SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
marketwatch.com
SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
1–10 of 43 posts
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#2Wonder what the implications are for the other companies/altcoins that go the IPO route. There are a number of well-known companies in the space that IPO without registering with the SEC, most recently MaidSafe [1] from the SAFE network that got a lot of publicity but no questions asked about the IPO (except boasting in their press release that they raised $5 million in the first 5 hours [2])
[1]: http://www.businessinsider.com/these-guys-are-creating-a-new...
[2]: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/cryptocurrency-news-round-dogecoin-...
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#3Wonder what the implications are for the other companies/altcoins that go the IPO route. There are a number of well-known companies in the space that IPO without registering with the SEC, most recently MaidSafe [1] from the SAFE network that got a lot of publicity but no questions asked about the IPO (except boasting in their press release that they raised $5 million in the first 5 hours [2]) [1]: http://www.business…
They are registered in Scotland. Likely any American individual or company that doesn't register is liable to have the same thing happen to them.
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#4Wonder what the implications are for the other companies/altcoins that go the IPO route. There are a number of well-known companies in the space that IPO without registering with the SEC, most recently MaidSafe [1] from the SAFE network that got a lot of publicity but no questions asked about the IPO (except boasting in their press release that they raised $5 million in the first 5 hours [2]) [1]: http://www.business…
They are registered in Scotland. Likely any American individual or company that doesn't register is liable to have the same thing happen to them.
If they are raising money from American individuals (not Qualified Institutional Buyers) they would need to be registered with the SEC irrespective of where they are headquartered.
They might, at most, qualify as foreign private issuer, so they can file with the SEC in private, but I strongly doubt they did it. http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm
Edit: For those asking why the American laws apply to this situation, it is because if you're raising money in America, American laws apply just like British laws would apply to Google if Google is doing business in Britain (or raising money there). If the company is registered in Scotland and raises money in Scotland, knock yourself out, the SEC doesn't care.
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are registered in Scotland. Likely any American individual or company that doesn't register is liable to have the same thing happen to them.
If they are raising money from American individuals (not Qualified Institutional Buyers) they would need to be registered with the SEC irrespective of where they are headquartered. They might, at most, qualify as foreign private issuer, so they can file with the SEC in private, but I strongly doubt they did it. http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm Edit: For those asking why the American laws apply to this sit…
Why would this matter to them if they are based in Scotland?
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#6It's interesting, but not surprising. If you offer to sell securities to the U.S. public, and meet certain other requirements, you need to register with the SEC. It doesn't matter if you take payment for the stock in dollars or Bitcoin or cupcakes.
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
They are registered in Scotland. Likely any American individual or company that doesn't register is liable to have the same thing happen to them.
If they are raising money from American individuals (not Qualified Institutional Buyers) they would need to be registered with the SEC irrespective of where they are headquartered. They might, at most, qualify as foreign private issuer, so they can file with the SEC in private, but I strongly doubt they did it. http://www.sec.gov/info/smallbus/qasbsec.htm Edit: For those asking why the American laws apply to this sit…
So long as they aren't domiciled in the US, American laws don't (or shouldn't) apply outside the US any more than British laws apply in the US.
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#8Wonder what the implications are for the other companies/altcoins that go the IPO route. There are a number of well-known companies in the space that IPO without registering with the SEC, most recently MaidSafe [1] from the SAFE network that got a lot of publicity but no questions asked about the IPO (except boasting in their press release that they raised $5 million in the first 5 hours [2]) [1]: http://www.business…
I'm not convinced a presale of a currency falls under the same regulations as equity in a company.
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#9 Voorhees agreed to settle the SEC’s charges by paying full
disgorgement of the $15,843.98 in profits plus a $35,000
penalty for a total of more than $50,000.
Re: SEC Charges Bitcoin Entrepreneur For Share Offering
#10Very interesting that the shares he issued were purchased in bitcoin, and still the SEC decided to step in. How is this different than if you issue shares and sell them for an in game currency?