safety concerns associated with the sharing of sensitive financial data and personal information. While transparency and accountability are fundamental in any regulatory framework, they should never come at the expense of individuals' privacy rights. The proposed rule's demand for detailed information about custodians, including custodial account numbers, is a direct threat to the privacy and security of clients' sensitive financial information. It is alarming that the SEC appears willing to wilfully endanger individuals' personal data without clear guidelines or measures in place to ensure its protection. If the SEC truly values privacy rights, it must not only limit the disclosure of account numbers but also prioritize robust cybersecurity measures. Implementing secure data encryption protocols, restricting access to sensitive information, and holding all parties involved accountable for breaches or misuses of client data are necessary steps to instill confidence in investors. It is disheartening to witness such a lack of foresight and consideration when it comes to addressing crucial issues in this proposed rule. One would expect the SEC to fulfill its duty of investor protection and maintain trust within the advisory industry. Yet with this proposal, it seems the SEC is more interested in generating frustration and confusion among market participants. I sincerely hope that the SEC reevaluates this proposed rule, takes the concerns of concerned U.S. citizens into account, and rectifies these glaring deficiencies. It is our collective responsibility to ensure the fair, transparent, and secure operation of our financial markets. Thank you for your attention, although it appears to have fallen on deaf ears in this instance. Yours incredulously, A Concerned U.S. Citizen