“A number of concerns have been raised regarding the cryptocurrency and ICO markets, including that, as they are currently operating, there is substantially less investor protection than in our traditional securities markets, with correspondingly greater opportunities for fraud and manipulation,” he said. Noting that both investors and businesses have legal questions regarding certain products and offerings, he added, “The answers to these and other important questions often require an in-depth analysis, and the answers will differ depending on many factors.”
Below are five key takeaways from Clayton’s statement on ICOs:
Investors Should Be Skeptical: Clayton devoted significant attention to the risks to so-called “Main Street investors.” He emphasized that no initial coin offerings have been registered with the SEC. In addition, the SEC has not to date approved for listing and trading any exchange-traded products (such as ETFs) holding cryptocurrencies or other assets related to cryptocurrencies.“If any person today tells you otherwise, be especially wary,” Clayton warned. He also provided a list of questions that investors should ask when vetting a potential investment involving an ICO or cryptocurrency.
Labels Won’t Deter SEC Scrutiny: Clayton also addressed attempts by market professionals to highlight utility characteristics of their proposed ICOs in an effort to claim that their proposed tokens or coins are not securities. He warned, “Many of these assertions appear to elevate form over substance. Merely calling a token a ‘utility’ token or structuring it to provide some utility does not prevent the token from being a security.” Clayton similarly advised, “replacing a traditional corporate interest recorded in a central ledger with an enterprise interest recorded through a blockchain entry on a distributed ledger may change the form of the transaction, but it does not change the substance.”
Support Professionals May be Held Liable for ICOs: Clayton also emphasized the role of support professionals in assisting businesses with SEC compliance. “[W]here the application of expertise and judgment is expected, I believe that gatekeepers and others, including securities lawyers, accountants and consultants, need to focus on their responsibilities,” Clayton advised. “I urge you to be guided by the principal motivation for our registration, offering process and disclosure requirements: investor protection and, in particular, the protection of our Main Street investors.”
Examples of Permissible ICOs: To illustrate the difference between an ICO that involves securities and one that does not, Clayton stated that a token that represents a participation interest in a book-of-the-month club may not implicate our securities laws, and “may well be an efficient way for the club’s operators to fund the future acquisition of books and facilitate the distribution of those books to token holders.” However, he cautioned that most ICOs are more analogous to interests in a yet-to-be-built publishing house with the authors, books and distribution networks all to come. “It is especially troubling when the promoters of these offerings emphasize the secondary market trading potential of these tokens,” he added. “Prospective purchasers are being sold on the potential for tokens to increase in value – with the ability to lock in those increases by reselling the tokens on a secondary market – or to otherwise profit from the tokens based on the efforts of others. These are key hallmarks of a security and a securities offering.”
No Bright-Line Prohibitions: While Clayton struck a cautious tone, he also acknowledged that ICOs can be effective ways for entrepreneurs and others to raise funding, including for innovative projects. “The technology on which cryptocurrencies and ICOs are based may prove to be disruptive, transformative and efficiency-enhancing,” he said. “I am confident that developments in fintech will help facilitate capital formation and provide promising investment opportunities for institutional and Main Street investors alike.”
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Dan Brecher, at 201-806-3364.
Does Your Homeowners Insurance Provide Adequate Coverage?
Your home is likely your greatest asset, which is why it is so important to adequately protect it. Homeowners insurance protects you from the financial costs of unforeseen losses, such as theft, fire, and natural disasters, by helping you rebuild and replace possessions that were lost While the definition of “adequate” coverage depends upon a […]
Understanding the Importance of a Non-Contingent Offer
Making a non-contingent offer can dramatically increase your chances of securing a real estate transaction, particularly in competitive markets like New York City. However, buyers should understand that waiving contingencies, including those related to financing, or appraisals, also comes with significant risks. Determining your best strategy requires careful analysis of the property, the market, and […]
Fred D. Zemel Appointed Chair of Strategic Planning at Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC
Business Transactional Attorney Zemel to Spearhead Strategic Initiatives for Continued Growth and Innovation Little Falls, NJ – February 21, 2025 – Scarinci & Hollenbeck, LLC is pleased to announce that Partner Fred D. Zemel has been named Chair of the firm’s Strategic Planning Committee. In this role, Mr. Zemel will lead the committee in identifying, […]
Novation Agreement Process: Step-by-Step Guide for Businesses
Big changes sometimes occur during the life cycle of a contract. Cancelling a contract outright can be bad for your reputation and your bottom line. Businesses need to know how to best address a change in circumstances, while also protecting their legal rights. One option is to transfer the “benefits and the burdens” of a […]
What Is a Trade Secret? Key Elements and Legal Protections Explained
What is a trade secret and why you you protect them? Technology has made trade secret theft even easier and more prevalent. In fact, businesses lose billions of dollars every year due to trade secret theft committed by employees, competitors, and even foreign governments. But what is a trade secret? And how do you protect […]
What Is Title Insurance? Safeguarding Against Title Defects
If you are considering the purchase of a property, you may wonder — what is title insurance, do I need it, and why do I need it? Even seasoned property owners may question if the added expense and extra paperwork is really necessary, especially considering that people and entities insured by title insurance make fewer […]
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Sign up to get the latest from our attorneys!
Explore What Matters Most to You.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Five Conclusions from SEC Chair's Latest Statement on ICOs
Author: Dan Brecher
SEC Chair Jay Clayton Recently Issued Public Statement on ICOs
“A number of concerns have been raised regarding the cryptocurrency and ICO markets, including that, as they are currently operating, there is substantially less investor protection than in our traditional securities markets, with correspondingly greater opportunities for fraud and manipulation,” he said. Noting that both investors and businesses have legal questions regarding certain products and offerings, he added, “The answers to these and other important questions often require an in-depth analysis, and the answers will differ depending on many factors.”
Below are five key takeaways from Clayton’s statement on ICOs:
Investors Should Be Skeptical: Clayton devoted significant attention to the risks to so-called “Main Street investors.” He emphasized that no initial coin offerings have been registered with the SEC. In addition, the SEC has not to date approved for listing and trading any exchange-traded products (such as ETFs) holding cryptocurrencies or other assets related to cryptocurrencies.“If any person today tells you otherwise, be especially wary,” Clayton warned. He also provided a list of questions that investors should ask when vetting a potential investment involving an ICO or cryptocurrency.
Labels Won’t Deter SEC Scrutiny: Clayton also addressed attempts by market professionals to highlight utility characteristics of their proposed ICOs in an effort to claim that their proposed tokens or coins are not securities. He warned, “Many of these assertions appear to elevate form over substance. Merely calling a token a ‘utility’ token or structuring it to provide some utility does not prevent the token from being a security.” Clayton similarly advised, “replacing a traditional corporate interest recorded in a central ledger with an enterprise interest recorded through a blockchain entry on a distributed ledger may change the form of the transaction, but it does not change the substance.”
Support Professionals May be Held Liable for ICOs: Clayton also emphasized the role of support professionals in assisting businesses with SEC compliance. “[W]here the application of expertise and judgment is expected, I believe that gatekeepers and others, including securities lawyers, accountants and consultants, need to focus on their responsibilities,” Clayton advised. “I urge you to be guided by the principal motivation for our registration, offering process and disclosure requirements: investor protection and, in particular, the protection of our Main Street investors.”
Examples of Permissible ICOs: To illustrate the difference between an ICO that involves securities and one that does not, Clayton stated that a token that represents a participation interest in a book-of-the-month club may not implicate our securities laws, and “may well be an efficient way for the club’s operators to fund the future acquisition of books and facilitate the distribution of those books to token holders.” However, he cautioned that most ICOs are more analogous to interests in a yet-to-be-built publishing house with the authors, books and distribution networks all to come. “It is especially troubling when the promoters of these offerings emphasize the secondary market trading potential of these tokens,” he added. “Prospective purchasers are being sold on the potential for tokens to increase in value – with the ability to lock in those increases by reselling the tokens on a secondary market – or to otherwise profit from the tokens based on the efforts of others. These are key hallmarks of a security and a securities offering.”
No Bright-Line Prohibitions: While Clayton struck a cautious tone, he also acknowledged that ICOs can be effective ways for entrepreneurs and others to raise funding, including for innovative projects. “The technology on which cryptocurrencies and ICOs are based may prove to be disruptive, transformative and efficiency-enhancing,” he said. “I am confident that developments in fintech will help facilitate capital formation and provide promising investment opportunities for institutional and Main Street investors alike.”
Do you have any questions? Would you like to discuss the matter further? If so, please contact me, Dan Brecher, at 201-806-3364.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!
