It'll be interesting to see if the SEC looks to retroactively enforce ICO regulation against many of the early companies that held public sales in the US. That would certainly be a massive worry for any token holders and something most people aren't discussing in to much depth.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Isn't that the reason why so many ICOs are banning US residents from participating in their ICOs? I think there's an assumption that the SEC will in fact look at and enforce rules retroactively. Does this mean that those in the US that are skirting around US bans using VPNs actually hurt those projects in the long run? I know that it's not hard unless their are KYC/AML rules in place, it's not a hard thing to do.
@cryptobobby what would your take be on what that ICO regulation might look like going forward from what people said during the recent hearing for US investors? What would labeling ICOs as securities do for americans or ICOs looking for american investors? If it's largely just kyc, isn't that generally a good thing long term for legitimizing crypto assets?
Bobby,
It's been a while since I've read it, but I think Preston Byrne touched on this subject lightly when laying out bear case for cryptocurrencies (going off memory). I tend to think it will be a question of resources, which I suppose then it is positive that they are have a shortage of labor due to hiring freeze.