Subject: S7-04-23: Webform Comments from Amy Phillips
From: Amy Phillips
Affiliation:

Oct. 31, 2023

Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549-1090
Re: Public Comment on Proposal "Safeguarding Advisory Client
Assets"
Dear Securities and Exchange Commission,
I am writing to express my concerns and provide feedback on the
proposed rule regarding the "Safeguarding Advisory Client
Assets" proposal (Release No. IA-xxxx; File No. S7-xx-xx). While
I acknowledge the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC)
objective to enhance investor protections and address gaps in the
custody rule, I would like to draw attention to the inadequacies in
the consideration of the unique properties of cryptocurrency.
Digital assets, including cryptocurrency, have emerged as a
transformative force in the financial industry, driven by the
technological advancements of blockchain. However, the proposed rule
fails to adequately consider the decentralized nature and
technological complexities associated with cryptocurrency. This
oversight can lead to impractical regulatory requirements that hinder
innovation and may not effectively safeguard client assets.
The SEC's proposed rule attempts to address the application of
the custody rule to crypto assets. However, the regulation needs to be
more flexible and recognize the decentralized nature of
cryptocurrencies. The custody of digital assets is often achieved
through the use of private keys held by technology platforms or
individuals. These private keys provide ownership and control, but
they do not fit neatly within the traditional framework of custodial
relationships. The proposed rule should take into account these unique
characteristics and provide a clear regulatory framework that enables
the effective safeguarding of digital assets without stifling
innovation.
Moreover, the proposed rule lacks clarity on how investment advisers
can demonstrate exclusive control over digital assets. Traditional
custodial arrangements might not align with the decentralized nature
of cryptocurrencies, making it challenging for advisers to meet the
requirement of exclusive control. The SEC should develop guidance or
establish best practices to address these challenges and provide
clarity on how investment advisers can oeffectively demonstrate
exclusive control over digital assets.
Additionally, the proposed rule should consider the impact of
regulatory requirements on small businesses, particularly startups and
innovators operating in the digital asset space. Excessive compliance
costs and complex regulatory frameworks can disproportionately burden
smaller firms and impede entrepreneurial activity and competition. The
SEC should actively seek input from industry stakeholders and
collaborate to strike a balance between investor protection and
fostering innovation in the evolving digital asset ecosystem.
In conclusion, I urge the SEC to consider the unique properties of
cryptocurrency and its decentralized nature when finalizing the rule.
The regulatory framework should provide guidance that supports
innovation and safeguards client assets effectively. Collaboration
with industry participants and actively seeking input will foster a
more inclusive and comprehensive regulatory landscape.
Thank you for considering my comments and addressing these concerns
appropriately in the final rule. I believe that by taking these
factors into account, the SEC can ensure a regulatory environment that
protects investors while fostering innovation and growth in the
digital space.