No More Quarterly Reports? The SEC’s Gamble and What It Means for Risk
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is preparing to upend one of the most entrenched practices in corporate America: quarterly reporting. SEC Chair Paul Atkins has signaled his intent to fast-track the removal of the decades-old requirement that public companies issue quarterly earnings reports, a change that could redefine how markets, boards, and regulators think about corporate transparency.
Quarterly filings have long been a fixture of American capitalism. They provide investors with a steady flow of financial and risk information, shape corporate behavior around earnings cycles, and give regulators regular touch-points to monitor market integrity. Atkins argues that mandatory quarterly disclosures create short-term pressure on executives and saddle companies with unnecessary compliance costs. In his view, a move toward annual or semiannual reporting would bring the U.S. closer in line with Europe, where companies are not bound to such frequent updates.
For investors, fewer disclosures may mean greater uncertainty. Without regular earnings reports, market participants will have to rely more on management guidance, press releases, or voluntary updates to understand a company’s trajectory. That raises questions about how consistently and fairly information will be shared. For boards and executives, the change could offer breathing room from the relentless quarterly drumbeat, but it also increases the responsibility to maintain trust through governance and communication practices.
What This Means for GRC
If quarterly reports disappear, the role of governance, risk, and compliance functions will not shrink, it will expand in new directions.
Governance shifts inward. With fewer external checkpoints, boards and audit committees will need to lean on more robust internal reporting to ensure risks are surfaced and acted on in real time. Continuous assurance, rather than quarterly cadence, becomes the watchword.
Risk management gets more central. Without the discipline of quarterly filings, organizations will need to strengthen their risk monitoring frameworks to avoid blindsiding stakeholders. Cyber incidents, supply chain disruptions, or operational failures that once would have been disclosed in a 10-Q may now linger under the surface until annual filings, unless GRC systems surface them sooner.
Compliance takes on a new flavor. The formal compliance workload around 10-Q filings may drop, but the importance of 8-K event reporting, SOX internal controls, and whistleblower programs will only grow. The SEC will likely rely more on event-driven reporting and analytics to spot red flags. Companies will need airtight processes to ensure material events don’t slip through the cracks.
In this environment, the organizations that thrive will be those that treat compliance not as a filing requirement but as a continuous capability. GRC platforms and programs designed for automation, monitoring, and risk intelligence can help fill the gap left by fewer mandated disclosures.
The Bigger Picture
If the SEC moves forward, the U.S. will be taking a bold step away from its reputation for high-frequency transparency. Investors will debate whether this makes markets more efficient or more opaque. Executives will weigh the freedom from short-term pressure against the need to maintain credibility.
And GRC leaders? They will be at the center of it all, tasked with ensuring that in a world of fewer reports, the guardrails of governance, risk, and compliance are strong enough to keep both the company and its stakeholders on steady ground.