根據新的SEC員工聲明，模因硬幣通常不構成證券

2025年2月27日，美國證券交易委員會（SEC）發布了有關Meme Coins的員工聲明（該聲明）。

On February 27, 2025, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a Staff Statement on meme coins (the Statement). In the Statement, the Division's Staff shared its views that meme coins, generally speaking, do not typically constitute securities, nor does their transfer constitute the sale of securities under federal securities laws.1 The Staff makes clear, however, that the Statement does not negate the possible finding of an investment contract, depending on the facts and circumstances. These facts and circumstances include, but are not limited to, marketing/promotional efforts and pooling of funds for business purposes.2

2025年2月27日，美國證券交易委員會（SEC）發布了有關Meme Coins的員工聲明（該聲明）。在聲明中，該部門的工作人員分享了其觀點，即Meme硬幣一般來說，通常不構成證券，其轉讓也不構成根據聯邦證券法的出售證券。 1工作人員清楚地表明，根據事實和情況，該聲明並未否定可能否定投資合同的可能裁定。這些事實和情況包括但不限於營銷/促銷工作以及用於業務目的的資金集合。 22

Regardless of how caveated, the Statement has sparked internal debate within the SEC. Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw criticized the Statement for its lack of a clear definition of a meme coin. She emphasized that the "economic reality" of most meme coins - in her view, to make money and generate profits based on the efforts of others, which implicate the finding of an investment contract and thereby a security - is neglected in the Staff Statement.3

無論警告如何，該聲明都引發了SEC內部的內部辯論。專員卡羅琳·克倫肖（Caroline Crenshaw）批評該聲明缺乏對模因硬幣的明確定義。她強調，大多數模因硬幣的“經濟現實” - 在她看來，是為了賺錢並根據他人的努力賺錢，這暗示了投資合同的發現，從而獲得了擔保 - 在工作人員聲明中被忽略了。 3

As this article will discuss, the ongoing debate surrounding the classification of meme coins are important for Canadian businesses operating in the digital asset space, particularly given the overlapping investment contract tests and securities policies between Canada and our neighbours to the south.

正如本文將討論的那樣，圍繞模因硬幣分類的持續辯論對於在數字資產領域運營的加拿大企業很重要，尤其是考慮到加拿大與南方鄰國之間的重疊投資合同測試和證券政策。

What is a Meme Coin?

什麼是模因硬幣？

Meme coins are a subset of cryptocurrencies that are often inspired by internet memes, jokes and current events. Unlike traditional cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, meme coins usually gain popularity through social media and online communities, and oftentimes lack real-world applications. They are often highly volatile and speculative, with their value largely driven by online trends, social media hype, and community sentiment rather than fundamental economic or technological factors.4

模因硬幣是加密貨幣的一部分，通常受到互聯網模因，笑話和時事的啟發。與傳統的加密貨幣（例如比特幣）不同，模因硬幣通常通過社交媒體和在線社區獲得流行，並且通常缺乏現實世界的應用。它們通常是高度波動和投機性的，其價值在很大程度上是由在線趨勢，社交媒體炒作和社區情緒的驅動的，而不是基本的經濟或技術因素。 4

Ongoing Discussion of Cryptocurrency: Security or Commodity?

正在進行的有關加密貨幣的討論：安全還是商品？

As we have communicated in prior Cassels Comments, the classification of cryptocurrencies has been a topic of debate for quite some time in the United States. In the US, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) views Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as commodities.5 However, the previous SEC administration has, in numerous staff comments and enforcement actions, indicated that certain crypto assets may be considered, or the manner by which they are sold may be considered, securities transactions, implicating registration and disclosure requirements.6

正如我們在先前的Cassels評論中所傳達的那樣，加密貨幣的分類在美國已經是一個辯論的話題。在美國，商品期貨交易委員會（CFTC）將比特幣和其他加密貨幣視為商品。 5然而，在許多員工的評論和執法措施中，先前的SEC政府表明可以考慮某些加密資產，或者可能會考慮某些加密資產的方式。

SEC's Analysis: the Howey Test

SEC的分析：Howey測試

Now, turning to the specifics of the Staff Statement, the Staff of the SEC's Division of Corporation Finance shared its perspective on why meme coins, generally speaking, do not typically constitute securities.

現在，轉向員工聲明的細節，美國證券交易委員會（SEC）公司財務部的工作人員分享了其對為什麼模因硬幣的看法，通常不會構成證券。

Under the U.S. Securities Act, the defined term "security" includes in its definition reference to an "investment contract," though the statute does not define the term investment contract itself.7 The US Supreme Court established the test for an investment contract in SEC v. W.J. Howey Co., which requires that a financial arrangement meet specific criteria including investment of money in a common enterprise, reasonable expectation of profit, and reliance on the efforts of others.8

根據《美國證券法》，定義的術語“安全”包括其定義指的“投資合同”，儘管該法規並未定義“投資合同本身”。

Applying the Howey test, and demonstrating the new policies of the SEC set down by the Trump Administration, the Statement posited that the offer and sale of meme coins generally do not meet these criteria. Specifically, meme coins do not typically involve an investment in an enterprise, nor are they purchased with the reasonable expectation of profits derived from the managerial efforts of others. As such, the Statement provided that most meme coins likely fail the Howey test and would not be classified as securities under US federal securities laws.9

通過應用Howey測試，並證明了特朗普政府制定的SEC的新政策，該聲明表明，Meme Coins的要約和銷售通常不符合這些標準。具體而言，Meme硬幣通常不涉及對企業的投資，也不是在合理期望從他人的管理工作中獲得利潤的合理期望。因此，該聲明規定，大多數模因硬幣可能未能通過Howey測試，並且不會根據美國聯邦證券法歸類為證券。 9

This determination, however, does not provide a blanket exemption. The SEC explicitly cautioned that the characterization of certain meme coins as non-securities does not preclude other forms of civil or criminal liability, such as fraudulent conduct,10 insider trading or money laundering. They further cautioned that the facts and circumstances would govern, and that it remained possible that an arrangement involving meme coins may still implicate securities laws.11

但是，這種決定並不能提供毯子的豁免。 SEC明確警告說，將某些模因硬幣描述為非安全性並不排除其他形式的民事或刑事責任，例如欺詐行為，10個內部人士交易或洗錢。他們進一步警告說，事實和情況將管理，並且涉及模因硬幣的安排仍然可能牽涉證券法。

Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw dissented, expressing concerns about the Statement's broad pronouncements and lack of clarity regarding the definition of meme coins. She argued that the vagueness could be exploited by those seeking to evade regulatory oversight and emphasized the importance of analyzing the "economic reality" of meme coin transactions. Crenshaw highlighted that meme coins are often issued to generate profits for both promoters and holders, and that promoters can influence market demand through various on and off chain activities (e.g., marketing/promotional efforts, insider trading, front-running, sniping etc.). She concluded that the Statement's broad generalizations about meme coins do not align with the individualized inquiry required by the Howey test.12

專員卡羅琳·克倫肖（Caroline Crenshaw）表示反對，對聲明的廣泛聲明和對模因硬幣的定義缺乏明確性表示擔憂。她認為，那些試圖逃避監管監督的人可以利用模糊性，並強調分析模因硬幣交易的“經濟現實”的重要性。 Crenshaw強調說，Meme硬幣通常是為了為發起人和持有人帶來的利潤，並且發起人可以通過各種鏈條活動（例如，營銷/促銷活動，內部人士交易，前線運行，狙擊等）來影響市場需求）。她得出的結論是，該聲明對模因硬幣的廣泛概括不與Howey測試所需的個性化詢問保持一致。 12

Implications for Canada

對加拿大的影響

In Canada, the regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies, including meme coins, is still evolving. While the SEC's guidance provides valuable context, Canadian provincial securities regulators and our courts will necessarily be tasked with determining the classification of these assets for offers and sales to Canadians.

在加拿大，包括模因硬幣在內的加密貨幣的監管景觀仍在不斷發展。儘管SEC的指導提供了寶貴的背景，但加拿大省證券監管機構和我們的法院將必須承擔確定這些資產的分類，以供加拿大人提供報價和銷售。

Both the Ontario and BC Securities Acts define security to include investment contracts.13 The Pacific Coast Coin Exchange v.

《安大略省和卑詩省證券法》都將安全性定義為包括投資合同。 13太平洋海岸硬幣交易所v。