US Legislators Seeking to Reduce SEC Chair Salary to Relief Undue Financial Burden

As the US strives to settle the competing interest in crypto regulation, lawmakers have submitted a new bill seeking to reduce government expenditure. The bill urges the policymakers to review the remuneration plan adopted by most of the regulatory agencies.

The new provision was presented by Tim Burchett, an active contributor to the Financial Services and General Government (FSGG). In his submission, Burchett requested the lawmakers to consider reducing the salary of Gary Gensler, the chair of the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

US Lawmakers  to Slash SEC Chair Salary to $1 

After analyzing the recent government spending, Burchett advised the lawmakers to shed Gensler’s salary from $300,000 to $1. The proposed remuneration plan for the SEC chair revives the previous request to defund Gensler.

Since he was appointed as the SEC chair, Gensler has doubled down efforts to regulate the crypto industry. Gensler’s regulatory approach has subjected several crypto firms to severe legal peril. His actions have compelled key players in the crypto sector to challenge the SEC decision.

In view of the amended FSGG requirement, Burchett underscored the need to reduce government spending. Addressing the House Rules Committee on Monday, November 6, Burchett outlined a practical approach to reduce government expenditure.

He stated that a substantial amount of government revenue is usually allocated to fund the operation of the regulatory agencies. In support of Burchett’s remarks, a US representative, Steve Womack, outlined the need to slash the amount of funds received by government agencies.

Reviewing SEC Regulatory Approach on Crypto Assets

Based on the heightened regulatory oversight of crypto assets, Womack regretted that the SEC operations have been financial burden on the government. The 61-year-old policy maker devised a strategy to weaken the SEC regulatory scrutiny on crypto assets.

He advised the committee to consider defunding the SEC to challenge the existing regulatory critique on digital assets. He underlined that defunding the SEC will weaken its regulatory intrusiveness in the crypto sector.

Also, the policymaker believes that minimizing the amount of funds the SEC receives will mandate the commission to focus on attaining the core goals.

Commenting on the SEC rulemaking process, Womack admitted that the policymakers refuted most rules with inadequate cost-benefit and aggregate impact analysis. The rejection of inappropriate rule making processes aimed at preventing  the SEC from derailing  its core mission.

Pro-Crypto Representatives Condemns SEC Regulatory Critique

A close examination of the SEC’s roles and past achievements demonstrated that the commission has already accomplished important tasks. Besides attaining the desired results, Womack noted that the SEC has stretched its regulatory action outside its mandate.

This action has  created uncertainty in regulating some of the crypto assets. Womack remarks mirror an earlier provision by US House Representatives Tom Emmer and Warren Davidson to remove Gensler from office.

The two policymakers have criticized the SEC’s regulatory approach, which focuses more on taking enforcement actions. Davidson and Emmer recently described the SEC as a bad faith regulator.

However, if Emmer and Davidson’s bill receives the final nod, the SEC will be forced to share power with other multidisciplinary units. This development will lead to establishment of a new directorate position to prevent the SEC from having the veto power in regulating the crypto industry.

Even though the US policymakers have not approved the bill, it has placed Gensler in a hot seat with the key industrial players.

All trademarks, logos, and images displayed on this site belong to their respective owners and have been utilized under the Fair Use Act. The materials on this site should not be interpreted as financial advice. When we incorporate content from other sites, we ensure each author receives proper attribution by providing a link to the original content. This site might maintain financial affiliations with a selection of the brands and firms mentioned herein. As a result, we may receive compensation if our readers opt to click on these links within our content and subsequently register for the products or services on offer. However, we neither represent nor endorse these services, brands, or companies. Therefore, any disputes that may arise with the mentioned brands or companies need to be directly addressed with the respective parties involved. We urge our readers to exercise their own judgement when clicking on links within our content and ultimately signing up for any products or services. The responsibility lies solely with them. Please read our full disclaimer and terms of use policy here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *