🧑🏽‍⚖️ Should we come together for a chat with the SEC's crypto task force?

[JFWooten4]

Firstly, given my past experience with staff, it's my understanding that a meeting like this would exclusively occur privately and without the option for community recording. While @CommissionerPeirce might be more apt to open this fodder for transparent discussions later down the line, it's not the biggest point I think we should invest political capital towards right this moment.

Official info 🔗

Would other community members like to have a conversation with the task force? Moreover, what would you like to see us discuss at such a meeting?

We can submit a written summary agenda of action items for discussion, which gets posted to the Commission’s website, in an effort to "increase the transparency of its engagement with the public and promote open dialogue among parties interested in these issues." 💜

The paragraph after this explanation also makes it sound like staff will materially prepare for the items we want to bring up, such as Rule 144's application to secondary trading of investment contracts. This could really help with the TAR1 efforts.

Additional written notes

Since our submitted agenda and analysis file gets published without modification (like comments), we can include material public information such as Cat's great recent post as examples.

The quality of this submission as a pre-screening tool could also matter since "the Crypto Task Force is not able to meet with every party requesting a meeting. Requests that are submitted with detailed agendas and a plan for a substantive discussion will be prioritized."

Nonprofit implications

There's a distinct difference between responding to agency questions such as number 41 and reaching out to "influence" policymaking. The latter implicated our Form 5768 submission in allowing general outreach.

I'd say this work could squarely fall into responding to agency outreach and publications, and thus not being an explicit expenditure to influence legislation. Notwithstanding, I can have the mail service forward that form back to the IRWS, since our first submission came back inadequately addressed from some accidental fluke.

cc @tehchives

They also ask about info on attendees. Could be a door into the roundtables later this year.

[tehchives]

Great thoughts John - I'd certainly be interested to try and get such a meeting, and attend such a meeting. Would be so useful in order to explain and get perceptions on the shortcomings we perceive in the market and our suggested nonprofit and decentralized solutions for them. I'm put in mind of the WhyDRS packet we had put together several years ago when considering something that could be submitted. A distilled version of that with some graphics and with the benefit of a few more years development could be handy.

I would agree that this kind of outreach and potential meeting solicitation should fall under the duties provided through the 5768 filing, which it seems we'll need to resubmit as you mentioned.

[JFWooten4]

Okay, great. I can get the doc forwarded to the IRS today. How could everyone collaborate on a presentation-style adaptation of that incredible DRS packet information together, tailored towards the crypto task force?

[tehchives]

That's a good question. I am not sure how much of it would directly apply to the purpose here but maybe we can start with pulling out key bullet points and key sources and work off of that. AI could likely help. Try to condense it by 90% then turn that into something presentable?