The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s proposal to permit public companies to file semiannual reports instead of quarterly reports has drawn substantial opposition from investor groups, securities regulators, and market participants, even as business organizations have largely supported giving companies flexibility to choose their reporting cadence. The comment letters submitted to the SEC highlight a growing debate over whether reducing financial public reporting requirements would lower compliance burdens and encourage more companies to remain public, or instead reduce transparency, increase information asymmetries, and weaken investor protections.
Under the proposal announced in May 2026, eligible public companies would have the option to file a new Form 10-S on a semiannual basis in place of quarterly Form 10-Q reports. A year-end 10-K will still be required. SEC Chair Paul Atkins has characterized the proposal as part of a broader effort to reduce regulatory burdens, encourage capital formation, and provide companies with greater flexibility in the frequency of disclosing financial information to investors. Minimizing this "thicket of obligations," as he calls them, has been a consistent theme since Atkins became chair of the commission.
Supporters Emphasize Flexibility and Reduced Compliance Costs
The strongest support for the proposal came from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which argued that public companies operate in significantly different environments than when mandatory quarterly reporting was adopted decades ago. The Chamber contended that many companies face substantial compliance costs and management distractions associated with quarterly reporting and that boards of directors are best positioned to determine whether quarterly or semiannual reporting is appropriate for their particular circumstances.
The Chamber also argued that modern disclosure requirements, including Form 8-K reporting obligations, Regulation FD, earnings releases, investor presentations, and earnings calls, already provide investors with substantial real-time information regarding material corporate developments. In its view, these disclosure mechanisms help mitigate concerns regarding delayed reporting while allowing companies more flexibility to allocate resources to long-term business priorities.
Notably, the Chamber did not advocate for mandatory semiannual reporting but supported the proposal’s optional framework, which allows companies to decide whether a reduction in reporting frequency serves the interests of their shareholders and business objectives. Other advocacy groups have argued that removing the mandatory quarterly reporting scheme will minimize companies' focus on short term results and encourage investments in projects that require a longer horizon to come to fruition, such as increases in research and development, focus on workforce improvements, and more cohesive corporate investment strategies.
Investor Groups Warn of Reduced Transparency
Several investor-focused organizations strongly opposed the proposal, arguing that quarterly reporting remains a critical source of timely, reliable, and comparable information.
The Council of Institutional Investors (CII), whose members oversee trillions of dollars in assets, asserted that quarterly reporting is a cornerstone of U.S. capital market efficiency and transparency. CII argued that quarterly reports provide investors with standardized financial information, auditor-reviewed financial statements, management certifications, and structured disclosures that voluntary earnings releases cannot replicate.
Similarly, the Asset Management Group of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA AMG) acknowledged the SEC’s goal of reducing reporting burdens but urged the agency not to proceed with the proposal. Instead, SIFMA AMG recommended focusing on reducing unnecessary and often boilerplate disclosures while retaining quarterly reporting. According to SIFMA AMG, less frequent reporting could make it more difficult for investors to evaluate companies, reduce market transparency, and impair the ability of asset managers to make informed investment decisions on behalf of clients.
The North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA), representing state and provincial securities regulators, also opposed the proposal, arguing that it would weaken investor protections and undermine the longstanding principle that public companies should be accountable to investors in exchange for access to public capital markets. NASAA warned that reducing reporting frequency could diminish market transparency, increase capital costs, weaken investor confidence, and reduce market liquidity.
Fraud and Insider Trading Concerns Take Center Stage
One of the most significant criticisms raised by opponents involves the potential impact on fraud detection and insider trading.
NASAA argued that extending the period between mandatory disclosures would create a longer window during which corporate insiders and others possessing material nonpublic information could potentially profit from information unavailable to the public. The organization warned that semiannual reporting would increase information asymmetries between insiders and public investors while simultaneously making suspicious trading activity more difficult for regulators to identify and investigate.
NASAA also expressed concern that less frequent reporting could increase accounting-fraud risks. According to NASAA, quarterly reporting creates recurring checkpoints through auditor reviews, management certifications, and public scrutiny that can help identify financial reporting irregularities. The organization argued that reducing periodic reporting could delay detection of accounting errors, control deficiencies, and fraudulent activity.
CII raised similar concerns, citing risks that less frequent reporting could result in delayed identification of internal control weaknesses, financial misstatements, and potential fraud.
Debate Extends Beyond Reporting Frequency
While supporters of the SEC proposal have suggested that quarterly reporting may encourage excessive focus on short-term financial performance, several opponents argued that quarterly earnings guidance, not quarterly reporting, is the more significant driver of short-term behavior. NASAA cited views from investors, academics, and market participants who contend that quarterly financial reports simply communicate actual results, and that it is earnings guidance that creates incentives for management to focus on short-term performance expectations.
SIFMA AMG similarly questioned whether reducing reporting frequency would have any measurable impact on corporate investment behavior or public-company formation, citing studies suggesting that reporting frequency has little effect on long-term investment decisions or IPO activity.
As a result, many commenters urged the SEC to focus instead on modernizing and simplifying the content of Form 10-Q disclosures rather than reducing the frequency of reporting.
Key Takeaways for Public Companies
The SEC’s proposal has sparked one of the most consequential debates in recent years regarding the future of public-company disclosure obligations.
Although many business organizations support providing companies with greater flexibility and reduced compliance obligations, a broad coalition of investor advocates, asset managers, institutional investors, and securities regulators has argued that quarterly reporting remains essential. Market transparency, price discovery, and investor protection remain a cornerstone of corporate compliance that cannot be ignored.
The SEC will now evaluate the extensive public comments before determining whether and how to proceed with the proposal. Public companies, investors, and other market participants should assess the value of engaging in the comment process, as the outcome may significantly reshape the U.S. public-company reporting regime and the balance between disclosure obligations, capital formation, and investor protection.
For more information, please contact us or your regular Parker Poe contact. Click here to subscribe to our latest alerts and insights.