The SEC has put out a new statement on exchanges, indicating that they are not being left out of the Commission’s big enforcement push:
Online trading platforms have become a popular way investors can buy and sell digital assets, including coins and tokens offered and sold in so-called Initial Coin Offerings (“ICOs”). The platforms often claim to give investors the ability to quickly buy and sell digital assets. Many of these platforms bring buyers and sellers together in one place and offer investors access to automated systems that display priced orders, execute trades, and provide transaction data.
A number of these platforms provide a mechanism for trading assets that meet the definition of a “security” under the federal securities laws. If a platform offers trading of digital assets that are securities and operates as an “exchange,” as defined by the federal securities laws, then the platform must register with the SEC as a national securities exchange or be exempt from registration. The federal regulatory framework governing registered national securities exchanges and exempt markets is designed to protect investors and prevent against fraudulent and manipulative trading practices.
The SEC also invites companies developing platforms to retain counsel and engage proactively with SEC staff:
We encourage market participants who are employing new technologies to develop trading platforms to consult with legal counsel to aid in their analysis of federal securities law issues and to contact SEC staff, as needed, for assistance in analyzing the application of the federal securities laws.In particular, staff providing assistance on these matters can be reached at FinTech@sec.gov.
Treating cryptocurrency as money is an important step in its broad acceptance as another unit of exchange. No one will buy a cup of coffee or much else with cryptocurrency if they have to report it on their tax return at the end of the year:
Germany won’t tax bitcoin users for using the cryptocurrency as a means of payment, the Ministry of Finance has said.
The guidance, published Tuesday, sets Germany apart from the U.S., where the Internal Revenue Service treats bitcoin as property for tax purposes – which means that if an American buys a cup of coffee with bitcoin, it’s technically considered a sale of property and potentially subject to capital gains tax.
An interesting look at the seizure and sale of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrency by the U.S. Government, including some legal twists and turns:
The U.S. Marshals Service is the oldest law-enforcement agency in the country, counting gunslingers like Wyatt Earp and Wild Bill Hickok among its alumni. More recently, TV and movies have familiarized many Americans with its role transporting prisoners and tracking dangerous fugitives. Far fewer people know the marshals sell Bitcoin.
A decades-old law gives the Marshals Service, which is part of the Department of Justice, primary responsibility for disposing of items seized by other federal law-enforcement agencies. That’s why you can visit the marshals’ website and ogle boats, cars, planes, wristwatches, and other ill-gotten gains snatched by the FBI and other agencies, all available at public auction. The seizure process, known as forfeiture (see sidebar), became more commonplace and controversial in the 1980s after Congress made it easier for federal officials to sell assets tied to drug crimes.
. . . .
Local authorities are dealing with comparable headaches. “We had a good, old-fashioned kidnapping and robbery where they put the guy into what he thought was an Uber and then held him at gunpoint for $1.8 million worth of [digital currency] Ethereum,” forcing him to give them his private key, says Brenda Fischer, who leads the cyber unit of the Manhattan District Attorney’s office. The DA’s office recovered the funds but is now coping with a conundrum: The robber converted the Ethereum to Bitcoin, whose price rose significantly after the theft—raising novel legal questions over who should get the surplus windfall.
Really interesting how Wyoming is taking the lead on deregulating tokens:
House Bill (HB) 70, which on Monday passed the House 60 to 0 and will now head to the Senate, explicitly exempts utility tokens from state securities regulations, a key factor in attracting initial coin offering (ICO) launches to the state.
As a patent litigator, I am very interested to see the evolving patent landscape on blockchain technology. This article suggests that Bank of America is ahead of the pack, at least for now:
The greatest surprise of all is reserved for top spot, which is claimed by Bank of America, with no less than 45 patents. Last year, a total of 1,250 cryptocurrency patents were filed, demonstrating the extent to which corporations have finally caught on to bitcoin’s huge potential.
Russian authorities say they have arrested several engineers employed at the the All-Russian Research Institute of Experimental Physics in Sarov, a top secret nuclear weapons facility, because they were involved in a cryptocurrency-mining scheme at work.
The tightly guarded nuclear facility is where the USSR’s first nuclear bomb was built. According to the BBC, it has about 20,000 employees and one of the country’s strongest supercomputers, which can run at one petaflop, or perform a quadrillion operations per second. That’s ideal for running nuclear scientific calculations and simulations.
According to some Russian media reports, the employees tried to use the power of the supercomputer to mine cryptocurrency, and were detected when they attempted to connect the usually offline machine to the internet.
An interesting post by the Export Law Blog on OFAC and Venezuela’s cryptocurrency. Go there for the full explanation, but in short, they disagree with OFAC’s decision to label Venezuela’s cryptocurrency an extension of credit and therefore an asset off limits to U.S. persons:
For starters, let’s address the notion that using currency issued by a government is an extension of credit to the government. Credit is extended to a government when goods or services are supplied to that government without a requirement for immediate payment. By that common and uncontroversial definition, accepting fiat money or representative money in exchange for goods and services from a private individual is not an extension of credit by the purchaser to the government that issued the currency because no goods or services were supplied by the purchaser to the government. This is even the case even if goods and services are provided to the government because the currency obtained can be immediately used for other transactions and there is no delayed payment. If the government paid with a debt instrument, such as a bond with a future maturity, then that would be an extension of credit to the government.
It appears that the genesis of OFAC’s misconception here is that the currency can be exchanged later with the government for the underlying commodity. Even were that an extension of credit to the government, OFAC’s rules would only be implicated if that exchange was delayed for more than 30 days. But, of course, the point of commodity backed currency is that it is immediately convertible. One could take the new Venezuelan currency and immediately demand to exchange it for oil, gas, gold or diamonds, so it does not have a “maturity of greater than 30 days.”