Live data from Hacker News

Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

sec.gov

21–30 of 282 posts

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#21
There doesn't appear to be any new information here, and this quote sums it up pretty well:

The SEC staff has concerns that many online trading platforms appear to investors as SEC-registered and regulated marketplaces when they are not.

The SEC has already made its view clear that many ICOs fall under SEC regulatory jurisdiction. For example:

https://www.sec.gov/news/testimony/testimony-virtual-currenc...

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#22
post #20

From my untrained perspective it seems like they are warning against "the appearance of a regulated market". Therefore, all these markets should do is have a big banner at the top stating: "We are not regulated by the SEC and any activity here is not protected by any rules and regulations which might apply to a SEC registered company. Please be careful" Or am i crazy?

It seems unlikely that it would be that easy. If it were, you'd see lots of unregulated stock markets out there in the wild (which, to my knowledge, is not the case).

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#23

So if some anonymous person invents cryptocurrencies, at what point are you supposed to be considered securities? If the first exchange had gone to SEC to register as a securities exchange, would the SEC not have laughed in their face? The headline itself really captures the ambiguity and uncertainty of all of this: "potentially unlawful".

Worth noting that the first major cryptocurrency exchange, MtGox, had no accountants and stole a lot of customer money. Preventing that is precisely what the SEC is for.

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#25

So if some anonymous person invents cryptocurrencies, at what point are you supposed to be considered securities? If the first exchange had gone to SEC to register as a securities exchange, would the SEC not have laughed in their face? The headline itself really captures the ambiguity and uncertainty of all of this: "potentially unlawful".

It's not about the coins, it's about the intent. If you go to the SEC and say "I'm going to sell pieces of paper of dubious actual value as securities," they'll be interested. The mechanism that the securities use is not important.

The unlawful part is not the technology, it's how the securities are sold. If you sell something that looks like a security, sounds like a security, and smells like a security, and you're violating regulations around securities, then yes, it's potentially unlawful.

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#26
post #18

This is going to put a dent into the classic Bitcoin exchange business models of "claim we were hacked", "front run the customers", and "speculate with the funds on deposit".

Yup, we'll probably be stuck with only 2-4 exchanges that are able to afford the regulatory burden and then the regulators will claim a victory for "helping the little guy."

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#27
post #5

I didn't see any cryptocurrency exchanges in their list of approved exchanges. How does one find out whether a cryptocurrency exchange is registered properly with the SEC?

It's very simple. The SEC will prosecute one of the big boy "exchanges" and bring that company to a screeching halt. All of the rest will have to meet stringent regulatory requirements in order to service American customers.

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#28
post #17

So if some anonymous person invents cryptocurrencies, at what point are you supposed to be considered securities? If the first exchange had gone to SEC to register as a securities exchange, would the SEC not have laughed in their face? The headline itself really captures the ambiguity and uncertainty of all of this: "potentially unlawful".

Of course they would have laughed in their face. Do you see Nasdaq trying to list Dogecoin? There is no ambiguity or uncertainty here - there is a big problem and they're trying to reign it in with gloved hands before it becomes one and it turns into a big economic mess that the government will have to foot the bill to eventually clean up. This site likes to complain about wealthy inequality - common people like your…

> who have provided less than zero benefit or service to our society

Was following your argument up to that point. Making such a value judgment requires, in my opinion, a lot more data and deep analysis. Cryptocurrencies have the potential of loosening the grasp of oppressive regimes over their people. And it takes those other investors for the process to function.

But, the reality and therefore data is needed to judge whether these new currencies can deliver on that promise.

Edit: Want to clarify that I'm talking about *coin buyers/sellers. Not scam ICO backers. Agree that those folks are scum with negative value to society. If the parent was mainly talking about ICO scams, then please ignore my response and apologies for the misinterpretation.

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#29
post #5

I didn't see any cryptocurrency exchanges in their list of approved exchanges. How does one find out whether a cryptocurrency exchange is registered properly with the SEC?

Probably none. Apparently they tend to register as money-transmission services: https://www.ccn.com/sec-chairman-to-testify-they-are-open-to...

Re: Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets

#30
post #20

From my untrained perspective it seems like they are warning against "the appearance of a regulated market". Therefore, all these markets should do is have a big banner at the top stating: "We are not regulated by the SEC and any activity here is not protected by any rules and regulations which might apply to a SEC registered company. Please be careful" Or am i crazy?

oh, i expect the activity is still covered by SEC rules and regulations. the exchanges just aren't registered exchanges.

and they should probably make that clear; it might (justifiably) shave down their inevitable liability slightly.

Post reply on HN