This is wrong. Those are some of the securities are supposed to be securities trading. They should not be trading, but why are we not really going and saying this? Is the regulation? This is how it should be treated. Nobody in the space is saying: hey we dont want to follow, or we gon na be were gon na, be having an issue with following we want to so uh. My biggest question out here is instead of saying: d5 is producing this much earn, or this much market cap or bitcoin disappeared. Why dont? We just say this is the way to do the business, and these are the regulations. What what would you, if you could uh advise uh the sec chairman um perrian? What how would you like to see this this done? What what is the the to satisfy all the constituents here, i think sorry, good yeah. We need clear and predictable guidance. Chair gensler has stated multiple times that he believes the law is clear. That is not true. We represent over 200 businesses that are innovating with digital assets at the chamber of digital commerce, and i have yet to have one company say yeah. We understand what the rules to the road are. In addition to that, we represent about 40 different law firms that are practicing in this space. Former sec officials in these firms advising companies who also say the rules to the road are not clear and at the end of the day there is a brain drain.

This is the most innovative and fastest growing industry in the world today and we are driving that overseas and that really needs to be taken into account in the public policy process. What is the opportunity of losing business due to not having clear and predictable regulations and its? Not just me, thats, saying this, commissioner purse whos also an sec commissioner, has stated this over and over again shes put forward a safe harbor for digital tokens. The sec has not taken it up for rulemaking. We urge them to do that and then theres about 30 different members of congress over the past four years. This isnt a new issue have either sponsored or co sponsored legislation to fix this issue. Theres about a half a dozen pieces of legislation that looks to clarify when a token is a security, theres, 16 hr 1602. The eliminate barriers to innovation act, congressman tom emmers, securities, clarity act, the token taxonomy act again. We need clear rules to the road now yeah, but i think from a product side right and from the technology side lets also break it down im, comparing it to a modem. They are saying every agent which is directly custodial or non custodial related in this space. Has to be taxed, this is like saying every router and every modem needs to have a fee. If there is an internet associated with it, it just doesnt even make sense with respect to basic what, if im a miner im a validator, how i dont even hold your crypto.

I have no idea whose crypto it is so being a router or being a modem in your house. How do i get that yeah heres another one, so uh and i think a lot of this is about a power grab for the sec at the end of the day. This is politics and we keep hearing this product. Is it scc or is it cftc because im also very confused? They keep on going on twitter and asking who has the the real authority over some of the things cf cftc, commissioner talking about yeah and at the end of the day, a lot of these products are retail products, especially in the stable coin market. And if we take all of these products and define them as securities pull them within the secs jurisdiction, theres actually going to be less consumer financial protection, the sec is not a consumer regulator. You have the cfpb. You have state regulators that are really uh. You know the experts and who have the teams to oversee consumer protections, thats, not the secs role and again. I think a lot of those statements yesterday were about trying to expand the power at the sec and we really need to think about how theyre going to it could impact consumers before we do that. Yeah and ive been going back. Sorry going back to your question of if i have to say three things which he should which, if i can advise one, would be uh having every node every uncustodian wallet in the space for taxing doesnt make sense.

Second thing, i would add, on the top of it, if usdt or any stablecoin is supposed to be a commodity, its supposed to be an asset just come out and build a rule around it, and the d5 industry is so agile. It will work it out, figure out stable coins and the third and the last important thing is. I personally think that just taking out coinbase as an example, because a really strong ceo has a mind of his own to come out on twitter and theyre, just having them underlining doesnt make sense. The whole d5 world is a trillion dollar economy already.