Subject: S7-04-23: Webform Comments from Anonymous
From: Anonymous
Affiliation:

Oct. 29, 2023

Re: File number S7-04-23, Safeguarding Advisory Client
Assets. I have some relevant comments.
Argument I: The Proposed Rule Violates Due Process Rights
The Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has recently proposed a new
regulation that would require all financial institutions to maintain
custody over their clients digital assets, including cryptocurrencies
and other blockchain-based tokens. This proposal raises serious
concerns about the potential violation of due process rights
guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution.
The proposed rule mandates that financial institutions must hold onto
customers' digital assets indefinitely until they are either sold
or transferred to another entity, regardless of whether there is any
legal basis for doing so. This requirement could potentially lead to
situations where individuals have their property seized without just
cause and held indefinitely by the government-regulated institution.
Such actions would be a clear violation of due process rights as
outlined in the Fifth Amendment which states that no person shall
"be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of
law. "
In addition to this constitutional issue, there are also practical
considerations at play here. For example, if an individual were to
lose access to their private keys - perhaps through theft or loss -
they would effectively be unable to regain control over their digital
assets unless they could provide proof that they owned them in the
first place. This creates a situation where individuals may find
themselves locked out of their own property with no recourse available
to them, further exacerbating concerns about due process violations.
Furthermore, requiring financial institutions to maintain custody over
customers' digital assets could create significant logistical
challenges for these organizations as they attempt to securely store
large amounts of data across multiple platforms and devices. This
increased burden on resources may lead some companies to pass along
additional costs onto consumers in order to cover the expenses
associated with complying with this new regulation, ultimately
resulting in higher fees being charged by financial institutions for
services related to digital asset management.
In conclusion, while it is understandable that regulators want to
ensure proper oversight and protection when dealing with emerging
technologies such as blockchain-based tokens, the proposed rule put
forth by the SEC goes too far in its attempt at achieving this goal.
By mandating custodial requirements for financial institutions without
providing adequate safeguards against potential abuses of power or
violations of due process rights, it risks creating more problems than
solutions when it comes to regulating digital assets within our
economy today.
Argument II: The Proposed Rule Lacks Clarity and Consistency
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets lacks clarity and consistency,
which could lead to confusion among market participants and
potentially harm investors. This is evidenced in several ways.
Firstly, the language used throughout the proposal is vague and
open-ended, leaving room for interpretation that may not align with
its intended purpose. For example, it states that "a broker or
dealer shall maintain physical possession or control" over
digital assets held on behalf of customers but fails to define what
constitutes 'physical possession' or 'control'.
This ambiguity could result in different interpretations by various
market participants, leading to inconsistent application of the rule
and potential legal disputes.
Secondly, there are no clear guidelines provided regarding how
custodians should store digital assets securely while still allowing
customers access when needed. Without specific requirements for
security measures such as multi-factor authentication or cold storage
solutions, it is difficult for custodians to ensure they meet their
obligations under the proposed rule without exposing themselves to
unnecessary risks.
Thirdly, the proposal does not address issues related to cross-border
transactions involving digital assets held in different jurisdictions
with varying regulatory frameworks. As more countries begin
implementing regulations surrounding cryptocurrencies and other
blockchain-based tokens, this lack of clarity could create significant
challenges for international business operations relying on these
technologies.
Finally, the proposed rule fails to consider potential implications
from emerging technological developments such as decentralized finance
(DeFi) platforms or non-fungible tokens (NFTs). These innovations have
already begun disrupting traditional financial services models and
will likely continue doing so in the future. Without taking these
advancements into account, the SEC risks creating a regulatory
framework that is outdated before it even comes into effect.
In conclusion, due to its lack of clarity and consistency, the
proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission concerning custody
of digital assets poses significant risks for market participants and
investors alike. It is therefore essential that further revisions are
made to ensure all stakeholders understand their obligations under
this new regulatory regime before it can be implemented effectively.
Argument III: The Proposed Rule May Stifle Innovation in the Digital
Asset Space
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
stifle innovation in this rapidly growing space. This is due to
several factors, including increased costs and compliance burdens for
market participants, as well as potential legal uncertainty
surrounding certain aspects of the rule.
Firstly, requiring financial institutions to maintain physical
possession or control over digital assets held on behalf of customers
could significantly increase operational expenses associated with
storing these assets securely. This additional cost may deter smaller
firms from entering into this market segment altogether, limiting
competition and ultimately leading to higher prices for consumers.
Secondly, the proposed rule does not provide clear guidance regarding
how custodians should store digital assets securely while still
allowing customers access when needed. Without specific requirements
for security measures such as multi-factor authentication or cold
storage solutions, it is difficult for custodians to ensure they meet
their obligations under the proposed rule without exposing themselves
to unnecessary risks.
Thirdly, there are no clear guidelines provided regarding cross-border
transactions involving digital assets held in different jurisdictions
with varying regulatory frameworks. As more countries begin
implementing regulations surrounding cryptocurrencies and other
blockchain-based tokens, this lack of clarity could create significant
challenges for international business operations relying on these
technologies.
Finally, the proposed rule fails to consider potential implications
from emerging technological developments such as decentralized finance
(DeFi) platforms or non-fungible tokens (NFTs). These innovations have
already begun disrupting traditional financial services models and
will likely continue doing so in the future. Without taking these
advancements into account, the SEC risks creating a regulatory
framework that is outdated before it even comes into effect,
potentially stifling further development within this space.
In conclusion, due to its potential impact on innovation in the
digital asset sector, the proposed rule by the Securities Exchange
Commission concerning custody of digital assets should be revised to
address these concerns and ensure all market participants understand
their obligations under this new regulatory regime before it can be
implemented effectively.
Argument IV: The Proposed Rule May Lead to Increased Costs for Market
Participants
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
lead to increased costs for market participants, particularly those
involved in storing and managing these assets. This is due to several
factors, including additional compliance burdens associated with
maintaining physical possession or control over customer-owned digital
assets, as well as potential legal uncertainty surrounding certain
aspects of the rule.
Firstly, requiring financial institutions to maintain custody over
customers' digital assets could significantly increase
operational expenses associated with storing these assets securely.
This additional cost may deter smaller firms from entering into this
market segment altogether, limiting competition and ultimately leading
to higher prices for consumers. Furthermore, without clear guidance on
how custodians should store digital assets securely while still
allowing customers access when needed, it is difficult for them to
ensure they meet their obligations under the proposed rule without
exposing themselves to unnecessary risks.
Secondly, there are no clear guidelines provided regarding
cross-border transactions involving digital assets held in different
jurisdictions with varying regulatory frameworks. As more countries
begin implementing regulations surrounding cryptocurrencies and other
blockchain-based tokens, this lack of clarity could create significant
challenges for international business operations relying on these
technologies. Additionally, the proposed rule fails to consider
potential implications from emerging technological developments such
as decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms or non-fungible tokens
(NFTs). These innovations have already begun disrupting traditional
financial services models and will likely continue doing so in the
future. Without taking these advancements into account, the SEC risks
creating a regulatory framework that is outdated before it even comes
into effect, potentially stifling further development within this
space.
In conclusion, due to its potential impact on increased costs for
market participants involved in storing and managing digital assets,
the proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission concerning
custody of digital assets should be revised to address these concerns
and ensure all stakeholders understand their obligations under this
new regulatory regime before it can be implemented effectively.
Argument V: The Proposed Rule May Create Legal Uncertainty for Market
Participants
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
create legal uncertainty for market participants, particularly those
involved in storing and managing these assets. This is due to several
factors, including vague language used throughout the proposal and a
lack of clarity regarding certain aspects of the rule.
Firstly, the proposed rule fails to define what constitutes
'physical possession' or 'control', leaving room
for interpretation that may not align with its intended purpose.
Without clear definitions, different market participants could
interpret this requirement differently, leading to inconsistent
application of the rule and potential legal disputes. Furthermore,
there are no specific requirements provided regarding how custodians
should store digital assets securely while still allowing customers
access when needed. This lack of guidance makes it difficult for them
to ensure they meet their obligations under the proposed rule without
exposing themselves to unnecessary risks.
Secondly, the proposal does not address issues related to cross-border
transactions involving digital assets held in different jurisdictions
with varying regulatory frameworks. As more countries begin
implementing regulations surrounding cryptocurrencies and other
blockchain-based tokens, this lack of clarity could create significant
challenges for international business operations relying on these
technologies. Additionally, the proposed rule fails to consider
potential implications from emerging technological developments such
as decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms or non-fungible tokens
(NFTs). These innovations have already begun disrupting traditional
financial services models and will likely continue doing so in the
future. Without taking these advancements into account, the SEC risks
creating a regulatory framework that is outdated before it even comes
into effect, potentially stifling further development within this
space.
In conclusion, due to its potential impact on legal uncertainty for
market participants involved in storing and managing digital assets,
the proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission concerning
custody of digital assets should be revised to address these concerns
and ensure all stakeholders understand their obligations under this
new regulatory regime before it can be implemented effectively.
Argument VI: The Proposed Rule May Lead to Increased Risk for Market
Participants
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
lead to increased risk for market participants, particularly those
involved in storing and managing these assets. This is due to several
factors, including vague language used throughout the proposal and a
lack of clarity regarding certain aspects of the rule.
Firstly, requiring financial institutions to maintain custody over
customers' digital assets could significantly increase
operational expenses associated with storing these assets securely.
Without clear guidance on how custodians should store digital assets
securely while still allowing customers access when needed, it is
difficult for them to ensure they meet their obligations under the
proposed rule without exposing themselves to unnecessary risks.
Furthermore, there are no specific requirements provided regarding
cross-border transactions involving digital assets held in different
jurisdictions with varying regulatory frameworks. As more countries
begin implementing regulations surrounding cryptocurrencies and other
blockchain-based tokens, this lack of clarity could create significant
challenges for international business operations relying on these
technologies.
Secondly, the proposed rule fails to consider potential implications
from emerging technological developments such as decentralized finance
(DeFi) platforms or non-fungible tokens (NFTs). These innovations have
already begun disrupting traditional financial services models and
will likely continue doing so in the future. Without taking these
advancements into account, the SEC risks creating a regulatory
framework that is outdated before it even comes into effect,
potentially stifling further development within this space.
Additionally, without clear definitions of what constitutes
'physical possession' or 'control', different
market participants could interpret this requirement differently,
leading to inconsistent application of the rule and potential legal
disputes.
In conclusion, due to its potential impact on increased risk for
market participants involved in storing and managing digital assets,
the proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission concerning
custody of digital assets should be revised to address these concerns
and ensure all stakeholders understand their obligations under this
new regulatory regime before it can be implemented effectively.
Argument VII: The Proposed Rule May Lead to Decreased Liquidity in the
Digital Asset Market
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
lead to decreased liquidity in the market for these assets. This is
due to several factors, including increased costs and compliance
burdens associated with maintaining physical possession or control
over customer-owned digital assets, as well as potential legal
uncertainty surrounding certain aspects of the rule.
In conclusion, due to its potential impact on decreased liquidity in
the digital asset market, the proposed rule by the Securities Exchange
Commission concerning custody of digital assets should be revised to
address these concerns and ensure all stakeholders understand their
obligations under this new regulatory regime before it can be
implemented effectively.
Argument VIII: The Proposed Rule May Lead to Increased Costs for
Market Participants
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
lead to increased costs for market participants, particularly those
involved in storing and managing these assets. This is due to several
factors, including vague language used throughout the proposal and a
lack of clarity regarding certain aspects of the rule.
Argument IX: The Proposed Rule May Lead to Decreased Innovation in the
Digital Asset Market
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
lead to decreased innovation in the market for these assets. This is
due to several factors, including increased costs and compliance
burdens associated with maintaining physical possession or control
over customer-owned digital assets, as well as potential legal
uncertainty surrounding certain aspects of the rule.
In conclusion, due to its potential impact on decreased innovation in
the digital asset market, the proposed rule by the Securities Exchange
Commission concerning custody of digital assets should be revised to
address these concerns and ensure all stakeholders understand their
obligations under this new regulatory regime before it can be
implemented effectively.
Argument X: The Proposed Rule May Lead to Increased Legal Uncertainty
for Market Participants
The proposed rule by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC)
concerning custody of digital assets has raised concerns that it may
lead to increased legal uncertainty for market participants,
particularly those involved in storing and managing these assets. This
is due to several factors, including vague language used throughout
the proposal and a lack of clarity regarding certain aspects of the
rule.
In conclusion, due to its potential impact on increased legal
uncertainty for market participants involved in storing and managing
digital assets, the proposed rule by the Securities Exchange
Commission concerning custody of digital assets should be revised to
address these concerns and ensure all stakeholders understand their
obligations under this new regulatory regime before it can be
implemented effectively. You should also extend the comment period or
propose the rule anew.