|
|
|
|
|
|
by Dylan16807
1098 days ago
|
|
|
You could make them pay for it. Also there is potential fine revenue. But for big enough companies, some amount of taxpayer-paid analysis makes sense. It ultimately benefits consumers. Isn't analyzing the S1 "pro bono legal advice" to begin with? And they did have legal opinions, just not from the SEC that is still almost entirely refusing to evaluate crypto tokens. Would a no action letter have been feasible? |
|
|
Probably not, given the integrated broker-exchange-custodian model. But that’s the point. We specifically outlawed that in 1934. Coinbase was counting on rules being changed in the midst of regulatory inertia.