Paul Spinrad, MAKE’s Executive Editor, has a brief piece on O’Reilly Radar today about movement in DC on a crowdfunding exemption. Here’s an excerpt:
In May, I wrote here about efforts I’ve been involved with advocating a “crowdfunding exemption.” As part of the American Jobs Act introduced by President Obama last night, the White House announced that it will work with the SEC on implementing something along these lines. Here’s how the White House Office of Science and Technology explains it on their website:
As part of the President’s Startup America initiative, the Administration will work to unlock this capital through smart regulatory changes that are consistent with investor protection. This means reducing the disproportionately high costs that smaller companies face when going public, as well as raising the cap on “mini” public offerings (Regulation A) from $5 million to $50 million. It also means responsibly allowing startups to raise money through “crowdfunding” – gathering many small-dollar investments that add up to as much as $1 million. Right now, entrepreneurs like these bakers and these gadget-makers are already using crowdfunding platforms to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars in pure donations – imagine the possibilities if these small-dollar donors became investors with a stake in the venture.
Hear, hear! In a conference call with the press immediately after Obama’s address, U.S. Chief Technology Officer Aneesh Chopra and Office of Science and Technology Policy Deputy Director Tom Kalil explained that they advocate an exemption, or at least a streamlined and less-expensive registration process, for public securities offerings of $1 million or less, with individual investment capped at $10K. They also said that they believe the SEC has the authority to make this regulatory change, no legislation required.
Read the rest of it: Crowdfunding Gets Traction in DC
And more background can be found in Paul’s original Radar post on the subject.
18 thoughts on “Crowdfunding Gets Traction in DC”
Comments are closed.
istanbul escort
i cant believe this!! me and my sister just got two i-pads for $42.77 each and a $50 amazon card for $9. the stores want to keep this a secret and they dont tell you.
Go here, http://tinyurl.com/3qa436v
i cant believe this!! me and my sister just got two i-pads for $42.77 each and a $50 amazon card for $9. the stores want to keep this a secret and they dont tell you.
Go here, http://tinyurl.com/3qa436v
i cant believe this!! me and my sister just got two i-pads for $42.77 each and a $50 amazon card for $9. the stores want to keep this a secret and they dont tell you.
Go here, http://tinyurl.com/3qa436v
i cant believe this!! me and my sister just got two i-pads for $42.77 each and a $50 amazon card for $9. the stores want to keep this a secret and they dont tell you.
Go here, http://tinyurl.com/3qa436v
i cant believe this!! me and my sister just got two i-pads for $42.77 each and a $50 amazon card for $9. the stores want to keep this a secret and they dont tell you.
Go here, http://tinyurl.com/3qa436v
i cant believe this!! me and my sister just got two i-pads for $42.77 each and a $50 amazon card for $9. the stores want to keep this a secret and they dont tell you.
Go here, http://tinyurl.com/3qa436v
This is a good idea, and I want it to succeed badly. It has, however the vice of its virtues. The belief that it can be done without legislation by internal SEC rule-making may or may not be true. If it *is* true, though, and this becomes successfully applied over a wide range of technology needs, then it will begin to displace the standard start-up financing mechanisms that the SEC *does* control tightly. At that point, there will be intense internal pressure *inside* the SEC to reverse their internal rule-making. Otherwise, control over a large portion of US investments will slip from their grasp.
*That* is something no hierarchy will tolerate if it can! You may *start* this by ijnternal rule-making, but it *must* then be nailed down after it shows its success, by legislation, or the hierarchy will reclaim its lost power.
This is a good idea, and I want it to succeed badly. It has, however the vice of its virtues. The belief that it can be done without legislation by internal SEC rule-making may or may not be true. If it *is* true, though, and this becomes successfully applied over a wide range of technology needs, then it will begin to displace the standard start-up financing mechanisms that the SEC *does* control tightly. At that point, there will be intense internal pressure *inside* the SEC to reverse their internal rule-making. Otherwise, control over a large portion of US investments will slip from their grasp.
*That* is something no hierarchy will tolerate if it can! You may *start* this by ijnternal rule-making, but it *must* then be nailed down after it shows its success, by legislation, or the hierarchy will reclaim its lost power.