As the SEC releases its first Regulatory Flexibility Agenda under the second Trump administration, the policy direction of Chair Paul Atkins is coming into focus. The agenda signals a shift toward deregulation and market-friendly innovation, aiming to promote capital formation, efficiency, and investor protection—while rolling back what some see as overly prescriptive rules from recent years.  

To help break down the implications for public companies, boards, and investors, Jay Knight, Co-Chair of the Securities and Capital Markets Practice at Barnes & Thornburg and former SEC Division of Corporation Finance attorney shares insights on the SEC’s evolving priorities—from crypto rulemaking and deregulation to restoring balance between transparency and practicality in corporate disclosure.    

CM: The SEC’s new Regulatory Flexibility Agenda marks the first under the second Trump administration. What stands out to you most about Chair Paul Atkins’ priorities, and how do they differ from the agency’s recent direction?  

JK: Chair Atkins’ agenda is emphasizing modernization and deregulation, in line with his previous comments about wanting to “make capital markets great again.” His priorities seem to reflect an issuer-friendly approach while still protecting investors. While many of these changes are still in the early stages, I would say it’s shaping up to be a more friendly regulatory posture overall.  

This is a notably different approach from the SEC’s direction under Gary Gensler. He was more focused on prescriptive rulemaking in areas that some would say were historically outside the SEC’s focus, such as climate disclosures  

CM: The agenda appears to mark the start of a broader deregulatory cycle. What areas do you expect the SEC to prioritize as it seeks to make compliance “more practical and less burdensome” for public companies?  

JK: When it comes to reforms, there’ s a lot of low-hanging fruit—things like reporting requirements that consume significant time and resources for companies without much added benefit to investors.   

Many expect the SEC to adopt efficiencies in the registration process for capital markets, making the process smoother and more accessible for more companies that previously couldn’t access the expedited review process. Industry observers also anticipate the SEC to modernization disclosure requirements around executive compensation.   

CM: In your view, what are the potential risks or tradeoffs that come with a more deregulatory stance?  

JK: The SEC plays a crucial role in maintaining a balance between protecting investors and facilitating efficient capital formation. On one hand, strong investor protections—through disclosure requirements, enforcement of anti-fraud laws, and oversight of market participants—are essential for maintaining trust in the financial system. Without that confidence, investors may hesitate to commit capital, which ultimately harms market efficiency and economic growth.  

However, the SEC must also ensure that regulation does not become so burdensome that it stifles innovation, raises costs for issuers, or deters companies from entering public markets. A more deregulatory stance might encourage greater capital formation by reducing compliance costs and speeding up access to markets. Yet, such an approach carries real risks and tradeoffs. Reduced oversight can lead to information asymmetries, market manipulation, or fraudulent behavior, undermining investor confidence in the long term.  

The SEC mission is to craft rules that balance all these interests: protect investors, maintain fair, orderly and efficient markets, and facilitate capital formation.    

CM: One of the headline items in the new agenda is crypto rulemaking. Chair Atkins has signaled that the SEC intends to make the rules “less prescriptive and more business friendly.” What might that look like in practice?  

JK: As an emerging industry, the crypto community is looking for clarity and coordination from regulators. In practice, this could mean clearly defining what constitutes a security, establishing consistent guidelines across agencies and engaging more openly with the industry. A business-friendly approach would see transactions proceed with disclosures and investor protection, minus the regulatory ambiguity.   

CM: What specific changes or simplifications to corporate disclosure rules would you expect (or hope) to see under this new agenda?  

JK: Under a new agenda that emphasizes modernization and efficiency, potential changes that are expected are: (1) More focus on principles-based disclosures. Rather than relying on rigid, prescriptive forms and line-item requirements, the SEC could move further toward a principles-based framework. Encouraging issuers to focus on material information rather than prescriptive, line-item rules. (2) Scaled disclosure requirements. Smaller reporting companies (SRCs) and emerging growth companies (EGCs) often face high compliance burdens compared to their size and scale. The SEC might expand eligibility for these categories or further streamline their disclosure obligations, allowing more small firms to access capital markets without excessive cost.  

CM: For public companies and boards, what immediate steps should they consider given the regulatory shifts signaled by this agenda?  

JK: Companies and boards should be monitoring developments and proposals under consideration. This is a good time to engage with trade associations and outside counsel to offer input during the rulemaking process. It might also be helpful to see what peer companies are doing as the regulatory landscape shifts.   

In most industries, there’s no need for companies to make drastic changes now. Rather, they should just ensure they’re fulfilling their fiduciary duty by being thoughtful about strategy and compliance as regulations change.  

CM: As someone who’s worked inside the SEC, what do you expect implementation of this new agenda to look like from within the agency?  

JK: I’ve always been impressed by the professionalism and thoughtfulness of the SEC staff in considering the input of all different perspectives. They do a great job engaging with stakeholders and thoroughly examining the economic impact of the agency’s proposals. There is no doubt they will be working tirelessly to deliver on Chair Atkins’ rulemaking initiatives with the professionalism and thoughtfulness that is the hallmark of their work product.  

CM: What will be the key test of whether this new agenda succeeds?  

JK: The first test is whether these rules get adopted and implemented in the first place, or whether they get challenged and held up in court.  

Beyond that stage, it will be interesting to see how the markets react as companies and investors respond to the changes, including whether these reforms result in more companies going public. Time will tell if this agenda meets the goals put forward by the administration, but many industry observers are hopeful.  

CM: Finally, how do you see the broader regulatory environment shaping over the next 12 to 24 months—particularly if the deregulatory trend accelerates?   

JK: It will be an exciting time for professionals in this space as well as investors. There are lots of changes on the horizon, and the new administration wants them to last. That means boards and management, along with in-house legal teams and outside counsel, need to respond and adapt. The markets will also need time to process these changes, even though they tend to be amazingly resilient. There’s just going to be a lot happening; we’ll see how it plays out.