[2017-12-30] Massachusetts Securities Regulator: Bitcoin Fails 'The Smell Test'

[cybersofts]

Massachusetts Securities Regulator: Bitcoin Fails 'The Smell Test'



The top securities regulator in Massachusetts told CNBC yesterday that the bitcoin market is "entirely speculation."

"It doesn't pass the smell test," said Secretary of the Commonwealth William Galvin, whose responsibilities include overseeing the state's securities division. He warned:

    "It's also subject to manipulation, because no one can explain it, no one can control it."

Galvin's comments are the latest from U.S. regulators that warn investors about risks associated with cryptocurrencies, following the Securities Exchange Commission and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority earlier this month.

Yet, it wasn't Galvin's first comment on the bitcoin market. Earlier this month, Galvin issued a press release cautioning against "bitcoin mania," while saying he is not coordinating with other state regulators on the issue at the moment.

The release listed seven points for investors to consider before buying bitcoin, including checking fees on exchanges, the inability to recover stolen funds and the wild fluctuations in price.

The federal government has also been cautioning investors about the cryptocurrency's historic rise. Galvin said, "we all seem to agree that this is a problem," and also extended his concerns to issues around other activities such as initial coin offerings.

"We believe they (ICO) certainly qualify as securities," Gavin said, adding "This is clearly an area with potentials for fraud. And we are very concerned about that."


Source: https://www.coindesk.com/massachusetts-securities-regulator-bitcoin-fails-smell-test/

[1715458680]

1715458680

[1715458680]

1715458680

[1715458680]

1715458680

[1715458680]

1715458680

[1715458680]

1715458680

[aso118]

"We believe they (ICO) certainly qualify as securities," Gavin said, adding "This is clearly an area with potentials for fraud. And we are very concerned about that."
Source: https://www.coindesk.com/massachusetts-securities-regulator-bitcoin-fails-smell-test/

This stance seems to be different from the SEC's stance. The SEC had stated that ICOs may qualify as securities. depending upon their underlying characteristics. The classification of tokens is important, because that decides which regulator should oversee it.

[squatter]

"We believe they (ICO) certainly qualify as securities," Gavin said, adding "This is clearly an area with potentials for fraud. And we are very concerned about that."
Source: https://www.coindesk.com/massachusetts-securities-regulator-bitcoin-fails-smell-test/

This stance seems to be different from the SEC's stance. The SEC had stated that ICOs may qualify as securities. depending upon their underlying characteristics. The classification of tokens is important, because that decides which regulator should oversee it.

That was their position in the DAO report. But SEC chairman Jay Clayton published a statement earlier this month that went further and was much more specific. The implication is that the vast majority (if not all) of ICOs as operated were securities offerings under US law:

By and large, the structures of initial coin offerings that I have seen promoted involve the offer and sale of securities and directly implicate the securities registration requirements and other investor protection provisions of our federal securities laws.

In particular, I think that most ICO promoters made a grave mistake in touting the trading potential and potential resale value of their tokens. That likely puts them squarely in the sights of the SEC:

It is especially troubling when the promoters of these offerings emphasize the secondary market trading potential of these tokens.  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.

   

[darkangel11]

It's also subject to manipulation, because no one can explain it, no one can control it.

I have to agree with the first part, but isn't any stock a potential subject to manipulation? How is a decentralized asset more of a subject to manipulation than one controlled by a small group of people? If a CEO of a company knows he made a great deal, he's going to tell insiders to buy more stocks because they're going to go up like crazy. It's by no means a safe investment as there's manipulation everywhere. The government is the biggest manipulator out there.
P.S. People can explain it, Mr. Galvin, you just need to listen to the right people.