当前位置: X-MOL 学术American Business Law Journal › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Regulation of Crypto: Who Is the Securities and Exchange Commission Protecting?
American Business Law Journal ( IF 1.3 ) Pub Date : 2021-09-29 , DOI: 10.1111/ablj.12192
Carol R. Goforth 1
Affiliation  

SEC v. Telegram and SEC v. Kik, both decided in 2020, establish some ground-breaking rules about how the federal securities laws apply to cryptotransactions. In both cases, the court concluded that a large, reputable social media company had conducted a crypto offering in violation of federal law. In neither case was fraud or other criminal conduct an issue; the sole problem was failure to register the sales or comply with an exemption from registration. To find a violation, both opinions collapsed a two-phase offering into a single, integrated scheme. This approach appears to be an unnecessarily overbroad application of the law, protecting neither investors nor capital markets. A cost of this approach is that crypto entrepreneurs are being forced away from the United States, and American investors are denied opportunities to participate in a potentially desirable technological revolution. This article examines the rationale employed in these two decisions in light of the existing statutory and regulatory framework. It also considers recent amendments to federal rules defining the “integration doctrine,” which was relied on explicitly in the Kik decision. This article suggests how future crypto offerings might be structured to avoid the pitfalls created by the Kik and Telegram opinions. It advocates a more limited approach than the one urged by regulators. Its suggestions depend not on a change in law but only a change in understanding what is required in order to conduct a compliant crypto offering.

中文翻译:

加密监管:美国证券交易委员会保护谁?

SEC 诉 Telegram 案和 SEC 诉 Kik 案均于 2020 年作出裁决,就联邦证券法如何适用于加密交易制定了一些开创性规则。在这两起案件中,法院都得出结论认为,一家声誉良好的大型社交媒体公司违反了联邦法律进行了加密货币发行。在这两种情况下,欺诈或其他犯罪行为都不是问题;唯一的问题是未能注册销售或遵守注册豁免。为了找到违规行为,两种意见都将两阶段的产品分解为一个单一的、集成的方案。这种方法似乎是对法律的不必要的过度应用,既不保护投资者也不保护资本市场。这种方法的代价是加密货币企业家被迫离开美国,美国投资者被剥夺了参与潜在的理想技术革命的机会。本文根据现有的法律和监管框架研究了这两项决定所采用的基本原理。它还考虑了最近对定义“整合原则”的联邦规则的修订,该原则在 Kik 决定中明确依赖。本文建议如何构建未来的加密产品以避免 Kik 和 Telegram 意见造成的陷阱。它提倡一种比监管机构敦促的方法更有限的方法。它的建议不取决于法律的变化,而只取决于对进行合规加密产品所需内容的理解的变化。本文根据现有的法律和监管框架研究了这两项决定所采用的基本原理。它还考虑了最近对定义“整合原则”的联邦规则的修订,该原则在 Kik 决定中明确依赖。本文建议如何构建未来的加密产品以避免 Kik 和 Telegram 意见造成的陷阱。它提倡一种比监管机构敦促的方法更有限的方法。它的建议不取决于法律的变化,而只取决于对进行合规加密产品所需内容的理解的变化。本文根据现有的法律和监管框架研究了这两项决定所采用的基本原理。它还考虑了最近对定义“整合原则”的联邦规则的修订,该原则在 Kik 决定中明确依赖。本文建议如何构建未来的加密产品以避免 Kik 和 Telegram 意见造成的陷阱。它提倡一种比监管机构敦促的方法更有限的方法。它的建议不取决于法律的变化,而只取决于对进行合规加密产品所需内容的理解的变化。本文建议如何构建未来的加密产品以避免 Kik 和 Telegram 意见造成的陷阱。它提倡一种比监管机构敦促的方法更有限的方法。它的建议不取决于法律的变化,而只取决于对进行合规加密产品所需内容的理解的变化。本文建议如何构建未来的加密产品以避免 Kik 和 Telegram 意见造成的陷阱。它提倡一种比监管机构敦促的方法更有限的方法。它的建议不取决于法律的变化,而只取决于对进行合规加密产品所需内容的理解的变化。
更新日期:2021-09-30
down
wechat
bug