Token Typing (and properties)

[drllau]

I refer to

If we can show that by having properties of (eg non-redeemable, restricted transfer only upon probate, etc) then the balance of probabiliies is not a security. WY blockchain legislation defines tokens as "property* but not subject to state property tax with separate classification altcoin as securities. If can show token is convertible, pegged to fiat, open non-vested holdings then more likely than not a security.

The onus should be on DAO that under the principle of functional equivalence, if it acts as such (mapping to mechanisms), then it falls into the default non-security WY property provisions. There may be some covenants (eg secondary trading or liquidity pools) which need to be carefully researched and documented as price discovery mechanisms and not ponzi schemes.

[drllau]

Tax Treatment - Need to consider tax treatment under state law. Probably goes back to the entity question, but if there's a unique entity for DAOs it would likely make sense for DAOs to be treated as pass-through entities.

Ditto taxes ... my initial look is (digital token) property is not taxed, but state use taxes may apply on purchases of certain goods and services for locals.

[drllau]

Anti-Takeover - Might want to consider whether there should be any anti-takeover provisions. It might be at least nice, especially for non-permissioned DAOs, that any persons and thier affiliates that acquire more than 20% of a DAO must make themselves know to the rest of the members.

This may be more a internal bylaw than direct mapping to existing legislation