SEC主席Jay Clayton：无需调整证券法以适应加密货币

浪花财经专栏 2018年12月1日

1.40W 0 7

原文：Cali Haan，SEC Chair Jay Clayton: No Need to Adjust Securities Laws to Suit Cryptocurrencies

翻译：比特律（bitlawyer）

导读：比特律创始人Roger认为在SEC对数字资产领域的动态监管中，我们可以看到：1.区块链项目发行规则制定权已经成为国家之间的竞争，将划定未来30年全球数字资产流动新标准；2.之前全球资源流动需要各国不断协商结盟不断推动，如G8G20WTO等，即便如此还很难真正实现，如今区块链技术从诞生起就是全球化的，绝大部分国家都挡不住这股潮流，我们需要拥抱监管；3.美国、法国、瑞士、日本在监管层面的动态监管可以成为我们的借鉴，区块链项目发行融资交易不是洪水猛兽，可以衔接现有法律框架进行有序监管；4.与克林顿政府发展信息高速公路政策看似路径不同，实则异曲同工。如果拿电子邮件对比数字钱包，门户网站对比数字资产交易所，你会看到快和安全是他们不同的本质属性，这也是信息传输与价值传输的本质区别。

The Chairperson of the SEC, Jay Clayton, spoke about the regulation of cryptocurrencies Thursday evening with reporter and author Andrew Ross Sorkin at a “Times Talk” hosted by The New York Times.Sorkin began by stating that Clayton may have “the swing vote” regarding the future of this technology.

美国证券交易委员会主席Jay Clayton 周四晚与记者和作家Andrew Ross Sorkin在纽约时报主办的“时代谈话”上谈到了对加密货币的监管。Sorkin首先指出，克莱顿可能对这项技术的未来进行摇摆不定。

But Clayton disagreed. “Our job (at the Securities Exchange Commission) is not to vote,” he said. “It is to provide a level playing field and…(ensure) disclosure…We want to be fair arbiters of the market…”

但克莱顿不同意。“我们证券交易委员会不投票，”他说。“这是为了提供一个公平的竞争环境......（确保）披露......我们希望成为市场的公平仲裁者......”

Clayton said that when he was sworn in as Chairperson in March 2017, he was not asked a single question about blockchain or cryptocurrencies, and has essentially been cramming in the car since while his wife drives him around with his giant pile of documents.

克莱顿说，当他在2017年3月宣誓担任主席时，他没有被问到关于区块链或加密货币的单一问题，并且基本上一直处被大量文件淹没状态。

Sorkin asked Clayton’s views on comments like Warren Buffet’s, who likened bitcoin to “rat poison squared.”

“My view is that our rules have stood the test of time,” he said. “I’m not going to change (investor protection) rules just to fit a technology.”

Sorkin询问克莱顿对沃伦·巴菲特（Warren Buffet）这样的评论的观点，后者将比特币比作“老鼠毒药平方”。

“我的观点是，我们的规则经受住了时间的考验，”他说。“我不会只是为了适应技术而改变（投资者保护）规则。”

Clayton called the men and women who crafted current American securities laws, alluding to the Howey Test, “geniuses”:

“What’s a security?…The folks who came out of the (1939) crash and crafted the rules, those men and women were geniuses…If you offer a token (etc.)…and you are expecting a return for it, that’s a security…and its ripe for fraud…We’ve created a 20 trillion economy based on those rules.”

克莱顿称暗指那些制定现行美国证券法Howey Test规则的人是“天才”：“什么是证券？......那些从（1939年）大萧条并制定规则的人都是天才......如果你提供一个代币（等等）......而你期待它的回报，那就是证券......我们根据这些规则创造了20万亿经济体。“

He repeated sentiment he has expressed previously that Bitcoin does not look like a security because it is, “…so disaggregated…that it looks like a currency.”To Clayton (and not necessarily the SEC), Bitcoin resembles a security more than a commodity because unlike cocoa, gold, etc., it has no industrial use.

他反复表达了他之前表达的观点，即比特币看起来不像是一种证券，因为它是“......如此分解......它看起来像一种货币。”对于克莱顿（并不一定是美国证券交易委员会），比特币类似于证券而不是商品，因为与可可，黄金等不同，它没有工业用途。

When asked if he, like Christine Lagarde, thinks a nationally-issued cryptocurrency is possible, Clayton said, “I think we’ll see,” adding that staying mum is an important part of his job:

“We all at the commission try not to comment on things that could move markets…I won’t comment on a particualar company or…stock. It’s just not appropriate for me to do so…I just don’t know where it goes…I want try to be fair and clear…(where) we’re not picking winners and losers but we are protecting investors…”

当被问及他是否像Christine Lagarde一样认为全国发行加密货币的可能性时，克莱顿说，“我想我们会看到，我们委员会的所有人都试图不对那些可能推动市场发展的事情发表评论......我不会对特定的公司或股票发表评论。我这样做是不恰当的......我只是不知道它在哪里......我想要公平和明确......（在哪里）我们不是选择赢家和输家，但我们正在保护投资者......“

Many times, Clayton reiterated that the SEC’s function is one of investor protection:

“The markets have a lot of sophisticated players and complexities…but in the long term we are running these markets for the retail investor…it is their money that fuels this…”

很多时候，克莱顿重申美国证券交易委员会的职能是保护投资者：“市场上有许多复杂的参与者和复杂的......但从长远来看，我们正在为零售投资者运营这些市场......正是他们的资金推动了这一点......”

But in the question period he also said this means not depriving investors of access to innovative companies:

“I worry that investors don’t get exposure to companies until they are very mature…You should just know that that’s on my mind as well.”

但在问题期间，他还表示，这并不意味着剥夺投资者进入创新公司的机会：

“我担心投资者在成熟之前不会接触到公司......你应该知道这也是我的想法。”

Clayton kept the door open as to whether or not other blockchain systems (Ethereum comes to mind but was not mentioned) will eventually be classed as securities:

“What is the permanent use case for anything? That’s how you look at an investment.”

克莱顿对关于其他区块链系统（以太网是否会浮现在脑海中但未被提及）最终将被归类为证券保持开放心态：

“什么是永久用例？这就是你看待投资的方式。“

He acknowledged that blockchain-style tech, “…adds efficiencies to the trust issues (in the issuing of securities)…this tech has great promise in that regard…”

…but wasn’t awed by claims that creating a supposedly “decentralized” network for tokens with the features of a security renders them non-securities:

“I expect that over time that distributed ledger technology will become part of the market ecosystem. What I’m not willing to say is, ‘You know what? If you wanna raise money in a public offering, you used to have give people financial statements. You used to have to take responsibility for disclosure, but this technology is so good, we’re gonna get rid of that protection.’ I’m just not going there.”

他承认区块链式技术“......增加了信任问题（证券发行）的效率......这种技术在这方面有很大的希望......”...但不能因为声称创建一个具有证券功能的令牌所谓的“分散”网络而使他们成为非证券的声明：

“我希望随着时间的推移，分布式分类帐技术将成为市场生态系统的一部分。我不想说的是，'你知道吗？如果你想在公开募股中筹集资金，你就不能说因为这项技术非常好，我们就不需要提供财务报表了，我们不需要承担披露责任了，这不是我们发展的方向。”

He also questioned whether a network governed by smart contracts could entirely automate responsibility, as is often envisioned in crypto circles:

“…Our securities laws do produce responsibility…underwriters and accountants (etc. are held responsible)…We almost take it for granted…(But) if you are gonna distribute an ecosystem and say no-one has responsibility…well hey, nothing better go wrong.”

他还质疑智能合约管理的网络是否可以完全自动化责任，正如密码圈中经常设想的那样：

“......我们的证券法确实产生责任......承销商和会计师（等等负责）......我们几乎认为理所当然......（但）如果你要分配一个生态系统并说没有人有责任......嘿，没什么更好的出问题。”

Clayton said there are plenty of securities laws that already apply to crypto, and “many more laws apply” including anti-money laundering laws, but new laws could be created if ICOs were somehow falling through cracks.

克莱顿说，有许多证券法已经适用于加密，并且“更多的法律适用”，包括反洗钱法，但如果ICO以某种方式破裂，可能会产生新的法律。

Clayton said the various agencies are very cooperative and willing to work together to harmonize their approach, and that he’s totally comfortable calling up the CFTC and others.

克莱顿说，各个机构非常合作，愿意共同协调他们的方法，并且他完全可以轻松地召集CFTC和其他人。

Sorkin pressed Clayton on how difficult it has become to do an IPO in the US.

He repeated a quote from James Freeman, founder of Blue Bottle Coffee, who sold his company to Nestle because he didn’t want to go through an IPO and said:

“An IPO seems like a way of living in hell without dying.”

Sorkin向Clayton强调了在美国进行首次公开募股的难度。

他重复了Blue Bottle Coffee的创始人James Freeman的一句话，他将自己的公司卖给了雀巢，因为他不想进行首次公开募股并说：

“首次公开募股似乎是一种生活在地狱中而不会死亡的方式。”

Clayton said he is aware of the problem and of the diminishing number of public companies in the US:

“(Freeman’s) not the only on who feels that way…and the numbers don’t lie. We’ve gone from…8400 publicly traded companies to just over 4000. The size of companies entering the markets is much larger…(There are) multiple contributing factors to this…(that) need to look at…”

克莱顿说，他知道这个问题以及美国上市公司数量的减少：

“（弗里曼）并不是唯一一个有这种感觉的人......而且这些数字并不是谎言。我们已经从...... 8400家公开上市的公司变成了4000多家。进入市场的公司规模要大得多......（有）多个促成因素......（需要看看......）

He also said, “You probably shouldn’t regulate (small companies) the way you regulate top companies…”

He said that public companies lose advantage when management has to spend too much time on compliance rather than growing the company.

他还说，“你可能不应该以监管监管顶级公司的方式监管（小公司）......”

他说，当管理层不得不在合规上花费太多时间而不是发展公司时，上市公司就会失去优势。

He said he is working on how to “streamline and reduce” the regulatory burden while maintaining investor protections, but also insisted:

“Our securities laws have been so effective that they have grown this economy.”

他说他正在研究如何“简化和减少”监管负担，同时保持投资者保护，但也坚持：

“我们的证券法非常有效，以至于它们已经发展了这种经济。”

He then commented on President Trump’s tweeted suggestion that companies should only be required to do semiannual reports, not quarterly. “Markets thirst for those quarterly reports,” he said, which are already backward-looking.

Regarding ICOs, Clayton said, “Many of these ICOs were non-compliant with our securities laws.”

然后，他对特朗普总统的推文提出了评论，即公司应该只被要求每半年报告一次。“市场对那些季度报告的渴望，”他说，这已经是落后的了。

关于ICO，克莱顿说，“这些ICO中的许多都不符合我们的证券法。”

He made clear two ways to do a compliant security:

1.a private placement

2.an IPO (obliged to register and do disclosure)

他明确了两种方法来执行合规安全性：

私人配售
首次公开募股（有义务注册并披露）

He said the SEC enforcement division has strong prosecutors with, “general direction from me”:

1.“We need strong deterrents

2.“I wanna get investors who’ve been wronged their money back

3.“I want bad actors out of the market.”

“It’s a privilege to work in this industry. If you work in this industry, you make a lot of money. And if you are a bad actor you shouldn’t be there…On those measures I’m extremely satisfied with the prosecutors.”

他说美国证券交易委员会执法部门有很强的检察官，“我的大方向”：

“我们需要强大的威慑力
“我想联系到那些被冤枉的投资者
“我希望坏人退出市场。”

“在这个行业工作是一种荣幸。如果你在这个行业工作，你赚了很多钱。如果你是一个坏人，你不应该在那里......在那些措施上，我对检察官非常满意。”

He also noted that despite strict conditions in the US, “Money returned to investors in ’17 in ’18- the highest years…Now, some of that is the work of my predecessors’ [because] it takes a while and let me give them credit. But that’s a very important metric.”

他还指出，尽管在美国有严格的条件，“钱在18年'17年 - 最高年份回归投资者......现在，其中一些是我前任的工作'[因为]它需要一段时间让我给他们信用。但这是一个非常重要的指标。“

During the question period, he repeatedly invited entrepreneurs to chat directly with the SEC regarding their compliance questions.

在提问期间，他多次邀请企业家直接与美国证券交易委员会就其合规问题进行交流。

An audience member suggested that tokens move governance to favour stakeholders over shareholders, but Clayton disagreed that tokens are the only way to change that balance:

“There are closely-held companies that much different suites of rights among their shareholders than your typical public corporation…I’m not going guess where this comes out with regards to the age-old principle-agent problem.”

一位受众成员建议，代币移动治理有利于利益相关者而非股东，但克莱顿不同意代币是改变这种平衡的唯一方法：

“在他们的股东之间存在着与众不同的权利公司，而不是典型的公共公司...我不会猜到这个问题出现在古老的原则 - 代理问题上。”

Clayton told Sorkin that exchanges too, must follow relevant laws:

“If you are exchanging securities, you have to register with us or have an exemption. And we recently brought actions to say, ‘You can’t just act like a securities exchange, and not follow our rules.’…”

克莱顿告诉索尔金，交换也必须遵守相关法律：

“如果您要交换证券，您必须向我们注册或获得豁免。我们最近采取行动说，'你不能只是像证券交易所那样行事，而不是遵循我们的规则。'......”

He said that expectations when trading at offshore exchanges should be that, “..the safeguards are not of the same calibre”:

“I was a patriot before I started this job. I’m even more of a patriot now. Let me throw a stat out. We have 4.4% of the world’s population. We have 52 of the top 100 companies. The standards we set…essentially become adopted by other places. I feel a responsibility to keep that going…”

他说，在离岸交易所进行交易时的预期应该是“......保障措施不一样”：

“在我开始这份工作之前，我是爱国者。我现在更像是一个爱国者。让我抛出一个数据。我们拥有世界4.4％的人口。我们有前100家公司中的52家。我们设定的标准......基本上被其他地方采用。我觉得有责任继续这样做.....”

US rules are used to create standards across the world, he said, and give investors confidence and stability:

“The value of a US compliant offering…private or public…it still has tremendous value…there are a lot of people who do a lot of things to get that good-housekeeping seal of approval.”

他表示，美国的规则被用于在全球范围内制定标准，并为投资者提供信心和稳定性：

“美国合规产品的价值......私人或公共......它仍然具有巨大价值......有很多人做了很多事情来获得良好的管理批准。”

Clayton said approving a Bitcoin ETF is a matter of being able to verify pricing, sound custody and being able to enforce:

“(With) an ETF…you’re generally creating a…product for retail investors…They expect good accounting, they expect good custody…and they expect that the price…is a good price…and it’s been set in a way they can be comfortable with.”

克莱顿说，批准比特币ETF是一个能够验证定价，合理保管和能够执行的问题：

“（有）一个ETF ......你通常会为零售投资者创造一个......产品......他们期望良好的会计，他们期望良好的监管......他们期望价格......是一个很好的价格......而且它已经设定为他们可以很舒服。”

He acknowledged that manipulation is a factor:

“Is…the risk of manipulation sufficiently low? It’s not necessarily jurisdictional. It’s how comfortable can we get that the rule set to that trading is enforceable and its good. You know rules are great. You can have the prettiest rules in the world. But you’ve gotta be able to enforce them.”

他承认操纵是一个因素：