On Monday, President Donald Trump revived his long-running effort to end quarterly corporate reporting, saying on social media that U.S. companies “should no longer be forced” to report every three months and should instead file on a six-month schedule.

He noted the change would be “subject to SEC approval,” a reminder that the Securities and Exchange Commission would have to approve any change in the rule. Most publicly traded companies in the U.S. today file quarterly 10-Q reports and an annual 10-K under SEC rules in place since 1970 . By law, the SEC can't just flip a switch to change that. It must adhere to a formal rule-making process that includes a public comment period, among other formal procedures.

Trump’s post went on to compare U.S. practices to China’s: “Did you ever hear the statement that, 'China has a 50 to 100 year view on management of a company, whereas we run our companies on a quarterly basis???' Not good!!!”

That may be the stated reasoning at this stage, but it's relevant that, in recent quarters, company earnings reports — from General Motors to Walmart — have highlighted the cost to American companies and consumers of Trump's ongoing trade wars. Making such reports more infrequent could slow the flow of such information to investors and to the public.

Trump's call also fits a broader pattern.

In 2018, during Trump’s first term, the SEC, led by Trump appointee Jay Clayton, formally sought public comment on whether and how to “reduce burdens ” associated with quarterly reporting and whether the current schedule encouraged short-term thinking. After receiving input, the agency did not move to change the reporting frequency.

Now the political and economic pictures have developed still further. Trump’s renewed call for reporting changes follows months of attacks on federal agencies, including the August firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics commissione r after a routine revision of jobs data and reports showing a slowdown in growth — signs that have alarmed economists and brought increased media and public attention to economic data streams.

Meanwhile, experts warn that thinning expert ranks at federal agencies and undermining public trust in the data they produce could increase already elevated economic uncertainty and, down the line, function to increase, rather than lower , borrowing costs for businesses and households alike.

Trump’s attacks on the BLS also come amid a larger backdrop of worsening economic conditions. The current data points to a further weakening in the job market and inflation running well above the Fed’s 2% target . A push to obscure such data would not improve the economy but simply make it harder to deal in facts.

Even if the SEC opened a docket, its process — from proposal to comments to final rule — would take months, and companies would still be bound by requirements to disclose material events promptly between periodic reports. Investor advocates have long argued that quarterly filings create greater transparency and reduce information asymmetry (i.e., cases in which management knows much more than, say, ordinary shareholders), and in the process, contribute to deeper, more liquid markets.

Those who advocate less frequent reporting argue that doing so could reduce compliance costs and short-term pressure without starving investors of material news.

The SEC, now chaired by Paul S. Atkins, has not yet indicated whether it will revisit the question. Atkins, a former commissioner who was sworn in again as chair in April, has emphasized a business-friendly agenda while also underlining the SEC's \\"core mandate\\" of protecting investors , per recent agency statements and public remarks.

In other words, Trump can set the tone, but the SEC still controls the timetable. Until the Commission formally proposes a rule, quarterly 10-Qs remain the law of the land.

Taken together, the moves point to a broader strategy: slow or discredit the flow of official information to gain more control over the narrative. As the Wall Street Journal points out, it's a strategy that, in recent memory , has created economic chaos, rampant inflation, and large-scale job loss in other economies.

Here in the U.S., stretching corporate disclosures to six months, firing the BLS commissioner after unwelcome jobs prints, and flirting with suspending monthly releases could all leave investors, businesses, and the Fed with a foggier view of the economy. The effect would be to raise the cost of capital, making life more expensive for Americans across the board. Markets can live with bad news, but they struggle with no news — or news that people no longer trust.