So the SEC voted to propose five uptick rule-related proposals. The comment period, during which the SEC receives feedback from member firms, will be 60 days before anything is decided on.
From Pensions & Investments:
Among the proposals being considered, one is to reinstate the original rule that was introduced in 1938 and was in place until being repealed in July 2007. The original rule required that a stock’s last trade represent an increase in price before it could be sold short.
Other proposals up for comment include a modified uptick rule that would restrict shorting a stock at a price lower than the last best bid price.
There are also three variations on circuit-breaker rules that would halt short selling of a particular stock once its price has declined more than 10% over a set period.
For my take on the return of the uptick rule and its importance, read below:
The following is not an argument for or against shorting, as that is a non-debate. The presence of short-selling is a necessary component of a free, liquid and healthy market. The question we’ll focus on here is what type of form the safeguards against abusive short-selling should take when the discussion by regulators takes place on April 8th.
First, a bit of background on the uptick rule:
Read the rest: Modified Uptick Rule Debate