USA Subsection Needed? (POLL)

[Clobered09]

As a small business-person you are NOT ALLOWED to ask anyone in public for funding.  It's against the law.  I cannot say to anyone in this or any other forum something like: "hey I want to borrow bitcoins from you and I'll pay you back with interest".  To do that is ILLEGAL.
      

This is inaccurate.  Privately negotiated lending does not have to be registered per se in the US, even if the initial solicitation is public, so long as it doesn't otherwise qualify as a security under the '33 and '34 acts.  The catch-all in the '33 acts definition of "security," the investment contract, is not broad enough to cover private non-standardized lending (as broad as it is).

[NewLiberty]

As a small business-person you are NOT ALLOWED to ask anyone in public for funding.  It's against the law.  I cannot say to anyone in this or any other forum something like: "hey I want to borrow bitcoins from you and I'll pay you back with interest".  To do that is ILLEGAL.
      

This is inaccurate.  Privately negotiated lending does not have to be registered per se in the US, even if the initial solicitation is public, so long as it doesn't otherwise qualify as a security under the '33 and '34 acts.  The catch-all in the '33 acts definition of "security," the investment contract, is not broad enough to cover private non-standardized lending (as broad as it is).

There are exceptions to each of the ANYONE blanket statements made in the OP.
Some but not all business transactions fall within these regulatory governance parameters.
Most private business transactions are just that.

[Clobered09]

As a small business-person you are NOT ALLOWED to ask anyone in public for funding.  It's against the law.  I cannot say to anyone in this or any other forum something like: "hey I want to borrow bitcoins from you and I'll pay you back with interest".  To do that is ILLEGAL.
      

This is inaccurate.  Privately negotiated lending does not have to be registered per se in the US, even if the initial solicitation is public, so long as it doesn't otherwise qualify as a security under the '33 and '34 acts.  The catch-all in the '33 acts definition of "security," the investment contract, is not broad enough to cover private non-standardized lending (as broad as it is).

There are exceptions to each of the ANYONE blanket statements made in the OP.
Some but not all business transactions fall within these regulatory governance parameters.
Most private business transactions are just that.

Well yes, there are always exceptions and OPs statement would have been overly-broad and inaccurate even if he had said it exclusively about equity funding.  That said, what I was trying to point out was that when it comes to raising capital, equity financing by default creates a security, while debt financing does not (it can, it just doesn't do it by default).  Registration requirements for offerings and sales apply to all securities unless explicitly exempted, so it's probably fair to say "As a small business-person you are not allowed to ask anyone in public for equity funding" even though there are some very unique types of equity funding that don't create securities and there are some equity securities that are explicitly exempt, because as a general rule that's correct.  With debt financing, registration requirements are the exception rather than the rule, and so saying it about borrowing with interest is flat wrong, it's nether absolutely true nor even generally true, only sometimes true. 

[Viceroy]

As a small business-person you are NOT ALLOWED to ask anyone in public for funding.  It's against the law.  I cannot say to anyone in this or any other forum something like: "hey I want to borrow bitcoins from you and I'll pay you back with interest".  To do that is ILLEGAL.
      

This is inaccurate. []

It's particularly inaccurate now, with the beginning of the JOBS Act implementation, ya? 

Even so, we need a USA subsection.  How 'bout it admins?

[Clobered09]

As a small business-person you are NOT ALLOWED to ask anyone in public for funding.  It's against the law.  I cannot say to anyone in this or any other forum something like: "hey I want to borrow bitcoins from you and I'll pay you back with interest".  To do that is ILLEGAL.
      

This is inaccurate. []

It's particularly inaccurate now, with the beginning of the JOBS Act implementation, ya? 

Even so, we need a USA subsection.  How 'bout it admins?

The JOBS Act has/will provide some avenues, but for the most part they [will] either: a) provide avenues for accredited investors or b) still require registration, but reduce regulatory burdens on small issuances. 

[NewLiberty]

As a small business-person you are NOT ALLOWED to ask anyone in public for funding.  It's against the law.  I cannot say to anyone in this or any other forum something like: "hey I want to borrow bitcoins from you and I'll pay you back with interest".  To do that is ILLEGAL.
      

This is inaccurate. []

It's particularly inaccurate now, with the beginning of the JOBS Act implementation, ya? 

Even so, we need a USA subsection.  How 'bout it admins?

A law ghetto?

Law is a matter of geography everywhere.  Why exacerbate US exceptionalism?

[Clobered09]

Law is a matter of geography everywhere.  Why exacerbate US exceptionalism?

We can't help it if we're exceptional! 

But ultimately I think I agree with you, though for different reasons.  The securities laws of many jurisdictions are based on US law anyway, the world is our subsection, suck it nerds.

[NewLiberty]

And the first stock exchanges were in Europe, so we all learn from each other.  If you need to feel separate, stick a [USA] in your thread title or something distinctive.
Hiding all the USA stuff in its own little sub forum doesn't improve matters.

[Viceroy]

FWIW I voted for:   Warn exchangers not to deal with Americans

[Clobered09]

FWIW I voted for:   Warn exchangers not to deal with Americans

If you're going to do that, will you also warn them not to deal with essentially every other country in the world?  With the exception of a few (China, the UAE, Brazil, and Nigeria come to mind), nearly every other country's securities laws are modeled significantly after the US system.

Edit:  Similarly, AML compliance (while less likely to track the US scheme) is also detailed and complex in nearly every country, the impact of FATF and related FSABs worldwide on national policies has been far reaching.  Singling out the US as if it's laws are somehow uniquely onerous is just idiotic and demonstrates complete ignorance about the international environment for investment and AML compliance regulation. 

[Viceroy]

You are absolutely correct.  I should have specified "warn US Based exchanges not to deal with Americans".

[Clobered09]

You are absolutely correct.  I should have specified "warn US Based exchanges not to deal with Americans".

I still don't understand the distinction.  Whether you're a US based exchange selling to Panamanians, a Panama based exchange selling to Americans, a US based exchange selling to Americans, or a Panamanian based exchange selling to Panamanians, the rules are essentially the same.  It may determine whether the SEC or the SMV is more or less likely to be the relevant enforcer, and you might make a practical judgment there about who you'd rather go up against (The SMV tends to be more relaxed, but they also can be pressured more politically if you've pissed off the wrong person, and they have greater investigative powers as they are a unified financial regulator.  The SEC has substantially greater resources, but they're also usually more responsive and organizationally easier to deal with, they're more independent politically, but also more reliant on inter-agency cooperation), but from the neutral standpoint of this board, neither is preferable to the other.

[jadescorpio]

Even if we warn exchangers not to deal with Americans, they still will deal with them

[NewLiberty]

There might be a more misguided segregation request in this forum somewhere, but I haven't seen it.