SEC has given a last warning on ICOs

[bbc.reporter]

I reckon it would be a good occasion for our portfolio's assessment and find which ICOs came into existence in the jurisdiction of the United States SEC but were not registered. They will be the low hanging fruit for the SEC to enforce fines and to take down which will certainly cause a market dump for those tokens.

I speculate that the ICOs from Asia will take over the top 10 in Coinmarketcap.



Preston Byrne, an Attorney at the ASI and the Founder of Monax, spoke about whether the SEC has successfully excluded the United States from the ICO market, in an interview with CNBC Crypto Trader. He also spoke about the potential risks that can be faced by companies that registered in the US but not with SEC before conducting an ICO.

Byrne stated that the SEC has not precluded ICOs from being registered, whereas, they have just stated that ICOs have to be registered. If not this, then the ICO must be included in an exemption. This includes a private placement deal such as Simple Agreement for Future Tokens [SAFT] under regulation D. The other common exemption is regulation S wherein ICO issuers who are based abroad and have no US touch points are going through compliance to avoid having US touch points.

Byrne further spoke about the current risks faced by ICOs that raised funds in 2016 and 2017, which were registered in the USA but not with the SEC. He stated that that they can face a lot of risk. The Attorney added that an entrepreneur has a few options when faced with compliance problems like meeting with the SEC and coming with a solution.

Read in full https://ambcrypto.com/sec-has-given-a-last-warning-to-the-cryptocurrency-space-says-preston-byrne/

[LeoEspansq]

I think this isn't good on the decentralized part of cryptocurrency. Yes, there are lots of ICOs not on the system but they are from other countries. I hope SEC can see their authority about some jurisdiction on some places. Maybe on US soil, but they must understand that their position has limited powers to impose a threat to cryptocurrency.

Maybe this is not good, but it is at least some real step to reduce the number sponge on the market and increase efficiency for investors. A small but pleasant step, I fully support them.

[shinratensei_]

I reckon it would be a good occasion for our portfolio's assessment and find which ICOs came into existence in the jurisdiction of the United States SEC but were not registered. They will be the low hanging fruit for the SEC to enforce fines and to take down which will certainly cause a market dump for those tokens.

I speculate that the ICOs from Asia will take over the top 10 in Coinmarketcap.



Preston Byrne, an Attorney at the ASI and the Founder of Monax, spoke about whether the SEC has successfully excluded the United States from the ICO market, in an interview with CNBC Crypto Trader. He also spoke about the potential risks that can be faced by companies that registered in the US but not with SEC before conducting an ICO.

Byrne stated that the SEC has not precluded ICOs from being registered, whereas, they have just stated that ICOs have to be registered. If not this, then the ICO must be included in an exemption. This includes a private placement deal such as Simple Agreement for Future Tokens [SAFT] under regulation D. The other common exemption is regulation S wherein ICO issuers who are based abroad and have no US touch points are going through compliance to avoid having US touch points.

Byrne further spoke about the current risks faced by ICOs that raised funds in 2016 and 2017, which were registered in the USA but not with the SEC. He stated that that they can face a lot of risk. The Attorney added that an entrepreneur has a few options when faced with compliance problems like meeting with the SEC and coming with a solution.

Read in full https://ambcrypto.com/sec-has-given-a-last-warning-to-the-cryptocurrency-space-says-preston-byrne/

SEC has cracked down not only icos but DEX which has known as etherdelta.
There was a point to not get in touch with SEC and as ico developer in USA and these guys must remain anonymous.
I have read an interesting article in this morning that explains there are some icos are still remain anonymous. If these teams are very well known by SEC and then they must prepare to get in touch with SEC.
US icos has placed on the first place of the icos which have raised a lot of money.

[frchowe214]

People should register a base in an offshore location and rum their ico from there. They should know that the authorities are going to crack down on them, no poimt risking it except for big companies

[cabron]

They should realize that digital currency has no boundaries, it can't just stay in a country. Even if a company is registered in US, its still possible that the rich guys who owns the token of this company are from ASIA. Or somewhere else. They should just back away from controlling crypto because after all there is no control over it which by nature  its decentralized as planned.

[jacafbiz]

There are two ways to see this, to be sincere of what use are 99% of these tokens, why do I need to hold a token after collecting my money and the tokens end up having no user as we are seeing these days and no value.

The only thing I see here is that SEC is not giving out a clear decisive statement of how to go about ICO and not to get wrought of the government, what would happen is projects moving out of US and to a more conducive regions to set up their projects.

[baconlike]

It is bad if we continue to invest in ICOs, because the ICO is not good for us to hold anymore, buy only loss and no chance to enrich the password as in previous years. .

[droptableguy2]

I do not believe in ICOs anymore, I do not dare invest in electronic money because I lose a lot, I lose too much capital so I no longer trust, I bought ETH at 1000 $ and now they are 122 $

[bbc.reporter]

They should realize that digital currency has no boundaries, it can't just stay in a country. Even if a company is registered in US, its still possible that the rich guys who owns the token of this company are from ASIA. Or somewhere else. They should just back away from controlling crypto because after all there is no control over it which by nature  its decentralized as planned.

The American government can do anything they want if an ICO falls in their jurisdiction. Yes ICOs can continue issuing tokens outside of that jurisdiction, however they are not controlling the cryptospace, they are upholding the law, their law that some of those ICO tokens are illegal securities.

[Harriti]

I think this isn't good on the decentralized part of cryptocurrency. Yes, there are lots of ICOs not on the system but they are from other countries. I hope SEC can see their authority about some jurisdiction on some places. Maybe on US soil, but they must understand that their position has limited powers to impose a threat to cryptocurrency.

Maybe this is not good, but it is at least some real step to reduce the number sponge on the market and increase efficiency for investors. A small but pleasant step, I fully support them.

I think SEC will refuse all the request to support of the cryptocurrency. This year the price of cryptocurrency is always dumped, and I think in spite of the approved of SEC, the situation of the market still will not improve in 2018. Let's wait for the next year 2019.

[watergold]

maybe after this ico world is getting tougher and not carelessly people can make crypo as they like. even maybe starting 2019 it will decrease ico-making companies that don't have offices and official destinations

[Naficopa]

SEC regulations will simply make harder creation of new ICOs. The risk will  decrease probably very little.
After all, it will certainly help in prosecuting scammers and will probably save people from losing money.
However, like all regulations, it will not allow people to make decisions by themselves, so in other words we will lose our freedom to decide what we want to do with our money.

[TwSeventh]

maybe after this ico world is getting tougher and not carelessly people can make crypo as they like. even maybe starting 2019 it will decrease ico-making companies that don't have offices and official destinations

It is good if they can reduce that kind of so-called companies that have no office and destination because that means they are not doing it properly and only wanted to make a quick money by creating an ICO, but the problem here is.
I am afraid, SEC will take their position as the controller. if they do that, does not that mean cryptocurrency loses its purpose as a digital currency with its decentralization?

[Oniko]

If US venture capital funds want to invest in ICO, they can open a subsidiary in England. SEC will not be able to control the investment of such a fund.

I think that the SEC does not greatly affect the cryptocurrency market

[ongkok87]

I do not believe in ICOs anymore, I do not dare invest in electronic money because I lose a lot, I lose too much capital so I no longer trust, I bought ETH at 1000 $ and now they are 122 $

most people do that too because there have been a lot of people harmed by the ICO who have experienced fraud, so now it's better to invest in high-potential coins that are already on the market that are certain

[FLHippy]

I thought that there are not so many ICos which are based in the USA, they even do not accept investors from the USA.
But SEC should create some solution to protect investors, not only ban ICOs.

[Febo]

I thought that there are not so many ICos which are based in the USA, they even do not accept investors from the USA.
But SEC should create some solution to protect investors, not only ban ICOs.

LOL sec protection for USA investors is that in case any ICO accept USA citizens as investors they will through the diplomatic establishment that USA have in country where ICO exist make sure that ICO gets closed down and organizers gets charged.   That should pretty much protect USA investors since none ICO organizer will dare to take one single cent from them.




Overall of this post is that Ethereum is biggest ICO and security. And they should start with that first.

[porebertaeiru]

this is kinda not appropriate at all but lets still hope they can discuss it in a much better situations

[cabron]

They should realize that digital currency has no boundaries, it can't just stay in a country. Even if a company is registered in US, its still possible that the rich guys who owns the token of this company are from ASIA. Or somewhere else. They should just back away from controlling crypto because after all there is no control over it which by nature  its decentralized as planned.

The American government can do anything they want if an ICO falls in their jurisdiction. Yes ICOs can continue issuing tokens outside of that jurisdiction, however they are not controlling the cryptospace, they are upholding the law, their law that some of those ICO tokens are illegal securities.

Them going to screen all the startup are like controlling and will eventually lead there. It will start by collecting information from traders which actually is going on right now that its now mandatory for exchanges to ask KYC. There is no stopping them though so they can go on like that but one thing that will happen soon is that there will be lesser startup companies doing in their soil.

[Zadicar]

This smell really bad to those who make an ICO which is trying to cover their path just to evade the consequences but the government now are trying their very best to trace who's behind in all of this. It might lead to Asia if ever they will found out but let's not just make and jump on to conclusions. Let's just wait and see what would the government actions for this.