[VWWHFSfQ]

SEC doesn't give legal advice because they don't make the laws.

Want legal advice? Talk to a lawyer. But if your council tells you it's OK to push some boundaries then don't be surprised if you get slapped. And if you don't like getting slapped then you can go to court. Which is exactly what is happening. Seems like the system is working as intended.

[jedberg]

The SEC enforces the law, and it should be totally normal for them to say "this is how we plan to enforce this law". By not saying so, they create a lot of unnecessary churn.

Imagine you are outside a store, and there is a police officer outside. You ask them "If I go inside and take some bread off the shelf and walk out without paying, is that ok?". Should the officer say "talk to a lawyer" or should they say "I would arrest you on the way out"?

They aren't offering legal advice, they are just telling you how they will enforce the law. And heck, maybe you'll go to court and get it overturned. But at least you know what enforcement actions will be taken.

[elliekelly]

You wouldn’t need to ask the SEC that hypothetical because you can see their long history of bringing cases against “bread thieves” and (correctly) infer that they would bring a similar suit against you for the same or similar conduct. To the extent you think your hypothetical situation differs enough from the case history that you and your lawyers are genuinely unsure (or, more commonly, genuinely believe they wouldn’t charge you) then you can ask them via a No Action Letter which is basically a formal way of asking them “What would you do if I did XYZ?” The risk, of course, is that they’ll tell you they would view XYZ as a violation of federal securities laws and take action accordingly. There’s also the risk that they’ll change their mind— it’s not a promise or even a permanent reprieve. It’s just one “police officer” telling one person how they would hypothetically respond to that one fact pattern at that one moment in time. The next “officer” might take an entirely different view.

[VWWHFSfQ]

First of all, not everything can be reduced to the absolute most simplistic of metaphors like you're trying to do.

Second,

> Last month, the SEC issued Coinbase with a Wells notice, which is often one of the final steps before the regulator formally issues charges. It generally lays out the framework of the regulatory argument and offers the potentially accused an opportunity to rebut the SEC’s claims.

It sounds like Coinbase has gotten the answers they were looking for, they just don't like it.

[dlubarov]

It doesn't seem like Coinbase has received such answers, they just know that some sort of enforcement action is coming. As per the article, "[Armstrong says] the company has not got any more information on the specific issues the SEC has".

E.g. here's Gensler refusing to answer whether the SEC considers ETH a security - https://twitter.com/sassal0x/status/1648338351832064003

[figassis]

You don't need to make the laws to give advice. Are you saying the SEC can't or isn't required? Because not being required does not mean they shouldn't do it.

[mrguyorama]

The vast majority of government workers (including such lowly people as the workers who check applications for food stamps) cannot give advice because humans are fallible and will get it wrong sometimes. The government doesn't want people suing them for that situation, so they just ban all advice basically.

[mthoms]

Is that correct? If I am taking a company public, or some other activity that falls under their purview, can I not ask the SEC to provide guidance on the appropriate measures to take?

Yes, of course, a lawyer can provide that. But surely, the SEC should be able to provide advice or point to resources on how to be compliant if needed?

If not, I'm really surprised.

[true_religion]

Social workers seem to give advice. IRS also looks like it can advise you as to what you need to do to avoid further action against you.

It’s not as if no one can ever get advise from the government bodies.