The ongoing debate in the crypto space revolves around whether it should be judged on substance or form. Utilizing the analogy of pancakes versus cake, the article illustrates how financial instruments can align more closely with traditional forms like stocks or bank accounts while resisting regulation. Skeptics argue that many crypto tokens essentially function as unregistered securities or company shares, even if they are presented as decentralized tokens. The prosecution in the Roman Storm trial highlighted this by stressing the economic reality of Tornado Cash, equating its function to money laundering irrespective of its form as smart contract code. A16z crypto distinguished between network tokens, which are newly valued through decentralized networks, and company-backed tokens that might circumvent securities laws. This distinction underlines that the legal frameworks may apply to tokens posing as securities. Ultimately, the piece concludes that while the artistic presentation (form) may influence perception, the true economic activities (substance) often dictate legal evaluations in the crypto domain.

Source 🔗