4 ms·
"...as private businesses raising capital (and the broker dealers) are the ones that face the potential liability from the state, (exacerbated by the much highe
by hirundo 5y ago
"...as private businesses raising capital (and the broker dealers) are the ones that face the potential liability from the state, (exacerbated by the much higher likelyhood of poor people complaining about their money to regulators or launching their own private litigation), and so the intermediary therefore enforces the accredited investor prohibition on behalf of the state..."
As you describe this it is very different in effect from the Texas law, in that SB-8 does not require any particularized injury of the plaintiff. If you don't need to be injured to sue successfully, the litigation pressure is vastly more intense because anyone can pursue it, and the fines are more than sufficient motivation.
- vmception 5y agoAccredited investor laws don't require injury. The injury just creates the likelihood that it gets noticed. But yes the major difference in capital raising laws is that the state regulator is the biggest issue, whereas the executive branch is (mostly) absent in SB-8 and likely will be completely absent.