# kaal:claim:2811729-038

**Claim.** The SEC should re-evaluate its reliance on the Company Act's disclosure regime in its current form as the best means of protecting retail investors from the risks of investing in unconstrained mutual funds.

**Type.** normative  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- SEC policy toward unconstrained mutual funds

**Source quote.**

> Regardless of the SEC's reason for inaction, the authors believe that the SEC should re-evaluate its reliance on the Company Act's disclosure regime in its current form as the best means of protecting retail investors in relation to the risks posed by investing in UMFs.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, *Unconstrained Mutual Funds and Retail Investor Protection* (2016), VI. Conclusion, page 54

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Unconstrained Mutual Funds and Retail Investor Protection (2016). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2811729

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `0877b0a076f2614559cb0b1a736f73401cecbee7cfe014da6e36709208e92a74` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Anderson%20-%202016%20-%20Unconstrained%20Mutual%20Funds%20and%20Retail%20Investor%20Protection.pdf

**Topics.** disclosure, securities-law

**Keywords.** disclosure-regime, regulatory-reform, investor-protection, sec-policy

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.