This is the Kader Daily Podcast for Thursday, July 20th,

2023. I'm Caleb Brown.

The credited investors are supposed to be more savvy than the rest of us.

They're supposed to be better at the ins, the outs, and the pitfalls of investing,

but the way accredited investors are approved by the feds doesn't make a lot of sense,

and the implications for the kinds of investments you might have access to are quite large.

It was Jennifer Scheldt discusses some potential reforms to those rules now in Congress.

Jennifer, you and I have talked about accredited investors and sort of the, is it fair to call them paternalistic rules with respect to investing and the degree to which people can be more active in investing without somebody holding their hand?

I think it's only fair to call them paternalistic rules.

There's not really another way to describe them. The

accredited investor rules essentially prevent people who don't make a

certain amount of money or have a certain amount of money in the bank from

investing in what are known as private a lot of what are known as private securities

offerings so not the type of securities that trade on the NYC,

but offerings that are made in the private markets.

Private markets are where most companies start and where investments in startups, small businesses

and and the like proliferate and these rules prevent basically 90% or so of the American population

from investing in those types of companies on the basis that the amount of money that they have in their

pocket determines whether or not they are sophisticated enough to assess the risk for

themselves of making these investments. That's nothing if not paternalistic.

See I'm wondering about people who may be relatively cash poor but also expertise rich in some particular industry or some particular

endeavor who would like to make these kinds of investments without this requisite

...