United States - SEC officials and members of Congress did not agree on regulatory ICO
At a hearing on Thursday, April 26 at the US House of Representatives, members of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the House Financial Services Committee of the House of Representatives disagreed on whether or not they could adopt a "balanced approach" to monitor ICO. Representatives of the SEC stated that the ICO should be supervised in a balanced manner, while MPs strongly oppose it and recommend it.
At the beginning of the "Oversight of the Securities and Exchange Commission Corporate Finance Department" hearing, William Hinman, head of the SEC's Corporate Finance Department, said that digital assets and ICO areas should "continue to develop":
One of the purposes of the hearing was to discuss the reasons for the reduction in the number of IPOs in the country.
Board member Bill Huizenga asked Hinman:
Hinman responded by saying:
Earlier, Jay Clayton, chairman of the US Securities Exchange, said that most ICOs should be considered securities.
According to Hinman, the SEC will negotiate with the entity issuing the tokens to verify whether the issuances are regulated or whether they qualify for securities.
Committee member Brad Sherman disagrees with the view that ICO can replace IPO, he said, because IPO "can provide employment opportunities in the real economy", and ICO is "the exact opposite":
Immediately afterwards, Sherman asked why the ICO had not been "banned," noting that Hinman's "balance" would have a negative impact on the economy:
Sherman talked about the decentralized nature of ICO:
Committee member Tom Emmer (R-MN) stated:
The US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) held a hearing in February this year. Their conclusion is that they need to supervise the ICO to the greatest extent, and distributed ledger technologies such as blockchain, such as Bitcoin, can be appropriately relaxed.
We hope to adopt a balanced approach to ensure that capital is protected while forming investors.
One of the purposes of the hearing was to discuss the reasons for the reduction in the number of IPOs in the country.
Board member Bill Huizenga asked Hinman:
Can ICO solve the problem of the decline in the number of IPOs? Is it necessary to supervise all ICOs?
Hinman responded by saying:
In theory, digital currency can achieve decentralized utility in the market over a period of time, but, as such, it may be difficult to manage digital currency.
Earlier, Jay Clayton, chairman of the US Securities Exchange, said that most ICOs should be considered securities.
According to Hinman, the SEC will negotiate with the entity issuing the tokens to verify whether the issuances are regulated or whether they qualify for securities.
Committee member Brad Sherman disagrees with the view that ICO can replace IPO, he said, because IPO "can provide employment opportunities in the real economy", and ICO is "the exact opposite":
ICO gets funding from the real economy. It requires people to invest and take risks. It cannot build factories to meet the needs of thousands of people. It just needs to sit and continue to trade.
Immediately afterwards, Sherman asked why the ICO had not been "banned," noting that Hinman's "balance" would have a negative impact on the economy:
You want to find a balance between those who are trying to create new currencies to promote drug deals, tax evasion, deprivation of the Fed’s ability to issue our securities, and the ability to return approximately $100 billion to the U.S. Treasury Department. In fact, all balances are It is to protect investors, and this can be achieved through complete bans.
Sherman talked about the decentralized nature of ICO:
Liars are particularly interested in decentralized new businesses.
Committee member Tom Emmer (R-MN) stated:
People are particularly ignorant about this area. Everyone who participates in a field they do not know is not a good person or a dishonest person. Government officials must help people in a timely manner.
The US Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) held a hearing in February this year. Their conclusion is that they need to supervise the ICO to the greatest extent, and distributed ledger technologies such as blockchain, such as Bitcoin, can be appropriately relaxed.
