SEC framework and no-action letter provide guidance on analyzing whether a digital asset is a security

Kenneth Berman, Morgan J. Hayes, Matthew E. Kaplan, Byungkwon Lim, Gary E. Murphy, Yean Do, Jonathan R. Steinberg
{"title":"SEC framework and no-action letter provide guidance on analyzing whether a digital asset is a security","authors":"Kenneth Berman, Morgan J. Hayes, Matthew E. Kaplan, Byungkwon Lim, Gary E. Murphy, Yean Do, Jonathan R. Steinberg","doi":"10.1108/joic-10-2019-0054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nTo analyze and draw conclusions from the “Framework for ‘Investment Contract’ Analysis of Digital Assets” (the “Framework”), released by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on April 3, 2019, and the SEC’s corresponding no-action letter to TurnKey Jet, Inc. (“TKJ”), which is the SEC’s first no-action letter publicly agreeing with the view that the digital asset described therein is not a security.\n\n\nDesign/Methodology/Approach\nExplains how the Framework assists market participants in analyzing whether a digital asset is a security, by applying the Howey factors for identifying an investment contract. Discusses the SEC’s TKJ Letter, highlighting the factors the SEC emphasized in its analysis of the Framework.\n\n\nFindings\nWhile largely reiterating prior guidance, the Framework provides a helpful overview of the SEC’s views on when a digital asset is a security and how to properly analyze the prongs of Howey with respect to digital assets. The Framework also leaves certain important questions unanswered, including, for example, whether digital assets distributed by means of a so-called “Airdrop” are securities under the Framework, and the extent to which the Framework is meant to interact with digital assets that were issued or otherwise operate on platforms that are primarily overseas.\n\n\nOriginality/Value\nExpert guidance from lawyers with broad experience in financial services, securities, investment funds, derivatives, and digital assets regulation and compliance.\n","PeriodicalId":399186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investment Compliance","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investment Compliance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/joic-10-2019-0054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Purpose To analyze and draw conclusions from the “Framework for ‘Investment Contract’ Analysis of Digital Assets” (the “Framework”), released by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on April 3, 2019, and the SEC’s corresponding no-action letter to TurnKey Jet, Inc. (“TKJ”), which is the SEC’s first no-action letter publicly agreeing with the view that the digital asset described therein is not a security. Design/Methodology/Approach Explains how the Framework assists market participants in analyzing whether a digital asset is a security, by applying the Howey factors for identifying an investment contract. Discusses the SEC’s TKJ Letter, highlighting the factors the SEC emphasized in its analysis of the Framework. Findings While largely reiterating prior guidance, the Framework provides a helpful overview of the SEC’s views on when a digital asset is a security and how to properly analyze the prongs of Howey with respect to digital assets. The Framework also leaves certain important questions unanswered, including, for example, whether digital assets distributed by means of a so-called “Airdrop” are securities under the Framework, and the extent to which the Framework is meant to interact with digital assets that were issued or otherwise operate on platforms that are primarily overseas. Originality/Value Expert guidance from lawyers with broad experience in financial services, securities, investment funds, derivatives, and digital assets regulation and compliance.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
SEC框架和不作为函为分析数字资产是否为证券提供了指导
目的分析并得出结论,美国证券交易委员会(“SEC”)于2019年4月3日发布的“数字资产投资合同分析框架”(“框架”),以及SEC给TurnKey Jet, Inc.(“TKJ”)的相应不作为函,这是SEC第一封公开同意其中描述的数字资产不是证券的不作为函。设计/方法/方法解释框架如何通过应用Howey因子来识别投资合同,帮助市场参与者分析数字资产是否为证券。讨论SEC的TKJ信函,突出SEC在分析该框架时强调的因素。虽然在很大程度上重申了先前的指导,但该框架提供了SEC关于数字资产何时是证券以及如何正确分析Howey在数字资产方面的观点的有益概述。该框架还留下了一些重要的问题,例如,通过所谓的“空投”方式分发的数字资产是否属于框架下的证券,以及该框架旨在与主要在海外平台上发行或以其他方式运营的数字资产进行互动的程度。创意/价值在金融服务、证券、投资基金、衍生品和数字资产监管和合规方面拥有丰富经验的律师提供专业指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
ESG litigation – how companies can get ready, respond and resolve claims Strengthening AML/CFT controls of digital payment token service providers in Singapore Understanding regulatory trends: digital assets & anti-Money laundering “Racing” to the IBOR transition finish line Structuring and financing private equity and venture capital transactions in Luxembourg
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1