SEC Signals Potential Rollback of Recent Regulations in Spring 2025 Agenda
Washington, D.C. – The Securities and exchange Commission (SEC) is signaling a potential shift in regulatory approach,outlining a Spring 2025 agenda that suggests a review and possible rollback of certain rules adopted in recent years. This move, detailed in a recent analysis by Gibson, Dunn & crutcher LLP, indicates a willingness too address concerns raised by industry participants regarding the cost and complexity of new regulations.
The SEC’s forthcoming regulatory flex agenda impacts a broad range of stakeholders, including public companies, investment advisors, and market participants. The potential revisions center on rules concerning areas like climate-related disclosures, cybersecurity, and market structure, all of which have faced scrutiny for their compliance burdens. The agency’s willingness to revisit these rules could significantly alter the regulatory landscape and influence corporate behavior in the coming years, with the outcome dependent on public comment and SEC deliberations.
Gibson Dunn’s analysis highlights the cyclical nature of SEC regulation, noting a pattern of rule-making followed by periods of review and adjustment. The firm’s experts-brian J. Lane, Julia Lapitskaya, James J. Moloney, Ronald O. Mueller, Michael A. Titera, Geoffrey E. Walter, and Lori Zyskowski-suggest the current agenda reflects a response to feedback received since the implementation of several high-profile rules.
Specifically, the SEC is expected to consider adjustments to its rules on climate-related disclosures, which require companies to report on climate risks and emissions. Concerns have been raised about the difficulty and expense of accurately calculating and reporting this information. similarly, the agency may revisit aspects of its cybersecurity rules, which mandate enhanced disclosure of material cybersecurity incidents.
The Spring 2025 agenda also includes a potential review of rules impacting market structure, including those related to order handling and trading practices. These rules have been the subject of debate, with some arguing they could stifle innovation and increase costs for investors.
Gibson Dunn cautions that these materials are for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. The firm emphasizes that facts and circumstances vary, and prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. For further information, visit www.gibsondunn.com.
