4 ms·

How about a knowledge/skills test instead of a wealth test? Something like the bar exam, but for investing instead of law. That would keep out people who have

by nokcha 6y ago

How about a knowledge/skills test instead of a wealth test? Something like the bar exam, but for investing instead of law. That would keep out people who have no idea what they're doing, without unfairly keeping out knowledgeable middle-class citizens.

thursday0987 6y ago
did you even read the SEC announcement? it is literally the first bullet point: * add a new category to the definition that permits natural persons to qualify as accredited investors based on certain professional certifications, designations or credentials or other credentials issued by an accredited educational institution, which the Commission may designate from time to time by order. In conjunction with the adoption of the amendments, the Commission designated by order holders in good standing of the Series 7, Series 65, and Series 82 licenses as qualifying natural persons.
- madamelic 6y ago
  Cool, I was bummed when I googled Series 7 and saw I needed to be sponsored. Looks like series 65 is the way to go since series 82 also requires sponsorship.
  - mindcrime 6y ago
    Looks like series 65 is the way to go since series 82 also requires sponsorship. Depends. If simply passing the exam was enough, that does seem semi-reasonable. But if it requires you actually be licensed by your respective state, then the rabbit-hole goes much deeper. I looked at the requirements here in NC, although I don't know how representative they are of other states, but basically you'd have to register with the State as an investment management company (which would probably entail registering an LLC or something), and then pay them $300 / year to keep up your registration. Add the $200/ year or so for the LLC filing fees, as well as the paperwork requirements (annual report, etc), tax filings, and suchlike, and you're talking about a barrier that while not insurmountable, is still going to be fairly steep for most people.
gojomo 6y ago
Yes, that's exactly in line with how I'd like the SEC to go further than these initial promising steps. More competence-evaluation – ideally constantly recalibrated according to the performance & satisfaction of those approved. Do some certifications/skills-tests strongly predict later competent investing? Increase their weights. Do others seem to be easy backdoors that lead to lots of burned investors? Decrease their weights. Manage for the goal - wealth expansion & a vibrant private investing ecosystem – without the archaic oversimplifications "rich are competent to do whatever they want, and young/poor are incompetent so must be kept on a short regulatory leash".

by nokcha 6y ago

thursday0987 6y ago

did you even read the SEC announcement? it is literally the first bullet point: * add a new category to the definition that permits natural persons to qualify as accredited investors based on certain professional certifications, designations or credentials or other credentials issued by an accredited educational institution, which the Commission may designate from time to time by order. In conjunction with the adoption of the amendments, the Commission designated by order holders in good standing of the Series 7, Series 65, and Series 82 licenses as qualifying natural persons.

madamelic 6y ago
Cool, I was bummed when I googled Series 7 and saw I needed to be sponsored. Looks like series 65 is the way to go since series 82 also requires sponsorship.
- mindcrime 6y ago
  Looks like series 65 is the way to go since series 82 also requires sponsorship. Depends. If simply passing the exam was enough, that does seem semi-reasonable. But if it requires you actually be licensed by your respective state, then the rabbit-hole goes much deeper. I looked at the requirements here in NC, although I don't know how representative they are of other states, but basically you'd have to register with the State as an investment management company (which would probably entail registering an LLC or something), and then pay them $300 / year to keep up your registration. Add the $200/ year or so for the LLC filing fees, as well as the paperwork requirements (annual report, etc), tax filings, and suchlike, and you're talking about a barrier that while not insurmountable, is still going to be fairly steep for most people.

gojomo 6y ago

Yes, that's exactly in line with how I'd like the SEC to go further than these initial promising steps. More competence-evaluation – ideally constantly recalibrated according to the performance & satisfaction of those approved. Do some certifications/skills-tests strongly predict later competent investing? Increase their weights. Do others seem to be easy backdoors that lead to lots of burned investors? Decrease their weights. Manage for the goal - wealth expansion & a vibrant private investing ecosystem – without the archaic oversimplifications "rich are competent to do whatever they want, and young/poor are incompetent so must be kept on a short regulatory leash".