Apr. 20, 2022
I as an anonymously concerned retail investor and formally complaining about the rule in the subject line being sent forward for approval. This proposal seem like it has been proposed before and are inherently unfair to retail investors. This rule would not anything to create a more free, transparent, and fair market for all investors. It looks like it was created specifically to be weaponized against retail by inherently encouraging the creation of unlimited short shares with no obligation to deliver on those positions. Retail is never given the opportunity to avoid their obligations to their positions, so no other actor in the markets should either. Seems like pretty simple logic to me. If institutions are unable to pay the risk that they took on while shorting other companies, then they should have been denied taking on those positions or never taking them on in the first place. Everyone should live with the financial consequences of their decisions, that’s the logic that our markets are built on. This proposal, if passed, would most likely undermine the trust of hundreds of thousands if not millions of peoples public in government institutions like the SEC so I don’t see the benefit of putting this up to a vote. I hope your agency has the right intuition to withdraw this rule. Otherwise, how could retail ever be motivated to place their trust in the US public markets if shorts have no obligations to deliver on their positions?