By: Natalia Renta
Last week, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Atkins appeared before Congress. He testified before the House Financial Services Committee and the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee at oversight hearings, which give Congress a chance to review the executive branch’s implementation of the laws it passed.
A little over a year since the Trump administration came to power, Congress should hold Chairman Atkins to account for the role the SEC is playing to consolidate the power of the oligarchy through dramatic market-moving changes — all of which the agency has made through quick tweaks that avoid procedures that would have given stakeholders a chance to weigh in and check this power grab.
What does the SEC have to do with the oligarchy? Unfortunately, quite a lot. We all know big corporations have far too much power in our economy. Within individual firms themselves, though, power dynamics between various actors had often served as checks on individual corporate insiders making unilateral decisions with no accountability. And in some cases, the courts served as a venue to adjudicate these disputes. The SEC is methodically eliminating any checks on corporate power from smaller shareholders, large asset managers, and the courts and paving the way for the large amount of power amassed by corporations to be exercised by just a few individuals.
Shareholders with small stakes in large corporations
Shareholders with small stakes in large corporations including individuals, workers’ pensions, responsible asset managers, and more have had ways to affect corporate decision-making. They have filed shareholder proposals on important issues such as workers’ rights, climate, racial equity, and political spending. They have also voted against directors and executive pay packages. Along the way, they’ve communicated their views to other shareholders and the public through EDGAR, the SEC’s public filing system.
Since the Trump administration took office, though, the SEC has taken aim at these tools. It changed its policy to make it easier for companies to prevent shareholders from voting on proposals, approved an ExxonMobil scheme that will help corporate management indefinitely lock in votes in their favor from retail investors, announced that it would no longer serve as the arbiter on disputes between corporate management and shareholders over whether shareholder proposals can be excluded from corporate ballots, and changed its staff guidance so that only shareholders with over $5 million in shares will be able to communicate with other shareholders and the public through EDGAR.
Large asset managers
The SEC has also targeted larger shareholders. The four largest asset managers — BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street, and Fidelity — own a significant portion of most public companies, making them influential voices in corporate decision-making. While large asset manager interests don’t align with the interests of the many workers saving for retirement whose money they manage, it is still notable that the SEC is transferring the power they exerted over corporate decision-making to corporate insiders. In February of last year, the agency issued guidance suggesting that if asset managers engaged with companies on important issues while owning five percent or more of shares, they could face regulatory compliance costs that would be prohibitive for their business model.
Disclosures
The SEC is also laying the groundwork to water down corporate disclosure requirements, which would result in shareholders having less opportunities to provide input on corporate decision-making and hold insiders accountable to acting in their best interests. Opacity can also be a breeding ground for fraud and other misconduct.
Courts
The SEC has also targeted defrauded shareholders’ ability to seek redress from the courts. In September 2025, the SEC made an about-turn on their position on shareholders’ ability to have their day in court in cases of corporate fraud and misconduct. Now, the agency will effectively allow corporations to block shareholders from bringing these types of claims in court.
The SEC is not the only public entity going out of its way to change the rules to facilitate the consolidation of power amongst a few oligarchs. (For example, state legislatures in Delaware, Texas, and Nevada are competing for franchise fees they get when companies incorporate in their state by changing their laws to make them more friendly to corporate insiders.) But it is a key player in this troubling trend.
We all know corporations have too much power over our lives, and that has long been the case. But now, that power is being further consolidated in the hands of just a few individual billionaires. Congress must stand against this SEC’s giveaway to the Elon Musks and Peter Thiels of the world at our expense.