Under the leadership of Chairman Jay Clayton, the Securities and Exchange Commission has taken a tactful approach to review regulations and statutes for their efficiency in a marketplace that is constantly evolving, innovating and incorporating new technologies to help investors successfully plan for their long-term interests. At the heart of many of Chairman Clayton’s initiatives has been reducing regulatory barriers and encourage more private companies and retail investors to seek the capital markets. 

On Dec. 28, 2018, the SEC published an advance notice on proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register to request public input on how best to balance investor protection and the need for quarterly disclosure of financial reporting. This comes on the heels of President Trump asking SEC Chairman Jay Clayton to review the process, of which the SEC agreed to continue to “study public company reporting requirements, including the frequency of reporting.”

Specially, the solicitation of comments asks investors and businesses alike to evaluate the need for multiple disclosures of quarterly filings, known as Form 10-Q, in conjunction with yearly financial disclosures on Form 10-K and earnings reports on Form 8-K. Among the multiple businesses and investors who provided comments, there is support for the SEC to review and consider adopting new reporting guidelines that would amend the current quarterly standard and adopt a tri-annual, or even a biannual reporting structure.

As some of the comments submitted to the SEC suggest, switching from quarterly to tri-annual, or even a biannual reporting basis, could help promote long-term investing, instead of a “short-termism” trading mentality. Proponents of the proposal note that shifting to a model that decreases the reporting frequency will save costs for public companies, particularly small cap companies, as the reports are time consuming, expensive, and repetitive as there are already multiple other forms of reporting to the SEC. Those opposed to shifting to a less-frequent reporting system believe that the lack of quarterly reports leaves investors in the dark and lacks transparency for disclosing company performance. However, as has been the case particularly among technology businesses have operated at a loss for multiple quarters or years after going public and using their earned capital to reinvest back into the business before turning a profit. Had some investors purely relied on Form 10-Q reporting, discounted the products or services made and the business’s management team, these investors could have been left out of valuable growth opportunities.

Since the healthcare crisis created uncertainty beginning in March, over 850 companies have pulled quarterly guidance, as noted by CNBC. Because of the uncertainty surrounded by the crisis, investors actually have not punished companies for not providing guidance during Q2 and Q3 of this year, with many companies opting not to providing guidance for a full year. For example, only 67 of the S&P 500 companies have resumed guidance. With this lack of guidance and the market returning to near pre-COVID levels, it has some institutional investors supporting the idea to eliminate the trend of quarterly guidance to encourage more long-term investment in the market as well.

Americans for Tax Reform lead the coalition letter encouraging the SEC to ease compliance burdens on public companies and promote policies to that encourage shareholders to invest for the long-term by moving toward tri-annual reporting and reviewing guidance structures.

Click here to review our letter.

The freedom to work as a freelancer or independent contractor provides flexibility for households and vibrancy to the American economy.

But Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have both endorsed the PRO Act which threatens freelancers and independent contractors.

The PRO Act not only bans Right to Work laws nationwide, it imposes the same independent contractor/freelancer-destroying policies of California's AB5 law, which has destroyed countless lives and driven people out of the Golden State.

Examples of quotations from people hit by AB5:

"I lost the career and relationship I was building with a content writing company." [Link]

"AB5 is why I had to pack my very ill husband with stage 4 cancer and autistic son and leave the state. There is no way I can take care of our family and work a 'traditional' type job." [Link]

"I'm a certified court interpreter. I've been very happily freelancing for 15 years. I can choose which agencies to work with, and work as much or as little as I want to spend time with my 3-year-old. AB5 is destroying my wonderful work/life combo." [Link]

"We do all sizes of events, mostly in the 50 to 200 guest range. Every now and then we'll have a 1,000-person event. I bring in independent contractors to work one day and this law says I have to bring them into my payroll. For ONE EVENT, I would have to bring on 100 people into payroll. Insane." [Link]

"AB5 is destroying the pet setting business due to having to hire as employees!" [Link]

"I lost my job of 12 years as a medical transcriptionist because of AB5. Many in this profession value the flexibility in hours and working from home more than employee status. Now I have no money at all." [Link]

"Not only myself but hundreds of hard working TAX paying musicians will now be forced to go back underground for cash gigs, and leave me here to figure out and question why I ever followed the law and created a small business to create the American dream and create jobs for so many others. Two decades of my business destroyed because I have no one who wants to work for me now." [Link]

"Being an independent contractor gave me the ability to set a work schedule that my body could handle and make enough to support myself by only working a few hours a day." [Link]

Here is the documentation of Biden's endorsement of AB5 and the PRO Act:

"I look forward to signing the PRO Act as President" said Biden on Feb. 9, 2020.

"I support AB5 in California" said Biden on March 7, 2020.

The PRO Act legislation is live ammunition, having already passed the Democrat-run U.S. House of Representatives. In the Senate, it has 40 Democrat co-sponsors and the self-described socialist co-sponsor, Bernie Sanders.

The PRO Act has also been endorsed by a number of Democrat senatorial candidates including Cal Cunningham, John Hickenlooper, Sara Gideon, Theresa Greenfield, Ossoff and Mark Kelly.

California's AB5 law was passed by state Democrats in 2019 and took effect on Jan. 1, 2020. It has caused widespread misery in California among dozens of freelancer and independent contractor occupations. Residents have fled to other states to pursue their dreams and pay their bills.

Now Democrats want to impose this nationwide to make the union bosses happy and keep their campaign coffers flush with cash skimmed from "dues" from newly unionized workers forced into a union by the PRO Act. This policy tramples on freelancers and independent contractors by attempting to force them into an employment relationship, against their wishes and needs.

Freelancers and independent contractors want to be their own boss. AB5 and the PRO Act dictate they must have a boss.Households need greater flexibility than ever. Biden and Harris will destroy that flexibility and freedom. No wonder the media hasn't covered this issue.

Congressman Tom Emmer (R-Minn.) has reintroduced the “Retirement Inflation Protection Act,” legislation that will amend the tax code to index capital gains taxes to inflation for American taxpayers over the age of 59 ½. 

All Members of Congress should support this important, pro-taxpayer legislation to ensure seniors are not taxed on inflationary gains.

Currently, if a senior purchases a stock for $100, and later sells that same stock for $400, he must report and pay taxes on a $300 capital gain. In many cases, much or all of the capital gain is merely inflation.  With an historical inflation rate of 3%, inflation halves the real value of all assets every 24 years.  While this is bad enough, paying taxes on purely inflationary gains adds insult to injury.

Ending the taxation of inflationary gains will have clear, immediate economic benefits.

Indexation would free up “sticky capital”—buildings, land, stocks—that are held by individuals or businesses rather than sold and put to higher and better use because much of the “capital gain” is inflation and the high capital gains tax discourages mobility of capital. The value of all property in America would increase.

Lowering the capital gains rate would also encourage the formation of more capital and would result in the creation of more jobs, raising wages and worker productivity. 

Ending the capital gains tax would help Americans all across the country. Whether one is a worker saving for retirement or a farmer selling off a parcel of land to acquire capital for new equipment and machinery that would help grow their family business, eliminating capital gains will be beneficial to business.

Recent history shows that reducing the tax on capital gains increases short-term federal revenues by creating an unlocking effect, where pent-up gains they had built up over time are realized at greater rates than they would be if the tax was not changed.

While this bill is a good first step, capital gains taxes should be indexed to inflation for everyone. Americans should not be punished by being taxed on inflationary gains.

There is strong support for indexing capital gains taxes to inflation. ATR President Grover Norquist last year led a coalition of 51 conservative, free-market, pro-business, and pro-family activists and organizations in calling for President Trump to end the inflation tax on capital gains. This policy is also supported by Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas), White House Chief Economic Adviser Larry Kudlow, Vice President Mike Pence,  Ways and Means Republican Leader Kevin Brady (R-Texas), The National Federation for Independent Business, The Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council, the Republican Study Committee, and The Farm Bureau.

Even current Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) once supported ending inflation tax on capital gains. In a 1992 video then-congressman Chuck Schumer stated:

“If we really want to increase growth, there are proposals that we can do. I would be for indexing all capital gains and savings and borrowing.”

Current House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) also supported indexing capital gains to inflation in 1992. He said: 

“The capital gains provisions in H.R. 4287 benefit small business by indexing newly purchased assets. Income gauged would be much more reliable so that, real not inflationary gains will be taxed, and taxed at the same 28 percent maximum rate on gains.”

Passage of the Retirement Inflation Protection Act will ensure that seniors are protected from the inflation tax. It will ensure Americans keep more of their own money for retirement by ensuring they do not have to pay taxes on inflationary gains. This is great start, but Congress should continue working towards indexing the capital gains tax for all Americans.

The Keystone State was the first in the nation to pass “Clean Slate” legislation, which automatically seals the records of most misdemeanor offenses, and charges that did not result in conviction.

Clean Slate has been a big success, and it was clearly overdue. Since the initial bill’s passage in 2018, Pennsylvania has sealed 107,000 records for misdemeanor offenses, and a startling 16 million cases that did not result in a conviction.

It has set an example that other states have followed, Utah and Michigan have both recently passed similar bills. Not one to easily relinquish their head start, Pennsylvania lawmakers approved House Bill 440 just last week. Like the 2018 bill, HB 440 was sponsored by Rep. Sheryl Delozier.

HB 440 enhances the Clean Slate program. Now, anyone who has been unconditionally pardoned, or acquitted, will have their records sealed. Further, fines and fees will not be required before a case is sealed under Clean Slate. Appropriately, restitution is still required.

Clean Slate incentivizes good behavior by reducing unintended consequences for people leaving the system. Having a record makes it more difficult to find work and housing. Helping people become fully functioning members of society is good for them, public safety, and taxpayers.

Those who are finally getting their records sealed must not have committed a crime in the past decade, proving that they will stay on the straight-and-narrow. Research shows the rate of reoffending plummets after 5 years following release. If someone is going to reoffend, they are much more likely to do so in the few years right after they are released, and extremely unlikely to do so after 5-plus years in the community.

More Clean Slate is a good thing, and Pennsylvania continues to lead the way with the passage of HB 440.