SEC Proposal to Cut Quarterly Reporting Opposed by 99% of Public Comments
Miles Bennett
The SEC proposed letting public companies switch from quarterly to semi-annual filings, but 99% of 8,080 original public comments explicitly opposed the plan — retail investors fear losing their last level playing field against institutions.
Where does the 99% figure come from?
Ohio State professor Tzachi Zach used an AI tracking tool to analyze all public comments by the deadline: 7,994 out of 8,080 original comments opposed the proposal — that is 99%.
An additional 59,972 form letters — template petitions signed by individuals — were all against.
This means → whether people wrote their own letter or signed someone else's, the public response was near-unanimous rejection.
Why are retail investors alarmed?
The core issue is information asymmetry. Institutions have expert networks, satellite imagery, credit-card spending data, and direct management access. Retail investors' main source of hard, regular information is the 10-Q (quarterly filing).
Reddit community WallStreetBets wrote: "The quarterly report is the single most important information-leveling mechanism between retail and institutional investors."
In plain terms = cutting quarterly reports to semi-annual ones halves the regular intelligence retail investors receive, while institutional channels stay fully intact.
Who else is pushing back?
Non-profit Better Markets called the proposal "a slap in the face to investors." Investment site Motley Fool launched a "Save the 10-Q" petition campaign.
A CFA Institute survey found 62% of investors oppose replacing quarterly with semi-annual reports.
About 85% of investors worry that letting companies choose their own disclosure frequency would distort peer comparisons — firms in the same sector could report on different schedules.
Who supports the proposal?
The American Bankers Association backed the change, arguing that quarterly filings create recurring costs and consume significant management time, while banks already disclose enough through regulatory reports and earnings calls.
ExxonMobil CFO Neil Hansen also submitted a supportive comment.
This reflects a pattern: supporters are mainly large financial institutions and corporate giants — entities that already sit on the information-advantage side. Less disclosure saves them cost first.
What happens next?
The SEC has not responded to the overwhelming public opposition, nor disclosed how many comments remain unpublished.
Zach said the thousands of comments not yet processed through his database are expected to follow the same trend: "We haven't seen a single form letter that isn't opposed."
This means → the proposal's final outcome will directly determine whether the information gap between retail and institutional investors widens further.
Content is for reference only, not financial advice.