Drew Hinkes Profile picture
Jun 8 10 tweets 4 min read
#NYDFS issues USD backed #stablecoin guidance; must be fully backed by an asset reserve; issuer must adopt a clear redemption policy, approved by DFS in writing (!!!) redemption at par in fiat; reserve must be held in custody with /1
dfs.ny.gov/reports_and_pu…
US state/federally chartered depository institutions and/or asset custodians. Reserve must be held in govt treasuries "subject to DFS- approved reqs re: overcollaterialiation." Reserve must be subject to independent audit 1x month by independent CPA under AICPA attestation /2
standards. DFS may also impose obligations regarding cybersecurity and IT standards and evaluate issuer BSA/AML & Sanctions compliance, safety and soundness of the issuing entity; and the stability/integrity of the payment system, as applicable on Issuers. /3
DFS may impose "different requirements" on any #stablecoin backed by #USD & will require clear and conspicuous disclosure of any such different requirements. /4
Currently approved: #Paxos #USDP, #BUSD; #Gemini #GUSD, #ZUSD; Does not applyto USD-backed stablecoins listed, but not issued, by DFS-regulated entities but DFS expects "regulated entities that list USD-backed stablecoins" to consider this guidance when submitting a request /5
for coin issuance/ seeking approval for a coin self-certification policy. Expect ongoing iteration of this guidance and engagement by DFS with industry to learn more. Link to full guidance here: dfs.ny.gov/industry_guida…
guidance allows issuers to redeem net disclosed fees (permits income beyond treasuries yield); redemption must be "timely" i.e. T+2. DFS can vary this time when "timely redemption would likely jeopardize the Reserve’s asset-backing or the orderly liquidation of Reserve assets" /6
reserve assets must be held by state/federally approved institutions or custodians who are pre-approved by DFS & segregated from proprietary assets of issuer; reserve assets must be govt treasuries or DFS pre-approved deposit accounts /7
CPA attetsation must cover amount of stablecoin outstanding, issuer reserve, whether reserve at all times was sufficient to cover outstanding units of stablecoins and whether DFS imposed conditions were met at all times; /8
also requires annual attestation by CPA of management controls; monthly attestations made public within 30 days; annual attestation made public within 120 days; /9

• • •

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

Keep Current with Drew Hinkes

Drew Hinkes 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 @propelforward

Feb 14
Take aways from the #blockfi settlement with the #SEC (sec.gov/litigation/adm……) 1. BIA were notes under the Reves test; one factor is that there is "no alternative
regulatory scheme or other risk reducing factors exist with respect to BIAs" Congress can of course, set out a /1
an alternative framework that would potentially push these sorts of ventures into a different regulatory classification. 2. the offer and sale of notes is an investment contract. Yes, you can be debt and an investment contract; the pooling of assets is the key factor here. /2
3. Blockfi was a 40 act company; 40% of its assets were investment securities - including loans. /3
Read 6 tweets
Jul 24, 2021
There has been lots of talk about #uniswap front end interfaces blacklisting #tokens that might be #securities. This is not an attack on #DeFi or regulation of #DeFi specifically, but instead a logical example of how existing regulation applies to legally addressable entities /1
including those that facilitate the use of #decentralized systems- in this case, legally addressable interface providers. And this isn’t new. Quietly, many front end providers are also engaged in #sanctions compliance. While laws obviously apply to legally addressable actors, /2
this does not mean that regulation has applied or will be applied directly to protocol code, at least not yet. This is b/c code itself is not legally addressable. It has its own rule-set governing its environment, & law cannot change code, although law can act on people /3
Read 12 tweets
Jul 19, 2021
Today I published "The Limits of Code Deference" papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf… Inspired by #theDao, #Dapps & #DAOs, this article explores whether #decentralizedventures can absolutely bind their users to their code’s execution. Not surprisingly, the answer is no. Why? A quick🧵:
These ventures use code to enable groups of people to act collectively to affect rights to #digital assets. We call these “decentralized ventures.” These decentralized ventures enable transactions among their participants in accordance w/rules created and enforced by their code;
human participants in these decentralized ventures interact with the venture, & sometimes with each other, using #smartcontracts. Smart contracts may break, or behave in unexpected ways. What happens when a smart contract defect /error harms a decentralized venture user?
Read 20 tweets
Apr 20, 2021
@CaitlinLong_ @uniformlaws @Prof_CarlaReyes I'm very proud of the work done by the brilliant members of the @uniformlaws Digital Asset Working Group incl. @Prof_CarlaReyes @Andrea_Tosato to create this draft. For the twitterati who don't practice law, you may wonder, what's this? & Is it important? YES. A quick #thread
@CaitlinLong_ @uniformlaws @Prof_CarlaReyes @Andrea_Tosato The proposed new article 12 of the UCC would include rules for commercial transactions of what we’ve termed "controllable electronic records" or CERs. This would include a wide variety of #digitalassets including what we generally call #cryptocurrency along with /2
@CaitlinLong_ @uniformlaws @Prof_CarlaReyes @Andrea_Tosato #digitalassets that are related to other assets or legal rights such as precious metals-backed assets, certain types of #NFTs etc. /3
Read 12 tweets
Apr 13, 2021
We've got a new proposed #SEC #token #safeharbor that would let issuers offer tokens in the US. It's big. But, what's new? How is it different from the prior proposal? What's new? You guessed it. It's unavoidable, It's inevitable. It's a #THREAD. Let's dive in/1
Right off the top, we have the elimination of the "good faith" provision that was previously implied upon the issuers in a(1) & of a(4) which required the issuer to act in good faith to "create liquidity for users." /2
New section a(5) includes reference to the new "Exit report" which is a new requirment defined and explained further down but tldr; its a report issued by the issuer's counsel that asserts whether the tokens will be a security or not after the 3 year period. Good inclusion /3
Read 31 tweets
Apr 13, 2021
released on #github. here's the link: github.com/CommissionerPe…
3 most significant changes: mandatory semi-annual updates to the plan of development disclosure and a block explorer; exit report requirement with analysis by outside counsel explaining why the network is decentralized or functional, or an announcement that the tokens will
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

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

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

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(