The debate around quarterly reporting is back in the headlines, even amid broader policy and market uncertainty in Washington. Earlier this month, U.S. President Trump renewed calls for eliminating the requirement for companies to file quarterly earnings reports, replacing them with semiannual filings. With the SEC signaling it intends to prioritize reviewing this proposal once normal operations resume, the discussion has again raised important questions for the capital markets. Such a change could significantly alter how earnings guidance, forecasts and performance expectations are managed, requiring companies to evaluate and strategize the best ways to maintain transparency while satisfying investor demand for timely information.

Quarterly reporting has been the backbone of corporate transparency in U.S. capital markets for decades. For investors, it provides regular checkpoints on performance, guidance and management credibility. For issuers, it demands rigor in financial controls and a steady cadence of communications with shareholders and analysts.

If quarterly reporting were reduced to semiannual:

· Guidance and Expectations Could Shift. Earnings releases and accompanying conference calls are a key anchor for consensus estimates and investor models. Moving to a twice-a-year rhythm could widen the gap between Street expectations and actual performance, increasing the risk of surprises and volatility.

· Transparency vs. Timeliness. Even if regulatory requirements relax, investor demand for timely insights will remain. Many issuers may still choose to communicate more frequently than required in order to maintain investor confidence.

· Operational Adjustments. A longer reporting cycle doesn’t mean less work for management. Instead, companies would need to rethink internal financial controls, forecasting discipline, and the cadence of board reviews to ensure they are prepared for fewer but higher-impact reporting events.

For Chinese companies listed in both the U.S. and Hong Kong, the divergence in reporting standards already exists. U.S. rules currently mandate quarterly disclosures, while Hong Kong requires only interim and annual results. That said, many Hong Kong–listed companies choose to report quarterly on a voluntary basis, recognizing that greater transparency can build investor confidence and support stronger engagement with global shareholders.

If U.S. rules were to shift toward semiannual reporting, dual-listed issuers could, in theory, align their calendars more efficiently. However, this would not remove investor expectations for frequent updates. U.S. investors are accustomed to quarterly checkpoints, and moving to a semiannual cycle could widen gaps in consensus and heighten volatility. Companies that

maintain a consistent reporting rhythm across jurisdictions — whether quarterly or through structured interim updates — will have an advantage in sustaining investor confidence.

Companies should also anticipate the cultural aspect: U.S. investors may accept less frequent formal filings if companies maintain strong interim communication through investor days, operational updates, or voluntary KPIs. Hong Kong investors, however, may expect continued transparency at closer intervals. Striking the right balance will be critical.

While near-term regulatory timelines may be affected by the ongoing government shutdown, the direction of discussion is clear—toward rethinking disclosure frequency and modernizing reporting expectations.

Whether or not this policy shift takes hold, IR teams can start preparing by:

· Evaluating Current Disclosure Practices. Ask whether your current cadence is meeting investor needs, or if supplemental updates between quarters are already necessary.

· Strengthening Forecasting and Guidance Frameworks. Fewer earnings checkpoints mean guidance needs to be clearer, credible, and supported by robust internal forecasting.

· Exploring Alternative Engagement Channels. Regular NDRs, webinars, or KPI dashboards can help bridge any gap in communication.

At Piacente, we see reporting cadence as just one piece of the broader investor relations puzzle. Regulation may change, but the underlying expectation for transparency, accessibility and credibility will not. In fact, companies that continue to engage consistently — whether through quarterly disclosures, voluntary updates or structured investor communications — will strengthen their reputations and maintain investor confidence.

Our advice: don’t treat fewer required filings as an invitation to step back. Treat it as an opportunity to design an IR program that goes beyond compliance and builds long-term trust with the market.