The SEC has issued guidance and made numerous statements regarding the application of securities laws to digital assets. For example, on July 25, 2017, the SEC issued a Report of Investigation (the “Report”) which concluded that tokens offered and sold by the Decentralized Autonomous Organization (“DAO”), a digital decentralized autonomous organization and investor-directed venture capital fund for digital assets, were issued for the purpose of raising funds. The Report concluded that these tokens were “investment contracts” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(1) of the Securities Act and Section 3(a)(10) of the Exchange Act, and therefore securities subject to the federal securities laws. In December 2017, the SEC issued a
letter to Munchee Inc., ordering that the company stop its initial coin offering of MUN Tokens on the grounds that it failed to file a registration statement or qualify for an exemption from registration. Similar to the tokens issued by the DAO, the SEC found that the MUN Tokens satisfied the definition of an “investment contract,” and were therefore subject to the federal securities laws. In February 2018, both the SEC and CFTC further reiterated their concerns regarding digital assets in written testimony to the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee. On March 7, 2018, the SEC released a “Statement on Potentially Unlawful Online Platforms for Trading Digital Assets,” and reiterated that, if a platform “offers trading of digital assets that are securities” and “operates as ‘exchange,’ as defined by the federal securities laws,” the platform must register with the SEC as a national securities exchange or be exempt from registration. The SEC’s statement serves as a notice to operators of any platforms, including secondary market trading platforms, which the SEC is actively monitoring for potentially fraudulent or manipulative behavior in the market for security tokens, as the SEC has cautioned recently in the context of ICOs. On November 16, 2018, the SEC released a “Statement on Digital Asset Securities Issuance and Trading,” and emphasized that market participants must adhere to the SEC’s well-established and well-functioning federal securities law framework when dealing with technological innovations, regardless of whether the securities are issued in certificated form or using new technologies, such as blockchain. This has all been followed by additional statements and guidance form the SEC including
no-action
letters relating to specific blockchain-based projects, and a Framework for “Investment Contract” Analysis of Digital Assets published by the Division of Corporation Finance on April 3, 2019. In an August 2021 interview, SEC Chairman Gensler signaled the SEC is contemplating a robust regulatory regime for digital assets and reiterated the SEC’s position that many digital assets are unregulated securities.
The SEC has been active in asserting its jurisdiction over ICOs and digital assets and in bringing enforcement cases. The SEC has directed enforcement activity toward digital assets, and more specifically, ICOs. In September 2017, the SEC created a new division known as the “Cyber Unit” to address, among other things, violations involving distributed ledger technology and ICOs, and filed a civil complaint in the Eastern District of New York charging a businessman and two companies with defrauding investors in a pair of
so-called
ICOs purportedly backed by investments in real estate and diamonds (
Securities and Exchange Commission v. REcoin Group Foundation, LLC, et al., Civil Action NO.
05725 (E.D.N.Y, filed Sept. 29, 2017)). Subsequently, the SEC has filed several orders instituting
proceedings against (i) Carrier EQ, Inc., d/b/a AirFox and Paragon Coin, Inc. in connection with their unregistered offerings of tokens (
CarrierEQ, Inc., Rel.
No. 33-10575
(Nov. 16, 2018) and Paragon Coin, Inc., Rel.
No. 33-10574
(Nov. 16, 2018), respectively), (ii) Crypto Asset Management, LP for failing to register a hedge fund formed for the purpose of investing in digital assets as an investment company (
Crypto Asset Management, LP and Timothy Enneking, Rel.
No. 33-10544
(Sept. 11, 2018)), (iii) TokenLot LLC for failing to register as a broker-dealer, even though it did not meet the definition of an exchange (
Tokenlot LLC, Lenny Kugel, and EliL. Lewitt, Rel.
No. 33-10543
(Sept. 11, 2018)) and (iv) EtherDelta’s founder for failing either to register as a national securities exchange or to operate pursuant to an exemption from registration as an exchange after creating a platform that clearly fell within the definition of an exchange (
Zachary Coburn, Rel.
No. 34-
84553 (Nov. 8, 2018)).