Atkins argues that complex market access rules without investor protection rationale serve no one.
“Labyrinthine restrictions on access to public markets unmoored from an investor protection rationale serve nobody.”
Atkins argues firms should be allowed to refuse paper-demanding customers despite the proposed rule requiring it.
“For example, a firm could refuse customers who do not agree to e-delivery even though Reg E-Delivery requires firms to provide paper if a customer requests it.”
Atkins argues cumulative regulatory burden, not individual rules, drives companies to stay private.
“Often a single line item does not look unreasonable in isolation. The cumulative effect is what pushes companies to stay private, or to leave the public markets.”