Overview
Title
To make improvements to the securities laws, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The SEC Reform and Restructuring Act is a plan to make the rules about buying and selling company shares better. It wants the SEC, which makes sure things are fair and safe, to tell others what it’s doing and check its rules often to keep everything working well.
Summary AI
The SEC Reform and Restructuring Act aims to enhance securities laws in the United States. It includes measures for the SEC to evaluate the costs and benefits of its regulations, requires periodic reviews of final rules, and mandates regular reports to Congress about its activities. The bill also proposes the transfer of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to the SEC and emphasizes cybersecurity audits and transparency in regulatory actions. Additionally, it mandates a minimum public comment period for rulemakings and requests studies on the impact of major rules issued by the SEC.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The “SEC Reform and Restructuring Act,” introduced as H. R. 8339, seeks to implement numerous reforms to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) with the objective of making securities laws more effective and transparent. This proposed legislation includes measures aimed at enhancing regulatory accountability, streamlining processes, increasing transparency, and ensuring cybersecurity within the realm of financial regulations.
General Overview
H. R. 8339 encompasses a broad range of proposals targeting several aspects of the SEC’s regulatory framework. Among its titles, the Act seeks to hold the SEC accountable by requiring it to weigh the costs and benefits of its regulations before they are enacted, ensure transparency through regular testimony to Congress, and conduct audits of its cybersecurity infrastructure. Additionally, the bill mandates periodic reviews of existing regulations to assess their effectiveness, streamlines oversight functions, and formalizes public participation in the rule-making process by establishing minimum public comment periods.
Summary of Significant Issues
One key issue identified is the transfer of responsibilities from the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to a newly proposed office within the SEC. This structural overhaul could raise concerns about the continuity and effectiveness of oversight functions. Complexity and potential delays in implementation may arise during this transition.
Another major concern pertains to the bill’s requirement for the SEC to conduct rigorous cost-benefit analyses of proposed regulations. While the intent is to ensure that regulations are worthwhile, the lack of clear criteria on evaluating problems or defining costs and benefits might lead to subjective interpretations and discourage timely rule-making.
The audit of the SEC’s IT infrastructure, as mandated, does not clearly define sufficient cybersecurity measures, raising the risk of inconsistent assessments. Similarly, the lack of clarity in defining cumulative regulatory effects could complicate implementation.
The absence of explicit consequences for the SEC’s non-compliance with certain requirements, such as periodic rule reviews or failure to provide the semiannual Congressional testimony, raises questions about accountability.
Public Impact
On a broad scale, this bill seeks to enhance public trust and involvement in financial regulations by mandating more transparency and accountability for the SEC. It encourages public participation through extended comment periods and aims to protect the public by ensuring that rules undergo thorough evaluations before they are enacted. Moreover, these efforts to monitor and assess cybersecurity practices at the SEC are crucial in safeguarding sensitive financial data.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Financial Institutions and Companies: Financial market participants, especially those involved in accounting, could be affected by the structural changes in oversight mechanisms. Transitioning oversight responsibilities might lead to initial confusion in compliance requirements but could potentially streamline processes once fully implemented.
Investors: For investors, the bill promises more comprehensive protections by ensuring that regulations are thoroughly vetted and consistently reviewed. It aims to offer enhanced market transparency and accountability, thereby promoting fairer and more predictable investment environments.
Regulators: Regulators may encounter increased workloads and administrative burdens due to the rigorous analysis processes, audits, and testimonies required by the bill. However, this could also foster a more disciplined regulatory framework once the structures are fully operative.
Public and Lawmakers: By providing regular insights into SEC activities through mandated testimonies and reports, the legislative body and the public can gain a clearer understanding of regulatory initiatives and their effects on financial markets, ultimately fostering greater oversight and transparency.
In summary, while H. R. 8339 aspires to improve various aspects of securities regulation, it presents potential challenges that need careful consideration to ensure it achieves its intended outcomes effectively. The clarity and transparency in the amendment processes will determine the extent of its positive impact on regulatory practices and the stakeholders involved.
Issues
The amendment involved in Section 501 regarding the transfer of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to the Securities and Exchange Commission introduces significant structural changes. This could raise concerns about potential impact on ongoing accounting oversight activities, including transition and implementation complexities. The provision lacks an explicit explanation or rationale for repealing certain sections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which contributes to uncertainty about the consequences and effects on existing regulations and oversight mechanisms.
The requirement in Section 101 for the Securities and Exchange Commission to assess costs and benefits using the Chief Economist might involve complex economic analyses that are not easily understood by the general public or stakeholders lacking an economic background. The provision lacks specific criteria for the 'significance of the problem' addressed by a regulation, which may lead to subjective and inconsistent evaluations, thereby impacting transparency and stakeholder engagement.
Section 102 does not specify a timeline for the issuance of rulings by the Securities and Exchange Commission, potentially leading to delays. Additionally, readers not familiar with section 23(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 might struggle to understand the full implications of the requirements, raising accessibility and understanding concerns.
Section 301, which requires a GAO audit of the SEC's information technology infrastructure, lacks clear guidelines for determining if data and cybersecurity systems and procedures are 'sufficient'. This lack of definition could lead to subjective assessments and risks related to data security and privacy.
Section 601 mandates a GAO study on major rules issued by the SEC, yet does not provide mechanisms for revising major rules based on study findings, limiting the study's potential impact on improving regulations.
Section 402 requires consideration of the cumulative effect of regulations but does not define what constitutes a 'cumulative' effect, which could lead to ambiguities in interpretation and implementation complexities in the rule-making process.
In Section 701, while the bill requires a minimum public comment period for proposed rulemakings, it does not define how 'imminent investor harm' is to be determined, which could lead to inconsistent application and question the transparency of the rules.
Section 201 necessitates semiannual testimony from the SEC to Congress but does not specify consequences if the testimony is not provided. This could result in unfulfilled compliance without repercussions, questioning the enforcement efficacy.
The lack of specific consequences if the Commission fails to conduct the periodic review as required in Section 401 may affect accountability regarding the effectiveness of ongoing rule assessments and adjustments.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title; table of contents Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The “SEC Reform and Restructuring Act” outlines various aspects of restructuring the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). It includes sections on regulatory accountability, transparency, cybersecurity audits, reviews of government expansion, public company accounting oversight streamlining, studies on major rules, and establishes a minimum public comment period.
101. Consideration by the Securities and Exchange Commission of the costs and benefits of regulations and certain other agency actions of the Commission Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to require the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to carefully consider the costs and benefits before proposing or finalizing any regulations. It outlines steps the SEC must take, such as identifying who will be affected, consulting with its Chief Economist, exploring alternative actions, ensuring accessibility and clarity, and assessing both intended and unintended impacts over time.
102. Accountability provision relating to other regulatory entities Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
A rule made by the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board or a national securities association won't become official until the Securities and Exchange Commission checks to ensure it follows certain legal requirements, similar to the rules the Commission itself has to follow.
201. Semiannual testimony to Congress regarding activities of the Securities and Exchange Commission Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Securities Exchange Act of 1934 has been updated to require the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission to testify before Congress at least twice a year about the Commission's activities. Additionally, all Commissioners must join the Chairman for these testimonies at least once a year.
301. GAO audit of information technology infrastructure and handling of data Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct an independent audit of the Securities and Exchange Commission's information technology infrastructure and how it handles data. This audit will compare IT spending by the Commission to other federal financial regulators, assess the quality of IT contracting, evaluate data and cybersecurity systems, and review any recent security incidents. A report will be submitted detailing the findings and making recommendations for improvements.
401. Periodic review of final rules required Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires the Securities and Exchange Commission to review each final rule it issues every 5 years to see if updates or changes are needed to help with capital formation, ensure fair markets, and protect investors. Additionally, the Commission must report to Congress about the review process and its outcomes.
402. Consideration of cumulative effect of regulations required Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section requires various financial regulatory acts, including the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, to consider both the individual and cumulative effects of rules and regulations when determining their impact. This applies to current rules as well as proposed ones, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of their potential effects.
501. Transfer of Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to Securities and Exchange Commission Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section proposes changes to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, transferring responsibilities from the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to the Office of Public Accounting Oversight under the Securities and Exchange Commission. It repeals certain sections of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, dictates the phasing out of references to the current Board, and states that the Board will cease to exist two years after this law is enacted.
502. Establishment; administrative provisions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The proposed changes to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 aim to establish an Office of Public Accounting Oversight within the Office of the Chief Accountant. This new office will be responsible for overseeing audits of companies under securities laws to ensure accurate and independent audit reports, and it will take on roles like inspecting accounting firms and handling investigations previously managed by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board.
503. Registration with the Office Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines changes to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, including replacing references to "the Board" with "the Office" in the section heading and modifying specific parts of the law that previously mentioned "the Board" or certain sections for clarity and consistency.
504. Auditing, quality control, standards, and rules Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section modifies the Sarbanes-Oxley Act by updating headings, removing and renaming certain parts, and making several textual adjustments to improve clarity and alignment with other sections.
505. Foreign public accounting firms Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section outlines amendments to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act concerning foreign public accounting firms. It changes references from "Board" to "Office" in the law and removes certain permissions previously given to the Board.
506. Funding Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section outlines amendments to the funding procedures of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, specifying how annual budgets for both the standard setting body and the Office will be established and funded, introducing flexibility by replacing certain mandatory terms with optional ones, and removing some outdated provisions.
507. Definitions Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The text amends the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 by changing the numbers of certain paragraphs and adding a new definition for "Office," which refers to the Office of Public Accounting Oversight within the Commission's Office of the Chief Accountant.
508. Technical and conforming amendments Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section provides amendments to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which include changes to the definitions and authority between the Board and the Commission, removes references to certain entities, and updates the clerical details in the table of contents by altering titles and removing certain sections.
509. Rule of construction with respect to cooperative arrangements Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
This section states that the law, or any changes it makes, won't interfere with ongoing cooperative agreements between the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and foreign auditor oversight authorities, as defined in a previous law, as long as they were effective two years after this law was enacted.
510. Regulations Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has the authority to create rules needed to implement the provisions of this section.
511. Effective date Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The changes introduced by this part of the bill will come into effect two years after the bill becomes law.
601. GAO study regarding major rules Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section adds a requirement for the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study every three years on major rules issued by the Securities Exchange Commission, including their costs and benefits, and their effectiveness in achieving certain goals like facilitating capital formation and protecting investors. If there are more than ten major rules to review, only the ten most significant will be studied, and a report on the findings must be submitted to Congress.
701. Minimum public comment period Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section of the act requires the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to have a minimum public comment period for new rule proposals. Normally, this period must be at least 60 days, but it can be 30 days if the rule is addressing an urgent investor threat. Federal holidays are not counted in these periods, and the timing starts on the day the proposal is published in the Federal Register.