The SEC’s Green Name Game

US
Securities and Exchange Commission headquarters in Washington, D.C. (Andrew Kelly/Reuters)
The agency is not — and should not be — in the business of deciding what is good for the environment and society.




NRPLUS MEMBER ARTICLE

W
hen considering the prospect of “green” finance, I’m often tempted to burst into song: Green, green, bo-bean, bo-na-na fanna, fo-fean, fee fi mo-mean. Green! Perhaps this can be attributed to my children, who are entranced by the rhymes in Shirley Ellis’s iconic song, “The Name Game.” Yet rather fortuitously, that song can actually help us in thinking about how to name investment products.

While determining what “green” means — or what qualifies as such — is not a new endeavor, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has recently begun to wrestle with it for investment products. As funds advertising themselves as …

To Read the Full Story

Articles You May Like

CNN’s Acosta Worries Team Anti-Trump Won’t Get a Perfectly Nasty Jury, But Analyst Counters
Joe Biden Is a Sniveling, Unabashed Coward
WATCH: Sen. Kennedy Exposes the Left’s Weakness on Abortion
Color Me Shocked? Ex-TikTok Employees Blow Whistle on Chinese Access to App
The Morning Briefing: Joe Biden and the Wawa Cannibals—An American Tragedy

Leave a Comment - No Links Allowed:

Your email address will not be published.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