Dear Securities and Exchange Commission, I am writing to provide my public comment on the proposed rule, "Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets." While I understand the need to enhance investor protections and address gaps in the custody rule, I have concerns regarding the unequal treatment of different types of digital assets. Digital assets, such as cryptocurrencies, have become an increasingly important part of the financial landscape. These assets, built on blockchain technology, have the potential to transform the way we do business and interact with the financial system. However, the regulatory environment surrounding digital assets remains uncertain, which poses challenges for both investors and industry participants. One of my main concerns is the unequal treatment of different types of digital assets under the proposed rules. The SEC's current approach treats digital assets inconsistently, leading to confusion and potential regulatory arbitrage. This unequal treatment not only creates uncertainty for investors but also stifles innovation in the digital asset space. For example, the proposed rule includes certain provisions that specifically address the safeguarding of digital assets. However, it is concerning that the rule does not provide clear guidelines on how different types of digital assets should be treated. Different digital assets have distinct characteristics and risk profiles, and a one-size-fits-all approach may not be appropriate. Furthermore, the proposed rule does not acknowledge the unique challenges posed by digital assets, such as custody and control. The nature of digital assets, including the use of private keys and decentralized networks, presents unique complexities that require thoughtful regulatory consideration. Failing to address these complexities may discourage innovation and hinder the growth of digital asset markets. It is crucial for regulatory agencies like the SEC to adopt a balanced approach that fosters innovation while protecting investors. Equal treatment of different types of digital assets is essential to provide clarity and consistency in the regulatory framework. Compliance with regulatory requirements is already a complex task for market participants, and inconsistent regulations only add to the burden. I urge the SEC to take into account the rapid changes and evolution in the digital asset space and actively engage with industry participants to develop appropriate rules. It is vital that the regulatory framework supports innovation while ensuring proper safeguards for investors. Consistency and clarity in regulation will help foster a healthy and vibrant digital asset market. In conclusion, the proposed rule's unequal treatment of different types of digital assets raises concerns regarding regulatory clarity and consistency. I believe it is essential for the SEC to adopt a balanced approach that takes into account the unique characteristics of digital assets and fosters innovation. I encourage the SEC to actively engage with industry participants and consider their input in shaping regulations in this evolving landscape. Thank you for considering my comment. Sincerely, Philip