Published on: 2026-03-17
The SEC is reportedly preparing a proposal that could let U.S. public companies choose semiannual interim reporting instead of mandatory quarterly Form 10-Q filings. That proposal has not been published, and quarterly reporting remains mandatory today.
Today, domestic issuers still need to file annual reports on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. According to The Wall Street Journal, a proposal could be published as early as April 2026. However, any actual change would still need to go through formal SEC rulemaking before it could take effect.
This article examines what the proposal entails, who is driving it, the arguments on both sides of the debate, and, most importantly, what it all means for you as an investor.
The SEC is reportedly preparing a proposal, but quarterly Form 10-Q reporting remains mandatory today.
The direction under discussion is optional semiannual reporting, not a blanket ban on quarterly updates.
Form 8-K, Regulation FD, and other material-disclosure obligations would still remain in place.
The main investor trade-off is lower compliance burden for issuers but less standardized interim comparability for shareholders.
Many larger issuers may still choose to keep quarterly updates even if the rule changes.
The Wall Street Journal reported on March 16, 2026, that the SEC is preparing a rule proposal that would allow public companies to report comprehensively twice a year, rather than on a mandatory quarterly 10-Q schedule. The same report stated the SEC has been discussing potential exchange-rule adjustments with major exchanges and that no outcome is guaranteed.
This policy direction is no longer just outside speculation. In a February 13, 2026, statement, Division of Corporation Finance Director James Moloney said the staff was focused on "creating an option for semiannual, rather than quarterly, reporting" and that Chairman Paul Atkins had asked staff to prioritise the proposal while considering what other rule changes would be needed for a workable transition.
The agency has also been signaling a broader push to cut what it sees as immaterial or overly burdensome disclosure requirements under Regulation S-K. In January 2026, Atkins asked for public comment on how the SEC could revise Regulation S-K to focus on material information and avoid compelling disclosure of immaterial information.
There is also a formal petition on file. In September 2025, the Long-Term Stock Exchange asked the SEC to amend Rule 13a-13, Rule 15d-13, and Form 10-Q so companies could choose comprehensive semiannual reporting while preserving timely Form 8-K disclosure for material events.
| Topic | Current U.S. regime | Reported proposed direction |
|---|---|---|
| Interim reporting | Mandatory Form 10-Q for Q1, Q2, and Q3 | Domestic issuers could be allowed to choose semiannual comprehensive reporting instead |
| Annual reporting | Mandatory Form 10-K | No change indicated |
| Current reports | Form 8-K still required for specified current events | Would remain in place |
| Selective disclosure | Regulation FD applies | No change indicated |
| Status today | Quarterly reporting remains mandatory | Proposal reportedly in preparation, not published or adopted |
The case for reform has two main parts. First, supporters argue that the current quarterly system adds cost and can reinforce short-term pressure without delivering enough incremental value. In its 2018 request for comment, the SEC asked whether it could preserve investor protection while reducing burdens associated with quarterly reporting.
That debate never fully disappeared. In December 2025, Commissioner Mark Uyeda said markets tend to react to quarterly earnings releases and analyst calls far more than to later Form 10-Q filings, raising questions about the marginal informational value of the 10-Q itself.
Second, the SEC leadership is connecting the issue to U.S. capital formation. Chairman Atkins has consistently positioned disclosure reform as a way to make going public more appealing for companies.
Corp Fin Director James Moloney stated that the Division is seeking specific input on how to reduce unnecessary disclosures and compliance burdens.
For investors, the biggest change would be less uniformity. A filed Form 10-Q provides a predictable package of interim financial statements, MD&A updates, risk-factor changes, controls disclosures, and other standardized information.
If semiannual reporting became optional, some companies would probably maintain quarterly reporting, while others could rely more heavily on earnings releases, investor presentations, and furnished Form 8-Ks.
That distinction matters because Form 8-K instructions state that information furnished under Item 2.02 or Item 7.01 is generally not deemed "filed" for Exchange Act Section 18 purposes unless the issuer specifically says otherwise.
In practical terms, investors could end up relying more on information that is still subject to antifraud rules and Regulation FD, but not packaged in the same standardized, filed framework as a Form 10-Q. That is a real difference for analysts comparing companies across sectors and across time.
Large-cap companies with heavy analyst coverage may continue to report quarterly because their investors, debt covenants, and market expectations favor this approach.
Smaller companies, early-stage biotechs, and firms with long product cycles may be more willing to shift to semiannual comprehensive reporting if the rule allows it. Even Commissioner Uyeda suggested that different business models may call for different reporting rhythms.
The best real-world comparison comes from Europe and the United Kingdom. The UK removed the requirement to publish interim management statements from November 7, 2014, while still allowing issuers to continue to make quarterly updates voluntarily. That experience matters because many companies kept reporting quarterly even after the formal requirement ended.
The research evidence, however, is mixed. A CFA Institute study on UK public companies found no material change in corporate investment when the UK moved away from mandatory quarterly reporting, but it did find a steeper decline in analyst coverage for companies that stopped reporting quarterly.
More recent academic work has been less reassuring on transparency. A 2024 paper in Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting found that quarterly-reporting deregulation increased information asymmetry and decreased firm value on average.
The regulatory path is still uncertain. There is no formal SEC proposal yet, and even after a proposal is published, the agency's own rulemaking guide says comment periods are typically 30 to 60 days. There is also no guarantee the Commission would adopt the rule in the form first proposed.
The regulatory pathway includes the following key stages:
Formal SEC proposal, if one is published
Public comment period, typically 30 to 60 days
SEC review of submissions and possible revisions
Final Commission vote and publication, if adopted
Effective date and any transition period set by the final rule
The safest framing is not to assume a fixed implementation date. A change of this size could take a long time, but the timeline would depend on the proposal’s scope, public comments, related exchange-rule changes, and whether the SEC believes it has sufficient authority to act without Congress.
Not necessarily in the same standardized format. Even if quarterly 10-Q filing requirements were relaxed, many companies could still choose to release quarterly earnings through press releases, investor presentations, or Form 8-K disclosures.
Investors may receive less consistent interim financial information if companies decide to report less frequently. That could make it harder to compare businesses, track performance trends, and react quickly to changes in profitability, guidance, or risk.
It could. If fewer companies file them, transparency may become more uneven.
If the rule is adopted, smaller companies, early-stage businesses, and firms with lighter analyst coverage may be more likely to reduce formal quarterly reporting.
In conclusion, the SEC's reported quarterly-reporting proposal would be a major disclosure-frequency change if it is formally proposed and ultimately adopted, but nothing has changed yet. For now, Form 10-Q remains mandatory, Form 8-K and Regulation FD still apply, and investors should treat this as an active policy debate rather than a settled rule change.
For individual investors, do not wait for the final rule to adapt your approach. Build habits around monitoring real-time disclosures, broaden the range of information sources you use to evaluate investments, and recognise that a world with fewer mandated touchpoints places a higher premium on independent research and long-term thinking.
Disclaimer: This material is for general information purposes only and is not intended as (and should not be considered to be) financial, investment or other advice on which reliance should be placed. No opinion given in the material constitutes a recommendation by EBC or the author that any particular investment, security, transaction or investment strategy is suitable for any specific person.
