Most people expected the SEC's proposals for Form PF to reflect the influence of the hedge fund and private equity fund industry, which were none too pleased by what they saw as onerous disclosure requirements, too few security guarantees and a tight 15-day reporting period among other things.

The commission is not exactly playing from strength right now, and few would be surprised if it ends up voting on a proposal with various watered-down requirements. The larger issue will be whether the industry decides to go all in and challenge the Form PF requirements legally.

As the Washington Post notes, some critics of this Dodd-Frank provision, which for some reason got much less public attention that the hedge fund registration issue, have hinted at their approach. They just might go after the provision using the same tactic that proved so successful in forcing the SEC to scuttle its famous proxy access proposal, which an appellate court nixed on grounds that the SEC did not do a proper cost-benefit analysis.

Of course, you could invoke this argument against any Dodd-Frank provision, as it is hard to know with certainty what the law's ultimate economic outcome will be. It is a generic argument that at least one panel of judges have legitimized. The SEC's trouble with its top economic position certainly doesn't help its cause. Still, by this reasoning, no law in America is safe.

For more:
- here's the article

Related articles:
Registration rule to affect more hedge funds  
Financial regulation imposes a high bar for data