This article comes fromForbes, original author: Jason Brett
Odaily Translator |
Odaily Translator |
Last Thursday (February 6), Hester Peirce, Commissioner of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and affectionately known as the "Cryptographic Old Godmother" by the encryption community, published a speech at the International Blockchain Conference entitled "Gap Run: Filling the Regulatory and Delegating The speech "Running On Empty: A Proposal To Fill The Gap Between Regulation and Decentralization" (Running On Empty: A Proposal To Fill The Gap Between Regulation and Decentralization) quickly attracted widespread attention from the encryption community.
Jason Brett, who worked for the FDIC during the US financial crisis and is currently a contributor to Forbes, recently spoke with Hester Peirce about his proposed "safe harbor" policy for crypto companies . Next, let Mr. Odaily (WeChat: o-daily) take a look at the content of this interview with everyone:
secondary title
Hester Peirce: Yeah, I did think about it and think the SEC could do that. Because under the Securities Act, the SEC has broad immunity. Knowing this, the situation isn't as different as I thought it would be, but it's not out of the question, and I'm looking forward to further exchanges with some lawyers.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: Any clarification on the proposal would be valuable - I would like to get initial feedback as a first step and work through it with my colleagues so we can have the confidence to say to crypto companies: "These It’s all been vetted and it’s going to work and achieve your goals.” Then, there could be the SEC formally filing a safe harbor bill and asking for public comment to finalize the rules. You've also worked in regulatory agencies before, so you know for sure that these jobs take time.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: They want to correct the problem of information asymmetry. Token issuers should make sufficient information disclosure at the operational level to ensure that investors can make correct purchase decisions, and at the same time not mix irrelevant information together. The SEC commissioners have seen a lot of poor token offerings... the most important thing here is to prevent fraud. Through the safe harbor, we can distinguish good projects from bad projects. If you are really serious about building an encryption project, you can clarify what you are doing to the SEC and take full advantage of the safe harbor.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: It's actually pretty easy to identify that in the safe harbor if you're honest about all the information and there's no malice, and no one is looking at you with nefarious motives.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: As a regulator, it is important to be flexible in policy if you want to encourage innovation. I think the introduction of Safe Harbor is an attempt by the SEC to explore innovation. I am not a big fan of technology or tokens, but I do think that decentralization is good because there are people who have never been able to access modern financial services, and with the help of new technologies, they have been locked out in the past Now you can also enjoy better financial services. This means that the token project can bring people together from all over the world in a new way, which I think is very promising.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: That's a great question. To some extent, the "safe harbor" is actually a protection for investors, including keeping open to investors' choices. This is a gray area that mainly helps regulators find the correct boundary of jurisdiction. As regulators, one of our roles is to define which places should be regulated and which places should not be regulated, but it is often difficult for token projects to find clear boundaries, but why not try to clearly regulate in meaningful areas?
secondary title
Hester Peirce: If we establish a framework where legitimate token projects can attempt to act, then safe harbors can work. Safe Harbor can help us find real problems and identify criminal projects. It's somewhat frustrating to hear you ask this question, because almost everything you consider good can be used for evil, and cash can be used for crime. Some people use this method to label it. There are indeed hype and fraud problems in the token, and there must be some illegal activities, but I see more of its development potential.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: Tokens are another matter entirely. Stocks or bonds are traditional equity or debt equity, which is different from the tokens being used in the network, or the tokens that will be used in the network. At that time, it was a completely different thing. Tokens are your necessary "on-ramp" to participate in the network, so it's unclear whether securities laws can govern such transactions.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: You can send an email to CommissionerPeirce@sec.gov, or enter the SEC FinHub to provide feedback. I believe that the relevant staff dealing with the issue will benefit from your suggestions.
secondary title
Hester Peirce: Oh, right.
secondary title
"Forbes": As far as the law is concerned, New Jersey is the only state in the United States that makes it illegal to go to the gas station to pump gas. It is said that Brazil and South Africa are also the same. Some people think that such a law may be set up to prevent gas workers from losing their jobs. New Jersey enacted this law for the following reasons: 1. When customers pump their own fuel pumps, especially pregnant women, they will be exposed to toxic gasoline fumes, which will endanger their health; Gasoline charges are much higher, and if self-service refueling is offered in these states, incomes are often insecure for low-income individuals who are often under greater financial pressure while also facing the inconvenience and danger of refueling; 3. Even at those gas stations that provide both self-service refueling and manual refueling services, many car owners still choose self-service refueling due to higher charges for manual refueling, which easily puts car owners and other drivers in danger , and some unnecessary expensive repair costs due to delayed maintenance; 4. The general liability insurance rate charged by self-service gas stations is relatively high, which also reflects the fact that when the owner leaves the car to refuel or contact other convenient When burning liquids, they face greater inconvenience and danger, such as being more vulnerable to robbery, falls, and other risks of personal injury, and some owners of vehicles with defects (such as disabled and elderly people) who get out of the car to refuel themselves cause unnecessary trouble. If you compare these rules and regulations with the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s current regulation of token projects, what is your reaction?
