Sec 132 - Suspension of Mark to Market!

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by Cdntrader, Sep 28, 2008.

  1. rc5781


  2. AAA30


    If they had MtMkt in the first place would much of this be happening? So much for transparency.
  3. I saw that, how convenient.

    .."in the public interest and is consistent with the protection of investors"


    WHAT ABOUT section 114 " market transparency" ?????

    so basically, if it is in the best interest of the people, by the people, and for the people, we, your government, will NOT TELL YOU THE TRUTH, for your own good of course.

  4. Well, that mark-to-market rule has been a big cause of problems. When there is (temporarily) no market for a security because of extreme short-term events, should all holders of that security have to immediately market it down to $0?

    It's one thing to have a mark-to-market rule on a very actively traded, liquid's quite different to have that rule to apply to assets which are thinly traded with few active market participants.

    The bill doesn't say the mark-to-market rule is being removed, just that the SEC is required to produce a study on the mark-to-market rule within 90 days of the bill's enactment.
  5. AAA30


    Yeah I see the study part but removal of this accounting rule is a bad idea. Best thing would be an admendment which states the guidelines used for hard to value iliquids, Elimination of the rule will just put us back to where we were before but now that everyone knows no one would trust the numbers anyways.
  6. Sec 132 gives the ABILITY to remove mark to market.

    Sec 133 authorizes the study of mark to market.
  7. Ah, I see...that started a page earlier. the SEC the ability to suspend the mark-to-market rule.

    Wasn't the lack of ovesight at the SEC what got us into a lot of this trouble? Weren't they the ones that were supposed to be enforcing the rules against naked shorting, but did nothing to do so? Not that naked shorting was the cause of all these problems, but illegal naked shorting exacerbated the problems.
  8. I did not look at whole bill yet , did anybody see transaction tax thrown in it?
  9. Right.

    "BAAAD accounting rules and GOOOOD mgmt.

    How dare we assume it was the lack of oversight or accounting rules that started this entire mess.

    I mean, if we only had MORE regulation and PERFECT accounting rules this would have never happened."


    #10     Sep 28, 2008