Musk’s Attempt to Rein In the Securities and Exchange Commission

Image Credit:  Wired Photostream (Flickr)

Musk’s Lawyers Call SEC Agreement a “Government Imposed Muzzle”

Elon Musk has had enough of being gagged. It has been over four years since he tweeted to his 22 million Twitter followers that he could take Tesla private, at $420 per share (a substantial premium to its trading price at the time), and that funding for the transaction had been secured, adding the only remaining uncertainty was a shareholder vote. On September 27, 2018, the SEC charged Musk, CEO of Tesla Inc., with securities fraud for a series of false and misleading tweets about a potential transaction to take Tesla (TSLA) private. 

Part of the resolution with the Commission was that the CEO and chairman would not use Twitter and mention business without each tweet being vetted by a lawyer. Apparently, the provision restricting open communication with followers is difficult for Elon, who is quite active on the social media microblog platform. The easier part is the $40 million in cash that was part of the settlement ($20mm Musk, $20mm Tesla), and his resignation as Chairman of the Board.

In a brief filed with the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan, on the fourth anniversary of the SEC’s charges, Musk’s lawyers called the pre-approval mandate a “government-imposed muzzle” that inhibited and chilled his lawful speech on a broad range of topics. The brief also said the requirement imposed by the SEC violated the U.S. Constitution and undermined public policy by running “contrary to the American principles of free speech and open debate.”

The SEC is expected to respond by filing its own brief with the appeals court.

Elon had filed an appeal previously to terminate the settlement agreement he had as CEO of Tesla with the SEC. That request was denied in April of this year. The denial was awkward as Mr. Musk was moving forward to acquire Twitter for $44 billion.

When on November 6, 2021 Musk asked Twitter followers whether he should sell 10% of his Tesla stake to cover tax bills on stock options, the SEC opened a probe and subpoenaed documents related to his compliance with the earlier settlement.

It’s time to rein in the SEC, according to the filing by Musk’s attorneys. It said the ruling is keeping Musk under “constant threat” as the Commission might reject his view as to which tweets require pre-approval from legal staff.

“Under the shadow of the consent decree, the SEC has increasingly surveilled, policed, and attempted to curb Mr. Musk’s protected speech that does not touch upon the federal securities laws,” the lawyers wrote.

In other events related to Twitter and the Tesla founder, Twitter has sued Musk to complete his purchase of the company. A nonjury trial is scheduled for October 17 in Delaware Chancery Court.

Paul Hoffman Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-219

https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2018-226

https://www.reuters.com/legal/elon-musk-seeks-narrow-sec-consent-decree-end-pre-approval-tweets-2022-09-28/

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/04/27/judge-rejects-elon-musks-motion-sec-consent-decree-tweets-00028341

Zero-Commission Brokers are Not in the Clear Yet, Says SEC

Image Credit: Karlis Dambrans (Flickr)

Gary Gensler Backs off on Payment-For-Order-Flow, But Promises Something More Comprehensive

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) chairman has softened his harsh talk against the brokerage practice of payment-for-order-flow (PFOF). While securities brokers and investors in the industry breathed a sigh of relief with the news that the practice won’t be banned, firms like Robinhood (HOOD), Etrade (ETFC), and Charles Schwab (SCHW) may have something else to worry about.

About PFOF

There are harsh critics of the practice of PFOF, and there are strong advocates. Proponents of the model say it provides investors more liquidity, while those that oppose the practice question if retail traders are getting the best price.

In a nutshell, what this compensation system does is when investors place trades for stocks, ETFs, and options, the broker uses market makers to execute the order. To compete for price and execution, market makers in the securities offer rebates back to retail brokers. The rebates add to the broker’s profit, which is in part what allows for “free trades.” Additionally, the net cost per share to the investor is often still below most other methods readily available to them.

PFOF provides a significant revenue stream for retail brokers that offer zero-commission trading. Stocks of these brokerage firms have been under downward pressure with the uncertainty of whether the practice that is banned in other countries would be banned in the U.S. The news that it won’t be banned is seen as positive by those in the online broker industry.

New Direction for PFOF

After harping on the idea of banning PFOF, SEC officials (as reported by Bloomberg) have indicated that a ban is no longer being considered. That has been followed by their promise that other changes to the execution mechanism are on the way.

While the final SEC plans for payment-for-order-flow are not known, it is expected that they will allow these brokers to conduct business, and it is not expected to be more profitable for the brokers – most expect it to make it more difficult to maintain current earnings. The Commission is, if nothing else, expected to propose changes that could affect the complicated system of the rebates designed to increase market makers’ trading volume. Additionally, the regulator is weighing a plan to force brokers to disclose more about how much trading with them costs compared with benchmarks, a metric known as price improvement. The metric would allow customers to be able to compare one firm to another.

The SEC may also better clarify requirements for brokerages on what is “best execution” of stock transactions. The scope of the overhaul by the SEC remains to be seen.

The SEC is expected to introduce its plan in the coming months, according to Bloomberg. The plan is likely to make the system more transparent and more competitive and to include regulations lowering access fees that exchanges charge the brokers to execute trades.

Paul Hoffman Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-09-22/sec-poised-to-let-wall-street-keep-payment-for-order-flow-deals?srnd=premium&leadSource=uverify%20wall

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4447377-how-does-robinhood-make-money?https://www.usfunds.com/resource/decision-to-switch-ethereum-to-proof-of-stake-may-have-been-based-on-misleading-energy-fud/?