Leister

The idea that it is an investment contract.

I am investing money with an expectation of a return of value.

And anytime that you are issuing a cryptocurrency peg to value in this regard, that it constitutes an investment contract.

So now,

They're defining in the future state an investment contract.

They are accounting for cryptocurrencies.

However, what they're saying now is this has to be something that is sold for the purposes of raising capital.

So now you're talking specifically around like an ICO.

or an ITO, something where you're generating a presale, you're generating for the purposes of getting money from people.

And so that initial transaction is an investment contract because the only reason somebody would buy in the presale is the expectation of a return on their investment.

It goes further to state once that token has been purchased by a person,

If the purchaser then turns around and resells it on the secondary market, that resell does not qualify as an investment contract.

It is a secondary market routine transaction, no different than any other commodity.

I actually support this.

I support the idea because what it does is it puts the burden on the token issuer.

It puts the burden on that project.

When you're putting a pre-sell out there, the moment you do that, you are creating an investment contract.

You are therefore subject to regulatory scrutiny and that's protection for the people buying the pre-sale.

I have no problem with that.

I have no problem with it being temporary.