Contrary to “the one-sided presentation by petitioners,” having assembled a robust administrative record, the SEC appropriately weighed and balanced these competing concerns, the industry brief said.
Although the SEC concluded that reform of broker-dealer regulation was necessary, it recognized that an ill-fitted standard “would risk reducing investor choice and access” and “would increase costs for firms and for retail investors in both broker-dealer and investment adviser relationships,” the trade groups argued.
The trade groups said that XYPN et. al.’s objections are unfounded because, among other things, they uniformly ignore that Regulation BI “will in fact accomplish a significant, durable improvement in retail investor protection,” while at the same time preserve the brokerage model as a choice for investors, a result that undoubtedly redounds to the benefit of investors.
“Petitioners offer no persuasive reason for this court to upset the balance the SEC struck,” the trade groups argued.
This article was provided by Bloomberg News.