金融商品取引法はICOを追え
米SECがチェアマンの名前で、ICOへの再度の注意喚起、ちょっと強めの奴を出したのは先週の話で、レストラン評価アプリ https://munchee.io/ による資金調達にストップをかけたタイミングと同時だ。その内容はシンプルで、エコシステムとか名乗って、サービス内で使うトークンと称してるけど、実態としては価格の上昇を期待させたSecurityだろと。そういうのはルールの上に乗りなさいと。
According to the SEC’s order, before any tokens were delivered to investors, Munchee Inc. refunded investor proceeds after the SEC intervened. Munchee was seeking $15 million in capital to improve an existing iPhone app centered on restaurant meal reviews and create an “ecosystem” in which Munchee and others would buy and sell goods and services using the tokens. The company communicated through its website, a white paper, and other means that it would use the proceeds to create the ecosystem, including eventually paying users in tokens for writing food reviews and selling both advertising to restaurants and “in-app” purchases to app users in exchange for tokens.
According to the order, in the course of the offering, the company and other promoters emphasized that investors could expect that efforts by the company and others would lead to an increase in value of the tokens. The company also emphasized it would take steps to create and support a secondary market for the tokens. Because of these and other company activities, investors would have had a reasonable belief that their investment in tokens could generate a return on their investment. As the SEC has said in the DAO Report of Investigation, a token can be a security based on the long-standing facts and circumstances test that includes assessing whether investors’ profits are to be derived from the managerial and entrepreneurial efforts of others.
SEC.gov | Company Halts ICO After SEC Raises Registration Concerns
プロフェッショナル向けにはステートメント中で、ブロックチェーンやら何やらガタガタ言ったところで、要は実質がどうだって話をしてんだから、ちゃんと正規のステップを踏みなさいと。わかってんだろなと。脱法スキームにはシンプルにパンチである。
I believe that initial coin offerings – whether they represent offerings of securities or not – can be effective ways for entrepreneurs and others to raise funding, including for innovative projects. However, any such activity that involves an offering of securities must be accompanied by the important disclosures, processes and other investor protections that our securities laws require. A change in the structure of a securities offering does not change the fundamental point that when a security is being offered, our securities laws must be followed. Said another way, replacing a traditional corporate interest recorded in a central ledger with an enterprise interest recorded through a blockchain entry on a distributed ledger may change the form of the transaction, but it does not change the substance.
I urge market professionals, including securities lawyers, accountants and consultants, to read closely the investigative report we released earlier this year (the “21(a) Report”) and review our subsequent enforcement actions. In the 21(a) Report, the Commission applied longstanding securities law principles to demonstrate that a particular token constituted an investment contract and therefore was a security under our federal securities laws. Specifically, we concluded that the token offering represented an investment of money in a common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profits to be derived from the entrepreneurial or managerial efforts of others.
SEC.gov | Statement on Cryptocurrencies and Initial Coin Offerings
そもそもSecurityって何だったっけと、どうしたって思うところだが、1946年に合衆国最高裁判所が"Howey Test"なる基準*1を示しているそうで、Howeyというフロリダの会社が、農園を証券化的な売り方をした際の判例のようだ。要件を引用してみよう。
- It is an investment of money
- There is an expectation of profits from the investment
- The investment of money is in a common enterprise
- Any profit comes from the efforts of a promoter or third party
3つ目の"common enterprise"というのがわかりにくいが、プロジェクトの箱のようなイメージだろう。そして4つ目の奴は、そのプロジェクトの成否を投資家自身では制御できないこととしている。要するに、箱にカネを突っ込んで、増えるのを期待して待ってるような奴がSecurityと。うん、しっくりくる。よく見るICOは、これなら該当する場合は多いだろう。ひるがえって我が国の金融商品取引法はと言えば、そのパンフレットには
「金融商品取引法」では、信託受益権全般を有価証券とみなし、集団投資スキーム持分を包括的に有価証券と位置づけるなど、「有価証券」の定義を拡大します。
http://www.fsa.go.jp/policy/kinyusyohin/pamphlet.pdf
と書いてあり、具体的には2条に列挙*2されている。他方で金融庁の説明サイト*3を見ると、平成18年の法改正に際しては、下記の4つの柱が掲げられている。
- 投資性の強い金融商品に対する横断的な投資者保護法制（いわゆる投資サービス法制）の構築
- 開示制度の拡充
- 取引所の自主規制機能の強化
- 不公正取引等への厳正な対応
どう「受益」のところを誤魔化そうとも、これICOは投資性の強い金融商品だろうし、そこに開示の義務はなくて、取引所もルールも整備されているとは言い難いわけで、もちろん不公正取引しやすさ抜群だ。金融庁さん、これ追わないで、どうすんだよ。いや10月の注意喚起*4は見たけどさ。新しいからって泳がせとくと、アレな連中でプール埋まるぞ。
