Skip to content

About us

eCounsel group

A boutique firm with unparalleled expertise in business and technology. We have good command of industrial ecology and legal practice, and have undertaken highly regarded cases. Because the small business scope, we pay more emphasis on effectiveness and efficiency, and choose clients with deliberation. The managing partner not only has extensive experiences in various legal issues more over than 20 years, but invests and manages several technology companies. In addition, he always checks each case rigorously. Clients’ business objectives are our primary focus. To achieve the same in the most cost-effective fashion trumps all seemingly sophisticated legal discussions.

SEC Cracking Down ICOs

2018 - 11 - 13

In the past few months, the U.S. SEC has significantly expanded its crackdown on hundreds of ICO projects, putting these startups at risk. Recently, the SEC has subpoenaed several ICO startups that failed to sell tokens exclusively to accredited investors.

In response to the subpoenas, dozens of companies have agreed to refund investors and pay a fine. However, it seems that those who can simply walk away by paying up are the lucky ones as many others continue struggling to satisfy the rather unclear and inconsistent demands from the SEC.

Many ICOs were successfully launched in the past two years by structuring as a “utility token” or a SAFT (Simple Agreement for Future Tokens), despite SEC executives’ previous comments on how they think of most ICOS as securities. It is not until July this year when the SEC announced that the $150M ICO project DAO is a security offering, other ICOs started to realise that the SEC is not messing around any more.

Why is being seen as a security offering such a big deal? Because it is required by law that any U.S. company offering a security must register with the SEC, which is a tedious process. The other lawful way to do it is to qualify for an exemption, such as selling only to foreign investors, or accredited investors with more than $200,000 income in each of the past two years or a minimum net worth of $1M. And you guessed it, virtually all ICOs went for the exemption path, by providing a set of checkboxes as a method to exclude unqualified investors. However, the SEC wants more than that by spelling out plainly: “reviewing documentation, such as W-2s, tax returns, bank and brokerage statements, credit reports and the like.”

From the SEC’s standpoint, lack of clarity does not exist, and that the decades old security laws can perfectly apply to ICOs.

“Everybody’s holding their breath for the SEC to create some kind of coin rule, and they’re not going to,” says a securities attorney at one high-profile Silicon Valley firm. “They’re applying the same laws, the same statutes, the same rules, to stocks and bonds and everything else.”

Sources are saying that a crypto union led by Ripple is formed and D.C. lobbyists are hired to lobby Congress on the industry’s behalf. The outcome shall be very interesting.

Recommended article 

Internal Controls - Don't Shove It to Your Accountant

No matter its the Enron or Procomp in Taiwan, seems like accountants play an important role. 不論是在國外的恩龍案或是國內的博達案,我們發現會計師都扮演關鍵地位的角色。會計師依據法令必須負責查核簽證這些大型企業的財務報表,如果會計師沒有做好把關者的工作,那麼就會釀成恩龍、博達這種大型弊案。 是否只有會計師才能做內控?這個問題可以分成會計師來做內控好不好以及有沒有必要,中、美、台法規基本上都會給予會計師一個法定簽核地位,所以因為這些規定大公司都必需要找會計師事務所來做相關文件的簽證,但是找會計師來做內控實際上是不好的。 不好的原因在於,會計師雖然是專業人士,但是會計師不可能也無須非常了解經營企業的各種面向,而公司的內部控制制度與公司的關係太深了,如果不懂公司內的各種面向,如生產銷售流程、員工脾氣、員工工作成效等,要做好公司的內控是有困難的,公司經營者當然必須懂這些事情,但是大部分的會計師通常在這方面的經驗會比較少。 內部控制牽涉公司內部的各種交易循環類型,包括下列多種循環之控制作業:銷售及收款循環、採購及付款循環、生產循環、薪工循環、融資循環、固定資產循環、投資循環、EDP(electronic data processing)電子資料循環以及研發循環。這九大循環囊括了公司當中從上到下的林林總總、五花八門的事務,鎮日在數字堆中鑽研的會計師們真得有辦法全盤了解嗎?如果答案是否定的,那會計師們又要如何做內控呢? 依據我國證券交易法十四條之一第二項授權主管機關訂定的「公開發行公司建立內部控制制度處理準則」1的規定,公開發行公司建立內部控制制度必須依照本處理準則辦理,其中關於內部控制制度的評估可以分為公司自行檢查或委託會計師專案審查,而會計師必須蒐集相關證據、資料來評估內部控制制度設計以及執行的有效性。 這個處理準則的目的無非是希望可以藉由外部會計師的專業能力來審核公司的內部控制制度有效與否,立意良善,但是實務上的情況往往跟法規所要求的不一致。處理準則第三十條規定,專案審查工作必須由受有專業訓練並具備適當能力者擔任之,但是事實上,處理各大公司內部控制評估的大型會計師事務所,往往是派大學剛畢業的查帳員來擔任此工作,拿著上頭發下來的標準內部控制評估表前往各公司查帳,照著表單勾一勾、填一填就完成了,再拿回事務所層層上繳,最後再由合夥人簽個章就將意見書交給主管機關了,公司實際上所做的就算跟帳面上不符也不會有人真正去關心。基本上會計師事務所都不願意與客戶過不去,大多是對客戶公司睜一隻眼,閉一隻眼,免的客戶跑去找別家會計師事務所簽證,更加擴大了內部控制的缺失。 所以,找會計師來做內部控制其合適性有待商榷。 從另一方面來看,會計師以其專業幫忙公司製作、簽證各種財務文件是有必要的,但是我們也必須要考慮、注意到財務文件之簽證跟公司內部控制間的關聯性。依據我國「會計師查核簽證財務報表規則」的規定,會計師於查核簽證財務報表時必須評估公司內部的各種內部控制制度,比如說現金的內控、票據的內控、營業收入的內控、長期股權投資的內控等,如果會計師不了解這些內部控制制度的話,經過其簽證的財務文件就很可能會出錯,所以要是公司沒有妥善的內部控制制度,會計師根本也無從確實的簽證相關財務文件。 總而言之,會計師做內控,不適合,也沒有必要,會計師只有在簽證財報的時候需要調查評估相關內控制度作業的有效性,充其量只是立於一種輔助公司的地位而已。 1 參證券暨期貨法令判解查詢系統網站(瀏覽日期:2008年12月31號)。

SEC Scored Victory in Crypto Crime Crackdown

A ruling in the Eastern District of New York sparked controversies in the crypto world as it was the very first time a federal court had weighed in on the SEC’s jurisdiction over ICOs in a…

Cord-Cutters - The Nightmare for Cable Providers to Come ?

We been expecting cord-cutters for a while and have yet seen any moves. 剪線潮,喊很久,卻只聞樓梯響,不見人下來。 Cord-Cutting Might Not Be So Bad for Cable Companies Today, video is only about 40% of cable companies’ profits… For a typical…