Topic: [Havelock] The Panama Fund, S.A. Acquires HavelockInvestments.com (Read 12603 times)

The Panama Fund, SA has been registered and licensed since 2008 with Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores (English: Superintendency of Securities Market)  as a Sociedades de Inversión Privadas (English: Private Investment Company).
http://www.supervalores.gob.pa/files/Sociedades/Sociedades_Inversion_Privada_DRA.pdf

There will be a FAQ page posted on Havelock later this week addressing further questions and concerns.

Exactly so this "official" exchange is just marketing.  Either governments don't give a shit then it doesn't matter and one should be more concerned about the real people behind it or governments get cranky and then it won't matter how "official" the exchange is if they really crack down hard.

I'd be surprised if havelock don't have to vet users to comply with us securities law within 6 months, if not 3. Whilst they are outside the US, the SEC could well put pressure on Panama to shut down havelock. They may not cooperate with the sec in general but that doesn't mean they won't in this case. This just looks like kicking the bucket a bit further away but nothing more. Bitfunder tried all kinds of things but failed.

There are very legitimate reasons that lawyers will advise Belize or Panama, it is not done on some random whim. Those same lawyers will also offer no guarantees because you can't do this and be fully compliant when the law hasn't caught up yet.

I believe Kickstarter also have done illegal or non-legal grey area things for the same reason. Boundaries get pushed, regulation adjusts to match.

What the SEC really care about it Americans losing money. Individual securities may escape scrutiny if people make their money back but an exchange is always going to be studied with deep interest.

Someone posted that the SEC probably aren't concerned. Well you're wrong. They very much are and they have been in touch with at least two of the major exchanges. Those within bitcoin regulatory areas were aware of this issue back in late July as I was investigating the area at the time.

Operating a torrent tracker with magnet links is more of a gray area than operating an exchange listing unregistered securities, advertised and sold to the American citizens. I'll agree with you that shutting down an exchange isn't easy and takes months or years to investigate and coordinate with local authorities. However, in the long run, I do not believe that Panamanian authorities will side with Havelock over the SEC. Perhaps operating for 12-18 months with US IP ranges blocked will give enough time to establish a decentralized blockchain based exchange operation. At that point, I see that the risk will shift from the issuer AND exchange operator to purely the issuer being targeted for enforcement, but it still won't go away.

My point is simple:
Either the governments see bitcoin as a real threat, in which case they will make a serious effort, or they don't, in which case they won't.

Pirate Bay as a threat is no more serious than shoplifting.  Perhaps bitcoin is no more important, though many users here might disagree.

Not if you feel that bitcoin presents a genuine threat to fiat & the moneyed elite.
If bitcoin truly is a disruptive technology, why wouldn't the powers-that-be pay close attention to it & try to nip it in the bud?
OTOH, if it is just another horsefly not worth a tail swat, you got a point.

First off, IANAL. However, I've worked at a global financial institution so I've seen a fair bit of compliance and enforcement action in my time.

The US authorities (SEC, FBI, etc) all work with their local counterparts in countries around the world with the goal of protecting American citizens from 'harm.' In the case of a firm selling unregistered securities to Americans, US laws are certainly being broken - the question is whether or not Panamanian authorities would care. My guess is that the answer would be yes, since Panama and America work closely together, have extradition treaties, etc.

In order for Havelock to steer clear, they're going to at least need to do a minimal amount of effort such as restricting US IP addresses. Whether they have to go through the full effort of verifying addresses and whatnot is going to depend upon Panama securities laws, something which I'm not familiar with.

Just remember - the reach of US law enforcement is global. Short of running a trading operation in North Korea, Iran, China, Russia, etc there needs to be at least partial compliance with US law and full compliance with local law.

The issuers are in US, the securities are not registered anywhere, the exchange is Canadian.  There's a Panama shell, but it carries as much legal clout as the toy detective badge from a cereal box.  It provides as much protection as burnside's Belize incorporation -- none.

As far as not targeting US, OP disagrees:

Your statements about RL may be true but the issuers aren't in the US and not actively marketing to US.  This is the same as current gambling issue.  You don't see the US chasing down offshore online gambling sites do you?

No no no.  The ratting i'm talking about would be exchange operators vs issuers.
The buyers will be tangentially involved -- as innocent bystanders who serve as witnesses.  I'm surprised it has to be spelled out.
The forum & IRC logs will provide enough evidence to fill the gaps.

Keep in mind that most people here are not career criminals.  A phone call from LEO would be enough to get many to cooperate.  Some will take the same self-righteous stance they talk on the interwebz, only to learn how unpleasant & most of all unsatisfyingly & totally unlike TV IRL is.

When you get pulled over with a car full of shit that shouldn't be there, it's not you who makes the cop ask you to step out of the car.  It's the clueless idiot in the passenger seat who starts yapping about his rights.

Great news, following!
People can legally own companies incorporated on different countires. In such case the only thing that really matters is that the company follows laws of its jurisdiction. Of course there can be official / behind the scenes debate / pressure between governments. I see gambling rugulations quite corresponding to this.

Agreed but then what?  Who would be rating on whom?  The US regulation is "designed" for retail customer protection.  It's not illegal for me to buy an unregistered security it's illegal for someone to sell it to me.  So for customers the worry is to make sure the operators properly protect their BTC and stock holdings.  This isn't Silk Road where purchasing/possessing drugs or drug proceeds is illegal per se for both sellers and buyers.

Seizing the servers comes to mind.
With Bitfunder, this would also provide all the necessary personal information of all the participants -- both issuers & holders.
From there, a child could take it.  People will trip over each other to be the first to rat  

This is all irrelevant marketing fluff.  The reasons various regulations regarding exchanges exist besides maintaining monopolies and preventing small time competition which is a separate issue is to give you legal means to prove ownership and seize funds and stocks.  In the bitcoin world that is irrelevant since you can't seize bitcoins nor am I sure how you'd accomplish seizing bitcoin denominated stock such as ASICMiner or others without their cooperation.  So really the only concern you should have with a bitcoin exchange is how trustworthy are the operators.  Legal structure or physical location are useless issues.  They might as we'll be on the moon.

Every TLA loves a challenge that may boost its clout, coinfresh.
Plastering "Seized by da SEC" across HavelockInvestments.com seems like a likely warning shot if a friendly "wrap it up, kids" email proves noneffective.

Let's say these guys do move to Panama and have servers in Panama. They are registered in Panama but not for US securities.

What exactly can the SEC do if Panama doesn't cooperate with SEC? Seems like they can't do shit. Please enlighten me.

Yes, they do.  I suspect if we were talking USD trading at the USD values these exchanges were working with, they might not, but Bitcoin is in the news a lot lately, so there's a lot of focus on it.  Thus pressure on them to make sure all the rules get followed.


In general you have to follow the law where you live.  If online gambling is illegal where you live, you can't run an online gambling company in another country.  If dealing heroin is illegal where you live, you can't run an op that deals it in another country.  Sure, your chances of getting caught are lower, but if you're successful then sooner or later someone notices.

Kudos to the team here for reducing exposure.  Now they just have to follow through and move to Panama.  

the sec this the sec that

FUCK the SEC!!!

stop talking about them. they don't care that much about our coin games...yet

1. See reply from thecoinjournal re: jurisdiction.

2. Selling unregistered securities to US persons runs afoul of US law, regardless of whether that law is enforced.  Claims to the contrary are simply false.  There's nothing here to debate.

3. If you feel that facts & empirical data are fantasy, and repeating "this time, it's gonna be different!" thrice will bring you back to Kansas, keep on investin'.

So continue to ignore every warning.  Continue shrieking "ZOMG WAI, WAI?!1!" each time another exchange website packs up & splits with ur monyz.  You deserve the lulzy fallout.

Edit (If it's not already obvious to everyone):
It is much harder to obtain a fishing licence in US or Canada than it is to incorporate & become a licensed exchange/medical doctor/ghostbuster/prince in Panama.  

Interesting news ... does that mean the atrocious GUI of havelock will be improved ?