1/ FinCEN is now accepting public comments on its proposal to extend AML regulation to non-custodial wallets.

The deadline is January 4. We have an unfairly (maybe illegally) short time for this, so we have to use it wisely.

Here's your ultimate guide on submitting a comment 👇
2/ I'll link to the comment form at the end of the thread, but I really want you to read through this first.

Writing a bad comment is worse than none at all. If you don't have time to take this seriously, use a pre-filled form instead (also linked below).
3/ First, let me assure you that public comments do matter.

A LOT.

Agencies have to read & respond to the substance of every single one. Your voice will be heard. It might change minds on the other side. Even if not, it still might slow them down.

This is worth your time.
4/ Here are five tips for writing a clear & effective comment.

TIP 1: BE RESPECTFUL.

This is really a requirement, not a tip. Be firm, but polite. Don't write anything you wouldn't say to your mother. Don't use insults or profanity. Focus on the rule, not the people behind it.
5/ TIP 2: DO YOUR RESEARCH.

Make sure you fully understand the rule & its impact. Your comment will be easy to disregard if you get the facts wrong. I'll link more resources below to help with this, but you can start with my last thread & the rule itself:
6/ TIP 3: MAKE IT PERSONAL.

Start by saying who you are & how you know what you're talking about. Then focus on how the rule would affect you personally, or how it would affect your company or business. Stick to what you know. Leave the complex legal arguments to the lawyers.
7/ TIP 4: BE SPECIFIC.

Give concrete, detailed examples of how the rule would affect you. Don't just complain generally about how you don't like it. You can also share your thoughts on the process surrounding the rule, such as if you'd like more than 15 days to write a comment.
8/ TIP 5: KEEP IT SIMPLE.

A few clear & sharp paragraphs is plenty. Use plain & straightforward language. You don't have to write a whole book or a fancy poem. Don't bother with logic puzzles, rhetorical questions, or hypotheticals.

Finally, don't forget Tip 1: be respectful!
9/ I also want to share some resources to help you learn about the rule & the arguments that others have made about it.

To start, the @coincenter team is all over this, as always. Check out their great blog post & detailed comment letter in this thread:
12/ Okay, that should be all you need to get started.

When you're ready, go to regulations.gov/document?D=FIN… & click "Comment Now!" in the upper right corner. Write in your comment & submit.

If this all seems overwhelming to you, don't worry, there's another option to make it easier.
13/ If you aren't up for writing your own comment or don't have time, you can start with & personalize the pre-filled language in a template form.

@fightfortheftr has a great one, focused on how the rule would infringe financial privacy & property rights.
stopfinancialsurveillance.org
14/ @coincenter also has an awesome template that you can use to send an email directly to Secretary Mnuchin, urging him to remove the most problematic parts of the rule.

You can & should do this *in addition to* submitting a public comment to FinCEN.
15/ Please, please, please take some time to submit a comment.

This is the most serious policy fight we've had in a long time. It's truly important that we show up in force -- with both volume & quality -- to claim victory when Secretary Mnuchin moves along on January 20.

[end]

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Jake Chervinsky

Jake Chervinsky Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jchervinsky

24 Dec
It's extremely unlikely that changes in SEC leadership will have any impact on the Ripple case.

Given Comm'r Peirce's conspicuous silence, I'd guess the vote was unanimous in favor of filing.

Regardless, the case is being prosecuted by enforcement lawyers who are here to stay.
To clarify the point re: Comm'r Peirce, she's often vocal when she disagrees with her colleagues on enforcement (e.g., Kik, Unikrn).

That she hasn't commented may suggest she approved. OTOH, it may be inappropriate to speak up while charges are pending, so it might mean nothing.
Even so, she's the only one who's shown interest in voting not to approve crypto enforcement actions. You can see the results of Commission votes on district court actions here (after they're resolved): sec.gov/about/commissi….

You'll struggle to find "no" votes other than hers.
Read 5 tweets
19 Dec
1/ After a long wait, FinCEN has finally issued its new proposed rule extending AML regulation to non-custodial wallets.

It could've been worse (really), but it's still a terrible rule in both process & substance.

Here's what it says, what's wrong with it, & what we do next 👇
2/ The rule would impose new obligations on virtual asset service providers (VASPs) like exchanges & custodians.

For deposits & withdrawals > $3k involving a non-custodial wallet, VASPs would have to record the name & physical address of the wallet owner.
home.treasury.gov/news/press-rel…
3/ VASPs would also have to report any deposit or withdrawal > $10k to FinCEN in the form of a currency transaction report (CTR).

FinCEN says these requirements are necessary to "combat the financing of global terrorism," "address transnational money laundering...." You get it.
Read 21 tweets
12 Oct
1/ There's been so much regulatory & enforcement news in crypto lately, it's impossible to keep up.

So instead of getting lost in the details, let's step back & consider the big picture. What's really going on here?

In short: an ideological war over self-custody & privacy. 👇
2/ This thread is long but very important.

If you believe in the principles of financial privacy & self-sovereignty at the heart of Bitcoin, as I do, you need to pay attention now.

We've made the world stage, but our biggest challenges still lie ahead.
3/ Crypto market infrastructure has improved dramatically in recent years.

It's now quite easy for most people to convert fiat into crypto, withdraw any amount to their own wallet, & then do as they wish without restriction or identification, subject only to the consensus rules.
Read 21 tweets
28 Sep
1/ Great question.

The short answer (not legal advice) is the money probably gets bailed-in just like other deposits at the failed bank & no special dynamics protect stablecoin holders, afaik.

The longer answer requires looking at the relationships between all the parties . . .
2/ First, you have the stablecoin issuer & the bank custodying its reserve; is there anything special here to protect against a bail-in?

Second, you have the stablecoin issuer & the stablecoin holders; is there anything special here to give holders recourse in case of a bail-in?
3/ The best place I can think of to look for insight on these questions is in the terms, conditions, & disclosures of the issuers' whitepapers, user agreements, & attestations (links at end of thread).
Read 14 tweets
26 Aug
1/ My last thoughts on security tokens & then I'll stop triggering everyone trying to shill their STO products here:

I agree it's possible to eke out some efficiencies by putting any financial instrument on a blockchain, & yes, disrupting central securities depositories is neat.
2/ To me, this fits the blockchain use case of "companies can save a few dollars by automating their back office."

That's fine! Nothing wrong with that!

It's just not particulary interesting in the broader context of crypto, & it gives off a very "blockchain, not bitcoin" vibe.
3/ What *is* interesting, maybe revolutionary, is allowing self-custody of financial instruments & exposing them to the composability of open protocols.

The problem is that security tokens are somewhat unfit for these goals, not only due to regulation, but by their very nature.
Read 9 tweets
1 Jul
I'm suspicious of describing "DeFi tokens" as a category.

These tokens have vastly different characteristics & pose varied & complex risks, as do their underlying protocols.

Calling them all "DeFi tokens" both legitimizes the terrible projects & undermines the space as a whole.
I have the same problem with "personal tokens."

Some are just interesting & harmless experiments by people playing with new tech. Others are blatant attempts to raise money by selling investment contracts, reminiscent of ICOs.

The former suffers by association with the latter.
There's something genuinely exciting happening here: the creation of natively digital assets with novel, unique, & diverse (if experimental) properties.

But if we've learned anything in crypto, it's that real innovation begets flawed imitation, which begets fraudulent schemes.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!