June 29, 2005
Independent Chairmen of Mutual Funds
Posted by Caroline Bradley

So the SEC voted to reinstate the independent chairman rule. This is the rule the DC Circuit remanded for consideration of the costs of the rule, noting:

the disclosure alternative was neither frivolous nor out of bounds and the Commission therefore had an obligation to consider it... The Commission may ultimately decide the disclosure alternative will not sufficiently serve the interests of shareholders, but the Commission – not its counsel and not this court – is charged by the Congress with bringing its expertise and its best judgment to bear upon that issue.

Foreseeing this would happen Larry Ribstein (among others) expressed some concerns. Like it or not, the issue of the costs of regulation is a real one, and it deserves more consideration than seems to have happened here. And regulators in other places have recently been adopting the strategy of requiring firms to disclose why they don't choose to adopt particular examples of best practice in governance.

Update: I've just been reading Commissioner Glassman's highly critical comments on the reconsideration of this rule.

Securities | Bookmark

TrackBacks (1)

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345157d569e200d8345911a169e2

Links to weblogs that reference Independent Chairmen of Mutual Funds:

» Still more on Donaldson's still not getting it from Ideoblog ...
"In what has to be a low point even for the Donaldson era of mediocrity, the SEC reaffirmed its mutua ..." [more] (Tracked on June 29, 2005 @ 16:05)
Bloggers
Papers
Posts
Recent Comments
Popular Threads
Search The Glom
The Glom on Twitter
Archives by Topic
Archives by Date
January 2019
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Miscellaneous Links