独家演讲全文 | SEC官员称比特币以太坊不是证券，提出6大判定尺度

另外，我们熟悉到，按照联邦证券法，某一特定资产被视为一种证券，有很多寄义。譬喻，我们的商业、市场和投资打点部分首要存眷的是经销商、买卖营业所和基金注册等题目，以及市场哄骗、托管和估值等题目。我们领略市场参加者正在全力使他们的处事切合现有的禁锢框架，我们很兴奋继承参加这一进程。

在评估一个数字资产是否作为投资条约，并因此成为证券时，必要思量哪些身分?

起首，思量是否有无论是小我私人、实体照旧和谐同等的群体等级三方敦促了回报的预期。这一题目将取决于详细的究竟和环境，而这一清单是声名性的，并非细致无遗：

1、是否有任何人士或集体赞助或敦促数字资产的刊行及贩卖，而这些人或集体的全力在资产的成长、维护及增值方面是否饰演重要脚色?

2、该小我私人或集体是否持稀有字资产的股份或其他权益，以促使其增进数码资产的代价?购置者是否会公道地信托这些全力将会举办，并也许使他们在数字资产上的投资得到回报?

3、提倡人是否筹集的资金高出了成立一个成果收集所需的资金？假如能筹集到足够资金，是否表白这些资金可以用于支持令牌的代价或增进企业的代价?提倡人是否继承从收益或操纵中支出资金，以进步令牌运行的体系的成果或代价？

4、购置者是在寻求回报吗?在这方面，是否以公道地价值向公家而不是向收集的隐藏用户贩卖数字资产?

5、《证券法》的掩护是否公道?在数字资产中，提倡人和隐藏购置者/投资者之间是否存在信息差池称？

6、提倡人以外的小我私人或实体是否利用管理权或故意义的影响力?

固然这些身分在说明任何第三方的脚色时都很重要，可是用条约或技能方法来构建数字资产，成果更像斲丧品，缺乏证券性。我们再次思量买卖营业的经济实质，但提倡人及其参谋应思量这些和其他也许的特性。

这份清单并不规划能细致无遗，我也毫不以为必要提出这些身分中的每一个，以证明令牌是不是证券。 该清单旨在促使提倡人及其状师举办思索，并开始与员工举办对话 ，它并不料味着是法令说明中全部须要身分的清单。

1.令牌建设是否与满意用户的需求，可能切合预期？

2.独立举动者是否设定了价值，可能支持资产二级市场的或以其他方法影响买卖营业的敦促者？

3. 与投资对比，购置数字资产的首要念头是供小我私人必要或斲丧？购置者是否就他们的斲丧意图而不是投资意图作出了告诉？这些令牌是否与斲丧与投资意图相干的增量可用？

4. 令牌是否以满意用户需求的方法分发？譬喻，令牌是否可以凭证购置者的预期用途举办持有或转让？是否有内置的鼓励法子可以迫使收集上的令牌敏捷行使，譬喻让令牌跟着时刻的推移而低落代价，照旧令牌可以长时刻保持投资？

5. 资产是否贩卖并分发给隐藏用户或公家？

6. 资产是分手在差异的用户基本上，照旧齐集在少数可以影响其应用措施的人手中？

7. 应用措施是完全运行照旧处于开拓的早期阶段？

这些都是令人欢快的法令时期，我很兴奋成为这个进程的一部门，可以辅佐这种新技能的敦促者及其状师应对并遵守联邦证券法。

以下是演讲原文：

Digital Asset Transactions: When Howey Met Gary (Plastic)

Remarks at the Yahoo Finance All Markets Summit: Crypto

Thank you Andy. I am pleased to be here today.[1] This event provides a great opportunity to address a topic that is the subject of considerable debate in the press and in the crypto-community – whether a digital asset offered as a security can, over time, become something other than a security.[2]

To start, we should frame the question differently and focus not on the digital asset itself, but on the circumstances surrounding the digital asset and the manner in which it is sold. To that end, a better line of inquiry is: “Can a digital asset that was originally offered in a securities offering ever be later sold in a manner that does not constitute an offering of a security?” In cases where the digital asset represents a set of rights that gives the holder a financial interest in an enterprise, the answer is likely “no.” In these cases, calling the transaction an initial coin offering, or “ICO,” or a sale of a “token,” will not take it out of the purview of the U.S. securities laws.

But what about cases where there is no longer any central enterprise being invested in or where the digital asset is sold only to be used to purchase a good or service available through the network on which it was created? I believe in these cases the answer is a qualified “yes.” I would like to share my thinking with you today about the circumstances under which that could occur.

Before I turn to the securities law analysis, let me share what I believe may be most exciting about distributed ledger technology – that is, the potential to share information, transfer value, and record transactions in a decentralized digital environment. Potential applications include supply chain management, intellectual property rights licensing, stock ownership transfers and countless others. There is real value in creating applications that can be accessed and executed electronically with a public, immutable record and without the need for a trusted third party to verify transactions. Some people believe that this technology will transform e-commerce as we know it. There is excitement and a great deal of speculative interest around this new technology. Unfortunately, there also are cases of fraud. In many regards, it is still “early days.”

（编辑：湖南网）

【声明】本站内容均来自网络，其相关言论仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本站立场。若无意侵犯到您的权利，请及时与联系站长删除相关内容!