Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

SEC issues first-ever no-action letter to token issuer

By Marc J. Adesso on April 7, 2019
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn


04.08.19

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Division of Corporation Finance has issued a no-action letter to TurnKey Jet, Inc. (TurnKey), a cryptographic token issuer. To our knowledge, the no-action letter issued to TurnKey is the first such letter in history to be issued by the SEC to an issuer of cryptographic tokens.

Much like the JPM Coin issued by JP Morgan, TurnKey’s tokens can only be used in a “walled garden” platform on a private blockchain, in order to facilitate payment. Another parallel is that it is intended to function much like a subscription-based, frequent flyer program that many airlines currently offer, where members can use points to purchase flights rather than using cash.

The SEC put a number of conditions on its recommendation that no enforcement be brought against TurnKey, in particular:

  • TurnKey will not use any funds from token sales to develop its platform, network, or applications, and each of these will be fully developed and operational at the time any tokens are sold;
  • TurnKey’s tokens will be immediately usable for their intended functionality (purchasing air charter services) at the time they are sold;
  • TurnKey will restrict transfers of tokens to token wallets created by TurnKey and inside TurnKey’s walled garden only (i.e., TurnKey’s tokens likely can’t be traded on a digital token exchange, or at least one that is not operated as part of TurkKey’s platform);
  • TurnKey will sell its tokens at a price of one USD per token in perpetuity, and each token will only represent an obligation of TurnKey to supply air charter services at a value of one USD per Token;
  • If TurnKey offers to repurchase tokens, it will only do so at a discount to the face value of the tokens (one USD per token), unless a court within the United States orders TurnKey to liquidate the tokens; and
  • TurnKey’s tokens are marketed in a manner that emphasizes the functionality of the token, and not the potential for the increase in the market value of the token.

It’s also important to note that the SEC’s position is based on the representations made to the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance in the Company’s correspondence, and any deviation from those representations could lead to the SEC reach an ‘actionable’ conclusion instead.

Also worth noting is that, in conjunction with the no-action letter discussed above, the SEC released a long-awaited framework for the “investment contract” analysis of digital assets, seemingly largely intended for token issuers (likely conducting an initial coin offering, or ICO), which can be found here. However, this framework was merely part of a public statement made by SEC employees, and according to usual disclaimer that accompanies such statements: “This framework represents Staff views and is not a rule, regulation, or statement of the Commission. The Commission has neither approved nor disapproved its content. This framework, like other Staff guidance, is not binding on the Divisions or the Commission. It does not constitute legal advice, for which you should consult with your own attorney. It does not modify or replace any existing applicable laws, regulations, or rules.”

Subscribe Now!

Recommended Content

SEC Chairman Issues Personal Statement on ICOs in Wake of SEC Enforcement Actions

SEC Releases Updated Regulatory Flexibility Agenda

To 8-K or Not to 8-K: the SEC’s Guidance on the Impact of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act

Could broadening the investor base help growing companies, save ICOs?

SEC approves NYSE rules change to allow direct listings

  • Posted in:
    Technology and AI
  • Blog:
    Waller Law Blogs
  • Organization:
    Waller
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo