Conversation
. says providers must show that "the assets are there, and they belong to you."
"That's kind of a challenge," she adds #SECatStern
1
1
1
. notes that providers would have to prove that they have the private keys to whichever wallet, and that no one else does (which I believe is the harder part here) #SECatStern
1
As the SEC's Valerie Szczepanik said earlier this month, it's hard to prove a negative #SECatStern
Quote Tweet
"They need to show they have possession and control and that could be hard to demonstrate with a digital asset because a digital asset ... is controlled by whoever possesses the private key and it’s hard to prove a negative," says Szczepanik #DCBlockchain
Show this thread
1
. recommends that exchanges with questions about whether they're supporting securities should come talk to the SEC #SECatStern
1
1
1
"You've got to be aware that you could trip [prescriptive securities laws/regs] and end up in a not a good place," says #SECatStern
1
Moving on to security tokens (the ones that are securities on purpose) now #SECatStern
1
"I'm glad people are thinking about permissionless and permissioned [blockchains]," says #SECatStern
1
Talking about accredited investor laws, says we should be thinking about them both in crypto and other areas #SECatStern
1
Brief history of accredited investor laws now:
- aimed at protecting investors by letting those who'd be able to weather losses more easily
- question if there are other ways to measure sophistication, ie a test #SECatStern
3
1
Replying to
Was this question about being able to test out of sanctions answered?