The SEC has received more than 200,000 public comments on a proposal that would let companies stop filing earnings reports every three months, a record for the agency, according to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Right now, public companies must file a report called a 10-Q every quarter, telling investors how much money they made and spent. The new plan would let companies switch to a new form called "Form 10-S," filed only twice a year, under docket number S7-2026-15 (SEC).

The SEC announced the proposal in press release 2026-42 on May 5, 2026. It would make semiannual reporting optional, meaning companies could choose to report every six months instead of every three. CNBC called the rule "Trump-backed," tying it to the administration's push to reduce short-term thinking in corporate America (CNBC). The public comment period stays open until 60 days after the proposal appears in the Federal Register (SEC).

The comment process hit a bump. Two SEC email addresses, "comment@sec.gov" and "comments@sec.gov," caused confusion about where people should send their feedback. Fortune reported on the mix-up on July 14, 2026, and Yahoo Finance ran the story the next day (Fortune; Yahoo Finance). The error raised concerns that some comments may not have been properly saved.

The numbers seem to confirm that worry. The SEC's public comment page for this proposal lists a category called "Comment A" with 23,786 letters (SEC). That is a small fraction of the 200,000-plus comments the agency says it received. The gap could come from the email mix-up, bulk submissions still being processed, or duplicates sorted into different buckets.

For investors, the stakes are straightforward. Quarterly reports give you a look at a company's finances four times a year. Cutting that to twice a year means you wait longer between updates. Professional analysts who build models around those quarterly numbers would have less data to work with. Company executives, on the other hand, would get a break from the pressure of reporting every 90 days.

The broader context here is a debate about whether quarterly reporting pushes companies to focus on short-term results instead of long-term planning. Supporters of the change say fewer reports would ease pressure on executives to hit quarterly targets and let them think further ahead. Critics, including many of the people who submitted comments, argue that less frequent reporting makes it harder for ordinary investors to know what is going on inside a company, giving insiders an advantage.

The email mix-up could also create legal trouble. Federal law requires agencies like the SEC to give the public a fair chance to weigh in on new rules. If the SEC cannot prove it properly received and organized all the comments, someone could challenge the final rule in court on that basis. The gap between 23,786 posted letters and 200,000-plus received comments will likely be a key point in any such challenge.

The 200,000-plus comments top any previous SEC record for a single rule. The agency usually gets thousands of comments on major proposals but has never seen this volume on one rule. Whether that surge reflects real concern from everyday investors, an organized campaign, or both is hard to tell from the available data. What is clear is that this proposal has drawn attention well beyond the usual industry insiders.

The SEC has not said when it will finalize the rule. The comment period is still open, and the agency needs to review and sort all the submissions before it can vote. The email mix-up and the gap between received and posted comments may extend that timeline, as the SEC works to fix its records and make sure all public input is properly logged under docket S7-2026-15.