technology lawyer

What exactly is an Initial Coin Offering?

HomePrivate: BlogLegal insightsWhat exactly is an Initial Coin Offering?

by

reviewed by

Malcolm Burrows

Reading Time:

3–5 minutes

With the rise of cryptocurrencies (think Bitcoin and Ethereum), start-up businesses have engaged in a new method of sourcing funding from would-be investors – Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs).  ICOs are becoming an increasingly popular method for new businesses to raise money in a short period of time with minimal effort.  As ICOs are a new concept utilising new technologies, they are yet to be regulated in Australia.  However, with the rise in popularity of ICOs in Australia, and around the world, whether or not ICOs will be regulated is a question many expected to be answered shortly.

What happens when a company does an ICO?

An ICO is a process whereby a company raises capital through the offering of secured tokens of cryptocurrencies.  According to Wikipedia, a cryptocurrency is:

a digital asset designed to work as a medium of exchange using cryptography to secure the transactions and to control the creation of additional units of the currency”.

These tokens are unique to the corporate issuer, thereby aligning the value of the tokens to the value (being the success) of the company.

Why is an ICO different from an IPO?

While an ICO may sound very similar to an IPO (Initial Public Offering) of shares on a stock exchange, there are fundamental differences that investors must be aware of.  These differences include:

  • Where an IPO entitles the purchaser to an equitable stake in the company (a share), an ICO entitles the purchaser to a cryptocurrency ‘token’ that is linked specifically to the company. Unlike the share, the token does not entitle the holder to any “ownership” rights in the company – such as the right to vote on decisions of the company or a right to receive a share of the profit.
  • Where an IPO requires a company to comply with listing rules of the relevant stock exchange and the corporate laws of the respective country, such as the requirement to prepare detailed disclosure documents (generally summarised in the form of a prospectus), there are no such guidelines for ICOs. With that said, companies undertaking an ICO will usually prepare a brief outline of the business opportunity in a ‘white paper’ in order to provide some overview to investors of the potential of the company. As there are not strict rules regulating ICOs (at this time), white papers will generally be far less detailed than their IPO counterparts.
  • Whereas shares purchased through an IPO entitle the holder to a proportion of the profits of the company (commonly referred to as dividends), holders of tokens from an ICO will not receive such payments. The profit to be made on tokens are from the rise in value of the token which will occur as demand for the token increases (similar to the share price movements from an IPO). In this sense, many consider ICOs to involve a large degree of ‘speculation’; but the same may be said of many micro-cap listings on the ASX.

Regulation of ICO’s in Australia

As ICOs are unlike capital raising methods previously used, it presents many unique scenarios for regulators – is an ICO a financial product capable of being regulated, and if so, what is the best method of regulating it?  Are they in fact equities at all?

In Australia, there is currently no detailed regulation of ICOs. While ASIC does provide some consideration of cryptocurrencies (see ASIC Information Sheet 219)(and ASIC’s MoneySmart Virtual currencies information), ASIC has yet to set out whether or not it will regulate ICOs undertaken in Australia.

While ASIC has not yet provided its view on the regulation of ICOs, ASIC Chairman Mr Greg Medcraft, in a recent interview with CoinDesk, did not close the door on regulating ICOs.  As Mr Medcraft noted, while ICOs may not be equities (within the traditional meaning), they may be considered financial products which may be regulated by ASIC.

ASIC is expected to announce whether it will regulate ICOs shortly.

Links and further references

Australian Securities and Investments Commission

Evaluating Distributed Ledger Technology – Information Sheet 219
Money Smart – Virtual currencies

Further information about financial services licencing

If you need assistance regarding financial services licencing, technology law or you are considering doing an initial coin offering, please telephone me for an obligation free and confidential discussion.


Related insights about financial services licencing

  • Software developer obtains Court order – names behind IP addresses

    Software developer obtains Court order – names behind IP addresses

    Justice Burley of the Federal Court of Australia in the case of Siemens Industry Software Inc v Telstra Corporation Limited [2020] FCA 901 ordered that Telstra, within fourteen (14) days, provide to Siemens all documents in its control relating to the identity of certain Telstra Account holders.  Those account holders were suspected by Siemens of…

    Read more …

  • The Digital ID Bill 2023 (Cth) – key points

    The Digital ID Bill 2023 (Cth) – key points

    On 30 November 2023, the Digital ID Bill 2023 (Cth) and the Digital ID (Transitional and Consequential Provisions) Bill 2023 (Digital ID Bills) were introduced in the Australian Senate.  Digital IDs are designed to provide individuals with a convenient way to verify their identity when completing certain online transactions and dealing with government and certain…

    Read more …

  • What are adequate cybersecurity measures?

    What are adequate cybersecurity measures?

    The adequacy of cyber security measures was considered in the case of Australian Securities and Investments Commission v RI Advice Group Pty Ltd [2022] FCA 496 (ASIC v Ri Advice Group).  One of the issues raised was whether the respondent had adequate cyber security and cyber resilience in place across its network of financial advisors. …

    Read more …

  • National Classification Scheme – proposed federal changes

    National Classification Scheme – proposed federal changes

    Albanese Government announces intention to reform National Classification Scheme, proposing R18+ for games simulating gambling and M for computer games with paid loot boxes/in-game purchases linked to chance. Learn more about proposed reforms and if simulated gambling needs to be addressed.

    Read more …

  • Digital Platform Services Inquiry – submissions sought

    Digital Platform Services Inquiry – submissions sought

    The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is investigating the activities of digital platform service providers and their impact on competition, consumerism, and business. Have your say and make a submission by 5 April 2023. Learn more in the seventh report of the Digital Platform Services Inquiry.

    Read more …

  • Australian legislation tackles loot boxes in video games

    Australian legislation tackles loot boxes in video games

    The Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Amendment (Loot Boxes) Bill 2022 (Bill)  has been tabled in the House of Representatives on the 28 November 2022.  The private member’s Bill acts in response to growing support for the regulation of features and elements within video games which appear to simulate gambling.

    Read more …

  • Influencers now regulated when promoting therapeutic goods

    Influencers now regulated when promoting therapeutic goods

    The Therapeutic Goods Advertising Code 2021 (Cth) (2021 TGA Code) brings regulations for social media endorsements of therapeutic goods. Learn more about the changes and how to ensure compliance before they take effect on 1 January 2022.

    Read more …

  • Implied terms in software contracts – part two

    Implied terms in software contracts – part two

    This article examines the concept of implied terms in software contracts, including the requirements for implying a term, the process of determining implied terms, and examples of implied terms applied in software agreements.

    Read more …

  • Australian Court: AI can’t be “inventor” in Australian patent

    Australian Court: AI can’t be “inventor” in Australian patent

    The Federal Court of Australia has made a groundbreaking ruling on the patentability of works created by Artificial Intelligence. Explore the implications of this decision and what it could mean for the future of patent law.

    Read more …


Posted

in

,
Send this to a friend